Lever is an outright NO for me.

Talent wise no, I can rate three other draftees as higher.

Position wise no, large backmen can be picked up later in the draft - like ruckmen. We also have McDonald, Frost, Dunn, and Garland to cover that role.

2014 output (or lack of), an absolute no. Due to injury why risk him along with the above.

If we want to take a punt or risk on someone with prior injury it should be Cockatoo. If he played that one game on a consistent basis he'd be in everyone's top two or three equations. He's also a midfielder and more likely to succeed at the next level (injuries aside). I'm betting he'll be the one everyone complains about not picking.

But Lever.... an outright NO!

But Lever.... an outright NO!

And if we pick him?

And if we pick him?

I'll be disappointed and consider it another drafting blunder. I'll accept him and hope he succeeds, that's all I can do.

What about you?

Who are your ideal top three?

I'll be disappointed and consider it another drafting blunder.

How does that work?

The club doesn't screw up this pick the second it says the name, that judgement waits for time to reveal it.

Just as it has for so many of our previous picks.

I don't know these juniors, my experience is of people telling me and my club - you choose this child, and maybe this other child - they are the best players and forever will be.

And they have been wrong.

If the club 'reaches' for a player they believe will be better than the ones they are 'supposed' to pick I would be pleasantly surprised.

This Lever kid doesn't deserve the emphatic dismissal you have given him and if he is selected it will be because the club thinks he has recovered from his knee issues and that he will be the better player.

I'll be disappointed and consider it another drafting blunder. I'll accept him and hope he succeeds, that's all I can do.

You must be in possession of a lot more info that the average Demonlander to make such "outright" judgements.

And your ability to foresee the future must come in very handy.

Our list definitely needs a Snake

How does that work?

The club doesn't screw up this pick the second it says the name, that judgement waits for time to reveal it.

Just as it has for so many of our previous picks.

I don't know these juniors, my experience is of people telling me and my club - you choose these this child, and maybe this other child - they are the best players and forever will be.

And they have been wrong.

If the club 'reaches' for a player they believe will be better than the ones they are 'supposed' to pick I would be pleasantly surprised.

This Lever kid doesn't deserve the emphatic dismissal you have given him and if he is selected it will be because the club thinks he has recovered from his knee issues and that he will be the better player.

Ok... so you're looking for yet another debate?... what a joy it is rpfc (sarcasm).

Firstly I love your skipping of the lines and twisting of words - you've been in Canberra alongside the politicians for far too long mate. Strangely I was actually looking forward to your response as I know your a Laverde fan, but now unfortunately ignoring the fact because you "don't know these juniors". You're happier to sit on the fence and shoot others down.

Now how is it possible that the second a club does say a name it can not have possibly screwed up that pick? That is ludicrous. Why not use pick 2 & 3 to draft someone in the hypothetical range of the 50's or 60's or even rookies, will that screw up a pick or merely significantly hinder our chances of obtaining that potential future star or A-grader?

Clearly time tells these things, clearly it's a combination between good drafting that includes club observation and homework (that yes can be screwed up), club development, club player culture, and player personality / personal desire and drive that contributes to their eventual success or failure over time. As we are unable to foresee all of these + a combination of other factors like living conditions, it is this reason why "stars" can come from anywhere like Pick 1 in the ND (Hodge) to the PSD (Rockliff) or RD (Cox). But look at the past in any draft of any sport and time and time again you'll see an increased probability of selecting a "star" or "A grade player" earlier in the draft order.

As for this Lever kid and this "empathic dismissal" I apologise if I hurt his feelings. I just don't want to see the club select another tall skinny kid that didn't play all year and yet another backman with such an early pick. As I recall you wanted mids, mids, mids due to our needs over talent, must I bring up the quotes?

I have far greater faith that our current recruiting department as against those who went before them, have what it takes to make the right decision based on all the information at their disposal. Brayshaw appears to be a lock and then the fun begins with the other pick. We can argue cases for and against each of the prime candidates (which is surely what Demonland is all about!) and I enjoy reading the parries and thrusts between posters - mostly. I have absolutely no inside or outside knowledge of any of the prospectives other than what I have read and the vision I have seen in clips. The problem is that each of them have their pros and cons and we need bits or lots of what each can bring. 3-4 draftees into one draft position just doesn't go. I will be disappointed not to get each one of the ones we don't get and rapt to get the one we do.

