Hey Ben, you've sold me on Hogan but if we have to take Viney at 3 I think we can't afford to take him. Monday it is...

It sounds like the consensus view is that the standout top three in the draft are Whitfield, Toumpas and Grundy in that order. It also sounds like the Bulldogs are super keen on Martin in the mini-draft and GWS will acquire #5 and #6.

I am not a fan of drafting a ruckman so early (especially given our current list), so I would think about attempting to trade #3 and #14 to GWS for #5 and #6. They could go for this depending on how much they want Grundy. I would also look at trading #4 to St Kilda for #12 and #13.

This scenario is obviously predicated on Viney slipping to the second round.

We would then have #5, #6, #12, #13 and Viney. And then #13 might be sufficient for Hogan in the mini-draft.

Strange to hear so many people talking about having to wait a year for hogan to come along... how many of our young midfield and other picks played games in the last 2 years. quite a few of them spent more time running around with Casey than with the seniors. While hogan can not play for us he can play with our team members at Casey, train with them etc in much the way viney has, this has got to be an advantage over just drafting another 18 year old next year who we will probably need to have run around the 2's for a year or so until they get AFL fit and ready to play their first game, where as hogan should be raring to go from round 1.

It sounds like the consensus view is that the standout top three in the draft are Whitfield, Toumpas and Grundy in that order. It also sounds like the Bulldogs are super keen on Martin in the mini-draft and GWS will acquire #5 and #6.

How will they get these picks?

I am not a fan of drafting a ruckman so early (especially given our current list), so I would think about attempting to trade #3 and #14 to GWS for #5 and #6. They could go for this depending on how much they want Grundy. I would also look at trading #4 to St Kilda for #12 and #13.

This scenario is obviously predicated on Viney slipping to the second round.

We would then have #5, #6, #12, #13 and Viney. And then #13 might be sufficient for Hogan in the mini-draft.

Tell me how many games did Cochin, Martin and others play in the VFL before they got a gig?

It just proves that our recruiting has been off. If we draft we should draft for immediate impact like other teams do

It sounds like the consensus view is that the standout top three in the draft are Whitfield, Toumpas and Grundy in that order. It also sounds like the Bulldogs are super keen on Martin in the mini-draft and GWS will acquire #5 and #6.

I am not a fan of drafting a ruckman so early (especially given our current list), so I would think about attempting to trade #3 and #14 to GWS for #5 and #6. They could go for this depending on how much they want Grundy. I would also look at trading #4 to St Kilda for #12 and #13.

This scenario is obviously predicated on Viney slipping to the second round.

We would then have #5, #6, #12, #13 and Viney. And then #13 might be sufficient for Hogan in the mini-draft.

This is a joke, isn't it?

So we trade 3&4 for a loss of two positions at the sharp end of the draft for an extra pick and a slight upgrade to our mid range picks, that sounds like the bargain of the century. Unfortunately not to us.

This is a joke, isn't it?

So we trade 3&4 for a loss of two positions at the sharp end of the draft for an extra pick and a slight upgrade to our mid range picks, that sounds like the bargain of the century. Unfortunately not to us.

As a a principal I think we should take the best available. This will be Grundy at #3, but he doesn't fit our needs, is a greater risk as a ruckman and is from SA. We probably shouldn't do this type of trade if you thought GC would take Grundy and leave us with Toumpas, but they don't need a ruckman.

The trade with St Kilda is similar to what Geelong have been doing in recent years. They ended up the big winners out of the Mark Williams to Essendon and Burgoyne to Hawthorn trade.

#12 and #13 would probably net us players WE rate in the top 8-10 range. This is not a huge price for the player WE rate at #4. IMO the draft is a bit of a lottery and we should diversify.

This is a joke, isn't it?

So we trade 3&4 for a loss of two positions at the sharp end of the draft for an extra pick and a slight upgrade to our mid range picks, that sounds like the bargain of the century. Unfortunately not to us.

