THE LAST DRAFT

[Demonland 72,187]

THE LAST DRAFT by Whispering Jack

Later this week, the Melbourne Football Club will go into the AFL's National Draft meeting holding many of the aces. It has the first two selections (almost certainly Tom Scully and Jack Trengove) as a consequence of finishing last and winning not more than four games in the season recently concluded. It has four picks in the first eighteen and will choose two more players before passing on its final selection which will enable it to take the first player in December's Pre Season Draft who will most likely be former Brisbane Lion defender Joel Macdonald.

The decisions that are about to be made are crucial. With a solid base of emerging young talent already at the club, the half dozen or so about to join the ranks are expected to bolster a reshaped Melbourne Football Club list that will lead it into a promising new future - a future that includes two brand new interstate clubs and a limited capacity to introduce fresh young blood for a number of years to come. In many ways, this is our club's last chance to get things right.

One decision that the Melbourne Football Club needs to get right is whether it chooses disgruntled former Saint Luke Ball in this week's draft. The likelihood is that he will be available at pick 18 but there's a major dilemma about whether the club should take him.

When the exchange period ended, Ball and his management had failed to secure a trade that would have seen him cross to his preferred club Collingwood. Many observers regarded this as a complete botch up on the part of all concerned. Ball was left in limbo and expressions of interest in the midfielder started flowing from a number of areas including the Melbourne camp. Here was someone who was a quality player who would not only add football skills, experience and great deal of know-how in the team's engine room as a hardnosed inside midfielder but he was also a leader of men. The complete package.

Melbourne originally hoped to use its position as first cab off the rank in December's Pre Season Draft to snare the Saints midfielder but its hopes were dashed when it became clear that Ball didn't want to have a bar of the wooden spoon club of the AFL competition.

Ball is a sensational footballer when at his best and, even at 75% capacity, he would fit nicely into most AFL teams so the Demons persisted. They waited for him to come back from his end of season overseas trip. And they waited ... and they waited ... and when Ball returned, he made himself scarce. In the end, he didn't even want to talk to the club although coach Dean Bailey made it clear that if he was told to his face that a player didn't want to come to the club, it would be a short conversation.

All the while, there was a bizarre streak to Melbourne's courtship of a reluctant Ball because the former Saint is, in reality, not by any stretch of the imagination a perfect package at all. In recent seasons his body has been affected by osteitis pubis and a severe hamstring injury and, this year, question marks about his fitness saw him consigned to several games in the VFL. On his return for the finals Ball was tracking at around about 50% game time and even less than that in the grand final. A prolific possession winner in the wet conditions on that one day in September, the problem was that he moved at a snail's pace and couldn't kick over a jam tin. Even his staunchest supporters were conceding that the 25 year old's body was looking more like that of a 30 year old. Little wonder then, that Ball himself (and his bevy of advisers) considered it inadvisable to go to a club that might not be a finals contender in the short term.

Ball's quality as a footballer is not in question. The concern is whether his body is capable of holding up in a game that requires ever- increasing degrees of fitness and pace. Given the right mix of rest and the appropriate training regimen, Ball's fitness might return to acceptable levels but we don't know for sure - he's not talking to anybody and isn't submitting for a medical.

So is the wooden spooner in the middle of a youth-focussed rebuild prepared to take such a risk given its limited resources on a player who might again crumble physically when the heat is turned up?

Where would he fit in Melbourne's game plan where speed, strength and precision kicking of the short and long variety were going to be essential?

And what of the recruiting edict issued last year about shunning potential recruits with injury concerns?

Does one make an exception for a wounded 25 year old whose best days might be behind him, just because he's supposed to be of good character?

Demons' football manager Chris Connolly has no doubts that Ball is a likely candidate for either his club's third or fourth selection and is undeterred by Ball's clear preference to play elsewhere. He told the Sunday Age that Ball "is going to be strongly considered because he's just a class player and a class person and he'll be a great role model for our young players." On Ball's refusal to talk to the club Connolly is adamant that this was not even taken into the club's consideration.

