Ill have to start a thread blaming Watts

I feel for you, Oli. It's like beating your head against a brick wall on this issue with some posters.

A few points that seem to be missed by a few here ...

1. Yes, of course, we definitely intend on drafting Viney, but we will not draft him under any and all circumstances. There are certain extreme circumstances where we might opt out, because it would be plain unprofessional not to. Imagine this scenario (yes, this a hypothetical, of course). He develops chronic OP, has a major debiltating injury or personal problems, has a serious personality clash with key members of the club, and drops substantially in perceived value. We have pick 3 (and 4) in the draft, and there are two clear standouts who are judged by all smart draft watchers to be heads and shoulders above everyone else. GWS state they are prepared to take Viney at pick 1 (to try and shaft us). What do we do? We have the chance to take one of the two standout future stars, plus the third, in a superdraft. Alternatively, we can take Viney (now valued as too risky for first round, maybe 20 at best) and the third best player who is daylight behind the first two. It's a substantial difference in benefit, and the club must seriously consider going with the former option.

OK, I concede that this is unlikely to transpire, but it is possible. And if you concede that it could happen, and that Melbourne could opt to drop Viney (maybe with a view to get him back to the club in two years) for the chance to pick up a superdraft star and another guaranteed player, then you must concede that there is a continuum along which all the potential circumstances of the upcoming draft lie, and at some point along that continuum, the club could drop their plan to draft JV, because not to do so would be unprofessional. When the benefit to the club of the two standout picks so substantially outweighs the benefit of getting JV, then a professional club management will take the option that is the greater benefit for the club.

2. In any scenario in which JV is not rated by the clubs as a top 2 or 3 pick, there is a substantial risk to be taken by the club with pick 1 or 2 in nominating him. To say anything else, is pure folly. They are taking the risk, no matter how small it is perceived to be, that they could lose their option on their preferred number 1 or 2 pick, should we opt out of taking JV. The greater the disparancy between JV's perceived value and their pick, the greater the risk. For example, in the above hypothetical, the team with the number one pick, is basically risking their prime pick in a superdraft, for a player valued 20 at best. Again, this is an extreme example, but there is a continuum along which the actual circumstances will fall, and at some point along this, the risk will be too great for that club to nominate.

3. Point 1 and 2 don't seem like brain surgery to me. But if you can't concede this two points, then we're obviously on a different planet, and I wouldn't bother reading further. Let's just agree to disagree. Anyway ...

4. Given point 1 and 2, the actions of the club should (and I think, will) obviously be dictated by which point along those two continua the circumstance lie at the end of the season. I believe that this is why we aren't hearing from the club publically on this issue. There have now been several articles in the press insinuating that we will take Viney with our first pick, no matter what. The club has not come out to confirm this, as they are waiting to see what happens. There is no advantage to them saying anything, so they aren't. Once the dust has settled on the season, I believe that you'll see them act in one of two ways.

i. If the circumstances fall so that picking Viney with our first round pick is good value for us, and that the risk for the teams higher than us in the draft order in nominating him is low, we'll back JV all the way, publically stating how in love with him we are and how good he is going to be.

ii. if they fall so that our first round for JV is very poor value, and the risk of the other teams is higher, then we will start using the media and gossip channels to create doubt about what we are going to do. We'll take a tough stance and say that we are not prepared to be dictated to by other teams. We'll ask the AFL to put pressure on the other teams not to 'dishonour' the F/S system, and the draft system generally. The Viney camp will spread rumours about his unwillingness to move to Sydney or GC. Etc etc.

5. Should ii. take place, all we would need to do is create enough doubt in the minds of the teams higher than us in the draft order so that they think there is a miniscule chance that they could lose their prime pick and be forced to take a lower valued JV, who doesn't want to come to their club. If these clubs want to act professionally, they will then back away from nominating him.

I can't believe somebody would put that much effort into a post.

I can't believe somebody would put that much effort into a post.

I'll take that as a compliment. Thanks, Riv.

Yeah, bit of brain fart.

Would love to see JV tear a Casey game apart just to see how Olisik would then hypothesize on pulling one over the competition.....

Maybe we should saw one of Jack's legs off - that might create enough doubt in club's minds whether we'd take him at 3.

Would love to see JV tear a Casey game apart just to see how Olisik would then hypothesize on pulling one over the competition.....

Im sure we would all love to see him tear the game apart, who wouldnt?

I must say though, some people in this thread seem quite optimistic about possibly paying overs for the lad.

Im sure we would all love to see him tear the game apart, who wouldnt?

I must say though, some people in this thread seem quite optimistic about possibly paying overs for the lad.

Optimism for being overcharged?

I don't think so.

I think they just feel that we are going to get great use out of the product and can't wait to enjoy it - no matter the price.

