KingDingAling

Agree, it will be years before we know whether we're winners, much like the Tyson/Salem vs Kelly trade. We don't know the quality of 2015 draft group vs 2016 draft group, and won't for some time. I think the most important thing is we get right the picks that we have.

Francis does the same.

Looks more agile, better evasive skills than Sloane IMO. Also, I think Oliver is better in tight, IMO a better clearance player than Sloane. But where Sloane has him covered is in endurance, gut running, and effectiveness. I think that comes with experience though. Oliver is an interesting draftee, he is a good user on both sides of his body, and like Wines, he does all the grunt work. I would take Oliver above any other mid, but I wouldn't be disappointed if the club looks to take a couple of talls with 3 and 7.

He missed the pre-season with OP. Started slowly because of it, that is why he didn't get an invite to the Nationals. Didn't poll many votes in the first half of the season, but came home like a steam train in the second half of the year - and won the Morrish medal. I have no doubt he is the best mid in the draft, but whether we take him or not is another story. But he should be still there at 7.

Good pedigree, his old man was a good player, coached down in Mid Gippy. But according to my old man, Sam's Grandfather was a very, very good centreman. Sam should fill out, both his old man and Grandfather were stocky blokes. He'd be a good pick up for us, I think he'll be a good player.

Yeah, you weren't far off. Good effort mate.

We just gained 3 and 10 for 6 and a future first round pick.

I wasn't specially talking about Howe or MFC. I was just referring to way Collingwood handled the Beams deal. At the time of the Beams deal, the footy media were criticizing Collingwood for not rushing and taking 5 and 25. The Pies stood their ground and Crisp was later included in the deal. Crisp then went on to have a great year. That is the only point I was trying to make.

Yep, and so called experts were calling 5 and 25 enough. Collingwood stood their ground, and they got Crisp - who went onto finish 3rd in their B&F. The Pies turned a negative (loss of Beams) into a positive, and they did so because they weren't in a rush to get the deal done. They stood their ground and were rewarded accordingly.

We declared our hand, and we were in a rush. IMO that deal should've been ongoing even now, and we should've been prepared to walk away from it. Much like St Kilda with the Carlise deal, if that were MFC in that position pick 5 would've been handed over on day 1. All I am saying is that there is no need to rush things, I just thought that was commonsense.

Well we given up 25 when we could've waited and offered 29. We made our hand known early, and we played it early. Bit quick on the trigger, that is just my opinion. Also, we can tell a club what we'd like to give up for their players, its called the trade period.

I wish they'd start acting like it.

Pick 29 for Melksham should've been our worst case scenario as well. We should've offered a late pick and held off on Melksham to late, then swooped in with 29 if we absolutely had to. As for Kennedy, we could've got him cheaper, and played hard ball with Howe. Pretty amateur stuff from the MFC.

Hey Jake, welcome aboard buddy.

One has uncertainly around their availability - the other doesn't.

Yeah that is what I think. Without the WADA situation, pick 25 for Melksham I could live with. But taking into account the prospect of a 2 year ban, I think there are some at the club with compromised views (Goodwin) about Essendon players. The only rational explanation for mine is that the AFL have reassured clubs that they will be compensated - in the face of WADA bans to players.

Can you blame MFC supporters for being pessimistic about trading? After a decade of Prenagast, not to mention the mismanagement that resulted in our club getting pinged for tanking, I'd be more surprised if MFC fans were supportive of our recruiters/list managers.

Maybe because we aren't in the running for Carlisle.

Yet the only thing that matters is WADA. Its no good being able to play footy if you can't grace the field. Pick 25 for a slightly above VFL level (on results) player, who faces the prospect of a 2 year ban. Aghh, no thanks.

laughable trade. When Melksham gets 2 years, with a bit of luck Goodwin goes with him.

Yeah, I think that makes sense. That would be a great result. Melksham and Kennedy for 25 would be a fantastic result, it offsets the prospect of losing Melksham due to a WADA ban.

Spot on. There is no rush, no other team is going to pay a second rounder for Melksham. Maybe Collingwood want 25 for Kennedy - who I rate a far better prospect than Melksham - so perhaps we are trying to keep 25 for Kennedy, and are trying to free up a second rounder somewhere else.

Recruiters should be looking for those opportunities, because it will happen, there will be a few teams who don't perform up to expectations. I think Adelaide and North would be 2 sides I'd be trying to pry a 2016 first rounder out of.

A player not looking down the barrel of a 2 year WADA ban.

My first thought was that it is hogans_heroes.