Gone are Neitz, Yze, Holland and the 200k to Brisbane for Johnstone (frees up a lot of salary cap)

I doubt Bode will get another chance, so add him.

Probably delisted or traded is White, depending if Melbourne drafts (Naitanui) or trades (Warnock) for another Ruckman.

With a settled back three consisting of Warnock, Garland and Martin. With Carroll still contracted (if he chooses to stay if told he has limited options and another club wants him) and with McNamara developing Rivers or Frawley MAY be offered for trade. Although I believe that Garland could play on-ball or forward if another key backman comes good (Rivers not injured or Frawley or McNamare improves) but I see Melbourne has a tall backman surplus considering you tend to play only 2 or 3.

Weetra may get kept on the list (as hopes he may improve because of his age) depending on the number of trades Melbourne make (ie player for pick) and thus the number of 30+ draft picks they have; as this draft is seen as deep, I don't believe it will be 4 or 5 rounds deep because of the increase in age the drafted players have to be.

The only other possible trade I see is Moloney to a team "there abouts" looking for midfield depth (eg St Kilda, Richmond, Roos, Collingwood etc.) but his value is probably only a second round now because of his OP problems.

I doubt Bell will get offered for trade, as Melbourne have a shortage of QUICK small backman.

..........................Of the other main contenders for trade on these forums, Sylvia and Newton, I would give each one more season, barring a trade offer reasonably exceeding their worth. ..........................

What do you reckon their worth is?

No, because Hawthorn kept Vandenberg, Crawf, Mitchell, Everitt , Osborne and a couple of others.

All of who were consolidated players (though Mitchell was just starting to reach that mark) and were kept to help lead the next batch of players (Hodge, Lewis, Buddy, Roughie) towards their next premiership.

The same could be said of Geelong. Do you think they'd be half as good if they turfed King, Scarlett, Harley, Millburn, Wojcinski etc in the years where they picked up Ablett and Bartel?

With regard to Hawthorn, I was talking about tanking, which they did to secure draft picks.

And why would Geelong get rid of such players when their premeirship window was opening. If you hadn't noticed we're very young, premeirship window still at the joiners. When fitted and opening Brad Green will be well past his best. Hence due to this being the last full draft we need to get another 1, hopefully 2 high picks, therefore we use Green as he's worth something. But then again if your happy scraping into the finals in 2 years time thanks to Green's leadership let's not trade him for a first rounder and maybe develop a premeirship side.

You still need players to lead the younger blokes though.

Miller is just about the only other player who is regularly out there that's a good on field and off field leader

You still need players to lead the younger blokes though.

Miller is just about the only other player who is regularly out there that's a good on field and off field leader

I understand this but the next 2 or 3 drafts are comprimised, so we may well not have the luxury of keeping players like Green. We've signed McDonald, we'll probably keep Bruce, some will have to go.

But then again if your happy scraping into the finals in 2 years time thanks to Green's leadership let's not trade him for a first rounder and maybe develop a premeirship side.

Ok I have read enough of this rubbish.......

For starters no-one is happy with that, despite the fact if we even sniff finals next season it will be a miracle no matter whose leadership we are under, and if (and that is a pretty damn big and unlikely if) a magnificent trade option came our way then of course Green could be put on the table.

But you are an idiot (and I don't say that lightly) if you think that now with all the re-building or re-shaping that we will be doing that Green's obvious skills, ever improving consistency and to this point outstanding on-field leadership aren't a huge plus as to why we should keep him then I seriously don't know what to say.

Playing the kids is great, and necessary, but you can't just play kids, there does actually need to be some older (and 27 ain't that old plus he is most definitely part of the age bracket we are most deficient in), wiser and more experienced heads out there. Green has proven to be the best of those.

Green has proved this year that he is by far our best option for captain at least in the near future as we try to build our list out of the muck.

He took the initial set back of being dropped from the leadership group and made people (well sensible people) eat their words and has been one of maybe two or three who have consistently played their best and lead the team. And that includes the two that are currently sharing that coveted role.

To me that shows a fantastic attitude (something Bailey seems to covet), coupled with his inarguable skill base it is by far the best option for him to stay.

What do you reckon their worth is?

Hard to say until an offer is made regarding any player swap. In terms of straight draft picks, given the apparent quality and depth of this draft, I'd say on current form, Sylvia is worth a third round pick and Newton perhaps a fourth which is somehere around what we originally got him for.

