Deespicable

Delighted with the changes and the scene is set for a ripper game down there. I'm sure we'd win if it was back at the 'G, but down there they are a 5-10 goal better team, part of that because of home-town crowd inspired umpiring. Whilst I would have liked to see our ever-ready battery Baker get a gig, I'm pleased he doesn't begin his career in such a cauldron and I'm also pleased JKH gets a chance to see if he can make it before decision time at season's end. He doesn't have to be sensational, he just has to stick his tackles and be evasive and link up. If he ends up on Kelly he's got to be there with him and if it's Menegola, then he's got to negate his height advantage. I suspect Scott has decided to use Blicavs as back-up to Stanley at times on Max in the hope of running the legs off him. And I'll be gobsmacked if Scott Selwood isn't given the job of a hard tag on Angus. How Angus copes with it, will probably determine if we can get a break on them before three-quarter time. I think all of us will be gobsmacked if in turn Goody plays Tyson again on a wing. My guess is that we will be sending him to Joel Selwood from the outset and hoping he can negate for at least the first half - the role he should have been given in Rd 1 if you recall. Oliver, I suspect, will start forward and if our coach has started to learn that you need to have the odd structural move up your sleeve, then he will move him into the middle when Tyson starts tiring each quarter. I love us having the flexibility of both Smith and Fritsch to throw forward, back or on to a wing as needs be. Ultimately though it will most likely get down to the final quarter will to win and that's when Joel does his best work and it's when we will really miss Viney. It would be lovely if Trac stepped up and took over the stoppages in the last, but it's hard to believe in fairytales.

It is interesting to hear you say that and he would keep the left-foot defensive brigade happy - Salem, Lewis and now Fritsch. I am still interested to see if Frost is also jettisoned for Joel Smith - as I said elsewhere, Goody would have been fuming at some of Frosty's choices last week, but hopefully his rage will have subsided and he will realise that Frosty does bring other attributes to the table which we need now more than ever. I'd go for Joel Smith ahead of Wags because he is that little bit quicker and gives us more flexibility because he can play as a forward ... and I've got him in my SC team! Furthermore, Wags' left foot can be covered by Fritsch if needed. It sounds to me that the selectors have decided to bring in Tyson for Hannan and I don't mind that provided Dom plays in the middle of the park. It will be a spiteful, niggling game played for high stakes at night and whilst we are some chance, I think we all have to realise what it will mean to the Cats and Joel Selwood if they lose. They will be feral and so will their fans.

Obviously our No.1 target is Gaff and we need that to be as a UFA, as we can't offer a deal that would meet their requirements. For us it would be a coup and if it means they get a first round concession pick for his loss, so be it. It's the same principle as to when the Hawks used to take players from other clubs, which was hardly the intent of the rule - but that's another matter. As to others, I suspect we will have about 8-9 players coming off our list this season - I know some of you think it will be just 4-5, but sorry I have a few more in mind and I suspect the club does to. That will allow us to rookie our two emerging Casey boys - Lockhart and Wags Jnr. But after Gaff, I think our main priority is securing a replacement for Pedo - a back-up tall who can ruck if required. Obviously Weid is progressing in that role, but we need another one. My view has been for two years now that Freo's Mitch Taberener would be handy and realistically he is a third round pick now - which is what we can offer. That would then take the pressure away from us having to retain either Pedo or our two project ruckman and leaves us a bit of time to see how Bradtke develops. It would be lovely to get a player such as Dahlhaus but we have virtually nothing to offer the Dogs in return.

