I can't think of a more perfect example of the lure of potential than draft picks. Totally untried, raw materials to mould whatever kind of player you want.

There is the trade option I mentioned regarding compo picks, and there's more than potential in that regard.

No. I believe our Compensation picks are. There's our value.

Well i did suggest trading a draft pick #1(Watts) and #4 (Morton) with a few years already into them and random other crap (that also could have included the compos) and people still said it wouldn't get it over the line.

I would love to see what just a possible pick 12 and 13 would get then.

Does no one think beamer can step it up and become A grade this year i really think its a chance with someone like magner around the ball helping to protect were the ball will fall and choping out with shepards i think it is a chance he is coming into his prime years

I think that all of our mids will be far better than they have been when we can develop a system that ensures that every player is required not only to win the ball but to ensure safe passage for the guy with the ball.

Let me tell you this - it works well at Hawthorn, Geelong, Collingwood.............and guess what.........they have all 'done pretty well' recently. (OMG, that sound too Ruddesque)

Edited February 29, 201213 yr by monoccular

Well i did suggest trading a draft pick #1(Watts) and #4 (Morton) with a few years already into them and random other crap (that also could have included the compos) and people still said it wouldn't get it over the line.

I would love to see what just a possible pick 12 and 13 would get then.

I would hardly call the compo picks random other crap.

I would hardly call the compo picks random other crap.

I would.

We overestimate their value on Land to staggering proportions.

And, olisik - we will be out there tempting the Jack Watts' of other clubs to come to ours, we are hardly in a position to attract a star, let alone have the currency to get the deal done.

I know this is not what people want to hear but that's just the way it is.

I would.

We overestimate their value on Land to staggering proportions.

And, olisik - we will be out there tempting the Jack Watts' of other clubs to come to ours, we are hardly in a position to attract a star, let alone have the currency to get the deal done.

I know this is not what people want to hear but that's just the way it is.

I don't overestimate their value at all, they are what they are and whilst they won't be the magic dust to attract a major star they will be valuable in the 2012 draft, not just other crap. I'm not so big on the idea of recruiting a star to the club anyway having seen it all before with Diamond Jim. Big Carl, Peter Moore, Kelvin Templeton etc. .......the mesiah has come to lift us to a flag. No, it doesn't work that way, let's keep developing our own, look to the draft and look for a good oportunity that may come with one of the GC or GWS kids wanting to come home, that's where the compo picks will be useful.

No, it doesn't work that way, let's keep developing our own, look to the draft and look for a good oportunity that may come with one of the GC or GWS kids wanting to come home, that's where the compo picks will be useful.

That's a realistic, yet aggressive, strategy for our compo picks.

Remember, we dont need more ................'his pretty good' players.

we actually want a star, and that will come at a price, and i would say that price would be more then a pick 12/13 and fringe players.

i honestly think that if Collingwood lost Cloke that they would be tempted by a watts + morton + other random crap trade.

Especially with Neelds relationship with the place.

Would like to add to the Watts discussion.

Looking at our forward setup with Clark, Martin and Jamar alternating down there when not in the ruck, we have Jurrah, Howe, Sylvia as options, I just wonder where Watts will fit in. I think they've got to keep developing him by settling him in a position. I'm wondering if he would be better suited for a run down back (ie centre half back) rather than middle, by making him more accountable. He has efficient kicking, will be led to the ball, and will be able to set play up. Can mark, getting to contests and reading play will be his strong suit and hopefully gains confidence.

Clark is our go to forward now, it's clear. I'm of the view that Watts may provide more value across half back. For now.

I just recall him playing there against North and yeah he got caught out from behind once but he did ok and with the tall timber we have now I would like to see him tried there.

tom mcdonald and sellar could be part of that group.

would like to see nev jetta get a decent run. starred for swan district colts on a wing

Are you guys serious? How on earth are you prepared to play Watts on the half back line, just becuase Clark is our "go to forward' now? We got Clark in to support the likes of Watts, so that our forward line isn't one dimensional. The only way you have suggested to ensure this doesn't happen is to play Martin forward (who will rotate with Jamar), then add in Sellar and McDonald. Sellar was delisted last year and we picked him up at 50 something. Tom McDonald has played 2 senior games, was picked up at number 53, yet people are expecting both these guys to take over from Watts - a number 1 draft pick, full forward for the AAT in 2008, a boy that is fast becomming a man, and has probably one of the best football brains on our list (which isn't far from being on display on a more regular basis).