The "pain" of paying "overs" for Viney will be soothed if we can get Dangerfield.

We must SMASH Adelaide. We also must get Craig to wisper sweet nothings to Patrick.

I must say though, some people in this thread seem quite optimistic about possibly paying overs for the lad.

a) who's to say we'll be paying overs and B) what's not to be optimistic about getting one of the standouts of this year's draft?

You, and others here, continue to refer to some kind of "market value" when in reality there isn't one.

a) who's to say we'll be paying overs and B) what's not to be optimistic about getting one of the standouts of this year's draft?

You, and others here, continue to refer to some kind of "market value" when in reality there isn't one.

Thats exactly what it is, thats the whole point of the draft and its order. To give more value to those clubs who need it.

If there was no market value behind the draft then why would teams bother trading picks?

GWS and GC would be mad to risk pick 1 or 2 on Viney if he comes out and says i would not want to play for anyone but the MFC. He is a really good player so far but no team is that silly because we will call there bluff. And they will not risk it in my view the AFL no that GWS has allready taken our 1st pick in scumbag scully and for them to play hard ball with us with a F.S when they no he is not worth pick 1 or 2 i would hope the AFL would say something to these scumbags. Viney should come to us with our 2nd round pick

lets hope jack doesn't have a bad game and the media start to sledge

GWS and GC would be mad to risk pick 1 or 2 on Viney if he comes out and says i would not want to play for anyone but the MFC. He is a really good player so far but no team is that silly because we will call there bluff. And they will not risk it in my view the AFL no that GWS has allready taken our 1st pick in scumbag scully and for them to play hard ball with us with a F.S when they no he is not worth pick 1 or 2 i would hope the AFL would say something to these scumbags. Viney should come to us with our 2nd round pick

Again, it is not about GWS or GC having any designs on Viney - IT IS ABOUT MAKING A COMPETITOR PAY THE MAXIMUM PRICE.

Yes, they will risk it - a club will make us pay the maximum for Jack unless we configure 'handshake' deals with all teams below us so that they do not bid for Jack.

The AFL is not going to do anything - the rules are the rules.

And again, it is irrelevant that it is GWS that can make us take Jack with a high pick. It is the rules. A rule that any club would exploit if they are in a position to.

Is Viney, Watts and Jurrah all lining up for Casey this week?

Sounds like a match worth watching. May even see some chemistry between the Jacks

The fact that they even bring Max into it is silly. I go to Carey and have seen Viney on many occasions, he is top notch and will do very well in the VFL as he has done in the Carey 1st Team.

Can't remember who wrote it but best post in this thread was regarding our potential ladder position;

1 - finish 16th, get picks 3 & 4 - Viney pick 3 and a good compo pick - result we potentially pay "overs" for Viney but also get a top 3 draftee

2 - finish 11th get picks 8 & 9 (or 9 & 10) - Viney pick 8 and an OK compo pick - result we get a potential bargain for Viney but only get a top 10 draftee

It's win/win - either we get another good draftee in addition to Viney or we get Viney for a bargain.

Of course if we finish 18th we get pick 1, 2, 13 & Viney. Can't see this happening and would be crap to "win" another spoon but if it was going to happen this year would be the year to do it.

GC looks like they are going to win, so now we are on track for pick #2 and #3.

Shouldn't be to tough making sure just GWS dosnt make the bid, just pass them Sylvia for a round 6 pick

I feel for you, Oli. It's like beating your head against a brick wall on this issue with some posters.

A few points that seem to be missed by a few here ...

1. Yes, of course, we definitely intend on drafting Viney, but we will not draft him under any and all circumstances. There are certain extreme circumstances where we might opt out, because it would be plain unprofessional not to. Imagine this scenario (yes, this a hypothetical, of course). He develops chronic OP, has a major debiltating injury or personal problems, has a serious personality clash with key members of the club, and drops substantially in perceived value. We have pick 3 (and 4) in the draft, and there are two clear standouts who are judged by all smart draft watchers to be heads and shoulders above everyone else. GWS state they are prepared to take Viney at pick 1 (to try and shaft us). What do we do? We have the chance to take one of the two standout future stars, plus the third, in a superdraft. Alternatively, we can take Viney (now valued as too risky for first round, maybe 20 at best) and the third best player who is daylight behind the first two. It's a substantial difference in benefit, and the club must seriously consider going with the former option.

OK, I concede that this is unlikely to transpire, but it is possible. And if you concede that it could happen, and that Melbourne could opt to drop Viney (maybe with a view to get him back to the club in two years) for the chance to pick up a superdraft star and another guaranteed player, then you must concede that there is a continuum along which all the potential circumstances of the upcoming draft lie, and at some point along that continuum, the club could drop their plan to draft JV, because not to do so would be unprofessional. When the benefit to the club of the two standout picks so substantially outweighs the benefit of getting JV, then a professional club management will take the option that is the greater benefit for the club.