Not as many changes required this week but still plenty of thought for match committee. The Cats down there are a seriously difficult proposition and we will only get free kicks in our back half. Further to that Joel will be manic and we don't have Viney to counter him. Then there is his niggling brother who will wear Angus like a glove - the first time he has had to counter such a tag. On top of that they will most likely dump Buzza and maybe either bring back Smith to try and negate Gawny with some rough stuff or alternatively play Henderson as a forward. As to us, we have to decide four things. 1) Will the coach stick with Frosty? As most of you know I love Frosty attack on the ball and unless we plan to send Hoges or T-Mac back, he is our only tall defender apart from Oscar capable of playing on a big and playing our game-style. But he went against team rules in the second term with his kick-in and there was enough choice errors for Goody to throw the book at him (way more than his past indiscretions which were pretty minor in comparison). Hopefully Goody realises that Frosty is our best chance come finals and his speed is critical in a side trying to use Lewis and Vince down back. The options if Goody jettisons Frosty again are 1) Pedo - In form down back in VFL and we all know he does the right things, but he ain't no racehorse. 2) Joel Smith - if he is fit then he has to come in ... surely. But can he cope with Henderson or Stanley? 3) Fritsch - he was trialled down there for a reason, but as with Joel Smith, can he cope with a big boy? My guess: Goody will drop Frosty and go with Joel Smith, or if Joel is still too sore, then Pedo gets the gig. My wish: No change. 2) Will the coach stick with JKH? It was an interesting choice v Dogs but JKH's VFL form was very worthy. But will he cope with the pressure of a night game at a rabid Catland. He may also have to pick up Megnola, Kelly or even Duncan at times, so it's a huge ask. This will either make him as a player or will be his last game for the club. My guess: Goody will stick with him. My wish: I'm sorry but I am not a fan of JKH on a wing or as a forward, although I can see some potential in him as a defender with clean hands and good kicking skills. Also this is not the week to bring in Baker, although I have warmed to him and with Billy now out and no sign of Jayden back for a bit, Ronald McDonald is our best chance of providing the run we need for finals. But we can wait another week on Baker and likewise VDB. 3) Will the coach stick with three pacey forwards - Hannan, Garlett and Spargo? Obviously this is a bit of a selection luxury that worked on Saturday because of who we were playing and might work on a dry day at Geelong - but we are playing at night in the middle of winter. My guess: Goody will stick with all three. My wish: Unlike Goody i can't see all three in same side come finals. Two yes. This is the week for another grunt forward such as Bugg or Kent - neither of whom dominated in VFL on weekend. 4) Is this the game for Dom Tyson? The answer is yes because it will be greasy and at night and will be a tackle-fest. His inclusion will take pressure off Angus and allow Oliver to play forward for even more. My guess: Dom has barely played in the middle all season so why would Goody change now - even with Viney out. My view: This is the game for either Dom or Buggy. But as we know Dom isn't a natural at chasing down blokes, so he can't play the forward pressure role as well as others and if Goody won't play him in the middle, then it's a pointless swap. My view: If I was picking the team it would be JKH out and Joel Smith in because he is more physical and quicker, but I am not. And given the likely niggling game, I'd even consider dropping one our small forwards for Bugg or Tyson (only if used in the middle). My guess is that we will bring back Joel Smith and Frosty will be dropped and if Joel is still too sore, then Pedo will replace Frosty. What will most likely happen is that we will be hard at it most of the night and lead for quite a bit of it but Joel Selwood will have a huge last term and with scores level Trac will be pinged for a high tackle on him late in the game. The ball will be moved down the ground where Henderson will nudge Joel Smith under the contest allowing TomaHawk to mark. He will turn quickly and spot Parfitt or Kelly or even Ablett 2m clear of Jordy and it will be game over.

Yep but logic goes out the door a bit when you lose. If we were to beat Geelong, then yes, we wouldn't need to rush him in. But given it's at their stadium and three umpires will only hear one noise, I think it would be one of our finest efforts to win down there - Richmond couldn't do it down there last season if you recall.

It's a short selection night coming up. If Smith is fit, then it's no change for me, because he adds flexibility and pace to our line up. Loved the way he went forward and even though he wasn't able to get on the end of anything, he's a presence in air and on the ground. That's the flexibility we need - but sadly in these days where clubs train up players for one of three areas - the mid-game switch rarely happens. If Smith is still too sore (note he was moved off Walters when he pulled up sore when he got away over the back), then there are only two players to consider - Bernie and Wags. And if either comes back you have to also consider whether the loss of pace means Jordy has a rest up for the Cats game - which is our real test anyway. The good news is that AVB is only about two weeks away. I doubt we will risk him for the Cats game, but I reckon the week after we regain our tackling bull. And yes he will turn it over ... but have a look at what he brings. And if you don't know, go down to training and walk on the ground near to where he is and ask yourself would you want him tackling you?

