deanox

He was a forward paying in the same team as Sautner. Whether he was any good doesn't have anything to do with whether he was in competition with Sautner, as they would have played the same position. In a stand alone tram he would have had dinner moor opportunity to develop. Would that have changed the out come? Probably not.

I agree 100% about the senior players not kids, but if that is the official rule other clubs will exploit it. If we say "top line player or top 10 draft pick" clubs may be more inclined to deal, if we say "top line player" they will probably counter with second rung players. I don't mind if they're is an AFL directive to trade for players, or if the AFL need to approve any trade first to make sure they will provide immediate impact, I just don't want that directive to be official as it may hamstring our negotiation position.

I hope there aren't official rules because it will make it too easy for other clubs to exploit..if they know it must be a player they will offer rubbish players. If it can technically anything it gives us more negotiatng room. If we could trade for a top 10 pick we may be able to trade two first round picks for a good player?

Can someone show statistically the difference between draft picks? I.e. success of players between picks 1-5, 5-10, 10-20 etc. Average games played, or number odds stars stars?

DC has hit it on the head. If we can't afford to buy FA's at the moment then who are we spending money on? We have two players on big money and after that we only have about 12 other AFL performing players. The others should be on low contracts.

Hey guys, on the mini draft idea, what type of club is most likely to want to trade a player for a mini draft pick? I assume another club at rock bottom probably won't want to trade away a high level player (although may be willing to trade a pick), a top of the table team in competition for a premiership probably won't won't to trade away their top level players for a young kid as it will weaken their chances over their open window. I think the only teams for would benefit from the trade are teams that see themselves as competitive but too far away to actually snag a flag, OR teams who have been at the top for a while and think they are about to begin the slide (potentially during a period of competitiveness without being an actual challenger. For these clubs, it is unlikely they'll get any top 10 talent onto their list in the next 2-3 years, however they have a core playing list that has a lot of potential and is developing very well. In this scenario the club could arguably trade away a 27+ year old player for a mini draft pick to him inject some talent in the the bottom age - One example may be Geelong, who would feel its window is still open this year, but if they want to extend their dominance for another 5-10 years there will probably be a few years where they don't challenge even though they are competitive. For example, if they think they'll get Ablett back in 2 years they may want to have another crack then. Trading a senior player now for a mini draft future-star may actually help them in the mid term by inject talented youth while they are still a good team. Can anyone really see any other clubs wanting to trade players for mini-draft picks? Potentially GC and GWS might be interested, only because they may have players wanting to leave for money or back to Melbourne, and the mini-draft pick coulc help spread their age group out a bit further and also potentially be the best return available for a trade. Would we be willing to take a 21 year old from one of the expansion clubs in return for a mini-draft pick, should we get it?

WYL, do you know who on the board voted which way? It is interesting because if there indeed are two distinct factions on our current board it probably explains the leaking that is constantly occurring.

Also suffered in development behind Nick Sautner at Sandringham. But I think the big problem was his constant four to six week injuries that never got him off the ground.

I like to think we have some advantage in the chase here as we should have substantially more salary cap room in the future. Plus we have the advantage of having listed players like Dawes, Clarke, Hogan, Frawley, Garland, Jones, which they don't have. Add some experience to us and we have other experience and mid tier players to support, GWS will be completely reliant on the young kids.

I'll trade a flag for some ribbing. Hell I reckon I'd trade some successful treats for some ribbing. It will be no worse than what is given to supporters from Essendon (re drugs), Carlton (re taking and visy), Richmond (re eating their own), Sydney (re cost of living allowance), St Kilda (re player behaviour), and not much different to the standard crap all supporters give each other for being different. Whose opinion should we care so much about not to accept help we desperately need? Redleg, you have a valid point about the PP our similar being available given the raw deal we get compared to other clubs, however I would still say that we are entitled to access those sort of concessions if required, rather than that we deserve it because of the deal. I think we are on the same page though, if we want to be competitive next year we need to bring in experienced players, and that won't happen without assistance.

