Is anyone convinced that any of the new recruits are in our best 22 if we stay semi healthy next year? I am not excited about them at all. Is there really much point recruiting more depth players like Newton and Riley.

Time will tell of course but I would much prefer to get either bonefide AFL players like Vince and Gartlett or use the picks to draft youngsters or hidden mature-aged gems like VB.

Best 22 is a flawed exercise. They will help add depth to the list and thats what matters.

I'd say Melksham and Bugg are locks

Kennedy is a maybe but should be in there

  On 23/10/2015 at 04:04, S_T said:

Is anyone convinced that any of the new recruits are in our best 22 if we stay semi healthy next year? I am not excited about them at all. Is there really much point recruiting more depth players like Newton and Riley.

Time will tell of course but I would much prefer to get either bonefide AFL players like Vince and Gartlett or use the picks to draft youngsters or hidden mature-aged gems like VB.

I don't care how exciting they are as long as they help win us games.

  On 23/10/2015 at 04:14, DemonLad5 said:

I'd say Melksham and Bugg are locks

Kennedy is a maybe but should be in there

If they're locks, we're in trouble. Melksham hasn't played good footy for 2 years, and Bugg wasn't offered a contract at GWS. I think Kennedy actually adds a point of difference if he takes the next step. He wasn't given consistent game time at Collingwood, and I think he has a higher ceiling than the other two.

  On 23/10/2015 at 04:19, mo64 said:

If they're locks, we're in trouble. Melksham hasn't played good footy for 2 years, and Bugg wasn't offered a contract at GWS. I think Kennedy actually adds a point of difference if he takes the next step. He wasn't given consistent game time at Collingwood, and I think he has a higher ceiling than the other two.

I imagine it would be difficult to perform at the elite level with the ASADA and now WADA stuff weighing on your conscience.

He will be a great addition once the monkey is off his back in November.

Backing him in to get back to his 2011-2013 form

  On 23/10/2015 at 04:04, S_T said:

Is anyone convinced that any of the new recruits are in our best 22 if we stay semi healthy next year?

Yes.

Melksham will play in Round 1. Whether he keeps his spot as the year goes on remains to be seen but as of right now he's best 22 in the role they will be allocating to him.

Bugg and Kennedy are less certain, but Bugg is in my best 22. Hard at it competitor that Roos will love and a definite upgrade on the likes of Riley and Jordie in the skills department.

Kennedy will have to earn his spot but will be given an opportunity early.

  On 23/10/2015 at 04:04, S_T said:

Time will tell of course but I would much prefer to get either bonefide AFL players like Vince and Gartlett or use the picks to draft youngsters or hidden mature-aged gems like VB.

I love Jeffy, but if he qualifies as a "bonafide AFL player" then I'm not sure why Melksham wouldn't with the number of games under his belt. He's had a torrid two years in terms of onfield performance, but his absolute best footy puts him in the frame for the longer term.

List builds require strategic recruiting. It can't all be top end players and going to the draft. While Hawthorn were recruiting Burgoyne and Frawley they were also recruiting Hale and Gunston. We actually have a decent crop of highly talented youngsters being assembled, and with two more to added to the crop this year, that job is very near completion. It's now a matter of improving the depth and giving the kids a more competitive team in which to develop.

An A grader or two would be nice but we're not in a position to land one of those yet. Check back this time next year.

  On 23/10/2015 at 04:04, S_T said:

Time will tell of course

There's your answer.

  On 23/10/2015 at 04:25, Mondê said:

I imagine it would be difficult to perform at the elite level with the ASADA and now WADA stuff weighing on your conscience.

He will be a great addition once the monkey is off his back in November.

Backing him in to get back to his 2011-2013 form

Are you a psychologist? It's too easy to say that. It's almost like when people were saying that all those players that left Melbourne would reach their potential at another club, because we were considered a basket case. It never happened.

Maybe Melksham's just an ordinary player. Time will tell.

They are an improvement on the likes of Bail, M. Jones, McKenzie and Terlich. They will provide greater competition with players like Newton, Michie, JKH, Stretch, ANB and Grimes which is a good thing and they are all competitors which is what we need.

