Dappa Dan

Upside down 6, his old number.

Just to change topic... Has anyone looked at his highlights package on the app? Actually sat through all of them? I know you can likely do that sort of thing for a lot of players.... but still... Imagine all those pack marks up one end, and Jesse up the other... That'll make you forget about the 2018 draft quicksmart.

Ok. Predicted superdrafts usually end up with more than the usual AA players. We're not talking about pick 44 becoming a freak, we're talking about first rounders going on to have good 150-200 game careers, and be decorated. I don't remember 2006 being called a superdraft. 2008 has been a success largely. Watts is a good player (not great but will rack up 250 games at least), NN, Hill, Hartlett, Hurley, Yarran, Ziebell, Davis, Sidebottom, Ballantyne, Trengove all within the first 22 picks. All have shaped the fortunes of clubs. Yes there's a few Vickery's in there, but that's true of 2001 as well, and the Buddy draft (Tambling). If you can't call 2008 a good draft then we don't need to continue this conversation at all. I don't know what planet you're living on with 2013. Everyone talked that up as a strong year I thought? All the Kelly Bont etc stuff. I think because we traded away our pick 2, it's got that reputation, but leading up to it I don't recall anyone poo-pooing it. And 2015 I don't remember being called weak either. I've been following drafting like everyone else, but only from about 2006 onwards. My point is that you can find exceptions to the rule, but there hasn't been a big superdraft year that was a complete let down. And a lot of meh draft years ave turned out to be just that. The Scully one is the big one that springs to mind, mostly cos we all follow demons. Saints get picks 1 and 2 and get Riewoldt and Kosi. Hawks get 2 and 5 and get Roughie and Buddy. We get Scully. People predicted it, and they were right. There's no comparison. Your second point: Of COURSE you can find a few good names. That's true of every draft ever. This is exactly what I'm talking about. You can't claim that just because Dusty went in a draft with Fyfe that it's a good draft. Look at the name around them. Scully isn't that great. Trengove and Morabito went on to do nothing (yes, yes, we know about injury), Cunnington's a good honest footballer not much more, Rohan's a flashy but inconsistent player, Sheppard and Butcher (who?), Moore, Melksham, Gysberts, Lucas.... Am I painting a picture here? That is a LOT of junk for what was, so you say, NOT a weak year? The pundits exaggerate a lot of the time, but the gist is usually correct. Having said all that, if the club thinks the 2018 draft isn't QUITE a superdraft... or perhaps they're projecting that we'll have pick 14-18... and that a pick in that area will get only a B+ player... Then hey, they've done well. It's risky... but aggressive. I really do want that first rounder in 2018... but these guys have earned our trust.

No disrespect, but that's EXACTLY what it's about. Trade tables and free agency if done badly can be the difference. Noone knows that better than MFC fans. Everyone's making good reasons for why it's a good trade. And good reasons for why it's not. The only real question that will last into the coming years is... what's better... Lever and no 2018 first rounder. Or Lever AND a 2018 first rounder. The second option is always preferable. I've noticed the glass-half-full folks on here haven't made the argument "There's no way we could have kept that 2018 first rounder." I suspect the truth is we could have, with a lot of messing around with later picks. THAT'S the point. Pick 35 could be the next Hunt. Lever could go on to win 3 Norm Smiths and a couple of Blueys. It's irrelevant. We'll never know now what we could have done with that extra first round pick. The pick that everyone seems to agree we could have kept. I'm still waiting with bated breath though. Two second rounders (albeit late) and the Watts trade. You never know. We could find ourselves with, say, the Pies 2018 first rounder. There's no doubt that as of now, the Pies 2018 first rounder will end up being an earlier pick than our first rounder in 2018.

It's one of the funniest things happening in AFL at the moment. Now that we're bringing in draft day trading, I think this rule will be considered an oddity of history.

Well that's not true at all. An above average draft is talked about as a superdraft. And a slightly shallow draft is looked on as "weak." People go to the extreme of whatever the popular opinion is. This year was spoken about as a "weak" year for the last 3 years. Next year has been a superdraft for the last 18 months. One annoying thing about these popular opinions is they tend to be self fulfilling. Predicted superdrafts always end up being exactly that. And weak drafts always end up with only a few AA players. You should have seen the pasting I got when I suggested it was a shame we got the first two picks in a weak draft year when we took Scully and Trengove. Now go back and look at that draft. It stunk. The predictions weren't wrong.

