volders

congrat flash and beamer

was a pretty damn accurate count imo

If only Cale Morton was expandable

LOL

but yeah bit sad to see him go after he was so looking very promising in his first season, 5th in rising star (behing murphy/h.shaw/pearce/raines) but hasn't shown much since then

He made a pact with himself at 14 that he wouldn't have a drink, because he wanted to get drafted and play footy.

He wasn't on the [censored] at 14, but it's the time when kids start to do stupid things - and drinking too much is one of them.

For me, Trengove is clearly second to Scully. Both would be capable of handling the expectations that come with being number 1, but Scully seems to want this life like no kid that has come before him.

i was going to say this. this is a massive show of maturity for someone only 14! With additional 2 years in the U18's and captaining his side to the grand final, sounds tough to beat maturity wise.

where's clark going to play in 2010? cant really play up forward with fev, bradshaw and brown there. I'm guessing they'll want to play both leunberger and charman in the ruck as well. man they have some good talls though.

I think you will find jamar+50 go to port for pick their second round pick, something along those lines. That does leave pick 34 to trade to perhaps Geelong for Mumford, or Geelong may ask for more such as on trading ports second round pick. Hard to gauge value on players and picks, geeling do need to shed some cap space and getting pick 34 instead of losing Mumford for nothing is at least something.

not a big jamar fan but he's worth more than that to us

I wouldnt trade bucks for any pic above 30, especially in this draft. and would hesitate for anything above pic22ish.

If carlton show interest in bell well then we should push to move him on for anything really, we need to find extra spots on our list.

agree with all of this, I think miller deserves another year but he's running out of time.

Sheahan's top 50 does nothing more than promote discussion about how far off the mark Mike Sheahan is.

What the hell is Lance Franklin doing there? Davey had a better, more consistent year than he did.

he did kick 65 goals in 21(?) games. i agree with sylvias no demon player deserved to be in the top50 imo.

Dont know was just on the AFL website. i was wondering do they still do the 3km time trail? I know Scully can run it in 9.20's well he has.

3k's up now

Three-kilometre time trial (min.sec)

1. Kallan Geary 9.43

2. Ryan Bastinac 10.03

3. Brayden Norris 10.05

=3. Kane Lucas 10.05

5. Dylan Roberton 10.13

6. Josh Cowan 10.14

7. Mitch Duncan 10.15

8. Jordan Williams 10.18

9. Mark Hutchings 10.19

10. Marcus Davies 10.22

looks like scully would have crushed

Read in the H-Sun I think it was today, Butcher perhaps falling to 15 to Dogs. You'd take him at 11 IMO. Or Talia.

yeah i read this too and laughed because i'm pretty sure we'd snap him up at 11 if he slips that far

Martin seems to be testing well, 2nd 20m sprint, 6th repeat, 2nd kicking test. top 2-6 is going to be very interesting imo.

And this one is a picture of quality and insight.

If you have a problem with the sample, do some research of your own and come up with an alternative. Or do you just base your estimations of the relative quality of pick 11 on your gut feeling?

Perhaps a list of all pick 10s, 11s, and 12s since 95 would be more appropriate,.... ooooops wait there I go again, trying to put up evidence to support an argument.

the problem is there is not enough drafts to get a meaningful representation of how valuable certain pick in the draft is, 20 is a laughable sample size. 20 isn't even correct because of the changes of the system in the past, and how much work goes into drafting now compared to 10 or 20 years ago. Not to mention this draft has players removed etc. there are just two many variables to be able to look on past years and say this draft is worth exactly the value of 70% of lenny hayes+shaun higgins - beau waters. posting this and saying name the players better than brock, divide by 22 and you get the percentage chance of getting a player better than brock is just plain retarded. EVEN if it were correct a player that is 3/4 of the player that brock is that plays a role we don't already have filled would be better for our team.

yes it is evidence (and the only evidence that we have), but that doesn't mean it's USEFUL or MEANINGFUL evidence

Aplogies for re-posting this.

Pick 11 for the last 22 years:

2008 Steele Sidebottom

2007 Patrick Veszpremi

2006 Andrejs Everitt

2005 Shaun Higgins

2004 Adam Thomson

2003 Beau Waters

2002 Jason Winderlich

2001 Richard Cole

2000 Trent Sporn

1999 Darren Glass

1998 Lenny Hayes

1997 Jason Saddington

1996 Brent Grgic

1995 Donald Cockatoo-Collins

1994 Damien Ryan

1993 Brad Johnson

1992 Jonathon Robran

1991 Leigh Willison

1990 Danny Sexton

1989 Darren Smith

1988 Mark Bayliss

1987 Tim McNeil

1986 Jason Taylor

Find 11 here that are better than Brock, and then we're at even odds to get value for the trade.

