I'd love for us to get Francis (5) and Hibberd (20/25) and in the process seal up our defensive stocks alongside McDonald (The Mcdonalds?) for a decade. Particularly as they are both rated for their composure and skill by foot.

I wouldn't be using pick 5 on a half back flanker, who's draft stocks soared based on a couple of carnival games. He was pretty average in the 3rd game against Vic Metro. We could pick up a similar type in Tomlinson with a 2nd/3rd rounder, but I'd be looking for a more dynamic line-breaker at half back, as STMJ stated.

Thats a wonderful day dream right there Ungarie boy.

I hope we can at least get Lynch and a mid like Prestia. Would be a huge boost.

Lynch, Prestia, McKenzie and Whitfield would do me nicely. Dreamworld, I'd add Bennell.

Second rounder on Lynch.

First rounder on Prestia.

Future second rounder on McKenzie.

Future first rounder on Bennell.

Howe for Whitfield.

Lynch, Prestia, McKenzie and Whitfield would do me nicely. Dreamworld, I'd add Bennell.

Second rounder on Lynch.

First rounder on Prestia.

Future second rounder on McKenzie.

Future first rounder on Bennell.

Howe for Whitfield.

3 out of those 5 would improve us nicely

3 out of those 5 would improve us nicely

I reckon 3 are pretty likely too.

I reckon 3 are pretty likely too.

Wish I had your enthusiasm Adam... Lynch seems like a good possibility and would be a nice acquisition, but the MFC just doesn't attract established players at the talent level of Prestia, Bennell and Whitfield.

Wish I had your enthusiasm Adam... Lynch seems like a good possibility and would be a nice acquisition, but the MFC just doesn't attract established players at the talent level of Prestia, Bennell and Whitfield.

Still reckon we'll get Prestia and reckon we might get Lynch too. I've no doubt Roos and co are targeting blank flankers with skill that have the versatility to also push into the midfield.

Howe is being linked to GC. O'Meara has been injured all year and there are rumours he has big problems with his injuries. Bennell is probably gettable and Hall may want out.

I would target Bennell and Hall with Howe and another player/pick.

Zac Smith also may be on the outer and maybe a huge deal between clubs could be done.

Maybe if Garland leaves as a FA, we could use the compo pick and Howe and maybe Spencer, as an example and try and get a big deal done.

There will be GWS players moving on and we should be in there trying to get one or two, but clearly they would be the lesser lights, guys on the fringe like Frost was. There should be players being let go by GWS to reduce their numbers and salary cap. Players may see us as a chance of playing more football.

Edited August 31, 20159 yr by Redleg

Howe is being linked to GC. O'Meara has been injured all year and there are rumours he has big problems with his injuries. Bennell is probably gettable and Hall may want out.

I would target Bennell and Hall with Howe and another player/pick.

Zac Smith also may be on the outer and maybe a huge deal between clubs could be done.

Maybe if Garland leaves as a FA, we could use the compo pick and Howe and maybe Spencer, as an example and try and get a big deal done.

There will be GWS players moving on and we should be in there trying to get one or two, but clearly they would be the lesser lights, guys on the fringe like Frost was. There should be players being let go by GWS to reduce their numbers and salary cap. Players may see us as a chance of playing more football.

Would love Zac Smith and Bennell. Is Whitfield on the outer enough for you?

Who's linking Howe to GC, btw, Red?

Who's linking Howe to GC, btw, Red?

Herald Sun article last week, also mentioned our interest in Lynch.

Ricciuto was suspiciously awkward during yesterday's match when pressed on the issue, as well (Lynch, that is, not Howe. Either way, seems like he's gone).

What picks

What MFC PIcks/players would you give to achieve all of this?

Trying to be realistic,

If garland left as a free agent and we received a 2nd round comp pick then that would be close to getting Lynch.

Packaging up Howe and a 2nd round pick should give us a first rounder which may be enough to get Prestia.