There's a lot of confusion about that rule. Geelong broke it, but requested permission from the AFL, which they gave. I feel like it's something that would have cancelled the trade had that rule still been in effect. So we should be ok.

Technically, yes. But it's almost the last pick of the second round. In a weak draft. It's still good though. Pick 35 with our recruiters is worth about pick 19 with the Pies recruiters.

Interesting. Good get. Doesn't change the fact that a 2018 pick is worth more than a 2017 equivalent. But still well done on the sums.

I hate when I'm right.

Yup. I said before the end of the season that two first was worth paying. But in the weeks leading up, a 1st and 2nd made sense given it was a superdraft. Even two early second rounders that could be flipped to get us into 2018 again would have been better.

Big talk. You should tip them, right?

I'm inclined to agree. PhillySS.

We all only need make one pick this week. No way anyone isn't picking the Pack and Pats with their first two.

TNF will make up for it. Wentz vs Newton. Who are we picking in THAT one?

Actually, on further inspection, Chris Johnson has been released.

Yeah I see, hence the AP signing. It's interesting though. He's gone from being the fourth in line guy behind Rawls, Lacy and McKissick to being either third or fourth in line behind Ellington, CJ2K or Williams. I'm thinking they saw Johnson against the Eagles run stuffers and thought, nup, too old, he's done. Weird that they get AP to do that role. He's lost a step as well.

Oooh. No I was talking about Chris Johnson who they signed and have been rolling with in a committee.

Oh man. I didn't even know he was hurt. Off to my fantasy squad to put a waiver request in.

Makes sense sort of. He wasn't being used, even with two of their RBs out. They obviously are going to just use Lacy and Rawls. Cards though must have lost patience with CJ2K.

Sweeeeeeeeeeet.

Is he better than Glennon? Yes. Is he better than Cutler was? Hmmm. Could be. Bears will be pleased so far... But TBH as far as rookie QBs go this year Watson has been unbelievable. Article yesterday had every teams quickest player as recorded by the speedo this year. Fournette was #1 league wide at 23 mph or something. Quicker than DJax, quicker than Hill... I didn't know he was a speed guy, I thought he was a heavy slower guy. Impressive. Yeah I saw that one to Watkins, and as an impartial I was pleased Goff went for it. The fact he has the guts to throw to Sherman on a one-on-one in his second year on back to back plays. I know only one came off, but they were both good throws that Sherman couldn't have gotten to. That was really something. I had to rub my eyes and check it really was him. You just never see Sherman in regular plays like that. Yeah you should be confident. There was an article today on the most watchable teams in the league right now. Eagles #1, Rams #2... and Eagles were only #1 cos you just don't know if it'll continue, or if it'll explode in their faces, which makes them more watchable for drama than for excellence. Eagles first quarter was like football porn. I can't remember the last time I could sit back and enjoy a second half of Eagles footy.

Yeah he's right. Their O line has been spectacularly bad. Commentators have been ruthless too which is never a good sign. Usually they're kind and make excuses. They took this kid Ereck Flowers two years ago at 9th overall... and overlooked a couple of players many had pegged as better in the same position. He's been spectacularly poor. So much so that when they played the Eagles, they knew they couldn't allow Eli to get sacked so they went no huddle and got the ball out quicker. Which meant no deep routes. Which meant they lost. McAdoo will have to do a lot just to keep his job. Even if they go 6-10, or even 8-8 by some miracle... They're just as likely to turn up next year and end up with a sub .500 record. In which case, he's gone. Pumped about tomorrow. Vikes D is good to watch and Bradford is back. More importantly though, Vikings win, I go into the lead.

Yeah I'm assuming many many heads will roll, and their first pick will be Eli's replacement. And yeah, fun times with QBs. It's looking like it's not even going to be that interesting to have a good one, as there's only a few teams who have basket-case QBs or backups put into single-season starting roles.

Yup. I do love that you're never more than a few days from a game to watch. As an aside. And as an impartial who knows a thing or two about gun QBs... How do you feel about the Wentz, Goff, Dak QB class?