HT - I'll match your North game where Watts played well on the half back line, with the game against Richmond at the MCG when some believed was his best game so far when he kicked 3, inculding that goal just before half time (from memoru) when he beat off 3 or 4 defenders and snapped.

Sorry guys, I'm just of the opinion that if we start playing Jack Watts in our backline, we would actually be taking a backward step. As for the midfield, he would be a liability for the next couple of seasons, due to the fact that he is still growing/developing, and opposition sides, especially the top sides, would be licking thier lips if JW lined up against them in the centre.

Clark is good, he can be very good, and he may end up great, but we will not win a premiership if he's our only go to man. Watts has class, and I have no doubt in my mind that he will be a far better player, actually, forward, than Clark.

I think it would aide in his development. I've suggested it "for now" because I think it will improve his overall game. Its not necessarily a long term solution of where he will play or where I want him to play.

Are you guys serious? How on earth are you prepared to play Watts on the half back line, just becuase Clark is our "go to forward' now? We got Clark in to support the likes of Watts, so that our forward line isn't one dimensional. The only way you have suggested to ensure this doesn't happen is to play Martin forward (who will rotate with Jamar), then add in Sellar and McDonald. Sellar was delisted last year and we picked him up at 50 something. Tom McDonald has played 2 senior games, was picked up at number 53, yet people are expecting both these guys to take over from Watts - a number 1 draft pick, full forward for the AAT in 2008, a boy that is fast becomming a man, and has probably one of the best football brains on our list (which isn't far from being on display on a more regular basis).

HT - I'll match your North game where Watts played well on the half back line, with the game against Richmond at the MCG when some believed was his best game so far when he kicked 3, inculding that goal just before half time (from memoru) when he beat off 3 or 4 defenders and snapped.

Sorry guys, I'm just of the opinion that if we start playing Jack Watts in our backline, we would actually be taking a backward step. As for the midfield, he would be a liability for the next couple of seasons, due to the fact that he is still growing/developing, and opposition sides, especially the top sides, would be licking thier lips if JW lined up against them in the centre.

Clark is good, he can be very good, and he may end up great, but we will not win a premiership if he's our only go to man. Watts has class, and I have no doubt in my mind that he will be a far better player, actually, forward, than Clark.

Spot on mate I'm with you I would love to see some faith put in Jack and see more of him inside the forward 50. I still remember that goal he kicked against the tigers before half time and that was all the proof I needed that he is our man. Port Adelaide are a rabble but they showed faith by picking butcher last year and then throwing him down forward. I don't think we will see him floating down back this year.

Edited February 29, 201213 yr by cowboy_from_hell

I think it would aide in his development. I've suggested it "for now" because I think it will improve his overall game. Its not necessarily a long term solution of where he will play or where I want him to play.

If you want to aide his development, I'd rather see him play on a HFF or wing. Actually, I don't want to see him moved from CHF, only to go to FF for a rest. Last year he often had the number 1 defender or the biggest defender. This year, there will be games where he has the number 3 or 4 defender, due to Clark taking the best one, and possibly Martin taking the next biggest (but that doesn't mean the next best).

Watts' development as a KPF will increase dramatically with Clark playing along side him in the forward line, not with Watts playing down the other end of the ground.

We have to foundations of a great forward line (Clark, Watts, Martin), there aren't too many teams that would host 3 defenders that could match up better than those 3. Martin is obviously the weakest link at this stage, so to take Watts out of that equation, and replace him with Sellar or McDonald (for the reasons I said earlier), then all of a sudden we have a very predictable forward line again (as Clark will be by far our best option).

we actually want a star, and that will come at a price, and i would say that price would be more then a pick 12/13 and fringe players.

