Lovell is a nephew I think.

If we're talking Kieran and Andy, I think the verdict was that if they're related at all, it is very distantly.

http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/38478-the-kieran-lovell-thread/

Quick question. Can we take both Lovell and Lovett under Father/Son?

chris from camberwell is that you. Just joking. Lovell is no relation

how tall is he?

likes handball more than scott west

Listed at 185 cm. For an outside runner, Milera's composure and skill in traffic stood out for me during the year. His awareness and handballing under pressure is very good. Uses his sidestep well too. If anything he could spread better from contests and get better at winning the 'easy' ball on the outside.

Not surprised at all to see his stock rise at the end of the season. Was watching Metro vs SA with a mate this year and after about three eye catching involvements in a short amount of time by Milera, I turned to my (Carlton supporting) mate and said 'our clubs need to be looking at this guy'.

I think he's a strong chance to get to GC at 6.

BF has some excellent junior football watchers. I'm not sure of this persons bona fides, however, they state that Curnow is a mid first and foremost.

7. Charlie Curnow - Vic Country (191 cm, 95 kg key forward/inside midfielder)

Style/Comparison: Jake Stringer

Charlie Curnow is one of the most underrated prospects in this draft and partially due to an unfortunate dislocated knee that forced him to miss the championships, has flown under the radar strongly. While many salivate over his highly rated teammates Rhys Mathieson and Darcy Parish, Curnow has quietly gone about his business rather impressively. Curnow is a strong-bodied midfielder who has starred up forward because of the lack of key forwards at the Falcons. In many games, Curnow has kicked a handful of goals and then gone into the middle and won plenty of inside ball. His style is not too dissimilar to a Jack Darling, Jake Stringer or Jarryd Roughead type with his combination a dominant forward presence and physical and athletic inside grunt work through the middle. There is scope for Curnow to develop a similar game to Josh Kennedy at the Swans should a club decide to play him as a pure inside midfielder. But forward of centre is where I think he has the most potential, as, like most kids who have a late growth spurt (which Curnow has), he has got the height of a forward but athleticism and nous of a bloke much shorter. With his rate of development both physically and in football terms, it is likely that Curnow continues to progress and becomes one of the best players from this draft.

!!!

Well Well Well

Not even Damien Barrett can claim we stuffed up this trade period

There is no doubt we put ourselves in an ideal position to draft the player we are wanting at pick 3

The depth of this draft is quite shallow which gives us an opportunity to get a another good player at Pick 7

I think we just outfoxed 17 other clubs

The players we wanted we got

The picks we wanted we got

Thanks for being BOLD Josh Mahoney and Co

Think we only outfoxed 16 other clubs.

Suspect we were in the tent with GWS the entire time. Hence, the Bugg trade was the last to fall into place.

Quality output MFC. So impressed. And I back our recruiting department to nail picks 3 and 7 too.

How this club has changed. It's actually professional and competent now.

We're Hawthorn circa 2006 now.

Tell you what, nine years of highlight clips and phantom draft writeups has me extremely jaded about looking into our draft prospects. It's a lot of info and thinking that ultimately ends up having minimal bearing on what actually happens once you have the player. To repeat what we have all been saying/already know - Viney, Hogan, Brayshaw, Tyson and others have started their young careers well under our new regime. Please God let that be an indicator that our Toumpas/Cook/Gysberts etc days are behind us and we can now start getting full value on the talent we get our hands on. Please.

Toumpas, Grgic, Cook, Morton, Gysberts, Tapscott, Blease, Maric, Strauss days must be behind us.

Toumpas, Grgic, Cook, Morton, Gysberts, Tapscott, Blease, Maric, Strauss days must be behind us.

you just made me cringe 9 times in a row

Could have easily added McLean, Sylvia, Watts, Scully and Trengove too

I was thinking the same thing when I read that last night. He does have a good pedigree, but he doesn't sound like a very safe pick. Inconsistent with no tank is what I gleaned from that article. I couldn't have Weideman ahead of Francis on that write up. I couldn't find any footage of Weideman, but his TAC cup stats weren't all that inspiring either.

There's not a whole lot of footage of Weideman given he's been out injured for so long, but some highlights of him playing for the Academy v Werribee are on this AFL Eyecatchers video. Some footage of Parish here too:

Draft stars announce themselves

pick 7... Daniel Rioli... anyone or have I gone mad?? Weideman likely but what if Rioli was as good as Cyril !!

But what if he is as injury prone and susceptible to weight gain as Dean?

One of the draft reports in the Weideman thread mentioned he had missed most of the season with a stress fracture in his foot.

Does anyone know if he played many games after he recovered to see how his foot fared in match situations?

