Plenty to like about Melbourne’s off-season moves
By Michael DiFabrizio, 18 Oct 2012 Michael DiFabrizio is a Roar Expert
Battle for the top four rages in the AFL rages - will Collingwood finish on top? (SLattery Images)
Related coverage
If you were told a club were to end the exchange period with a top five pick, a father-son that would’ve been top seven, two premiership players and a 17 year-old who could very well have been top five next year, you’d be pretty impressed, right?
What if you were told that same club gave up pick 20 for Chris Dawes and were at one stage staring at three picks inside the top 13. Does that change your thinking?
Naturally, Melbourne have divided opinion this off-season.
Some love the way they’ve gone about it. Journalist Damian Barrett has repeatedly described it as a “scattergun approach” on the popular Trade Week Radio.
But who’s right? Is this the work of a smart footy club or the Brisbane Lions of late 2009 all over again?
Categorically, it’s the former.
Barrett and others might be well riled up by that notion, however when you dig beyond the surface, what Melbourne have done makes plenty of sense.
On the surface, Dawes for pick 20, plus an exchange of later picks that benefited Collingwood, seems downright crazy.
But ask yourself one question: What can we realistically expect the Melbourne recruiters to achieve with pick 20?
Of the top ten players at the Demons’ best and fairest count this year, only one – Jared Rivers way back in 2002 – was drafted between picks 15 and 32.
Before you put that down to chance, consider that Lucas Cook, Jordan Gysberts, Luke Tapscott, Sam Blease and James Strauss are among the players Melbourne have taken before pick 20 in just the last three years.
It’s probably too early to judge in a couple of cases there, but it sure wouldn’t fill Mark Neeld and company with much confidence that this group of players averaged only 7.6 games this year.
The definition of insanity, it’s often said, is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
Unless Melbourne’s list managers had become insane, they would’ve been well aware that holding on to pick 20 meant only a very small chance of finding a player that can both fill a need and have a noticeable impact on the team’s performance.
Dawes, meanwhile, will have an instant impact.
People forget how great Mitch Clark was playing this season prior to getting injured, but those that watched Melbourne in the first half of the year would know he’s one of the team’s biggest assets. Now, they’ve brought in support for that asset.
Instead of double-teaming Clark all the time, opposition defenders will have two big power forwards to man. Don’t be surprised if those four-to-five goal hauls that Clark delivers become six-to-seven goal hauls as a result.
In other games, don’t be surprised if Dawes steps up for three or four of his own.
Yes, at Collingwood he didn’t have a particularly impressive year. But being forced into the back-up ruckman role was clearly not for him – never once did he surpass ten hitouts – and that’s not the role he’ll be playing at Melbourne.
As for Melbourne’s other moves, it’s true that their draft positions this year could’ve been better. However, being able to get Jack Viney at pick 26 is a steal. Port Adelaide deemed him worthy of pick 7, but he may have ended up going higher without being a father-son.
17 year-old Jesse Hogan, although he won’t be able to play until 2014, has received big wraps. He’s already 195cm and 97kg, which is impressive in its own right, but at the draft combine he ran a 20m sprint at midfield standard and completed the 3km time-trial in 10m 20s.
In addition to these two youngsters, they’ve held on to pick 4.
By my calculations, that’s basically three top ten picks. Along with free agent and ex-Geelong forward Shannon Byrnes, who still has a few years to give and will be a positive influence for his young teammates, that’s also two premiership players. Finally, a promising 18 year-old by the name of Dom Barry was thrown in from their trade with the GWS Giants.
The only significant picks they started with that are no longer with them are picks 3 and 13. Pick 26 will be used on Viney, and the 28 year-old Rivers is yet to decide his future, but that’s it.
Surely, that’s a successful off-season. At the very least, it’s no reason for any form of fierce criticism.
Just remember, this time last year the Dees went against popular opinion and supposedly “overpaid” Mitch Clark. He turned out to be one of their – very few – shining lights in 2012.
Michael DiFabrizio is completing his journalism degree. As an AFL writer, he has been an expert columnist at The Roar since 2009, and appeared in The Age and on ABC television and radio. Follow Michael on twitter @mdifabrizio
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
![]()
Passionate about your AFL? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily AFL email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
- Explore:
- AFL, AFL Trade Week, Chris Dawes, Collingwood Magpies, Jack Viney, Melbourne Demons


October 18th 2012 @ 7:45am
Bill Larkin said | October 18th 2012 @ 7:45am | Report comment
Good article. I think Melbourne have had a very good trade period. They needed older, stronger players to go with the youngest list of all clubs. Dawes was a very good pick-up, and round 20 seems fair to me.
