The Chazz

Getting Ball at 18 would be a bigger win for the club, although only marginally. Take out the obvious top 2, you then have 3 or 4 players that would fall in to the next bracket, therefore, I don't think there is a huge difference in the quality of the draftee's from around pick 7-20. What we would miss out on at pick 11 (if we were to select Ball there) wont be much different to what we pick up at pick 18. Hope that makes sense, I knew what I was trying to say in my head, seemed difficult to type it out! Waiting until 18 to get Ball could turn out bad, as clubs have more chance to get him before us (if we really want him). There will certainly be a tall still around at 18, one that some people would have already mentioned in other posts (eg. Butcher, Talia, Panos, Black, Vardy), it's just the unknown as to which one it will be. But as I said, those names have been mentioned by various people in here as "would love to pick up" selections. Instead of having maybe 3 or 4 to chose from at 11, we might just have 1 or 2 to pick from at 18.

The first 2 picks are hard earned, as is pick 18 and pick 1 in the PSD. Pick 11 is a bonus from McLean leaving us. If McLean didn't leave, we wouldn't have that pick, and I can assure you, we wouldn't take Ball at 18! That's why I think picking him up at 11 is a big win for the Club. It doesn't mean we are taking a step backward by recruiting a 25 year old ahead of a 17 year old, just means that we are getting a trade that will take place during draft night (ie trading McLen for Ball). As I have said, I would rather Vardy/Ball 11/18 (no particular order), and take a punt on a KPF at 34 or 50, as long as we get a ready made KPF in Thorp in the PSD. I have the same opinion as an earlier post - I'm 2 strokes away at the thought of watching Scully and Trengove next year. If we can jag Ball, Vardy, Thorp and McDonald, Christmas might come early. Either way it's going to be either an excellent draft for us, or one of the Club's greatest drafts. I'm happy with both, prefer the latter.

I agree and disagree with that HT. We are 15 days out from this years draft, so I agree, this should obviously be our main focus at present. Why I threw it out there though is for people to remember that we will more than likely have a top 10 draft pick next year where we will have the opportunity to top up in areas that we might miss out on this year (eg. maybe a better KPP, or another quality midfielder). Unfortunately, we wont answer all our prayers in this years draft, hopefully we will go bloody close! But at 11 and 18, if we don't pick up a player that a lot of thought we should, there will be some reason behind it. This is where I disagree though. I can assure you that BP would have been focusing on next years draft already, with the view that there might be, for example, a lot more better quality KPP. Once this years drafting has been completed (both ND and PSD), I think we will have a great bunch of guys and kids that will hopefully develop in to a premiership side. By picking up another top 10 draft pick next year will just add more strength. Just trying to show that the compromised draft will still have some benefits, although hopefully we finish 9th-11th and we wont have a top 10 pick!

An article in the Herald Sun; http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/dees...f-1225796240877

It was a report in the Herald Sun (I think) that we were interested in him, possibly via PSD. If that's true, I am putting faith in the Football Department.

Not sure if this deserves a full thread or not, but where do you think Melbourne will finish on the ladder next season? Reason for this is because; 2010 Finish/Draft Pick we receive: 16th/4 15th/6 14th/8 13th/10 12th/12 11th/14 10th/16 I would expect that we will finish somewhere around the 11th-14th mark, therefore, a minimum first draft pick in next years draft for us will be pick 14, or possibly even pick 8. Plus, we have to option of trading for a better draft pick if need be. As I mentioned in a different thread, next year sees a compromised draft, not an abolished one. Realistically, we will end up with close to a top 10 draft pick next year, which should see us gain another handy player.

One outside the square... Any chance we have been in Ball's ear telling him we are going to pick him up with pick 11 or 18 knowing no-one else was likely to pick him up before then (almost assuring him of a Red and Blue jumper), freeing up PSD#1 for Thorp? A lot happens behind the scenes of these footy clubs, and as Cam Schwab kept writing on twitter during the Flash issue, "don't believe everything you read". I really want him to come to us, but thought I'd attack it from another angle!