Given how foot problems are notoriously difficult to fully recover from (Clark, Trengove, S. Frost) he could be too high a risk to take early in the draft.

One of the draft reports in the Weideman thread mentioned he had missed most of the season with a stress fracture in his foot.

Does anyone know if he played many games after he recovered to see how his foot fared in match situations?

Given how foot problems are notoriously difficult to fully recover from (Clark, Trengove, S. Frost) he could be too high a risk to take early in the draft.

Anyone drafting Weideman would have to think he's off to scumbagland the first chance he gets - look elsewhere would be my advice

I can only judge off what limited footage I have watched but I think we should take Francis at 3. I think Parish has more chance of being found out at AFL level while Francis seems more versatile and more skilled. I actually don't want a 'pure' mid, Francis can be part of a rotating midfield division with Petracca, Brayshaw, etc. Tyson and Viney are already pure mids along with the skipper we have on our list and I wouldn't want too many of them. Hawks don't have many while Sydney have about 3/4 which compromises ability to adapt to different teams and game plans. This looks to be an important aspect going forward, particularly with limited rotations and an ever evolving game. I know we are looking to improve our midfield but my limited knowledge says that Parish is an underwhelming 'best mid' for a draft. Would be very happy to get Francis and Curnow.

I'd say from the reports that we are 99% certain to take Parish at number 3.

I hope with pick 7 we take a natural goal kicker, whether that be a tall forward or medium sized forward. I'd imagine it will be out of whoever is available between Weideman, Francis, Curnow and Milera. I also wouldn't be surprised to see someone like Burton from Adelaide who seems like a natural forward.

We need genuine goal kickers as mush as we need mids.

With all the discussions and trades with Gold Coast, I have a feeling we know what they will be taking at 6, which made upgrading to 7 that important. To me, I'm not worried about 'who might slide to us' because MFC wouldn't have upgraded our picks to 3 and 7 blindly not knowing who will be available to us, especially pick 7. Who that player is though I don't know.

Anyone drafting Weideman would have to think he's off to scumbagland the first chance he gets - look elsewhere would be my advice

He ran during the combine with no issues. Hasnt played football since the injury though. Also someone said in the other thread he wasnt a Collingwood supporter.

With all the discussions and trades with Gold Coast, I have a feeling we know what they will be taking at 6, which made upgrading to 7 that important. To me, I'm not worried about 'who might slide to us' because MFC wouldn't have upgraded our picks to 3 and 7 blindly not knowing who will be available to us, especially pick 7. Who that player is though I don't know.

Couldn't agree more with what u have said juzzk1d.

Given the clubs interest in Parish, he'd be our most likely fit for pick 3 as he wont be there at pick 7. As for pick 7, any of Curnow, Francis or Weideman would seem like great fits (provided any are also still available at pick 7).

With all the discussions and trades with Gold Coast, I have a feeling we know what they will be taking at 6, which made upgrading to 7 that important. To me, I'm not worried about 'who might slide to us' because MFC wouldn't have upgraded our picks to 3 and 7 blindly not knowing who will be available to us, especially pick 7. Who that player is though I don't know.

No way Essendon would tell them who they are going to pick. So they would have made the decision on the range of 2-4 players that would still be there without knowing which one for sure.

Anyone drafting Weideman would have to think he's off to scumbagland the first chance he gets - look elsewhere would be my advice

He ran during the combine with no issues. Hasnt played football since the injury though. Also someone said in the other thread he wasnt a Collingwood supporter.

So, you think "scumbagland" means Collingwood only. I thought it was a collective noun used to describe Collingwood, Carlton and Richmond. At least, it ought to be. Can Demonland make it so?

So, you think "scumbagland" means Collingwood only. I thought it was a collective noun used to describe Collingwood, Carlton and Richmond. At least, it ought to be. Can Demonland make it so?

With the necessary inclusion of Essendon!

In the first few picks all this "cloak and dagger" stuff is silly. The draft order is now set. Nobody can do anything about who we pick at 3 bar Carlton and Brisbane. We will just rank the players in order and take the best available at 7. We are not going to let the player we want go at 3 with the hope they get to 7, that would be dumb having gone to all the trouble and cost of getting 3.

And I don't think we will necessarily take a tall for the sake of it. We'll take the best available. If that's a tall so be it. The way Hawthorn structure their forward line is just to have as many goal kickers as they can in there. Doesn't matter about size. Even Roughy plays a lot around the ground. They succeed because they are unpredictable and don't have a go to target. They are arguably better without Buddy.

Our danger with Hogan is putting all our eggs in one basket. It can go horribly wrong as it did for WCE in the GF. We need a team and system that kicks goals and a set formula of "two talls" is yesterdays philosophy I reckon.

