On what you saw today ?

Good grief man. Even Wines speaks in awe of Viney. And Viney was clearly rusty coming off a 6 week break from a broken jaw. Viney is exactly the inside quality mid we need. Based on their history you'd choose Viney.

I absolutely love Toumpas' class, movement and poise. Being the SA captain he'd add to the quality type of people we're developing. And there's no doubt that Garlett is really special. I don't know where he fits in from a draft perspective, but he looks better than Yarran who went at 6.

Agree with you on both Viney, Wines and Toumpass whom was carrying an injury as well .Gartlett is good but I would take the others before him.

If the club says he is pick 3 material, we should use pick 3. If he is pick 7 material - we should not.

This is what gets me about this "debate". In the longer term, the difference between 3 and 7 an irrelevance. Anyone in the top dozen or so would be pretty much interchangeable, and you only have to look back over previous drafts to see that. Try the 2006 draft for example. 3 was Lachlan Hansen. OK player. 7 ... Joel Selwood.

If we had to take a second rounder in our first round to ensure getting him as a F/S, we'd need to do some thinking. But to take a high first rounder high in the first round ... don't even need to think about it.

This is what gets me about this "debate". In the longer term, the difference between 3 and 7 an irrelevance. Anyone in the top dozen or so would be pretty much interchangeable, and you only have to look back over previous drafts to see that. Try the 2006 draft for example. 3 was Lachlan Hansen. OK player. 7 ... Joel Selwood.

Agree. IMO there are also benefits such as the time he has spent at the club getting to know the place already and other "intangibles"... pushed him up a few ranks in the draft (for us).

We only have ourselves to blame when it comes to Jack Viney. Maybe if we can win some more games this won't be an issue. Plus he has to come to the MFC I told my mum he will be playing for us next year and I don't want to lie to my mummy!

Just don't forget that GWS and Sheedy will want our pick more than they will want to annoy us. That suggests a deal for an Under 17 and.............

Yes I know the father /son is done before trading, but there is plenty of time for discussion after the season, when final ladders positions are known and before the F/S date.

Edited June 30, 201213 yr by Redleg

But to take a high first rounder high in the first round ... don't even need to think about it.

But the club has "supposedly" stated that we won't use pick 3 on Viney. If they subsequently buckle at the knees under pressure will they be viewed as a soft touch ?

Edited June 30, 201213 yr by Ben-Hur

This is what gets me about this "debate". In the longer term, the difference between 3 and 7 an irrelevance. Anyone in the top dozen or so would be pretty much interchangeable, and you only have to look back over previous drafts to see that. Try the 2006 draft for example. 3 was Lachlan Hansen. OK player. 7 ... Joel Selwood.

This is definitely a point that leads me to believe if GWS do nominate him with their top pick we will take him at 3. We already know much of what we're getting with Jack; hard working, hard at it, fierce competitor. Whereas we pass him up we're getting a more unknown commodity. Sure we'd do interviews and review the tapes of him playing but Jack has been inside the club.

I'm glad we've leaked this hardball stance to Barrett, but at the end of the day if he is rate 3-7 we should take him if we have to.

maybe, but not in my eyes. Passing on Viney after basically signing him up last year would be poor form

Agree. We've committed to the kid and his family.

its all just posturing, brinkmanship with a little bit of showtime thrown in for the AFL's benefit .

We going to get dizzy watching this go round and round.....

Vineywill play at Melbourne

Agree. We've committed to the kid and his family.

Plus the kid wants to be a demon!

But the club has "supposedly" stated that we won't use pick 3 on Viney. If they subsequently buckle at the knees under pressure will they be viewed as a soft touch ?

Maybe we shouldn't make recruiting decisions driven by public perception?

But the club has "supposedly" stated that we won't use pick 3 on Viney. If they subsequently buckle at the knees under pressure will they be viewed as a soft touch ?

There is a slight chance of being viewed this way. But I think publicly it can be explained well enough. Privately I suggest the club makes it known we will target their best players with good cash.

Btw Ben - your quote regarding Leigh at the bottom of your posts - did you hear Leigh last night in the post game discussion ( Blues v Hawks) have a little laugh at himself for offering that opinion? Gold.

