Demon_JB

Like many others have said, 2016 is a big year for the MFC. Trading away our future first round was a statement despite next years crop is touted as a 'super draft'. We have a lot at stake here.

The guy can time his leads well but also take a massive pack mark. If he gets his body right and plays consistent footy he will be a very valuable asset for us.

Yeh I agree. We don't know for certain if Oliver would have lasted at pick 6 however. He might have, but by all reports Essendon seemed just as keen on him also. I think it has all panned out well.

Can I just say, I think this new Demons outfit is justified by the pick of Clayton Oliver. Old Melbourne would have been sucked in the hype of Parish and the media and would have just pulled the trigger on him at pick 3. Our recruiting team obviously identified a need, identified his strength as a player and chose him at 3 despite Parish being the clear front runner for pick 3 long before Clayton.

A few things stand out for me when watching Oliver His ability to break tackles, get his arms free and handball out of congestion over players heads His ability to take contested marks His goal kicking ability as a mid The way he stops and props and allows his opponents to be drawn to him to allow his team mate to be free so then he can fire out a handball (Think Sam Mitchell) In one game he kicked 6 as a mid, he got 30/30 for the goal kicking in the draft combine meaning he can slot them on both feet. He has all the right attributes to be a massive player for us going forward. Sure, Parish has more speed, he can play inside & out but in terms of his contested marks, goal kicking and ability to break tackles and handball over people to clear congestion Oliver is the clear winner for me here.

Drafting someone like Oliver is less of a risk than Parish. I feel given the state of us needing to draft competitors and bringing in tall big bodied mids, we will go with Clayton.

If we were to draft wideman and Oliver, it makes sense that wideman goes at three. If we take Oliver at three wouldn't essendon most likely draft parish and wideman?

Could there be a scenario where we get Parish at 3 and Oliver at 7 and disregard a tall completely? We will have Pederson & Frost coming back from injury, with Dawes as a decoy/support. Maybe we might look at drafting two mids (one with speed and outside class) the other a bollocking inside mid and see what happens next year in the draft of the year after where we haven't traded away our future pick to get a key forward? If we get a forward in Wideman this year, I don't see him making an impact for 2+ years. Do we sit tight, draft talented midfielders who are more likely to make an impact within two years. and wait until a key forward becomes available within the next year or two via a trade or free agency?

I was shocked Richmond didn't go for Garlett.. One thing they were lacking was a good crumbing forward player.

The more I'm thinking about it the more I think we are going to get curnow at 3 and get one of the best available mid fielders at 7. With widemans injuries and fitness concerns I feel as though we might be looking at locking curnow away early.

Reading things like this excites me. I have really high hopes for Salem. Do others agree he could potentially be one of our best?

Answer me this. Which has more depth right now as we speak. Our forward line or our midfield?

Exactly this. I keep harping on about it. We don't just need midfielders.. People keep crying out that we have a weak midfield. We don't just have a weak midfield. We lack experienced and veteran midfielders. We don't NEED to draft another young midfield brigade. Look at the list that was quoted above ^. Which is exactly why we need a tall at 3 or 7.

Is it at all out of the realm of possibly we take Weideman at 3 and we take the mid that falls to us at 7 out of Mathieson, Oliver & Francis given Parish would be snapped up prior to our next live pick? Is there more upside in landing a KPF to partner with Hogan and a mid who may not be as good as Parish now in his junior years? Is the gap between Parish and the other mids that great we MUST take Darcy at 3 and miss out on a chance at getting a KPF in the draft?

I'm in the same boat

I just don't see it happening.. Banking on two tall players, one of them a potential forward mid I feel will be too risky for them.

Essendon won't take both Curnow and Wideman at 4 & 5.

One of Francis or Mathieson, Essendon simply don't get both Curnow & Wideman, one of them will fall to us at 7.

Fair call, I just remember everyone including myself thinking we found a player here and then turned out to be our whipping boy. Not sure what went wrong with him after such a promising start.

I hope now he has earned his spot in the senior side and a contract, he doesn't stop competing and going the extra level to become even better and a consistent contributor. Blokes like Jordie Mckenzie come to mind when he first played with his ferociousness around the ball and tackling and we thought "Gee, we have a player here" I hope his attitude stays positive, we have had too many players in the past who choose to take the easy option after putting pen to paper. Bring on 2016. Go Dees!

Bloke from my work, his father works for Redlegs function. Has dinners with a lot of melbourne footy club players once every 3 or so weeks.

We will be getting Parish at 3 and one of Wideman/Curnow at 7. Bookmark it.

With the right diet, training anyone can bulk up.. It's not a matter of 'I wonder if he can bulk up or not' I used to have Parish's frame at his age and similar height. I started to eat 5 meals a day, all good clean bulking foods, did sprints, lifted heavy weights and I've put on heaps of mass. And the smaller you are, the easier it is for you to bulk up.

It's either going to be one of: Parish / Curnow Parish / Wideman I reckon.

Curnow will fall to 7. Essendon would be dead set keen on Weideman and there is no way they are drafting wideman and curnow at four and five. They will probably draft Francis and wideman, Gold Coast Milera leaving us with Curnow.