To me it's more about the restructuring. The first area is that we need to fix is our forward entries - which way too often head to the goalsquare where we either are outmarked or fail to crumb. The situation has been made worse when we took out Spargo and didn't replace him with a fellow crumber - like Jeffy. We had success during our six-game win stretch with the three tall forwards, but I said at the time that it may not be sustainable at night and also in the winter when agility is almost everything. Having three talls is a luxury up in Darwin anyway, because it's at night it gets dewy/greasy - it's very different to Alice Springs. Clearly having another small helps our pace and mobility and forward pressure and maybe forces players to look lower. Telling players (namely Hoges) to lead up to the contest is also crucial. The second area is our failure to cover opposition sides on the break. We no longer have Lever to intercept and save the fix a two-fold. 1) we need to make sure our mids aren't all downhill skiing - Viney and Jones definitely ain't ones, so the others need to lift as well and rotate quickly enough to maintain their ability to get back and pressure. More two-way runners are needed which to me means ANB needs to go in there at times and we need to add pace to our wings - Stretch is a must and Baker needs to be considered, even though I doubt his kicking ability at this stage. But Baker will certainly add run and the fans will love him. 2) We need to add more speed to our back line or play an extra down back (although we did do this on occasions against the Saints). The downside of the extra down back means you turn the game into a low-scoring close tussle, but it may be necessary if we can't get our mids right. And it might be necessary because whilst Jordy bring precision, he most certainly doesn't bring speedy defence. In terms of players coming in, the following must be considered: A crumber - Spargo is a given and there's a case for Jeffy as well, especially in Darwin. Kent will be ready again soon, but not yet based on his game in VFL last week. More two-way runners, ideally with pace - Stretch is a given because of his VFL form, but there's a case for Baker, who is quicker, as well, although after what happened with Petty, I am not sure Goody will be so eager to trial that this week - once bitten, twice shy. There's also a case for Buggy because whilst he's not quick, he works his butt off and we may need him to tag/niggle in coming weeks. But with Fyfe out, do we really need Buggy to tag Neale this week? Maybe he has to wait for Toby the following week. There's also a case for Frosty - some will argue Keilty but he's the same player as Petty - not mega quick, just more developed and more of a man. But you can't bring in Frosty unless the coach wants him and he has to be part of his restructure. Given it's going to be slippery in Darwin and Freo have lost Taberner and Nyhuis and Kersten are hardly big names, maybe it's the game to go small down back anyway. In which case you have to consider recalling Bernie, who is honest and will make a contest and is by and large a terrific kick. Or as I have stated before, we send Nat Jones back there to make our transition game more smooth and also because he's a hard nut and will put his life on the line. I'd have him play on Ballantyne with Jetta on Walters and Hibberd on Matera. As to the outs, I have three certs. 1) Hannan - I still think he's critical come finals, but he may need a few weeks of dominating in the VFL again before a recall. 2) Tyson - unless we play him in the guts, then there's no point having him as that's his forte. he's not quick enough to be an outside mid. 3) Petty - I have made comment on another thread about this, but we don't want another Chris Lamb scenario - he needs to regain his confidence and the best place for that to happen will be in the VFL finals. We need to win this game. The other outs - possibly 4) Petracca - I said last week that it was imperative that Goody shows him some tough love for his long-term development. Please bite the bullet with him Goody - if you don't we all lose as he is imperative as a weapon in the run home against the good sides. He needs to be playing in the middle for Casey for two weeks and working his butt off. The time to do it is now, not in Rd 21 when we are out of it. 5) Weid - I actually feel that with Petty out and with Frost unlikely to be recalled, we can rejig by sending T-Mac and Hoges back to help out for part of the game. That could leave Weid to play the outlet role down the line again but as I said earlier, three tall forwards is not an option at night against a quick young side. But my gut feel is we'll give Weid another go. He's ready. He just needs to show it. 6) Lewis - The big call if Goody has the courage to make it. Clearly he gets caught out on transition defensively and clearly we need his smarts and precise ball movement offensively. Can we keep playing him and if we ain't a chance to win the flag, how can we justify playing him? So: Forward 7 - Spargo, Weid, T-Mac/Hoges, Fritsch, Melky, Garlett, ANB Mids 8 - Gawn, Oliver, Viney, Brayshaw, Harmes, Baker, Stretch, Jones Defenders 7 - Lewis, O-Mac, J.Smith, Salem, Jetta, Hibberd, Hoges/T-Mac Or, in simpler terms: In: Stretch, Spargo, Baker and Garlett Out: Petty, Hannan, Tyson and Petracca

