rpfc

Agree, I like that we got value back from the ND23 trade too by using those picks. I don't like it when we lose value in trades by not using picks returned in a trade. It's quite a haul for ND23 now by the looks of those that fell to 40 and 53...

Barry was the vacancy that opened up ND40. Evans was ND53. Your point stands but its poor list planning to have to delist contracted players. It's not advisable to do it often.

'Best 22' 2014 vs 2015 OUT: Frawley, Pedersen, Terlich, M Jones, JKH, Salem IN: Frost, Hogan, Lumumba, Garlett, Frost, Newton I have Grimes saving his career as a ute, Howe as a ute, Bail on the wing, and McD, Frost, Dunn, Garland, Jetta and Lumumba in the backline. Garlett, Kent, and Watts with three talls - Gawn, Dawes, and Hogan. IMO of course.

Updated.

Ok, well Hunt was ND57 and our next pick for Strauss and Tapscott would have been ND82 and ND90 after ND72 was involved in the Tyson trade. I guess we could have picked up some DFAs or state level players but doing so would mean we would lose 2 of the players we have got this trade/draft period. So 2 of Lumumba, Newton, Garlett, Frost, Petracca, Brayshaw, Neal-Bullen, Stretch, and McDonald would not have been recruited. Instead we would have had a couple of delisted players, state players or young players at ND82 and ND90... You might be right about Salem and JKH but, really, it's not so simple to say 'we should have got rid of him a year ago' when you don't properly discuss the opportunity cost it sounds a bit superficial.

What was the missed opportunity?

Frost is ready to go, Oscar is an embryo.

Ahem... And Oscar.

I guess history will be the ultimate judge but what do those that were miffed we gave up ND23 for Frost, 40 and 53 think at this point? We look to have secured Frost, Alex Neal-Bullen (an impressive inside mid the 'experts' say) and Oscar McDonald (and impressive tall the 'experts' say). All for ND23 (and Barry and Evans of course).

Probably misspelled backwards Tomato. No, that is what I meant to type...

Ok.

Yes, but what happened to all my Demon friends who wanted another key forward?!

Everyone seems so at ease (read excited) with us taking Petracca now that we have the 'inside word' of what the Saints are to do. Are there any people on here who still would prefer McCartin?

We all appreciate the reports of OUR club and we should all realise that reacting to belittling with more belittling is pointless and self-defeating. Saty can ask the players whatever he likes, the players can politely ask him to GAGF or talk to him, posters can have any (non-defamatory) opinion they wish, and all of this can happen without this BS.

I have hope, just no time for the hype...

20509 on the 26th of Nov. We passed 20k at a similar time last year. Context: 10/12/2011 - 19,656 10/12/2012 - 19,393 11/12/2013 - 22,105

That's not to say I am not excited by the fact we look to be getting two mids who know hoe to get the pill. That's what we need. It's hopefully what we get.

I'm baulking at it. The way the 'experts' talk up these kids belies the fact that the junior footy infrastructure has never delivered players further away from being ready for AFL then they do today. The gulf for these teenagers to bridge is so massive that I really do struggle to get excited by the so called 'best players' that we have access to with ND2 and ND3. We just don't know what talents we are getting. I am hopeful, but the hype makes me nauseous...

It is hard to believe that adults, whose job it is to judge the abilities of children, have trouble doing so. Yet here we are.

It's good recruitment. It's favouring the right things in players, it's finding out who wants to play football for a living, and whose body will let them do it, and whose style of play means they can win contested footy. I would say we are getting better at favouring the right things, but I can't deny there being luck involved, they are teenagers asked to immerse themsleves in a vocation they have little idea whether they will excel at.

That doesn't rule out us simply being wrong about the players chosen, in fact it lends itself to everyone being wrong about where they rated the players we chose.

That may be, but I would argue that there wasn't enough potential there in the first place. If saying that players 'not coming on is their own fault' is too easy an out, then equally the notion that 'some players have that internal drive to improve, and some don't' is similar an easy excuse. Surely you pick the players with the internal drive to improve? I don't blame the entirety of our predicament on our poor recruitment but I refuse to believe we would turn a Dangerfield into a Morton and vice-versa - which I don't think you would disagree with me on. We needed to have the best people in place, in a stable environment, with on field, experienced leaders...but we also needed to pick Dangerfield...

Bitter experience disagrees with that...

He is 18 years old... Do you think that the judgements made by people when you were 18 can be fairly extrapolated for a decision like this?

Well said, Macca. The players that deal with the nonsense and get on with it - do so. Jones has shown the way in that regard, but Garland has made the most of himself as well, and I not about to say that are development has been great, nor the circumstances at the club stable, nor that we have had appropriate senior players for the lowly years, but the state of the list comes back to the talent picked at the draft. And it hasn't been strong at all.