Deespicable

On the contrary there is a fair bit of difference when it comes to pick in the top 40. It's only when you get out beyond 40 that it becomes more of a lottery and the chances of you missing out on someone you rate highly becomes minimal. Kev Sheehan says from pick 4-20 there isn't much of a difference in talent this year. So if a few of his expected top 20 slip through, it would be nice to take them at No.23, because that player might be gone by No.28. So I'd rather see us exchange fourth round picks (60 v 64) where it really shouldn't matter much, or if they don't want Blease, then simply offer our fourth rounder. Further to this, Garland has pretty much been delisted anyway, so all we are fighting with are the Bombers (pick 52 or 70) and any other side that want to make the Blues a better deal.

I agree with the free agency is fine set. I think it's fantastic that players at s..t clubs get a chance to play finals footy - I was really rapt for Stan Alves and Greg Wells when they won flags after year's as long-suffering Demon service. The Frawley case ultimately gets down to our incompetence as a footy club - if he had been paid in the top 25 per cent of our players then we would have been able to match any offers and keep him for two more years. But our footy manager decided Frawley wasn't in our best 10 players (even though he is one of only three Dee AAs in the past 10 years) and shafted him. So good luck to Chip in his endeavours. And we are getting great compensation anyway (assuming pick 3), so what is the problem? But where I think the AFL needs to work on is to make sure that the top clubs are heavily scrutinised with their books and things like COLA are stamped out. I still can't believe that four years ago when we wanted David Hale and he'd agreed to come to us, the Hawks were able to outbid us and pay him around $450K a year. That was on top of paying Burgoyne $600K to go there and also later securing our own highest-paid player Cam Bruce. That was when they still had Franklin. I'd love to know which Hawk greats accepted massive pay cuts to fit them in under the salary cap. Of course, there was never any story about Hodge or Mitchell playing for peanuts out of loyalty. So how did they do it? So ultimately I think the free-agency rule is fine, but the AFL just needs to tighten the screws on the salary cap and make sure clubs are all above board.

He'll be paid a princely sum by us I'm guessing. I hope he cuts back on the finger pointing - unless he aims most of it at Jack Watts.

It will be really interesting to see what pans out with Geelong on this one. The Cats used to be the leaders in recruiting but in recent times have been way off the mark. I remember them spruiking about how good Smedts was and how lucky they were to get him at pick 15, but while he has skill, he doesn't have pace or toughness so shapes as a major bust for them - something we are used to. The Cats have already delisted five and I doubt they will offer much in return and certainly not a regular or their first pick, but our aim should be to get their second round pick at very least so that we can offload it to Pies for Lumumba.

Thank christ the AFL knocked us back - sick of us surviving on handouts and being labelled as beggars. Perhaps the club can be proactive and put something back into the NT community and set up an academy similar to what they do on NSW and Qld. That way we could actually ask to be on a similar draft scheme to NSW and Qld clubs, whereby we get first access to players from NT whom we have been developing. It's far better to be rewarded for hard work, than incompetence.

As I have stated elsewhere, I think he needs to go to a SANFL or WAFL club where he will be viewed as a leader having had AFL experience. He seems to lack confidence and the desire to impose, but he has speed and is a good kick and ball user. It would not surprise me if after a year or two in such leagues, he may become worthy of another gig at AFL.

Correction - he's a great young prospect. If he was a great player, he'd be in Sydney's side week-in, week-out. He's got genuine ball-winning ability and a fantastic work ethic - but his kicking efficiency at the moment lets him down. He's a bit like our Jack Viney at this stage and most likely will become a great player, but both need to improve their disposal before the tag "great player" is handed out IMO. Sydney will want pick No.6, but whether they will get it for him is still of debate. I'd reckon his value would be pick No.6 and in return the Swans give up their second-rounder to Blues (ie: pick 35-37).

