NATIONAL DRAFT PICKS 3 & 7

[Mach5 4,599]

Is he from Moggs creek?

Not far.

Same area as Lachie Henderson roughly.

[dee-luded 2,959]

If we were able to snare both Curnow and Weideman come draft time, i'd be over the moon (moreso than if it were one of those 2 and Parish).

I think we'll be lucky indeed, if either Weideman or Curnow are available by P-10

[Guest]

I was pleased with the Melksham trade and at the time very displeased with the Kennedy trade. However it makes much more sense after this move. Add Bugg, and I'm personally very happy with this trade period.

Edited October 21, 2015 by Scythe

[old dee 23,486]

I think we'll be lucky indeed, if either Weideman or Curnow are available by P-10

All the evidence is NO.

Why do you think we are were busting to get get pick 3?

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

All the evidence is NO.

Why do you think we are were busting to get get pick 3?

Yep. There's only one thing that can be concluded which is that the club KNEW that the Bombers would take whoever it is WE want with their 4th or 5th pick, so they have pulled this swifty

[ManDee 7,124]

Ummmmmm...that is clearly incorrect

In gaining these selections, the Demons handed the Suns picks No.6, No.29 and a future first round draft selection.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2015-10-21/dees-secure-picks-no3-and-no10

How is it clearly incorrect?

Edit: I may be wrong but I have not read anything that states that the future trades must be the first round selection.

Edited October 21, 2015 by ManDee

[watchtheeyes 1,404]

Yep. There's only one thing that can be concluded which is that the club KNEW that the Bombers would take whoever it is WE want with their 4th or 5th pick, so they have pulled this swifty

And to me that seems Parish.

One of Weideman or Curnow would've been available at 6.

[rpfc 28,045]

In gaining these selections, the Demons handed the Suns picks No.6, No.29 and a future first round draft selection.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2015-10-21/dees-secure-picks-no3-and-no10

How is it clearly incorrect?

Mate, it is our pick from 2016.

The AFL hasn't stipulated it properly because they don't know what they are doing - but it is our pick.

[daisycutter 29,301]

In gaining these selections, the Demons handed the Suns picks No.6, No.29 and a future first round draft selection.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2015-10-21/dees-secure-picks-no3-and-no10

How is it clearly incorrect?

Edit: I may be wrong but I have not read anything that states that the future trades must be the first round selection.

lol

[Mad_Melbourne 872]

All the evidence is NO.

Why do you think we are were busting to get get pick 3?

Because Parish wouldn't be available.

Wiedman or Curnow would 100% be available at 6, one of them at least. Half a chance to slip to 10 dependent on clubs opinions. But the move to me seems like a move to select Parish

[ManDee 7,124]

Mate, it is our pick from 2016.

The AFL hasn't stipulated it properly because they don't know what they are doing - but it is our pick.

If the AFL have poorly worded it I think my suggestion could be tried.

Edit: Anyhow we will will the flag and it will be pick 18 anyway. Go Dees.

Edited October 21, 2015 by ManDee

[rpfc 28,045]

Not too sure why we were so keen of pick 3?

Seems like Curnow and Weid would have been available at pick 6

http://m.afl.com.au/news/2015-10-18/phantom-form-guide-update

Seems like?

Perhaps they want more of an assurance than 'seems like'...

They have one particular player in mind for that pick and the last bloke these guys singled out from a long way out was Angus Brayshaw.

I am excited about who they have targeted.

[watchtheeyes 1,404]

Because Parish wouldn't be available.

Wiedman or Curnow would 100% be available at 6, one of them at least. Half a chance to slip to 10 dependent on clubs opinions. But the move to me seems like a move to select Parish

Yep, that's how it appears to me too.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

In gaining these selections, the Demons handed the Suns picks No.6, No.29 and a future first round draft selection.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2015-10-21/dees-secure-picks-no3-and-no10

How is it clearly incorrect?

Edit: I may be wrong but I have not read anything that states that the future trades must be the first round selection.

