Tall Timber

I baulk at these low draftees who haven't yet cracked it. There'd be a good reason why, and if they're available for trade it makes it even more obvious.

Where does Grimes sit in the bigger scheme of things ?? The guy was touted as the club's next Moloney back in his first or second year. He would be a useful depth player but he can't run for sheet.

Ironic that the last two games of the H&A season - after everyone's moved on to next week - will be the most exciting. I actually went to the Bulldogs-GWS game last year under identical circumstances. Both sides threw the kitchen sink at each other knowing there was no tomorrow. I'd love to see the same this year but our pattern of recent form suggests otherwise.

Just watch Brisbane offer 4 years at double his current salary. Hawks will chortle until their sides split.

Journos rehash articles all the time. That or they blow things way out of proportion. Welcome to fast-food media 2015. Because there's no high points in this draft pool, it's immediately called a 'weak draft'. But what's a low point ? It's all conjecture until we look back in hindsight. I mean, we're those 'superdrafts' hyped up as such in August that year ?

In all interviews I've seen and read Jesse has come across as being of extremely strong character thanks to his family. Because of this I can't see him ever 'quitting his job' for a similar one closer to home ie. being wooed home to join Freo or Franchise. If anything I think he's a better chance of moving overseas to play for bigger money and opportunity, which is inconceivable.

Hate to be pedantic but 'redevelopment' is the wrong word. Geelong needs a redevelopment. We need to stop dealing with shoddy contractors that stall building works.

I was using Cross and Lumumba as examples only. They have been more than useful to us. My point was about trading for picks this year.

I don't *think* the recruiters will, nor do I know -- just to clarify -- but if it so happens that they do rate the draft pool higher than most then I would hope it gives the club reason to trade with the idea of strengthening their hand in the draft. If by "wrangle a player with proven AFL credentials (not necessarily an A grader)" you might mean, say, a Tom Mitchell or Adam Tomlinson ?? Also it depends on your definition of A-grader, B-grader etc. Hannabal had a 4-tiered ranking system which made complete sense. Bernie Vince is B-grade, where Dangerfield is A-grade and Ablett is a Star. A-graders win Premierships. B-graders play their role which can influence games but typically hold the team's structure afloat. If we can give away a second or third-round pick for a Mitchell, Tomlinson "type" then bombs away but it's completely unrealistic. I want the A-graders. The first-round of a draft has delivered them when most pundits dismissed them at the time. And if the recruit falls short of A-grade then at least we can develop a young kid from the ground up to play a role he understands with a team he's been around from day dot.

Spot on. It's done. You have to treat Toumpas on merit and merit alone. If his spot -- his contract -- would be better off in the hands of someone else, so be it. But at 22 next year, 27 games and recruited with the hopes of becoming an A-grade player, he deserves another shot IMO. Or, the club can try their hand with offcuts from elsewhere instead ??

Roos flags aggressive changes to the list, and this is encouraging to hear, but I don't want to see like-for-like trading occur. The team's in no position to "top up". Adding players like Cross and Lumumba (although we had no choice there) reads more like a Band-Aid solution rather than progress, so I want this rubbish to end. Change for the sake of change is pointless and creates (or in our case perpetuates) a vicious negative cycle. If notable names are indeed moved on the club should strengthen their numbers in this year's draft. Apparently the draft pool is weak but I only see this as a positive because it will allow us to accumulate draft picks without resistance from other clubs -- if the club sees the draft pool differently to everyone else. I understand it will mean buying low but the list is still at a very low base, albeit building an impressive core of 20 to 23-year-olds, so we have reason to be optimistic and take some risks. And it's about damn time we stop dwelling on -- and apologising for -- past instances of draft failure and recognise what we did wrong then and get it right now, or at least have a good crack at it. Back ourselves right in from recruitment right through to development. We will get it wrong sometimes, make no mistake, but a strong culture is built on responsibility and confidence. Unless an A-grade young mid or tall gets served to us on a platter, make the draft priority.