old55

Or perhaps it's going to get embroiled in a Fevola deal?

I'm with rpfc a 1 year extension now. Otherwise Bailey must coach for wins at the expense of all else from R1 next year.

Aaron Judd?

Agree. Our prospects of winning games in 2010 have further receded if we retain pick 11 and take a skinny KPF in place of Brock McLean. After drastic "list management" during the season, we are (correctly IMO) continuing to make sacrifices now for better days in the future. That puts Bailey is in an extremely unreasonable position if he's to be judged by match results in 2010. Who could blame him chasing Burgoyne, Fevola and Hall if that's the case? You can't have it both ways.

The Blues have a 2-3 year window with Fev but they have a 5-6 year window with Judd, Waite, Murphy, Gibbs, Kruezer and now McLean. Trading Fev now would be a gutsy move but they have time to replace him and have shown an ability to get their man to the club - Stevens, Judd, Warnock.

I get it - you would've like some more attacking losses. We could definitely have defeated Sydney in Canberra and who knows what might have happened against North and Carlton if for example we didn't play 4 ruckmen on the field at the one time. You probably thought Spencer, Jamar, Paul Johnson and McLean was the best forward set-up we had all year.

No surprise that you think that ending up with picks 1 & 2 was a disaster. Would you prefer to have won 7 or 8 games?

I think you're on the right track and that would be more meaningful.

Indeed - it's a powerful change to the rules to make the contract expire pre-National draft and allow players to nominate in there with a price. It's going to make Trade week more active and reduces the power of the PSD, particularly PSD 1 - quality players will not get through to the PSD unless they want to go to a club with an early pick. This Burgoyne case is an excellent example, PSD 1 for Burgoyne is a total no-brainer but an early ND 1st rounder is serious ju-ju. As you point out if Port refuses the Hawks pick 9 then they will end up with nothing and Burgoyne still has an excellent chance of getting to the Hawks. Meanwhile we can huff and puff about PSD 1 but it doesn't mean much (e.g. to Port and Burgoyne who will go into the ND) unless it's a club with a player who wants to come to us - that player can threaten to by-pass the ND and go straight into the PSD. I'm assuming that this is still allowed? I recall last year that a special exception had to be made for Liam Jurrah to nominate for the PSD when he didn't nominate for the ND but I'm assuming that only applies to "new" players not to out of contract players. If it applies to out of contract players too then the PSD is a dead-duck and may as well be ditched.

Davis has certainly been a disappointment in finals - he has averages 15 possession in his last 8 finals over the past 3 years. What's Davey's finals record like?

Interesting that he just came off a 3 year deal - first 2 years ordinary, last year his best - probably just a coincidence. Would you put any performance incentives in this 4 year deal of yours?

Aaron Davey is a very good player - nearly as good as Leon Davis - we wouldn't want to lose him.

4-6 years is realistic for us. In 4 years Watts and Scully will be 22 and they're going to be key to us winning any flag - to expect more earlier is very optimistic. Brock is not getting any quicker and who knows where he'll be at in 2014 - as Hannibal has pointed out, look at Luke Ball. Brock goes to Carlton, they get Waite and Warnock playing and are contenders next year - it's not that hard to understand. It's a win-win-win deal for Carlton-MFC-Brock. Other clubs are paralysed by inaction or trying to screw out deals at trade time - it's great that we've got a clean major deal done.

good start ...

That taste is sentimentality - the champagne in the premiership cup doesn't taste like that - ask Max Hudghton. By the way - that 2nd quote is not mine - you need to be more careful with your cut and paste.

Yes the Grimes/Johnstone trade looks like we may come out in front if his body stands up to AFL. Yes Bell has been disappointing, but to assess the Woewodin trade you've got to look at what Woey did at Collingwood - 62 games, one really good year, we're in the red but not by much. There's the Dunn/Jolly trade and we're in the red there. But all these trades had legitimacy - Johnstone, no comment required, - Woey, it's about who we drafted - we didn't lose much - Jolly behind White and would've left the year after for much less compensation any way. We've been one of the most aggressive clubs trading for 1st rounders in a bid to improve our list and I think that's good.

No prefer Rohan, but haven't seen either live.

Someone with a big nose or maybe trouble staying awake?

Indeed, with the exception of Watts, Morton, Grimes and possibly Jurrah and Frawley any offer of a 1st rounder for any of our players would have to be seriously considered It's a good comparison and illustrates what we risk. Pick 11 might give us access to a KPF that doesn't warrant pick 2 but wont make it to pick 18. Best case we're looking at 5th or 6th best KPF at pick 18.

IMO Judd and Riewoldt have great on field personas - both are leadership personified. How did you feel about Nathan Buckley?

Do you know any of them personally?

Could not disagree more ... Both would be very deserving winners, so it's hard to split them - makes for a very exciting day Riewoldt is a fantastic player who has been a real difference in both finals and has totally stood up as a great captain should - if Watts turns out even nearly as good as him I will cry with happiness.

Why would Port Adelaide do that - they're giving up a 1st round pick and a player picked in the 1st round for pick 2 - it's a shocking deal for them and would never happen. If we had pick 8 would you give Cale Morton and pick 8 to Richmond for pick 3? No I didn't think so. But that's what you're asking PA to do. See my trade scenario: Pick 2, 18 and 34 for Boak and pick 8 more realistic but still stacked in our favour. Means we end up with Scully, Boak and our pick of KP at 8. So we equate Boak with Trengove and lose pick 34 to get a improvement from 18 to 8 in a shot for KP.

Who says Boak wants to move? If he does then ... Picks 2, 18 and 34 for Boak and Pick 8 Gives Port the SA boy Trengove and a decent pick at 18 and a filler at 34 Gives us a quality Victorian midfielder and a much earlier crack at a KP with 8. The balance is probably still in our favour The alternative might be: Pick 2 for Pick 8 and Pearce

Minimum number of talls selected in the first 17 picks in the past 8 years is 4 (in 2006 it was 12). Unless some new record is created, the best case we'll be looking at is 5th best rated tall at 18.