old55

No I don't think it's a waste if you couch it in terms of which players phantom drafters have over-rated. AFAIK EQ and MB have so far only provided ranges for draftees so far so to be "a slider" he'd need to fall outside their predicted range. It's quite wrong to suggest that players slide - each team in turn has the option to pick the player and has made their rating.

Wed, Nov 18, 2pm – Delisted primary list player draft nomination deadline It appears as though 2pm today Wed 18 Nov should be instructive. It's the deadline for delisted players to nominate for the ND. Players who don't nominate presumably will nominate for the PSD because they have arranged their destination.

If a player rated by Quayle or Burgan in their phantom drafts slid then there may be some basis for this thread. But they haven't puiblished their phantoms yet so there's no even approximate source. And it's quite possible they are being deliberately fed (or even promulgating) misinformation to confuse. There's only one draft.

Slider? A very strange concept. I think you mean which player has been over-rated and over-hyped by ill-informed amateur punters.

unlike you

We might be surprised: In the red dirt Demon president delivers on promise Scully Trengove Butcher Bartlett Gawn Patrick == Thorp Disclaimer: a complete guess without any informed U18 analysis based entirely on hearsay

Well there's Brent Prismall and Brent Moloney - the Geelong fringe player is a good player at other clubs. We can get him virtually for free at a late pick or a PSD pick. As you say he's worth a look at least.

That statement just shows how little you understand.

That your mail has proven to be very reliable - perhaps Demonland deegirl? A fringe player in a champion team is not necessarily a dud and it's facile to assert that. He's potentially a pretty good player, but it's very hard to break into that midfield. He's excctly the right age and he has pace, which when I look at our 2010 best 22 even with Brock gone and Ball not arriving, is a problem. Look at Farren Ray, he made a significant contribution at St.Kilda. I think Tenace could add value. In the long run the problem is that we're aiming to be the next Geelong so that would see him at the fringes and Ray failed in the GF. But there's the possibility that he becomes a more effective player in his late 20s. I'm definitely interested.

Let's say he thinks coming to MFC is like a holiday in Hobart and going to Collingwood is like a holiday to Paris. He's not going to sign up for Hobart when he might get to Paris but if that doesn't come off he'll still have a good time in Hobart. I guess the risk is he may end up holidaying in Alberton.

So for every position lower we finish we get a pick two picks earlier. Lucky tanking doesn't exist or this may be an incentive.

Maybe worth noting that Hughes is, and Meeson would be, a mature age rookie and you're allowed 2 maximum.

My understanding is the issue with Carroll was whether or not we had to pay him out under the circumstances, not whether we could terminate him.

Was never convinced by the arguments that he had only 2 options - St.Kilda or MFC. I thought plan A was St.Kilda but he must have irreconcilable differences with Ross Lyon. He obviously doesn't want to come to MFC and we shouldn't pick him. This is no big surprise or insult - he just doesn't want to go back to 2001 - fair enough, he's done that pain. He must regard North (re-build) and Brisbane (re-locate) as no more evil than MFC. Probably rates Essendon as significantly more desirable. And keeps his dream alive of possibly getting through to Collingwood. The only wildcard is Choco, with only 3 picks it seems unlikely he'd use 16 on Ball, but who knows what he thinks? I read with some amusement the discussion re the Pies prospects in 2010 in the other Ball thread. If he does indeed get through to them, together with Jolly and Pendlebury back (who they sorely missed in last year's finals) they'll be a real premiership threat in 2010. The Saints don't want this (and probably neither does anyone else) and would be happier if he went to North or Essendon.

Do these players have to be delisted prior to the ND and go thru both the ND and the PSD to the Rookie draft or can they be delisted between the ND and the RD and only nominate for the PSD and RD? I guess the players involved would want every chance to be selected onto a senior list so would want to go into the ND, but is it possible to delist them after the ND? It is possible for uncontracted players to just nominate for the PSD - what we want Luke Ball to do.

