Yeah, I doubt it. Not only are the odds stacked against Hunt, Harmes, and King making it, Georgiou looks nothing more than decent cover for a few games where Garland and/or Frawley are injured, and Jetta is a known jack-of-all commodity.

I would have preferred to get some ready made role players in the late in the ND/RL rather than more projects...

So many of our high end talent need work and attention. I just don't see the need to bring in low end talent that require just as much work.

Ready made role players are Terlich and Matt Jones. They had good years and they should play plenty this year, but how many players like this do you need? I supported the notion last year and believe it was worthwhile, but if you get too carried away with this, you're just packing the list with filler I reckon.

Ready made role players are Terlich and Matt Jones. They had good years and they should play plenty this year, but how many players like this do you need? I supported the notion last year and believe it was worthwhile, but if you get too carried away with this, you're just packing the list with filler I reckon.

It's a balance, but I think we've got it right. Looking at the next year or so at this stage the delistings will likely mostly come from guys in that 22-25 year old range who didn't end up cutting it (Blease, Strauss, Tapscott, Nicho, Bail) so in that regard guys like Matt Jones and Terlich fill their spots.

If we had a bunch of 30 year olds set to retire but strong numbers in the 23-28 range then I'd be saying lets go after mainly kids.

Richmond have gone much more extreme than us. They got Orren Stephenson, Petterd, Lonergan and Aaron Edwards last year and have doubled or even tripled down with Gordon, Hampson, Thomas, Banfield and Miles this year.

The important thing is you don't stagnate the development of underrated kids due to playing depth guys, but Melbourne are miles off that problem. Even last year we had Pedersen and Sellar take games away from Fitzpatrick to a degree but he got his opportunity and showed his talent and in terms of numbers we were very deep in tall forward/rucks C graders. Any midfield or other small player who was half decent would've got a shot last year and the same will probably be true this year. I can't imagine someone getting buried at Casey if they show talent.

Ready made role players are Terlich and Matt Jones. They had good years and they should play plenty this year, but how many players like this do you need? I supported the notion last year and believe it was worthwhile, but if you get too carried away with this, you're just packing the list with filler I reckon.

I agree with this except that I think we are a bit hard on Terlich and Jones. they did ok in an absolutely awful team this year. in a competitive team I suspect they would look pretty good. You could easily lose 2 backs and find Georgiou playing a useful role. But as to King, if he can cope with the physical work which wil be put into him he's a real prospect

It's a balance, but I think we've got it right. Looking at the next year or so at this stage the delistings will likely mostly come from guys in that 22-25 year old range who didn't end up cutting it (Blease, Strauss, Tapscott, Nicho, Bail) so in that regard guys like Matt Jones and Terlich fill their spots.

If we had a bunch of 30 year olds set to retire but strong numbers in the 23-28 range then I'd be saying lets go after mainly kids.

Richmond have gone much more extreme than us. They got Orren Stephenson, Petterd, Lonergan and Aaron Edwards last year and have doubled or even tripled down with Gordon, Hampson, Thomas, Banfield and Miles this year.

The important thing is you don't stagnate the development of underrated kids due to playing depth guys, but Melbourne are miles off that problem. Even last year we had Pedersen and Sellar take games away from Fitzpatrick to a degree but he got his opportunity and showed his talent and in terms of numbers we were very deep in tall forward/rucks C graders. Any midfield or other small player who was half decent would've got a shot last year and the same will probably be true this year. I can't imagine someone getting buried at Casey if they show talent.

I like our approach now better than Richmond's. I think we made a big mistake in following their model last year when we picked up Peders, Byrne, Gillies and Rodan. They will hover around the 8 but never be a true GF threat with the list they have and the approach they are taking in building it. All they have done this year is build on mediocrity. I'm also not convinced about Hardwick as a match day coach, makes too many mistakes under pressure.

There is a good chance that some of the players we picked up like Hunt, Harmes and King will make it. There is a big wrap on Hunt and he was well worth the pick at 57, a couple of years in the system and let's see what we have.

I like our approach now better than Richmond's. I think we made a big mistake in following their model last year when we picked up Peders, Byrne, Gillies and Rodan. They will hover around the 8 but never be a true GF threat with the list they have and the approach they are taking in building it. All they have done this year is build on mediocrity. I'm also not convinced about Hardwick as a match day coach, makes too many mistakes under pressure.