For what it's worth, the thought of a two pronged Hogan and McCartin combo is salivating, however the adage of drafting for mids and trading for talls resonates with me. The highlights package of Laverde was the most impressive of the lot, however for him to be in the 4-10 bracket perhaps indicates something missing somewhere. Lever's biggest concern is obviously his knee, however all the other attributes accredited to him including leadership, possibly makes him the safest bet (injury aside) as he seemingly has the combination of talents also found in the other two. Competitiveness, marking and strength - McCartin; athleticism and footy smarts - Laverde. People say he is a defender as well as a potentially untried midfielder. Could he also be a potentially untried forward? No one seems to have mentioned this. Could he be a rebounding defender a la Fyfe or Heppell when they started - or a big midfielder a la Bontempelli, or as someone suggested, Mundy - or could he also be that big competitive key position forward like a Hogan or McCartin have been touted to become? He is young enough to be moulded into a body shape that will enable him to be any of these.

He therefore may be the one which gives us the best combination of all three - assuming any unnamed others are out of the picture. His knee is a risk (all due diligence no doubt being done here), however he could almost be that 3 in 1 draftee who could help fulfill a number of needs in the one pick with the flexibility and scope to be a forward, back or mid.

So I guess it's Jake Lever for me - but will trust those in the know to pull the right rabbit out of the hat.

I wasn't meaning to compare him to other mids jacey, just speaking about speed sometimes being a little bit overrated.

In my mind Lever has more to offer being a natural footballer than a couple of the others around him. Mind you, I haven't see him play once so I am only basing this off the highlights and reports on him as a player. I just like the way he is agressive at the pill in the air and then takes the game on with some run and spread. His speed on the video's looks fine to me.

I don't know if he will be a gun midfielder or not but I do believe he will be a very good player no matter where or for who he plays.

The draft combine is a massive [censored] and in my opinion nearly a complete waste of time.

I was lucky enough to do the testing this year as apart of my work (work at NAB) and as much as it was a thrill getting out there I feel we place way to much emphasis on the stats it provides.

The couple days are more for a commercial purposes in my opinion, I don't think the data provided adds that much more value to who is selected where.

Surely the coaches / recruiters would have there minds made up after the TAC cup season and the U/18 championships of who they would be after.

If 'Player X' gets the pill 25 times a game but runs a 20m run 0.20secs slower than 'Player Y' who gets 12 touches I know who I'd go after. Also, on the 20m sprint, starting at the actual laser-line I ran a 3.18 I think and then the next I was a bit cheeky and started a foot back and got a 3.02 without being noticed. So the results can be skewed a little.

Anyways, It's all about footy smarts and I think the snake has got it.

The way I see the combine is that the most valuable data is gained from the interviews. It’s generally the last access clubs have to players before year 12 exams.

As far as testing goes, the most useful application is to track how well players have improved on previous results and how they’ve on perceived weaknesses. These kids are being tested progressively over the course of 2+ years, so when Jarrod Pickett is asked earlier in the year what beep he runs and answers 13, by the time he tests at the combine the recruiters might get should idea on how much extra work he will have put in to improve.

In Callum Twomey’s article Pickett says he was asked earlier in the year what he hoped to run (in the beep) at the combine and he said 14. Think he ended up running 14.3. The fact that he worked on his endurance and exceeded his expectation would be the tick in recruiters books rather than the overall result.

The learning is probably more in a players character, desire and competitiveness (and to an extent personal pride) than the raw athletic testing results.

As for this Lever kid and this "empathic dismissal" I apologise if I hurt his feelings. I just don't want to see the club select another tall skinny kid that didn't play all year and yet another backman with such an early pick. As I recall you wanted mids, mids, mids due to our needs over talent, must I bring up the quotes?

Ignition I haven't seen any of these kids and so I sit hear reading the same old same old.

The pros and cons seem reasonably clear on both Lever and McCartin (how I'd laugh if we picked someone different) and a fair concern is that Lever has no exposed form for 2014 coming off an ACL - but lets face it so many have recovered so well from ACL's in the past that I don't believe that's an issue.

Now IF we choose Lever and because he hasn't played in 2014 and given our recruiting staff will have been all over all of the top prospects for some time now doesn't that give you a little confidence in the kid? Doesn't that make you at least question your own position?

I'm in Nut's camp. It's highly unlikely that the top 3 picks will end up being the best 3 footballers in this draft. You back your judgment and see how you go.

