Tom McDonald is not a rookie - he's on the senior list.

Sorry for misleading you, my mistake. I had Campbell also on my mind whwn I mentioned Tom. I hope Kel Lawrence does play tonight and stars.

Thanks for confirming.

Just hope information gained is accurate.

Evans.

No question.

He really slipped through the net, this kid.

Will be at MFC for a while to come.

Yeah, I think Evans has been super. Deserves a spot on pre-season form.

Evans, I think he will be a good player for us and even if he's not ready for the opening game I would see him playing sometime in the first half of the season. Good skills and can find the ball.

As TH said, Evans is the only rookie to have played in both NAB Cup matches (where they sort of counted, as opposed to NAB Challenge).

Evans gets my vote.

I would pick him ahead of Bail, Jones, Strauss, Blease and Gysberts at this stage.

The kid has looked ok so far, but lets not get carried away. They were just pre-season games. Bail, Jones and Gysberts would be comfortably ahead of him for selection (although fitness may rule out Gysberts).

The kid has looked ok so far, but lets not get carried away. They were just pre-season games. Bail, Jones and Gysberts would be comfortably ahead of him for selection (although fitness may rule out Gysberts).

I reckon he's shown at least as much as Bail this preseason but with much better kicking.

Moloney and Jones in the same team slows the midfield down way too much in my opinion, but there could be a whole new thread about that. The only way Jones and Moloney can line up on the field together is with Jones playing an outside midfield role, in which I believe Evans has far more scope for improvement. Evans is faster, has better kicking and according to his draft profile, strong overhead marking which are the neccessary strengths for that role, which I don't believe Jones possesses. We already know what Jones can do and at the moment, he isn't showing enough (admittedly, returning from injury). Evans would have to be close to selection so we can see what he can do in the real stuff.

I'd be happy for him get a game early on to see how he goes in the real thing, but i don't think he's ready just yet to replace anyone in the starting 22. Looked liked he adapted to the pace of the game reasonably well, just needs a bit more composure when disposing of the ball.

Agree Jones and Moloney in the midfield can be of concern, and I'd imagine team selection may get quite interesting when Gysberts is fit and ready to go.

I would pick him ahead of Bail, Jones, Strauss, Blease and Gysberts at this stage.

I would not pick him ahead of any of those players except maybe Strauss who does not play midfield.

Without Morton, Frawley would Tommy Mac be a possibility due to the overload of midfielders?

Ah - injured - never mind

Edited March 11, 201114 yr by Dee-licious

I would not pick him ahead of any of those players except maybe Strauss who does not play midfield.

I wouldn't pick Newton ahead of anyone, ever.

There is a reason why he's on the rookie list. He has to show us something and prove he can play in multiple positions before he earns an elevation. In the 7 years he's been on our list he has shown a distinct lack of ability to play at the highest level.

At least we might get a long term player out of Evans.

I think they'll pick Newton too. Martin's not cutting it as back up ruck, Spencer seems away off - good in the ruck but that's it. IMO, the preference would be for Campbell, but his injury may shunt him to the mid-year elevation or the next LTI

I wouldn't pick Newton ahead of anyone, ever.

There is a reason why he's on the rookie list. He has to show us something and prove he can play in multiple positions before he earns an elevation. In the 7 years he's been on our list he has shown a distinct lack of ability to play at the highest level.

At least we might get a long term player out of Evans.

If we are actually going to play him then yeah I agree Evans. But realistically without many injuries to our midfielders I think he won't get a look in. Same goes for Nicholson.

Therefore I think we promote the one guy who sadly makes us a better team and that is Newton. I really believe that late last year he proved himself as our best second ruck option. Of course he is still a spud but picking between him, Martin and Spencer he wins.

Without Morton, Frawley would Tommy Mac be a possibility due to the overload of midfielders?

Ah - injured - never mind

I have to concede after the Adelaide NAB cup game that Tommy Mac hasn't got it, so I wouldn't be nominating him. We have to nominate on Tuesday not knowing how Lawrence went last night I would go with Evans, I see him as someone who could play the Bartram role if needed.

I wouldn't pick Newton ahead of anyone, ever.

