mo64

I'm just about to vomit after reading some of these comments. Parish can clearly play, and the only thing I'm concerned about is whether Oliver and Weideman make it as AFL footballers.

That's the worst analysis/conclusion reaching I've ever read. Brayshaw and Petracca were unanimous top 3 picks. I doubt that Roos' philosophy swayed Taylor one iota.

So am I. For mine, he's a combination of Stretch and ANB. He knows how to find the ball like ANB, but has more tricks to his game. Would definitely take him with a late pick, but somehow doubt that the club will, due to our quota of midgets.

A comparable player to Parish is Heppell. He was recruited as a lightly framed ball magnet, and has become an adept clearance player, because as you say, he's on the move at stoppages.

IMO, that's part of contested football. Players like Mitchell and Simon Black had that innate ability to dispose of the ball in contested situations. That takes talent. Based on limited highlights, Oliver seems to try to take on the tackler, whereas Parish looks to dispose of the ball instinctively. Give me Parish any day.

Hogan had elite endurance before he was drafted. He missed 12 months with a back injury, which would severely impact his fitness levels, and yet he maintained his elite endurance. Clubs clearly have an issue with Weideman's endurance levels long term.

Yep. The beep test is just as important for a key forward as it is for a mid. Without repetitive efforts and defensive accountability, he'll struggle at AFL level.

I must be missing something when I see Mathieson's highlights. His disposal is haphazard, and that's being kind. All I see is a Liam Picken clone.

Based on those brief highlights, Parish looks like he knows what to do with the ball before he gets it. And that's what you look for in a gun midfielder. In comparison, Oliver looks like he wants to take the tackler on before disposing of the ball. He may not get away with that at AFL level.

Jack of all trades like Goddard are fine if you are a contending team. We need players who can lock down critical roles on the field, ie; midfield and key forward. It took Goddard a long time to establish a role at the Saints, and he's been average when the Bombers have struggled. Give me the best mid in the draft ahead of a floater any day.

I'd be staggered if Essendon took Milera with their 1st pick.

I think you're being presumptious. We won't know the cost of giving up next years' 1st rd pick for a while. There's more certainty when trading for players than there is with future picks. If we have a bottom 4 year in 2016, we're definitely not winners.

Not a lot of logic or sense here. It's ridiculous to think that we'd pass on potentially the best mid in the draft because he's 4-5 cms shorter than Roos likes. And I'd say that Goodwin would have more input than Roos at the draft table.We may pick Curnow at 3 for no other reason than to play as a long term forward, not as someone who'll graduate as a mid.

I see what all the fuss is about. If we're taking the best available, welcome Darcy Parish.

I remember a highlights package of Blease from a carnival game, and Liam Pickering was gushing every time he was involved. Late in the last quarter the commentators mentioned that Blease has had 8 disposals. This was a common trait throughout the carnival, and I questioned his worth. The standard reply went along the lines of him recovering from some illness. It was proven that Blease had an aversion to winning his own football. That was his ailment.

And he won't be able to break tackles that easy at AFL level. His disposal looks average if that's his highlight reel.

In reference to Collins, I always question if a key position backman at junior level is so talented and warrants a top 10 pick, then why isn't he playing as a forward? There has been numerous examples of talented forwards at junior level making it as a backman at AFL level, but you never see the reverse.

Nickname - Salty?

Bugg hasn't been offered a contract by GWS, so anything other than an exchange of late picks would be stupidity on our part. Tell that to the other 16 clubs who all haggle over what seems to be minor draft picks (excluding Hawthorn who haven't had to worry about the draft in years). With the points sytem in play for academy/FS selections, it does matter. We were still in play for other deals, so why not try to improve our draft position and potentially try to unlock another deal.

Do you understand the difference between "contracted" and "uncontracted", or just couldn't comprehend what I wrote?

That makes no sense. His manager states that it's Essendon or us, and you say that it's a scrap of info? It was pretty categoric if you ask me, and proved to be correct.

Just like GC offered more for Howe. How did that turn out for us? Once an uncontracted player commits to a club as his destination, 99% of the time that's where he'll end up. Which is why we held the upperhand on the Melksham deal.

His manager came out and said that Melksham would either stay at Essendon or go to Melbourne. That was a couple of weeks before the trade went through. But carry on if you must.

Agree. The contract that we offered Melksham blew any other potential suitor (if any) out of the ballpark. We could have sat on this trade until the Howe deal was finalised.

I think you've got your wires crossed. If McCarthy stays, there's hope for Tomlinson to get a trade.