And yet you trumpet McCartin.

Do you not understand the logic of the argument ??

At draft time Toumpas was considered at top 4 pick

At draft time McCartin is considered at top 3 pick

I am not for a minute suggesting McCartin won't make it - but as it stands now he could be Wines or a Toumpas and I am amused by your "insane love".

Nutbean - ignore the guy and move on.

The definition of crazy is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.

You are not going to get self-reflection from picket fence, you are not going to get an exploration of his own logic.

Best left alone IMO.

The ignore button worls well I find....

Nutbean - ignore the guy and move on.

The definition of crazy is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.

You are not going to get self-reflection from picket fence, you are not going to get an exploration of his own logic.

Best left alone IMO.

To quote Al Pacino

"just when I thought I was out they pull me back in again"

(PF - I know it was you...you broke my heart...you broke my heart)

As far as I can tell, this isn’t an easy choice.

McCartin’s endurance is the biggest concern about him IMO. The AFL game today is played in a ‘concertina’ fashion, whereby forwards must push all the way up the ground to half back and then work all the way back to present inside forward 50. Also against McCartin, I feel that contested marking is also an overrated skill in junior football, as there are more one-on-one marking contests than in the AFL. This is not to say I wouldn’t take McCartin (I haven’t done the homework) but I would need to gain comfort that his skillset could translate to the AFL game.

With Lever, I like his bio. If he can develop into a midfielder he looks a pro-type AFL player. But I think the risk of doing his ACL again should not be understated (as the risk of re-injury is quite high and the impact is devastating). While believing in drafting ‘best available’, I also don’t think we need a key defender given we have Frost, McDonald, Garland, Dunn and Howe on our list.

Laverde is the other name being mentioned and he looks to have a lot of AFL qualities, but hasn’t shown himself to be a productive midfielder.

I definitely wouldn’t take Wright at #3, as ruckman need to be clearly superior to the rest of the draft pool to be worth the risk of an early selection.

Hopefully the Saints do us a favour and take McCartin.

With Lever, I like his bio. If he can develop into a midfielder he looks a pro-type AFL player. But I think the risk of doing his ACL again should not be understated (as the risk of re-injury is quite high and the impact is devastating).

This has been disputed by Jako13 who seems to know of what he speaks when it comes to such injuries

If only Heeney wasn't an academy drafted player.. Would settle this drafting debate and make things a whole lot easier.

West Coast took a player at pick 3 in the 2001 draft that had 2 shoulder reco's..... from memory he went ok.......

The other interesting thing about Judd that highlights the folly of making black and white calls on 18 year old draftees is that even after a player starts playing AFL and everyone gets to see him, how a players is ranked in comparison to other players can change.

I have made this point before so apologies for repetition but there are any number of examples where a player hailed as a gun early in his career has been matched or surpassed in terms of standing in the game by other players who were initially not though to be as good as the gun. After 2-3 years most footy people would have said the Hawks made a blunder not taking Judd and instead taking Hodge. Without debating their relative merits, with 2 premierships, a brownlow and 2 Norm Smiths fewer people would make that case now.

Nickat v Watts is another example. After a year footy people were universal in their view that the dees made a big mistake. And now, some 5 years later? Well, still lots of people would argue we erred but i doubt that view is still universal and if Watts has a big year and Nik Nat has another poor one even fewer people would argue we made a clear error.

The point is, it is folly making calls about untried kids and also fraught to make early calls on players in terms of how they rank and how wise their selection was, even after 1 -2 years of playing AFL footy. Some players take time to get to an elite level. Gibbs is an excellent example. He was brilliant last year and no doubt was happy to respond to those who suggested Carlton erred in taking him so high. Watson, Ablett and Hawkins are other examples.

Conversely people were lavish in their praise of Rich and Hurley early on but i would argue both have flat lined and the case for them being guns (as they were widely touted in their first 2 years) is pretty hard to make.

The obvious current example of this naive tendency is Wines v The Toump. History tells us that there is every chance the Toump will be a better player, even if shrill posters and some footy people could not countenance such a heretical idea. Time will tell.

Heeney would be pick 1 if this was an open draft imo

Heeney would be pick 1 if this was an open draft imo

And we'd have a jackpot with Petracca and Brayshaw...

Just our luck.

ACLs are rarely collision injuries, just thought I'd add that.

And if we took Darling off his 17 year old form we'd have done really well.

Anyway it's all a bit irrelevant. We'll draft who we draft and worry about it then.

And if we took Sellar, Callum Bartlett or Swift on their 18 yo form we would've taken them at pick 1 if we had it.

This has been disputed by Jako13 who seems to know of what he speaks when it comes to such injuries

Many players have had multiple ACL injuries, far more too many that could be attributed to chance. (Schwarz, Morabito, Menzel, Gawn, Malceski, Bailey, Walker etc)

West Coast took a player at pick 3 in the 2001 draft that had 2 shoulder reco's..... from memory he went ok.......

The shoulder is not a weight bearing joint, totally different kettle of fish to a knee reco. Lever is a massive risk, don't care if he's a great rehabber or leader or whatever, we need players who actually get on the field.

This has been disputed by Jako13 who seems to know of what he speaks when it comes to such injuries

Jako13 clearly doesn't give much regard to evidence based practice though. He'd be using the same skills and knowledge he learned decades ago.

Do you need a hug this afternoon TheoX?

Do you need a hug this afternoon TheoX?

Na, just need us to not draft Lever lol.

And if we took Sellar, Callum Bartlett or Swift

Swift and Sellar were highly regarded as 16-17y.o (considered pick 1-2 calibre) but fell away badly with differing circumstances or injuries.

Lever missing 12 months and having no development in that time must be a concern.

