Yes, skin. Although they've got an extended list there's still a limit to the number of players they can have and it reduces each year back to the standard number - list spots on their list will be at a premium, they can't fill them with players they don't really want. We'll need to offer them quality players they want or picks.

Why? They are not going to have to do much for it. Just be honest and say JV isn't their preferred pick 1, pick 2 ,

That doesn't demand very much, just something better than nothing

Edit: it doesn't necessarily have to be Dunne/MacDonald they were just examples

Edit2: we are just talking long shots anyway - odds are they won't cooperate

Edited May 1, 201213 yr by daisycutter

I was talking draft at 3/4 time of the Brisbane game. No [censored].

Let's go pace and tall mids. Pendles/Goddard style. We have the in and unders. We have the dual role (Trenners), we need prototypical modern day footballers who'll love the G.

One gets the feeling with Viney and Neeld running recruitment, we will not be looking at another Morton situation.

I was talking draft at 3/4 time of the Brisbane game. No [censored].

Let's go pace and tall mids. Pendles/Goddard style. We have the in and unders. We have the dual role (Trenners), we need prototypical modern day footballers who'll love the G.

One gets the feeling with Viney and Neeld running recruitment, we will not be looking at another Morton situation.

Todays game is all about inside Mids tough hard ball winners that can win their own football. I have a feeling thats the model we may follow with our current game plan.

Question is can we develop some of our outside mids to fill those roles. Time & money will tell.

Edited May 1, 201213 yr by Dr Who

(Obviously this would all need to be agreed upon before the bidding session via informal chats)

I would have thought the opposite you make no commitments prior to knowing what picks you have - but you would 100% highlight your interest in 17Yo or players that they may struggle to maintain.

You might also think if a team was going to pick Viney out of spite you would struggle to deal with them in this recruiting process - making "enemies" burning bridges via spite picks is very short term thinking. Football moves in mysterious ways.

Its easy for the "other" clubs saying yes, yes, yes you should do it - but will they? What goes around comes around.

Edited May 1, 201213 yr by Dr Who

tell GWS we'll trade them pick#3 for the first pick of the 17 mini draft. then they wont bid coz they ll want our pick 3.

then we get first pick of 17yr olds and get viney for 2nd rounder.

This is very clever thinking olisik...

This is a trade that GWS might initiate rather than the MFC.

This is very clever thinking olisik...

This is a trade that GWS might initiate rather than the MFC.

and where does that leave GCS?

and do we really want a 17yo?

and where does that leave GCS?

and do we really want a 17yo?

how good are they?

This is very clever thinking olisik...

This is a trade that GWS might initiate rather than the MFC.

The "penny has dropped" - well done.

and where does that leave GCS?

and do we really want a 17yo?

Probably not, but if they give us an ultimatum - it's better than a punch in the face.

The "penny has dropped" - well done.

This is bait, people!

I have been talking about appeasing the teams before in the draft for a few weeks now...

Your holier-than-thou Zen attitude is as lost on me as it makes you seem.

Absolutely, there are people on here who don't rate him at all and would see him gone at years end.

I didn't, but only because i have a MFC Player memory of longer than 6 months, and knew what he is capable of.

But he has been down, as has McKenzie, and Trengove...

Jeez we ask the kids to do a lot...

I totally agree. Bail is a very important player for us. Am i right in thinking he hadn't played a huge amount of footy before we picked him up? IIRC his focus was on athletics and was a state rep for Qld in the 400 or some such distance (unless i'm confusing him with someone else of course). Tremendous upside and i reckon all the young players will benefit hugely from having a coach who is a proven developer

He was the QAFL player of the year or something like that, which probably isn't saying too much- but it still is the best player out of however many play up there.

He has zip and flair, something we lack. Great runner, will benefit from Viney coming on

and where does that leave GCS?

and do we really want a 17yo?

I'm willing to bet we'd prefer the best 17 year old plus Viney with pick 20-something, rather than pick 20-something plus Viney for pick 3.

Best 17 year old generally > pick 20-something.

But I guess that judgment call is where our recruiters come in...

I'm willing to bet we'd prefer the best 17 year old plus Viney with pick 20-something, rather than pick 20-something plus Viney for pick 3.

Best 17 year old generally > pick 20-something.

But I guess that judgment call is where our recruiters come in...

Dont think it would be out of the question you might also get something back if you did deal with GWS. ie pick/s

Their list reduction problem will force them to seek quality over quantity. As per GC17 last year.

hows this for a scenario

GC gives GWS pick #2 in draft

we give GC pick #3 in draft

We get Pick #1 in 17 yr old draft

GC gets pick #2 in 17 yr draft

GWS gets pick #2 in strongest draft.

(Obviously this would all need to be agreed upon before the bidding session via informal chats)

we can then use our pick #4 for any player, pick #12 for any player and second round pick on Viney and get the best 17 yr old

Really like this -- it gives both teams a vested interest in us not using pick 3 on Viney, rather than just "please don't make us use the pick on him and we'll give you something".