I think it's very important. We require assistance to get back on track and I think we'll get it but at the same time I can understand people saying we don't deserve it because we have brought so much on ourselves. The tanking drama ensured that no one will ever earn or deserve a priority pick again.

Not deserves, no one deserves. We require. Subtle but important difference. No club will ever again be given any assistance because they deserve it, only if they require it.

WJ I think I may have been one of the first to float the idea of a mini draft and I see a number of benefits over the traditional priority pick: -the AFL doesn't have to award a priority pick, which may seem like semantics but may be an important point -we can't use it to stock pile as trades must occur, enabling us to bring in players who will impact straight away -the AFL can easily make the mini draft as big or as small as it wants to cater for they think we require I think the mini draft is one of the best ways to get established talent to our club, although that being said GWS did not attract any senior players using their mini draft. Whether this was circumstance or design it is not clear but pretty sure Sheedy has stated that clubs didn't want to trade established players.

Reckon the draft picks will come with a lot of conditions ie first AFL is satisfied we are sorted out off field, then they will want the picks to impact our onfield performances straight away - that is their biggest concern and I don't think stockpiling 18 year olds will help us in the short term.

Another achievement of the Jim Stynes board, which I can't remember at Melbourne for a month time was trying to unite the club again. On the surface at least, and I heard no rumblings in the background (although there are plenty more qualified people on this board than me to confirm), the club was united in its approach. Old boys were welcomed back, supporters, members etc were either working together or keeping their noise out of it. In the past 12 months this hasn't been the case, we've had ex presidents and past players talking rubbish to the media, public spats between people and now in fighting between supporters such as what we've seen on demonland recently. I'd like everyone who loves the club to step back and think "what would Jimmy do" when it comes to dealing with other club members, particularly in public. To me that was Jim Stynes' legacy as president - get everyone working together - but unfortunately we fell apart again on field before we could achieve success ruining all his good work. I hope that whoever the new board and president is comes out and says "ask Melbourne people are welcome back and welcome to contribute and welcome to be part of the club, even if they weren't successful in their attempts to run the club, because after all, despite failure they were working for the club they love as well as the club we love.

Re lethal, I know he hasn't been out of the coaching game "that long", but I feel there have been significant shifts in tactics and potentially fitness levels since he left. He should be able to help with "culture" although Brisbane have become a rabble after he left. He didn't rate Mitch Clark when we got him either. Hee would need some up to date assistants coming out of Sydney and/or Geelong to make sure he was on top of current practices - yes he will be able to pick it back up but info from current coaches is required. Also, regardless of what happens in the coaching stakes, o hope we keep Misson. He has been involved in so many successful teams and has such a good track record that I think we'd be mad to let him go because he is party of this regime.

Hey guys, the concept that "this is a public forum so I can say what I like" is not correct. This is a privately owned forum, hosted and run by sine very generous individuals on a voluntary basis. It's it is "public" because anyone can see it, however it is up to the owner(s) to decide what you can and can't post about on this forum. If they say be nice, be nice. It's their house.

I'm not sure how many we've had, but I'd like to look at first round picks rather than top 10 or top 20. Top 20 is skewed because apart from the expansion years the four worst sides always received two top 20 picks.

I don't see the report button either...

You need to get there early WYL, they play it every week!But you are right, bring on the planned changes to get us on the right track. Today could be defining for our club, even if it goes largely unnoticed. I'll take any hand out we can get off it will get us closer to a flag.

And we will be renamed the Melbourne Zombies?

My reading was always that Connelly's contract was part of the reason he fell on his sword - protect the club and it will look after him in return.

Derailing my own thread here WJ, but reading further on that article, some things never change (see below)! I'd also be interested to know more about the 'racial vilification' we were fined for. Our club has been in the mess for a long time hasn't it? not wonder we are still struggling.

Have heard that about a couple of our of contact players; they may not leave if Neeld leaves but they want to see what IS happening before committing.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-06-13/another-lib-for-demons Alan Stockdale has arisen as a possible candidate for President or the board. He is a Melbourne supporter, with serious experience. The article indicates he has been approached, but doesn't indicate whether he has been approached by the current board or if he has been approached by disgruntled supporters.