Suckling could easily be a delisted free-agent or achieved through a swap (downgrade) of later round picks.

Watts should land us at least a 2nd rounder which could be used on Bugg/Ploughman (GWS will be looking for picks to convert to their academy players)

a third round for Horlin-Smith seems reasonable.

In theory we move on Howe, Watts and Garland; 2nd round pick and 3rd round pick.

If the first round pick is required for prestia as well then we would expect to get an early a late first round pick in return.

Jamar may look for another year as well, and bring in a 3rd round pick.

In theory we would get most of these players (or players of similar ilk) and still keep a first round pick and have a late round pick for Lovett,while we can use very late round picks to upgrade Vanders and Harmes. In what's meant to be a very weak draft after the first round we end up with a lot of talent and little risk.

Edited August 31, 20159 yr by Ungarie boy

Watts should land us at least a 2nd rounder which could be used on Bugg/Ploughman (GWS will be looking for picks to convert to their academy players)

a third round for Horlin-Smith seems reasonable.

Jamar may look for another year as well, and bring in a 3rd round pick.

I agree with a number of your options but can't understand a few.

Why would we trade Watts after he has played his best season and looks to be heading in the right direction, and then use it for Bugg or Plowman who have not played anywhere near his level?

And there is absolutely zero chance anyone would trade a 3rd round pick for Jamar.

Trying to be realistic,

If garland left as a free agent and we received a 2nd round comp pick then that would be close to getting Lynch.

Packaging up Howe and a 2nd round pick should give us a first rounder which may be enough to get Prestia.

Suckling could easily be a delisted free-agent or achieved through a swap (downgrade) of later round picks.

Watts should land us at least a 2nd rounder which could be used on Bugg/Ploughman (GWS will be looking for picks to convert to their academy players)

a third round for Horlin-Smith seems reasonable.

In theory we move on Howe, Watts and Garland; 2nd round pick and 3rd round pick.

If the first round pick is required for prestia as well then we would expect to get an early a late first round pick in return.

Jamar may look for another year as well, and bring in a 3rd round pick.

In theory we would get most of these players (or players of similar ilk) and still keep a first round pick and have a late round pick for Lovett,while we can use very late round picks to upgrade Vanders and Harmes. In what's meant to be a very weak draft after the first round we end up with a lot of talent and little risk.

Not sure if serious. For starters, Horlin-Smith re-signed this year till the end of 2018, and you think we could get him with a 3rd round pick? And how on earth do you think that Jamar will bring us anything, even as a UFA? He'd be on base payments, and our compo would be zilch.

Crows have an interest in gorringe i have heard so three way deal?

Howe to suns

Gorringe and pick to crows

Lynch to dees?

Roos flags aggressive changes to the list, and this is encouraging to hear, but I don't want to see like-for-like trading occur.

The team's in no position to "top up". Adding players like Cross and Lumumba (although we had no choice there) reads more like a Band-Aid solution rather than progress, so I want this rubbish to end.

Change for the sake of change is pointless and creates (or in our case perpetuates) a vicious negative cycle.

If notable names are indeed moved on the club should strengthen their numbers in this year's draft. Apparently the draft pool is weak but I only see this as a positive because it will allow us to accumulate draft picks without resistance from other clubs -- if the club sees the draft pool differently to everyone else.

I understand it will mean buying low but the list is still at a very low base, albeit building an impressive core of 20 to 23-year-olds, so we have reason to be optimistic and take some risks. And it's about damn time we stop dwelling on -- and apologising for -- past instances of draft failure and recognise what we did wrong then and get it right now, or at least have a good crack at it. Back ourselves right in from recruitment right through to development. We will get it wrong sometimes, make no mistake, but a strong culture is built on responsibility and confidence.

Unless an A-grade young mid or tall gets served to us on a platter, make the draft priority.

Roos flags aggressive changes to the list, and this is encouraging to hear, but I don't want to see like-for-like trading occur.