It also depends who wants them. A team in the window of opportunity might see Sylvia as topping them off nicely as he would do very well in a well drilled top team and might offer more for him than another team rebuilding like we are. I would like to think that in 2-3 years, we are that well drilled top team and he is topping us off nicely, having developed his game and remained injury free. He still has a huge potential upside and I just get the feeling he will be a late bloomer - as some players are.

Newton is more speculative and may be seen as too one dimensional. Keep him as a project player, most teams have them and hope he can turn himself around. There have been glimpses, but mainly last year, and I wonder if injury and confidence have helped conspire against him this year. I also think if Sautner was not in his way at Sandy he could better develop his game at full forward down there to teach him what he needs to do to step up.

I understand this but the next 2 or 3 drafts are comprimised, so we may well not have the luxury of keeping players like Green. We've signed McDonald, we'll probably keep Bruce, some will have to go.

I agree with the added incentive of this draft being the last uncompromised one but do you really think it comes down to simple choice of Bruce v Green (which it obviously doesn't and won't), but seriously if that is the way it is then my choice is still firmly with the latter to stay and lead.

Besides you have no idea who we will keep and who we won't. We will lose a number of oldies through retirement, a couple of youngsters through delisting and probably a few in the middle though trade. And Green has done more than enough this season to, one win the B&F, and two maybe secede to the captaincy.

You think that Green is expendable (I've more respect for his importance to us) and therefore should be the one sacrificed, I obviously don't especially given what I think he has to offer (and this is above a number of his peers as well) is hugely important especially now in our current state and will help to build our future.

Elsewhere - Sylivia for a 2nd Round pick - What do you think you're going to get ?

Yes, please. We won't get that, though.

I agree with the added incentive of this draft being the last uncompromised one but do you really think it comes down to simple choice of Bruce v Green (which it obviously doesn't and won't), but seriously if that is the way it is then my choice is still firmly with the latter to stay and lead.

I'd keep Green over Bruce, too. However, you're right - it's not a one or the other choice.

Pretty sure you can get rid of as many as you want but you gotta replace them somehow.

So if there's 3 or 4 retirees don't expect too many to be chopped just yet

Wallace chopped a good dozen or so on arrival with richmond,

Dont think we need to be that drastic with at least 4 going Neitz def poss Holland, White and Yze

Plenty of youth already to build with how much can we really handle and keep in mind we have to pay a percentage of the salary cap do we go all out youth and have some on inflated salaries

All in all am waiting with anticipation to see what the powers to be do

Yes, please. We won't get that, though.

Re Sylvia.

I'm sure if we shopped Sylvia around, at least one club will be seduced by his preceived talent, and offer a second round draft pick.

Re Sylvia.

I'm sure if we shopped Sylvia around, at least one club will be seduced by his preceived talent, and offer a second round draft pick.

You must think other Clubs are complete dills if you think they will get sideswiped by a No3 draft pick in one of the most ordinary drafts ever who has been (and may still be) crippled by OP, has never performed at high level and has off field attitude problems. We are just not going to extract any reasonable value from Sylvia in the market.

And a second round draft pick is covering pick around 20 to 36. MFC would have to be satisfied that they will get more value out of an unknown in that range than a player they have had at close quarters for five years who the Footy department believe is likely to improve.

Gone are Neitz, Yze, Holland and the 200k to Brisbane for Johnstone (frees up a lot of salary cap)

I doubt Bode will get another chance, so add him.

Probably delisted or traded is White, depending if Melbourne drafts (Naitanui) or trades (Warnock) for another Ruckman.

With a settled back three consisting of Warnock, Garland and Martin. With Carroll still contracted (if he chooses to stay if told he has limited options and another club wants him) and with McNamara developing Rivers or Frawley MAY be offered for trade. Although I believe that Garland could play on-ball or forward if another key backman comes good (Rivers not injured or Frawley or McNamare improves) but I see Melbourne has a tall backman surplus considering you tend to play only 2 or 3.

Weetra may get kept on the list (as hopes he may improve because of his age) depending on the number of trades Melbourne make (ie player for pick) and thus the number of 30+ draft picks they have; as this draft is seen as deep, I don't believe it will be 4 or 5 rounds deep because of the increase in age the drafted players have to be.

The only other possible trade I see is Moloney to a team "there abouts" looking for midfield depth (eg St Kilda, Richmond, Roos, Collingwood etc.) but his value is probably only a second round now because of his OP problems.

I doubt Bell will get offered for trade, as Melbourne have a shortage of QUICK small backman.

White is gone regardless. Who would trade for an undersized ruckman with no physical presence who cant cut a game anymore in a bottom side anymore and is struggling in the VFL.