Fantastic intro to this thread and crying image adds to the effect. I can cope with Gysberts, Cook because basically we got the players we wanted (albeit not up to it) and did not appear influenced by outside factors. I can also cope with Scully and Trengove because we got great compo for Sculls and I still have some hope for Trengove - provided he employs a sprints coach off-season. But the two most damaging choices in the past 10 years are doubtless the change of heart non-decisions - Nic Nat and Wines. Nic Nat would have been the most marketable icon we could ever have taken - he would have been our Richo. Jim Stynes was keen on him and so were we we, all season, until JW took a mark to win the U18 champs and tested so well that we switched tack. I would love to have been a fly on the wall at the draft meeting where our wise guys swapped - my belief is that Prendergast pushed for it, but I'd love someone to confirm that. Then we were into Wines and loved his ethic and altered because everyone seemed to be rating JT higher and he was an outside player that we also needed and Neeld wanted. Todd Viney was overruled and the rest is now history. The moral of the story is go for the player who you like - it's a lot easier to rationalise if it doesn't work out.

Interesting to read Emma Quayle's verdict that we are keen to snare Dylan Shiel or Adam Treloar from GWS. Obviously either would be a huge coup for us and having Dom Tyson at the club will obviously help our chances. I can't imagine Treloar being let go or wanting to go after his breakout season. But the Giants may view Shiel as expendable and assuming we get pick No.3 as Frawley compo, it would seem a fair deal to me, but I'd also ask for their round 3 pick in return (about 40) - just so we can get back into third round. Given that Roosy is also mentioned as quite keen on Brayshaw (possibly even more so than Petracca) then we have a chance to set ourselves up with a midfield that is deep, young and on par with most sides. I would be happy with a Clark for O'Brien trade (both high risk) and if the Swans win the flag, I reckon we are a huge chance to nab Malceski, given we can offer him a far more lucrative deal than Buddy's Swans. I am worried that Macleski as a FA will water down the Frawley compo, so I'd offer our second rounder, which may seem unders for an AA defender, but he is 30 with dodgy knees and is a three-year proposition at best. I am still hopeful we get Billy Stretch as a third-rounder F/S and the draft gurus seem a little divided on whether he's 2nd or 3rd rd. We also need to add a tall defender to our list and Frost would seem handy and suit those needs. But to get him we would most likely need to get back into the second round and that means trading Watts (pick 25 to Blues) and/or Toumpas (pick 33-35) to Port. That would give Roosy five new ins for Round 1 - Shiel, Frost, Malceski, O'Brien and Brayshaw - and six if you include Hoges. And it would be a great mix of youth and experience. On the draft front, obviously 98% of us know little about the actual players as yet, but I have two favourites that I'm hoping come our way. 1) Liam Duggan - we need a long left-footer for our back six - and the Western Jets midfielder has played a lot of footy down back and takes the kick-ins. The problem is that he seems to be rated around pick 10-20 - so we'd need to be extremely lucky and because he has a weapon foot, I can't see him slipping to 2nd rd. 2) Oscar McDonald - I always reckon that once you know a bit about an older brother, Tom, you can get a gauge on what development is likely to take place. Oscar is apparently starting to blossom (latish like Tom) and we know he comes from good country stock, so I'd reckon he'd be a great option for us as an early third rounder - assuming he still falls that far. If we did get pick 33-35 for Toumpas, then I'd be happy with us taking him there.

Agree. Can someone terminate this thread - it just shows Demonland to be a delusional website for morons. Danger would be regarded as in the top two young players in the country with Fyfe - so why would he come to our club? He'll be the Crows captain next year and if he really can't hack it in Adelaide, then he'll go to a Victorian club with money and success.

That's not that surprising given Lumumba's played about 60 games in the past three years compared to Clark's 15 or so. But I'm hopeful the fact that Clark is key forward/ruck - an even more valuable commodity in the current game - means that the Pies desire to get him will mean they see a trade with Lumumba as a fairly even split. To me it's a very even transaction, because both have offfield issues, both are about same age and both solve problem areas with their respective new clubs. But for us the best bonus is that Lumumba's ability to provide dash from the wing means Roosy has an obvious replacement for our current tall wingman - and I don't mean Daniel Cross.