The most important reasons we should pick Lever, IMO:

1. I haven't said that I like him.

2. Picket Fence wants McCartin.

3. Someone somewhere thinks he might be able to play in the midfield some day.

4. Is most likely to be our first ever 18 year old captain.

5. His mum or dad cook a mean dinner. (Or Roosy's wife cooks a shocking one. )

6. They call him Snake.

The most important reasons we should not pick Snake, IMO:

1. Jack Watts can run 20 metres faster than him, on a basketball court wearing sneakers.

2. He did his knee 12 months ago and if he ever does either knee ever again under any circumstance, then it's another recruiting blunder.

I think the pros have it.

And they say it's not an exact science. Pffft.

Ok... so you're looking for yet another debate?... what a joy it is rpfc (sarcasm).

Firstly I love your skipping of the lines and twisting of words - you've been in Canberra alongside the politicians for far too long mate. Strangely I was actually looking forward to your response as I know your a Laverde fan, but now unfortunately ignoring the fact because you "don't know these juniors". You're happier to sit on the fence and shoot others down.

As for this Lever kid and this "empathic dismissal" I apologise if I hurt his feelings. I just don't want to see the club select another tall skinny kid that didn't play all year and yet another backman with such an early pick. As I recall you wanted mids, mids, mids due to our needs over talent, must I bring up the quotes?

I asked you a question and your answer was ridiculous. I didn't twist anything.

I am a fan of a club that shouldn't just listen to supposed experts about who they 'should' pick. I have heard from everyone that Brayshaw and McCartin are the best talents at 2 and 3 and will tell you now, using the weight of probabilities and this Russian Roulette of an AFL Teenage Draft that we have here, that those two will be joined or surpassed by talents that we were not allowed to choose from because we would be 'reaching' for players; this one too small, this one too big, this one had a bad knee, this one has bad shoulders, this one is still at school, this one doesn't have elite speed over 20m, this one has wonky skills.

All of these things should come into considerations but they are not reasons to forbid a club to pick someone.

That is what irritates me. The club should choose who they think is the best player when they are 22, the fact some fans are already gearing up to dismiss the selection the minute it is made is frustrating to say the least.

You don't know which child will become the best player - how one can be so dismissive in the absence of so much information is astounding. And I don't care for Jake's sake. I care for ours.

I asked you a question and your answer was ridiculous. I didn't twist anything.

I am a fan of a club that shouldn't just listen to supposed experts about who they 'should' pick. I have heard from everyone that Brayshaw and McCartin are the best talents at 2 and 3 and will tell you now, using the weight of probabilities and this Russian Roulette of an AFL Teenage Draft that we have here, that those two will be joined or surpassed by talents that we were not allowed to choose from because we would be 'reaching' for players; this one too small, this one too big, this one had a bad knee, this one has bad shoulders, this one is still at school, this one doesn't have elite speed over 20m, this one has wonky skills.

All of these things should come into considerations but they are not reasons to forbid a club to pick someone.

That is what irritates me. The club should choose who they think is the best player when they are 22, the fact some fans are already gearing up to dismiss the selection the minute it is made is frustrating to say the least.

You don't know which child will become the best player - how one can be so dismissive in the absence of so much information is astounding. And I don't care for Jake's sake. I care for ours.

I'll disagree with your first line as I don't consider my answer ridiculous, but I just wouldn't feel comfortable with it for the reasons stated above (we can agree to disagree on that).

For everything else I agree with you as we are often on the same page regarding the draft as a lottery, the over obsessions with the likes of height and speed, separately the age as the American systems support the argument, the unknown and inability to completely foresee the futures best, and how important it is for the club to get both picks right.

As a one liner I see it as a "lottery with a descending probability of selecting a future A-grader as we progress through the order" homework and other factors influence this (stated above). We or the clubs can only place well calculated guesses/ selections based on this homework (output and interviews), and clearly those at the club have the best information so yes their opinion is far greater than the likes of yours, mine or most outside the AFL environment.

With regards to the "lottery" or "roulette" or whatever we want to call it, I think I state it every year, I just hope the club "stacks the odds in their/ our favour" and so back onto Lever this is where he scares the hell out of me!

Could his previous injury have been a one off? or has his genetic code rendered him similar to the Menzel brothers, Rodan, or Morabito? who knows. As a tall defender will he make the transition in the the AFL environment as easily as most midfielder? who knows. What of his lack of 2014 exposure? or does the club consider his excellent 2013 form capable of overriding this?

