old55

I'm surprised that you can't see the distinction between being rated in the top 6 and actually bringing that on GF day - it's not circular. 8/10 of those NSMs are best 6 with probably only Lake and O'Keefe as outliers and some may even argue that they were top 6. Across those "best" lists there's only Graham, Langford, Ellis and Osborne who are bottom 6. That's 4 out of 70+. They just don't make an impact.

The team breaks up into the forwards, mids and backs at the game breaks - these categories do exist even if "forward pocket" no longer exists. It is meaningful to group the players into each area and see what type of team balance you get and who misses out.

Both those sides are missing Fritsch

Keen to see some best 22s and the associated forward lines with Hogan, Weid and TMac all in that forward line.

It's a myth that it's the bottom 6 who matter in finals, it's the top 6 that have to be capable and fire in big finals. Here's a list of the "best" from Wikipedia for the last 10 GFs with the Norm Smith Medallist highlighted. The lists are dominated by the best 6 players at each winning club. 2017: Martin (NSM), Rance, Houli, Astbury, Prestia, Edwards, Graham, Grimes 2016: Johannisen (NSM), Picken, T. Boyd, Macrae, M. Boyd, Dahlhaus 2015: Rioli (NSM), Mitchell, Smith, Hodge, Gunston, Burgoyne, Frawley 2014: Hodge (NSM), Lewis, Mitchell, Roughead, Hill, Lake, Langford, Burgoyne 2013: Lake (NSM), Gunston, Lewis, Rioli, Hodge, Birchall 2012: Hannebery, O'Keefe (NSM), Kennedy, McVeigh, Jetta, Goodes 2011: Bartel (NSM), Selwood, Hawkins, Ling, Johnson, Chapman, Ottens, Varcoe 2010: Ball, N. Brown, Jolly, Pendlebury (NSM), Shaw, Sidebottom, D. Thomas, Wellingham 2009: Chapman (NSM), Rooke, Milburn, Taylor, Selwood, Ablett, Corey, Bartel, Ling, Scarlett 2008: Hodge (NSM), Brown, Ellis, Sewell, Crawford, Dew, Rioli, Osborne, Williams The reason MFC has failed to win flags in our competitive years in the 80s, 90s and 2000s was because our top 6 was not elte. That's different now - our top 6 is developing to be as good as anyone's and that's why we're a real threat.

It's the top 6 that win finals.

Dave's not here man.

We played all 3 in R 6, 7 & 8 this year and then abandoned that plan. Weed is a improved since then and can be expected to improve more next year, and there will be rule changes - but is that enough to make it work?

It's a great problem to have, but it will be tricky to manage. I think only 2 of Hogan, TMac and Weed fit forward - we tried the 3 tall fwds earlier in the year and it worked briefly but then failed. We've got it at both ends. I think also probably only 2 KPBs fit too - that's currently out of Lever, Frost and OMac. We've got Keilty and Petty developing there nicely too - although they will be more patient. The added curve ball is that Hogan and Weed could play great football back too, so that may be a solution to the forward problem but add to the defence problem. It will come to the crunch in 2019.

Thread definitely should not be closed - there are too many revealing posts.

Heard a bit of "WEED" call going up last Sunday. It would be good it that took off.

You've got a very long list of favourite commodities there.

IMO that's not correct. Weed is a beautiful kick, I watched it on "all the goals" and that spun as a perfect drop-punt with late fade - only the best can kick that kick. http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2018-08-27/rd-23-all-the-goals 4:50

Kelly is contracted and Geelong said they wont trade him. I believe them too.

If I was West Coast and Gaff nominated MFC I'd match and request a tall in trade. Kennedy is close to retirement age and McGovern can play forward or back. I think OMac, Frost and Weed would be in play if it was me.

I'm confident Weideman will make it as an AFL player. It's someone else's (good) idea - if he doesn't make it as a forward he would make a very good key defender - he's strong in the air, clean at ground level for his size and is a beautiful kick. IMO he has to play this week in Hogan's absence. We've got to bite the bullet and give him his opportunity. In the medium term we do have a problem fitting him into the 22 with TMac and Hogan locking in the 2 tall forward spots and barring long-term injury to either (both have had foot troubles) or a move by Hogan back to Perth - he's going to be at Casey and that will not fulfill his ambitions or capability. If Hogan and TMac look good for 2019 pre-season, IMO it would be worth trying him down back over that period. We could retain T.Smith OR Pedo as willing depth in the key forward area In the long run down back we've got Lever, OMac and Frost (who has enhanced his reputation strongly) too, with Petty and Keilty as willing developing depth. We've got one of two promising talls on our list that are likely to be looking for opportunities elsewhere in the medium term - that's a good problem to have.

I'm in favour of red card but it has to remain 18 v 18 on the field. Red card is only applied if the targetted player is out of the rest of the game - then it's 21 v 21.

Hogan is a great player and I hope he stays. It was absolutely vital that we signed him to his current contract. But if he left at the end of this contract it wouldn't be fatal. TMac has signed long term and Weid is going to make it. We can't currently fit all three in and retain team balance. We have Tim Smith as depth and we could get away with one true tall forward - Richmond-style for a period anyway if necessary. Hogan to Freo for Andrew Brayshaw and their 1st rounder - say pick 6 would be a very reasonable deal for us. Weid is not Hogan but a deal like that means for our best 22 - Out: Hogan, In: Weid, Brayshaw, pick 6. I could live with that.

Tom Scully gets a bad rap. He would have been totally insane not to take that GWS offer and stay at the basket case that was MFC at the time. in the AFL players still don't say they are leaving until they do - look at Tom Lynch. "...lied to dying Jimma's face" - spare me! I'm totally over it - Hogan is at the club as a result.

Good on you for following the under age footy and providing an insight. What this illustrates is how meaningless talk of "2018 super draft" is. No-one really knows. It's only now that there's some real insight into the quality of the 2015 Draft - Schache, Oliver, Francis etc ...

and 2/10 for the top 10!

Should I value your judgement? Here's your post from earlier this year in the corresponding 2017 draft prospects thread (with their actual draft position in brackets added by me): How did that go for you? 3/10 in the top 10 9/20 in the top 20

Highlights package = grain of salt. But there is some tremendous judgement of the flight and one grab marking in that package - it's hard to fake.

Lever trade - IMO fair market value - but you said the Crows would eventually buckle Cameron trade - the Crows held firm and didn't buckle Fully consistent with my position and reality while you're tilting at windmills

The Crows didn't buckle. Another one to support my position. Keep them coming.