stevethemanjordan

He'll build a frame as long as he has the desire to work as hard as he can, (which from what I've read, is one of his strengths). He looks 'athletic' rather than skin and bone. The frame is there. Obviously the most crucial element in this hypothetical is how we'd develop him, what position we'd play him early in his career and what role he'd be given early days. As far as his attributes go, I think he'd compliment our midfield rotation nicely. I look at what Collingwood have done with Steele Sidebotttom, Freo with Stephen Hill, Hawthorn with Bradley etc. From the day they were drafted they were developed and nurtured appropriately and obviously those individuals benefitted from having strong lists but I think Melbourne supporters are still scarred and scared about what happened with players like Toumpas, Gysberts, Morton etc etc. I'll back our current coaching group to pick up whoever and give them the best preparation and chance to succeed at AFL level. Our list depth/quality and coaching group now should alleviate these worries that supporters have when it comes to drafting players like Parish. Whoever it is at 3 and 7, I'm confident they'll be staple best 22 players in a few years at the very least.

Except the Toumpas and Hodge one yeh?

Both used to play for Essendon... .. .... ...

Obvious to say that when he's at his best and playing with confidence, he's a valuable player. Clearly Goodwin and McCartney believe that he can get back to playing like that with some simplified roles and a new environment. Melksham isn't like Michie, Newton or Riley. He's a previous top 10 pick who's played a whole season (2013), in a manner that validated why he was a top 10 draft pick. Let's get him playing at that level again. Welcome Jake.

I'm sure we'd like either. But we'll need pick 3 to have the chance of landing one. Here's hoping Howe goes to Gold Coast so we can do swapskies of picks.

Good get. Happy with a second rounder. I reckon the haters will be surprised next year. Perfect case of a talented player not playing to his potential at a rabble of a club.

You're my boy, DL.

Well that makes two of us JVF.

You asked about the pot-shotting. I answered. I never accused you of being part of that group. But that group exists on this thread. As for these 'facts' you're basing your argument on, you seem to be conveniently letting slide the one season that he has without doubt proven his worth and talents as a former number 10 draft pick. You've stated he's awful, yet you refuse to acknowledge what he has visibly shown on the football field. So what you're really basing your argument on is his last what, two years? Of which he's been in and out of a side who have had the largest of dark clouds hanging over it. Our club is interested in getting Melksham. Goodwin and McCartney have both been at Essendon with Melksham under their tutelage. What does that tell you mate? That he's awful? lol. He is an upgrade. He adds depth. There is potential for further improvement. They are facts. As for the last bolded line, it just demonstrates your love for exaggeration. Two reasons really: - He's a young player still developing - Collingwood have a string of small forward/midfielders ahead of him and with greater games experience Riley was delisted and we picked him up as a DFA. Newton and Michie were third round draft picks and have helped with our depth. Kennedy possesses a whole range of attributes that our team still lacks. I give up.

You insinuate the reason why Ben Kennedy hasn't been getting regular games is solely to do with his ability or talent as a player. Again. Clearly no idea. I'm assuming you thought (Josh) Kennedy was a dud at Hawthorn before he moved to Sydney then? And the countless others who once moved clubs, became valuable players.

When posters dislike the personality of a player and decide to base their entire argument against recruiting that particular player because of the dislike, it's completely nonsensical. That seems to be the trending theme of this thread. I'll mock them all I like. Either that, or people just refuse to see any positivity surrounding Melksham as a footballer. You being one. In your first post, you state that he's awful which means you didn't see his season in 2013. Or if you did, I'm even more baffled. Awful is a strong word 'Members Wing'. Do you think Watts is awful? How many die-hard supporters on this forum think he's awful? Only a minority. Because he plays for Melbourne. Chatted to any other die-hard supporters from other clubs about him? Overwhelming majority would think he's awful. Generally, die-hard supporters don't have a [censored] clue what they're talking about because they cannot see past their teams colours. Melksham coming into our side for an injured starting 22 player over McKenzie, Bail or Riley actually would help. And if Kennedy was another, it would help too. Our depth has been non-existent. Melksham has runs on the board. Bridge the gap between your best and worst players, and you begin to become a more competitive team when injuries start hitting. That's a fact. It's all part of the puzzle.