"We know if we choose him that he'll commit to play 100 per cent because that's his character. We're not even discussing that aspect of it," he said.

Connolly would have been buoyed by the Channel Ten vision of Ball training alone on the tan late last week looking fit and rippled but it was, after all, a twenty second grab. And the cynics are claiming that it's all a ploy. A recruiting bluff to confuse all comers.

Recruiting guru Colin Wisbey agrees with Connolly's views on drafting Ball, stating on the Extreme Black 'n' White website that in the Ball scenario, the "Demons would be making the professional decision". In his view, "when a player wants to go to a particular club, most other clubs respect the players' wishes during trade week" but after that, "a club should select on draft day whoever it thinks is the best player for them at each pick."

Wisbey maintains that AFL clubs "have to be focussed on building the best lists they can. Part of that means drafting the best players available where possible. An AFL club is a business, not a benevolent philanthropist." He concludes that if a lowly club bowed to each player's wishes who wanted to play for a stronger club then "they would overlook a large chunk of the best prospects in the draft pool and be rightly ridiculed."

Whilst agreeing with those sentiments, I'm not convinced on Ball for reason of the doubts listed earlier. My own personal opinion remains that the club should not become a repository for players from other clubs who are not quite right and I would therefore be looking elsewhere.

Of course, the decision in this "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario rests with others. If the Demons' football department is prepared in its wisdom to make the call and take the risk, then Ball will be a Demon on Thursday night.

Whatever the case, the AFL will almost certainly be forced to deal with the issues that the Ball dilemma has highlighted. This could well herald the approach of free agency and, with it will probably go the Pre Season Draft which has been emasculated as a result of changes in the rules regarding the eligibility of these players.

So enjoy Thursday night's National Draft, Demon fans because it will be your night and probably the last opportunity for three or four years before there will be much for fans of the existing AFL teams to cheer about at draft time. Thanks to the introduction of the new expansion clubs and thanks to the botched Luke Ball trade deal, this will most likely be the last of the drafts as we know them.

FOOTNOTE:

The 2009 AFL National Draft can be viewed almost live on Fox Sports2 at 6:30pm on Thursday 26 November.

There's also time to join your fellow Demon fans at the MELBOURNEfc 2009 Draft Event Presented by Mates of Melbourne at the G to find out who we select and to discover the fate of Luke Ball. Will he become a Demon, a Bomber, a Lion or a Magpie or will someone else select him?

Jack Watts will be there to give his insights on life as the number 1 draft pick, and subject to AFL timing obligations, the number 1 and 2 picks will be presented after their selection. Mates of Melbourne need you to be there to welcome our young recruits into the Melbourne Football Club family, and show them what a great club they joining.

Visit matesofmelbourne.com.au for more details.

[rpfc 28,425]

Well said.

There is no line through his name and that is all I wanted.

[Demon Head 273]

Well said.

There is no line through his name and that is all I wanted.

I think it's sad for Ball that he probably won't get through to the club of his choice but he really doesn't have a leg to stand on. His club of choice and his manager both botched things up. They could have made a reasonable offer to the Saints and they neglected the opportunity for mediation during trade week. The best Collingwood could offer was the equivalent of pick 25. If we're considering taking him with pick 18 it shows Collingwood wasn't trying hard enough.

[beelzebub 23,374]

Well said.

There is no line through his name and that is all I wanted.

and no line under it either

[MO FINE 170]

and no line under it either

I think that pick 18 is going to be one of the most anticipated selections in the draft on Thurday evening unless someone picks Ball up with an earlier pick.

Who are the candidates?

Essendon are really crying out for a classy midfielder but would they pick him with # 10? I'm not so sure but by that time the classiest of the young midfielders will have already been taken so it might be a possibility.