Carroll was offered for trade last year and MFC were laughed at. Another player who cant get a game in a bottom club and is a renowned culture sore. If he was not contracted, you would delist him.

If Bode is gone then Weetra??. Its a pity he is not a bottle of wine as he may well inprove with age. But Weetra is corked and cant even cut a game in Sandy 1sts and does not make an impact at Sandy 2nds.

Moloney has been crippled with OP for the past 2 to 3 years. He also has shoulder problems. He lacks pace, has acountability issues and limited decision making. None of the teams you mentioned need or require Moloney. In fact each of those teams have a surplus of that type of player. And Moloney only gets a 2nd round pick? Really?

Why do posters on this site naively believe that underperforming players in a bottom dwelling club like MFC mythically have some trade value to another Club (or Clubs) who posters think would have no idea about issues that even the supporter sitting on the second tier of the Southern Stand could see?

I agree with the added incentive of this draft being the last uncompromised one but do you really think it comes down to simple choice of Bruce v Green (which it obviously doesn't and won't), but seriously if that is the way it is then my choice is still firmly with the latter to stay and lead.

Besides you have no idea who we will keep and who we won't. We will lose a number of oldies through retirement, a couple of youngsters through delisting and probably a few in the middle though trade. And Green has done more than enough this season to, one win the B&F, and two maybe secede to the captaincy.

You think that Green is expendable (I've more respect for his importance to us) and therefore should be the one sacrificed, I obviously don't especially given what I think he has to offer (and this is above a number of his peers as well) is hugely important especially now in our current state and will help to build our future.

Look, as I have said in any other draft I wouldn't put Green on the table. Basically my point is would you swap him for pick 16 - 22. I would, you mightn't, that's fine. It would be unlikely that the club would trade him anyway, but for a good pick it would be hard to resist.

And of course I have some idea of who they will keep and who they won't, but of course I may be wrong.

I just can't see clubs giving away picks this year. Everybody is concerned about the impact of the new teams.

I think the best we could hope for is a second round pick for Bruce. He is one of the most versatile players in the AFL and could fit into a team like the Western Bulldogs who have a very short premiership window when you think about it (Akermanis, Hudson, Johnson, Welsh all over 30).

We will not get value for Bell, Newton, Sylvia or a few others mentioned above. I think we are better off keeping them. If Bailey can turn Miller around why not the others?

I think the best we could hope for is a second round pick for Bruce.

Now you've done it

Weetra may get kept on the list

I appreciate that you're not advocating his retention on the list beyond 2008, but delisting Weetra would be about the easiest decision any list manager would ever have. I'd have Weetra and Bode as automatic delistings without a second thought, and add the retirements (pushed or not) of Neitz, White, Holland and Yze plus the elevations of Wonaeamirri and Valenti and the list is at 36. That only means we've got a couple of tougher decisions to make this year. Carroll's contract means he dodges a bullet, otherwise that'd be another easy decision. I'd delist Newton too.

Now you've done it

I agree with him. Green would go close as well, but Bruce definitely has the greatest market value of the experienced Melbourne players

I agree with him. Green would go close as well, but Bruce definitely has the greatest market value of the experienced Melbourne players

Greater than Davey in terms of market value? (Just throwing it out there!)

Greater than Davey in terms of market value? (Just throwing it out there!)

I reckon Davey is it. He is the most damaging and has more potential to improve. He is the one player at Melbourne who can swing a game.

I believe so, obviously depends on a teams individual needs but I'd still rate Bruce ahead of Davey.

For one Davey has off field issues and his commitment to AFL could come into question and can only really play as a crumbing forward who can push up the ground.

Bruce on the other head has a fantastic work ethic and can play just about anywhere on the ground (bar ruck).

Weetra may get kept on the list (as hopes he may improve because of his age)

I would be very surprised to see him on the list for next year. IMO he's got Buckley's.

The only other possible trade I see is Moloney to a team "there abouts" looking for midfield depth (eg St Kilda, Richmond, Roos, Collingwood etc.) but his value is probably only a second round now because of his OP problems.

OP problems - if anything sides will want no less than a 3rd round pick.

I would be very surprised to see him on the list for next year. IMO he's got Buckley's.

Buckley's almost a monty

I believe so, obviously depends on a teams individual needs but I'd still rate Bruce ahead of Davey.

Most opposition fans rate Bruce pretty highly, but he cops a reasonable amount of flak from Dees fans for a player quite highly rated by outsiders.