The team's in no position to "top up". Adding players like Cross and Lumumba (although we had no choice there) reads more like a Band-Aid solution rather than progress, so I want this rubbish to end.

Change for the sake of change is pointless and creates (or in our case perpetuates) a vicious negative cycle.

If notable names are indeed moved on the club should strengthen their numbers in this year's draft. Apparently the draft pool is weak but I only see this as a positive because it will allow us to accumulate draft picks without resistance from other clubs -- if the club sees the draft pool differently to everyone else.

I understand it will mean buying low but the list is still at a very low base, albeit building an impressive core of 20 to 23-year-olds, so we have reason to be optimistic and take some risks. And it's about damn time we stop dwelling on -- and apologising for -- past instances of draft failure and recognise what we did wrong then and get it right now, or at least have a good crack at it. Back ourselves right in from recruitment right through to development. We will get it wrong sometimes, make no mistake, but a strong culture is built on responsibility and confidence.

Unless an A-grade young mid or tall gets served to us on a platter, make the draft priority.

Agree with everything you say other than stockpiling draft picks. And why you we see the draft pool any different to other clubs?

With the new Academy bidding system, clubs like GWS and Sydney will need additional picks in the 15-30 range to get sufficient points to pick up the likes of Mills and Kennedy. We may be able to wrangle a player with proven AFL credentials (not necessarily an A grader), for a middling pick in a shallow draft.

Roos flags aggressive changes to the list, and this is encouraging to hear, but I don't want to see like-for-like trading occur.

The team's in no position to "top up". Adding players like Cross and Lumumba (although we had no choice there) reads more like a Band-Aid solution rather than progress, so I want this rubbish to end.

Change for the sake of change is pointless and creates (or in our case perpetuates) a vicious negative cycle.

If notable names are indeed moved on the club should strengthen their numbers in this year's draft. Apparently the draft pool is weak but I only see this as a positive because it will allow us to accumulate draft picks without resistance from other clubs -- if the club sees the draft pool differently to everyone else.

I understand it will mean buying low but the list is still at a very low base, albeit building an impressive core of 20 to 23-year-olds, so we have reason to be optimistic and take some risks. And it's about damn time we stop dwelling on -- and apologising for -- past instances of draft failure and recognise what we did wrong then and get it right now, or at least have a good crack at it. Back ourselves right in from recruitment right through to development. We will get it wrong sometimes, make no mistake, but a strong culture is built on responsibility and confidence.

Unless an A-grade young mid or tall gets served to us on a platter, make the draft priority.

I agree that adding quality talent with the right attributes is important for us building a strong core which includes that of Viney, Hogan, Brayshaw, Petracca, Tyson etc.

However, in highlighting those statements in bold, I must say I disagree.

I can only assume you haven't noticed the complete void in quality and professional senior figures and leaders at this club for the best part of 8 years which has undeniably contributed to the under-development of young players, contributed to the poor culture and sense of being 'lost' and absolutely contributed to some of the poorest team performances the AFL has witnessed.

If you were to ask anyone at the club, the inclusion of Cross as someone who exemplifies leadership in the way that he plays the game each week, prepares himself and acquits himself at training wouldn't be underestimated. The fact that he's slow and is a poor disposer is something we have to cop because we simply need someone like him to help lead the way.

As for Lamumba, as unfortunate as his form has been this year in the way of providing the same flair and dash off half-back as he did at Collingwood, he was also brought to the club as another highly driven and professional footballer to add to our list.

If you haven't noticed, it's likely that serial under-performers and general floaters in Garland, Jamar and Howe will all possibly be moved on over the off-season. Two of those players should be part of the senior group driving this club forward but are not for various reasons.

As important as nailing the youth is, it's equally important that we nail some more senior figures with leadership qualities who will genuinely inspire change and help develop this young core group of highly talented kids we've got coming through. In fact, I'd argue that it's of more importance.

