Carlos Danger

I vehemently disagree. Getting deals done > posturing. He's famous for constipating the trading period and dragging deals out until zero hour yet their list really doesn't look any better for it.

The only player in the competition right now worth breaking the bank for. He's a freak.

Crossroads.

That money towards Jack or Sidebottom via free agency would considerably upgrade the midfield for 2017 onwards.

There was also a triple blow (to use your analogy) that landed Hogan, Viney and Kent in that same trading/drafting period. 4 years later, why look past the triple blow to continue complaining about the double blow?

Out of all the clubs with banned players we definitely got off the lightest and the timing works out well enough as the list is into the early stages of having legitimate depth. I look at it like it's a player that's going to be out for a full season, which obviously isn't good, but with there not being an injury I don't think there could possibly be a better scenario for a player to miss a season of football. Without losing fitness or doing any rehab he's going to be hungry as all hell to get back and make up for lost time, along with repaying the faith shown in him by the club. Melksham in 2017 is a seriously exciting prospect. And on top of that, I rate Melksham. He was drafted in a year I paid a lot of attention to (we had picks 1,2,11,18)- he stood out as an under 18 and has been one I've kept an eye on since the draft.

I enjoyed reading the article about Oliver in the Hun today and the thing that really stood out was the McCartney factor. It really strikes me as being the perfect development coach for the perfect country footballer. Brendan has done some incredible things with young players at Footscray, it's exciting to see what's going to come of this.

He needs a year at Casey to significantly build his size? Ok, as it currently stands... Hogan: 195cm 97kg Weideman: 196cm 94kg Watts: 196cm 88kg And I agree he needs to work on his motor but on that note it'd be interesting to find out what 2015 Dawes can do in a beep test. Anyone know?

I'm happy he landed at Essendon. There appeared to be too much hype without substance about Darcy, glad it's their gamble.

Weideman and Hogan in the same forward line, this is going to be awesome!

I rate Knightmare's draft work probably higher than anyone else's and he has Parish at 14 in the power rankings. http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/knightmares-2015-draft-almanac.1091303/

I'm still amazed by the Geelong recruitment of Mark Blicavs in similar fashion and how much he evolved. Would love for Smith to become our Blicavs.

He's a gun selection, looking forward to a few more of them over the years. The rookie draft has been a resource this club has considerably mishandled for many years. Does the credit go to Jason Taylor?

I don't believe Port made an incorrect call in his leadership group inclusion. I do believe an incorrect call was made in resurrecting this thread. He's a Port player in the AFL, always has been. Get over it.

Getting Neal-Bullen at 40 comes across as being a reverse-Gysberts and Oscar not only still being available at 53 but actually selected is a fantastic result. Petracca and Brayshaw always looked to be the best combination of the 'big 3', as far as I could tell anyway. I can't see how the draft could've played out any better than what it did.

I thought it was 40? But yes it was a great get, very fortunate Hawthorn took the punt on Garlett instead.

Look it up. Pick 2, pick 20 and pick 72 for Tyson, pick 9 and pick 53. That's the trade that happened. As I said before I believe we won the trade and I'm very very happy to have Tyson on the list but I get annoyed when people insinuate we outright got Tyson/Salem for Kelly. Pick 20 could have been Crouch, it wasn't a nothing pick.

I'm not suggesting that at all. I just don't like seeing the trade being construed as "Tyson/pick 9 (Salem) for pick 2". That would have been trade of the century but that's not what happened, pick 20 was also involved.

Pick 20 was also part of that trade, a lot of people seem to have forgotten that. I do believe we won that trade and was happy it happened but it's worth mentioning that pick 2 wasn't a straight swap for Tyson and pick 9 (Salem).

I still can't understand why we didn't take Templeton at pick 2 in the rookie draft. Jayden Hunt might have been the smokey and the questionable call (straight onto the senior list) but to then pluck another player out of obscurity over Eli yet again in the rookie draft? There's been very little said about Hunt or Harmes since being drafted whereas Templeton has already played 6 games and kicked 4 goals in the big time. I'd prefer not to harbour spots on either of the lists for long-term prospects, it's a luxury this club can't afford right now.

What is the logic behind your 6-8 year estimate? Looks to me like he could certainly hit his prime as early as next year.

This year's midfield is like day and night compared to last year's and Tyson is a huge part of that (along with Vince and Cross). I'm very keen to see what Roos has in mind for the trade table next season.

Giving overs to GC for Caddy certainly wouldn't be a "game changer" for the MFC and if it was it'd be for the worse. For the past season with all the hype Caddy has been getting I'd rate him as being 'serviceable' at best and the MFC already has an abundance of 'serviceable' on the list. But after yesterday I'm convinced he is worse than that, bad days are bad days I get that... but 3 disposals from a full game is woeful. Lemon.