There is a good chance that some of the players we picked up like Hunt, Harmes and King will make it. There is a big wrap on Hunt and he was well worth the pick at 57, a couple of years in the system and let's see what we have.

I kindly disagree. I think your underestimating Richmond. They have a good young list that is still ahead of us and the last couple of drafts for them has been good. Bringing in tough nuts like Vlaustuin and Ellis and then Lennon for class and creativity has been good recrtuiting for them. Their senior players like Cotchin, Deledio, Martin, Jackson, Maric, Grigg have been standouts for them and are set for big year next year.

They will be pushing top 4 next year. Hunt and King are still miles off and will take time. King especially a good 4 years away and Hunt is still unkown. Im excited about harmes thought I reckon he is a beauty and wouldn't be surprised if he snuck in a couple of games towards the end of the year.

I like our approach now better than Richmond's. I think we made a big mistake in following their model last year when we picked up Peders, Byrne, Gillies and Rodan. They will hover around the 8 but never be a true GF threat with the list they have and the approach they are taking in building it. All they have done this year is build on mediocrity. I'm also not convinced about Hardwick as a match day coach, makes too many mistakes under pressure.

There is a good chance that some of the players we picked up like Hunt, Harmes and King will make it. There is a big wrap on Hunt and he was well worth the pick at 57, a couple of years in the system and let's see what we have.

That model also brought Dawes, Jones, Clisby and Terlich.

And Nasher, yeah it does look better on reflection, however Toumpas, Viney, Salem, JKH, Trengove, Watts, Fitzpatrick, Hogan, Barry, Kent, Tyson, Evans, Michie, Gawn, Riley, and Howe is a lot of young talent that I hold out great hope for but require a great deal of development if we want a few to be what I think they can be.

I kindly disagree. I think your underestimating Richmond. They have a good young list that is still ahead of us and the last couple of drafts for them has been good. Bringing in tough nuts like Vlaustuin and Ellis and then Lennon for class and creativity has been good recrtuiting for them. Their senior players like Cotchin, Deledio, Martin, Jackson, Maric, Grigg have been standouts for them and are set for big year next year.

They will be pushing top 4 next year. Hunt and King are still miles off and will take time. King especially a good 4 years away and Hunt is still unkown. Im excited about harmes thought I reckon he is a beauty and wouldn't be surprised if he snuck in a couple of games towards the end of the year.

I expect I will get a lot of disagreement on the Tiges and I understand they have got some good ones in the last couple of years. I reckon Ellis is a beauty and I like the look of Vlaustuin but I think they should have taken Grundy ahead of him. Not hindsight, told a Richmond mate at the time. In fact I was angry that the Pies got him so cheap.

I wouldn't be surprised if they missed the 8 next season and can't see them making top 4. I think the players love Hardwick and you can understand why but he will be under pressure if they fall back and as I say, I just don't rate him as a match day coach.

Just a different viewpoint mate but I know where you are coming from, I may be well off the mark.

You're right with Hunt and King but I think we need to take the punt now and back in the development guys we have at the club. I would rather go there than with what else was on offer. I think we got some good balance in the list with our trading, Tyson and Mitchie more than make up for what we missed trading for Clark and Cross adds that bit of leadership the club missed with draft sanctions in the early 2000's. Vince more than covers the loss of Silvia.

That model also brought Dawes, Jones, Clisby and Terlich.

And Nasher, yeah it does look better on reflection, however Toumpas, Viney, Salem, JKH, Trengove, Watts, Fitzpatrick, Hogan, Barry, Kent, Tyson, Evans, Michie, Gawn, Riley, and Howe is a lot of young talent that I hold out great hope for but require a great deal of development if we want a few to be what I think they can be.

…3 battlers and good on them, I hope they push on this year plus one guy who can't get on the park and may have been a waisted pick.

I much prefer the way we've gone about things this year in the draft trade period.

…3 battlers and good on them, I hope they push on this year plus one guy who can't get on the park and may have been a waisted pick.

I much prefer the way we've gone about things this year in the draft trade period.

There is inherent risk with the picks we gave up this year too...

Battlers they may be but they worked as intended - one is a bonafide leader of men (with trouble staying upright, adding to our collection...), two finished very high in our B+F and the other was a revelation of our dispirited backline.

What we did this year excites me more too, young midfielders that may become something. I just want us to develop them, I don't want to waste time on low-end talent, as blunt and rude as that sounds.