October 18th 2012 @ 10:45am
TomC said | October 18th 2012 @ 10:45am | Report comment
I think it’s fair to question the true value of a draft pick around 20, seeing as so many picks around about there end up becoming mediocre players (particularly for Melbourne). But you also need to remember that, just in recent years, Darling, Fyfe, Bastinac, Redden, Shuey, Zaharakis and Beams have been taken around that mark, so while sometimes a second round pick is a waste, sometimes it unearths a really valuable footballer. Just because Melbourne under Bailey wasted some of their picks in the past doesn’t mean Melbourne under Neeld will continue to do so.
I’m not sure whether Dawes can capitalise on the promise he showed a couple of years ago. Maybe he can. He has a few things going for him. But on the face of it I doubt he can be a more successful second forward to Clark at the struggling Demons than he was to Cloke at Collingwood, who boast in my opinion the strongest midfield in the league. I don’t think Clark was being held back by the lack of a second tall forward, but by the ordinary efforts of the midfield, and I think most of us would be surprised if Dawes was able to kick three or four of his own in 2013 when he averaged less than a goal per game in 2012.
Regardless of what Melbourne have traded, if the media reports of a four year deal worth $2m are true, then they are certainly overpaying in one way or another.
No doubt though that they’ve done some crafty work to get Viney and Hogan. I agree they’ve played the percentages well there.
Personally, I think the Demons would have been better off stockpiling picks in and around the top 20 and trying to unearth a few superstars, rather than trading for average players. Either way, it’ll be a long, tough road to their next premiership.
October 18th 2012 @ 11:06am
Michael DiFabrizio said | October 18th 2012 @ 11:06am | Report comment
Fair points, TomC. I will add that with most of the picks you mentioned from around the pick 20 range, they went to well-resourced clubs like West Coast, Collingwood and Essendon. Fremantle at the time they drafted Fyfe were one of the top four spenders on development, so you can throw them in as well.
I think even if you leave recent history aside (as important as that might be) a pick 20 at Melbourne still isn’t worth the same as a pick 20 at some of their more wealthier rivals. Their recruitment and development resources aren’t on that level and no matter what they do, they can’t afford to bridge the gap completely.
October 18th 2012 @ 11:09am
Tim said | October 18th 2012 @ 11:09am | Report comment
There is no way in any dimension that Dawes is worth a first round pick. Collingwood got a bargain out of that deal.
October 18th 2012 @ 11:55am
piesman2011 said | October 18th 2012 @ 11:55am | Report comment
Its not really a first round pick Tim.
This draft is already missing Omeara, Viney (both top 10) and St Kilda will get a pick in the top 20.
Collingwood will end up with pick 23 eqivalent, which is a mid second round pick at best.
Usually picks around 23 get you an average player who on average plays around 80 games. Dawes is better then 75% of players who have gone in the ranges of 20-25.
October 18th 2012 @ 12:15pm
Tim said | October 18th 2012 @ 12:15pm | Report comment
Fair point, however I cant agree with Dawes being better than “75% of players” who have gone in the low 20s, for a key position forward, his goal return is pretty poor and he’s coming off a shocker of a season. With the new ruck rule, using him as a relief ruck option has also become redundant. Will he provide a target for a Melbourne forward line which was pretty much non-existent? Sure. Will he suddenly become a 65+ goal a season player? I doubt it, especially with the type of delivery he’ll be getting now compared to what he had on offer at Collingwood.
October 18th 2012 @ 12:39pm
Michael DiFabrizio said | October 18th 2012 @ 12:39pm | Report comment
Tim, I’d argue they don’t need him to be a 65+ goal scorer. Mitch Clark is the main man, he was kicking bags of 4-5 pretty regularly before getting injured this year. His value is in adding another big body oppositions will need to account for and, in games where they don’t do that, stepping up for 2-3 goals of his own.
October 18th 2012 @ 12:41pm
D.Large said | October 18th 2012 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
Melbourne have done fine with the bounty of picks they have been gifted, but lets be clear about what you are giving Melbourne credit for. They did not earn those draft and compensation picks, they were given them for being an abomination of a club. Any other club given those same picks would in all likelihood have been able to come up with similar deals.
Clubs that are run better and have proven over the last 10 years that they go about it the right way will come out of the trade period as ‘losers’ solely because they haven’t been handed the benefits that Melbourne have.
October 18th 2012 @ 12:56pm
SurlyPie said | October 18th 2012 @ 12:56pm | Report comment
Clearly there are arguments on both sides and many would describe it as a win-win, in that Melbourne got an experienced big body and Collingwood got an early(ish) draft pick which have been as rare as hens’ teeth at Collingwood in recent years.
