Accepting Mediocrity

Why would we split 10? As it stands I believe we have 5 list spaces to fill - 3, 10, 28 and looking strongly like we'll pick up Brown and Bennell. Unless I'm missing something?

I don't think Hunt is a natural forward. He's dangerous when he's able to receive the ball streaming inside 50, but looks a bit lost when he's ahead of the ball I reckon. Fast, but not a natural crumber and doesn't provide enough pressure (not through lack of effort, just lacks the instinct IMO). Wing or half back for mine.

I'll add my voice to the 'don't split 10' chorus (don't think it's on the cards anyway). My reading is that there seem to be a group of 8-10 players that are hard to split after Rowell and Anderson. As others have mentioned, it's looking likely that at least one of Kemp, Stevens , Ash, Serong or even Young will slide to 10 - all of which have been firmly in the top 5 discussion since the championships. Geelong recruiters aren't slouches - if they want 10, it's for a reason.

Every chance the blues grab him at 9 you'd think

No complaints from me - just deeply ingrained MFCSS

This - and if he doesn't grow, a couple of cm won't be the difference in whether he makes the grade. Ryder, Martin, Mumford all go alright as sub-200cm rucks. He's tall enough if he's good enough.

We compete against 17 teams (18 if you include our traditional rivals - ourselves). It would be utter madness to give up the player we want just to stick it to one of those teams. Green may well end up the better player than Jackson, but if our recruiters rate Jackson higher, we pick him every day of the week. Although to be fair, given our proud tradition of stuffing up top draft picks we should probably decide who we want, then pick the alternative.

We're being charitable... think of them as rescue puppies.

Mate, if Goodwin only picked players who deserved selection we would have had about 8 players on the field all year.

There's a lot of sense in that. No doubt they'll be interested in Green, doubt they'd want him enough to hand over 25 without something else coming back though. Maybe Dees pick 3 & 2020 3rd rounder for Swans pick 5 and 25?

Because gifting games to youngsters has worked out so well for us previously... If they can't get a senior game ahead of Brown, they're either not ready or not up to it. The 'young player + afl experience = gun' formula has never worked and never will (we of all teams know that). That's what Casey's for. He'd be a cheap insurance policy for our injury-prone forwards that will almost certainly offer more in 2020 than a 1st year rookie. Every premiership team has at least a couple of average 'role player' types.

Not saying we should take Jackson, but Gawn and Pruess are irrelevant in the decision. If he makes the grade, Jackson probably won't be much chop til he's 22-24. A week is a long time in football; half a decade is an eternity. On topic, Green looks the goods. More of what we have, but you can't turn down class when available. Wouldn't be disappointed if we bid.

Nah I think it means they are happy with either Jackson or Green. Scenario 1: Melbourne don't bid on Green, select Jackson at 3. GWS select player X (Young?) at 4, then Green with later picks. Scenario 2: Melbourne bid on Green, GWS don't match. GWS select Jackson at 4. It looks like Green is ours if we want him.

Typical that in my time following the MFC, the only position we've consistently had topline players in is arguably the least important - Stynes, White, Gawn, and (briefly) Jamar, Jolly and Martin (no disrespect to any of those players - all guns in their own right). However, not many good teams have a genuine spud ruck - guys like Nankervis, Lycett, Vardy, McEvoy et al are all more than handy. Having a big guy that can clunk marks, distribute the ball and throw their weight around is always a valuable asset. But - as others have pointed out, pick 3 seems a high price to pay for this type of player. Big risk IMO - there aren't many good forwards in the afl who didn't play forward and regularly kick bags as a junior. History suggests that forward nous can't be taught very easily, even if a player has all the right physical traits. I wouldn't necessarily draft Jackson at 3 - but if we do, I hope it's with the vision of a Tim English type player, rather than the hope that he might develop into a decent forward. Not a need at this stage - but (assuming he makes the grade) he won't be any good for 4 years anyway - who knows what our list will look like by then.

Risk? We'd be picking him up for next to nothing on a 1 yr contract - if he never plays a senior match, what exactly have we lost?