Clark for Lumumba is the perfect trade for us. Both about the same age, both with off-field issues and both potentially great acquisitions for their new clubs, but at the same time, very high chance that it will go pear-shaped. Clark could solve the Pies lack of a back-up forward/ruck for Cloke problems. Lumumba could solve the lack of dash and taking the game-on problems that we have. He also now prefers to play on the wing, which means we can offload the tall under-performing wingman that we have - Watts his name? So it's a WIN-WIN-Win situation.

I have just watched this video and I've got to say his highlights are the best I've seen. He has vision, is a deadly accurate kick and when he needs to roost it, he roosts it at least 50m which makes him the equal or better than almost every current Demon. He has quick hands, tackles well and appears to have speed and he's a nice mark. So why isn't he in the mix for No.1? There's 168 centimetres of reason for that, but sometimes you have to give these kids a go - just look at Boomer Harvey. If he was slow, I could understand why he would be ruled out, but he's not. He'd be well worth a late pick and would be an instant cult hero if he played - and god help us we need one of those having missed the last freakshow boat that sailed called Nic Naitanui. Roosy is against small guys because he wants midfield grunt. But Caleb is ideal for up forward and actually can read where to crum the ball and his vision under pressure would make him a rarity at our club.

I certainly dont' profess to know the varying talents of next year's crop of underage player - which I suspect puts me in good company here. But a few points: 1) If Christian Petracca is clearly the best player in the draft as everyone here seems to be saying, then why St Kilda would not take him beggars belief - sure they need a key forward to replace Riewoldt but they also need midfielders to replace Goddard, Dal, Hayes and before too long Montagna. 2) Obviously as bad as our recruiting has been, there's a fair degree of luck involved - that's why Fyfe, Lachie Neale and others have slipped through. Most years aren't clearcut like Hodge, Ball and Judd. 3) We need a star (ideally two or three of them) and sadly we missed out on Bontempelli, Macrae and Wines in recent seasons and Heppell and Prestia and Fyfe and Dangerfield before that - but we weren't the only clubs who had overlooked them. 4) The more picks we take in the draft - albeit with a good judge guiding them - the more likelihood we have of getting lucky. 5) Star players generally don't come from trades - unless they are stolen from a club under the lure of cash - ie: Franklin. And most of those stars are moving to clubs in the window. So my view is that if we are going to rise back up, then we need to get back to trading players in only for second or third rounders and that we keep our first-rounder(s) in the hope that eventually we get lucky and get a star. Given we should be trying to get Stretch - his speed and vision and kicking makes him fit one of our key needs and to not go after him is being disloyal to father-sons and would be an embarrassment to us in the future should he end up being a gun. So if he requires a second round (as draft experts such as Knightmare and others are now suggesting), then we also need to trade back into the second to be in the mix for GWS trades and players who slip through the system and end up being second-rounders (eg: Taylor, Darling). And to do that we need to give up some of our under-performing fringe players with value to other clubs - ie: Watts to Carlton for pick 25, Toumpas to Port Adelaide for pick 33, Fitzy to North for pick 32 - we give them our third round pick 39 in return. That would give us a fair chance at getting lucky, without decimating the existing side!

Thankfully Roos for once has listed Salem on the field. Roos can still change his mind, but so far this year the sub has always come from the four listed interchange on Thursday night. So thankfully Salem will get to play a full game and if he plays down back, we'll get a chance to see what he can do. Would you rather Watts play down back, so he can do his lollipop man defensive press?

