Agreed HH. This guy is a poor afl player. The only thing is that Goodwin must see something in him as he would know him so well

But fk me I fail to see any upside or how he would provide any value to us

And we certainly shouldn't recruit someone coz they are a marginal upgrade on our worst listed player

Just because the Bombers supposedly play hardball on trading doesn't mean we'll cough up more than his value. The last 2 years have shown us to be very smart at getting more than we give. Garlett, Vince, Lumumba, Cross. Any exceptions? Wouldn't we expect the list builders to remain smart? If we can get him for value, we'd be crazy not to as he's just coming into the ripe stage of his career.

Just because the Bombers supposedly play hardball on trading doesn't mean we'll cough up more than his value. The last 2 years have shown us to be very smart at getting more than we give. Garlett, Vince, Lumumba, Cross. Any exceptions? Wouldn't we expect the list builders to remain smart? If we can get him for value, we'd be crazy not to as he's just coming into the ripe stage of his career.

The only way I'd even think of taking Melksham would be as a rookie.

The only way I'd even think of taking Melksham would be as a rookie.

thought you were going to say water boy - lol

He'd be an improvement on our worst players but... [censored]. I wouldn't touch an Essendon player until WADA's situation is resolved. Essendon are bad news at the trade table, period.

If Carlton are dumb enough to give up a first rounder for Carlisle, only to have him banned for 2 years, it would be the funniest situation to unravel in the modern game. Do we really want to play a part in that by sacrificing something as high as our third rounder? Essendon will demand our second rounder, for starters.

I'm not against up taking Melsham, just not for a second rounder. I have no idea what the club is prepared to give for him, but I think Essendon will ask for our second round pick. I wouldn't do that, there are some good kids in this draft around that point. If we could get Melksham for a 3rd round pick, sure, no harm in that. He is a big bodied kid, and he does have some upside.

Edited September 12, 20159 yr by KingDingAling

I'm not against up taking Melsham, just not for a second rounder. I have no idea what the club is prepared to give for him, but I think Essendon will ask for our second round pick. I wouldn't do that, there are some good kids in this draft around that point. If we could get Melksham for a 3rd round pick, sure, no harm in that. He is a big bodied kid, and he does have some upside.

The only universe where we should give up our second rounder involves Melksham and Essendon's 3rd rounder coming back, ala the Frost deal last year.

But a second round pick in a shallow draft has much, much more currency than a third rounder. So unless Goodwin knows something we don't, this seems like a big mistake.

Edited September 12, 20159 yr by Lamashtu

I'm not against up taking Melsham, just not for a second rounder. I have no idea what the club is prepared to give for him, but I think Essendon will ask for our second round pick. I wouldn't do that, there are some good kids in this draft around that point. If we could get Melksham for a 3rd round pick, sure, no harm in that. He is a big bodied kid, and he does have some upside.

Given he is likely to face a holiday could we offer McKenzie, M Jones or Bail?

Well if Melksham is given a 4 year deal, then I'm surprised Howe hasn't asked for 8, and Hogan for eternity!

How can people froth over the prospect of bringing in Riley, Michie, Newton, Magner, Couch, who were all completely unproven at AFL level, whilst denigrating Melksham, who has played some good footy at AFL level in one of the most horrific environments for a sporting team in world history?

Melksham played some great footy in the first half of this year as a half-forward.

Goodwin will have slightly more insight than most here.

The 4 year deal is around 300 - 385k a year. He will be on same at the Bombers minus two years. It's more the extra two years for security he is waying up. We are offering a 3rd round pick,Essendon will play hardball and wan't 2nd round. Watch this space.

Edited September 12, 20159 yr by ashdemons22

So the Footy Dept might be prepared to bet one of our 44 list spots on a guys with 5yrs development, about to enter his prime in footy, clearly a talented junior and has played some good footy in seniors. He fits our age profile.

Expect a lot of bombers to play improved footy once they get out and the saga ends. Would have been an appalling place to develop as a youngster, much like Melbourne in 2010-2013.

I'm know more or less excited by him than I was Harmes, Hunt, Bail, M Jones, Pederson or Lumumba when they came onto our list. A few have added real value, a few stink, but if we get him for pick 40 that's fine.

Look, I'm sure if we recruit him, it will be at minimal cost, and to raise the the absolute minimum standard for non-developing players on the list.

ASADA related issues aren't an issue for me.

The only issue would be overpaying, and I doubt we're silly enough for that.

The 4 year deal is around 300 - 385k a year. He will be on same at the Bombers minus two years. It's more the extra two years for security he is waying up. We are offering a 3rd round pick,Essendon will play hardball and wan't 2nd round. Watch this space.

Surprised they haven't asked for McDonald, Hogan and Brayshaw in return given their trade history

3rd round pick or GTFO!

