Its Time for Another

I agree. I put them in that category because they are already performing at a consistent AFL level even though there's still a lot of upside whereas the others in the second category haven't got that consistency yet. Some might argue Petracca has but he's a long way off his potential. I don't agree with you on Gawn. He had that season last year but was cruelled by injury this year. Are we worried enough about whether he can recapture his best to put him out of this category? That's a different issue.

A certain R Flower managed to go all right with one of these shoulders for most other career although it probably would have robbed him of a Grand Final appearance if we'd made it in '87. Saw his Open Mike interview again recently and he said he struggled to play a month later in some rep game. Kent is an interesting one. Year before last he was shaping up as one of our key players. His forward pressure was the best in the team and he had a few games he blew open with those fast dashes and goals but injuries and form have brought him down. Really hope he recaptures it and fulfills the glimpses he's shown.

Attitude alone won't save Pedders. His problem is consistency. He's admitted this himself. He covered himself in glory for a few weeks and then dropped off badly at the end of the season. I don't know if that's an attitude problem or something else. If he knew he'd fix it.

I'd like to agree with you and without question his best is best 22 but his problem which he has admitted and which Paul Roos mentioned is his inconsistency. He had a purple patch and I thought he'd really finally arrived but then in the last month he vanished again especially when we really needed him to stand up. That's the reason I don't have him best 22 and that's the reason he'll be gone if the Weid come through. The only hope is that he works out why he played so well for those couple of games and can make that consistent.

There's 36 on the list now including Smith. Plus 4 draft picks makes 40. Plus 4 Rookies makes 44. A list can be up to 47 with a maximum of 6 rookies which means there's still room for 2 more rookies. So stop being your namesake and check your facts before blasting away saying "Wrong" when you don't know what you're talking about.

I like many on here and in the press are expecting the Dees to substantially improve and at least make finals next year. The improvement other than Lever's inclusion is expected to come from assumptions that many of our players who haven't reached their potential yet will do so next year. For instance Jon Ralph wrote this week the Dees will win the flag if Petracca kicks 40 goals. So I thought I'd go through the list and break it down into players who have reached their potential and those who haven't reached their potential yet but we hope are going to next season. I've also loosely broken them down into positions but that is very fluid. It's also a useful exercise in working out list weaknesses for drafting. Will be interested to read people's opinions. I have included Oliver in players who have reached their potential because he's already playing at an outstanding level even though he clearly has a lot more improvement to go. So arguably he could go in either. Whereas I have put Tyson in the not reached potential yet because I think there's such a knock on his disposal that if he doesn't improve it he could well be moved on in the next couple of seasons. So arguably hasn't reached his full potential. We are all hoping and expecting future stars like Hogan, Petracca, Brayshaw, Hunt & Salem go to the next level next year and be consistent high level performers to push us deep into finals. But the fact is "hoping" is the big question. None of them are there yet and whether some or all of them do or don't will decide the future success of the team. Players who are top 22 and have reached their potential

Why not? We have 4 Rookies and can have up to 6. We have the list room for 6if we choose to.

Nice one Ignition. Hats off to you.

DS you're right on Lumumba & Trengove. Shame on me for forgetting them. But I think you'll find our primary list last year was 39. I just rechecked again. Not sure where I've got that wrong if I did. So far we have 6 out 2 in. So primary list of 35 plus Smith upgraded in the draft. If there's no more trades that would leave a min of 2 or max of 4 draft picks. If that smokey player Siren has mentioned is traded in it would be 1 less. This all still leaves the potential for up to another 2 Rookie A's and 1 Rookie B or 1 Rookie A 2 Rookie B's. Or no more Rookies. Clear as mud.

Thanks MAH. Can't take the credit for the graph. It's actually from the AFL's official rules book.

That's correct. Both our current ones are going off that list so it will be empty and therefore can take up to 2.