Melbourne at 11 should be aiming for a tall (see elsewhere for argument about that one).

Carlton could surprise by taking him at 12 because they don't have a salary cap limit so they would surely fit him in. Let's not forget also the fact that if the Blues could screw Collingwood, they would do that any time of the day.

Sydney or Port Adelaide at 14 and 16 can't be discounted, especially the Swans. Roos has been silent on the subject but Ball's old man was a Swan so why not bring him home. A real dark horse.

Melbourne at 18, will we or won't we? Are we bluffing, making Ball sweat because he wouldn't talk to us or are we fair dinkum.

Can't wait to find out.

[Freddy Fuschia 741]

Tim Harrington was just interviewed on Fox Sports News and when the interviewer asked if they would draft Luke Ball even despite the fact he wants to go to Collingwood, he answered "we certainly are." He said it was no different to some of the other players in the draft." He said if "we get to a particular pick and we want him, we'll pick him."

It was a pretty good indication to my mind that we will be taking him with pick 18 at the very least.

[BAMF 4,353]

I really hope we don't pick him. Not even meeting with any other clubs is very unprofessional. Its clear that he doesn't want us. And I really don't want him. If we do pick him up, I will never ever cheer for him. In fact I will probably swear under my breath every week he gets selected.

Really hope Port pick him up.

[Crystal Dees 372]

I really hope we don't pick him. Not even meeting with any other clubs is very unprofessional. Its clear that he doesn't want us. And I really don't want him. If we do pick him up, I will never ever cheer for him. In fact I will probably swear under my breath every week he gets selected.

Really hope Port pick him up.

Bullsh*t!

[Bring-Back-Powell 14,821]

I really hope we don't pick him. Not even meeting with any other clubs is very unprofessional. Its clear that he doesn't want us. And I really don't want him. If we do pick him up, I will never ever cheer for him. In fact I will probably swear under my breath every week he gets selected.

Really hope Port pick him up.

bullshite x2

On a side note, I've got a sneaking suspicion that Sydney may take him at pick 14. The reason being that Sydney have a strategy of always going for mature aged players. Plus they will have already spent pick 6 on youth.

I'll be pretty happy with Ball at pick 18. Three top 11 picks and a proven mature age player that has won All Australian and a B & F. How many MFC players have won an All Aust. - James McDonald and that's it.

Unlike other people around here, I don't care about the politics and how he's shun the club. All I care about is winning games, stop being a laughing stock and rising up the ladder - If Ball can assist in that area, the you pick him up at pick 18 -but not 11.

Edited November 23, 2009 by Bring-Back-Powell

[45HG 1,539]

I've been wondering that about Sydney too BBP, if we're prepared to take him against his wishes I'd reckon the Swans would be straight onto it.

[H_T 3,047]

I've been wondering that about Sydney too BBP, if we're prepared to take him against his wishes I'd reckon the Swans would be straight onto it.

Agree with Swans.

Sydney at 14, Port at 16.

Port have 8 and 9. They could surprise and pull the trigger if Swans bypass him. Then there is 18...

[Supreme_Demon 3,849]

I'm just worried that Luke Ball will be really immature and is likely to stand out of AFL football for 23 months just to spite us.

Let's hope I'm wrong....

[rpfc 28,425]

I'm just worried that Luke Ball will be really immature and is likely to stand out of AFL football for 23 months just to spite us.

Let's hope I'm wrong....

Yeah, it's incredibly likely that he will turn his back on a $1m, and spend 2 years travelling and doing fitness work whilst not being able to play football at any level in the hopes that not only would Nathan Buckley still be interested in him, but that he would even be able to play a sport at the highest level after not playing competitively for 2 and a half years.

2 to 1 on, really.

[titan_uranus 25,018]

I feel now that it's basically certain that we'll take Ball if he's still there at 18. It sounds like the club is really keen on bringing in some midfield experience and leadership. And possibly screwing over Collingwood.

