Mach5

You shouldn't.

You do? Maybe the most detailed, but I wouldn't consider him as being close to the most accurate.

She has no eye for talent and regurgitates an amalgamation of what she has heard from recruiters & talent managers.

Where did she have Fyfe in his year..?

Was that not shortly after returning from a layoff with a busted thumb? If so, you can forgive him for a flat spot, I think.

I think the odds are that there will be a better secondary choice option available as a KPF at pick 7, than there will be as a midfielder if we pass on Parish at pick 3. I'd rather Parish + Weideman/McKay/Curnow than Weideman/McKay/Curnow + Mathieson/Oliver/Francis. Parish certainly doesn't last til pick 7 unfortunately.

I think this goes for most footballers these days. They all look like lean triathletes in person.

I wonder if CAC went on to post on a Richmond forum.

The Danger trade was relatively easy? Is everybody conveniently forgetting the way Geelong tried to get him as a FA to begin with and his manager publicly pleading for the crows to let it go? It was simply a case of the prospect being on the table from a long way out and discussions being held leading up to the trade period, so a lot of the work had already been done. Both clubs had an incentive to get it done quickly so they could move onto other deals. I'd say most of our deals would have been in a similar vein, had they not been held up by other critical preceding deals involving old mates Essendon, St Kilda & Collingwood. Once those deals fell into place we moved quickly.

I'd guess we take Parish at 3 simply because he's too good to pass up, especially for our needs. And then Oliver is a potential pick depending on who goes at 4, 5 & 6. I know there's talk of Milera to Gold Coast at 6, but I couldn't see us taking him as early as 7, and we need to make sure all our bases are covered if Curnow, Weideman, Francis, etc. are all gone. I'm not against taking Oliver either, as I love the look of his attack, but I'd choose Parish ahead of him every time.

This kid could be anything. He could be another Tom Rockliff. He could be another Josh Toy. Whilst the payoff might be huge, I'd be inclined not to roll the dice with this pick. Parish at 3 and a forward at 7 (whether it be Weideman, Curnow, or failing those Burton).

Hard to pick one, if there's not one there to be picked. AND Picking a tall at that stage of the draft won't make him into the forward you want him to be. Pick the player there that deserves it. Obviously. And I think Parish deserves it, personally.

I'm not sure if you remember, but Brayshaw's "highlights" package was lacklustre leading up to the draft, and the impressive vision was saved for the MFC-generated post-draft package.

SOS would know Trac from their basketball days obviously.

I know! If only they'd act like a like a professional with the same commitment that you show in acting like an amateur!

I agree. I don't think we have any designs on keeping this pick anyway, so it's a moot point.

If there is no assumption, you'd have to think both Hawthorn & St Kilda have been incredibly negligent in their offers for Carlisle.

Yes. So much yes.

Snakes on a plane! Very happy to welcome Jake Melksham who I feel will be making a lot of people very happy to have been wrong.

No, it was Kennedy and Grundy.

Freeman was pick 10 and he wasn't even in the same draft.

Could possibly be waiting for Melksham to get his arss into gear, go to an internet cafe somewhere in Eastern Europe, print off the contract to sign, scan it for an exorbitant amount and then send it back.

Probably complicated by Dodoro specifically stating and interpreting that it would be pick 25, as opposed to our presumably deliberate wording of a "2nd round pick" allowing for the event where we downgrade a pick in the 2nd round.

Why stop there..?

Broomhead. Done heaps that kid. Really embarrassed us.