Leaderboard

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.

After more research and deeper thinking I've changed my mind. It makes perfect sense to take the class midfielder in the draft. Hopefully, it's the last time we'll be in a position to do so. We lack outside class and Parish has that in spades. Essendon also need midfield class and they must have been mightily disappointed when they saw we'd managed to wrangle pick 3. Parish at pick 3 and I suspect one of Curnow or perhaps Weideman at 7. This will leave a developing midfield of Viney, Tyson, Salem, Brayshaw, Petracca, Stretch and Parish to complement Jones, Vince and hopefully Trengove. That aint no third world midfield no more.

Good detective work.

Shaun Smith was just interviewed on SEN and his comments about Joel were: - Played under 16's football; - Dropped footy to focus on VCE and basketball; - In the Dees' sights for nearly a year; - Dees liked his athleticism; - Last year he did some trials and kicking with the Dees; - Being son of a former player appealed; - MFC left it up to Joel to think about it for a year; - with Jeremy Howe going, it provided an opportunity for someone like Joel ... he alluded to maybe taking high marks like Howe; - Joel is 6'3" and Shaun sees him as a forward, has endurance and a tank. Sounds very good ... I'm dreaming that he could be the forward buddy we are looking for Jesse. Long way to go but he will be another Son of ... to enjoy watching in red and blue!

Now this kThis type of post really does my head in FFS this guy who won't be named says something disparaging about a MFC person and then backs it up with a discussion with someone within the footy club who confirms the person is no good. Then you have a member of an opposing team who gives the author his own version of what a former player has said. Honestly are you for real? My first question is what's in it for you, your friend, the MFC staffer, the Hawthorn player and Frawley? By that I mean each person in this scenario has a different personal and professional relationship with JM and those around him. JM may have provided advice or a decision that was not received positively, Maybe JM is in a role one of the above covets. All of you have a motive for why this view has formed Secondly all these people seem to hide behind their anonymity (bar Frawley) who is being quoted and quite frankly if you can't say what you need to say to JM's face then that just lacks character. Thirdly JM does not need to be charismatic or animated as a leader in fact I would rather he be dead pan and serious when it comes to fronting the AFL journalist at Trade time. My point is as long as he produces quality work its a moot point we all can't be Peacock's and Eagles organisations need Doves and Owls too. Finally the proofs is in the pudding our trade period was successful in that we got value for money in players and traded higher up the draft. NB: I don't know JM I am not pro or anti him. I am a member of this club who thinks shitty politics and sniping like this belong in Parliaments, Soapies and High School. Save the drama and [insert storm in a Tea cup JPEG here] for someone else. But hey that's only my opinion'

Someone here mentioned they went past goschs paddock and saw Viney, Petracca and someone who looked like Daniel Mcstay all having a kick. I'll bet it was Joel Smith. Same height, weight and similar looks etc. I wonder if they could shed some more light on the subject?

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.

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.

Ok, so I am unsure of the ins and outs and I have tweeted Patrick KEane about whether or not Sydney's matching of Mills by using 33, 36, and 37 as an example, will turn the Lions 38 into 35 with the equivalent points. I really hope they thought about this... As for the Dees - let's say that these teams burn through 9 of the 13 picks before our 3rd pick at 46. That would turn our pick 46 into pick 37 in a proverbial instant. I am just eager to know where these picks will end up but I am also interested more broadly too in what it will look like.

I am really happy for Jess. She has worked so hard for her achievements and despite her success she is humble and one of the nicest persons I have met. For about 8 years I have trained at the same running track as Jess. Jess knows that my kids and I are Melbourne fans and when we meet at the track she always takes the time to say hello and often gives me an update on Jack (in recent times the updates are all about Jack's foot). Even at the local supermarket or at MFC functions in Adelaide Jess always stops to chat and engage with my kids. When I get home from training my kids often ask me if I "saw Jack Trengove's sister at training tonight". In light of Jess' success and impending Olympic qualification, it may be appropriate that the kids refer to Jack as Jess Trengove's brother. Whatever the case, terrific athletes and terrific people!