I found it quite distressing watching his debut today - I felt sick for him and I'm sure nothing anybody could do or say will make him feel any better tonight . I had to turn away as I watched his left foot kick dribble off his boot in the second term because I have seen him train and I know his kicking is normally one of his strengths. Some of you will remember the debut of Chris Lamb back in 1999 when he played the first two games of the season. Lamb was a high draft pick but just 18 and we needed a tall because I think Shanahan was injured. Can anyone else recall how he stubbed his toe on the ball trying to kick it one time and you just knew he was never going to live it down - at least in his head. He didn't play for another two years and despite a good turn of speed, he never really overcame that horror debut. What's worse is that he had to back up the next week because the coach was hopeful that his nerves would be overcome. They weren't. And it's worse for a defender because you can't hide away on a wing and pick up some lazy touches. Time will tell if Harry can overcome what happened. I am a bit worried that Goody will get all stubborn and decide to play him again next week, hoping he will show his true form. But I'm sorry the psychological damage of rushing a player in can be huge and your mindset, once shattered, doesn't change that quickly and we can't afford another loss. What needs to happen is that Harrison needs to play in the VFL finals and get his confidence back. Provided he has a good strong pre-season, he then needs to be given a shot in pre-season games so that he can get a taste of what AFL is like before his next main stage performance. If Goody thinks he can play him again this season, he's a bigger dill than when he used to gamble his earning away. Sadly he now has to go to the player whose manic play at times frustrates him - welcome back Sam Frost.

Almost impossible to read what the selectors will do these days. The most interesting thing so far is that Joel Smith has kept his spot, even with Petty coming into play his intercepter role. To me that shows that Goody is aware of the pace issues we have down back and kept him in the back seven ahead of Bernie and Joel will most likely play on Josh Battle , leaving Membrey and McCartin to O-Mac and Petty. I'm still awaiting to see our restructure up forward, but like many, would be surprised if Weid hasn't done enough. Can't see Pedo playing this week - the second tall defender role went to Petty already - and in my view, Pedo's too slow for that role anyway, even though his kicking skills are up to the required level. And as a forward, I expect Weid to play his back-up ruck role - so even if T-Mac is a late withdrawal, Pedo's chances this week appear limited to me. I'd be shocked if Stretch doesn't get a call up, but I've been shocked before. Could Vince play up forward if T-Mac is injured? Will both Harmes and Tyson be kept? Who knows? Find out at about 6.15pm tonight!

For some reason it didn't like my word documents, but when I copied it into pages and tried again it worked. It did keep the attempted downloads on bottom though of topic though and I couldn't remove it - see actual topic called Deespicable's 2018 player rankings

I am trying to start a new topic. When I try to load my 2018 rankings it only allows the first page and I have 11 pages of the stuff. It brings them in as a file, rather than just allowing me to place words - albeit lengthy- on the topic. Any suggestions as to way around it so that I can just copy and paste the one lot of 6000 words?

I hear where you are coming from and yes I did notice his lack of chase time and time again and yes in our earlier lossess against Cats and Hawks, he was exposed over the back, as he would have been against the Tigers if he had played. But Jordy's precision is a big reason why we have won the past six games and his distribution, except for his last-quarter clanger was exceptional again today. Take a breath and figure out the other reasons behind the loss today - pace beat precision and what's worse we lost in the hardball area for just the second time this year - both losses. Goody will reconfigure and fix those areas and I reckon he will now know that he must have Hunt playing against the Pies and Tigers, even if he does turn it over.

Agree on your three, although I reckon Melky is in the mix - his standout games on Rance and against Carlton will have won him points and this year there will be no Betts as the small forward. Bruest, Caddy, De Goey and even Walters are challenging for those spots I think. As to Jetta, he was a standout on Saturday - I reckon it was the best game I've seen him play - but even then he only went forward 251m. That's the negative wrap on him - he only hurts sides by stopping players. He also started season poorly. But if he keeps playing like he did Saturday, then he'll firm for a spot. Plenty of options in his role. Laird and Tom Stewart are certs and Hurn and Vlaustin must be close as well.

I still think that when Ross Dillon went down with an achilles injury in 1971 after making the state team the previous year it was bigger than Schwarter's knee. Back then nobody even knew what an achilles injury was - it was the turf-toe of today. Speaking of turf-toe, it sounds like T-Mac has succumbed to it - must have something to do with jumping up for the ruck tapouts. Anyway by my reckoning we may now have five first 22 players missing for Rd 1 and there's a few yet to prove their fitnes. 1) Viney. 2) T-Mac. 3) Lewis. 4) ANB (he's still not allowed to do competitive work). 5) VDB (he's a favourite of mine, although like my colleagues above I accept that I'm living in the past). You can also add O.Mac and Oliver, who are racing against time with their niggles, but I suspect will get up.