There is inherent risk with the picks we gave up this year too...

Battlers they may be but they worked as intended - one is a bonafide leader of men (with trouble staying upright, adding to our collection...), two finished very high in our B+F and the other was a revelation of our dispirited backline.

What we did this year excites me more too, young midfielders that may become something. I just want us to develop them, I don't want to waste time on low-end talent, as blunt and rude as that sounds.

Barrett and Denham seem to think we've given up a brownlow medalist in Kelly and I guess there is inherent risk in any strategy. Time will tell but my bet would be that Tyson will be one of the top 5 mids in the comp by 2015.

I think we would only have brought in low-end talent with any of the senior players left over and Taylor flagged that we thought the lower lever comps (VFL etc) had been milked of talent over the last few years and there wasn't a lot on offer. Vince and Cross really add a hell of a lot that we haven't had for a long time. I think we got the balance right.

By the way, I won't come at the Dawes, leader of men yet until I see him do it on the ground. He talks a good game and showed some glimpses on the ground but it's there that he needs to lead. Not saying he won't be and I hope he does but so far the talk is cheap.

Barrett and Denham seem to think we've given up a brownlow medalist in Kelly and I guess there is inherent risk in any strategy. Time will tell but my bet would be that Tyson will be one of the top 5 mids in the comp by 2015.

I think we would only have brought in low-end talent with any of the senior players left over and Taylor flagged that we thought the lower lever comps (VFL etc) had been milked of talent over the last few years and there wasn't a lot on offer. Vince and Cross really add a hell of a lot that we haven't had for a long time. I think we got the balance right.

By the way, I won't come at the Dawes, leader of men yet until I see him do it on the ground. He talks a good game and showed some glimpses on the ground but it's there that he needs to lead. Not saying he won't be and I hope he does but so far the talk is cheap.

Fair enough. I just tire of potential - I want to see some of that talk come to fruition.

Tyson would have to show astronomical improvement to become one of the top 5 mids in the comp within the next two seasons.

I've noticed those on here who claim that we snatched Tyson and Salem for pick 2 often leave out out the fact we also gave up Pick 20. Time will tell if it was the right decision, and we needed the immediate injection into the midfield that Tyson brings, but there appears little doubt about Kelly being a future champ.

I can't see the Tiges dropping out of the 8. Their biggest headache was converting their chances and they are still another quality tall shy of being a top 4 side. Vickery hasn't shown enough and Riewoldt does his disappearing act too often. They are also a fair way off thinking like a champion side. When the opposition get on a roll, they crumble. It's why I think it will be another very winnable game in 2014.

Tyson would have to show astronomical improvement to become one of the top 5 mids in the comp within the next two seasons.

I've noticed those on here who claim that we snatched Tyson and Salem for pick 2 often leave out out the fact we also gave up Pick 20. Time will tell if it was the right decision, and we needed the immediate injection into the midfield that Tyson brings, but there appears little doubt about Kelly being a future champ.

I can't see the Tiges dropping out of the 8. Their biggest headache was converting their chances and they are still another quality tall shy of being a top 4 side. Vickery hasn't shown enough and Riewoldt does his disappearing act too often. They are also a fair way off thinking like a champion side. When the opposition get on a roll, they crumble. It's why I think it will be another very winnable game in 2014.

I know it's a big call 'P-man' but given an injury free run he really has the attributes to be one of the top liners, he sees the game in slow motion and only the top players do that. Think Pendles and Mitchell.

As for Kelly there is as much doubt as there is with any new draftee, to me he looks like Scully with an upgrade on skills. A running machine with a professional attitude, no real x-factor whatever that is. Will he be a good player or a Brownlow medalist, I think the former.

The Tiges, they do miss a quality tall and it's why I think they made a big mistake in not taking Grundy. Not hindsight, I bashed it into my Tiges mate on draft night. Must admit partly because the Pies got a free hit (have said this above but it still p…..me off they got him. I don't think he was for us but…). I don't see them as a lock on the 8.

Being inter-state, I can only judge the draftees on the little I've seen and what I've read, but a more skilled Scully, which seems to be an accurate description, I would suggest is is a pretty damn good player.

I hope you're right on Tyson. I'm going to wait until he produces the goods before I start singing his praises. He didn't exactly do that at GWS, injuries not withstanding.

Being inter-state, I can only judge the draftees on the little I've seen and what I've read, but a more skilled Scully, which seems to be an accurate description, I would suggest is is a pretty damn good player.