No way I think a drop of two positions for an extra pick in the top 15 is win for us. This draft's top 6-7 is very even and I believe all will be stars: I would be very happy to take two of Whitfield, Toumpas, Grundy, Macrae, O'Rourke, Wines or Mayes. As Fat Tony pointed out, Whitfield and Toumpas are destined to go 1 & 2 and Grundy is at a position we have in excess. If we slide down to 5 and 6 the drop in quality would not be excessive and the extra pick could allow us a player from the second tier such as a Kennedy, Garlett or Stringer who would all walk into our team.

I would think about attempting to trade #3 and #14 to GWS for #5 and #6. They could go for this depending on how much they want Grundy.

I'd do that in a heartbeat. I doubt GC would be keen though,

I would also look at trading #4 to St Kilda for #12 and #13.

Not so keen on that one. I understand the thinking but I'd rather top ten picks if possible.

It sounds like the consensus view is that the standout top three in the draft are Whitfield, Toumpas and Grundy in that order. It also sounds like the Bulldogs are super keen on Martin in the mini-draft and GWS will acquire #5 and #6.

I am not a fan of drafting a ruckman so early (especially given our current list), so I would think about attempting to trade #3 and #14 to GWS for #5 and #6. They could go for this depending on how much they want Grundy. I would also look at trading #4 to St Kilda for #12 and #13.

This scenario is obviously predicated on Viney slipping to the second round.

We would then have #5, #6, #12, #13 and Viney. And then #13 might be sufficient for Hogan in the mini-draft.

Jesus Christ....

No way I think a drop of two positions for an extra pick in the top 15 is win for us. This draft's top 6-7 is very even and I believe all will be stars: I would be very happy to take two of Whitfield, Toumpas, Grundy, Macrae, O'Rourke, Wines or Mayes. As Fat Tony pointed out, Whitfield and Toumpas are destined to go 1 & 2 and Grundy is at a position we have in excess. If we slide down to 5 and 6 the drop in quality would not be excessive and the extra pick could allow us a player from the second tier such as a Kennedy, Garlett or Stringer who would all walk into our team.

We have 3 & 4 so we get to choose who "we want"not what's left; 5 & 6 mean we have to allow someone to pick the cream of the crop.

Picks 12 & 13 may have a few good ones around like Cook, Gysberts etc but there's no guarantee that we could get that sort of quality. There is much more of a lottery once you get past the top 5 players.

I would say there is zero chance of the club looking at this as a viable alternative.

Oh! Hogan available for pick 13 in the mini draft, yeah right.

Edited October 7, 201212 yr by RobbieF

We have 3 & 4 so we get to choose who "we want"not what's left; 5 & 6 mean we have to allow someone to pick the cream of the crop.

Picks 12 & 13 may have a few good ones around like Cook, Gysberts etc but there's no guarantee that we could get that sort of quality. There is much more of a lottery once you get past the top 5 players.

I would say there is zero chance of the club looking at this as a viable alternative.

Oh! Hogan available for pick 13 in the mini draft, yeah right.

Well I don't think there is much separating the crop so I wouldn't mind having second go at it in return for another first round pick.

Although we haven't had much luck of recent times with first rounders it doesn't mean they carry no value. Last year I know the Demons were keen on Toby Greene with our first rounder if we couldn't get a trade for Clark (ended being take a pick 11) so there is quality to be had and the recruiting staff may have improved under Neeld with more definitive qualities to be targeted.

Jesus Christ....

Yes?

Well I don't think there is much separating the crop so I wouldn't mind having second go at it in return for another first round pick.

Although we haven't had much luck of recent times with first rounders it doesn't mean they carry no value. Last year I know the Demons were keen on Toby Greene with our first rounder if we couldn't get a trade for Clark (ended being take a pick 11) so there is quality to be had and the recruiting staff may have improved under Neeld with more definitive qualities to be targeted.

I doubt that the club or any recruiter would agree with this.

Toby Greene was my choice last year but that wasn't meant to be.

Lets drop off the Wellingham & Dawes trade Idea!

Let Wellers go west young man.

And get the door to swing open in the pre season.

