Currently 6 senior list vacancies.

Trade out Dawes, Watts, Howe, Grimes

Trade in Melksham, Hrovat, Currie, Moore

Promote off Rookie List: Vandenberg, Harmes, White

Delisted Free Agents: Adcock, Mason Shaw, Cameron Giles

Delist & re-rookie: M. Jones, Terlich

Natonal Draft: Charlie Curnow, Kurt Murtimer

Rookie Draft: Jack Watson

Thank God your not in charge of our list management..

That's a horrible and utter bad list change that it would set us back another 5 years.

Who we do think are our bottom 10 players? That is, on our entire list.

I'd like to think that our list management team can achieve a much better outcome than that.

I'd like to think they can to.

Don't think there's any big fish out there for us this off season unfortunately.

Who we do think are our bottom 10 players? That is, on our entire list.

I will happily answer that in a few weeks.

Who we do think are our bottom 10 players? That is, on our entire list.

The other part to that is players not getting a game should be kids learning the craft not dead wood in their mid 20's.

Edited September 19, 201510 yr by Al's Demons

A lot of posters want to trade out jack watts but I cannot see it happening unless we give him way for nothing. Just cannot see another team being interested in him. It's his 7th year and he still has not made a position his own and is he a player that can help them take the next step up the ladder. He has just been a contributor in a average bottom six. Maybe being a bit harsh on jack, but just cannot see his clear value to anyone else.

Currently 6 senior list vacancies.

Trade out Dawes, Watts, Howe, Grimes

Trade in Melksham, Hrovat, Currie, Moore

Promote off Rookie List: Vandenberg, Harmes, White

Delisted Free Agents: Adcock, Mason Shaw, Cameron Giles

Delist & re-rookie: M. Jones, Terlich

Natonal Draft: Charlie Curnow, Kurt Murtimer

Rookie Draft: Jack Watson

It's nice to know that Barry Prendergast still takes an interest in Melbourne.

I will happily answer that in a few weeks.

What? Once they've been delisted or traded? Thanks

Have heard some serious rumours about us and Hamish Hartlett what are people's thoughts on him and what's he worth?

Have heard some serious rumours about us and Hamish Hartlett what are people's thoughts on him and what's he worth?

Good player.

Can we on trade Melksham for him?

Have heard some serious rumours about us and Hamish Hartlett what are people's thoughts on him and what's he worth?

Where are these rumors coming from exactly?

Where are these rumors coming from exactly?

Probably BF or FB

Signing Shultz and Dixon, you would think they would have to get rid of someone.

Your maths...

6 deletions from the PL. If you lose 6 apples and gain 2 apples, how many apples will you go and get from the cart to end up with the same amount of apples?

4 more apples! Plus at least 2 rookie apples...

Is it really necessary to put your information directly at another person, in such a derogatory way, rpfc ?

.... you simply could have explained that, without your insecurities needing you to put another human down at a personal level. I mean they didn't jamb your toe with an axe, or anything.

Edited September 19, 201510 yr by dee-luded

Would love Hartlett.

What? Once they've been delisted or traded? Thanks

Im thinking your taking the pi££.

After all trades/draft have occurred, depending on who's brought in, some senior players who were once getting a game on a regular basis might find themselves as depth or even bottom ten on the list players.

People have bemoaned the likes of Michie/Newton/Riley coming to the club. But if they're only given two year deals it can't hurt to use 2-3 spots on the list for fringe players at other clubs because everyone now and then you find one. The key is limiting them to two years unless the show something.

Probably BF or FB

Thoughts so

I'd like to think they can to.

Don't think there's any big fish out there for us this off season unfortunately.

Even if there are no big fish available, that doesn't mean that you go after minnows.

Virtually all of the players you mention from other clubs are struggling to get games with their current clubs or have been delisted which puts them in the same category as the NQR's who we've just delisted. Your proposal is like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

Even if there are no big fish available, that doesn't mean that you go after minnows.

Virtually all of the players you mention from other clubs are struggling to get games with their current clubs or have been delisted which puts them in the same category as the NQR's who we've just delisted. Your proposal is like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

There are plenty of examples that prove that point wrong.

I'm happy to keep 2-4 max spots on the list for "select" recycled players(not an open door policy) Initial 2 year contract, but not on 400k.

Howe is going to GC, would prefer to stay at the dees but we won't match $$$.

Steve Johnson going to GC also most likely if he decides to keep playing.

Interesting listening to ABC and SEN yesterday.

ABC with one of the journos from the Age and one from AFL Media are pretty adamant that Melksham to Dees for our second rounder will happen early on once trade period opens up, and that it's probably a good deal for both parties. The Age journo's brother is Howe's manager, and he was reluctant to comment on him, but it seems his asking price has fallen by some $2-300k, and he's happy to stay with us - primarily because no one is all that interested in him at his asking price.

Listening to SEN, it seems that the story is the same for both Garland and Watts - with the former, there seems to a general feeling that he's explored his options and his contract offer will be higher at Melbourne than anywhere else.

With the latter it was really interesting - slobbo said that he's been shopped and there's been absolutely zero interest in him, especially as he has a year to go on his contract, and the vibe is that any club recruiting him would only want to pay him a bare minimum contract not what he's on at melbourne. it seems that, like us, other clubs have no idea what to make of him; they can all see his upside but think he lacks the basic fundamentals to be a regular AFL player. the general acceptance seemed to be that he'd stay with us for at least the next year, if not beyond, as no one has any idea as to where he fits into a side's make-up as he's lacks a true position and seeminly lacks the desire to become an AFL-level player.

The other part to that is players not getting a game should be kids learning the craft not dead wood in their mid 20's.

I totally agree.

There are plenty of examples that prove that point wrong.

I'm happy to keep 2-4 max spots on the list for "select" recycled players(not an open door policy) Initial 2 year contract, but not on 400k.

There are plenty of individual examples that might prove the point about NQR recycled players wrong but the one given above was a virtual across the board scenario which wouldn't appeal to me.

We went after Riley who was NQR etc, we have to stop getting stop gap players. I want us to go for quality or go for youth in the draft. I especially don't want us to trade with Essendon they are notoriously unrealistic and want overs.

We have taken several NQR players in the past, either because we wanted to freshen the list and prove players would come to us, or we simply misjudged their ability.

We should not be taking anyone for depth, other than perhaps a backup ruckman.

IMO we should be trading for established players who would be in our best 22, or players we believe can make it under our development regime.