Pick 3 AND 10 and no Howe or Toump??

Bring it!!!!

Exactly, he doesn't have a crystal ball, so then how can it be a good trade? He is the one going early on this, and slandering Demonlanders for doing exactly the same. Let's just wait 12 months, better let just wait a few years before calling this deal a good trade/bad trade etc. I know patience isn't at a premium around here, but this deal is neither a good/bad deal as of yet. It is far too early.

Everyone knows that the draft is a (weighted) lottery and we won't really know for a few years. But those slagging Mahoney were only too ready to call for his head early and they deserve to be criticised for wallowing in tearing their shirts and spreading tales of woe - which BTW is not being 'slandered'.

But kudos to those who have apologized for going early.

All of Parish's game-changing qualities were on show in the Geelong Falcons' qualifying final against North Ballarat, when he collected 27 disposals, had seven tackles, five clearances and eight inside-50s. Parish is tough, composed and is a quick-thinker: he hunts the ball, darts away and doesn't take long to make a decision. Parish tested at the combine but didn't stand out in any of the events. That shouldn't be a surprise or a worry. He's a natural footballer and one who steps up a level when the ball is there to get and offers plenty of dash.

Makes a good point. The talent we have now is well above anything we had in the 2008-2012 period. In 2010 we looked like the next best thing. It's top 10 or bust next year. Would be a colossal failure for Roos is they can't finish 10th or above in 2016.

Is he from Moggs creek?

Everyone knows that the draft is a (weighted) lottery and we won't really know for a few years. But those slagging Mahoney were only too ready to call for his head early and they deserve to be criticised for wallowing in tearing their shirts and spreading tales of woe - which BTW is not being 'slandered'.

It just goes to show that too many on here don't see the bigger picture Sue. When one deal drops they want to tear it apart, yet surely they can see that the club is always on the front foot and that many deals will be part of other ones. For example - the deal that went down for Howe allowed us to not only trade out 2 players we didn't need, but also landed us a bonus player in Kennedy (quoting Mahoney there) and a pick that we could on trade for the deal that went down today.

It would be nice if others waited before bagging the FD but, sadly, that will never happen.

I will say this, I'm really glad that we have a good working relationship with so many clubs, especially GC & GWS.

I bet that GC wouldn't have honored a deal, or even contemplated doing one with Essendon or Collingwood.

We go about our business without trying to 'screw' anyone else, and that is why we can get good win-win deals done. It's a credit to our football department.

I will say this, I'm really glad that we have a good working relationship with so many clubs, especially GC & GWS.

I bet that GC wouldn't have honored a deal, or even contemplated doing one with Essendon or Collingwood.

We go about our business without trying to 'screw' anyone else, and that is why we can get good win-win deals done. It's a credit to our football department.

Wonder if things change when we try and shaft the suns for young Dion next year?

We fill holes but at least now days our kids will be developed rather than played straight away. No doubt we will take a tall with one of the picks it will be one that is 198cm plus that can ruck

Wonder if things change when we try and shaft the suns for young Dion next year?

With what? This could be forward thinking play by GC. They've taken away our ability to lure Prestia. They could be thinking that if Prestia can't get to MFC, then he will stay at their club.

BTW, if you are one of the many who have prattled on about what we did and failed to do and how Mahoney sucks and how you are a better negotiator and waawaawaa... this would be a good time to stick your hand up and admit you don't know WTF you're talking about

here fing here.... Oli.... thoughts?

Shallow means lack of depth, rather than weak at the top.

I think its a good deal, provided we pick hard players that can kick or one of those and a key forward prospect.

It's so tricky with the structure of the feeder comps - if the draft is shallow does it make the top end look better than they are due to the competition being worse (especially for u18 carnival, tac cup etc)? I think it's still an inexact science and a lot of variables that don't exist in other professional "draft" structured leagues.

I will say this, I'm really glad that we have a good working relationship with so many clubs, especially GC & GWS.

I bet that GC wouldn't have honored a deal, or even contemplated doing one with Essendon or Collingwood.

We go about our business without trying to 'screw' anyone else, and that is why we can get good win-win deals done. It's a credit to our football department.

Yes. Not dealing with these two new clubs when there's advantages in improving draft position with incentives could be an opportunity missed for some. Hopefully the good talking between GC and us covered a little future work project, called Operation Prestia.

What I like about the deal is that we are confident about where we will end up next year and that we think we can get 2 good players this year, it sends a positive message.

However the trade debt situation is one that concerns me a little, mainly out of my ignorance of next years crop and how it may affect our ability to attract an A grade player (or Prestia).

That said the club through Mahony articulated its plan and has got it done (other than Prestia). We are clearly going for youth and backing our ability to pick the right types (which we clearly did last year).

But we may still be able to trade back into the first rnd next year....

We trade our first rounder next year (likely 3-8) for pick 3 and a couple of downgrades.

Carlton trade Geelong's first rounder next year (likely 8-14) for pick 8.

I'm warming to this bold decision we've made but if anyone thinks it's a win based purely on the trade they are wrong.