In a weak draft

We don't get the players picked after pick 11, we get the player we picked at 11. And we're one of the least resourced recruiting departments around, I have nothing against BP but chances are he won't find one.

this post is so, so useless. do you really think the draft runs the same way in 2009 as in the 80's? do you think the same information was available and that the same amount of effort went in to picking players? even 10 years ago the amount of effort to determine a draft pick is vastly different.

was looking around blues forums to see what they think on the trade and they had a thread about mclean being up for trade on the 15th sep! how were we so far behind?!

there were mixed opinions from mclean being a steal at pick 11 to not being worth pick 27. some of them consider him to be our best player though, lol?

Before the Bounce... Friday nights on fox sports... best footy show on tv by a long way... Dunstall, Spud, a rotating Journo and Damien Fleming... They analyse the game, have some good banter, and they have some great flashbacks to days gone by... Not to mention the Yesterday's Heroes Challenge...

haha i love spud and dunstall, but on the couch is still my fav.

if hawks want a genuine backman i dont see how they will have the resources left to get burgoyne unless they get rid of a starting 22 player.

i think it's not so much his disposal but more his decision making ie. getting caught, hospital handballs. however i think it has improved this year and hopefully wil continue to.

hard to say from outside but i'd prefer green/bruce to take it for a couple of years then hand it over to someone young (ie. grimes) that or davey.

i secretly hope that pies will beat geelong (even tho i do like the cats) and then get smashed by saints in the gf just so i can see josh fraser cry again.

Who knew Adelaide were so one-dimensional?

They have no forward prepared to lead, and no midfielder (except for McLeod, who was played far too far back) capable of working the ball through a crowded corridor. Their only play into the forward line was the long bomb, which made it so easy for Maxwell & Presti & Shaw (one brain, one big, one small) to clean up. Collingwood do well against Adelaide because Adelaide make it so easy for them!

Malthouse is the best match-day coach, assuming it's Malthouse who does the match-day tactics (if it's someone else, we need them no matter how much it costs). If an average or one-dimensional team belts them for a quarter, Malthouse will always figure out how to stop them at the quarter break. This is why it was a completely different game after quarter time, when Collingwood went man-on-man and closed up the middle. IMO Malthouse's coaching has got a side that should struggle to make the 8 into the last 4.

There's major lessons for us in that game too. One being that long bombs to power forwards who can "crash packs" is one-dimensional, can be easily countered by a team with a half-decent defence, and teams that rely on this tactic rarely have an alternative once it does get countered. It's far harder to counter a team that has a number of different avenues to goal.

But the biggest lesson is the critical importance of that last delivery into the forward 50, no matter how good a team looks in getting it to that point.

it's not that they are that one dimensional they have 6 equally effective forwards. what really hurts them is that they didn't have a penetrating kick out of the midfield. edwards, goodwin, McLeod and ottens all got a lot of ball but some of their disposal was shocking. i thought they did well for a team that imo was way out classed in the midfield.

definitely deserves another year at least imo

If you need any convincing over why the 2009 draft is shallow - read my signature.

This is not opinion, it is fact.

You can still pick up a good player at 27...

I just don't think it is as inviting to clubs as trade bait, nor to Barry Prendergast, who has already commented on the shallowness of the draft.

wow my post went over your head. i'm not denying it's shallow and there are 33% less players but that doesn't necessarily mean pick 18 = EXACTLY pick 27. and what pick 27 are you talking about?? pick 27 in 2001 and 2006 were probably as good as pick 18 in some of the other recent drafts. just say pick 18 everyone knows it's a weaker draft than previous years.

Pick 18 is effectively Pick 27 so I would be throwing that around a little bit if there was someone we were after.

can u stop saying this seriously? every draft is different yes this one has less numbers but is it pick 27 comparable to 2007, 2001, 2003 1991??? you cant just say pick 18 = 27 because there are less numbers players.

contested possessions? goals? clearances?

also @bruce i wouldn't really call this grimes 'seconds season' since he playes ONE game in 2008

but seriously, he will be a star.

y would they trade for either when they can pick them up in psd?

would be awesome, but i dont see it happening.

nothing wrong with his age imo, key defenders can generally play longer than most positions. look how good scarlett is at 30. presti has also had a great year at 31. also his sick ability to read the ball/play wont go away. anyway isn't he only turning 28 in feb? means he'll be 30 in 2012 season, which seems ok to me. i just dont see him deserting the dogs though.

wow sick last quater, lions come back from 28 down