I don't know if you are right or not, but surely you can't be.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

Mate, it is our pick from 2016.

The AFL hasn't stipulated it properly because they don't know what they are doing - but it is our pick.

he's saying 'what if we have TWO first round picks as a result of trading for a second one - which do we have to give to GC?'

[M C 221]

In gaining these selections, the Demons handed the Suns picks No.6, No.29 and a future first round draft selection.

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2015-10-21/dees-secure-picks-no3-and-no10

How is it clearly incorrect?

Edit: I may be wrong but I have not read anything that states that the future trades must be the first round selection.

GC get our first round draft selection next year.

We do not get the opportunity to trade it down for another first round pick and then give that to GC, because we will never receive next year's first rounder. It goes straight to GC

[ChaserJ 4,643]

Not too sure why we were so keen of pick 3?

Seems like Curnow and Weid would have been available at pick 6

http://m.afl.com.au/news/2015-10-18/phantom-form-guide-update

Don't take too much stock in the placement of the players on the form guide, it's Twomey's personal ranking of players at this stage, not where he thinks they will go. Milera is likely to be top 10 now, and Essendon are (IMO) highly likely to take one of Curnow or Weideman. Think GC have strong interest in both Milera and Weideman.

Also, from the Age trade blog:

On the subject of draft value, lets look at Gold Coast's deal with Melbourne.

picks 3, 10 and 43 = 4007 points

picks 6 and 29 = 2404 points

So on the face of it, Melbourne have won big. But they've also traded a future first-rounder to Gold Coast.

So, on a points basis - if Melbourne finish above 11th, they win the trade. If they finish below 11, they lose it.

I like our chances to finish 11th or better next year.

Edited October 21, 2015 by ChaserJ

[old dee 23,486]

Don't take too much stock in the placement of the players on the form guide, it's Twomey's personal ranking of players at this stage, not where he thinks they will go. Milera is likely to be top 10 now, and Essendon are (IMO) highly likely to take one of Curnow or Weideman. Think GC have strong interest in both Milera and Weideman.

Also, from the Age trade blog:

On the subject of draft value, lets look at Gold Coast's deal with Melbourne.

picks 3, 10 and 43 = 4007 points

picks 6 and 29 = 2404 points

So on the face of it, Melbourne have won big. But they've also traded a future first-rounder to Gold Coast.

So, on a points basis - if Melbourne finish above 11th, they win the trade. If they finish below 11, they lose it.

Correct but it does not take into account the player we pick up at 3 this year.

He could be our next Brownlow medalist?

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

So, on a points basis - if Melbourne finish above 11th, they win the trade. If they finish below 11, they lose it.

I like our chances to finish 11th or better next year.

I think it's reasonable to suggest the both GC and MFC agreed the most probable outcome is for us to finish around there and therefore called it an equitable agreement

11th is only 2 spots higher but it's an extra 4 wins plus % compared to last year

[Mach5 4,599]

he's saying 'what if we have TWO first round picks as a result of trading for a second one - which do we have to give to GC?'

Yeah. And it's a patently stupid question.

[ManDee 7,124]

GC get our first round draft selection next year.

We do not get the opportunity to trade it down for another first round pick and then give that to GC, because we will never receive next year's first rounder. It goes straight to GC

Thanks MC that makes sense.

[daisycutter 29,301]

he's saying 'what if we have TWO first round picks as a result of trading for a second one - which do we have to give to GC?'

???

the 1st round pick for 2016 allocated by the afl based on our ladder position is no longer ours. it has already got a new owner. finito, dead, gorn, deceased, fallen off the perch

[Demon_JB 1,359]

Parish sounds and looks like a name that someone would be a great player.. I can just picture myself looking at Footy Live app and seeing Parish, D.. Lets get excited fellas!

[Moonshadow 17,470]

Is it too early for the club to go with a Parish/Curnow interview wearing red and blue while signing the paperwork next to gf?

Edited October 21, 2015 by Moonshadow

[daisycutter 29,301]

wish there was a decent highlights video of parish (the one posted is useless)