I hope you're right on Tyson. I'm going to wait until he produces the goods before I start singing his praises. He didn't exactly do that at GWS, injuries not withstanding.

Yeah, Kelly will be a good player at worst a good ordinary player.

I reckon I'm right on Tyson and I know he loves being at the club under Roos. I hope I'm right too.

I expect I will get a lot of disagreement on the Tiges and I understand they have got some good ones in the last couple of years. I reckon Ellis is a beauty and I like the look of Vlaustuin but I think they should have taken Grundy ahead of him. Not hindsight, told a Richmond mate at the time. In fact I was angry that the Pies got him so cheap.

I wouldn't be surprised if they missed the 8 next season and can't see them making top 4. I think the players love Hardwick and you can understand why but he will be under pressure if they fall back and as I say, I just don't rate him as a match day coach.

Just a different viewpoint mate but I know where you are coming from, I may be well off the mark.

You're right with Hunt and King but I think we need to take the punt now and back in the development guys we have at the club. I would rather go there than with what else was on offer. I think we got some good balance in the list with our trading, Tyson and Mitchie more than make up for what we missed trading for Clark and Cross adds that bit of leadership the club missed with draft sanctions in the early 2000's. Vince more than covers the loss of Silvia.

Totally derailing this thread but why not. Anyway Richmond's issue for mine is that the 2010 and 2011 drafts pillaged by GWS and Gold Coast has cost them depth of young talent. Add in another of the preselections/top 10 picks from each of the expansion clubs along with Conca and Ellis - for example a Zac Smith or Prestia (GC) and Devon Smith or Taylor Adams (GWS) and you'd be looking at a really well rounded team ready for consistent top 4 finishes. But because the expansion clubs took a raft of top 10 picks away it meant Richmond's list didn't get the full spread of talent. It's meant that right now they are probably trying to cheat the system a bit and find a diamond in the rough with all these recycle and mature age guys. I don't mind the strategy because their best 22 is still so young and full of quality (Unlike St Kilda bringing in a bunch of spuds under Ross Lyon the age of their 22 should save them from the drop off effect) and because they (so far) have hung on to their first round picks at least.

It's a really good point 'master'. I think the timing is against Richmond in their run at a flag but it's all yet to be seen.

It's a balance, but I think we've got it right. Looking at the next year or so at this stage the delistings will likely mostly come from guys in that 22-25 year old range who didn't end up cutting it (Blease, Strauss, Tapscott, Nicho, Bail) so in that regard guys like Matt Jones and Terlich fill their spots.

If we had a bunch of 30 year olds set to retire but strong numbers in the 23-28 range then I'd be saying lets go after mainly kids.

Richmond have gone much more extreme than us. They got Orren Stephenson, Petterd, Lonergan and Aaron Edwards last year and have doubled or even tripled down with Gordon, Hampson, Thomas, Banfield and Miles this year.

The important thing is you don't stagnate the development of underrated kids due to playing depth guys, but Melbourne are miles off that problem. Even last year we had Pedersen and Sellar take games away from Fitzpatrick to a degree but he got his opportunity and showed his talent and in terms of numbers we were very deep in tall forward/rucks C graders. Any midfield or other small player who was half decent would've got a shot last year and the same will probably be true this year. I can't imagine someone getting buried at Casey if they show talent.

Magner and couch were buried at Casey this year.

Reading through this page, I could easily be forgiven for thinking that the header had been changed.....not one post re Max King that I can see.

How about starting a new thread.

Off you go then.

Reading through this page, I could easily be forgiven for thinking that the header had been changed.....not one post re Max King that I can see.

How about starting a new thread.

Sometimes discussions go down different paths, at least it has been a serious football discussion and not a slanging or one up-manship match.

The merits of selecting someone like King or taking the Richmond approach and going for more players with senior experience I would think are relevant to the thread. I've been interested in the differing views on the topic, not just my own.

Magner and couch were buried at Casey this year.

Surely that says something to you, though, doesn't it?

And look! No other club picked them up in the draft either!

Probably because in spite of their effort, they are consummate butchers.

If only you could see...

Magnet was playing very well in the VFL and despite the seniors playing badly he never seemed to get a fair go.

Seems to take a clean grab from viewing the highlights reel. Nice set shot as well. But I suppose that's what a highlights reel is for...

Does that mean he has sticky fingers like yourself Moon?