Mids Mids and more mids, when we struggled this season it was when several of the not up to it players from 2012-13 were getting games again. For the right price I don't mind getting somebody like Melksham in

And I am fairly confident the Bombers players will get very limited suspensions from the Wada and pretty sure anything will be backdated. Thier club may well be belted but I think the players will fair okay

I agree with this PSD, minimal at worst penalties on the players, who had this philosophy pushed onto them. & injected into them in a secret safe house, after they had to sign waivers.

a real stain on that club's history.

but not so much the unlucky bomber players.

How can people froth over the prospect of bringing in Riley, Michie, Newton, Magner, Couch, who were all completely unproven at AFL level, whilst denigrating Melksham, who has played some good footy at AFL level in one of the most horrific environments for a sporting team in world history?

Melksham played some great footy in the first half of this year as a half-forward.

Goodwin will have slightly more insight than most here.

I don't think anyone frothed over those players, also what did we have to give up to get them? Not much.

The fact that we know most of those players were a mistake should be a lesson to not repeat it again with Melksham.

So we're offering a contract he might not be able to fulfil half of?

Maybe worth a punt for $250-$300k, but nearly $400k? No way.

I understand where Steve and others are coming from, but keep in mind going we are dealing with Essendon, by far the biggest pr1cks to deal with in the league. If they think that it is us or them, they will hold out for a second round pick or threaten the PSD in the belief Melksham will get nervous on where he will go and stay with Essendon.

As for WADA, I do consider it an issue, after the way the Bummers and the AFL have behaved in the whole saga, I would not be surprised to see WADA throw the book at all concerned

Edited September 12, 20159 yr by Rod Grinter Riot Squad

We do need midfielders, but we can do a hell of a lot better than Melksham.

Perhaps. But we could also do a lot worse, and given where we are ...

Maybe the bummers are keen on Bail or M Jones

Maybe the bummers are keen on Bail or M Jones

How about they take the contracted Terlich off our hands, straight swap.

Edited September 12, 20159 yr by TheoX

If we are "interested", I hope we get him for basically nothing. Can't see him in our best 22 anyway with guys like Petracca, Trengove, Kent and Frost coming back.

can't he just walk after the injection fiasco, that clubs responsibility for going outside the rules, thereby breaking the contract...

I have serious doubts about Goodwin's judgment if this is true. This is not aiming high!

IMO, filling our inadequacy holes, whilst bigger fish are being sought... we can't afford to just Aim High, we need to pepper-spray the whole dartboard.

...also, we need change for changes sake, this is a way of changing the culture, to slowly remove the old ways, & do a transplant of the NEW ways. this is the only way, removing the less's, & replacing with others with none of our old Ways.

Top 10 draft pick means there's clearly 'something' there. You've got to possess either some sort of talent, some elite attributes/traits to get you there.

He's not potentially an upgrade on the list cloggers. He is a [censored] upgrade on them. How anyone can refute that I have no idea... His season in 2013 shits all over any 'best form' we've seen from Bail, McKenzie or Jones.

It sounds much more to me like supporters gathering like vultures in an excitable way only to be talking about their own personal 'dislike' for him. From what I've been reading on this thread, it sounds as if posters don't want him because of this supposed '[censored] attitude' or 'hot-head' character that he is. Is that really a good basis for forming a view on whether or not a player like him could be at the very least an upgrade on our deplorable depth who we've had to hold onto for far too long?

As for his personal attributes and qualities, again I'm sorry but I have to disagree with you.

I see him as someone who is really competitive and has a flair of aggression at the ball and player, he is a really hard runner, he has an ability to hit the scoreboard. I agree he's not an elite kick but I see it as more of a decision making thing than anything else. Similar to Viney.

If we're talking about his draft number I'd say that he possesses qualities that are much more important to the foundation of a side than qualities we've seen with our own past top 10 draft picks who haven't made it. Morton being one. No competitive edge, outside receiver, poor contested player, poor tackler, no elite kick etc.

As for Garland, he's a 28 year old senior figure at our club who's fluctuation in form over the years has been painful to watch. Regardless of the bluey, (which is voted by members of the board), his position in the backline could be filled by someone who provides more than just a 'beat your man' philosophy. The backline is a major problem and I see Garland as someone who in this day and age of football, doesn't provide enough run, intensity, counter attacking play, foot or decision making skills to propel us forward.

Melksham is a young midfielder who even if he was playing at Casey, would absolutely be an upgrade on having someone like Matt Jones as a depth midfielder.

Do you genuinely believe we'd be better off having one of Jones, McKenzie or Bail as a replacement for an injured starting 22?

C'mon.

Before I respond, I need to know if this is the same stevethemanjordan who thinks Christian Salem is an ectomorph ?

Did some light reading from 2009. Appears he was a silky outside midfielder with sharp skills and great hands but on the downside he was soft, bit slow and lacking defensively.

That seems to fit in with how a lot of Dons supporters see Jake today.

I'll trade him in but for a cheese sandwich at most.

Sounds like a Blease/Strauss/Morton.

No thanks.