Our football dept aren't idiots. Lots of stuff is going on behind the scenes. Let's just leave them to it and see what emerges.

They don't need gratuitous advice from the media, or Demonlanders (myself included)

Trading second year players is just [censored] dumb, especially if they are #4 draft picks.

trading two players picked at 2 and 4 for a couple of mid 20 picks if we are lucky does not sound much of a win situation for mfc. Both players have great potential and need time with Roos and co to bring that out. We are already expectingh/hoping there will be a major cleanout of between 8-12 players this year, getting rid of some of our better players may be too much of a hit on the team and their confidence. These guys have the ability they now need to start to produce it. Our attacking game has obviously been thrown out of kilter by the loss of Clarke and Hogan, not many teams will cope well with 2 of their best forwards out, i.e. how would collingwood go without Cloak and Jessie white, oh hmm maybe that is not the best example...

Trading second year players is just [censored] dumb, especially if they are #4 draft picks.

Not trying to be provocative but how many years should we wait? I agree that we shouldn't be knee jerk and 2 years is probably too early but where is the cut off point? Colin Sylvia and Travis Johnstone come to mind.

Trengove and toumpas have far too much theoretical upside to trade for a bad pick, watts and grimes might fetch a better deal

I think our attacking game suffered because of our skill errors and Hogan being injured

and you forgot about Clark, and about Dawes the first few vital rounds.

David King was a great footballer. But he is a complete negetive nancy and a [censored] and Maclure hasn't been relevant since he played for Carlton!

Says the guy tapping on his keyboard whose never played at the highest level. I'd give them a [censored] load more credibility than you or I. Attack the ball Laces. Much of what they say has credit. They don't have the emotional attachment we have. I think one of the names they mentioned will be traded, maybe two. Which ones depends upon Roos' opinion and the trade scenarios that come up. What's more valuable? Potential talent largely unrealised or potential talent yet to be seen?

The GWS boys have made a pact to stay together.

You can forget about Shiel, Boyd, Patton, Cameron, Tomlinson etc etc.

Did Tyson make the Pact to?

Not trying to be provocative but how many years should we wait? I agree that we shouldn't be knee jerk and 2 years is probably too early but where is the cut off point? Colin Sylvia and Travis Johnstone come to mind.

You think two years is plenty of time for a kid to properly develop in an area do you?

Minimum of 4 for me. Absolute MINIMUM

MFC fans are so starved for success that if someone doesn't show a glimpse of talent (which Toumpas actually has, i have posted his stats numerous times and refuse to again) we must remove them from our list. We have waited 7 [censored] years, i don't mind waiting again. I finally actually trust a board, and coach of the MFC. No knee jerk reactions thanks.

Edited August 13, 201410 yr by The Song Formerly Known As

Says the guy tapping on his keyboard whose never played at the highest level. I'd give them a [censored] load more credibility than you or I. Attack the ball Laces. Much of what they say has credit. They don't have the emotional attachment we have. I think one of the names they mentioned will be traded, maybe two. Which ones depends upon Roos' opinion and the trade scenarios that come up. What's more valuable? Potential talent largely unrealised or potential talent yet to be seen?

What about culture? A show of confidence? Age? Familiarity with the system, team, and other players?

It's not just 'unrealised talent' vs 'potential future talent'. It's much more than that.

The GWS boys have made a pact to stay together.

You can forget about Shiel, Boyd, Patton, Cameron, Tomlinson etc etc.

yes and scully said he was not talking to GWS, pacts, promises etc are likely to be broken when $$ are on the table. Thankfully a few clubs will probably be throwing obscene offers at some of these GWS players which GWS will need to start matching soon. I am sure these guys are not going to enjoy being paid $250,000 per year while Scully is wandering around of $1m per year. i wonder which guy came up with the idea of the pact the guy on $200k per year or the guy on $500k per year?

The GWS boys have made a pact to stay together.

You can forget about Shiel, Boyd, Patton, Cameron, Tomlinson etc etc.

Tomlinson wants to come home. Must have missed the pact meeting.

Can you update us ones that don't have foxtel?

Can watch it in a day or 2 on youtube.

Lately all epsiodes have been uploaded by user "jraaang"

The GWS boys have made a pact to stay together.

You can forget about Shiel, Boyd, Patton, Cameron, Tomlinson etc etc.

Not sure if serious...

It is getting near the end of the year and all clubs will be spreading disinformation about their team and others. So it is difficult to believe all that you hear. I wonder how many of the top clubs are talking up players that they dont want to get lower clubs interested in them instead of their real targets.

What about culture? A show of confidence? Age? Familiarity with the system, team, and other players?

It's not just 'unrealised talent' vs 'potential future talent'. It's much more than that.

Fair point Anus. I guess Roos will weigh up all of these things with Taylor and T Viney and we will see in October/November.

'The GWS boys have made a pact to stay together'

Nowhere is that mentioned on the Internet

...that I know of

Not trying to be provocative but how many years should we wait? I agree that we shouldn't be knee jerk and 2 years is probably too early but where is the cut off point? Colin Sylvia and Travis Johnstone come to mind.

Hey Col Travis had his issues but don't tell me you wouldn't love to have him coming off half back or the wing with his silky skills and delivery by foot in amongst the dross we have put up with this year?

Pick 3

Frawley - Pick 4, then on trade that in a Dom Tyson style deal, say for pick 15 and a player

Toumpas - Pick 12-15 (Port or Adelaide)

Watts - 20-25

Trengove or Grimes in an upgrade for our second rounder (pick 20odd) for a team around pick 12

It would leave us with 3, 12, (Trengove+2nd rd),14 (Toumpas), 15 (Frawley), 23 (Watts) plus a decent player

Pretty much selling the currency of 4 players in order to get 4 picks plus replacing one of those players with a decent player in a Tyson like deal.