Anyway that's my opinion and it is those risks that go against the stacking of the odds, maybe I'm looking at it far too much like an insurance company or bank. But if the club take that punt on him believing the Pros out weigh the cons ahead of a McCartin or other risky prospect in Cockatoo I will take a deep breath and then support him like any other MFC player.

Anyway cheers for the debate mate

And thank you Baghdad Bob for seeing my point. I agree with you too.

I'll disagree with your first line as I don't consider my answer ridiculous, but I just wouldn't feel comfortable with it for the reasons stated above (we can agree to disagree on that).

For everything else I agree with you as we are often on the same page regarding the draft as a lottery, the over obsessions with the likes of height and speed, separately the age as the American systems support the argument, the unknown and inability to completely foresee the futures best, and how important it is for the club to get both picks right.

As a one liner I see it as a "lottery with a descending probability of selecting a future A-grader as we progress through the order" homework and other factors influence this (stated above). We or the clubs can only place well calculated guesses/ selections based on this homework (output and interviews), and clearly those at the club have the best information so yes their opinion is far greater than the likes of yours, mine or most outside the AFL environment.

With regards to the "lottery" or "roulette" or whatever we want to call it, I think I state it every year, I just hope the club "stacks the odds in their/ our favour" and so back onto Lever this is where he scares the hell out of me!

Could his previous injury have been a one off? or has his genetic code rendered him similar to the Menzel brothers, Rodan, or Morabito? who knows. As a tall defender will he make the transition in the the AFL environment as easily as most midfielder? who knows. What of his lack of 2014 exposure? or does the club consider his excellent 2013 form capable of overriding this?

Anyway that's my opinion and it is those risks that go against the stacking of the odds, maybe I'm looking at it far too much like an insurance company or bank. But if the club take that punt on him believing the Pros out weigh the cons ahead of a McCartin or other risky prospect in Cockatoo I will take a deep breath and then support him like any other MFC player.

To be perfectly honest, I don't have any predisposition to any player; as I said - I have no knowledge about the kids.

My point is, and has been since watching in horror our recruitment over the past decade, is that I don't like the club being boxed into a few certain players.

If they break out of it and pick Laverde, Lever, De Goey, et al. all I will know is that they didn't just pick the bloke that we seem to be predestined to pick - McCartin.

But I also see the nonsense of my own standpoint - what if McCartin is the best player to pick?

As you allude - who the f knows - I just don't like being told what the club can and can't do.

Try and pick the best player when they are 22.

Do that and we are all happy.

The thing Lever has in abundance is his relentless urge to improve. He's the guy who's going to come into the club and make the experienced players look bad with the level of his training. Given our history of drafting fast players who look good but have no work ethic to speak of, this is something that can't be rated too highly. I know there are more talented players in the draft, but we've seen so many talented players fail because they didn't have the work ethic. I'd be more than happy to take a guy with slightly less talent but massive workrate and a good football brain. Whether he is developed into a third tall defender, a rebounding HB or an oversized mid, I think we'd get value out of this kid, and a top 10 pick who can play 100+ games is something we really need.

Maybe Mrs Lever cooks a mean meatloaf...

Meatloaf is associated with GFs.

Try and pick the best player when they are 22.

Do that and we are all happy.

Amen to that. Look at GC and GWS with all their picks they still got quite a few gun juniors that haven't turned into the A graders they were hyped as in their draft years.

Looking past their first few years in the system is sound recruiting if you develop them right.

To be perfectly honest, I don't have any predisposition to any player; as I said - I have no knowledge about the kids.

My point is, and has been since watching in horror our recruitment over the past decade, is that I don't like the club being boxed into a few certain players.

If they break out of it and pick Laverde, Lever, De Goey, et al. all I will know is that they didn't just pick the bloke that we seem to be predestined to pick - McCartin.

But I also see the nonsense of my own standpoint - what if McCartin is the best player to pick?

As you allude - who the f knows - I just don't like being told what the club can and can't do.

Try and pick the best player when they are 22.

Do that and we are all happy.

Yeah well said, and I think it's predominantly the media that drive those selected four or so.

I know my scouting/ recruiting mate (another club) that has given me next to nothing this year doesn't read or get carried away in the media hype.

Besides we can argue til' hearts are content when one day the consensus age of the draft is lifted

To be perfectly honest, I don't have any predisposition to any player; as I said - I have no knowledge about the kids.

My point is, and has been since watching in horror our recruitment over the past decade, is that I don't like the club being boxed into a few certain players.

If they break out of it and pick Laverde, Lever, De Goey, et al. all I will know is that they didn't just pick the bloke that we seem to be predestined to pick - McCartin.

