There would be no harm in us telling the Dons our pick 3 choice (i.e. Parish), assuming we are certain of it. It might explain why the Don have gone cold on Parish (i.e. he's unavailable to them).

I don't think the Dons will take both Curnow and Wiedeman, as they have a need to bolster their midfield. So most likely one should be available to us.

I suspect we'll land Parish and Wiedeman

Edited November 18, 20159 yr by PaulRB

There would be no harm in us telling the Dons our pick 3 choice (i.e. Parish), assuming we are certain of it. It might explain why the Don have gone cold on Parish (i.e. he's unavailable to them).

I don't think the Dons will take both Curnow and Wiedeman, as they have a need to bolster their midfield. So most likely one should be available to us.

I suspect we'll land Parish and Wiedeman

I can't see why we'd offer up this information to them. Sure, there's no harm in it, but it's better to see them sweat on who we're going to take. They're not exactly a club that have earned goodwill.

Edited November 18, 20159 yr by Good Times Grimes

It's not Hogan's forward line...I don't see us doing a Pagan's paddock.

We need to build the forward line, a forward/ruck would be a great pickup for us. If we have to rely on so called role players like Dawes we are going nowhere.

...and of course we don't spend top 10 picks on role players. I wouldn't see Weideman or McKay as role players.

Good, and I hope we pick a talented tall if we pick up one of those two - but I don't want this club to reach past a mid to do it.

Our midfield is all promise at the moment - I would argue to add to it.

Vince and Jones have a handful of years left, Trengove is a running question mark, Vanders has started well but will be at his peak very quickly, Tyson and Kent have struggled with injury in their short but promising careers, Salem and ANB are yet to play midfield in the AFL, and Petracca yet to play AFL...

There is so much promise there to go with Viney and Brayshaw but little room for the aforementioned quality (or seeming quality) to fail or be lost to injury.

Jones, Vince, Viney, Brayshaw, Tyson, Salem, Petracca, Kent, ANB, Vanders, and Trengove is not a great midfield.

It could be a great midfield...

Thinking about it more, I think 100% Parish at 3

Whoever is available out of Weideman, Curnow, McKay

#1 Preference - Weideman

#2 - Curnow

#3 - McKay

This is my thinking too with one proviso though. The three talls you list must all be rated as top 10 talent. If our ranking list has Parish at 3 and Curnow at 6 and Weideman at 9 and McKay at 18 and Curnow and Weideman get snapped up by Essendon and Gold Coast, do you still want us to take McKay? Or do you back our full time recruiting team who have spent 2 plus years watching this batch of players and may well rate Milera at 5, Oliver at 7, Francis at 10 and Collins at 11? It's easy to talk about taking 'best available' but a scenario like the one I presented is a little more challenging particularly when our jigsaw is oh so close to completion. I agree, a forward who can ruck is a key need. I just hope the draft works out so that we pick an elite mid and in order to meet needs we don't reach too far. If Weitering, Schache, Curnow and Weideman are all taken, are we happy taking the 5th best tall when our rankings has that player outside the top 15?

Edited November 18, 20159 yr by Goodvibes

I can't see why we'd offer up this information to them. Sure, there's no harm in it, but it's better to see them sweat on who we're going to take. They're not exactly a club that have earned goodwill.

The benefit would be if they tell us there 2 picks at 4 & 5 then we can eliminate those options and concentrate on 2 players that we can take at 7. We may already know who GCS are keen at with 6 with the trade we did with them which would mean we would know who was going to be available at 7

This season coming we have another year into a great group of kids, Petracca and Trengove back and Salem ready to move into the middle...

If we don't have a forward line to kick to then we won't be pumping the ball in, we will be playing keepings off around the middle of the ground.

I'm not as worried about the midfield as others are.

Look we have a functioning fwd line. Could it be better of course. But its not the priority.

Hogan, Dawes, Garlett, Pederson, JKH, Petracca are a fwd line.

We have one player in the media's top 50 list. One. I applaud your confidence that our midfield will be OK but its totally unproven and lacks depth. And yep, our young guns could well turn out to be elite but we need 2 elite mids and 8 others to be able to rotate through there with a consisten output. We are a long way off the pace.

Good, and I hope we pick a talented tall if we pick up one of those two - but I don't want this club to reach past a mid to do it.

Our midfield is all promise at the moment - I would argue to add to it.

Vince and Jones have a handful of years left, Trengove is a running question mark, Vanders has started well but will be at his peak very quickly, Tyson and Kent have struggled with injury in their short but promising careers, Salem and ANB are yet to play midfield in the AFL, and Petracca yet to play AFL...

There is so much promise there to go with Viney and Brayshaw but little room for the aforementioned quality (or seeming quality) to fail or be lost to injury.

Jones, Vince, Viney, Brayshaw, Tyson, Salem, Petracca, Kent, ANB, Vanders, and Trengove is not a great midfield.

It could be a great midfield...

...and Hogan is not a great forward line. He's well on the way to being a great forward.

I doubt we will be reaching for a forward, we don't need another Cook. I'm a believer in best available and looking at it Parish is the best available mid then we have some talls and in betweens like Curnow, Weideman, Francis and McKay. It's going to be interesting to see where the cards fall.

I doubt we will go with Oliver at 3 unless the FD really have seen something in him. He just doesn't have the body of work to back that selection up and that's all I can go on at the moment. Of course the professionals will have a much, much wider view.