You keep saying that - why? I know he's from SA and has been placed at 8 or 9 almost universally on Big Footy Phantom Drafts. Do you have more info than that? Have you seen him play? Do you have some inside info from Port? Neither Emma Quayle or Mark Stevens have him going there.

Agree

Indeed Collingwood has an enviable record in all aspects of the game except that last Saturday in September. All those resources, all those opportunities and 1 flag in 50 years! But those top 4 finishes make up for that though don't they 6-1

So Luke Ball might re-sign with St.Kilda, would probably prefer to go to Collingwood and may have some misgivings about coming to Melbourne? OK.

I hope we can get him but I think it's a long shot. The point is, with him we are more likely to improve quicker, it's a lttle self-fulfilling. If he comes we will be better and play finals quicker, if he doesn't we'll take a bit longer. He might be playing a fair bit of VFL or maybe even not at all by 2014. I can definitely understand why he'd prefer to be at a current contender. At St.Kilda or Collingwood he's not going to be #1 opposition focus but in 2010 at Melbourne he is. On the other hand their window is open right now and they must throw everything at winning a flag, we can afford to use him a bit more carefully. I don't think the ND is so fraught for him as everyone likes to make out. We wont pick him at 18 and Richmond and Freo wont pick him either. I don't think WC will pick him but if they did there's worse outcomes than playing in WA with a super rich club on the way up the ladder. Why would he view North as a worse option than us? Essendon is an attractive option. Brisbane like WC is a desirable location. Geelong, Adelaide and then his desired location Collingwood. The worst thing that could happen is that Port picked him at 16 - who knows what Choco thinks! If I was him I'd go ND or a one year deal at St.Kilda and try to get to Collingwood or GC next year.

I'd like us to get a contested marking KP too but only if he's worthy. All I'm trying to do is illustrate that there's a very real and reasonable scenario where we might pick up 4 mids with our first 4 picks. If we do end up with 3 mids or 4 mids then I can understand why and I wont be crying to mummy and tearing my hair out like all those on this forum who demand a KP no matter what. Please yourself, but don't ask me to pass the tissues if it pans out that way ....

I'm trying to imagine the conversation at our draft table ... Chris Connolly: Now Bazza, you know we need a strong contested marking KP - pick one at 11. Barry Prendergast: Yes agree Connolls but Sydney and Port picked the two I rate at 6 and 9 and now there's only flakey ones left and the fact that they picked KPs has let one of the mids I really rate slip through CC: Doesn't matter, we've got to take a KP no matter what and anyway I read on BigFooty that you could throw a blanket over the lot of them from 10 to 25. Just pick one. I think something alarmingly similar to that might have happened in 2001 - well not the BigFooty part but ... CC and BP are not going to fall for that. BP has said he'll pick for need only if he thinks the players are equal. The same argument applies at 18 - the later you get in the draft, the more you can take a risk, but we shouldn't be taking risks with 1st round selections.

Yeah I reckon that's right cake. By 10 November we'll know whether Ball is going somewhere else or it's just St.Kilda or Melbourne. If he doesn't nominate for the ND on 10 November, St.Kilda wont delist him so the 18 November deadline is meaningless - they'd prefer to keep him or see him at MFC (via the PSD) rather than a current flag competitor. 1 December is St.Kilda or Melbourne deadline. If he hasn't nominated for a draft by then he's playing for St.Kilda (on a new contract) or not at all. Of course he might announce his intentions well in advance of any of these dates.

By 10 November we'll know whether Ball is going somewhere else or it's just St.Kilda or Melbourne. If he doesn't nominate for the ND on 10 November, St.Kilda wont delist him so the 18 November deadline is meaningless - they'd prefer to keep him or see him at MFC (via the PSD) rather than a current flag competitor. This really belongs in the Ball thread.

http://forums.demonland.com/index.php?showtopic=16865 For the ND: Tue, Nov 10, 2pm – Out of contract listed AFL primary list players draft nomination deadline For the PSD: Tue, Dec 1, 2pm – Out of contract AFL primary list player draft nomination deadline, NSW scholarship-listed players and international scholarship-listed players inclusion on rookie list deadline