Josh Mahoney last week on SA radio said we will have two live picks in the draft.

If we take Newton as a DFA, then you can switch off the draft after pick 3. Two rookie spots - perhaps one for Tapscott - and our list is set.

Mahoney might have said this in Adelaide - but its looking like gospel.

Roos' comments late in the season suggested a larger turnover of players than this - but Terlich is about the only "marginal" player coming out of contract we chose to re-sign. Terlich shaped like a good hard-running player in his first year - but too many mistakes seemed to emerge last year - and I expected us to let him go.Word was that he carried a few injuries in 2014 - so I'll bow to the club's better judgment..

Nothing is certain in list management. At one point we didn't think that Trenners was going to be on the list in 2015

Would be absolute insanity to trade in for pick 40 and not use it

The trade for pick 40 gave us the option of a speculative mid- draft pick. As events have transpired it appears as though we are going to be able to sneak a youngster with potential (Newton) directly on to the list as a DFA instead.If we have decided that Newton is a better prospect than the speculative pick we planned to take, then it would be insane to sit back and wait for whoever is available at 40.

I hope so, DL....his highlights show that he reads the game well and waits for a good option.

I'm hoping our defence doesn't get as bombarded as much as it has in the past..

I still wonder it may take him a couple of seasons to become a leader of the backline?

we are going to be young & inexperienced again down back IMO. I'm OK with teaching a new breed the right culture, & am patient Re this as long as we do it right. but I think we do need another key tall swingman. I think garland is as good as he's going to be.

Pity we didn't try to land Jaksch as well ?

we still need a lot of talent to claw our way up, but pieces are being added i feel.

If we take Newton as a DFA, then you can switch off the draft after pick 3. Two rookie spots - perhaps one for Tapscott - and our list is set.

Mahoney might have said this in Adelaide - but its looking like gospel.

Roos' comments late in the season suggested a larger turnover of players than this - but Terlich is about the only "marginal" player coming out of contract we chose to re-sign. Terlich shaped like a good hard-running player in his first year - but too many mistakes seemed to emerge last year - and I expected us to let him go.Word was that he carried a few injuries in 2014 - so I'll bow to the club's better judgment..

Nothing is certain in list management. At one point we didn't think that Trenners was going to be on the list in 2015

The trade for pick 40 gave us the option of a speculative mid- draft pick. As events have transpired it appears as though we are going to be able to sneak a youngster with potential (Newton) directly on to the list as a DFA instead.If we have decided that Newton is a better prospect than the speculative pick we planned to take, then it would be insane to sit back and wait for whoever is available at 40.

Is there a way that we can ask for special assisstance with the case of Trenners? In efffect he is unusable as a player for us [effectively a long term deposit]?! Can't we retain him outside of our list [and the Rookie list] so that we effectively have forty players at our disposal [and four rookies], the same as every other Club? I would be bitterly disappointed if we could not take Newton and also use pick 40.

I know that there are other player/rookie scenarios but the question is the same.

Is there a way that we can ask for special assisstance with the case of Trenners? In efffect he is unusable as a player for us [effectively a long term deposit]?! Can't we retain him outside of our list [and the Rookie list] so that we effectively have forty players at our disposal [and four rookies], the same as every other Club? I would be bitterly disappointed if we could not take Newton and also use pick 40.

I know that there are other player/rookie scenarios but the question is the same.

We will get no draft or list help from the AFL, as they believe we will win the flag this year.

We will get no draft or list help from the AFL, as they believe we will win the flag this year.

The AFL's draft assistance rules are dead and buried and no club will or should qualify given the way the AFL treated our applications over the last two seasons.

Trenners is injured no different to what a lot of clubs go through, no assistance is warranted.

We need to take the best players we can with the draft and we should not redraft players via the rookie draft who we have cut from our list, i.e. Tapscot, he maybe a nice guy but has failed miserably to impress in all of his time at the MFC. He is too slow and does not seem to able to find the ball, go for a new kid we can develop. The constant persisting with players who cannot make the grade by giving them another year then another year in hope that the next year they have a full preseason and show what they can do is wrong. We need to cut our losses quicker than keeping dud players on our list year after year after year.