It sounds like the consensus view is that the standout top three in the draft are Whitfield, Toumpas and Grundy in that order. It also sounds like the Bulldogs are super keen on Martin in the mini-draft and GWS will acquire #5 and #6.

I am not a fan of drafting a ruckman so early (especially given our current list), so I would think about attempting to trade #3 and #14 to GWS for #5 and #6. They could go for this depending on how much they want Grundy. I would also look at trading #4 to St Kilda for #12 and #13.

This scenario is obviously predicated on Viney slipping to the second round.

We would then have #5, #6, #12, #13 and Viney. And then #13 might be sufficient for Hogan in the mini-draft.

I'd suggest just to make the point of Daniher, that the top players would be like > Whitfield, Daniher, Toumpas, Grundy, O'Rourke, Wines, Viney, Mcrae,,,

and players I'd like to see in R'n'B.... Toumpas, Grundy, Hogan, Viney, Wines, O'rourke, Mcrae, Kennedy, Stringer,

Do the deal Melbourne, of some sort, to get the Suns to understand the need to not nominate Viney.

Offer them the player they need, that we can afford to help them with. Is it a ruck Spencer, Jamar? Is it a mature player or 2 players?

Get it done.

I doubt that the club or any recruiter would agree with this.

Toby Greene was my choice last year but that wasn't meant to be.

Seeing as you must watch a lot of Under 18's as Greene was your choice last year, could you inform me of the massive bridge between players picked at 3 & 4 compared to 5 & 6 assuming Whitfield and Toumpas go 1 & 2.

Seeing as you must watch a lot of Under 18's as Greene was your choice last year, could you inform me of the massive bridge between players picked at 3 & 4 compared to 5 & 6 assuming Whitfield and Toumpas go 1 & 2.

You don't have to be real smart to work out that Recruiters have a pecking order and they obviously want the first choice not the second; they may have a need for a certain type that may not be there when they get their turn, hence the higher the draft the better the options. They may want Grundy or they may have the chance to get Toumpas if GC select Grundy; you with me there?

We have the opportunity of participating in the mini draft, which the club has shown interest in, so the higher the pick we have to offer the more chance we've got, or are you with your mate Fat Tony who reckons we can get Hogan with pick 13; still with me?

So whilst you may think there is no difference I doubt there'd be a recruiter in the land who'd agree with you, especially if they wanted a particular player who may not be there when their turn came. Skill level isn't the only criteria that determines selection, it's suitability as well, isn't it?

Greene was second best on ground in the TAC final Viney was best and as Micky Malthouse said you always look for players that perform in finals and big games. He got 37 possessions in a losing side so that's not too shabby is it?

BTW you can't assume anything so there's no guarantee that Whitfield and Toumpas will go 1 & 2 and you might find that Grundy is still there at 5 and the top 4 midfielders are gone at that stage.

Edited October 7, 201212 yr by RobbieF

[based only on reading of profiles and phantom drafts and the like, so pardon me]

My standing position is that we have an opportunity to use this draft to completely reform our midfield, turn it from shallow and filled out with not-quite-AFL-level ability, to deep and particularly powerful in the contests.

I would be thrilled if we could go

3. Toumpas

4. Wines

13. Vlastuin

26 Viney

That might be ahead of the rank for Wines, but I think he is right on the 'needs' and someone we can bank as a definite good player. Vlastuin just completes a set, but pick 13 will be fascinating - a great position to be in to 'catch the slider', of which there are a few possibilities lik Stringer and Menzel.

As for remaining trades, I would hope that the balance of what we get for Rivers, Moloney and any other transfers would be sufficient to trade for Dawes.

Later in the draft, I would like to grab one of the big keyforwards currently doing very well in the state leagues, there's a few around. I don't have unrealistic expectations of them but like the thought of having that backup of someone who can at least provide a contested target.

Then, experimental players - high-risk high-reward. I actually don't mind at all if the later stages of the draft are used for a high 'churn-rate'. Let's say we try a kid who definitely doesn't make it, they are gone again in two or three years, we pick again. Or, we can pick guys who will 'just not quite' make it, persevere for five years before finally cutting them. The first scenario actually meas we have had an extra 'attempt' in the time that the second scenario plays out.