But I also feel that Port Adelaide at 16 is a strong chance to take him. I would really hate to see us take Ball at 11 because we don't think he'll be available at 18. Unless Ball is the best possible option at 11 (which won't be the case), we should wait for 18, and if he's gone, so be it.

[Akum 2,660]

I'm persuaded by the thread about "Are our mids enough?" that's been moved to the other board. As great as they're going to be, I doubt that Scully and Trengove are enough to turn our current midfield into an elite midfield all by themselves, and we need at least one more very good mid from picks 11 or 18 to back them up.

There are a number of "second-tier" mids (Trengove & Scully being the first tier) that have been touted as top 10 or top 15 by various experts, starting with Rohan & Martin (Laugh-In???), then guys such as Morabito, Cunnington, Lucas, Melksham, Jetta etc etc. If one of these "second tier mids" slips to 11 (which is quite likely if Butcher and another tall are in the top 10) , then I think we'll take that mid, and then the best remaining tall at 18 - Plan A. If all the "second-tier mids" are taken by 11, then we'll take the best tall at 11 (Butcher? Talia?) and Luke Ball (if he's still there) at 18 - Plan B.

This way we're assured of getting a good mid and a reasonably good tall, but the mid is the priority. It may be Ball, it may not be. I like Plan A better, but Plan B isn't too bad either.

[H_T 3,047]

I'm just worried that Luke Ball will be really immature and is likely to stand out of AFL football for 23 months just to spite us.

Let's hope I'm wrong....

He is smarter than that surely. He can kiss his footy career goodbye if he intends to stand out.

[The Chazz 4,077]

I think a lot of people on this site are putting too much expectations on picks 11 and 18. When it's all said and done, we are drafting 2 potential superstars of the competition...Scully and Trengove. These two kids have been likened to Chris Judd and James Hird respectively, as well as any other stars including Nathan Buckley, and current players like Bryce Gibbs. The reality is that if they both live up to the expectation, we will have made this the best individual club draft in many years. The last time a team drafted 2 or more superstars in the one draft would be back in 2001, where clubs like Geelong landed Bartel and Ablett (although Gaz was pick 40 via father and son), St Kilda got Ball and Dal Santo, Hawthorn got Hodge and Mitchell, the list goes on, but my main point is that the class of 2001 is like nothing we have seen before, and will be a long, long time until we see it again. I'm amazed that Melbourne were about the only team that [censored] up - possibly cost us a crack at the flag in the later Daniher years, but that's a side issue. Have a look at the selections, quite an amazing draft http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_AFL_Draft

So, what I'm getting at is that picking up Ball at either 11 OR 18 will be a massive collect for the club. He is proven, he may not be a superstar (when comparing him t the likes of Judd, Ablett, etc), but should he play for Melbourne, I would rate him in the top 3 at the club. IF, and it's a very big "IF", Scully and Trengove turn out to be the A+ midfielders that we need, and we get an "A" midfielder in Ball, we have done very, very well, and we still have the chance to pick up another A- player with 11/18 (whichever we didn't use on Ball), as well as 34 and 51.

Saying that we are going to get a quality forward at 11 and 18 is a massive call, and in time, may be correct. I would call it a massive risk for the MFC. In that 2001 draft, Melbourne picked Luke Molan at pick 9, missing out on names like Dal Santo (pick 13), Stevie J (24), Campbell Brown (32), Sam Mitchell (36), Dane Swan (58). At the time, they obviously thought Molan was the best available. To Molan's defence, he never had the chance to prove if he was every bit as good as those other players selected in 2001 (http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/unlucky-pick-from-the-superdraft/2008/11/24/1227491463795.html). Looking at the quality of the kids that are earmarked to go around that pick 11 and 18, I think there is more chance that they will end up, at best, average players, as opposed to the "high quality" status that a number of people on here have them tagged as.

