old55

Great work by CC. If we think Ball is the best player at our pick we should take him. If someone else is the best choice then pick them. There's a lot of factors that go into deciding who is the best player at a particular pick and often very different players are being compared - it's not easy but that's what BP is paid to do. One factor that wouldn't come into it for me is Ball's preference to play elsewhere. There is no way he'd sit out for 2 years and as CC says he'd give his all. Ball is guaranteed to give us 60 games minimum, that means an 18yo alternative would need to give 100 games minimum given the first 40 would be learning curve. I'm not committed to Ball in any way but I can see how he would be a legitimate selection. The risk that Ball would look elsewhere in 2012 is low - if things go according to plan MFC will be the exciting club on the rise to be at then.

That's the truth, but we're not going to know that for 3-5 years.

Joel Selwood is not going to be in the PSD. It's really a free hit without us having to use an ND pick. Since the rules were changed re contract terms in the ND the PSD has lost its punch.

Nice work thanks McPhee, Macdonald, Shirley, Bradshaw absent.

I believe the official inquiry found no evidence of tanking, I'm not sure what TOX is on about. Since 2000 the premiers have been: Brisbane - salary cap concessions Port Adelaide - start up concessions Sydney - salary cap concessions West Coast - priority pick Captain Geelong - unprecedented father-son advantages Hawthorn - priority pick Wake up and smell the roses - St.Kilda, Carlton, Melbourne, Gold Coast and GWS are all closer to a flag than Collingwood.

And Collingwood's 4th top 8 finish in a row for no flag. You probably think you're getting closer.

You might think I'm making a pedantic point. But it really goes to the heart of the perceived authority of phantom drafts. No-one slides - phantom drafters just get it wrong. The only type of slider that exists is if Barry Prendergast sees more of a player during the year and subsequently rates him lower than he previously did and that's a very different thing.

Oh really? http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/emma...7491840994.html My point exactly! It's an important difference that seems too subtle for some.

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