Gator

Yes, Parish has a long career ahead of him. He's an unbelievably busy and smart player, who will really hurt teams once he gets a tank. He reminds me of a young Cousins and a young Crawford.

Which is not what you said.

That's not my recollection.

The last product they sold us took a year to fix. They can wait a year this time.

Not withstanding being inhibited by all of the club's woes I reckon Grimes was also a victim of a changing game. Early in his career he was rock solid across half-back where he was strong overhead, read the play well and played within his limitations. One felt comfortable when he had the ball in hand and he was a reliable general. But as the game has evolved the back-line has become the generator for attack. Speed and bold ball-movement by foot and hand has become the backman's weapon. It doesn't suit Jack's slow and steady play. Jack was dependable and reliable but struggled to adapt to a more attacking game. As his comfort zone changed his foot skills and decision making were increasingly challenged and put under the microscope. It never suited his game. One of the few players I'll remember very fondly.

I don't know enough about Smith, other than his impressive game yesterday, but I'd love him to develop into an Isaac Smith type wingman. Isaac Smith has incredible endurance and I have no idea how Joel goes in the endurance stakes, but Smith and Hunt running the lines is an exciting prospect. I actually want to leave Hunt in his current role, as I suspect he finds it easier playing behind the ball, so would be interested to know if a tall wing role would suit Joel.

Hibberd and Barlow came from the VFL, so it's certainly a reasonable pathway, but I think it's definitely harder for key position players. Keilty has a better chance than McInerney, but I wouldn't back on either making it.

Agreed. McInerney did nothing for me and I don't see an AFL quality kpp with Keilty. Liam McBean looked great at VFL level, but his AFL form exposed the gulf between senior and seconds football. Mitch Brown is a terrific VFL footballer and while he's shown a bit at the higher standard I don't project regular games at Essendon. He may get rookied, but I see little more than a depth player.

The great Dale Carnegie explained back in the 1930s that it's impossible to 'win' an argument. It is especially so when the other person is deranged.

Unlike some, including debates I've had with my Brother, I really do think we let down some previous draft picks with poor development. I suspect most were just bad selections, but development and a club's culture is ultra-important. I still believe that you can't make chicken salad out of chicken ***, but there's always that balance.

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.

Yes, I quoted your incorrect stats and then proceeded to note that they were incorrect. The point being that if the were correct (they weren't) it wouldn't have mattered anyway. 1.4 to 1.2 would have been a non-issue if your stats were correct. Which, of course, they weren't. You are a blight on this site, but tolerated for some mystical reason. Not be me anymore.

YOUR stats are wrong. You posted that he averaged 1.4 tackles in 2015 and 1.2 in 2016. This is INCORRECT. He averages 1.4 this year and 1.25 LAST year. This point still escapes you. I also said "he's a young player with 30 odd games and is no doubt working on all aspects of his game", which you either didn't read or once again chose to ignore. By all means hold him to account, but when YOU bring up stats at least get them right. And the contested marks stat was beyond a joke. He's top 3 (equal) in the competition and was the same as last year before yesterday's game. Anyway, enough of you, Stu. You don't warrant further time from me or anybody else.

Hang on. Are you related to Bub ? YOU were the one comparing his tackles this year compared to last. YOU. And if you're going to compare one year to the next you have to use the games in the subsequent year, which in this case is 13. Last year he averaged 1.25 tackles for the WHOLE year and this year he's averaging 1.4 tackles. YOU got YOUR stats wrong whichever way you want to slice it or dice it. Change your post which gives the incorrect numbers. And let's keep going with your stats. Last year Hogan averaged 2.4 contested marks per game. This year he averaged 2.4 contested marks per game, i.e. the same, before yesterday's game. How many contested marks did you think he was going take in the pouring rain ? Talk about disingenuity. Before Sunday this stat was identical. It's incredible that you would bring up a stat that can change from one round to the next. So we've now demolished 2 of your stats. Your other stat, i.e. disposal efficiency, is arguably the most useless stat in the AFL. James Frawley came in the top 15 last year and is top 30 this year. Haha. Good stat. And in the post above you question his "work rate". His work rate is superb. The ground he covers for a key forward is superb and acknowledged by all paid to analyse the game. But let's look at some other stats. He averages more marks inside 50 this year, (3.2 > 2.6), more disposals (15.5 > 13.1), more marks in general (7.1 > 6.7), more goal assists, and more shots at goal (3.85 > 3.15). Oh and more tackles (1.4 > 1.25). Most importantly, he's a young player with 30 odd games and is no doubt working on all aspects of his game. He's rarely out-marked and the contests he makes every week are nothing short of outstanding. He's constantly providing opportunities for others and I repeat has an exceptional work rate. Rather than analysing football stick to your silly gifs.

Some are concerned his tackles are going from 1.4 to 1.2 (which is approx. 3 tackles over 13 rounds). That's the level of debate provided by some. Ever checked the numbers of nearly all the great key forwards ? But let's get the facts straight. In the first 13 games Hogan played last year he made 13 tackles. In the first 13 games this year he's made 18. So even the point that was being made is factually incorrect. He's made 5 more tackles this year from the same amount of games. Hogan is the best young talent to come the club in 40 years, but naturally enough there are those who would rather concern themselves about his perceived lack of pressure in the forward 50. Of all the things to dwell on they think a hulking 195cm forward could apply more defensive pressure. It's about 77 on the list of things you could highlight or be concerned about. Jeff Garlett being down an average of one tackle per game is of more concern, because that's a strong part of the role of a small forward.

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 ?