ChaserJ

Love how we grabbed Weideman with the pick that belonged to Collingwood prior to trade week. That'll drive some Pies fans nuts! (Treloar's a decent consolation…) SW listed at 196cm. Genuine KP height.

Apparently some (not all) clubs still have concerns.

Agree with you to a point WJ, but what if your budding young superstar forward, in a meeting with Roos, Goody & Mahoney said something along the lines of 'I want to sign an extension, BUT I want a quality big body to support me up forward. That's what I want, because I don't want to be the sole focus of opposition key backs, double teaming, triple teaming me and increasing the strain on my body and reducing the length of my career. I want a long term partner to share the load and I want to know what the forward line looks like going forward before I seriously consider putting pen to paper' What would the response be?

So, a hypothetical then. What if the club knew, definitively, that the player we originally wanted at 3, would be there at 7 (ala Hawks and Franklin in 05). Would you still take him at 3?

Think Sanderson said 12 on the AFL podcast, but think it was Francis who had double figure marks in defence against Northern. Weideman had 7, but as many as five might have been contested. Weidemans first half or so against Northern was very,very good.

I believe it's a range of tests that usually would have occurred at the Combine (20M sprint, agility, possibly 3k time trial and beep). In other news, here's the reason we have to bid on Cal Mills with pick 3: http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/draft/afl-draft-2015-melbourne-expected-to-bid-for-sydney-academy-product-callum-mills/story-fnyc10cj-1227613753378 Bidding on him will move our pick 46 (and 50) up 4 spots in one hit. If Essendon bid on the GWS academy kids, our later picks will get up a bit higher.

Yes on both counts.

Here's an article on him as a bottom ager last year. You get the feeling that he and Petracca would enjoy working together up forward. http://afldraftcentral.com.au/2014/04/15/afl-bloodlines-weideman-wants-to-forge-own-legacy/

Brendan's son also played for the Falcons this year, so another reason from B Mac to be present at Falcons games. Would imagine we have some decent intel on the Falcons lads in contention for our picks.

I'm more inclined to think the club's looking at possibilities if we take a key forward at 3. If I were to take any prompts from it, it would be that we're considering passing on Parish. Given our acknowledgement in needing a partner for Hogan, I'm comfortable in assuming we will take a key forward with one of those two picks and that it is very much a priority for us. As we've added so many mids through the last three drafts, I'd be highly surprised if we took two more mids at 3 and 7.

Collins is very, very good. Strong in the contest, reads the ball well and looks like he added a bit of run to his game this year. The other thing to consider is that he's a December birthday, so will be considered to have a fair amount of development in him. Who knows, if he was a month younger, we might have been talking about him as next years Weitering. I think in an AFL.com draft podcast Gary Buckenara rated him (personal rankings) as third best this year, and Bucky's got a pretty decent track record. I think we'd like to get another key back in, and would not be surprised if Collins is in our thoughts. Especially if we take Parish and Curnow & Weideman are gone by 7. We may need a Kieran Collins thread.

Needs to be upgraded I believe. We can have up to 6 cat A rookies & 3 additional Cat B rookies. Must have min 38 on primary list and 44 in total (prim & rookie), so a lot depends on whether we want to go with a primary list with as few as 38 (unlikely). Might see something like 40 + 4 again. Few more delistings to come I fancy.

Vaguely heard about this 6 months ago, but hadn't heard anymore. Welcome and good luck Joel!

Curnow less likely. Think we'd be [censored] a hoop if he was still there at 6. Would be in contention if we held pick 3. Weideman probably widely thought to be in the 10-15 range because we didn't see him for most of the year through injury. Some believe on talent he'd be in the first 5.

Yeah. For the first 2-3 years of his career, he was deemed to be the wrong call given Juddy hit the ground running.Wasn't until Hawks premiership year in 08 that the commentary started to truly shift.

Tend to agree with you. I appreciate the time KM puts into his threads, but if we're talking bigfooty draft writers, I tend to lean more toward the BGFN guys (Skippos, Rahul, Jourdan Canil). I know they base their write ups on more live watching of games and have decent access to footage.

I would say no. Next year's draft looks far deeper in talent, I'd much prefer giving up this year's.

Largely talks about Hogan's possible extension but Melksham, Bugg & Kennedy are mentioned as possible additions: Jesse Hogan to consider long-term contract extension to stay at Melbourne Demons

Hogan open to contract extension: Jesse Hogan to consider long-term contract extension to stay at Melbourne Demons

Brett Anderson ‏@BrettAndersonIF 2m2 minutes ago Strong chance Magpie Ben Kennedy is wearing Red & Blue in '16. Toumpas back to SA with Port Adelaide. More tomorrow on #TradeSENtral

Isn't losing your job was being held accountable?

Fair amount of chatter around that Aish is Hawthorn bound. Paul Connors confirmed Collingwood are no longer in the running. HIs silence on his future may have a lot to do with his prospective employer's involvement in finals footy. For all the debate on Aish's trade worth, the Hawk's first rounder is probably around the mark. If they were feeling extra generous, they could throw Suckling into the deal so any Leuenberger compensation isn't diluted. EDIT: Insert Grimley for Suckling and we may have the formulation of the deal.

Don't think so. Was always a reach at pick 25, more athlete than footballer and didn't really handle the step up to senior footy. Mason Shaw a better option of the delisted talls.

Yep. Although Stringer's coming along pretty nicely too.

That's pretty much where I sit with it, especially if we're offering ball park 400 p/a for him (unsubstantiated). Who knows, maybe we are playing a long game with Brad and starting by luring Matt?