You called? On Petracca, much of the criticism is downright unfair. He stated a while back that he wanted to be remembered as a "Hall of Famer", and got shouted down on here as being arrogant, all talk and no action. No doubt by the same people who got stuck into Watts when he said losing games didn't ruin his life, or words to that effect. No idea how gets pigeonholed as lazy/ fat. I see a highly talented player who works his backside off, but for whatever reason, it hasn't quite clicked yet. Endurance no doubt a weakness, but that will improve. Still, he can do things that no one else on our list, and very few players in the AFL are capable of doing (see goal from 50 while being swung in a tackle against Sydney (?) this year). A good pet project for the new fitness team. If it clicks, we'll have a genuine matchwinner on our hands. Time still on his side, but needs to keep improving next year if he's to become the player we all know he can be.

We sure as hell didn't give up a 2020 first rounder and pick 26 to draft a highly speculative, albeit exciting prospect with a couple of nice highlights but 0 runs on the board at any decent level of footy.

Nah who knows who the Dusty of this draft will turn out to be - but statistically speaking, at least a couple of the widely accepted top picks (Young, Kemp, Serong, Flanders, Robertson etc) will go on to become out and out guns (a couple will almost certainly be busts as well). Yes, we're pretty set for purely inside mids - but Fyfe or Bontempelli would still improve our side dramatically. Recent examples of us drafting relative 'unknowns' in the first round include Cook and Gysberts (I don't count Oliver, he was a risk at the time but nonetheless would have been picked in the top 10 if we passed him up). No doubt we need speed, outside class and a small forward or 2, I'm just not convinced that any are top 10 material (with the possible exception of Henry). I'd take the surest bet at 3 and 8, then fill needs elsewhere. People are quick to forget that our forwardline functioned well in 2018 with only Garlett as a genuine small forward (and he only played 11 games). Keep it simple and draft Young and Kemp - both are extremely talented and neither are purely inside mids anyway.

Don't get me wrong - I understand the logic of playing him down back given our injuries and lack of kicking skills. But he's such a natural forward it's not even funny - 20 goals this year despite such limited time in the forwardline speaks for itself. Will only get better.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love an effective crumbing forward - a good one makes any forwardline better. It's a matter of risk vs reward for me. Is it worth passing up a chance at drafting the next Dusty for a more speculative, albeit desirable small forward that almost certainly won't make an impact for 2 years anyway? (If he turns out to be any good). I'd rather rookie one, and be aggressive during free agency and trade period next year. On Jackson, I agree with most on here - doesn't really seem to make much sense.

Pretty much. If a bid comes before their 1st pick (6), they need to use pick 6 on him if they want him; if no bid comes they can draft him with subsequent picks and use 6 on another kid. If they choose not to match, he can be drafted by a club with picks 1-5. Draft points come into it as well (which is where it gets a bit more complicated), but that's the gist of it as I understand.

No point wasting a top 10 pick on Pickett - might as well split 8 and take him later if we want him that badly. As others have said, he'd be a massive risk. GWS have shown you don't necessarily need a specialist crumber to have a potent forwardline (although having Cameron, Green et al. admittedly helps). I'd bid for Tom Green, then take Young and Kemp. Talent over needs in the first round every day of the week.

On the proviso that we keep Maxy, I'd consider it I'd hardly break out the champagne if we sign him, but he'd be a cheap insurance policy for minimum $ - likely to provide more than a speculative rookie pick in 2020.

A bit meh, but worth noting that he would have finished second in our goalkicking this year. Not a terrible depth option.

It's hard to argue that our fowardline dysfunction was purely personal driven IMO - the whole system was a farce. I don't buy the 'Tom McDonald had 1 good year and never got the best defender' argument, which has been repeated so much it's almost become accepted as fact. He dominated the second half of 2017 (when he was originally thrown forward) as much as he did in 2018, and often with Hogan playing further up the ground or out injured. He struggled this year because he was horribly out of sorts and/or injured, not because he's been figured out. Weideman has been spoken about a lot, but ultimately does a lot right - I still think he can become a 40 goal forward as soon as next year. Early signs are good for Petty. Obviously Melksham and Fritsch have shown they can be more than handy, and Petracca is harshly judged and still improving. If we can get some continuity into those players and make it click, that's a decent forwardline.