Despite all the talk of depth in next year's draft, other than if it's for trade value only, it's unlikely that the one player we'd get to pick from that draft would be massively better than Parish, Curnow or Francis.

Further to this, the players we land with picks 3 and 7 will have an additional year in the system.

And we'll be finals bound next year(?!) so our first round draft pick won't even be that high.

So, in short, it's a no brainer that the club has done the deals that it has this year.

A+.

Sorry RB, but you are really just guessing. Can you even name one kid likely to be drafted in the top 10 next year?

Anyone assessing our trade period as an A+ is an eternal optimist.

Love the trade period and am pleased we are (presumably) making a play for Parish at 3. Hope we can get who we want at 7.

I'm nervous about next year's first round pick. I like that the football department is backing the team to improve their ladder position but if it all goes pear shaped bottom 4 is a sad place to be without the subsequent top 4 pick.

Mate, we have moved the pick ahead a year - if we finish bottom 4 that isn't great but the pick 'we missed out on' is already at the club and is a pick 3.

There is your 'subsequent top 4 pick'...

JM et al have done extremely well to get on the front of the wave in working out how to use the points system. Everyone will be up to speed with it by next year, so this is the one chance to get the jump on the rest of the field and they've taken it.

Getting 2 picks in the top 10 in a shallow draft also gets the jump on the rest of the field. We are one of a small group of teams that will have a much better chance of picking up 2 worthwhile players from this draft. In a deep draft (2016?), there's much less gap in talent between, say, pick 5 and pick 15; in a shallow draft, the gap is much greater.

ok so vandemon, harmes, white and king were our rookies

the first two to be upgraded(?) j.smith takes one of their spots... does that mean we won't use pick50?

List Size

Primary List Size Category A Rookies Category B Rookies Total Rookies (Maximum) Total

38 (Minimum) 6 3 9 47

39 5 3 8 47

40 (Maximum) 4 3 7 47

so cat-b rookies don't affect cat-a rookie limits or primaryl list limits

Edited October 24, 201510 yr by daisycutter

I don't like the traditional grading methods.

I would prefer to give the recruiting staff a wombat stamp of approval.

.... and injuries. Lots of 'em. Petracca, Trengove, Frost, Salem, Viney, Pedersen, Kent all missed (big) slabs of the season (or most of it). Even having a player like ANB miss most of the pre-season didn't help.

OK, injuries are part of the game, but we don't have the depth to cover the above outs.

Could not agree more. Add jetta to that list as well. It would be great to have a lucky year injury wise next year. Starting with a healthy track, trenners and Kent

Mate, we have moved the pick ahead a year - if we finish bottom 4 that isn't great but the pick 'we missed out on' is already at the club and is a pick 3.

There is your 'subsequent top 4 pick'...

I don't think it is too hard to understand. We have cashed in on a top draft pick a year early. We are getting in high end talent a year early. In every draft we have to hope that the talent pans out like a Brayshaw and not some of the failures we have had but I think it is a sound strategy.

I think this thread needs a revisit now. Maybe its very title could change to Trade and Draft ? As thats really what its all about, the whole shebang.

Trade was not just about bringing in some players directly but positioning ourselves to go shopping at the draft..

This pairing of trading and drafting somewhat parallels the two areas on need for the club's list.

1) The midfield...it's all about the midfield is often the catch cry. Ours has gone from overworked /undertalented to embryonic and now to "we've got the recipe, the ingredients and now is in the oven " Trade brought us Bugg Kennedy and of course Milkshake. But we still needed some more grunt and inside power to this combination....cue Clayton Oliver. We can and will always revise and embellish this collection of midfileders going forward but finally it seems we have something to really work with

2) Talls.. Jesse needed a playmate. Someone who can hold a ball in contested marking. Someone who knows where to be on the ground..Someone who can kick goals.. We have the Weed. Hopefully the niggle goes and these two can become the best of forward mates and terrorise the oppositions defenders.for many years to come. But that wasnt all we needed.. We still needed more forward stocks. We need another Ruck project type,,we needed more depth and we get this with King and Hulett.

With only the rookies to come and more than likely Michie to be retainied as one of them it's pretty well near over for the years recasting of the list

How did we do overall

Bloody marvelously I'd say.. We turned 1 early pick into 2. We plugged holes all over the list. We have genuine reason for optimism.