Having to bring in these types of older and experienced players is an unfortunate reality for the MFC. We just need to make sure they're the right ones. You've written Lamumba off fairly early in my view even though he's got money in the bank and Cross has been monumental for both the club on game-day as well as for role-modelling for the younger crew.

I'd be enquiring about a Kelly or even Boris (Enright) as another senior figure who could fill a leadership role for the group in the absence of Jamar or Garland.

Edited September 1, 20159 yr by stevethemanjordan

Not sure if serious. For starters, Horlin-Smith re-signed this year till the end of 2018, and you think we could get him with a 3rd round pick? And how on earth do you think that Jamar will bring us anything, even as a UFA? He'd be on base payments, and our compo would be zilch.

Signing a contract means nothing, He's currently not in there first 22 and may be looking for opportunity elsewhere. Also Geelong is going to have to move on players if they are seriously in the market for rumoured players such as Dangerfield and Henderson. A midfield of Dangerfield, Selwood, Duncan, Motlop, and Co doesn't scream opportunity for Horlin-Smith. Wasn't sure of his value but most clubs will struggle to trade a player who is not starting 22 for anything higher than pick 30's.

Forgot Jamar was an UFA, but then again he wasn't included in the potential scenario of how we could achieve the potential trades. Clubs are always looking for an experienced ruck as assurance for final campaigns, so perhaps his value (not him personally) becomes the slight upgrade needed to get another trade over the line.

I personally believe Z Jones is gettable - despite resigning (Sydney will be wanting to bring in academy and father/son players and will need picks to achieve this. Sydney is the team we should be looking very hard at, as they also have salary cap constraints in addition for the need trade in picks - maybe Kennedy. Ironically they will also be looking for a ruck!!!

Edited September 1, 20159 yr by Ungarie boy

Adding people like Cross and Lumumba keeps our head above water while we develop young players and has a positive effect on culture.

Agree with everything you say other than stockpiling draft picks. And why you we see the draft pool any different to other clubs?

With the new Academy bidding system, clubs like GWS and Sydney will need additional picks in the 15-30 range to get sufficient points to pick up the likes of Mills and Kennedy. We may be able to wrangle a player with proven AFL credentials (not necessarily an A grader), for a middling pick in a shallow draft.

I don't *think* the recruiters will, nor do I know -- just to clarify -- but if it so happens that they do rate the draft pool higher than most then I would hope it gives the club reason to trade with the idea of strengthening their hand in the draft.

If by "wrangle a player with proven AFL credentials (not necessarily an A grader)" you might mean, say, a Tom Mitchell or Adam Tomlinson ?? Also it depends on your definition of A-grader, B-grader etc. Hannabal had a 4-tiered ranking system which made complete sense. Bernie Vince is B-grade, where Dangerfield is A-grade and Ablett is a Star. A-graders win Premierships. B-graders play their role which can influence games but typically hold the team's structure afloat.

If we can give away a second or third-round pick for a Mitchell, Tomlinson "type" then bombs away but it's completely unrealistic.

I want the A-graders. The first-round of a draft has delivered them when most pundits dismissed them at the time. And if the recruit falls short of A-grade then at least we can develop a young kid from the ground up to play a role he understands with a team he's been around from day dot.

Signing a contract means nothing, He's currently not in there first 22 and may be looking for opportunity elsewhere. Also Geelong is going to have to move on players if they are seriously in the market for rumoured players such as Dangerfield and Henderson. A midfield of Dangerfield, Selwood, Duncan, Motlop, and Co doesn't scream opportunity for Horlin-Smith. Wasn't sure of his value but most clubs will struggle to trade a player who is not starting 22 for anything higher than pick 30's.

Forgot Jamar was an UFA, but then again he wasn't included in the potential scenario of how we could achieve the potential trades. Clubs are always looking for an experienced ruck as assurance for final campaigns, so perhaps his value (not him personally) becomes the slight upgrade needed to get another trade over the line.