A great topic Big Carl and you did a superb job. Obviously all of us will differ in our view - but I'm in the lucky boat of being the right vintage for this one, as you may be as well. Almost all of your line-up I agree with, although I did struggle with a few and have made three changes and swapped a couple on the bench. I'm sorry but I can't have Graeme Yeats in this side. He was handy, but occasionally was dropped as a defender, although his superb 1987 year as a wingman helped turn things around for the whole side. But he can't get the wing role for obvious reasons. The tricky thing is deciding whether his spot goes to a tall defender or a small one. Ultimately I suspect Jake Lever or Michael Hibberd will get the spot, but the only good, tall intercepters we have had are Jared Rivers and Clint Biz and whilst they had their days, they weren't quite dominant enough. I think any side of this 50-year era has to consider Laurie Fowler. Dumped by the Tigers, he was as tough as nails, won a few B&Fs and was a long clearing kick. He'd also back into anything - Neil Balme included. He's the only one I feel comfortable enough to propose for the other back pocket besides Alan Johnson, who is a monty. The full-back spot is also a troubling one. Danny Hughes was tough and a great kick, but he was mighty slow - that's why Northey decided against playing him on Dunstall in the 1988 GF. He did have a few cracking QB games on Brian Taylor though. Peter Giles was tight-checking and good enough for Lethal to decide to wipe him out. But I like Sean Wight most of all - he kept Ablett goalless one game and his attack on the footy was inspiring. While our depth came on in 1987 and hence everyone played a part in that revival, it was Wight that turned us into a counter-attacking side - a bit like Alex Rance today. Frawley of 2011 also was worthy but his other years were solid, not amazing. I eventually agreed with your choice of half-backs. Brett Lovett was slow, but did all the fundamentals right and enjoyed playing on Peter Daicos. I think he was probably a tad smarter than Tony Sullivan, though cut from the same cloth. The running half-back spot is a toss up between Steven Febey and Stephen Stretch, although Jayden may go past both of them in time. Stretcher was a better kick and had a bigger leap, but Febel could run all day and kept presenting and with brother Matt and Nathan Brown, gave us the run that propelled Daniher's side to finals. Both lacked the mongrel touch though. Grinter, however, was considered by other fans to be more mongrel than footballer but he was a pretty handy kick on the run plus he could take a hanger, so you could probably forgive him the fact that his hip invariably wound up making contact with opponents. Adem Yze also had a sensational year in 2000 off a back flank but played way more as a forward and a bench spot in this side beckons for him. Gary Hardeman is somewhat lucky. The taxi driver was a wonky kick and probably wouldn't even get drafted today because of it, but he was a good mark, played tight, was pretty quick and also was reliable enough when playing for the Vics. He fared well in the Brownlow, but I reckon even he would say that he wasn't as good as a runner-up and third place suggest. But who has been a better CHB on a regular basis? Wight was good there in 87 but played most of his footy at FB, Lyon was exceptional when switched there and Neiter had that one game on Carey in 1994 that everyone thinks makes him a CHB guru, but he was way better as a forward. Spalding wasn't quite quick or mobile enough, hence got sent to CHF. The centreline is hard to argue with. Alves and Wells were premiership players, albeit it after the skippers left to finish their careers in glory. Flower was a God. But that leaves us with a problem because Willo in 1982 was amazing and he was very good for a few more years, often in the uncanny small forward role, where his big baulking hip-swivel was lethal. But I'll take Willo on the bench. The other hard luck story is Stephen Tingay, who was hard and gave his all, but just missed both our grand finals - too young for 88, too old and injured for 00. I've named him emergency to keep the hard luck theme going. The choice