Another way to put it is, over an eight year period, would you take one 'Simon Godfrey' types or three attempts at finding a Wonaeamirri type that realy commits and becomes elite?

Also, I really don't care much for the mini-draft. Wy spend a top-5 pick this year to get a top-5 pick next year, when you also have to consider the risk that they will slide or others improve between now and Nov 2013? Makes no sense - there is no return on investment unless the kid is really incredible.

You have said a lot without actually answering my statement that there is minimal drop off in talent from 3&4 to 5&6. Then have thereafter reenforced my point that you can get players of Greene's talent later in the first round...so not a great post on your behalf I'll break it down for you.

You don't have to be real smart to work out that Recruiters have a pecking order and they obviously want the first choice not the second; they may have a need for a certain type that may not be there when they get their turn, hence the higher the draft the better the options. They may want Grundy or they may have the chance to get Toumpas if GC select Grundy; you with me there?...So whilst you may think there is no difference I doubt there'd be a recruiter in the land who'd agree with you, especially if they wanted a particular player who may not be there when their turn came. Skill level isn't the only criteria that determines selection, it's suitability as well, isn't it?

Well obviously recruiters have boards with an order but I am stipulating that in this draft there is not much separating players 1 through 6, which is why you would take a 2 place drop for another pick in the first round. Unfortunately drafting in accordance to "suitability" is what landed us Lucas Cook you must always pick the best choice available when you are this high in the draft.

We have the opportunity of participating in the mini draft, which the club has shown interest in, so the higher the pick we have to offer the more chance we've got, or are you with your mate Fat Tony who reckons we can get Hogan with pick 13; still with me?

In Tony's proposition we would still have picks 5, 6, 12 and 13 which would still give us enough firepower to get Hogan, pick 6 would get it done.

Greene was second best on ground in the TAC final Viney was best and as Micky Malthouse said you always look for players that perform in finals and big games. He got 37 possessions in a losing side so that's not too shabby is it?

This is giving credence to my argument, Greene was picked up at pick 11 illustrating you can still draft quality players outside the first 4 picks in the draft...

BTW you can't assume anything so there's no guarantee that Whitfield and Toumpas will go 1 & 2 and you might find that Grundy is still there at 5 and the top 4 midfielders are gone at that stage.

Well actually you can assume Whitfield will go number 1 or 2 in the draft and Toumpas in my mind will turn out to be no better players than Wines, Macrae or O'Rourke.

[based only on reading of profiles and phantom drafts and the like, so pardon me]

My standing position is that we have an opportunity to use this draft to completely reform our midfield, turn it from shallow and filled out with not-quite-AFL-level ability, to deep and particularly powerful in the contests.

I would be thrilled if we could go

3. Toumpas

4. Wines

13. Vlastuin

26 Viney

That might be ahead of the rank for Wines, but I think he is right on the 'needs' and someone we can bank as a definite good player. Vlastuin just completes a set, but pick 13 will be fascinating - a great position to be in to 'catch the slider', of which there are a few possibilities lik Stringer and Menzel.

As for remaining trades, I would hope that the balance of what we get for Rivers, Moloney and any other transfers would be sufficient to trade for Dawes.

Later in the draft, I would like to grab one of the big keyforwards currently doing very well in the state leagues, there's a few around. I don't have unrealistic expectations of them but like the thought of having that backup of someone who can at least provide a contested target.

Then, experimental players - high-risk high-reward. I actually don't mind at all if the later stages of the draft are used for a high 'churn-rate'. Let's say we try a kid who definitely doesn't make it, they are gone again in two or three years, we pick again. Or, we can pick guys who will 'just not quite' make it, persevere for five years before finally cutting them. The first scenario actually meas we have had an extra 'attempt' in the time that the second scenario plays out.

Another way to put it is, over an eight year period, would you take one 'Simon Godfrey' types or three attempts at finding a Wonaeamirri type that realy commits and becomes elite?