Thanks for the insult. So you think being a bit over the limit is no big deal? Where do you draw the line on drink driving 0.08, 0.09 or perhaps 0.10? How on earth could you argue the bit from my post is tripe? Are you honestly saying that someone who is 0.06 is not impaired, not affected by alcohol? Is that what you're saying? With your speeding analogy you're also implying that you don't really deserve a penalty for being just a little bit over? You really believe that? Note i didn't say drunk, i said impaired. The difference between life and death in some accidents might be literally a split second reaction time. Any impairment might impact on that reaction time. That's why we have a limit. It is a serious offence to go over, far more serious and much more likely to be a factor in an innocent person being hurt than some bozo taking a line of coke in Vegas.

Edit : Removed scanners exploding head on request.

An important element in this play was getting the melk. Some on dl think we paid covers and some said we went to early and should have waited to drive the price up. But getting it done early was critical as it didn't hold up other trades and indeed it gave ESS some currency to get their trades moving. In the end it mattered little if we gave up 25 or 29. Also we needed to ensure if we were going to angle for high draft picks that we got a player with approx the same number of games and age as howe lest we unbalance the list. In an ideal world we would also get a player who could slot into the back line to replace howe. And we wanted a tough, hard running competitor. Given all that clearly it was not overs after all. The melk perfectly fitted the bill and as required we got it done early and without fuss. Well played A+ for mine

vandenBerg.

FMD I'm so bloody glad my club doesn't leak like a sieve anymore. Look forward to seeing if this works out. Don't know anything about him but I like the outside the square thinking.

Don't know what planet you guys have been on, but that's how the new draft system will work. we have the 3rd and 7th live pick of the draft.

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.

...and also that only one true A grader moved this trade period. They're pretty hard to dislodge.

Look at this draft order: Pick 1: Carlton Pick 2: Brisbane Pick 3: Melbourne Pick 4: Essendon Pick 5: Essendon Pick 6: Gold Coast Pick 7: Melbourne Pick 8: Carlton If I am a gun young AFL player coming into the draft, I am 100% thinking "[censored], I hope the Dees pick me."

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.

Ha ha this is a beauty, he happens to be the boyfriend of one of my daughter's best mates. Seen him play basketball quite a few times and he has won best a couple of best and fairest with one of our local footy clubs. He is lightning quick for his size and has a huge leap on him, top kid too.

32 and 24 First lesson HT, before posting, listen to the wind blowing between BBO's legs and when you see the golden rays of the sun, face the direction of the moon and contemplate, why the countdown exists. When you begin to understand, ask the trees for permission to post. You will have that permission, when the branches blow to the East in the breeze. Remember this all of the days of your life.

I posted back in July that Melbourne are totally focused on getting Parish and nothing has changed. In fact, my source has only re- confirmed the fact it will be Parish at 3.

If the following kids go in these spots; Hopper (GWS) at 4, Mills (SYD) 5, Kennedy (GWS) 11, Hipwood (BL) 15 and Keays (BL) 18 (pulled from a phantom on Big Footy) then the draft will look like this: Hopper burns through 10 and moves 34 to 42 for GWS. Mills burns through 33, 36, and 37 moves to 61 for Syd. Kennedy burns through 42, 43, and 53 moves to 72 for GWS. Hipwood burns through 38 and moves 39 to 72 for BL. Keays burns through 40 and moves 41 to 64. This needs to be cleaned up when I know how it functions in a bit more clarity but essentially, our pick at 46 is now 35 and 50 is 39. So people feel better with 3, 7, 35, and 39?

The GWS twitter peeps replied with "*when"... Good fun.

Seems like a good time to revisit:

my brain hurts

http://giphy.com/gifs/history-head-exploding-oaPcDncoLfgjK Edit:- Do not open if your name is Picket Fence

And apparently they have... Guardian Australia ‏@GuardianAus 10m10 minutes ago Baby giraffe at LA zoo makes his first official outing – video http://trib.al/Kjwbtjg View summary 0 retweets0 favorites Reply Retweet Favorite More

What?

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.

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.

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.

