Gator

Again... It means he plays his last game under this contract as a 31 year old, not 32. You know, the same age Lake arrived at Hawthorn.

But K2 was better.

Brian Lake played his first game for Hawthorn as a 31 year old. Played in 3 flags.

I do just want to say that unlike nearly all players that leave Melbourne I will have a large soft spot for Hogan. I think he's definitely wired differently to some, who wouldn't be so concerned being away from family and friends. but he's a hugely talented and smart footballer. I wish him well.

Like Hawthorn, who in my opinion paid ridiculous overs for Wingard, we're a net outcomes based club who just gets deals done. I remember when Hawthorn gave up picks 9 and 16 for a 27 year old Burgoyne (got back 24 and 40), who supposedly had a knee that was "bone on bone". Hawthorn supporters were livid. He's still playing 10 years later and bagged another 3 flags. Hogan is immature with concerns re off-field issues and that doesn't help you at the negotiation table, especially when the circus would just continue next year. More importantly, just when we became the club he hoped we'd become he bailed. No problem, but that demonstrates to me he doesn't bleed for a flag. Our list now has never been more balanced in my time watching them. May will be a gun in a good team and make life a hell of a lot easier for Lever and Oscar. And if Kolodjashnij can get his body right, and in turn confidence, we've got another very highly talented player on our hands. Btw, pick 23 in a good draft is nothing to sneeze at. Taylor can recruit a 150+ game player with a pick of that nature. All things considered, in my opinion we've improved the list. But I do rate Weideman more than some on here. At 21 he has so much improvement left it's not funny. By the way @Baghdad Bob, there's disappointment and the usual addle-pates that would never know a good deal if it slapped them in the face.

Here, use this...

Hey, @EnterTheDragon, seriously mate, you couldn't read a phone book. ?

I'd like to play poker with you. Can anyone misread a situation so badly ?

I didn't always think this, but seemingly it was always going to happen. I'm happy to draw the curtain this year and move on.

My "gut feel" is very different to Range Rover's. 80/20 he'll be in purple next year.

I wonder how many of those poster who don't rate May wanted to play Pedersen every week and were livid when Watts was put on the market ? I'm guessing strong correlations. ?

But May is naturally offensive while at the same time a very good negator. He's also 27 and 102KG. He won't get shifted like Oscar is occasionally. It will be interesting how they're used.

The notion of FB and CHB has changed. May gets the no.1 key forward, Oscar (or Frost) gets the next tall/resting ruck, and Lever is the intercept.

No, it's not. Pick 5 and 23 is BETTER than what we paid for him. We gave up one first rounder - pick 3. Our pick 13 then slid to pick 20.

Due to Olisik's incorrect assertions it seems I also have to post this here. A few things... I doubt you know that every one of those goals was kicked on May. In fact, I know you don't, because Kennedy kicked 4 on him and Riewoldt 6. And key defenders are only as good as team structures and the quality of their midfield. You think May is slow when speed is one of his biggest strengths. This clearly tells me you have no clue about the player you're criticising. The following is from a recent article: In 2016 he (May) was the third-best defender in the competition behind Alex Rance and ahead of Jeremy McGovern, losing just 14 of 71 one-on-ones for the entire year. This season Gold Coast haemorrhaged inside 50s, giving up five more than the next-worst side. The offensive stuff is what elevates him above the dime-a-dozen stoppers. This year he averaged 17.4 disposals (second-most for key defenders), 334 metres gained (second most for key defenders) as well 7.6 intercept possessions, three intercept marks and 6.8 spoils (all above average). Put him into an good side with quality players around him and you have a weapon at full back. They (Melbourne) get Jake Lever back at some stage and improved their defensive mix late, but still were the fourth-easiest side to score against across the entire season. Slot him in alongside Lever and Max Gawn becomes an offensive threat again instead of being forced to play as a seventh defender at times as well as a ruckman. To sum up, Olisik, you're welcome to your opinion, but it's hopelessly misinformed.

Cheers. That's his "mail", but it would still surprise me. 5 and 23 seems fair.

That would be disappointing. I don't get too hung up on picks, as it's about outcomes and improving your list based on cards you're dealt, but that would be a poor outcome, imo. That said, I didn't hear his comments and only have your interpretation to assess.

It needs to be reiterated that 5 and 23 is a BETTER outcome than 10 and 16. The first scenario represents a first and a second, while the second scenario is two firsts. Don't fall into the trap of thinking it must be two firsts.

A few things... I doubt you know that every one of those goals was kicked on May. In fact, I know you don't, because Kennedy kicked 4 on him and Riewoldt 6. And key defenders are only as good as team structures and the quality of their midfield. You think May is slow when speed is one of his biggest strengths. This clearly tells me you have no clue about the player you're criticising. The following is from a recent article: In 2016 he (May) was the third-best defender in the competition behind Alex Rance and ahead of Jeremy McGovern, losing just 14 of 71 one-on-ones for the entire year. This season Gold Coast haemorrhaged inside 50s, giving up five more than the next-worst side. The offensive stuff is what elevates him above the dime-a-dozen stoppers. This year he averaged 17.4 disposals (second-most for key defenders), 334 metres gained (second most for key defenders) as well 7.6 intercept possessions, three intercept marks and 6.8 spoils (all above average). Put him into an good side with quality players around him and you have a weapon at full back. They (Melbourne) get Jake Lever back at some stage and improved their defensive mix late, but still were the fourth-easiest side to score against across the entire season. Slot him in alongside Lever and Max Gawn becomes an offensive threat again instead of being forced to play as a seventh defender at times as well as a ruckman. To sum up, Olisik, you're welcome to your opinion, but it's hopelessly misinformed.

That wasn't a "report". That was just thrown up as a likelihood. And they weren't drilling down, just having a chat. Don't take any notice of lightweight conversations on SEN.

There are plenty of posters that one isn't enamoured with, and I'm sure I fit the bill for some, but this a-clown has almost completely ruined the most highly read thread on Demonland.

This was an AFL.com.au rating of our 2015 draft: Nathan Schmook's verdict: Brilliant. The Demons used the incoming points system to perfection to gain picks No.3 and No.7 in this year's draft. They read the play quicker than other clubs, working well with GWS to secure pick No.7 and Bugg. Rating A+

I was just about to post the same. There was extensive media commentary post the 2015 trading period extolling Mahoney and co. for showing other clubs how to use the new rules to their advantage.

I've never been good remembering the nuances of posters, but is there a bit of E25 about this old new poster ?

Well, yes mate, if it doesn't happen then it probably won't happen. Well done. As for Chook in Perth, Langdon, Nixon, and vague references by Tom Browne, as well as other speculation that has filtered across the airwaves ? Some supporters on a thread about Hogan may be interested to know that off-field issues are being publicly discussed as reasons why the Dockers may have gone tepid on the idea of drafting Hogan. I don't subscribe to that theory. Why offer pick 11 if that was a major issue. But some supporters may be interested in that type of thing being said. But, as stated, there may be smoke and I don't automatically assume that a discredited person is subsequently wrong in everything they ever utter henceforth. Yes, I know it's easy to take that road, but it's unintelligent and requires no thought. Naturally, you can please yourself.