GCDee

God it would be good to get one back on GWS after $cully

Would love this, Kelly AND Lever, and our list would be complete. However I can't see us having the currency & cap room for both.

I played a few games with Zak in the under 18s at Mount Eliza (I was a year older but he was playing up a grade or two) And his attack on the ball at that age was ferocious... to the point where me 6 foot 2 and 100 kgs didn't want to get in his path and I was on the same team! Made of the right stuff and would slot straight in. Would deffiantly be worth our first round this year... approx pick 10... which ironically is what Nathan was drafted at wasn't it?

I really hope we hold firm on this one... I really would hate to give in. Clearly we either have someone in mind in this years draft or another trade for this years pick lined up.

Lloyd just said in trade radio the deal will get done today for this years 2nd rd pick... Could just be Lloyd being an Essendon man saying what he wants to happen.

I'd absolutely love for Jenkins to be lining up next to Hogan next year, but I wouldn't be upset if Freo threw a massive contract at both Jenkins and McCarthy. Surely Freo couldn't fit all three in their salary cap and trade for all three.

Hey GNF, Don't listen to all the haters, you cleary have some connections within the club because there is no way you can guess what you have shared with us all. When I first started reading demonland (around the season when we landed Mitch Clark) It was because of you I kept coming back because I just wanted to get more info. I for one really appreciate what you share and can't wait for your next scoop! Cheers!!

Hi guys and girls, I'm a long time reader but first time poster on this forum and just wanted to add my 2 cents on the Melksham deal. For me I think it's a win for the club, Melksham in comparison to Watts statistically speaking are almost identical since they were drafted although Watts is a year older. Jake was once a high draft pick (granted it doesn't mean everything) but it meant Essendon must have rated him highly in his draft year as we did with Watts. And both haven't lived up to their potential yet. So it begs the question would anyone on this forum happily trade out jack watts for anything less than pick 25? Personally I wouldn't and that's why I think Melksham deal was a good get. Granted I will say Watts has a higher ceiling due to his polish but with Melksham we will get someone who will give their all and not afraid to hurt the opposition (fairly) which is what a lot of you have wanted in our team in previous years. No I don't believe he will rack up 25+ touches every week and be top 5 in our B and F but I see a player who will go out and give his all and play the way the game should be played. I believe there is a negative view of Melksham not just because he hasn't quite lived up to his potential but just purely because he is a ugly bastard and he gets under your skin, maybe that's the sort of player we need in our back half to get under the skin of the opposition a bit. Just my 2 cents and no this post was not made to belittle Watts in anyway, I think Watts will be a star for the MFC.