I personally believe Z Jones is gettable - despite resigning (Sydney will be wanting to bring in academy and father/son players and will need picks to achieve this. Sydney is the team we should be looking very hard at, as they also have salary cap constraints in addition for the need trade in picks - maybe Kennedy. Ironically they will also be looking for a ruck!!!

Horlin-Smith re-signed in May when he wasn't getting a game. And Geelong clearly rate him as they gave him a 3 year deal.

And you've mentioned 4 players out of a midfield rotation of 10/12. They lose Bartel, Kelly, Stevie J this year or next. Horlin-Smith won't be traded.

I don't *think* the recruiters will, nor do I know -- just to clarify -- but if it so happens that they do rate the draft pool higher than most then I would hope it gives the club reason to trade with the idea of strengthening their hand in the draft.

If by "wrangle a player with proven AFL credentials (not necessarily an A grader)" you might mean, say, a Tom Mitchell or Adam Tomlinson ?? Also it depends on your definition of A-grader, B-grader etc. Hannabal had a 4-tiered ranking system which made complete sense. Bernie Vince is B-grade, where Dangerfield is A-grade and Ablett is a Star. A-graders win Premierships. B-graders play their role which can influence games but typically hold the team's structure afloat.

If we can give away a second or third-round pick for a Mitchell, Tomlinson "type" then bombs away but it's completely unrealistic.

I want the A-graders. The first-round of a draft has delivered them when most pundits dismissed them at the time. And if the recruit falls short of A-grade then at least we can develop a young kid from the ground up to play a role he understands with a team he's been around from day dot.

That's worked well in the past.

I agree that adding quality talent with the right attributes is important for us building a strong core which includes that of Viney, Hogan, Brayshaw, Petracca, Tyson etc.

However, in highlighting those statements in bold, I must say I disagree.

I can only assume you haven't noticed the complete void in quality and professional senior figures and leaders at this club for the best part of 8 years which has undeniably contributed to the under-development of young players, contributed to the poor culture and sense of being 'lost' and absolutely contributed to some of the poorest team performances the AFL has witnessed.

If you were to ask anyone at the club, the inclusion of Cross as someone who exemplifies leadership in the way that he plays the game each week, prepares himself and acquits himself at training wouldn't be underestimated. The fact that he's slow and is a poor disposer is something we have to cop because we simply need someone like him to help lead the way.

As for Lamumba, as unfortunate as his form has been this year in the way of providing the same flair and dash off half-back as he did at Collingwood, he was also brought to the club as another highly driven and professional footballer to add to our list.

If you haven't noticed, it's likely that serial under-performers and general floaters in Garland, Jamar and Howe will all possibly be moved on over the off-season. Two of those players should be part of the senior group driving this club forward but are not for various reasons.

As important as nailing the youth is, it's equally important that we nail some more senior figures with leadership qualities who will genuinely inspire change and help develop this young core group of highly talented kids we've got coming through. In fact, I'd argue that it's of more importance.

Having to bring in these types of older and experienced players is an unfortunate reality for the MFC. We just need to make sure they're the right ones. You've written Lamumba off fairly early in my view even though he's got money in the bank and Cross has been monumental for both the club on game-day as well as for role-modelling for the younger crew.

I'd be enquiring about a Kelly or even Boris (Enright) as another senior figure who could fill a leadership role for the group in the absence of Jamar or Garland.

I was using Cross and Lumumba as examples only. They have been more than useful to us. My point was about trading for picks this year.

Adding people like Cross and Lumumba keeps our head above water while we develop young players and has a positive effect on culture.

Cross yes, but Lumumba has been very underwhelming thus far. I think he'll step up next year and feel more comfortable in the side and with the game plan.

What picks

What MFC PIcks/players would you give to achieve all of this?

what would people think If Dunn was put up for trade? for a mid 1st Rnd pick, or part of a Prestia deal ?