Gator

Not semantics, just a mistake. This business of people being "taken around" Hunt is an utter nonsense. Taylor only had access to players available at pick 57, not those taken before. Name ONE pick after Hunt that is any good. I'll disagree on Salem. He's a young player with tremendous class that is miles off his best. Let's talk when he's played 60-80 games. As for Kennedy-Harris and Neal-Bullen, neither does much for me either, but I don't expect him to nail every 40+ pick. Do you ? Steven Wells has plenty of failures. Taylor's record looks superb to me any way I want to slice it or dice it.

You do realise that none of those players were available to the MFC in the 2013 draft ? They were all rookie upgrades and selected in drafts prior to 2013 - Hunt's draft.

So it's not a myth then ? A myth is a false belief, but now you're saying the jury is out ? Btw, I don't agree with your evaluations and some of your judgments are either too early or wrong. Who was taken after Hunt that makes this selection anything other than stunning ? We were desperate to improve our midfield, so I can't see any logical supporter questioning the Brayshaw decision. He'll be a star in my view. Your concerns on Weideman at such an early stage seem very premature, but fair enough, your opinion. Oscar and vandebBerg are very good picks after 50 of the ND - "limitations" or no limitations. Oliver may go down as one of the best picks by a recruiter since the inception of the draft (1986). And no, it's far too early to call Salem a "disappointment" on the back of an injury plagued third year. He's already shown his class in his first two. I find your assessments strange. You'd have to go out of your way to take the negative position you seem to have.

I think you'll find that the Dogs just pipped us for least experienced with 60 games.

You're reading far too much into things. You're looking for smoke and mirrors. Before the season is over clubs virtually never concede anything in the media, He'll be a Dee.

It would have been nice and in no way do I think Roos thought he was compromising a win, but for me it would have been small fry in the bigger picture.

I know it's part of an apprenticeship, but I think you're overly excited about playing finals and just making up the numbers. Half the competition play finals. Ordinary sides play finals. How have those 3 straight years of finals helped Richmond ? I think it's a blessing in disguise to not play finals this year. There will be a drive over summer that will hold this group in good stead for 2017.

I'll be looking at Weideman as the equivalent of this year's first rounder. But with a year already in the system.

I reckon a club would do well to rookie him. He's worth a punt imo (assuming he's delisted subject to contract status).

Perhaps if you revisit the post you responded to you'll see I simply said that I'm still underwhelmed by them as players. And that they'll probably not run out on GF day when we get there. For some reason you then felt the need to state the bleeding obvious. We all know that role players get a medal sound their neck. It's my view that these two probably won't get that opportunity. Let's hope that you, me and fanboy above find out.

So did Clay Sampson and Steven Armstrong. If they do they do they're still "good ordinary", which makes them less likely than likely in my view. Any other scenarios you can mention that won't mean anything to me ?

I still am. Good ordinary players who are great for the club's depth and both are presently best 22, but when we're in the hunt for a flag I doubt either will be running out on GF day. But I agree they've been worthwhile recruits and better than I expected.

Nah mate, I remember it happening. Viney was already walking off. It was byplay between two friends. There was no "helping" about it.

Trengove is the obvious replacement.

Add Trengove. I know we disagree about his pace, but I reckon he'll become a pivotal cog in our midfield too.

I'm underwhelmed. Granted he's a handy player, but despite his size he's a third stringer. He benefits from the heat going on to Walker and Betts, plus they have the handy link player Lynch. With Weideman coming along nicely, Watts improving and Garlett/Hogan I wouldn't have thought Jenkins would be on the radar. A quality key defender and/or gun mid is of more interest.

Roosy has been great for the club, but I'm not sure Goodwin will want him hanging around. I'm not sure I do either (not that that matters).

Gerard Healy had a superb debut year for Melbourne as an 18 year old.

It's everything. The size, pace, agility, aggression, skill, and best of all he makes really good decisions in a split second. It's great to see a player with such footy nous.

They'll all be regulars by round 3/4. Their all best 22 now. Their best footy will come after the age of 24.

I'm not sure of Petracca's pace. My Brother doesn't think it's explosive, but he's quick enough and just so powerful. He's also an elite mark. The comment was that despite his 186cm, he could play full forward and kick plenty of goals. He also noted that he certainly isn't a lazy trainer. He's fully switched on.

My Brother told me this afternoon that he'd pay to watch Petracca train (he was at Gosch's today) and that he's the most exciting talent he's seen come to Melbourne since Jakovich. Best of all, they're all different and will complement each other. Petracca, Oliver, Brayshaw and Viney will be as good as it gets in 4 years time.

You can still get $15 at Sportbet.com.au

Some people are self effacing. You're reading too much into his comments (I know you're being jovial).

Looked at Parish closely and I'm rapt we chose Oliver. Parish will be a good player in time, but he's a mile off competing against strong bodied mids (who he didn't come up against today).