I will say this, I'm really glad that we have a good working relationship with so many clubs, especially GC & GWS.

I bet that GC wouldn't have honored a deal, or even contemplated doing one with Essendon or Collingwood.

We go about our business without trying to 'screw' anyone else, and that is why we can get good win-win deals done. It's a credit to our football department.

Yep agree with this.

here fing here.... Oli.... thoughts?

We take 2 first rounders in a [censored] draft while Gc now have 2 in a strong draft.....speaks for itself

I'll admit I've not seen much of the u18's comp, but the highlights linked earlier of Parish were very average, his first two kicks were terrible.

Hands look decent tho.

I will say this, I'm really glad that we have a good working relationship with so many clubs, especially GC & GWS.

I bet that GC wouldn't have honored a deal, or even contemplated doing one with Essendon or Collingwood.

We go about our business without trying to 'screw' anyone else, and that is why we can get good win-win deals done. It's a credit to our football department.

Essendon go about their business in a 'screw' anyone else kind of way. Yet they managed to get a more than fair deal done with St Kilda/Sydney.

Given we have loaded up on mids the last few drafts and this trading period looks like we may go for talls with 3 and 10. Giving up our 2016 pick which is touted as a mids draft further indicates this. With Jamar and Fitzy delisted we need a couple more talls. Maybe a crash and bash Weideman? Callum Twoomey on AFL radio today suggests Weideman or Parish who is a game changer. I think we need a back up for Hogan - so I tip a KPF.

I'll admit I've not seen much of the u18's comp, but the highlights linked earlier of Parish were very average, his first two kicks were terrible.

Hands look decent tho.

Taylor and co have been watching him for two years and not one minute so I'll back their judgment. Taylor has barely put a foot wrong yet. I'll admit I'm skeptical of the skinny kids though. Francis sounds enticing.

Essendon appears not to have gone in with their usual MO of try to screw everyone over and be hard to negotiate with this year. Apart from holding St Kilda to account for their poor offer for Carlisle, their trades have been quick and reasonable. Change of directive from the new management?

We trade our first rounder next year (likely 3-8) for pick 3 and a couple of downgrades.

Carlton trade Geelong's first rounder next year (likely 8-14) for pick 8.

I'm warming to this bold decision we've made but if anyone thinks it's a win based purely on the trade they are wrong.

Clearly the FD has its eye on a player in particular and are taking no chances so have snared Pick 3. Who that player will be remains to be seen.

3-8 is pretty gloomy. Our first rounder next year should be 5-9, so for argument's sake let's say pick 7. Trading 6&7 for 3&10 isn't bad. Downgrading 29 in a shallow draft also isn't much of a sacrifice to make.

It's a bold move and I like it.

It's so tricky with the structure of the feeder comps - if the draft is shallow does it make the top end look better than they are due to the competition being worse (especially for u18 carnival, tac cup etc)? I think it's still an inexact science and a lot of variables that don't exist in other professional "draft" structured leagues.

I don't know. In the NBA or NFL you are comparing college kids who have played in all sorts of different leagues. There are some who played for top programs against elite competition and some who played for small schools against much weaker competition.

It's worth weighing up the competition this year but I think at least the kids come together for the national carnivals which provide a good look. That's an advantage over the American leagues.

I think this trade isn't about getting in kids who are just way better than every other teams (although that would be nice), but about getting a core group together of good players. If we pick up 2 more very good kids then we'll develop a team and culture with a lot of exciting young players and they'll work it out between them as to who becomes the stars.

fwiw, twomey reckons we could go weideman with #3 if we go for a tall, particularly as blues now hold #8 and he can't see him sliding to #10.

perhaps we're thinking weideman and mathieson?

Love this quote:

'Parish tested at the combine but didn't stand out in any of the events. That shouldn't be a surprise or a worry. He's a natural footballer and one who steps up a level when the ball is there to get and offers plenty of dash.'

In case anyone missed it Roos, PJ and Mahoney have been crystal clear who they want at the club - competitors. Parish sounds like one. The Melk and Kennedy both appear to be competitors. Add these pick ups to recent pick ups like Petracca, Brayshaw, Viney and Vandenburg and we have a core of hard at it fierce players.

I love that the club has a clear, publicly stated plan for building their list and they have gone about getting the type of players who fit that plan.

I watched the GWS replay for the first time last night (withdrawal pains) and what stood out is how fierce the players were. Salem taking down Cameron and competing with much bigger players, his niggle and refusal to back down, the attack on the ball by Harmes (and his niggle with McCartney), Vineys manic tackling, Michies attack on the ball, Gawndogs energy and Hogans ferocity both in the air but also on the ground. Terrific to watch and exactly what Roos wants.

I have no doubt Watts was dropped for that game to send him a clear message that you get with the program or see ya round. He said as much a couple of weeks later when making a public statement that he was super keen to stay with the dees but knew he needed to get more competitive.

Players who we want (ie competitors) will want to come to our club.

Bring on 2016.

Oh and well done Josh.