RalphiusMaximus

This is pretty much exactly what the rookie list of for. Big upside, big downside player who could go either way. Why not take a punt?

Pretty sure we'd be happy with any of the 3-8 range kids to be honest. They all seem to be pretty similar in overall ability. Certainly if you look at what we need Parish looks to be a great fit with the clean hands and foot skills. I'm quite looking forward to seeing what we do on draft day.

I think he's had long enough at North to show what he can do. He's capable of moments of awesome, but for the mot part he's a traffic cone. I don't see the point.

This too is a fair point. I sometimes forget how big a step up there is between the age groups for teen sports. It's one I failed to make, so you'd think I could relate.

The photo of him standing next to his dad makes him look good. Has a nice build and good height. He played u16's so should have the basic skills he needs.

All speculation aside, this is great news for the pair of them. I'm thrilled the club has signed them both.

Freo's recruiters had him in their top 5. They had to argue with the coach and admin to take him when they did.

I don't know which thread it's in, but someone posted a highlights package for him a few weeks ago that made him look like a soft outside spud who can't hit targets. His passes to the leading forwards were exactly what we see from the team already, either too long or dropping short. Nobody looking at that footage would have him as a first round pick. The footage posted above is far more impressive.

He's the Lucas Cook of defenders. Big and slow, can kick a bit but doesn't handle pressure at all.

The thing that I like about Curnow is the work ethic. If you look at his interviews he talks about how hard it was for his brother to find a spot in a team and how it really drove home for him the amount of work needed to make it at the top level. This is what makes me believe that he will be able to make himself into the oversized mid that Roos wants us to develop. He understands that his running isn't there yet and he'll need to work really hard to get up there, but he seems to be up for the challenge.

Much better footage of him in there than in the previous highlight package. Very nice kick on both sides.

Reminds me of a Malthouse comment. He said it doesn't matter where in the draft they go, because every kid in the draft can play. What matters is how you develop them once they're at the club. Just had a look at them myself. The kid could really play. Clean hands, good evasive skills, good vision and disposal.

Nope. The pick was fine if a little high. The result was bad. There's a massive difference.

So, assuming that Parish, Francis, Curnow and Weideman are gone by seven, who are the contenders for pick seven? Not having read the whole thread because it seemed like a lot of work, I see some support for Oliver. I assume Balic would be in the running as well. Would it be worth taking an early punt on Rioli given that he'd be gone by the time our next pick arrived?

I don't dispute that we took him early. My issue is with people ranking him with epic failures such as Cook. Molan could play. His career was ended by terrible luck rather than a lack of ability or application like Cook. I just think it's monumentally unfair to list him as one of the club's great recruiting blunders. You might as well call the Ox an unfulfilled talent because his knees preventing him from matching the career of Carey.

We'll smash the crowd the Pies drew when they tried to play in that slot. Hopefully we'll smash the Tiggers as well.

I really wish people would stop rubbishing poor Luke Molan. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the decision to take him. His career was destroyed by terrible luck and perhaps a lack of self-preservation. He never lacked for talent, application or aggression. Nobody could have predicted the succession of impact injuries he suffered. On Weideman, I'd be thrilled to land either he or Curnow at 7. I think either one of them would be a great get for the club. A big, reasonably athletic forward with some mongrel and aggro is just what we need.

It seems that the club is absolutely set on who they want at three given the lengths they went to to get the pick. Consensus is that it'll be Parish. Despite his terrible highlights video most observers say that he really does have great disposal which is what we need more than anything. Personally I'd be thrilled if Curnow were to slip through to us at 7 but that doesn't seem to be on the cards. I can see him developing into a really good mid who can push forward and have an impact if a club wanted to take him in that direction.

Not overly worried. We have the next two years to show that the club is going to play finals and be a contender. If we can do that he'll most likely stick around, especially if Fremantle and West Coast drop off a bit. If we stay in the cellar then he'll be a certainty to move back to Perth. Who thinks we won't be playing finals in two years?

Most of it's been covered, but here are the points: - Not counted as part of the list for the purpose of player numbers (ie he's not one of the 44 listed players). - His wages are not counted in our salary cap. - We have him for an initial contract of 2 years. If we like him we can then add him to our Rookie list for a further two years. - The same rules apply for upgrading him as for any other Rookie. To qualify as a Category B Rookie a player can not have been a part of any Aussie Rules List for three years (pretty sure that's the limit) and I think they have to be playing another sport at the elite level. Playing Basketball for Australia obviously qualifies him. Blicavs at Geelong was trying out for the Olympic track and field team as a steeplechaser when he signed with them. There was a bit of talk earlier this year that Alex Keath wanted to get back into AFL. This is the route he would be taking as well, and I think he'd have his pick of pretty much every club in Victoria if he decides to do it. So basically we get to sign him outside the drafting system, pay him whatever we like and he doesn't cost us anything in terms of salary cap or list composition for two years while we train him up and see if he can really play.

I don't think there's much in the second round this year to excite. I'm torn on the Melksham deal because I really don't rate him, but again we only paid pick 25 which in this draft is a pretty poor pick.

His highlight reel is terrible, but people who actually watch the U18s say that he is actually a pretty solid contested ballwinner. I think he's better on the outside from the look of things, but when it's his turn to go he will go.

If Schache isn't gone we take him at three and probably have to pass on seven because everyone at our table is laughing too hard to push the button.

Yesterday I would have rated this trade period a D for deplorable. At that point we'd traded for Melksham in a deal nobody is really sure if we did ok or not and we'd been shafted on a multi-club deal where we lost Howe and Toump and gained Kennedy and chump change. Today, I can only admire the wheeling and dealing that went on to improve our draft position. Ending up with picks 3 and 7 is an amazing result from that starting point. Upgraded to a B