Trenners is injured no different to what a lot of clubs go through, no assistance is warranted.

We need to take the best players we can with the draft and we should not redraft players via the rookie draft who we have cut from our list, i.e. Tapscot, he maybe a nice guy but has failed miserably to impress in all of his time at the MFC. He is too slow and does not seem to able to find the ball, go for a new kid we can develop. The constant persisting with players who cannot make the grade by giving them another year then another year in hope that the next year they have a full preseason and show what they can do is wrong. We need to cut our losses quicker than keeping dud players on our list year after year after year.

Yeah, i remember the last time we redrafted a bloke, what was his name again? Neville something. Dud.

Trenners is injured no different to what a lot of clubs go through, no assistance is warranted.

We need to take the best players we can with the draft and we should not redraft players via the rookie draft who we have cut from our list, i.e. Tapscot, he maybe a nice guy but has failed miserably to impress in all of his time at the MFC. He is too slow and does not seem to able to find the ball, go for a new kid we can develop. The constant persisting with players who cannot make the grade by giving them another year then another year in hope that the next year they have a full preseason and show what they can do is wrong. We need to cut our losses quicker than keeping dud players on our list year after year after year.

So there is no way that we are considering delisting the injured Trenners or the under-perfoming Evans and paying out their contracts? This is a massive shame as I am sure that there are players sitting around pick 40 [Oscar McDonald?] who may may improve our list better [and with more flexibility] in both the short and the long-term.

aren't you really meaning to say, that you wish us all would be happy & optimistic that we got Frost in,,, even If it did cost us P-23. ???

the other way of looking would be that we could have maybe got Frost for P-40, & we also could have had P-23 for another kid, maybe another Mid? the Saints screwed us, & maybe the GWS asked the Saints for some help to get the price up? could that be draft tampering by the Saints?

No. Let me put it this way, what would you hope to get out of a pick 23? A 10 year player? I think Frost is going to become a very important player for us, I think he'll end up being our best tall defender and is definitely worth pick 23.

Don't try and make stuff up to suit your own agenda, it just makes you look foolish. In other words, stop being a smart arse.

No. Let me put it this way, what would you hope to get out of a pick 23? A 10 year player? I think Frost is going to become a very important player for us, I think he'll end up being our best tall defender and is definitely worth pick 23.

Don't try and make stuff up to suit your own agenda, it just makes you look foolish. In other words, stop being a smart arse.

Also what they hell do St Kilda get out of it by helping GWS?

Yeah, i remember the last time we redrafted a bloke, what was his name again? Neville something. Dud.

do you also remember how many dud players we have kept on our list long past their use by date. So one success makes up for the years of failure? McKenzie and Evans are two who are just not up to AFL standards, how many more years to do we give them to prove it before we believe it.

From a purely 'natural footballer' perspective, meaning not many faults in their game, can play well on both sides and just look like they were born to play football. From the players touted to be picked in the top 10. This is it IMO.

Brayshaw, Lever and Duggan. (Duggan is still only 17yo as well)

Then followed by Petracca, McCartin, Wright, Laverde, De Goey, Cockatoo, Pickett, Garlett, Steele. All these players are potential A graders but need to iron out some small deficiencies like awareness, playing on both sides etc.

Heeney, Moore etc. already gone so not in calculations.

Don't be surprised if we take Duggan with pick 3. Complete player already, no prior injury history still with huge upside. Deadly left foot and a right foot that is nearly as good.

do you also remember how many dud players we have kept on our list long past their use by date. So one success makes up for the years of failure? McKenzie and Evans are two who are just not up to AFL standards, how many more years to do we give them to prove it before we believe it.

Remember the payouts that go with delsiting contracted players.

The club may be trying to make a profit and that could tip them into a loss.

Clearly we want to use draft picks and also clearly there are still players on the list who will not take us to finals, but there is a fine line to be walked in the negotiations me thinks.

Also I suspect we have our eyes on some free agents next year and possibly saving resources and list vacancies until then.

No. Let me put it this way, what would you hope to get out of a pick 23? A 10 year player? I think Frost is going to become a very important player for us, I think he'll end up being our best tall defender and is definitely worth pick 23.

Don't try and make stuff up to suit your own agenda, it just makes you look foolish. In other words, stop being a smart arse.