The list is all but unrecognisable to say 4-5 years ago say a small handful...and thank god for that

Well done Taylor and Co..Well done MFC-FD

Nothing is ever perfect but I'd rate this years trade draft at 9-1/2 out of 10. I still hold concerns in one area but I think we've done very well and should see us play some very good footy from here on in.

Go Dees

Hopefully our midfield will be completed next year with the inclusion of Prestia.

I think this thread needs a revisit now. Maybe its very title could change to Trade and Draft ? As thats really what its all about, the whole shebang.

Trade was not just about bringing in some players directly but positioning ourselves to go shopping at the draft..

This pairing of trading and drafting somewhat parallels the two areas on need for the club's list.

1) The midfield...it's all about the midfield is often the catch cry. Ours has gone from overworked /undertalented to embryonic and now to "we've got the recipe, the ingredients and now is in the oven " Trade brought us Bugg Kennedy and of course Milkshake. But we still needed some more grunt and inside power to this combination....cue Clayton Oliver. We can and will always revise and embellish this collection of midfileders going forward but finally it seems we have something to really work with

2) Talls.. Jesse needed a playmate. Someone who can hold a ball in contested marking. Someone who knows where to be on the ground..Someone who can kick goals.. We have the Weed. Hopefully the niggle goes and these two can become the best of forward mates and terrorise the oppositions defenders.for many years to come. But that wasnt all we needed.. We still needed more forward stocks. We need another Ruck project type,,we needed more depth and we get this with King and Hulett.

With only the rookies to come and more than likely Michie to be retainied as one of them it's pretty well near over for the years recasting of the list

How did we do overall

Bloody marvelously I'd say.. We turned 1 early pick into 2. We plugged holes all over the list. We have genuine reason for optimism.

The list is all but unrecognisable to say 4-5 years ago say a small handful...and thank god for that

Well done Taylor and Co..Well done MFC-FD

Nothing is ever perfect but I'd rate this years trade draft at 9-1/2 out of 10. I still hold concerns in one area but I think we've done very well and should see us play some very good footy from here on in.

Go Dees

It looks to have been a brilliant strategic trading and draft period.

For me the missing piece of the puzzle on the overall structure of the list with the failure of Mitch Clark was another key forward. They brilliantly traded away next year's pick to fill the gap now. I have no idea of what KPF's will be there next year but assuming we start a decent climb up the ladder a Weideman type forward isn't likely to be there by whatever later pick we have. It's an awesome outcome.

It looks to me like they decided to take a big gamble in taking Oliver first and hoping that Weideman would still be there at 9. They knew Oliver definitely wouldn't be. I bet there were some sweaty hands as the Dons picks were read out. It's a great result.

In some ways they've gambled with the picks this year. Oliver is the first pick in the top 10 not to have been selected to play in the U18 Championships. I understand this can be explained because he was restricted early because of injury but still....

Weideman could be anything but injuries have restricted the past two years. We have to hope he's over them. The good news is, that as I understand it the injuries were stress fractures in his ankles. These could possibly be due to rapid growth in a large body. Unlike ACL's or other ligament etc damage there shouldn't be any long term concerns at all. Brenton Sanderson said last night he thought he could end up being the best player in this draft. Love it!

Lateish pick ruckmen/forwards like King will always be a gamble.

Hulet could end up being a smokey as he too has been restricted by injuries over the past few years.

Lets hope the footy gods smile on us finally and we have a list of players who had their injuries before they came to us which helped them slide to us.

It's starting to have the sniff of a competitive list with the addition of the 3 competitive trades as well.

I think this thread needs a revisit now. Maybe its very title could change to Trade and Draft ? As thats really what its all about, the whole shebang.

Trade was not just about bringing in some players directly but positioning ourselves to go shopping at the draft..

This pairing of trading and drafting somewhat parallels the two areas on need for the club's list.

1) The midfield...it's all about the midfield is often the catch cry. Ours has gone from overworked /undertalented to embryonic and now to "we've got the recipe, the ingredients and now is in the oven " Trade brought us Bugg Kennedy and of course Milkshake. But we still needed some more grunt and inside power to this combination....cue Clayton Oliver. We can and will always revise and embellish this collection of midfileders going forward but finally it seems we have something to really work with

2) Talls.. Jesse needed a playmate. Someone who can hold a ball in contested marking. Someone who knows where to be on the ground..Someone who can kick goals.. We have the Weed. Hopefully the niggle goes and these two can become the best of forward mates and terrorise the oppositions defenders.for many years to come. But that wasnt all we needed.. We still needed more forward stocks. We need another Ruck project type,,we needed more depth and we get this with King and Hulett.