Melksham and Kennedy for a second rounder (in a supposed weak draft) is solid. I just see them as immediate upgrades on McKenzie and Riley. They offer more. Provide greater versatility as far as attributes go and have scope for much more significant improvement. (Especially Melksham as he has money in the bank from a few years back). Not sure why anyone would be annoyed/upset about this.... Unless of course you suffer from cognitive dissonance. Which sounds like it could be the majority of posters on this particular thread.

Aside from him. (Like the hot tuna lookalike though).

Agree. Any news on the trade front, great oracle?

Dissociative identity disorder or just bat-[censored] crazy? Whichever way, you're truly one of a kind.

Get the tissues out boys and girls. Welcome to the club, Jake. Let's hope you can recapture that 2013 form.

Jobe Watson Nat Fyfe Sam Mitchell Luke Hodge Dan Hannebery Josh Kennedy Adam Treloar Travis Boak Isacc Smith Bradley Hill Brent Stanton Mark Blicavs Dan Nicholson Jarryn Geary Rohan Bail The first group are footballers first and foremost. They're players who have developed a 'tank' through sheer work ethic and none of them were elite runners before being drafted. The second group are runners first and foremost. Some of whom have greater footballing ability than others on their list. Of course running is important. But it's fair to say the differences once you get to AFL level rest in your ability to 'play' the game and not so much whether or not you can beat a bloke in a 3km time trial by 20 seconds.

Interesting and thanks for the info. Much can change over the course of a year and judging by comments made this year after certain losses and similar periods of non-competitive and skill-less football as last year, Roos and co have surely come to the understanding that the list still needs a lot of work. In all areas. Looking closely at the six players that have already been moved on, it would be fair to say that Jamar, Bail, McKenzie, Riley and Fitzpatrick offered us very little in the way of 'depth'. One of many problems with our list is that not only do we not have quality depth, we don't even have decent depth. Clearly this was evidenced by Roos' desire to play underdeveloped first year players off the back of very limited pre-seasons in ANB, Stretch and Vandenberg, and a refusal to play those aforementioned, much older and more experienced names. In knowing that, is it not obvious as to why we'd be trying to target out-of-form but talented players like Melksham? Or do posters still struggle to recognise this? Again, I'll remind you that Melksham's 2013 season shits all over anything that Bail, McKenzie and Riley have produced throughout their careers and he possess a skill-set that is greater than theirs. List management and changes at a club like ours is clearly a more difficult and complex process than at most other clubs. We don't have the luxury of only targeting A-grade talent through trade period and then drafting well. We have to target depth, talent, senior leadership, role-playing and we have to nail our drafting. Targeting depth players like Melksham with the scope for improvement is nothing short of a necessity for the MFC at this point in time. After this time next year and if all goes to plan, list changes won't be anywhere near as drastic as what we've witnessed over the past few years. Get our depth right, develop our kids right and keep nailing the draft, bring in a couple more older and more experienced heads to continue to help nurture and bring in at least on A grader into the midfield, (hopefully two) and we'll continue to rise.

He certainly will be.

Glenrowan. Three-peat next year.

Ones big fella. Cmon.

I may have been playing..

Didn't happen to see the O&K grand final at the rovers ground last weekend did you?

Calm your farm. Do you really think Melksham is the only player we'll be bringing in? The reason we're not a destination club is our own fault. You do realise that?

Just as embarrassing as when we picked up Bernie Vince? What'd you say again? 'Excitement level equal to that of getting David Rodan', or something similar? Haha. Club being embarrassing you say? Mate, have a look at some of those posts RPFC highlighted from when we got Bernie. Yours topped the list for embarrassing! You should just hold your tongue on this one and it's the same with everyone else who jumps the gun thinking the sky is falling. You're all being stupidly short-sighted. We won't pay overs and he'll turn out to be better depth replacement than the blokes we've just delisted with the potential to be even better than that. Sadly, not many can see that.