And just to show you that, unlike most of you, I am excited about our chances here's Five reasons how we win: 1) Jamar and Gawn should smash Currie and Brown - if we don't clean up in the rucks then we really are VFL standard. 2) Howey lines up on first gamer Mason Wood which should be a huge win provided he doesn't get cocky. 3) Crossy is perfect for Dal Santo and Bail's chase is perfect for Atley. Two surprise wins for us. 4) Dawes, provided he is intense, makes Thompson cough it up a bit, because of his sore ribs. 5) Our midfield with Riley, Jones, Viney and Dom can match North for grunt (unlike the past 10 times we've played them) and we should win the clearances. Five reasons why we lose 1) Jack Ziebell gets really hot and blows Jordie away. 2) Lynden Dunn kicks out to the right so many times that even Brad Scott's superior IQ means he figures out to camp Petrie over there. 3) Jack Fitzpatrick fails to realise that when Lachie Hansen is on him, his role is to be a decoy and drag him to the pocket. 4) We can't figure out how to score goals and the ball keeps falling to Matt Jones with space to run. 5) Jack Watts lines up at half forward, allowing Atley to line-up on him. That really is game over for us - just ask Jamie Bennell.

I'm going out on a limb here, but load up on the $9 we are for this game. Yes, I know the last time we won at Etihad was when John Howard was PM, but selections have really dealt us kindly. We all know how Boomer cuts us up so that was already a bonus, but on top of that they are resting Goldstein, who has smashed our rucks every time, even back when Stefan Martin lined up for us. Lindsay Thomas is always a danger and he's out too, and for those of you not up with North, Levi Greenwood will finish top five in their B&F this year. Then there's no Firrito - yes I know he's a chump, but he outbodies very Melbourne forward he's ever lined up on. As a result we only have a few headaches for selectors. Nick Dal (always cut us at Saints) and he'll almost certainly have Crossy. Lachie Hansen for the past two seasons is a fantastic sweeper against us and hopefully Roosy will play six forwards and with Gawn, Dawes and Fitzy up there, Lachie will have to man one of them which will negate his intercept mark count. Shaun Atley runs off us with ease, but I suspect we will try and manufacture the match-ups to have Bail or Viney marking him. Daniel Wells is also class but I'm hoping his lack of match fitness means he spends a lot of time forward and that means he cop our Jetta Warrior. Nat Jones will go head to head with Swallow which is an all-square match-up and that leaves us with Ziebell as the only big problem. I hope Jordie has his assignment and will be [censored] off if we go a less-tighter option. The other guy who normally slaughters us is Nathan Thompson but with his sore ribs, I don't actually reckon he'll want to be getting too physical with Dawesy. With Garland out I also reckon there's a real chance Salem may start back, which is where he dominated at the carnival for Vics last year and where he should have been playing all year. Roosy may well decide to go with Matt Jones or Vince down there, but either way, we'll have more run from down back than previous weeks. Significantly Watts was named on the bench for the first time this year - could he be our dream sub to come on for Fitzy/Jamar or Gawn and show his class when the pressure goes off? What's also great is that we went with Riley, who is the typical North kind of footballer and ideal for Cunnington - honest, hard at it, no frills and loves to tackle. I will be so disappointed if he's the sub, because this is his kind of game. Yes, in the end we may show ourselves to be truly [censored] and start coughing up easy ball to allow Petrie, Black and Wells to convert easy chances, but I actually think the game is our's for the taking. Load up!

Draft picks move depending on ladder position and also can be adjusted by AFL with their reward for Free Agent player movements. Plus some clubs will only want the minimum four picks (less with rookie upgrades) so later order pick numbers alter quite dramatically. Assuming we finish second bottom, the order as it stands is: Pick 2, 21, 39, 57, 75, 93 etc. If Chip goes the expectation is that his age and prospective salary will mean we also snare pick No.3 But if we were able to recruit Nick Malceski as a FA, then pick 3 might be diluted to an end of first rounder. So selections are still a movable feast.

Happy for us to target Macleski - we urgently need a left-footer down back and he's had a great season. Happy for us to consider Ryan O'Keefe because he's a big bodied type who can play as a mid-size forward for variety. But there's no reason to go for Luke Ball - even though he's a bloke with great work ethic. His body started falling apart some time back and he can't play anywhere except the middle and why would we want to give him a spot that should be taken by Riley, Trengove or Petracca.

