Skuit

Compared to last year it has been a pretty weak draft for names. Now that I've seen his full name is Kysaiah Kropinyeri-Pickett I'm completely sold. Who's down with K.K.P - yeah, you know - me.

The Vitruvian Man!

Interesting. I recall in recent times we were running drills with attackers outnumbering the defence?

While we're all sharing our car-rolling stories: my best friend barely clipped a round-about in his Subaru on a Sunday morning once and we briefly went up on two wheels before landing safely and breathing a big sigh of relief. We'd been doubling-down on MDMA for around the past 14 hours, so according to the law of diminishing returns I don't think it would have been a major factor by then.

I have a random question (for those on here in the know): do the recruitment team ever consult the current players on their thoughts prior to the draft? It would make sense - but I don't think I've ever heard of this spoken about.

Fair enough. I have no idea of his basketball credentials - but evidently they were decent. So being willing to back out of a potential but unfulfilling career at a young age could also indicate a high level of maturity.

Those losers have to deal with faulty Centrelink robo-debts. But ask @ding: just give the kid a big fuzzy ball and some jelly and it will be fine - freeing up Papa to concentrate on football.

We need an Elijah Taylor thread. Although Taylor picking Taylor might be a bit too Inception for some.

Definitely bid on Green. It doesn't matter if we're flush with inside-mids: our draftees won't make a difference to our immediate flag chances. If we uncover another blue-chipper like Oliver in Green - then the investment will pay dividends in a couple of years. Whether that be trading out Green, or another one of our insiders. Oliver is worth close to two pick 3's. Paraphrasing, but Taylor said in his recent Road to the Draft interview that Green will have a stellar AFL career.

Amateur-hour contribution but I sense a go-home factor in Deven which may be limiting the commentary. (Same for Henry, but he's already being marketed by Freo, so there's no way they will let him slip regardless). For whatever reason, I don't have the same feeling re. Jackson. Maybe it's his previous exposure to the world? That raises an interesting point regarding Jackson though - which only just occurred to me now: Kid was on a lucrative path toward the NBA. Called his mum while on camp and gave it up. It doesn't scream mental fortitude to continue through the hard times . . . (No serious aspersions intended).

In fairness dee-tox, it may be that other clubs have leaked following our open discussions. In saying that, I have no idea why we would bother telling other clubs that we're looking at Pickett at 10. Unless . . . MFC: 'Hey, Freo, we'll swap you 8 for 10 & 28 if you don't intend on taking Young.' Freo: 'Sure. Robertson is our man. But what about Henry?' MFC: 'We won't bid on Henry and Western can have Weightman. We like Pickett.' (People forget that Freo still have to pay for Henry. Massive points dif. between 8 and 16). Media (MFC trades for 10. Likes Pickett . . .): 'MFC likes Pickett for pick 10' (I think I may be in denial about potentially missing out on Young after giving up 8).

This Grundy kid goes alright. Any chance he slips through to 28?

Simon-Kucher & Partners - one of the world's leading consultancies - recently elected co-CEOs.

Yup. You definitely caught me out. But he also has a super-high D/E - and while that stat is mostly b/s, it's high compared to all the other half-backs in the pool. The fact that he can nail a high number of those damaging kicks is exciting - and as been stated before, why is everyone talking about the upside of other unproven draft prospects while dismissing any potential upside in Young?

I think that may be baby-boomer Josh.

Now down to 117 days and 8 hours. I'm starting to get nervous.

These were a few of the quotes I patched together from earlier draft reports, which also noted a bit of mongrel and his desire to tackle. "Has explosive speed", "is a damaging half-back with great intercept marking." ‘"Explosiveness from packs", "Disciplined, checking his opponents tightly and providing them with few opportunities." Sure, a phenomenal kick (Knightmare says the best in a draft prospect outside of Lukosius last year), but it's not like he's lacking in other areas. Also topped the agility test and has leadership qualities. Have no idea where this notion that he's not physically developed comes from - watching the highlights and he constantly backs into packs (maybe one-on-one, he's easily pushed off the ball?) I don't think you can say he's just an everyday back-flanker, a la Marty Hore. Has potential upside in other areas, and looks a better prospect than Lever - who we picked up for around the same or more. A couple of weeks ago Young seemed a lock for 3 - so the sliding since smells a bit fishy to me. I get the talking up of Jackson, but not the fresh knocks on Young.

Demonland added an annoying countdown feature which shows that round one is still 117 days and 9 hours away. You could pretty much fly to Mars in that time.

Ripping right foot pass at the start of that package.

Sweet. We should be eligible for Petracca father-sons shortly after the bye.

But are we posters ourselves providing oxygen for that fire? In Twomey's latest phantom (and he seems to have got the ball rolling on Jackson during the Taylor draft interview) he writes: "Jackson will be the first ruckman to be picked inside the top 10 since 2011 when he has his name called, with the West Australian expected to head to Demonland. Thought it was strange, as it's not a commonly used phrase. Made me think he'd been reading the forums.

Yes, it does seem like Taylor is a bit of a basketball fan. I think I heard somewhere that Pendlebury used to play b'ball as well.

Jackson Weightman Someone random.

My biggest supporter regret is still the loss of Liam Jurrah. I've always backed possibilities like Bennell and was disappointed we lost Frost. Because while winning is great, I still want some extra-natural excitement in watching my team. I rate our list and don't think who we draft will be the key in delivering us flag. I support Taylor and Goodwin and absolutely adore Clarry. I also think draft picks should be considered like a non-refundable gift voucher - it doesn't matter if you spend the full value so long as you get what you want. I should be super-excited by the prospect of Jackson and Pickett. And yet, where this draft is heading leaves me feeling somewhat uneasy. I think it's because of how far the assessment of talent has shifted in the past two weeks - post-football. An outside top-ten prospect and a player slated for the 30s are now our potential pick 3 and what was pick 8.

I get this - turn 10 into two strikes at longer-odds needs-based. (Our draft-hand and pick-trade movements have to be looked at holistically) Port would be the one who should net us both. 12 & 18 in exchange for 10 & 28 & future 4th. Gets us ahead of the Dogs on Weightman at 13 and should be enough to land Pickett. I suppose the key would be Stephens (or another decent prospect) still on the table at 10. Though I think there will still be someone of interest in the mix at 13 who the Dogs will prioritise. So that opens up Geelong at 14 & 17 as well - and then, repeating, GC at 15 & 20. But I think Port are then a threat on KP at 18 if they also hold 12 &16. I wasn't a fan of us trading down from 8 pre-draft - as that was the absolute sweet spot. But we may have calculated that 10 is also also a decent sweet spot, and with 28 gives us extra flexibility.