But I also see the nonsense of my own standpoint - what if McCartin is the best player to pick?

As you allude - who the f knows - I just don't like being told what the club can and can't do.

Try and pick the best player when they are 22.

Do that and we are all happy.

For what it's worth, a couple of current coaches (family connection) consider Lever & Heeney to be the two players with the highest upside/potential.

At a recent dinner both commented that they expect the 'so-called' draft expects will see a few surprises in the top 15 picks (well more than in previous years was their exact wording). I found it interesting that both expect Lever to be drafted in the top 6 (one suggesting to us at pick 3 & the other to pies at pick 5) with the general consensus that he's a 'permanent defender' being way off-base and most likely to play the game in a similar manner to Luke Hodge in a sweeper role who also rotates through the midfield.

My 2 cents - Lever to MFC at 3 & McCartin to the Giants at pick 6.

To be perfectly honest, I don't have any predisposition to any player; as I said - I have no knowledge about the kids.

My point is, and has been since watching in horror our recruitment over the past decade, is that I don't like the club being boxed into a few certain players.

If they break out of it and pick Laverde, Lever, De Goey, et al. all I will know is that they didn't just pick the bloke that we seem to be predestined to pick - McCartin.

But I also see the nonsense of my own standpoint - what if McCartin is the best player to pick?

As you allude - who the f knows - I just don't like being told what the club can and can't do.

Try and pick the best player when they are 22.

Do that and we are all happy.

Yeah well said, and I think it's predominantly the media that drive those selected four or so.

I know my scouting/ recruiting mate (another club) that has given me next to nothing this year doesn't read or get carried away in the media hype.

Besides we can argue til' hearts are content when one day the consensus age of the draft is lifted

This is not right guys...the media in reality get the word back from their contacts at clubland and that's how they come up with their lists. They just don't have the resources that the clubs do to track all the kids in the draft, and remember many of these kids have been on the radar for years.

We are not boxed into anything, we are picking who we think are the best players at draft time, not who Emma, Terry or anyone else thinks. Our thinking is similar to the other clubs as we all have similar information, that's why the same players are talked up.

A really good recruiter has that little bit extra and maybe more than a touch of luck going their way. Lets hope that's who we have and we identify and recruit the next great of the game.

We are a big group here at demonland. Lever will know where he is going now, so will McCartin, Brayshaw, Petracca, Laverde etc. top 10 usually know before the start of November. So if you know one, give him a call or see if he has booked a ticket to Sydney for Decelber.

My mail from "mates" of the boys is that Wright thinks he's staying in Victoria, Brayshaw is locked at the Dees, and Lever thinks he's not leaving the state next year.

The one constant that I am delighted with is Roos steadfast theme that these picks are not the instant saviors of the club and need to be allowed to develop ( and last year we put development plans in place to nuture these kids and further reinforced it with the addition of BM for next season)

For us to drive up the ladder we need to put pressure on the likes of Tyson, Howe, Watts. McDonald, Viney and others to improve. You can name anyone you like but they need to have been in the system for a while. Even expecting sub 22 year olds with so few games to be our saviors (Viney and Tyson) is a big ask but we are bereft of talent at the mature end of our list.

I like what I saw from Salem and JKH last year and I deem their year as a success - I want to see them improve but I don't have the expectation that these boys will be a huge factor in our improvement.

I want to see signs from our new draftees and that includes Hogan but I don't expect them to any better than Salem and JKH were this year - if they are then it is a massive bonus.

I find it strange that many advocate picking another skinny kid, in Lever.....ala Morton and Watts.

Give me the big lump of a lad in McCartin any day of the week.

I am not sure if he is our man, I do know that we have been tracking him for ages and have been speaking to him and his family several times recently so apparently we are still very interested.

I am excited by a strong and wiry, hard working player with a mad attack on the footy who has a very good sidestep, great judgement and game awareness and the ability to mark the footy over others with arms that go up like giant testicles.

A player like this who could perhaps make the transition into the midfield is hard to go past. I look forward to tracking his career wherever he ends up.

The issue with the Prendergast years is that we took players in the first round who had glaring physical or mental deficiencies, players that were incomplete. From reports this bloke has the physical and psychological attributes necessary to do well.

No wonder he is slow.

I find it strange that many advocate picking another skinny kid, in Lever.....ala Morton and Watts.

Give me the big lump of a lad in McCartin any day of the week.

Theres a big difference between Lever and watts/Morton