The very best players, generally, play at the very best clubs. How can we possibly lure a player from a club that's gunning for a flag, to Melbourne?

The AFL isn't like manager mode on FIFA, we cannot orchestrate these ridiculous trades to our advantage. It sucks, but it is what it is.

I'm also amazed that we have one of the best back 6 in the league, and people are wanting to get all fancy by tinkering with it ie. Frawley to midfield, Garland to the wing, Watts to play half back. FFS, we have seen what happens to a group of players that are left alone and develop in to a unit, why change it? Imagine what our forward line would be like if they got to play 20-40 games with each other as a unit rather than individuals.

I don't recall seeing Scarlett, Taylor and Harley played forward or in the midfield.

Someone, can't remember who, said that Bailey's biggest problem was that he was so focused on developing individuals that he forgot to develop a team. I don't think I've seen a truer word spoken on Demonland. If Neeld is fair dinkum about him developing players for roles, I thin kyou will find a very setteled forward line, midfield and backline, as those players will need to understand their role in their selected department. Playing Watts anywhere other than forward is developing the individual and not his role in the forward line. I understand that individual development is vital, put he will develop as quick up forward, and it will also mean the forward unit will develop quicker over the next 20-40 games as opposed to Jack playing in the backline for that period.

Remember, we dont need more ................'his pretty good' players. we actually want a star, and that will come at a price, and i would say that price would be more then a pick 12/13 and fringe players. i honestly think that if Collingwood lost Cloke that they would be tempted by a watts + morton + other random crap trade. Especially with Neelds relationship with the place.

If Collingwood lost Cloke do you really think they would jeopardize their flag chances by trading Pendlebury for Watts, a fringe player, and random crap?

That trade wouldn't happen if Cloke stayed or left.

Watts is more value to us than he is on the market. He is still all potential.

We may want a 'star' but we cannot get one, we have to go and lure a young talent who 1) has the chance to become a star, 2) agrees to come to the MFC, and 3) can be affordable in trade week.

If Collingwood lost Cloke do you really think they would jeopardize their flag chances by trading Pendlebury for Watts, a fringe player, and random crap?

That trade wouldn't happen if Cloke stayed or left.

Watts is more value to us than he is on the market. He is still all potential.

We may want a 'star' but we cannot get one, we have to go and lure a young talent who 1) has the chance to become a star, 2) agrees to come to the MFC, and 3) can be affordable in trade week.

I actually think that Carlton was in a similar position to what we are now when they got Judd. Bunch of high draft picks comming into there early 20's.

they just had the backbone to do it.

I do admit the go home factor helped though whose saying we cant take it one step further.

I dont see a Gaff or Caddy being an Elite mid, I see them being 'Pretty good', which is something we already have. Gysberts, Tapscott, Blease, Magner, Viney coming through, Sylvia ect. We dont need more of these.

I was really disappointing the Dees didnt throw more into the ring for O'Meara :-(

I actually think that Carlton was in a similar position to what we are now when they got Judd. Bunch of high draft picks comming into there early 20's.

they just had the backbone to do it.

Funny you mention The Judd Nonsense © as it illustrated one of my points - we can't lure star players unless we have currency that is overly attractive to the club in question. Carlton was more attractive and could get a deal done. Not only did they have a prospect similar to our Watts, they Pick 3 in the draft.

I'm not sure it was about backbone, it was about having currency and being attractive.

I was really disappointing the Dees didnt throw more into the ring for O'Meara :-(

How would we beat Pick 4?

Watts and a compo might have done it but why are you shifting from star players to 'potential' star players because that is what O'Meara is. Hell, he can't even play footy in 2012.

Oh, and I think Viney will make you eat your words about him just being 'another MFC good player'...

Oh, and I think Viney will make you eat your words about him just being 'another MFC good player'...

I really hope so. at the moment i really only thinks Grimes has it in him to be an Elite mid fielder (If his body can hold up). I think Trengove would be an Elite team player rather then breaking games open individually. If he has some good boys in there with him he'll be great, if he dosn't then he'll just be good.