That said, though, I still can’t shake the feeling that Melbourne got dudded. Chris Dawes didn’t though! He got a big pay rise and a 4-year deal after having the worst season of his life! Funny old world….
Still, as a Pies fan, I’d love to see Dawesy do well. Because heaven knows it still wouldn’t be enough to drag the Demons out of the mire!
October 18th 2012 @ 3:44pm
Justin Curran said | October 18th 2012 @ 3:44pm | Report comment
I am a Melbourne supporter, and I was a bit dubious at first but the more I think about it, the more I am convinced it is a win-win situation. Melbourne simply cannot afford to wait for an 18 year old to develop into a dominant forward. We cannot afford to go through 2013 with the same makeshift forward line we had this year. We need a ready made player. Maybe we are overpaying a little, but we needed to beat out other clubs for his services. He only needs to kick 25-30 goals next year to have been worth it, and I think he has a good chance of doing that if he is a stay at home forward.
October 22nd 2012 @ 11:18am
Grovel said | October 22nd 2012 @ 11:18am | Report comment
I agree entirely. I’m also a Dee’s supporter and although at first I balked at the thought of recruiting Dawes at all let alone paying him a big wage, the more I thought about it the more I liked the idea. You only need to look as far as our 2012 goalkicking numbers to see how desperate we are for someone who can average more than a goal a game. Clark missed half the season and still finished 10 goals clear this season, we can’t afford to be so heavily reliant on a single player, let alone a bloke in his first season with us.
All in all, I think we picked up two potential stars in Viney & Hogan, and a kid with fair potential in Barry. That’s before we use pick #4.
Given that we have the youngest list of any non-expansion side already, I think that’s more than enough quality kids – why not use the rest of our picks to get some senior blokes from successful clubs to give the kids a role model?
October 18th 2012 @ 4:18pm
Tom Dimanis said | October 18th 2012 @ 4:18pm | Report comment
Melbourne haven’t done too badly building their forward line.
They’ve just lost Jared Rivers which will hurt them in defence.
October 18th 2012 @ 4:58pm
Justin Curran said | October 18th 2012 @ 4:58pm | Report comment
That’s bad news for us. He was one of the dwindling number of senior players we had left to guide the young kids. Not to mention the fact that he has been in great form the last two seasons. All the more reason to bring in more experience like Dawes rather than more kids.
October 19th 2012 @ 7:52am
Ian Whitchurch said | October 19th 2012 @ 7:52am | Report comment
On the flip side, they’ve also now committed three first round picks to it, and about a million dollars in cap room invested in Clark and Dawes.
October 24th 2012 @ 12:38pm
Grant Smith said | October 24th 2012 @ 12:38pm | Report comment
Good article. The gist of it is providing sound reason behind the decisions and providing facts that prove the critics wrong. The likes of Cam Mooney, Damien Barrett and even Greg Denham – don’t have a handle on the true nature of Melbourne’s list. By that I mean, age, experience & quality.
So when they question the decisions with the view of wasting early picks in not choosing to draft young kids, instead going for experience – they’re 1/ Neglectful of the list and 2/ Not looking hard enough in their assessment at MFC’s decisions.
For instance I heard Cam Mooney/Damien Barrett last week agonising over MFC giving up picks 3 and 13 (giving up youth for experience in Dawes). What they don’t assess is the outcome. Melbourne did this to get Jack Viney in the 2nd round, but also secured the 2nd pick in the Mini draft to obtain Jesse Hogan (touted top 5 pick in next years draft/possible no.1 pick) in 2014 and Dom Barry (young pacey player been likened to a young Michael Long) and pick 20 (used to obtain Dawes). Is that not youth??
A little bit more research by those critics, a little bit more nous and understanding of proceedings by them would result in a bit more respect their way, before going off half-cocked without any thought to what has actually been achieved here.
October 24th 2012 @ 7:13pm
Me said | October 24th 2012 @ 7:13pm | Report comment
Well written piece.; It is nice to hear from somebody in the media that doesn’t hate Melbourne and relishes the opportunity to troll them at every turn. I am not an optimistic supporter by any stretch and I am in 100% approval of everything they have done this draft/trade period. They absolutely owned it.
October 24th 2012 @ 7:28pm
Sandy said | October 24th 2012 @ 7:28pm | Report comment
I am also a Melbourne member and very happy with who the club has chosen this year. I also agree 100% with what you guys have also said about having some stronger bodies to help out the young kids we already have.
Greg Dumbham is nothing more then a want too be news reporter that tells nothing more then lies and hope they come true.
These so called news reporters have no idea.