There is a slight chance of being viewed this way. But I think publicly it can be explained well enough. Privately I suggest the club makes it known we will target their best players with good cash.

Btw Ben - your quote regarding Leigh at the bottom of your posts - did you hear Leigh last night in the post game discussion ( Blues v Hawks) have a little laugh at himself for offering that opinion? Gold.

Why would we bother and what good would that do? ALL other clubs will do this regardless, and GWS would be stupid not to know it.

That won't do a thing to aid us in getting Viney.

does no one quite understand the 'game' thats being played here. So many taking statements at face value.

Stand back all and let the experts handle it.

This is definitely a point that leads me to believe if GWS do nominate him with their top pick we will take him at 3. We already know much of what we're getting with Jack; hard working, hard at it, fierce competitor. Whereas we pass him up we're getting a more unknown commodity. Sure we'd do interviews and review the tapes of him playing but Jack has been inside the club.

I'm glad we've leaked this hardball stance to Barrett, but at the end of the day if he is rate 3-7 we should take him if we have to.

And seemingly of good character. Plus we've given his dad a job....

Maybe we shouldn't make recruiting decisions driven by public perception?

It's not the public perception that concerns me. I couldn't care less what opposition supporters, or the media think.

Most clubs have a reputation at draft time, i.e. Essendon were impossible to deal with and Port would stand on their principles. I don't want to overstate how any backflip from Melbourne may effect their reputation at the trade table, but it seems to me that if you say one thing and do the opposite you don't help your profile when it comes to future negotiations. But it may be insignificant in the overall context of things.

I'm starting to think that GWS, or Gold Coast won't bid for Viney. Gold Coast will want Whitfield and won't want him slipping through to GWS and GWS don't really need him when you consider their vast array of contested ball winning mids: Greene, Coniglio, Dom Tyson, Ward, Adams, Treloar. I understand the argument that you can never have enough, but they may want a top shelf ruck talent like Grundy, when you consider they're relying on Giles and Brogan.

Edited June 30, 201213 yr by Ben-Hur

It's not the public perception that concerns me. I couldn't care less what opposition supporters, or the media think.

So if that's the case what do you think I actually mean ?

Well, the only ones left to 'view' this decision are Melbourne supporters.

I reiterate, should we be making decisions that are driven by possible perception of the club?

Haven't seen much of his footy but the two things that come across from the article I just read are his maturity in the media and his already afl style cut physique.

If we finish 3rd last lets just hope the quality of players make that decision easy i.e. two standout players so we know whether to select Viney or not if GWS want to play hardball.

I owuld love Viney to the Dees and hope he does make it there but sentiment doesn't win you games of football.

Overly convoluted discussion RE: Viney.

We'll either take him with #3 or a second round pick. We will NOT not take him.

It's critical to our success that it's the second rounder, but someone will probably bend us over. The endgame is half a season away.

Overly convoluted discussion RE: Viney.

We'll either take him with #3 or a second round pick. We will NOT not take him.

So Melbourne are bluffing ?

GWS have already stated they will definately be bidding for Viney.

I dont think he is in the best 2, but they are bidding, its on record.

The whole thing with GWS bidding on him is they actually have to take him meaning we could take a potentially better player at pick 3. Are they willing to do that just to prove a point?

So Melbourne are bluffing ?

We are most likely bluffing.

I kinda hope we arent though, if Grundy is there at 3, we take him, bottom line.

As for 4, Id have others before Viney.

Ive said it before, he is only small, doesnt have great pace - and although he is a clearance specialist,

if GWS and Goldy taken the best 2 kids, Jack wouldnt be one of them.

Whitfield and Grundy really should go 1 and 2 and Tompas looked very good yesterday.

So, it will be interesting, GWS might be the ones bluffing.

Our club has had huge success with our top 10 picks from the past 5 years, Morton, Watts, Scully and Trengove only two will be at our club in 2014 and if we can get a trade it may be 2013. This kid is a 250 game player there is no chance we are not picking him up. Imagine the flip side we don't take him, pick 3 ends up being another Morton and Viney goes to GWS with Sculls and wins a flag, now that would be a dagger into the heart of our club.