There is a reason why he's on the rookie list. He has to show us something and prove he can play in multiple positions before he earns an elevation. In the 7 years he's been on our list he has shown a distinct lack of ability to play at the highest level.

At least we might get a long term player out of Evans.

Newton for mine has shown more as a forward and relief ruck than Martin. Rumours were he was also looking suitable as a relief backmen as well. If you think you have seen more actual performance in Martin than Newton to play the relief role you are kidding yourself.

I agree Evans may be a long term player but you dont promote a rookie pre-season based on long term it is based on the most likely to have immediate use.

Newton for mine has shown more as a forward and relief ruck than Martin. Rumours were he was also looking suitable as a relief backmen as well. If you think you have seen more actual performance in Martin than Newton to play the relief role you are kidding yourself.

I agree Evans may be a long term player but you dont promote a rookie pre-season based on long term it is based on the most likely to have immediate use.

At the end of last season the only reason I wanted to keep Newts was for the relief ruckman/forward role. The only issue I have with his promotion/nomination is that he hasn't played at all this pre-season and wont be ready for another few weeks, so then a few games to get him match fit and he probably isn't good to go until round 8. I would still go with Evans at this stage. If I had the choice and there was not a Tuesday deadline, I wouldn't nominate anyone yet, and just sit back and see how players perform with Casey.

We might see a couple this year get elevated. Evans gets the nod to be first off the list.

Shame Campbell is injured, he would have been a monty.

I disagree that Campbell would have been a monty - with Jamar as #1 ruck would we really have played Campbell in the same side? If not, he would have only received a game if Jamar became injured.

I think we should elevate Campbell then immediately place him on the long term injury list, thus allowing room to elevate Evans

Brilliant!

Interesting tactic

I think we should elevate Campbell then immediately place him on the long term injury list, thus allowing room to elevate Evans

Brilliant!

How devilishly redundant.

Newton for mine has shown more as a forward and relief ruck than Martin. Rumours were he was also looking suitable as a relief backmen as well. If you think you have seen more actual performance in Martin than Newton to play the relief role you are kidding yourself.

I agree Evans may be a long term player but you dont promote a rookie pre-season based on long term it is based on the most likely to have immediate use.

My goodness me. That's twice you have said Newton.

If you seriously think Newton is the answer, then you are asking the wrong question. We're not tanking any more.

Let me tell you, it's daylight before Newton. The only reason he is still around is because inexplicably, we signed him for 2 years instead of 1 (instead of zero, really!). I think the pen slipped.

My goodness me. That's twice you have said Newton.

If you seriously think Newton is the answer, then you are asking the wrong question. We're not tanking any more.

Let me tell you, it's daylight before Newton. The only reason he is still around is because inexplicably, we signed him for 2 years instead of 1 (instead of zero, really!). I think the pen slipped.

Dont think Newton is the answer but believe he is more the answer than Martin as a relief ruckman/forward. For mine he is the closest to being required in the make up of our first 21 than Evans who would have 4-5 mids ahead of him before he got a serious look in at senior football.

Edited March 14, 201114 yr by big_red_fire_engine

Dont think Newton is the answer but believe he is more the answer than Martin as a relief ruckman/forward. For mine he is the closest to being required in the make up of our first 21 than Evans who would have 4-5 mids ahead of him before he got a serious look in at senior football.

Martin has been a big disappointment as a player and I don't see much future for him.

You can't have enough Mids and Evans will be a very good player (IMO). Cannot for the life of me understand why we didn't take Atley in the draft, mids are the players that win the ball and win games. We have a very good goal to inside 50 ratio and that's without winning more than a handful of clearances a game.

Martin has been a big disappointment as a player and I don't see much future for him.

You can't have enough Mids and Evans will be a very good player (IMO). Cannot for the life of me understand why we didn't take Atley in the draft, mids are the players that win the ball and win games. We have a very good goal to inside 50 ratio and that's without winning more than a handful of clearances a game.

If only we had pick 1 and 2 in the national draft and could get the best two mids available

Evans

Evans IMO.

If only we had pick 1 and 2 in the national draft and could get the best two mids available

Not quite sure what point you are trying to make there, we were able to select Atley but didn't and I was surprised as were many others.