Also, I really don't care much for the mini-draft. Wy spend a top-5 pick this year to get a top-5 pick next year, when you also have to consider the risk that they will slide or others improve between now and Nov 2013? Makes no sense - there is no return on investment unless the kid is really incredible.

This plan I like. There are a couple of details I'd change, like swapping out Dawes for an alternative big-bodied forward and maybe Stringer at 13 if he were still there, but in general I think you've hit the nail on the head.

You have said a lot without actually answering my statement that there is minimal drop off in talent from 3&4 to 5&6. Then have thereafter reenforced my point that you can get players of Greene's talent later in the first round...so not a great post on your behalf I'll break it down for you.

Well obviously recruiters have boards with an order but I am stipulating that in this draft there is not much separating players 1 through 6, which is why you would take a 2 place drop for another pick in the first round. Unfortunately drafting in accordance to "suitability" is what landed us Lucas Cook you must always pick the best choice available when you are this high in the draft.

In Tony's proposition we would still have picks 5, 6, 12 and 13 which would still give us enough firepower to get Hogan, pick 6 would get it done.

This is giving credence to my argument, Greene was picked up at pick 11 illustrating you can still draft quality players outside the first 4 picks in the draft...

Well actually you can assume Whitfield will go number 1 or 2 in the draft and Toumpas in my mind will turn out to be no better players than Wines, Macrae or O'Rourke.

That says it all.

Suitability doesn't mean just the position they play it also involves the players character and work ethic. Some of the players you deem to have equivalent talent may be lazy (Gysberts) or just idiots.

You are aware that GWS had 9 of the first 11 picks in the draft so the order in which they took their players was largely irrelevant?

Tony was of the opinion that we could get Hogan with pick 13. Who will have picks 3 and 4 and what's to stop them from bidding?

The rest of your post is simply you opinion and hopefully the club will be a bit smarter than you; in fact I give you a guarantee that they are and you know how smart they are.

Tony was of the opinion that we could get Hogan with pick 13. Who will have picks 3 and 4 and what's to stop them from bidding?

I said #13 might be sufficient, but it is difficult to really know. This view was based on the draft order being:

GWS, GC, GWS, GWS, Melb, Melb, Port, Bris, WB, Ess, Carl, Melb, Melb. Only really Port (new coach), Brisbane, WB (won't go for both 17 year olds) and Carlton could trump #13

That says it all.

Suitability doesn't mean just the position they play it also involves the players character and work ethic. Some of the players you deem to have equivalent talent may be lazy (Gysberts) or just idiots.

You are aware that GWS had 9 of the first 11 picks in the draft so the order in which they took their players was largely irrelevant?

Tony was of the opinion that we could get Hogan with pick 13. Who will have picks 3 and 4 and what's to stop them from bidding?

The rest of your post is simply you opinion and hopefully the club will be a bit smarter than you; in fact I give you a guarantee that they are and you know how smart they are.

Your argument lacks credibility, you can't merely speculate without evidence or even rumours that players are lazy or are idiots. Even so Dane Swan was determined to be too lazy to take in the first round and Jack Darling was thought to be an idiot look how well they're going. Ultimately it boils down to their footballing ability which is what I'm judging on.

Obviously Greene is not the only successful player to be taken after the first 4 picks so not sure why you're getting caught up on this point. Our three best payers Jones, Grimes and Clark were taken at 12, 14 and 9 respectively so of course I would love another pick around a bouts there.

Yeah an opinion which is based on watching under 18 carnival and talking to mates who played against these guys; so I'm certainly more informed than you who from your inane posts knows little to nothing about any of these players.

I said #13 might be sufficient, but it is difficult to really know. This view was based on the draft order being:

GWS, GC, GWS, GWS, Melb, Melb, Port, Bris, WB, Ess, Carl, Melb, Melb. Only really Port (new coach), Brisbane, WB (won't go for both 17 year olds) and Carlton could trump #13

You do understand that other clubs can bid with a combination of pick/s and players don't you? Anyway it won't happen so there's no point in talking about it.