Gator

As I said, it's impossible to be categoric with any argument, but common sense tells me it's a far less valid argument. Parish was no chance of being overlooked by Essendon, such is their dire need for quality in their midfield, whereas Curnow is a genuine chance to be available at pick 7. If Essendon only had one pick it's feasible they'd overlook Parish, but not when they have two. Twelve months ago Weideman was being bracketed with Schache and Weitering as the quality tall of the draft. There's also Francis who can play at both ends and the middle, albeit he's better in defence. So if we assume Parish takes up one of those picks Essendon still have a choice between Francis, Curnow, Weideman or even Collins as a potential tall forward. It wouldn't surprise me if Essendon take another mid in Mathieson or Oliver their midfield is that putrid. In summary, there's no way Essendon overlook Parish considering they have picks 4 and 5, but it's entirely feasible they overlook Curnow.

Melbourne needed pick 3 because they thought the player they'd earmarked wouldn't be there at pick 6. One club had picks between 3 and 6 - Essendon. If we think Melbourne have recently been light on for mids take a look at Essendon. Watson and Stanton are geriatrics with their best footy well behind them. Zaharakis hasn't taken the next step. If anything he's regressed. Myers is a disappointment. Hocking is a good player, but little more than a no frills tagger. That leaves Heppell as their only class mid with years left. If you're Essendon you're taking Parish. No questions asked. Any surmising 3-4 weeks before the draft is prone to error, however, it just makes sense that Melbourne want the class mid in this draft. Especially when he's exactly what we need.

Just part of due diligence. He'd be one of a few in the mix at 7.

Steve, you are not allowed to discuss a player's frame pre-draft.

And there's your glaring issue. Hogan is the only quality forward. We desperately need a Gunston, Stringer or Darling type. Someone who isn't the main focus, but can kick 50+ goals. I don't disagree that we need outside class, but 50 goal talls are much harder to find, which is why I like the idea of Curnow. The best talls are usually taken early. Vince, Jones, Viney, Tyson, vandenBerg, Brayshaw, Petracca, Trengove, Salem, Stretch, ANB, and now Kennedy, Melksham and Bugg provide a solid group who can rotate through the middle. It really depends on who our recruiters think are best available. They may think Curnow has huge upside to partner Hogan and is too good to ignore. Obviously many of our mids are a work in progress, but if they reach the heights expected we'll be pretty well covered except for a real line breaker. I'd rather that be the last piece in the puzzle than overlook a potential Stringer type. Although, I also reckon Petracca could be our Stringer and better

He's a harmless supporter that is passionate about the Dees. And that's all that matters.

Did you just hear his dulcet tones ?

In what way ?

This is the crux. We obviously have a clearly defined role for Melksham and it also releases Salem to the wing.

Brilliantly evaluated.

From hearing him for over 10 years I'd be amazed if he posts here. I can't really articulate why, but I don't think he walks among us. He says too many things that are at odds with what is discussed here. Even our greatest nongs are a step up from Chris.

I hadn't even noticed this until I saw your highlight. What am I meant to be saying and about whom ?

They said we'd agreed on our second round pick, which is currently pick 25.

Chris Pelchen, who's been doing this for a long time at 3 clubs, said a week ago he thought Melksham was worth in the vicinity of pick 20-25.

He used to like Juice Newton...

Pick 25 is a steal for 2013 Jake Melksham and it's overs for 2015 Jake Melksham. I suppose I have to back Goodwin's assessment of how he thinks Melksham can be developed.

Chris from Camberwell has been ringing in for over a decade - SEN/3AW. His whiny voice is arguably the worst ever heard on the airwaves and he is always, and I mean always, asking incredibly inane questions.

You reckon Toumpas is worth more than Melksham ? I have no idea how you process that. Fwiw, Chris Pelchen said he thought Melksham was worth in the vicinity of 20-25. He said he's an untapped talent that had the excellent combination of speed and endurance and had the lowest skinfolds in his draft year. I keep harping back to 2013 when in his 4th year he averaged 20 possessions and kicked 16 goals. He finished top 5 in the B&F and Essendon finished 7th. If a trade was mooted at the end of that year he would have been worth pick 10 and Essendon would not have traded him. How much has coaching and ASADA ruined the last 2 years ?

Can do some special stuff, but only gets it 9 times a game. But there's talent there. Conundrum.

So you're equating a doctor's role with the coaching staff's footy acumen ? Great logic.

Do you reckon we might know him a bit better than Port Adelaide ?

SS is a scrubber.

It was discussed on Demonland at the time. We had 7 top 20 draft picks between 2008 and 2009. It was imperative we get them right. For varying reasons, such as Trengove's foot, all have been a fail. Throw in Morton at pick 4 in 2007 and our drafting set us back 7-8 years. He lucked out with Max Gawn, but a chimp with a dart board would have got one right.

If a player is average and small it's worse than a player who is average and 185 cm. Kennedy is average and small. A good VFL player. I wouldn't have thought this would be a revelation around here. So when I question a potential trade targets height I don't need reminding of the Tony Liberatore's of this world. Btw, you'll forgive me if I don't take the advice of someone who'd happily resurrect Col Sylvia's career.

So am I.