So, my question is, why not take Ball at 11? While I'm not a big fan of his, John Butcher would be the only player I would consider at 11, should he be available. He has shown ability/potential, at one stage he was a contender for pick 1 or 2 (Daniel Rich proved the form of former top draft picks that slide can turn out very good). If Butcher isn't around, get Ball. Put the bullsh!t aside about him not wanting to come to us, we (the general public) will never know the true story behind the scenes. Picking him at 11 is assuring we are going to get a top class midfielder (for Melbourne's standards) for the next 3-5 years. He is a player that will help win games of footy for the Club, absolutely no doubt about it. I want to see us win games, do you? I think the difference between pick 11 and 18 is minimal. I don't think we can say that a kid at pick 11 is showing much more potential than the kid likely to be picked at 18, that's why I think Melbourne isn't sacrificing anything by picking Ball at 11. We have a history of stuffing up early picks, but getting something handy at pick 30+, I can't see why that wont continue this year (the bit about us jaggin something with a later pick).

I know the anti-Ball community amongst us will be licking their lips reading my post, so I'm prepared! Just make sure you don't use 2 things in you arguements;

1. The line on "he doesn't want to come to us". As I said, we will never know the full truth in regards to this.

2. The line about "his body wont last 3 years...blah, blah". Read the above link on Luke Molan, a former pick 9, INJURIES CAN HAPPEN TO ANYONE!!!

Edited November 24, 2009 by billy2803

[two sheds jackson 3]

I definitely don't think we'll take him with pick 11; I think it's a bluff by Connolly to try to get someone like Essendon to use a first round pick on him, effectively bumping us up to picks 10 and 17. If the bluff works I'll be surprised and elated, if we actually take him at 11 I'll be surprised and disappointed.

I don't think he's bluffing about pick 18 though; if Ball is still around by then we'd have to seriously look at him. We lack experience, physicality, leadership and quality midfielders, and Ball brings all those things to the table. Despite his injury concerns, we can be pretty confident of getting at least 3-5 good years out of him. And as HT said, he won't just sit out the contract, because if he does, there's no guarantee he'll ever get another one. If somebody we rate higher slides to 18 and we take him instead, great. If Ball's not around by pick 18, we're effectively bumped up to 17. Whatever happens, we win.

Edited November 24, 2009 by two sheds jackson

[beelzebub 23,374]

Billy what you say is essentially correct. we about to mine gold big time. The conundrum of sorts is should we decide to wait til 18 in order to pick up a tall ,not necessary dedicated KPF...or KP at al..just a taller type. If Ball comes at 18 we will have three excellent midfielders. we also need more depth in the taller timber.. The argument ( for want of a better word ) is that there ought to be better picks at 11 than at 18. If Ball is still there at 11 he will most likely be there at 18. its our decision. Harrington has said previously they are looking at some taller types. Its all of us trying to join dots

[beelzebub 23,374]

Im with TSJ...I still have a funny feeling there much about this to goad Essendon into an earlier than it want selection. A lot of Brinkmanship about this draft

[The Chazz 4,077]

Billy what you say is essentially correct. we about to mine gold big time. The conundrum of sorts is should we decide to wait til 18 in order to pick up a tall ,not necessary dedicated KPF...or KP at al..just a taller type. If Ball comes at 18 we will have three excellent midfielders. we also need more depth in the taller timber.. The argument ( for want of a better word ) is that there ought to be better picks at 11 than at 18. If Ball is still there at 11 he will most likely be there at 18. its our decision. Harrington has said previously they are looking at some taller types. Its all of us trying to join dots

I don't think there is much gap between the "better" talls in the draft. Therefore, waiting til 18 to pick one up will mean we get a similar quality one, we just have less to choose from.

I'd like a tall at either 34 or 51 too, to go with the one at 18!

