KingDingAling

I don't even think Ben Kennedy has had much opportunity. He looked very good during the NAB cup last year, and looked good in patches in 2014. Collingwood have just been blessed with such a dominant midfield, and even before 2015, they had Beams lock down a position in 2014 and have a great year. Beams left and Crisp, Adams and Sidebottom stood up. Kennedy just couldn't break in. He will be a good pick up for us, and I still think he'll be a top 10 player of that draft. Emma will be justified IMO. I like Kennedy, he is a go-getta.

Yep. Essendon would be in a lot more trouble if they didn't bend sides over during trade week. What is the value of Melksham atm? Carlisle? Not alot, about as much as it should've been during trade week. St Kilda paid massive overs for Carlise, us for Melksham. I'm more interested in our rookie upgrade atm though. On wards and upwards.

Nah that wasn't too bad. Better than the St Kilda one I heard last year.

First in - best dressed. Its a good problem to have. Oliver will be first to the football, I don't think we have much to worry about.

The thing I really love about Oliver is that after a couple of years in the system, he is going to run over players. Like literally run straight through them, he is a bull - as aggressive a draftee as I've seen. The fact that he goes for the ball at all costs means the opposition will have just 2 choices - get out of his road, or get stream rolled. I cannot wait to see the finished product of Clayton Oliver. The only comparison I can think of is Dangerfield.

I agree. Not only that, here is a kid who missed the Nationals, was coming off of a limited prep - yet fought back to win the Morrish Medal. I like the way Oliver goes about his business on the field, but indications are that he is self motivated off field. He obviously has a healthy confidence in his own ability, and a motivation to ensure he gets the best out of himself. He simply wasn't going to let a missed State opportunity hinder him as player - if anything it motivated him. Those are the type of players we need at MFC. Of course its also a bonus that he is a bull and a clearance machine.

A mid and a tall, fantastic.

This kid is going to be an absolute bull. Just what we need.

If Olisik is Oliver then I no longer want him.

Actually, Emma used to be pretty good before she got into the media, and that is no knock on her for moving up in the world - just means she has changed her methodology. She appears to have moved away from assessing players based on her own point of view, towards assessing players based more on the view of recruiters, which is ok, it gives us fans an inkling into who certain clubs might take. Obviously Knightmare has a more hands on approach to his work, he gets out there a lot. I don't think he would claim to be any better than anyone else, but from a fans perspective - he is relevant, and probably the best armchair scout going around.

Spot on.

I don't think they are similar. Scully only had/has one pace, has doesn't tread water and he doesn't see the bigger picture, he is a selfish football play, not the greatest kick (because he doesn't slow down, has no poise), whereas Parish is an intuitive footballer, sees the bigger picture and will often lay a tackle, bounce up and receive the hands off, if you watch Parish play, you will see he has a great understanding of the game.

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.