Rhino Richards

How would you know? They traded and got Lachie Henderson for Fev from Bris. If Warnock is back fit next year Kruezer goes forward. They also traded Josh Kennedy to WCE as part of the Judd deal.

We will never really know if it was lack of talent. i had heard reports going both ways on Molan. But based on Camerons assessment, it seemed to me we got a young KPP ahead of his station in the draft and it did not work out. It cost us pick 9 hurt. You are right though. Its not isolated and we are not the only ones who stuff it up. We got Sylvia and Brock at 3 and 5 in 2003 and there many other Clubs who blew first round picks on no value players....And then there is Richmond...

Sorry about that. B) Molan was clearly a case of placing needs about best available. If he was pick 50 and failed then OK. But at pick 9 and nothing but a delisting then that's ouch. Some years ago Craig Cameron advised that this was the case with Molan and a lesson had been learned from it. All recruitment is judgement and that comes with risk.

It depends on the draft. This draft is said to be light on for KPPs. In this draft the one or two KPPs you would have considered at 11 might not be available then.

Isnt it more what they will give you over that period of time? It a good chance that when a player hits his 5-10 year ceiling, it may not be at MFC. And that ceiling may in fact be a few floors below the standard you want.

There is such a thing and it is purely subjective. But its an assessment that has to be made by BP. And his job lives or dies by it. Best available refers to whats availabler not the needs of the list. If the best available is a KPP then fine if it isn't then you take the player you believe is the best talent in the draft. Why compromise the quality of your list by taking a KPP who you have reservations about against a midfielder who you dont, particularly in a skinny draft with few if any KPPs of quality being available. And as far I am concerned I might "be in it to win it" with pick 34 but I dont want to punt picks 1,2,11,18 on KPP who BP did not consider the best available talent. I still have nightmares over Molan, Smith, Rogers and Breese.

Absolutely. Best available should be the policy for our top 4 picks.

I think they will have to look at other options bsides Robbo. If Carlton take him, Robbo wont go close to even partially filling the void left by Fev. They would want to develop Lachie Henderson up real fast. Throw a defender forward....Waite? Judd was a key recruit for Carlton but he came at a high price. One of the items was Josh Kennedy.

I think that is the case at most Clubs. They are all focussing on improvement, the 8 or top 4 depending on where they finished the prior year and what their aspirations are for the coming year.

Underrated at his best. However he was cruelled by soft tissue injuries throughout his career. And his last few years he was a shadow of the fine small defender that he had shown in earlier years. By many reports a fantastic leader and elder statesman in the playing group to younger indigenous players. Quiet achiever. Well done Wheels.

Now Fevola has left who are the first two forwards at Carlton?

Pick 20? Where are you getting all this "inside information"?

If he was the true professional, he would have realised before you have that if he nominates for the ND then he clearly does not want to be at MFC and if MFC has to offload pick 18 to get him then he has already screwed the club before he even slips on a jumper. Its a crud way to get him given he could come to us through the PSD and we still save pick 18. A win win for both sides. And I am sure we need more than a replacement for a player who was 11th in the Bluey this year.

PM Nasher... And if you get the answer can you ensure it is posted here?

Highlights the silliness of the reference "bleeds for.the [fill in whatever suits]...". When MFC had an alliance with the Zebras, one poster argued that Nick Saunter "bled for the [Zebras] jumper" because at the breaks, Nick was jumping around and pumping up the other players and slapping them on the back. Saunter may be talented at VFL level but an extremely selfish footballer. He only bleeds for the jumper on his terms. Moloney's passion for the his football is great and he chooses to show it demonstrably...that's fine too. But to define it as superior to the passion, focus and attitude of others is unfounded. And for some supporters they need that demonstrative behaviour to prove what has always been there but they haven't seen it.

The last one like that was Simon Godfrey. You cant carry players like that on AFL list of 40. You must move them on. That's a worry, Valenti is not even on the main list. We already have 4 or 5 on the main list who have their contract's expire in 2010 and will be gone because they are not good enough.

In his short career, Bamblett was a gifted ball winner who could not apply himself to the requirements of VFL at the time and living in the big city. If the kid has his Dad's ability and has the application to make it, he would could be a good ball winner. Was one of Ray Jordan's wonder kids in the early 80s that did not take the next step.

Right on the money. We need to get it right this time around.

And clearly overrated by a few. That aint hard. In the last half of the year I did not think McLean did much either. The Club did well to get 11 for McLean. Its telling even with McLean going there still is not a spot for Valenti.

Choko, I think that is an excellent summation of the situation regarding Beamer.

If he was up to standard they would have elevated him permanently. "dime a dozen fringe players is a fair assessment of where he is at as player not for the effort he put. Continue with your fawning of the ordinary.

You are assuming such a condition is a standard in a contract. And you clearly dont know the terms of an AFL contract. What you are putting forward is not bilateral but one sided in favor of the Clubs. In AFL we dont have player free agency and players do not have the right to close contracts early. As a consequence, neither the Clubs have that contractual option either. In the situation of Carroll, you are agreement is strick that replaces the old agreement and effectively pays the player out.

The issue is that a Club that pays out contracts prematurely where there are not special extenuating circumstances risks blackening the relationships on which such contracts are formalised. The Club can normally pay out a contract early. However it is a variation of the original contract terms The other party may not wish to terminate the contract that limits his AFL opportunities at that time. His only real remedy is to accept the money. But its clearly a denial of the opportunities provided to the player under the original contract. And in doing so the Club is at a risk of compromising its position in future negotiations with current and future players.

I dont think it is. And I think you have a potted understanding of contracts to suit your own point of view. When a Club contracts a player they do so on the basis that the player provides services to that Club for a fee for an agreed period. During that period the player agrees to exclusively provide those services in accordance with the contract for the period. Both parties are given surety of exchange of contractual benefits for the agreed period of time. Its not just a matter of the Club determining that it no longer wants the player and here's your cheque. A contract should be a two way commitment that if both parties are honouring their terms then it should go its full time. A club that decides that a player does not fulfil its needs and cuts them pre maturely does little to engage themselves pro actively with current players and their managers. And if they are so ruthless on players then its likely when contracts are coming up for renewal that managers may be seeking alternatives that gives their client a gneiune opportunity of having the contracted time to achieve what they want in AFL. A Club that habitually closes out contracts early does itself few favours amongst players and their managers in the contract negotiation stakes. And in any contract the perception of a lack of goodwill by either party makes a contract, difficult to negotiate and often at less than an optimal outcome for both parties.

Neither Bartram nor Bucks use the ball well. If anything Bartram does have some defensive and accountability skills which Bucks lacked in spades.