Thanks for doing all the legwork rpfc. Like many (I suspect) I wanted to understand how this worked, but couldn't be bothered figuring it out myself.

Maybe, but don't film your self doing it.

I wish Jimmy all the best, but not to become a star. That would compound a double mistake. I am still struggling with the first one.

Some of the comments in this thread are horrendous..

I like the look of 200cm Max King. He's a forward/ruck. Played 8 games for Casey this year kicking 13 goals and taking 30 marks (15 contested). In fact, he's a really good mark and has neat kicking skills for a tall. He's not quite ready. 1-2 years. Plays all of next year as a 20 year old. Callum Sinclair came from Port, is 26 and has played 29 games. Sydney were very keen to take him off West Coast's hands. Like King, he's not a number one ruck, but more a forward/ruck. It can take a while, but Max is tracking exceptionally well.

I particularly liked these two lines from Nathan Schmook (in his verdict): "...The Demons used the incoming points to perfection to gain picks 3 and 7...They read the play quicker than other clubs."

I actually could not be happier with Jeremy Howe leaving. Although I do have to say I did love his marks and for a while was the only enjoyable thing about going to watch. But Jeremy Howe oozes everything that was wrong with the club during the rebuilding, give us a glimpse of hope and then turn it over. Pretty much the story of the demons with drafts and new coaches new recruits. Everything was designed to give the supporters more hope but nothing really came from it. Now that he is gone I feel like we almost have a 22 (excluding the younger players who don't have a big enough tank yet) that can play and put 100% grunt and work into 4 quarters, and I can't wait for 2016 season to begin.

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.

I will never forget the massive specky Shaun took in the goal square when he basically was standing on Garry Lyons shoulders and took mark of the century. One of the biggest highlight I remember as a kid.

This will fall on deaf ears, but don't start endorsing players from highlight reels.

And while we are talking Shaun Smith, I say he could play. One of Neale Daniher's biggest errors was moving this guy on when was it 1998? Neale never got the obvious that Shaun had another 3 years in him as a key position backman but not as a high flying forward. He had everything you needed as a key backman - that I remember.

Article on the MFC website said he played as a junior and did very well, but moved to basketball. Now wants back into football. Sounds like a great prospect as he obviously has played competitive sport. Has played football so knows the basic and is coming off an excellent base and has a great pedigree. I look forward to hearing more about his progress.

Joel Smith.

I reckon Clayton Oliver is also worth a look at Pick 7. Really tough, inside mid who has leader written all over him. Could play from day one, gets clearances, great tackler etc. A few highlights here: Some tough decisions for our recruiting team to make in the next month!

Was sitting right behind this mark, the only interstate game I've ever been to.

My contribution, based on hearsay and chatter - Pick 3 - Club is reported to be very focused on Darcy Parish. Skilled and smart midfielder, not soft. Kind of self-explanatory. Looks like a Tudor prince though, which is a problem. Pick 7 - I think everyone is agreed a long-term second tall forward is needed. I've been persuaded that Charlie Curnow can be a forward-mid the way Petracca can be a mid-forward. That is to say; brutally. I would also be perfectly happy if Aaron Francis was brought in with either of these picks, to bring a bit of skill and smarts to our defensive group, or as a true utility. Pick 46 - James Parsons is a tall lightly built wingman with a good kick. Two main reasons to draft him are to make Parish-Parsons jokes, and to give Pickett Fence nightmares. Pick 50 - Gach Nyuon. We need long-term coverage of ruck stocks and I like that Nyuon is a completely different type to King. Also as a nice bonus he's from down near Casey and part of a migrant community that is disproportionately building its connections to Australia through football. By late in the draft I'm usually on the hunt for entertaining names, so tall defenders Glass-McCasker and Uebergang would keep me happy. Midfielder Ben Crocker is also suitable provided we can also recruit someone named Schitt in the near future. Even a Schmitt would do. Speaking of great names, VanDenBerg obviously gets a rookie upgrade at 82. This does leave the question of where Jake Lovett fits in. Can a father-son be rookied? Do we still have players waiting to be cut?

Told you guys!!!