I actually think that Carlton was in a similar position to what we are now when they got Judd. Bunch of high draft picks comming into there early 20's.

they just had the backbone to do it.

I do admit the go home factor helped though whose saying we cant take it one step further.

I dont see a Gaff or Caddy being an Elite mid, I see them being 'Pretty good', which is something we already have. Gysberts, Tapscott, Blease, Magner, Viney coming through, Sylvia ect. We dont need more of these.

I was really disappointing the Dees didnt throw more into the ring for O'Meara :-(

Judd = not a number 1 draft pick

Ablett = not a number 1 draft pick (and even though he was a F/S pick, he still wouldn't have been #1)

Pendlebury = not a number 1 draft pick

Swan = not a number 1 draft pick

We may already have the next Judd/Pendlebury/Ablett, or we may get him in this draft (maybe it is Viney or one of the other compo's). But they will take time, just as Ablett, Swan and Pendlebury did. If those that are happy that $cully has gone can't see the massive hole that this [censored] has left, I've got concerns for you! But, we move on.

As RP said, "We may want a 'star' but we cannot get one, we have to go and lure a young talent who 1) has the chance to become a star, 2) agrees to come to the MFC, and 3) can be affordable in trade week". With that in mind, and the fact that stars don't have to be top draft picks, I'm going to put it to Blease, Gysberts and Viney to be our star within 3 years (Viney can get an extra year). Put 80 games and a handful of full preseasons in to Blease, and he could be our man.

I think blease is our man I really do. A player like Judd leaving West coast doesn't happen that often I am happy with the potential in players like Blease and JT i can see them being like a Judd/Murphy or Pendels/Swan combination.

I think blease is our man I really do. A player like Judd leaving West coast doesn't happen that often I am happy with the potential in players like Blease and JT i can see them being like a Judd/Murphy or Pendels/Swan combination.

We've go to remember that he has only played a handful of games. In those games he has shown to have something that the best players have. Most of them have pace, most of them have goal sense (Blease playing forward this year shows he must have this), they have that ability to get out of trouble by taking the game on.

He obviously has a long way to go, and that's just to cement a spot in our best 18, but I think with the right coaching, he of all players on our list has the potential to reach great heights. I actually think he's a very good bet in the Rising Star this year and should be another Melbourne player to receive his 2nd nomination (does he fit the age criteria?).

I actually think he's a very good bet in the Rising Star this year and should be another Melbourne player to receive his 2nd nomination (does he fit the age criteria?).

By the look of it he does. He turned 21 last month (Feb).

AFL terms:

To qualify for the NAB AFL Rising Star nomination, a player must be under 21 years of age as at January 1 of that year, must not have played more than 10 games to the start of that season and must not have been suspended by the AFL or State League tribunals during the season.

Whoever it is, as long as it doesn't mean we're resting our hopes on Bater in the midfield long term.

Wet weather or not, the bomb in hope approach might work against the Suns but the majority of other teams won't be so generous when you continually hand over possession. I love his endeavour but a playmaker he is not. I just hope Neeld knows what he's doing.

I do agree that Blease is an exciting prospect, having emerged from the shadow of he who shall not be named. Not many genuine potential gamebreakers on our list but he's one.

Saw alot of upside in Tynan also last weekend.

Jones must step up this year.

It seems we are identifying the attributes that each individual player lacks. If we can see this what are our coached doing to rectify these attributes.

I say this only to confirm expressions that all players have the potential and if we can get them to deliver we will win games.

Again it may be too much to have the potential expressed every day and judicious use of the whole list can select those best suited for an opponent or circumstance on their day to get maximum output and best results.

Im still positive

GO DEES!!!

Our midfield will win plenty of the pill this year but I fear it will be used poorly as the team gets used to the new game plan.

The hardness shown last weekend suggests stoppages will be a major area of improvement. Can our outside mids deliver it to the forward half and hit targets regularly? I'm not so sure.