It would be a move to go full ball in to the draft in order to get a group of young players together the way the Saints are building now and the way the Hawks and other teams build together.

It disregards a few things:

1. I think development has way over taken the draft alone as a way to build

2. We already have some pretty high level talent youth wise coming through

3. We've had 2 failed rebuilds, the fans don't want another

4. It's just not Roosy

5. Hogan, Viney, Tyson, Salem, Kent. We have some upside talented kids who need to get games already

6. Tanking and Neeld destroyed our playing groups spirit, trading a bunch of them will do the same

7. All these high draft picks would be nice, but we'd still have to use a bunch of third and 4th rounders on our actual delistings/retirements

King says

- pick 3 and 21

- chip leaves, get pick 4

- pick 20-25 for Watts (Maclure said don't trade him)

- Toumpas on the table, King says Port's first pick, possibly not on his own, and Maclure thinks he's worth 2 or 3rd round

- Trengove or Grimes for a second round pick, upgraded first round pick alongside Watts / pick for Watts

Interesting.

It is interesting...hmmm... It seems that a big club may be interested in our young players and they want them cheap...lol.. We'll know how bad they want them, by how hard their media puppets go on our list... Richmond used the media like this last year, to re-sign Dustin Martin... I wonder which big club it is?

dumb and dumber

Grimes, Toumpas & Watts are all to stay.

Frawley going is likely so we get 3, 4, 22, Stretch hopefully at 40.

Need to use pick 4 then to get Shiel.

So my take would be:

1. If Frawley goes he goes

2. Wouldn't trade Grimes or Trengove, neither of them would have near as much value as they could be. Selling them now would be selling low

3. Would gladly trade Watts

4. Just don't know about Toumpas. A South Australian clubs first round pick would be great but the Toump is a hard worker, can kick and can run and after a good preseason he might not be a star but could come on as a reliable wingman or flanker.

dumb and dumber

Grimes, Toumpas & Watts are all to stay.

Frawley going is likely so we get 3, 4, 22, Stretch hopefully at 40.

Need to use pick 4 then to get Shiel.

This is all ideal for me. And i'm done on this topic. Nice job, Spirit!

Hey Col Travis had his issues but don't tell me you wouldn't love to have him coming off half back or the wing with his silky skills and delivery by foot in amongst the dross we have put up with this year?

Earl, Travis couldn't tackle a teddy bear and imposed his physique like a champion chess player. However, we certainly could use someone, anyone, across the back line with consistently good disposal and decision making.

Are we really looking at things properly.

The new people (our saviours) are going to have to spend another year getting used to the "Game Plan"

Why would we be even thinking about trading people who have actually got skills just for draft picks ?

Another year of Speculation.

Why would you trade Trengrove, Grimes and in particular Toumpas ( even though he hasnt played for 6 weeks).

Next we should trade Hogan, he hasnt done anything this year !!

Watts is being set up for a role. Wait until we have players who can get it to him when he is not so high up the ground and consequently he has a role similar to Gibbs, Suckling, Burchell, Enright,Kelly .

I think our biggest problem is getting positive rather than numerical clearances . We get the ball but do not control the exit ( Jack Viney is the classic case with only 50% usage %) Get Jack's % to 70 and then you will see the value of Watts ( who is already averaging 18 possessions with high efficiency).

I mentioned in an earlier post that Jetta,Howe and Watts or Trengrove should be the people with ball in hand coming from half back area.

We also forget trengrove is a good ball user and Dom Tyson is still really a 1st year player.

What I am saying is dont go throwing the babies out with the bathwater !!

Pick 3

Frawley - Pick 4, then on trade that in a Dom Tyson style deal, say for pick 15 and a player

Toumpas - Pick 12-15 (Port or Adelaide)

Watts - 20-25

Trengove or Grimes in an upgrade for our second rounder (pick 20odd) for a team around pick 12

It would leave us with 3, 12, (Trengove+2nd rd),14 (Toumpas), 15 (Frawley), 23 (Watts) plus a decent player

Pretty much selling the currency of 4 players in order to get 4 picks plus replacing one of those players with a decent player in a Tyson like deal.

It would be a move to go full ball in to the draft in order to get a group of young players together the way the Saints are building now and the way the Hawks and other teams build together.

It disregards a few things:

1. I think development has way over taken the draft alone as a way to build

2. We already have some pretty high level talent youth wise coming through

3. We've had 2 failed rebuilds, the fans don't want another

4. It's just not Roosy

5. Hogan, Viney, Tyson, Salem, Kent. We have some upside talented kids who need to get games already

6. Tanking and Neeld destroyed our playing groups spirit, trading a bunch of them will do the same

7. All these high draft picks would be nice, but we'd still have to use a bunch of third and 4th rounders on our actual delistings/retirements

Interesting looking at last weeks side, of the starting 22, it included just 5 first round draft picks, the other 18 players come much later in the draft or have been drafted in after we got a look at their value, re Vince, Dawes etc. I think Roos will be doing a lot of horse trading at years end for players who have demonstrated some ability. Drafting these kids is always a risk. You could win big time or you could lose. Our record post 2007 is Shyte as in there was only one first round draft pick post 2006 playing last week. That is just appalling but shows us where Roosey is coming from. It is about playing the odds in a more conservative way. We may miss the chance of a Judd or a Selwood but we have more chance of avoiding the failures where we have picked kids who never played a game.