The PP and round 22 last year...

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

One of MFC fans' sore points this year has been the fact we could have gotten two of Watts, Naitanui and Rich had we lost to the blues last year...

Something that only just occurred to me is that what's important is that we get as many picks inside the first 20 or so as possible. The beauty here is that instead of 1,2 and 17, we get 1, 17 and 19. Either way we still get an extra player within the first 20...

I'm not naive enough to think that whoever we get at 19 will be better than who goes at pick 2.... but what's important here as that we get the quality cattle. We're not in need of one or two problem solving players, but about 12 good -> really good players... And history is littered with picks in the teens that outplay guys taken in their own drafts at 1-5...

We lost out big in our recent drafts by winning five games last year. But the GREATER loss is the priority pick we would have gotten last year (in the teens somewhere)... NOT the fact that we missed out on pick 1 and 2 this year... And even the 2007 priority would have been in a weaker draft.

Having said that, if pick 2 goes on to be an out and out star, I'll be forced to retract this.

My point is that the damage, IMO, is not as bad as first thought.... at this stage, anyway...

[Jarka 767]

One of MFC fans' sore points this year has been the fact we could have gotten two of Watts, Naitanui and Rich had we lost to the blues last year...

Something that only just occurred to me is that what's important is that we get as many picks inside the first 20 or so as possible. The beauty here is that instead of 1,2 and 17, we get 1, 17 and 19. Either way we still get an extra player within the first 20...

I'm not naive enough to think that whoever we get at 19 will be better than who goes at pick 2.... but what's important here as that we get the quality cattle. We're not in need of one or two problem solving players, but about 12 good -> really good players... And history is littered with picks in the teens that outplay guys taken in their own drafts at 1-5...

We lost out big in our recent drafts by winning five games last year. But the GREATER loss is the priority pick we would have gotten last year (in the teens somewhere)... NOT the fact that we missed out on pick 1 and 2 this year... And even the 2007 priority would have been in a weaker draft.

Having said that, if pick 2 goes on to be an out and out star, I'll be forced to retract this.

My point is that the damage, IMO, is not as bad as first thought.... at this stage, anyway...

Luckily we'll have a chance to get a pp before the 1st round next year, so all is not lost.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

We were never going to lose to the Blues in R22 2007. Not a chance. We played them in Rd 14 and played poorly on the day and still won.

The game that cost us was the unexpected win against a failing Bulldog outfit a couple of weeks earlier.

No use crying over spilt milk.

We look like we have picks 1,17,19,35,51,67 etc. Lets make these work

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Luckily we'll have a chance to get a pp before the 1st round next year, so all is not lost.

Do we though? With the new GC team I can't figure out if we still even qualify. Though I doubt we'll win less than five next season. We're bad, but enough is enough...

The game that cost us was the unexpected win against a failing Bulldog outfit a couple of weeks earlier.

We look like we have picks 1,17,19,35,51,67 etc. Lets make these work

Agree with the Bulldogs part. And ultimately, any one of the five wins was the heart-breaker.

And those picks look nice... And that's only assuming we don't get another within the first 25 with a bit of crafty dealing...

[Redleg 40,905]

We were never going to lose to the Blues in R22 2007. Not a chance. We played them in Rd 14 and played poorly on the day and still won.

The game that cost us was the unexpected win against a failing Bulldog outfit a couple of weeks earlier.

Bingo.

[stretch marks 2]

No use crying over spilt milk....

agree....in fact this subject shouldn't be raised again..its history, boring and a complete waste of time

[Bay Riffin 1,474]

agree....in fact this subject shouldn't be raised again..its history, boring and a complete waste of time

thats right demonologist. We also lost games we had in the bad with seconds left in the game. Essendon and North come to mind.

We have to move on. looking forward to get the number one pick this year.

[Jarka 767]

Do we though? With the new GC team I can't figure out if we still even qualify. Though I doubt we'll win less than five next season. We're bad, but enough is enough...

My understanding is that the GC17 team will get the draft picks in 2010, next year they'll continue with being able to select kids from the Queensland U/18 team. This means that next year if Melbourne or WC (presuming that they don't win against Hawthorn or Geelong) win less than 5 games then they will qualify for a PP before the 1st round.

