rpfc

He can be picked up in Delisted FA by any club.

That is a big statement. He's a HFF turned HBF and he needs to be able to have more dimensions than the one he has now to be 'multi-dimensional.' What will he be so good at as to be considered 'A grade'?

If Jones is paid $600k of a $10m salary allowance, we must have a spare $6m lying around of empty space. Get real - the guy will be on that now, if not more, after winning three Bluey's and being our Obi Wan - the guy is going to get at least $800k.

All I want those that know these kids and that want McCartin is to tell me he is a generational talent. Because you need forwards obviously, but you can survive with a couple of targets, thrive if one of them is dominant - but you need a platoon in the middle: a dozen skilled mids with various attributes to compete against the best. Jones, Tyson, Vince, Viney, Cross, Matt Jones, Bail, Trengove, McKenzie, Kent, Salem, JKH, Michie, Toumpas, Riley, and Evans. The above list does not inspire me with confidence. The fact that Matt Jones will be our 6th best mid and that 4 of those listed could be gone in a years time only serve to highlight the issue. The kids picked at ND2 and ND3 won't displace Matt Jones next year, but they will provide a solid base so we can build that platoon over the next few years.

Is it ludicrous? Google the salary cap, and then google the cap from 2010 to see how much it has gone up by. You know what - I will do it for you: 2010 - $7.95m 2015 - $10.71m 2020 - ??? The next TV deal will send this further rocketing up, hopefully in exchanged for un[censored] up the Free Agency/Contracts/Trade infrastructure. Jones will go close to a million for his next contract. An $800k salary, is a mil today.

I wouldn't take a ruck in the first 50 picks. The point I am making with regard to talls vs smalls is, unless, they are a latent talent ahead of the mids in the draft class, they should be overlooked until all those similar talented mids are off the table. I just would not invest the same amount in a tall that is as talented as a mid. The return is quicker, the development is more assured, and you know more of what you are getting because their body doesn't give them an advantage the way that taller kids get an advantage in junior footy. Essentially, if you can throw a blanket over them - take the mid.

The only issue I can see is that Membrey is a Swan until October 31 when his contract expires. Unless delisted, contracted players should not be allowed to train with another team. But as the AFL makes this up as they go - who knows what is possible.

The following doesn't definitely answer this question but of the top 21 goalkicking talls this season - 16 were not F/S, u/17 Priority selections, and NSW academy selections - and those players were taken at: 1, 2, 4, 4, 5, 11, 12, 13, 23, 24, 26, 29, 32, 71, 75, and Rookie Draft. Now, Riewoldt, Roughhead, Pavlich, Kennedy, and Franklin are the exceptional talents taken in the top 5. The job of Viney, Taylor and Roos is to work out whether McCartin is akin to those talents.

So we should avoid getting a mid with Pick 3 because we might get a few mids 12 months from now? Mids that are being chased by 9 other Victorian clubs and their own club as well? A bird in the hand is worth two in the...wow! have you guys seen how many birds are in the bush? Yeah, nah.

I agree with you - the only group think that I agree with is the "don't draft tall"* with early picks group think. We need midfield talent and they come on quicker and the best talls of the last ten years come from every part of the recruitment infrastructure, the mids come from the the top 40 picks in most cases. * the asterisk is for exceptional talents.

Off the top of your head - what is the salary cap? What is it next year? What should it approximately be in 4 years time? If you can't pull these out of your arse without the help of Google then what sense do you think it makes to dismiss a proposed salary for our best player?

'Best Available' is not a black and white rule either. We, and the coach, always talk about how this draft is a lottery and, to a great extent, you don't know how these 18 year olds will be as footy players when they are 22. This is my major concern about getting a tall with ND3 - unless he is a talent so superior as to be well above the other mids - you just can't tell how they will fill out, play against men, and find the footy. This is true for mids as well, but the degree of extrapolation is larger with talls. I want two mids because it is what we need and because we are more likely to pick up the second and third talents if we look for mids as opposed to talls.

I highly doubt that will include the oh-so probing questions of Matt Burgan for the website...

If we pick up a DFA or have someone on the hook in the PSD - we may not use this pick.

There is this ridiculous feeling out there that just Roos flagged a desire for clubs to trade out FAs a year early, that he will do that to every player that doesn't re-sign. That is nonsense. Nothing is black and white and the grey is right here with Nathan Jones. He may stall and put off talks but we were never going to trade him for not re-signing 13 months in advance. He is going to be very well paid - over market - because we cannot afford to lose him and he is our best player by quite a long way.

Seriously? Those that want to take two mids know that we have the worst midfield in the league. The worst, by nearly every metric, and the eyes of most MFC fans. That is why posters want us to get two of the best three available midfielders.

Cap will increase by about $400-500k too. More money than Jesus, TSFKA...

I am usually all about 'best available' but these talls do not look like they are in Hogan's company. We need mids and we have an opportunity to get two right now - midfield talent is hard to poach as we just found out, this is our chance to get two midfield talents. I think McCartin as the third best talent is just groupthink amongst the armchair experts. Two mids.

If they want him to re-sign they will not delist him. If they think that he will re-sign once he sees which clubs have picks in the PSD, they will not delist him. I agree that it is borderline redundant now, as players can also go into the National Draft. But it is one way to more easily get to the bottom couple of clubs if one were so inclined.

I was 'correcting' it for the benefit of others who would have thought you weren't talking out your o-ring. You gave a post that attempted to play right into the battered psyche of suffering MFC fans for a laugh. I got it. But I also found it funny that only two of those players were available post ND23 and one of them was taken with the very pick we now have. Maybe you should 'lighten up?'

Yes.

ND2, ND3, and ND40 are all the space we have now. If PSD2, a DFA, or ND53 have a talent that we want - we will have to delist a contracted player. Clubs are reticent to do this but I think it is a necessity now to at least remove one more player from the Primary List.

Franklin was ND5, Fyfe was ND20, and Priddis made it to the rookie draft there were so many overlooking him. The difference, to answer the question, will be the players we will no longer be able to get, but the club with this one deal was able to secure Frost, secure another new player for the list at ND40 and position themselves to go after someone in the PSD or use ND53. 3 for the price of 1. Oh, and the irony of your handwringing, Lamashtu? Luke Parker - Selected with the 40th pick in the National Draft in 2010...

I was talking about 'you' in the abstract. And there was also about 4 lines between my response to your post and my general response to the thread. And I can really see you writing for the Herald Sun...

Perhaps Frost releases Dunn to do that more?