[DirtyDees DDC 176]

Lets assume the first 10 picks go down 'in no particular order' according to Scott Claytons' selections:

Jack Trengove, Tom Scully, Dustin Martin, Anthony Morabito, Ben Cunnington, Gary Rohan, Lewis Jetta,

Jake Melksham, John Butcher, and Andrew Moore.

That leaves a pool of players available from 11 to 18 that includes:

Daniel Talia, Aaron Black, Jasper McMillan-Pittard, Brad Sheppard, Nathan Vardy, Jake Carlisle, Luke Tapscott and Kane Lucas.

Plus a loose cannon in Luke Ball.

Many Demonlanders are saying 'just pick the best available. Don't pick for type'. But what if you can't choose?

What if you have a bunch of players with similar potential?

If Tapscott goes at 11 and Lucas at 18, is there that much difference between the two?

This is when you need to look at your current list, identify your needs, and pick for type.

EG: If we had 3 top key defenders in our current line-up and they were all over 30,

you'd pick a KPP at 11 to fill a need in 2-3 years.

I see at least two key areas where we have to develop our list.

We need a KPP that can possibly play for at least 10 years. But not a dopey big lug KPF.

This guy should be tall AND mobile, and can play back and forward.

And as you can't have a long term outlook without a short term focus,

I'd look for an experienced midfielder to fill the hole left by Brock mclean.

This draft has to set us up for the next 5-10 years, so I'd go for the KPP at 11,

and Ball at 18.

I just have a feeling that Ball might go before pick 18.

If he get's picked up early, then let's copy Adelaide. They are picking a bunch of younger players in the middle

and gradually moving their older players like Thompson to other positions.

[Crystal Dees 372]

Conratulations everyone - the last 10 posts have been the best discussion on this overblown topic in weeks. Proves to me we have the best supporters in the AFL. For your good work I'll grant you your wish for a premiership in 2012.

[The Chazz 4,077]

Lets assume the first 10 picks go down 'in no particular order' according to Scott Claytons' selections:

Jack Trengove, Tom Scully, Dustin Martin, Anthony Morabito, Ben Cunnington, Gary Rohan, Lewis Jetta,

Jake Melksham, John Butcher, and Andrew Moore.

That leaves a pool of players available from 11 to 18 that includes:

Daniel Talia, Aaron Black, Jasper McMillan-Pittard, Brad Sheppard, Nathan Vardy, Jake Carlisle, Luke Tapscott and Kane Lucas.

Plus a loose cannon in Luke Ball...

Interesting quote from BP in the Herald Sun this morning;

""We are also at pick 11, and last year it was Steele Sidebottom, who stepped up and played really good footy. We would be rapt to get someone like that at 11, but in this draft we are not expecting it..."

While he does say that the first 25 picks will be solid, it doesn't give me as much confidence as others in here when thinking we are going to get the answers to our prayers at 11 and/or 18. I have thought this all along, hence my desire of picking Ball at 11. It's a safe bet that Luke Ball will turn out more than solid over the next 5 years.

From your list of names above, I want Ball and Vardy. I think our ruck stocks are at the URGENT stage, and he appears too be the best in this years pool - how good that will be, who knows, but as I said above, getting 2 potential superstars at 1 & 2, and a top midfielder in Ball at 11, anything after that is a bonus.

[The Chazz 4,077]

...

I know the anti-Ball community amongst us will be licking their lips reading my post, so I'm prepared! Just make sure you don't use 2 things in you arguements;

1. The line on "he doesn't want to come to us". As I said, we will never know the full truth in regards to this.

2. The line about "his body wont last 3 years...blah, blah". Read the above link on Luke Molan, a former pick 9, INJURIES CAN HAPPEN TO ANYONE!!!

Just quoting myself from an earlier post; the "Ball-bashers" haven't ripped me a new one like I thought they would. Maybe it's because most are over the topic, or maybe it's because of the 2 rules I made about what not to include in their arguements. After those 2 rules, they've got nothing!