He sounds strong mentally but speaking from experience coming back from a knee is hard as it takes another 12 months to trust your knee or always trying to protect it.

The argument seems to be Lever or Pat.

MFC needs to pick the best player, not who's the safest.

It's still Pat for both for me.

The other interesting thing about Judd that highlights the folly of making black and white calls on 18 year old draftees is that even after a player starts playing AFL and everyone gets to see him, how a players is ranked in comparison to other players can change.

I have made this point before so apologies for repetition but there are any number of examples where a player hailed as a gun early in his career has been matched or surpassed in terms of standing in the game by other players who were initially not though to be as good as the gun. After 2-3 years most footy people would have said the Hawks made a blunder not taking Judd and instead taking Hodge. Without debating their relative merits, with 2 premierships, a brownlow and 2 Norm Smiths fewer people would make that case now.

Nickat v Watts is another example. After a year footy people were universal in their view that the dees made a big mistake. And now, some 5 years later? Well, still lots of people would argue we erred but i doubt that view is still universal and if Watts has a big year and Nik Nat has another poor one even fewer people would argue we made a clear error.

The point is, it is folly making calls about untried kids and also fraught to make early calls on players in terms of how they rank and how wise their selection was, even after 1 -2 years of playing AFL footy. Some players take time to get to an elite level. Gibbs is an excellent example. He was brilliant last year and no doubt was happy to respond to those who suggested Carlton erred in taking him so high. Watson, Ablett and Hawkins are other examples.

Conversely people were lavish in their praise of Rich and Hurley early on but i would argue both have flat lined and the case for them being guns (as they were widely touted in their first 2 years) is pretty hard to make.

The obvious current example of this naive tendency is Wines v The Toump. History tells us that there is every chance the Toump will be a better player, even if shrill posters and some footy people could not countenance such a heretical idea. Time will tell.

Yes Binman But how long to you wait

In my opinion we have waited far too long in recent history

Don't know if Morton, Gysberts, Bennell, Petterd, Blease, Tapscott and Strauss would necessarily share that view.

Jako13 clearly doesn't give much regard to evidence based practice though. He'd be using the same skills and knowledge he learned decades ago.

First and only warning from me Theo. Never ever have a go at my skill set and knowkedge base when you know absolutely nothing about me. My whole work is based on evidence. And the evidence shows that ACL's happen, and afl level most likely they only happen once in a career. There is no place for attacking ones professional credentials on a public forum. You may disagree with me and that's fine but let's not get all personal here.

One question though and I will not be entertaining anymore on the matter. What would be your thoughts if we recruited Tex Walker who has recently recovered from the same injury?

I'm just hoping we end up with a photo like this using our picks 2 and 3 + Stretch:

Or this:

At least one premiership isn't too much to ask out of our next lot.... is it?

My favourite bit about this all is that everyone thinks we'll either get a superstar or a dud depending on a choice.

I bet Richmond with pick 12 or even Hawthorn with pick 31 would gladly take whoever we pick at 3 be it McCartin, Lever or one of the mids.

Of course we should aim for a superstar and take the best player. But we just need to pick a guy and develop them in to an above average player, that's the most important thing.

The picks above demonstrate it. Roughy and Lewis were very decent early but really took years of development to become stars. All 4 of those Geelong stars were the same. And the order in which they became good players is almost inverse to the heights that their careers got to. It was Kelly, Bartel/SJ then Ablett early, now it's the reverse.

Only Franklin was the rare freak who is just a class above from very early and he went pick 5 anyway! Even the Hawks didn't take him with their first pick!

Am still going with my 'feeling' we'll do something a little left field. I think Melbourne sees value in Lever but were considering him at around 10-12 if we got a trade back pick after a Tyson-esque deal. With 2 and 3 im going to suggest its Brayshaw and La Verde.

2 mids that will take the game on after some development

It's just a thought , an opinion.

We'll know soon enough

First and only warning from me Theo. Never ever have a go at my skill set and knowkedge base when you know absolutely nothing about me. My whole work is based on evidence. And the evidence shows that ACL's happen, and afl level most likely they only happen once in a career. There is no place for attacking ones professional credentials on a public forum. You may disagree with me and that's fine but let's not get all personal here.

One question though and I will not be entertaining anymore on the matter. What would be your thoughts if we recruited Tex Walker who has recently recovered from the same injury?

What about the long history of hereditary weakness in some peoples ligaments, which strongly leads to reoccurrence or greater chance of the injury eg Menzel family

Or the science of core weakness regarding hips, calves or tight echilles leading to individuals being highly likely to suffer injury such as an ACL rupture due to there body not being capable of controlling certain movement ?

These are things that are either unavoidable or take a long long time to rectify, and certainly aren't rectified during a 12 month rehab program, as the stress is way to high.

No professional, just things I picked up through my experience.

Also some peoples tissue is not strong enough to successfully create the new ligament during the graft, which leads to a very high rate of reoccurrence and can't be diagnosed until the rupture happens again.

Am still going with my 'feeling' we'll do something a little left field. I think Melbourne sees value in Lever but were considering him at around 10-12 if we got a trade back pick after a Tyson-esque deal. With 2 and 3 im going to suggest its Brayshaw and La Verde.

2 mids that will take the game on after some development

It's just a thought , an opinion.

We'll know soon enough

Correct and we should not be shy in picking kids who won't play immediately. Our new structure off field and the apparent coaching group mindset should be backed in to develop them into A graders in time... Not overnight.

The only thing I know for sure in this whole episode, is that you are either right or wrong. Simple really.

Am sitting back happy about that rtight now!

Na, just need us to not draft Lever lol.

You will be disappointed then!