With only the rookies to come and more than likely Michie to be retainied as one of them it's pretty well near over for the years recasting of the list

How did we do overall

Bloody marvelously I'd say.. We turned 1 early pick into 2. We plugged holes all over the list. We have genuine reason for optimism.

The list is all but unrecognisable to say 4-5 years ago say a small handful...and thank god for that

Well done Taylor and Co..Well done MFC-FD

Nothing is ever perfect but I'd rate this years trade draft at 9-1/2 out of 10. I still hold concerns in one area but I think we've done very well and should see us play some very good footy from here on in.

Go Dees

BB, I'll assume you rated it 9.5 out of 10, not 9 minus 1, divided by 2 equals 4 out of 10.

BB, I'll assume you rated it 9.5 out of 10, not 9 minus 1, divided by 2 equals 4 out of 10.

you assume correctly

9.5

10

Can I just say that nine minus half = four and a half out of ten.

If I can't, i'll understand.

I'm stoked but would have been great to have a pick around 20 to get the other mckay brother or hibberd . the only pick I felt genuine envy for was carlton getting harry mckay the pick after ours when we took weideman , cant have them all I guess but I reckon Mackay will be ripper also.

As well as past foot problems, the name Weideman and the MFC do not go. They are polar opposites.

Like linking the name Barassi or Flower with Collingwood.

Call me old fashioned but any association would end badly . Important that we maintain proper standards here and give thought to the long history with our mortal enemy.

Very bad karma to select Weideman..

Hogan had stress fractures also , weideman talked bout his grandfather who lives in adelaide , the kid is a tiges supporter and talked glowingly of learning from the likes of Jesse Hogan. I reckon we will annoy the hell out of eddie and his gang for many years to come.

Listening to their interviews they all have a bit of mongrel in them.

I'm starting to look forward to our version of the hawks Anti Social Football

Listening to their interviews they all have a bit of mongrel in them.

I'm starting to look forward to our version of the hawks Anti Social Football

Me too. Every new recruit should be made to sit down and watch tape of Vince vs Dangerfield and Viney vs Selwood. Marquee players just about reduced to tears from sheer brutality. That's the type of midfield I would like to see us bring with every player every week.

Edited November 25, 20159 yr by Curry & Beer

Went for B based solely on someone mentioning that King and Hulett expected to be rookied. This suggests we were hoping others were available at those picks, so didn't go exactly as planned.

Pumped with Oliver and really hopeful Wiedeman can stay uninjured, get fit and deliver on the raw talent he has.

Listening to their interviews they all have a bit of mongrel in them.

I'm starting to look forward to our version of the hawks Anti Social Football

“I want to compete. I hate losing and I’ve got a strong set of hands and really aggressive at the footy,” he said.

Sound familar? This was a quote from Hullet but could have been from any number of players recruited to the dees in the last two years (and you can chuck in Hogan and Viney as players cut from the same cloth)

We won't know until next years draft, and see what becomes of the 1st rounder we gave up.

Oliver.

Interesting that all the Draft picks we took had been held back through injuries. It has either enabled us to pick above our weight, or get lumbered with injury-prone players.

I'll go with the former until evidence proves otherwise!

I feel it is a shame we didn't swap our picks in the 40s for a higher pick with Sydney, Brisbane or GWS and went for Bonner, Balic or Mathieson (or even for 2016 pick(s)). It seems likely that King and Hulett would have been available in the rookie draft.

“I want to compete. I hate losing and I’ve got a strong set of hands and really aggressive at the footy,” he said.

Sound familar? This was a quote from Hullet but could have been from any number of players recruited to the dees in the last two years (and you can chuck in Hogan and Viney as players cut from the same cloth)

Yep Binboy you are dead set correct. Until we we see these boys on the park it's all speculation.

Long,protracted and full of opinions from D*&kheads all over the internet when all we had to do was read Emma Quayle-who was bang on the money as per usual.

Long,protracted and full of opinions from D*&kheads all over the internet when all we had to do was read Emma Quayle-who was bang on the money as per usual.

about 2 days before the draft she was

prior to that she was naming Parish like the rest of them