So an unforeseen disaster befalling the young man will null-and-void the agreement?

And 'Draft Viney' is a continuum that at some point will have a 'do not draft' point?

Of course, we all concede this abstract notion of the club getting out of deal if Jack becomes gravely ill, a cripple, or dies.

But can we discuss probabilities rather than pointlessly hypothesise about 'what if the worst happens?'

2. In any scenario in which JV is not rated by the clubs as a top 2 or 3 pick, there is a substantial risk to be taken by the club with pick 1 or 2 in nominating him. To say anything else, is pure folly. They are taking the risk, no matter how small it is perceived to be, that they could lose their option on their preferred number 1 or 2 pick, should we opt out of taking JV. The greater the disparancy between JV's perceived value and their pick, the greater the risk. For example, in the above hypothetical, the team with the number one pick, is basically risking their prime pick in a superdraft, for a player valued 20 at best. Again, this is an extreme example, but there is a continuum along which the actual circumstances will fall, and at some point along this, the risk will be too great for that club to nominate.

3. Point 1 and 2 don't seem like brain surgery to me. But if you can't concede this two points, then we're obviously on a different planet, and I wouldn't bother reading further. Let's just agree to disagree. Anyway ...

Well, any argument that has a last line like that deserves to be torn apart...

It is 'pure folly' for clubs to let us take someone, with whom we have agreed a contract already, in the second round.

If it is just GWS and GC below us - we may get them to not bid. Any more than that and we will take him with Pick 4 or whichever pick will be our first.

Clubs know, that unless he becomes gravely ill or a cripple, that we will take him.

He better be well down that Continuum of Drafting Viney that you were talking about.

4. Given point 1 and 2, the actions of the club should (and I think, will) obviously be dictated by which point along those two continua the circumstance lie at the end of the season. I believe that this is why we aren't hearing from the club publically on this issue. There have now been several articles in the press insinuating that we will take Viney with our first pick, no matter what. The club has not come out to confirm this, as they are waiting to see what happens. There is no advantage to them saying anything, so they aren't. Once the dust has settled on the season, I believe that you'll see them act in one of two ways.

i. If the circumstances fall so that picking Viney with our first round pick is good value for us, and that the risk for the teams higher than us in the draft order in nominating him is low, we'll back JV all the way, publically stating how in love with him we are and how good he is going to be.

ii. if they fall so that our first round for JV is very poor value, and the risk of the other teams is higher, then we will start using the media and gossip channels to create doubt about what we are going to do. We'll take a tough stance and say that we are not prepared to be dictated to by other teams. We'll ask the AFL to put pressure on the other teams not to 'dishonour' the F/S system, and the draft system generally. The Viney camp will spread rumours about his unwillingness to move to Sydney or GC. Etc etc.

So your answer to this is for the club to whinge about the rules and spread rumours about the kid?

All the while we have a contract with the kid in place...

How does that fit in?

5. Should ii. take place, all we would need to do is create enough doubt in the minds of the teams higher than us in the draft order so that they think there is a miniscule chance that they could lose their prime pick and be forced to take a lower valued JV, who doesn't want to come to their club. If these clubs want to act professionally, they will then back away from nominating him.

Is that all we would need to do?

Create doubt that we will pick a kid we have a contract with?

Who is rated a top talent but one that if we have to take 8 places above his perceived value we suddenly won't honour the contract we have with him?

If we finish 15th or higher - we will take him with our first pick.

If we finish 16th or 17th - we may be able to work out deals that let us keep our Pick 3 or 2.

If we finish last - we will pick him in the second round.

I am hearing some fairly ordinary alleged circumstances in relation to Wojcinski's behaviour and Viney's broken jaw.

Anything in it ?

yeah- a broken jaw!

I am hearing some fairly ordinary alleged circumstances in relation to Wojcinski's behaviour and Viney's broken jaw.

Anything in it ?

From memory their is a rule sub section XYZ that states any opposition player who causes a broken jaw to a Melbourne player has no case to answer

Looking in the mirror just in case i was mistaken i can factually conclude that the jaw was sufficiently large enough to be considered part of the head

That's JV's National Champs basically over. 6-8 weeks for a broken Jaw, the last Vic metro game is July 4.

That's JV's National Champs basically over. 6-8 weeks for a broken Jaw, the last Vic metro game is July 4.

That is 6-8 weeks for any normal player but this is a Viney we're talking about!

Watching the highlights of the Casey game I was quite impressed by his ability to burst from packs.

Not playing Champs wouldn't be the worst thing considering all the above talk

lets hope jack doesn't have a bad game and the media start to sledge

Might have been preferrable to the injury...