The main difference for next year though is that they are going to raise the age a bit. This means that next years draft will be at about 60% strength, however the top 5 kids are still very, very good. There's a KPP kid running around in Vic who looks every bit as good as Watts.

At the end of the year Bailey will delist alot of the older players, this means some more of our depth will go.

Our forwardline is still a work in progress, if we do get Watts I don't expect him to make a big impact next year. Robo isn't goign to make a alot of difference coming back from injury.

Our defence is still developing - Garland, Warnock and Martin are still learning the trade. I don't expect them to start to hit their straps for a couple more seasons.

While we have some good mids we still lack some speedy outsiders to balance them properly, still a couple of seasons away.

Our rucks are ok but our current set up won't dominate at AFL, even if we get Warnock I don't expect him to dominate next year, afterall this is his first real full season.

Alot will depend on how Bailey treats the list. If he does trade a player like Green, Rivers or Bruce then it signals a complete rebuild. I don't think it would be such a bad thing, the only thing that would majorly concern me is our finances.

[titan_uranus 25,016]

I think a lot of people have forgotten how 'lucky' we were to be in a position to get a PP last year. The real issue last year is that we lost a lot of close games, that, had we won them, would have seen us well out of contention for a PP by Round 22. I speak of matches early in the year against the Bulldogs, Port Adelaide, Essendon and North Melbourne, all of which we lost by a goal or so, and all of which we led in the last quarter. If we'd won just one of those then Round 22 last year would have been a non-issue.

[Guest Schtacker]

I think a lot of people have forgotten how 'lucky' we were to be in a position to get a PP last year. The real issue last year is that we lost a lot of close games, that, had we won them, would have seen us well out of contention for a PP by Round 22. I speak of matches early in the year against the Bulldogs, Port Adelaide, Essendon and North Melbourne, all of which we lost by a goal or so, and all of which we led in the last quarter. If we'd won just one of those then Round 22 last year would have been a non-issue.

exactly right - and also we were ruined by injury. The PP system is there to 'help' sides that are truly struggling - our 2007 season was actually not that bad and we shouldn't have been anywhere near PP contention

Having said that of course I wish we had got it anyway, but I don't feel all 'oh the injustice of it' about it

This season however we deserve about 10 priority picks for being a joke that cannot compete

[sylvinator 96]

The main difference for next year though is that they are going to raise the age a bit. This means that next years draft will be at about 60% strength, however the top 5 kids are still very, very good. There's a KPP kid running around in Vic who looks every bit as good as Watts.

this is correct.

Draft age will be increased from 17yrs 8months old on draft day, to 18 yrs old.

So- the draft age is increased by 4 months.

I do not believe this is mean a 60% strength draft... probably more like 80% strength draft.

And if you look over the past 10 years of top 10 picks, in every year there are ussually, on average, only about 3 of those picks who were 17 when drafted.

Therefore, if we do qualify for a PP next year and get pick 1 and 2, it will be pretty much as strong as any other pick 1 and 2 in any other draft.

Besides which, the certain number 1 pick next year- Butcher- will be 18 by draft day neways.

[Scoop Junior 3,471]

I think a lot of people have forgotten how 'lucky' we were to be in a position to get a PP last year. The real issue last year is that we lost a lot of close games, that, had we won them, would have seen us well out of contention for a PP by Round 22. I speak of matches early in the year against the Bulldogs, Port Adelaide, Essendon and North Melbourne, all of which we lost by a goal or so, and all of which we led in the last quarter. If we'd won just one of those then Round 22 last year would have been a non-issue.

True, but in an ultra-competitive environment you take every opportunity you get to improve your team. Doesn't matter how the opportunity arises, if it's there you take it. We should've ensured that we won 4 games max last year. We stuffed it. But now let's just move on and focus on maximising our picks this year.

[deanox 9,914]

...our 2007 season was actually not that bad...

wow. could of fooled me haha.

[Jarka 767]

Besides which, the certain number 1 pick next year- Butcher- will be 18 by draft day neways.

He's the one I was thinking of. If he continues to develop a forward line of Watts and Butcher would be....very nice