stinga

I know it's not so simple but when you look at the table above. Melbourne has a really good selection. If you take out North there is no other club I would swap with as a whole.

Thanks

There was one midfielder from last years draft (can't think of his name) who started the season at 187 and grew to 197cm Only played the one game so far but looked good.

how did he go at the combine testing? Was he invited?

According to your latest chart we have 35 senior spots and 3 A Rookiies. B rookies are full. If Melksham goes to Rookie then it is 34 and 4. That leaves 4 spots vacant in any selections we make in whatever category regardless of whether Melksham is rookied. We usually only have 36 senior positions. Interesting times.

LH how does the Kye Turner delisting affect your views on how the ND picks will pan out? My view is they will now put Melksham to rookie then go for 37 senior and 5 A rookie lists. Would allow for using first 2 ND picks on new players and Brown as father/son misses out. This means no new A list rookies. If they upgrade with a deal for 6 &11 then do the same except using 43 as the second pick.

Thanks for all your efforts LH and answering the query. I doubt we would use the first two picks for Brown as they would go to other more credentialed draftees. I think North have a better go at swapping for number 1 and not sure there is much hope for pick 2 or 3 swap (below that is hardly worth it). I think Brown would likely go in the ND and not make it through to the rookie. I hadn't thought about the second option though. Not enough room for the third option unless we can pick upgrade the first 2.

So at the moment to stay the same 36 senior list we only have 1 selection to be used in the draft. With 2 round one picks it would make sense as you suggested to move Melksham to the rookie list. We would then use two picks 6 and 11. (Melbourne: 6, 11, 42, 93 That means 42 is wasted as we don't have room to pick Brown as a father son. My question is can we use the rookie draft for a father/son selection getting the same priority? Of course we still have the option of delisting more players prior to the draft.

Agree with the 5 you've got but we generally take 7 - 8 into the game. 2-3 on ballers who have turns on bench and forward (mainly ANB and Petracca but also Kossie). Then one designated forward rotating through the bench - say Smith and either Chandler, McAdam or Melksham when fit. If they decide to use Fullarton in the same way we used Jackson 2021. Then he takes one of those spots.

For a ruckman to get an average 15 posessions a game even at VFL level indicates he has a bit of go about him Maybe not just a Mark and Hitout type.

Agree our game is built around the best defense. You add a lumbering tall up forward and its one less player to race back to form the tight knit that doesn't allow holes. Would rather groom a younger Jefferson to run back into that role. Of course we still need someone to fill for Max if he goes down for insurance. Is it better to kick an extra 3 goals or allow opposition to kick 5.

Williams dad was a top footballer at Mornington Peninsula and so familiy ties would count. Would probably live close access to Casey similar to Gawne and others

If we say McVee and D Turner get promoted onto the primary list then the primary list is filled. Assuming we get a decent player for Grundy our primary list will still be full. Hard to see who else goes from the primary list to get any other players (including draftees). There's always talk about Thomlinson, TMac and Melksham but more likely to stay than leave.

Does anybody else think Verrall can play the petty role down back so Petty can become permanent forward. Verrall is 199cm, athletic and can take a mark. I don't think he'll ever be tall enough for a ruck, other than as a secondary.

Tmac is best when he is jumping for marks. It would be good for him to have a run and just have a go at some. Even just hitting packs hard.

Melk deserves an extension. I thought he was a one trick forward - wanting the ball over the back or trying to muscle against an opponent to take a mark. But he's showed how flexible he is as he how runs around creating space and leaping for marks (even if he doesn't mark it, the ball comes to ground). If he gets back to play ones it would be great but even at Casey, his experience would be invaluable to young forwards.

I agree with the Sparrow comparison. Jordon is a very good VFL player. He there racks up large numbers of possessions, puts himself in great positions and finds targets. But so would most AFL players going back to VFL. I recall Hibberd getting midfield possession numbers off half back and Thomlinson does it regularly from Full Back. But where Sparrow has physicallity, can take a good mark and is a penetrating kick, Jordon is none of those things. He is not super quick, nor has he height. He is often left to kick to shorter distance packs and the ball returns further back from where he is.

Can't see a future for Jordon either.

I like that only he and Brayshaw kick naturally with the opposite foot.

JVR is reasonably accurate and Jefferson is super accurate. Jefferson's body is filling out and often kicks 3 or 4 goals at casey when he is the main man (no brown and no TMac). He also has a great pair of hands and is around the 200cm mark. I think they might both be in the side before the year is out.

If you can't kick straight you can't win games. No bulk in the defensive half. The only melbourne players that look like they will play AFL to me are Farris White (leap and height) probably 2 years Jefferson (height, marking and kicking) probably next year Howes (height, leaping, running, handball receives, kicking) probably next year but might get a game this year. The rest don't show enough or have been tried and found wanting at the next level. Maybe Verell might improve, and Sestan lost 10 kgs. Of the unlisted players I thought Shepperd showed a bit, but didn't get enough of it.

All the better Key forwards have height around 200cm, so you need at least one backman around that height and we used to have it in Petty. Lever has a decent leap and makes up for that when he has space to launch but because we only have 2 talls in defence that is a rarity. We've tried with Thommo but he is more a bulk defender and that hasn't worked. It's a pity Kye Turner has been injured all year as he is a leaping type. J.Smith might have filled the roll but he's been put as a forward. To make it worse Salem never gets airborn. Verell might fill that role next year but you'd risk wrecking him this year as he hasn't got a mature body. With 4 small defenders it makes it tough. In the forward line it's the same problem. We miss Brown's height but he's on one leg. We have the ideal replacement next year with Jefferson but its the same as Verell above. We don't have a 200cm replacement so you need a leaping forward at least to negate the defensive intercept marking. There's only one but no one likes him.

I think its time to change the balance a bit. JVR is only young and Tmac is struggling a bit. This puts a lot of pressure on Fritta. At present we have 8 defenders in the side if you include Brayshaw. I think you can remove one of them and include another marking forward. Smith seems to be performing that role at Casey. If he was included if Bowey is injured, you would also have cover if a tall defender goes down (either he or Tmac could then cover that and still have marking strength up forward). Smith also has pace which creates room which has enabled Melks to kick goals at Casey. Perhaps he could do the same for JVR/Fritta.

He was holding the back of his head. So it wasn't the spoil that hurt him, it was when he hit his head on the ground.

JVR took 11 marks last week running around as 2nd Ruck to Bell. He is also a bit of a mobile midfielder in that role. Whereas as a KPF he only takes a few marks, but rarely allows defender to mark.