The key to this trade period is picks 3 and 7, this is where we are more likely to get top-end talent from.

You can tell from the highlights that Melksham, Kennedy and Bugg are in a different class to the likes of Bail, McKenzie and Riley.

Jordie McKenzie was shanking them from the top of the goalsquare.

Melksham kicks one goal from 65m, drills one 45m low, hard bullet into the corridor, and in another highlights package kicks one on his left from 50m.

Bugg slots a couple from the boundary line.

I think they'll be best 22, but it'll be great if they're not because that would mean the likes of Watts, Lumumba, Kent, Garland are consistently performing.

  On 23/10/2015 at 04:19, mo64 said:

If they're locks, we're in trouble. Melksham hasn't played good footy for 2 years, and Bugg wasn't offered a contract at GWS. I think Kennedy actually adds a point of difference if he takes the next step. He wasn't given consistent game time at Collingwood, and I think he has a higher ceiling than the other two.

Either was Miles. GWS have a plethora of talent and need to cull their list. Some of the players who end up getting culled still have an immense amount of talent.

  On 23/10/2015 at 05:12, Watts Jurrah Dunn? said:

You can tell from the highlights that Melksham, Kennedy and Bugg are in a different class to the likes of Bail, McKenzie and Riley.

Jordie McKenzie was shanking them from the top of the goalsquare.

Melksham kicks one goal from 65m, drills one 45m low, hard bullet into the corridor, and in another highlights package kicks one on his left from 50m.

Bugg slots a couple from the boundary line.

I think they'll be best 22, but it'll be great if they're not because that would mean the likes of Watts, Lumumba, Kent, Garland are consistently performing.

It's difficult to gauge much at all through highlights.

I'm positive that if someone cut together a highlight reel of Jordie McKenzie's, it would show a ferociously tackling competitive beast. Any clip of him kicking the ball would have to be cut out though.

We'll have to wait and see, really. But I'm confident that all three will play quite a bit of football in the seniors next season.

the 3 of them are in our best 32, given they have experience. I wouldnt call any of them locks for our first team if we somehow had no injuries.

I hope they can prove me wrong but I dont rate any of them too highly. they are still young though.

to say they are better than players we just delisted does not prove anything. I guess it proves they would have played a few games last year. hopefully we get a better run at it injury wise and play out best team

Well I hope Melksham, Bugg and Kennedy don't turn into another group like Michie, Riley and Newton. Guys who were also brought in from clubs where they weren't playing consistently in the seniors with the hope they would be regular contributors. Very similar stories coming out in the welcome to the club information from the club and recruiters. They had assembled pretty good highlight packages too. Bringing on one of them I wouldn't have a problem with, but I think 3 is too much. Would much prefer using the 2nd or 3rd round picks used to recruit them ourselves at the draft table.

  On 23/10/2015 at 05:26, S_T said:

Well I hope Melksham, Bugg and Kennedy don't turn into another group like Michie, Riley and Newton. Guys who were also brought in from clubs where they weren't playing consistently in the seniors with the hope they would be regular contributors. Very similar stories coming out in the welcome to the club information from the club and recruiters. They had assembled pretty good highlight packages too. Bringing on one of them I wouldn't have a problem with, but I think 3 is too much. Would much prefer using the 2nd or 3rd round picks used to recruit them ourselves at the draft table.

I still reckon Michie and Newton could come good.

The reality is that for the better teams players 18-28 on the list are fairly interchangeable. In our case it is probably players 10-28 that are fairly interchangeable. We have a small amount of top end talent, and a large amount of players who are either not good enough or who are still developing.

We haven't traded in anyone who is better than average, so they'll just add to the pool of mediocre players clogging up the middle of our list. All three recruits are good enough to play senior football in a poor side, but will hopefully get squeezed out over the next few years.

Until the likes of Petracca, Stretch, Neal-Bullen and this years draftees can step into that top tier, we will continue to struggle. Hogan, Brayshaw and maybe Salem stood up last year, hopefully a few more join them this year.