Best available. Players able to play multiple positions and roles. That's what we should be aiming for.

And I reckon we've got the second tall on our list already in Tom McDonald. His kicking is an issue but no more so than coming out of the backline. He can run, mark and finds the ball. I think he will play forward a lot next year.

In the first few picks all this "cloak and dagger" stuff is silly. The draft order is now set. Nobody can do anything about who we pick at 3 bar Carlton and Brisbane. We will just rank the players in order and take the best available at 7. We are not going to let the player we want go at 3 with the hope they get to 7, that would be dumb having gone to all the trouble and cost of getting 3.

And I don't think we will necessarily take a tall for the sake of it. We'll take the best available. If that's a tall so be it. The way Hawthorn structure their forward line is just to have as many goal kickers as they can in there. Doesn't matter about size. Even Roughy plays a lot around the ground. They succeed because they are unpredictable and don't have a go to target. They are arguably better without Buddy.

Our danger with Hogan is putting all our eggs in one basket. It can go horribly wrong as it did for WCE in the GF. We need a team and system that kicks goals and a set formula of "two talls" is yesterdays philosophy I reckon.

Best available. Players able to play multiple positions and roles. That's what we should be aiming for.

And I reckon we've got the second tall on our list already in Tom McDonald. His kicking is an issue but no more so than coming out of the backline. He can run, mark and finds the ball. I think he will play forward a lot next year.

The point you make is a good one. It basically comes down to ball movement into the forward line. At the few training sessions I attended this year, in the drills, the only players leading out from the goal square were Hogan, Dawes or Pedersen. For mine it was predictable footy, bigs lead, smalls crumb. There's no reason why a mid/small can't lead out if the delivery is good.

I had a bit of a think about forward lines last night, and I think that versatility is very important. By that I don't mean that being able to swap your CHB and CHF, for example, but instead that your set forward line is able to function in a number of different ways depending on the situation.

For example, in the Grand Final Hawthorn kicked a winning score with only 1 goal between Roughead, Bruest, Puopolo and Hale. They got their goals from Rioli, Smith and Gunston instead, and in the Prelim they got their goals from Roughead, Rioli and Schoenmakers. Bruest kicked 6 in the semi!

You are right about West Coast, who placed a lot of eggs in the Kennedy basket. Once Frawley got him, they were out of ideas. Hawthorn were able to neutralise the long ball forward with Roughead and Schoenmakers (plus Hale) and then allow the smaller, quicker players to break forward into space, like Rioli, Smith or even Gunston.

What we need to do, as a forward line, is to compete for the long ball (even if we don't mark it) and then have a variety of options who can win the ball in general ground level play. We only need the talls to compete for a long kick, not mark it, but then after that everyone's a midfielder. The question is, how many players do we need to compete for that kick? I think that we need two players to compete, because the workload (and risk) for one key forward is too much. But that doesn't mean that it has to be a big three pronged forward line like West Coast's, but it could just be a resting ruckman type.

It could even be Frost. Not because he's a a skillful high marking player but he is athletic enough to get to a lot of contests and strong enough to disrupt the opposition's defenders and bring the ball to ground. The role doesn't require someone to be a superstar, or even very good. You just need someone who works hard and stops the oppositions taking intercept marks. In that role, Dawes (despite how much he is maligned) is actually perfectly fine.

The idea of drawing defenders away from your main key forward is slightly outdated, because there's almost always an extra defender anyway, no matter who it is being kicked to. Plus forwards very rarely get to lead at the ball carrier from deep in the forward line like they used to. So the key is being able to bring the ball to ground and then having players that can win it when it gets there. If you can have running, crumbing players who are good enough to mark when they get a run at the ball, then you require their defenders to guard them in the air, which will create more opportunities at ground level.

I can only judge off what limited footage I have watched but I think we should take Francis at 3. I think Parish has more chance of being found out at AFL level while Francis seems more versatile and more skilled. I actually don't want a 'pure' mid, Francis can be part of a rotating midfield division with Petracca, Brayshaw, etc. Tyson and Viney are already pure mids along with the skipper we have on our list and I wouldn't want too many of them. Hawks don't have many while Sydney have about 3/4 which compromises ability to adapt to different teams and game plans. This looks to be an important aspect going forward, particularly with limited rotations and an ever evolving game. I know we are looking to improve our midfield but my limited knowledge says that Parish is an underwhelming 'best mid' for a draft. Would be very happy to get Francis and Curnow.

Yep that's the ticket. 3mins of video footage to decide our whole drafting strategy.

The footy dept has done nothing all year but has since watched youtube and is now ready for the draft.

Its probably fair to say that the footy dept worked hard to get pick 3 becuase it knows exactly who it wants.