of CHF is a lot harder than most young people realise. Officer Greg Parke was amazing in the early 70s, he had sticky fingers but his errant boot often let us down. I accept Schwarter at CHF as he was the most amazing player I have seen though until his knee and he did fight back bravely to win our B&F. I can just cop Parke's omission - but I think if enough people of my age were online, then I reckon he probably would get the nod. I've gone with Gerard Healy on a flank. He often played that spot for the Vics after his 77-odd goal season as a forward pocket next to Whacko Jacko in 1982. In 84 and 85 he was virtually unstoppable as a ruck rover before heading to to the Swans. Seven years and 130 games for us - yep that's enough I reckon to make this side, even though his first couple of seasons on the wing were very much developmental years. In fact I'd say he's the third best footballer we've seen in this 50-year period behind Robbie and Garry Lyon. Neiter gets the full forward spot hands down. If only Hoges had a thumping kick like David did! And the whiz was Mr Magic for us - also for seven seasons - and his 2000 year was phenomenal. You could make a case for Aaron Davey as a small forward and even though he never kicked a swag of goals, he did change the game with his forward pressure. That's why he's in my 22. Then I get controversial for you Big Carl. I'm sorry but I disagree on Allen Jakovich's inclusion. Sure he was amazing once he got his chance in 1991, but four seasons and 47 games isn't a team of the century stat. I'd be happy for him to be in our most mercurial or talented team of the century, but I don't think that's what this topic is about. It's for that reason that Russell Robertson gets my vote - keep your feet, Robbo. Sure Robbo benefitted from having Neiter next to him, but he did win four club goalkicking awards and played more than 200 games - not bad for a guy spotted taking a nice hanger. Brad Green also goes close, but he spent a lot of time as a winger. The ruck's a given, the ruck-rover is also easy as Todd Viney was bigger than Jack and just as tough, although his kicking let him down. I loved the Obstetrician as a player and Glenn Lovett was clever as well, but neither can match Nathan Jones for workrate or heart nor, as some of you have seen, the kicking skills. Henry Coles and Sugar Healy had their moments and Junior Mac was a great leader ... but Jonesy is a three-time B&F winner for good reason. The last spot on the bench goes to a defender for balance and Grinter just pips Stretch and Hughes, but really I'm splitting hairs now. So here it is In bold are players that you picked that I agreed with Big Carl, although Healy and Viney have swapped positions - Todd was never as good as a forward. B: A Johnson S.Wight D Hughes L.Fowler G Yeats HB: B Lovett G Hardeman S Febey C: S Alves G Wells R Flower HF: G Lyon D Schwarz Gerard Healy F: J Farmer D Neitz R Robertson A Jakovich R: J Stynes T Viney N Jones Int: B Wilson R Grinter, A. Davey A Yze J McDonald, Emerg: S.Tingay G.Parke, S.Stretch A Obst, E Spalding OK, a few other comments on those that other have mentioned but miss out IMO. Gary Baker - A lovely mark, but was usually beaten in hit-outs because he was quite short compared to other tapmen. He also wasn't mobile enough to hold down CHF or CHB - something that Jimmy did a bit of early in his career. We've had a long list of handy ruckmen - Big Carl, Peter Moore, Jeff White and Strawb O'Dwyer, but only one so far can match Jimmy and big Maxy needs to do it for quite a few more years yet to challenge him. Ray Biffin - The problem is he can't get a gig as FF because we have Neiter in that spot and even then, his kicking for goal was sporadic at best. As a FB, he played some handy games, but he wasn't fit enough to be a flying intercept mark or rebounder and hence misses out. Stephen Smith - Ultimately a bit of a tease like Jack Watts. Under Skilton we thought we had a superstar in the making at CHF, but then he was never quite able to nail down the spot, eventually being sent to defence where he was reliable in a very ordinary side. His best game was on Leigh Matthews and we all should know where that ends - just ask Gilesy or Allen Jarrot.

