mo64

I think he can also play as an outside mid, which is what we're lacking. Even with a full list, he's definitely makes best 22 in our side.

The facts are that very few Laird/Yeo types come on the trade market, whereas Kelly is. Each year there are very few quality players that move clubs, which adds a premium on those that do. To get Kelly, you initially have to entice him away from GWS, and then outbid all the other Vic clubs. That's what drives his price up. Plus his old man played for North, which could pull at his heartstrings.

Two years ago, we gave a bog ordinary player in Melksham a 4 yr deal on between $400-450k, and you don't think that Kelly is now worth more than $600k? And don't get me started on the 3 year deal given to Garland. Kelly is worth a minimum $800k once you factor in the impending salary cap increases with the new CBA.

Fair enough.

If you can't grasp that there is a difference between not rating a player a "gun" and not rating them at all, then that's your problem.

Averaging almost 24 possessions a game. You must be thinking of Nathan's step brother Liam.

Not really. Only mentioned briefly that his older brothers Garry and Allen had played at South Fremantle before him. As for Zac Jones, if he was a Melbourne player, we'd be delighted with his improvement from year to year. At the right price I'd take him, because he's sure as hell an upgrade on Melksham.

Is he a champion bocce player?

That's only if Lever nominates Carlton as his preferred destination. Plus the Blues seem to be well stocked with young key backs, such as Marchbank and Plowman. They need quality mids more than anything.

Steve, It's fair to say that clubs have started sowing the seeds for potential trade acquisitions. Lever does address a need, regardless of how the season pans out, and now is time to get into his ear. Convincing the player is 99% of the battle, because history will tell you that 99% of of uncontracted players will end up at their preferred destination. Suggesting trade scenarios is a pointless excercise at this time because we don't know what currency either party will have by the end of the season. Having said that, I'd trade like for like: Lever => Lumumba and Garland

As much as I love Oliver, Williams was infinitely better by foot than Clarry with both right and left, and was possibly the greatest exponent of handball. If he ends up a cut above Williams, Oliver will be the greatest midfielder in the history of the AFL.

"Elite" should only apply to sustained greatness over several seasons. Having a great 12 months doesn't make you elite. The Bont has the potential to become elite.

I think it's a case of most elite key forwards come from inside the top 10, elite mids less so and elite ruckmen never. The term elite can be overused, and was discussed on radio this morning. Hutchy tried to say that Bont was elite, but Liam Pickering rightfully shot him down, by saying he's potentially elite. Pickering then went on to naming the players he thought were currently elite, and I think he was spot on: Dangerfield, Selwood, Fyfe, Ablett, Franklin, Pendlebury, Rance, S. Mitchell, N. Reiwoldt

If McCartin can get his body right, I think he's got greater agility than the likes of Tom Boyd and Patton. I didn't see the Geel/Freo game last week, but some were saying that Tom Hawkins looks like he's trimmed down, and covered a lot more ground than in the past.

Stringer made AA in his 3rd year playing a similar role, so that's a big call. If Petracca kicks over 50 goals as Stringer did in his 3rd year, then we'll finish top 4.

Petracca has all the tools to be an elite player, but the great unknown is what role he'll play in the future. He could become a Gary Ablett, who started as an average half forward and developed into an elite midfielder. Or he could become a Jake Stringer, who despite winning an AA berth at a young age, I'm unconvinced that he'll ever reach elite level. IMO, there's greater certainty of Oliver reaching elite levels than Petracca, even though Petracca has more natural ability.

Some people are getting way ahead of themselves with their assessment of what Petracca has done to date. He's hardly been an instant star like Judd and Selwood. At this stage, he's provided some cameos without ever being a top 3 player in any game. McCartin has shown a fair bit, but injuries have cruelled him. He's still a developing key forward who needs to get his body right, so any comparison with Petracca to date is pointless. On pure talent, Petracca has a higher ceiling, but only time will tell as to who has the greater impact at AFL level. If you want to crystal ball, I'd see McCartin as a future Josh Kennedy (WCE) and Petracca as a future Jake Stringer. If we didn't get Weideman, I would say it's a 50/50 call as to who I'd prefer long term.

So we're going to offer Hibberd as a trade for Lewis?

Well I've heard Rob Kerr on SEN say before trade week that they thought our 2nd rounder this year would get it done. BTW, I think the idea of whether a club leaks or not is a load of bollocks. It has little or no impact on the trade whatsoever. All the talk was of Hawthorn wanting Mitchell and O'Meara. And they'll get their wish because the seeds were sown months in advance, which is why the leaks occur. Some players may have a change of heart, like Lin Jong. On the other hand, you get the chinese whispers which the likes of GNF like to publish. They usually amount to nothing because the message is lost in translation. It starts off as, Melbourne and 7 other clubs have asked Paul Connors about whether Dangerfield would be interested in coming to them. It ends up as, Melbourne have put up a trade for Dangerfield and he's a real chance of coming to the club.

Maybe because that's the outcome they were after, not necessarily ours. They may have leaked it to the media to suit themselves. Giving up our 2nd rounder this year has never made sense. The developments today makes me hopeful that we'll have a pick under 30 this year.

I thought we didn't leak?

Giving away our 2nd rounder this year when we don't have a 1st round pick is NOT suitable to us.

Unless Hibberd is prepared to stay at the Bombers on rookie wages, we have them over a barrel. They've renegotiated contracts for the likes of Hurley on the assumption that Hibberd was leaving, and didn't try to match our contract offer to Hibberd. Why would we give them anything other than what suits us, and that is next years 2nd rounder. Take it or leave it.

What about Hogan? I would have thought that 8 of our best 22 remaining would be pretty standard turnover for clubs that don't make the finals over 3 years. I'd also argue that Roos thought the Garland was best 22 when he gave him a 3 year contract last year.

For one of the few times, I agree with you Saty. It's a common trait amongst Demonlanders to think that everything will be rosy because we moved on certain players. They applauded when Neeld conducted a clean out, then 3 years later applauded Roos when he conducted a clean out. Unless the players that are replacing them can reach a superior level, save your applause, and appreaciate the efforts of the players delisted.