There's a direct link between us selecting him with pick 3, GWS getting probably the best deal possible for the 1st mini-draft pick, and GC getting their hands on the 2nd mini-draft pick and keeping a top 3 ND pick.

Clever.

Only problem isn that GC seems to get too much for nothing.

Reckon they'd have to add a bit more to the deal for the 2nd mini-draft pick.

Gotta be a surplus talented kid who can't get a game at GC, that GWS might like.

Get Essendon involved with Caddy?

The "penny has dropped" - well done.

Pathetic trolling, btw.

Pathetic trolling, btw.

Thanks but he is only like 20 months behind - but such is life.

I'm willing to bet we'd prefer the best 17 year old plus Viney with pick 20-something, rather than pick 20-something plus Viney for pick 3.

Best 17 year old generally > pick 20-something.

But I guess that judgment call is where our recruiters come in...

Agreed, but satisfying GWS doesn't stop GCS from forcing us to use first round pick on Viney.

If you are going to come up with a "deal" you should also include a GCS "deal"

Unless of course you believe we will finish below GCS

And, of course it depends on what sort of 17yo we are talking about. If he is likely to be a ready-to-play type when eligible then that is better than if he is the type who will take years to develop. We need good players able to play quickly, not in 3-4 years.

Edit: missed olisiks inclusion of a "deal" for GCS - that looks better

Edited May 1, 201213 yr by daisycutter

Thanks but he is only like 20 months behind - but such is life.

Since you have been back Hangon, all you do is troll people: rpfc, RF, Bossdog (the war talk), everyone trying to talk about recruitment, DC, I am sure I am missing a few.

Why are you behaving like this?

You keep this up and you won't be here long.

If you want to be apart of the conversation?

Don't make yourself into a joke that people just ignore.

I dare say you are getting to that point now.

hows this for a scenario

GC gives GWS pick #2 in draft

we give GC pick #3 in draft

We get Pick #1 in 17 yr old draft

GC gets pick #2 in 17 yr draft

GWS gets pick #2 in strongest draft.

(Obviously this would all need to be agreed upon before the bidding session via informal chats)

we can then use our pick #4 for any player, pick #12 for any player and second round pick on Viney and get the best 17 yr old

Good thinking - there's a few kinks - GC gets too good a deal - I think they get the U17 pick for free. One of the hurdles in coming up with a good fair deal is that GWS, GC and MFC have specific picks and to get the trade mix right is not always easy. The fair value might be a half a round upgrade but if you don't have those picks then you can't do the deal. Working the U17 picks in gives another dimension.

BTW, it's great to see you suggest a practical a scenario ...

This draft is "critical" draft for us in so many ways, it easily has the ability to shape our 2013 seasons onwards in so so many ways.

We must, must be active in all components of the recruitment process.

IMHO we need to

a/ Hand pick a Free Agent to target

b/ We have the picks to easily be an active leader at the trade table - we must must make effective use of them. All picks should be placed on the table for the "right" player.

c/ With our remaining picks we must not go down the same obviously wrong path of just focusing on "kids" - I have a feel all teams will create more than the minimum required 3 spots this year, which should open the ability to recycle reasonably earlier than many other sides.

We have been given a rare opportunity (thank-you Tom) lets not waste it by spending it on "best available kids" surely we have learned its all about your complete recruitment strategy - not just "top 5 draft picks".

Go Dees

Suggest some actual scenarios rather than the hypothetical generic gobbledegook ...

Which free agent?

Which "right" player for which picks?

Which "non-kids"?

Since you have been back Hangon, all you do is troll people: rpfc, RF, Bossdog (the war talk), everyone trying to talk about recruitment, DC, I am sure I am missing a few.

Why are you behaving like this?

You keep this up and you won't be here long.

If you want to be apart of the conversation?

Don't make yourself into a joke that people just ignore.

I dare say you are getting to that point now.

For me it has largely been that way for months...

Unless they're really short I just skip over them.

If Freo pull off a coup and pinch Cloke, compo picks will be headed Collingwood's way.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/fremantle-makes-massive-bid-for-free-agent-travis-cloke/story-e6frf9jf-1226344152734

Still wouldn't really affect us since Collingwood are a monty to finish much higher (except pushing back our 2nd round pick).

Suggest some actual scenarios rather than the hypothetical generic gobbledegook ...

Which free agent?

Which "right" player for which picks?

Which "non-kids"?

I will give you some.

Black and Sewell in FA.

Dangerfield with Pick 3 or 4 (depending on the deal with GC and GWS and, of course, our continued poor results).

So Black, Sewell, Dangerfield, Viney, and Pick 13ish. And possibly another top 4 pick if we can get 'that' deal done.

Suggest some actual scenarios rather than the hypothetical generic gobbledegook ...

Which free agent?

Which "right" player for which picks?

Which "non-kids"?

No problems I will try to remember that for the future.