Love the way Lever plays and given we were smashed in the air this year, then it's nice to know we have a guy who has a presence in this area with his leap. Apart from T-Mac going forward, I hope they prepare O.Mac pre-season to play as a forward/back-up ruckmen as well. Unless Frost or Lever is injured, then O-Mac will be required to head forward on occasions and last year for some stupid reason, players like Weid and O-Mac and T-Mac did no work on the back-up ruck role pre-season. It was only when Gawn went down that we started work in that area.

Sounds pretty fair all round to me. Lever's a gun. If the Swans feel hard done by then they get back pick 34 (35).

We already have two first rounder available - this year's 10 and next year's - and if we are worried about the quality of next year's draft being too good then we should ask for their 2018 second rounder back in return. We also are yet to play the "trade player" card with them, although I suspect Ben Ken has been offered up behind scenes. But given they are also losing Charlie Cameron's run, then maybe we have to consider giving up another SA player - Billy Stretch comes to mind, even though I like the way he goes about his footy - sometimes to get something you really want, you have to give up something you like.

A lot of people have talked him up and I hope we get him - but if you saw him on TV three weeks ago against Willy you would have to say "No way". The worst game by a potential draft pick that I have seen - conditions not good though. The fact that, against the same side, he came back and played well last weekend, indicates he is still worth claiming - but I am thinking as a rookie, but I may be dreaming on this one as it is always hard to rate VFL players and the club will have an idea of who is in to him pre-draft.

Why would you say that? Could you explain your Collingwood assertion? To me, the Pies want him because they desperately want anyone and think they are the biggest and best club in the AFL and they don't really plan out their long-term structure. The reason why the Pies shouldn't want him is that Jeremy Howe already plays the intercept sweeper role for them and unless they are planning to trade Howey after a year where he might be AA, then it doesn't make as much sense to have two playing that role - as we saw early in the year with Jetta and Wags, you don't want four players going up and no-one down. By contrast we don't have a tall defensive marking sweeper, so Lever would be an ideal pick up for us and will complement an area where we are deficient - T-Mac wasn't bad at it before his reallocation to the front six.

Or a clever way of finding out if he was going to have a full-on tag or not and therefore getting immediate intel on it!

Tubby Taylor will find it difficult to avoid a few media interviews and a few new major offers after his selections have consistently come up trumps - not bad for a bloke who left the Pies in embarrassing circumstances. If someone, with inside knowledge, on who was behind the choice of Hannan can reveal details please. Obviously the VFL GF was the major rider on this as he cut us up, but I doubt Tubby would have been there as he would have been off looking at other players in GFs around the country and the Etihad game was an easy one for so many of our other key staff to get too. But I do know Tubby was right behind the choices of both Oliver and Vandenburg and had the backing of Paul Roos to go for big-bodied midfielders.

Declan was quite impressive early in the VFL season with his stints in the ruck, up forward and primarily as a tall defender. But he had a relatively poor finals campaign for Casey, which has meant he is no longer talked about as someone who will attract the sort of interest that would make see him taken in the normal draft - and the rookie draft now seems a more likely spot for him and us. It may come down to a choice between him and Jack Hannath - who we were keen on four years ago before Freo nabbed him before us. I'm hoping we go for Declan because it will also send a signal to Casey players that if you play well, then it is a potential road into Melbourne. I'd also be happy if we took Footscray's Ben Long who is a pacey, medium forward from Darwin - yes indigenous - Rioli's cousin. I always think we should be supporting NT players now that we have a relationship with the state and he is obviously one that we missed and the Dogs now have the jump on him. But I imagine if he's still around when it comes to pick 69 then he'd be perfect outside pace that we need to punt on - Dogs may take him at pick 50 though.

Two things about Hibberd. The first is that the DL camp who have highlighted him as a good pick-up have underestimated (ignored) one of his main ingredients that he adds to our list - a left foot defender. At present we have Salem and Wagner as our only two left-footers back there while sides like Hawthorn and Sydney have quite a few. Wagner is handy but not a thumping kick like Hibberd, while most of us would like to see Salem tried in the midfield. So Hibberd's acquisition is huge and those that watched him pre-2016 know that he's as tough as nails and will be part of our back seven (six plus one interchange). The other is I don't quite get why we want to try and trade out of next year's draft already. Perhaps some have got cocky after our improved showing with a young list, but there's no guarantee that we won't slide a little next year as we wait for our young squad to fully mature. And when we grabbed an extra pick last year (for Weideman), we were told by the club that the 2016 draft was shaping as being a little thin. And there's also no obvious other trades on the horizon this year, but next year we may want to use our second round pick - just as we do this year. One can only presume that our maestro Jason Taylor now is keen on a couple of players who may fall in that 20-30 bracket. But there are ways of getting back to the second round, even if we have to trade our current pick for Hibberd. For example - Dunn to Brisbane should net us the Lions third round pick 49. We then can go after the Gold Coast's pick 25 or 29 on the basis that trading them our two third rounders (picks 46 and 49) will actually earn them more points to be used for either Jack Bowes or Brad Scheer.

Agree - all clubs play the real estate game initially. Our pick 27 probably is a little unders, so we will have to decide whether we give up our third round as well, maybe for a switch with their pick four. We should pick up something for Grimes (round 4 pick) and maybe Dunn (round 4 pick) and I am waiting to see what Goody decides on Trengove (potential round 3 pick) and Neal-Bullen (Port Adelaide second round pick). Why have so many jumped off the Salem bandwagon?