  On 23/10/2015 at 05:26, S_T said:

Well I hope Melksham, Bugg and Kennedy don't turn into another group like Michie, Riley and Newton. Guys who were also brought in from clubs where they weren't playing consistently in the seniors with the hope they would be regular contributors. Very similar stories coming out in the welcome to the club information from the club and recruiters. They had assembled pretty good highlight packages too. Bringing on one of them I wouldn't have a problem with, but I think 3 is too much. Would much prefer using the 2nd or 3rd round picks used to recruit them ourselves at the draft table.

2nd or 3rd round picks would be fringe players or those developing at Casey. The Melksham, Bugg, Kennedy samples for footy are of greater experience than the other group you mention and fill targets in the 21-24 age bracket the club was hoping for. Ones who had played a number of games and that are competitors.

It gives the team a stronger backbone onfield short-medium and long term. At the same time we can draft top-end talent with picks 3,7 that was achieved through these trades. Had we just gone in with 6,25,...and no trade-ins, you'd be even more peeved!

Some players had to be cut regardless and it is debatable who should go and who should stay. Hopefully one of the three picks up will become a champion,the loss of Howe and Toumpas is no great loss to the club.The beauty of the draft we end up with picks 3 and 7 that within itself is class.Two years running perhaps in the past would be considered as un demonlike!

  On 23/10/2015 at 05:15, juzzk1d said:

Either was Miles. GWS have a plethora of talent and need to cull their list.

Their list gets reduced by this year (by 2 players), as does their salary cap allowance. The big squeeze.

Happy to have all 3, will add something, even if it's only a harder edge and competitiveness. They're ahead, even streets ahead, of the likes of Bail and Matt Jones.

Cross and Howe player 22 games each in 2015, so there's a little room opened up there in the best 22.

The other already delisted players shared about 30 games between them in 2015.

After that, its a matter of how the competition for spots comes through, and which of the kids (and veterans) do or do not progress well in 2016.

Honestly, how long has it been since there was real competition for spots in the best 22 at Melbourne? I don't think it even happened much in the Daniher years - we had a handy group of very good core players, but it tailed off and there were always 'questionable' inclusions and gap-fillers in every area.

If some of the players we've traded in aren't getting many games in 2016, then the trades don't look so great but it also likely means we will all be quite content with our overall list development, and probably delighted about the reduced injury toll, too.

A good measuring stick of our depth will be if Matt Jones gets a game again

  On 23/10/2015 at 04:04, S_T said:

Is anyone convinced that any of the new recruits are in our best 22 if we stay semi healthy next year? I am not excited about them at all. Is there really much point recruiting more depth players like Newton and Riley.

Time will tell of course but I would much prefer to get either bonefide AFL players like Vince and Gartlett or use the picks to draft youngsters or hidden mature-aged gems like VB.

Kennedy will consolidate a spot in our midfield by round 1. He has a lot of upside and is definitely an upgrade on M.Jones, Bail and Riley. IMO he'll be the best of our pick ups, I also expect Tom Bugg to start in the 22 by round 1. I know you're probably not excited about these guys, but they are a step up on our depth players of the past.

Can they arrest a run on? I understand a rampant Dogs outfit barking at September - but Carlton? 72 - 9?

Carlton.

  On 23/10/2015 at 04:04, S_T said:

Is anyone convinced that any of the new recruits are in our best 22 if we stay semi healthy next year? I am not excited about them at all. Is there really much point recruiting more depth players like Newton and Riley.

Time will tell of course but I would much prefer to get either bonefide AFL players like Vince and Gartlett or use the picks to draft youngsters or hidden mature-aged gems like VB.

I think we could all agree that the team has been in a lot of ways very fragile.

My guess is that Roos & co have looked to stabilise and improve us with players who can lessen the fragility (moving toward robustness/resilient then ultimately antifragile (from wiki)). Players with some inner strength maybe? Reports are that they are a tougher breed somewhat that their outgoing predecessors.

Just my 2 cents.

Edit:

The Hawks would be antifragile, improving with stress and the disorder of the game, the grand final showed that, they just got better. We have been at times the exact opposite.