I have no issue at all with s taking Frost even at P-23. thats not what I'm talking about. I would have taken him according to what the club thinks of him no matter what.

but all the talk was of a 3rd Rnd pick, then all of a sudden we get panicked by the saints, IMO in an ideal world we should have Frost & still have P-23 as well.

glad we have Frost, I think. really unhappy we don't have pick 23 to use in the draft.

do you also remember how many dud players we have kept on our list long past their use by date. So one success makes up for the years of failure? McKenzie and Evans are two who are just not up to AFL standards, how many more years to do we give them to prove it before we believe it.

How many have we redrafted as a rookie ?

I have no issue at all with s taking Frost even at P-23. thats not what I'm talking about. I would have taken him according to what the club thinks of him no matter what.

but all the talk was of a 3rd Rnd pick, then all of a sudden we get panicked by the saints, IMO in an ideal world we should have Frost & still have P-23 as well.

glad we have Frost, I think. really unhappy we don't have pick 23 to use in the draft.

We'd committed our 3rd rounder to Stretch and our 4th rounder to Garlett. The only way to get what we needed for Frost was to downgrade one of our first 3 picks. I wanted that downgrade to be less steep than pick 23 to pick 40. I would've liked our third pick in the draft inside to the top 30 or 35. But it wasn't to be.

How many have we redrafted as a rookie ?

How many rookies picks have actually been successful and resulted in players coming through and playing well, Tom McDonald is one of the few

How many rookies picks have actually been successful and resulted in players coming through and playing well, Tom McDonald is one of the few

No Tom wasn't a rookie he was a pick 53 in the 2010 draft..

How many have we redrafted as a rookie ?

All spuds except Jetta

Jetta, McNamara, Newton, Meeson, Molan, M.Clark, Bradly

How many rookies picks have actually been successful and resulted in players coming through and playing well, Tom McDonald is one of the few

We had some excellentt rookie picks from 97-03

Nathan bassett, Ward, James McDonald, Robertson, Peter Walsh, Broadbridge, Jolly, Davey, Woneameri.

Our rookie picks since 2004 have been horrid except for Wonna & Jetta

We had some excellentt rookie picks from 97-03

Nathan bassett, Ward, James McDonald, Robertson, Peter Walsh, Broadbridge, Jolly, Davey, Woneameri.

Our rookie picks since 2004 have been horrid except for Wonna & Jetta

Which goes to show our rookie picking over the last 10 years has been as bad if not worse than our drafting.

Is there a way that we can ask for special assisstance with the case of Trenners? In efffect he is unusable as a player for us [effectively a long term deposit]?! Can't we retain him outside of our list [and the Rookie list] so that we effectively have forty players at our disposal [and four rookies], the same as every other Club? I would be bitterly disappointed if we could not take Newton and also use pick 40.

I know that there are other player/rookie scenarios but the question is the same.

No we'll get the same same "assistance" every club gets when a player suffers a season long injury - the opportunity to upgrade a rookie to cover the" loss"

So there is no way that we are considering delisting the injured Trenners or the under-perfoming Evans and paying out their contracts? This is a massive shame as I am sure that there are players sitting around pick 40 [Oscar McDonald?] who may may improve our list better [and with more flexibility] in both the short and the long-term.

You may be right - but the odds weigh heavily against "Oscar" and other potential Pick 40's getting even one AFL game - much less improving our list.

In any event all remains quiet on the Newton front - so we might have to rely on pick 40 after all.

Remember the payouts that go with delsiting contracted players.

The club may be trying to make a profit and that could tip them into a loss.

Clearly we want to use draft picks and also clearly there are still players on the list who will not take us to finals, but there is a fine line to be walked in the negotiations me thinks.

All true. In our situation the difference between a relatively small profit and a relatively small loss, is quite important - and cannot be ignored.

Thats the most sense I have heard from this thread!

We wont be taking McCartin as I said before. 3 is between Lever and Laverde. That is from my golf mate

In regards to 40 and 53, we still have not finalised our list and quite possibly will have another delisting with paid out one year contract. And that will be that

My golf mate told me the same

My golf mate told me the same

Were we playing together without our knowing?