Here's an explanation of how many players permitted on a list from the minimum on a Primary list of 38 to max of 40 and the consequent number of Rookies you can have making a max total on the list of 47. Primary List Size Category A Rookies Category BRookies Total Rookies (Maximum) Total 38 (Minimum) 6 3 9 47 39 5 3 8 47 40 (Maximum) 4 3 7 47 We had a Primary list of 39 this season. If Watts goes we have 4 out and likely 2 in. So our list will be 37. Departures so far should be Watts, Hulett, Spencer, Kennedy and ins should be Lever and Balic. A team has to have 3 draft picks in a draft which would increase our primary list to 40. So we can't use more than 2 decent picks anyway. We can use pick 100 or whatever for a Rookie upgrade for Smith. We had 4 A's & 2 B's this year. Mitch White is the only A lister delisted so far. Maynard has been elevated onto that list and Smith we assume will be elevated onto the primary list. So we can potentially take on 2 more Rookie A players and 1 Rookie B or 1 Rookie A and 2 Rookie B's.

I'll be very annoyed if Hogan decides in the next two years he's going to go home and we had the chance to get Schache for next to nothing now. Same with Tom Lynch by the middle of next year if he decides he wants to go back to Vic and Hogan then tells us the following year he wants to go home. I really hope that by the middle of next year he signs up for 5 years and puts end to the endless speculation. Same with T Mac. Hope he doesn't carry on as a leader of the Club and hold off till the end of the year again. It's a downer for everyone else.

He's in there as one of the U23's. He's barely out of draft age.

Fair point. But we have plenty of time to start bringing in younger players in a few years time.

For those worried about us losing out on youth by trading out the two years of first rounders. Have a look at this demographic breakdown of the list. We don't need to worry about getting youth into the list. 22 players, half the list is 23 or under. 6 20 or under. Melbourne players who are 20 years and under: Oliver, Weideman, McKenna, King, Johnstone, Filipovic 23-21years : Viney, Petracca, Hogan, Hunt, Brayshaw, Salem, Harmes, McDonald, Stretch, ANB, JKH, Kent, Hannan, Wagner, Joel Smith and now Lever. 24 years: Tyson Frost Bugg are 24.

Plus Tom Lynch for nothing as an FA

Last year was no first rounder because we brought it forward to the year before and got Weideman. This year & next is to get Lever who is 21. We have the 3rd youngest list. We don't want to be going to the draft for top end talent anymore. We'd have to wait 4 years for them to be ready. We don't have that time anymore. We can bring in kids in a few years.

Do you know if he get a choice or does the system dictate the draft?

Does he go into pre season draft or national draft. In same scenario Ball went into the National draft and he went all the way through toCollingwood’s pick 30.

He was a Restricted Free Agent and Adelaide said they’d match the Cats offer which forced Cats to trade picks. Lever is actually easier because as an in contracted player he can just walk and Crows can’t stop him. He can use Luke Ball trick. Put a ridiculous price on his head and say he’ll only take one year at any other Club and then go in the draft again. No Club would touch him and he goes to Dees and Crows get nothing. He goes to us and then negotiates a 5 year deal or whatever and the first year price is absorbed into the contract. Ultimately that is why Crows will have to be reasonable. Im sure I t won’t get to that. Also sure Lever won’t want to leave that way unless absolutely forced.

Ron, alternatively if they win he might be more prepared to leave having achieved the ultimate and knowing back to back is rare. If they lose he might stick around and think they're so close we'll get it next year and they are way ahead of that happening at Dees. This is why you've just convinced me to support the Crows on Saturday

Because he invented the Toby Green don't argue flying for the ball with his legs parallel to the ground and feet directed at anyone who wanted to get in the way of him or the ball. All 70kg's of him.

Cool. Based on last night's game. He'd be ok. Still think horse trading will go on.

Don't know why people are wasting time debating two first rounders. Won't happen. Crows know this. They said themselves last year on Gibbs trade 2 first rounders would be irresponsible list management. I know this isn't Gibbs but he was contracted Lever isn't. It will be some sort of combination amounting to a 1st & 2nd & maybe steak knives of pick swaps and or a player of a Wagner level. Picks are only worth what you get for them. I have a feeling there will be a combination of other trades involved which might effect lots of horse trading not just what happens in this one. A few have mentioned maybe Motlop. It'll all wash out. All I know is the first time since 1964 we have the right people in the right positions making these decisions. I trust their judgement more than mine or anyone on here or anywhere else.