Mach5

Reminds me of Birchall. Agile tall, will put on size, lovely long kicks out of the backline hitting running players in stride.

You sure that's how it works?

Except for the fact we have a deal with GWS to not bid on Hopper = added value to our offer for pick 7 & Bugg. Hence the AFL's half-hearted threat recently in regards to clubs colluding on academy player bidding. They'll never prove it.

Wish it was Parish & Weideman.

For me, what seems obvious is that there IS a big gap between the mids, but that there is little between the tall forwards, and much more likely that there will be a better KPF left at pick 7 than a high quality mid. I'd happily take Parish at 3, then wait for whoever is left of Curnow, McKay or (hopefully) Weideman.

I still like Tommy Glen. Gach Nuyon might be a good bet too, maybe for a rookie.

Probably Parish would be available too.

Utterly reliable. Obviously.

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..?

I think Burton is way more of a risk than Stringer or even Lever last year.He has barely got back to running after that horrific broken leg, and has done nothing to prove it wasn't a Nathan Brown career-destroying type. You'd have to go off x-rays and previous form alone, and I think it's just too big a risk for such an important pick. I can't see us passing up Parish at 3, and for that reason pick 7 is our most important pick. We need to make sure we get a kid who can become Hogan's foil for years to come. I'm sure there will be a few options available, we just need to select the correct one. Oliver a firm no from me. Our priorities lay elsewhere.

I'm the opposite. Weideman for me, in the off chance the Dons get spooked by the prospect of another Gumbleton and realise they need mids more than 2 more forwards. Curnow seems a bit off to me for some reason. And for God's sake stay away from Mathieson.

Great minds think alike.

I don't believe a good club would take such a risk with pick 3.

A big FU to the AFL website though for spoiling the build up.

Well if he really says that, it only confirms that he has no idea and is full of shiz.

Probably true, but I also think the preference is to have a quality KPF with the height and ability to hold down the ruck duties in the F50, like a David Hale. I'm not confident in Curnow's ability to do that.

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 recall James Hird on behalf of Essendon flying to visit Shaun Atley's family a day before the draft where they selected Dyson Heppell. I wouldn't read too much into these leaks too quickly.

Not so much confidence, but having it drilled into him from the beginning in the AFL that he was an outside receiver that should float around collecting cheap possessions, and avoiding anything physical or contested.

? Both Bugg & Kennedy were known of well ahead of time also. Still, I'd attribute it to player managers & the opposition. Our fondness for Parish would have been clear as he's the obvious choose for pick 3, and we were probably open with GCS about why we wanted to move up in the draft. I'm not concerned about leaks at all.

He reminds me of Anthony Bennett with worse hair. Anyone? Anyone? Probably why I'm not so high on him.

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.