I can't see Roosy forsaking any of his senior players now so I'm sure Watts, Frawley etc will survive the final cull of the season before the real cull post-season. We always get smashed by North's tough players, so I would hope that both Riley and McKenzie come back in (yes I know their disposal isn't great, but I'd rather have intensity than woosiness). JKH is our only true crummer, so I'd get him back in as well. Matt Jones, Garland (injured) and one of the bigs (given it's a night game, it's probably not that wise to play four ruckmen!) should be the third omission. As I've said every week for five weeks now, given Roosy does not want to make a media issue over dropping Watts, it might be nice if he made him the sub - that way it gets lost in all the talk about the game and Roosy can play it down post-match by saying some babble like we wanted a bit of spark off the bench. Love Salem to play down back so we can actually see what he can do with the ball without the pressure of being a small forward. And as I've said before, every side in the comp except us has at least one left-footer in their back six - might partially explain why our guys miss targets coming up the left-side.

I want to change my vote. Having seen him get bumped off it so easily by Bennell, it's fair to say he just hasn't got it. I used to think it was just a matter of time before the club forced him to do extra tackling sessions and strength sessions, but either they can't get him to do it or he just doesn't want to do it. Carlton is still keen on him - Mick Malthouse was his mentor two years ago - and I think we can still get their second pick (25 approx) for him. It's more a case that you can't have a guy who is one of the club's two most well-known players influence the image of the whole team. Our club is laughed at because of him. Paul Roos has tried all year to show him support and I'm sure he will one more time next week, but after that he just has to let him go. Just like we all do. He's a nice bloke, super talent but he just doesn't have a nasty competitive streak that all footballers must have to succeed. I still wish that he'd show all the knockers what he can do, but I'm afraid it's just a wish of mine like winning the lottery. At some point we all need a reality check.

Having just watched the replay, I've got to say that Leucopogon pretty much nailed it with all of his 19 points. But hey, when you pick 10 guys over 192cm for a night game on the biggest ground in Australia, what do you expect? We were hardly going to have the speed to run and carry. I think Roosy was hoping that having Watts on Bennell was going to be a fantastic match up for us with his height advantage. But Jack's form in one-on-ones is so down that even the whoosiest defender we've had in history was able to push him off and run off him with ease. Matt Jones also gave us another reminder as to why he's not good enough to make it as an outside runner - we've now played him for 41 games and not once has he been in my best five. Even Bennell had one good game at Melbourne - (night match v Geelong). Sadly Fitzy was our most effective forward on the night - god knows how he snapped truly with his balldrop but he did - twice. Jetta had his first shocker for the year, Garland can at least claim an injury excuse, while one of Dawesy or Jamar has to sit out next week so we can see Hogan in action to lift our spirits for next year. I still don't get why our big forwards can never time their runs so they are actually leading into space. Haven't they ever heard of screening for one another. The only point I disagree with Leucopogon on is with Howey. While he cocked up one pass to Jetta that cost a goal, he was always on the move and unlike his teammates actually took the game on coming out of defence, rather than going sideways or to the boundary. I love him as a defender.

6 Howe - Only bloke who can get his boot on the ball quick enough to actually go forward 5 N.Jones - Still turning into trouble too much, but always working and presenting 4 Cross - Priddis had been the form player of the league for the past month. 3 Vince - Wish he'd do a bit more with the ball, but at least he got it heaps. 2 Bail - Our only true running player. 1 Dunn - Still handy with his kicking but needs a left footer down back with him so he can switch on occasions. Biggest surprise: Jetta's worst game this year.

We played the Giants last week. We play the Giants this week. If King was fit as well, I reckon Roosy would have selected him! God help us in the second half when our handful of runners tire.

I'm happy with your assessment, except Evans and M.Jones would have zero trade value. Blease and Tapscott would both be more likely to draw interest from other clubs. I personally still would keep Grimes - I'm one of the few here who rates him for his courage and smarts and I tend to downplay his turnovers. I'd also like to see what Garland can do as a forward - that's what he was drafted as.