So, I think we agree on best available...I don't think it will be 2 mids but I'm not paid the big bucks to make the decision.

Good, and I hope we pick a talented tall if we pick up one of those two - but I don't want this club to reach past a mid to do it.

pretty well sums it up for mine

Whilst the fwd setup can of course be bolstered...and will need to be we have shown that if we can get it into the 50 we can score... Our biggest let down in games is the fwd 50 entries...

/

This needs to be vastly improved and the only way you will do that is to better the midfield. If the best two players available at 3 and 7 are midfielders I think we'd be silly not to take them

Look we have a functioning fwd line. Could it be better of course. But its not the priority.

Hogan, Dawes, Garlett, Pederson, JKH, Petracca are a fwd line.

We have one player in the media's top 50 list. One. I applaud your confidence that our midfield will be OK but its totally unproven and lacks depth. And yep, our young guns could well turn out to be elite but we need 2 elite mids and 8 others to be able to rotate through there with a consisten output. We are a long way off the pace.

I think it only barely functions because of Hogan.

Petracca will be a big plus. Forget Dawes, Pederson and JKH, they add nothing.

If a KPF is best available and there at our pick we should take him.

bit like do we get a cart or the horses.

Edited November 19, 20159 yr by beelzebub

After trading in 3 mids who we think can develop and trade out of a 2016 mids draft and then trade up even higher in this talls draft why would we bother unless we wanted talls. Plus we have mids in Trengove and Petracca back. We will be up to our ears in mids and when we become that destination club we will even have them coming cap in hand to play for us.

Edited November 19, 20159 yr by manny100

Correct. Anyone who thinks we didn't know who we would get when we traded for 3 & 7 are tripping.

how can they be certain who is going at 4/5/6? Especially since whoever we take at 3 will impact what is taken at 4/5/6?

Demonland needs more names which can be mis-spelled. Parish, Curnow and Oliver all seem almost impossible to stuff up, so we should pick Weiderman the Weed.

We were ranked 18th last year. I disagree with you. Yes we might improve but when was the last elite mid we had? And I mean elite. You need at least two to be a contender.

And there is no guarantee we will get the right fwd line. I maintain we are better off finding elite mids and pumping th eball into our fwd line 70 times a game. The opposite doesn't work imo.

Totally agree. We need more midfield class. What some people don't seem to realise is that mathematically speaking we will lose the services of some our current stock due to injury, defection and just plain failure to develop. Not all of Viney, Brayshaw, Petracca, Tyson and Salem are going to be star mids for us.

I quite like Harry McKay at 7. Assuming Curnow and Weideman are gone. He is a good contested mark and is super athletic. Also pinch a hit in the ruck. Similar to Jarryd Roughead

I quite like McKay... the other two are a bit over hyped

still prefer two mids though

Edited November 19, 20159 yr by beelzebub

Demonland needs more names which can be mis-spelled. Parish, Curnow and Oliver all seem almost impossible to stuff up, so we should pick Weiderman the Weed.

agreed, how could anyone mis-spell perisch, kurno and olisik. would be impossible

agreed, how could anyone mis-spell perisch, kurno and olisik. would be impossible

Presumably you mean impozibull

If we select Weideman, he should be made to change his name by deed-poll to Weidemon

Like everyone else here, I can only guess at who we might select with these picks. However, I am 100% positive that I'll be thrilled with our selections come 08:30 on Tuesday evening. For the first time in eons, I know that our Club will be completely on top of the credentials of all the contenders, and that a couple of important pieces will be ticked off against a master plan. IMO the turn-around in our list has been nothing short of remarkable in a few short years, and right now, nobody could convince me that that we won't 'nail it' again. Yeah, I know I'm a sill old fart, but .....

I can't wait for all of us to stop guessing and bloody find out who the hell we are getting.

Bring on the draft.

It can't come quick enough for me.

I think it only barely functions because of Hogan.

Petracca will be a big plus. Forget Dawes, Pederson and JKH, they add nothing.

If a KPF is best available and there at our pick we should take him.

Yeah, we are 17th for i50s and 16th for centre clearances. Hard to judge a fwd line on that.

I'm sticking with my view.

Cheers

Yeah, we are 17th for i50s and 16th for centre clearances. Hard to judge a fwd line on that.

I'm sticking with my view.

Cheers

If you were a mid looking forward and saw Dawes there you would hardly feel inclined to bang it forward.

...anyway, appreciate your opinion on this, as you probably guessed mine is different. Be a boring forum if we all agreed on everything.

Cheers 'jnrmac'

We could have one of the best mids in the Comp but if hogan (Hate to even think this) goes then who do we kick too? No one will be developed to take his role if need be

Hogan is not the entitre fwd structure. So many arguments make it seem so.

Midfielders , pesky little devils , are somewhat notorious for kicking a goal or two. Midfielders can link to other players in the fwd arc if there's tuition to do so and good position by any other player forward.

Who's to say club doesn't already have someone(s) in mind already on list or otherwise to groom. Into fwd support role or an additional kpp fwd ?

For years weve taken some odd picks and now we're 'that' close to actually aspiring to midfield that competes and has depth and now some seem to want to revert to old thinking.

Ah well we'll know soon enough

Our best win of this year, against the Cats at Mordor, was without Hogan, and our temporary tall forward structure held up quite well...