Thanks for the info re. confirmation on the AFL website. I know it seems like he doesn't want to play for Melbourne, but if he was hell bent on not playing for us, he would have stayed a Saint. He knows that we are in probably the best position of all clubs to pick him up, he would have thought about this prior to nominating for the draft. Reality is, if we don't pick him up, he will most probably go to one of the other 13 clubs that he didn't nominate as his team of preference. Do you think these Clubs will be saying "he doesn't want to play for us, so we'll just let him go"? Some yes, others No way known.

Pass thanks. Having said that, the team I play for had 2 American's do preseason with us this year, both started terribly, but with one of them in particular you could see the penny drop and he played a handful of games before he had to go back to the USA, and regularly made our best. We are far from AFL standard, but the bloke ran all day, and in straight lines (didn't take a side step regardless of the oncoming traffic!). His action was very similar to this Shae guy, sort of holds the ball on the point, a lot of his kicks were great, but his bad ones were exactly that!

If he didn't want to take the risk of being picked up by Melbourne, wouldn't he stay a saint?

Sorry Gooner, but how can you say Ball is past his best? Had he played a full game in the GF, he might just have won the Norm Smith. Gee, a lot of their players that are at their best (eg. Saint Nick) performed well below Ball did. (Not directed at you Gooner) I'm still waiting for a) A list to confirm that Ball has nominated for the ND, and b ) Ball to come out and say that he doesn't want to play for us. I know he could go straight to the PSD if he was certain about playing for us, but give the guy some credit. The only thing he has said is that he wanted to play for Collingwood, but if he has infact nominated for the ND, he has pretty much declared that he will play for anyone BUT St Kilda.

Exactly right, just need to look at Geelong/Mark Blake! Just been thinking about it, if we pick up Ball and all listed players are ready to go come round 1, it is a certainty that Ball would be a walk up start for our best 18, let alone best 22. If he stays that way for the next 4-5 years (as a certain selection each week), how is he holding back the development of a younger player? We could say that Cameron Bruce, Brad Green and James McDonald are limiting the opportunities for our juniors as those 3 will not play in a GF in their remaining years. It's probably blokes like Daniel Bell, Ricky Petterd and Dunn (the fringe players) that are keeping out the younger players. I'm sure Ball would be in the starting 18 well before those 3 names appear. Please don't get me wrong, I like the 3 of them, just using their names for the arguement. One thing about Ball is that he obviously would prefer to play for Melbourne than St Kilda.

We made 1 space available on the permanent roster at the expense of Newton, good enough for me. The reason why there is no clear-as-day replacement for him is because we aren't fully familiar with the non-MFC listed, Casey reserves players!!! I just don't like him in a MFC jumper, sorry! I think KPF wise we are traveling ok, assuming Thorp comes our way (I have no opinion of him, never watched him play). Eventually (when all current guys are developed), we will have talls that can play forward in the way of Watts, Stef Martin, Thorp, and by all reports Garland can play there (I highly rate him as a defender though), and who knows, maybe Morton if he can develop. I think we will also pick 1 other tall in this draft. Let's no forget, the drafts coming up over the next few years are compromised, not abolished. We will continue to pick up young players next year, and the year after, etc. And the trade period will be there, until further notice.

Pick 34, and 50 for that matter, gives us the flexibility to pick up a delisted player through the ND rather than the PSD. Word is we are keen on Joel McDonald, as well as Thorp. If we waited until the PSD, we would probably only get 1 of the 2, but using a later pick in the ND, we could end up securing both. My bet is that we have a word in Thorp's ear and say "nominate for the PSD only and we will pick you at #1", then we will aim for McDonald at either 34 or 50, with the spare pick of those two to be used as a "needs" player, as opposed to "best available" - the best available kid at either 34 or 50 is a bloody lottery! I'm just happy we got rid of Newton! If we do get him and Meeson back as rookies, does that mean they have to wait for someone to go on the long-term injury list before they can play seniors?

No better way to reduce this happening than to make sure Ball doesn't go to his club of preference. Might stop other players doing it in the future. Judd wanted to leave WCE because of the culture, and let's face it, he nearly left Carlton because of it. He picked Carlton as his team, but it cost them to get him, and the Eagles were reasonably compensated (the Eagles were always going to lose in the Judd deal, he's a Champion).

Has anyone been able to get an official list of the players that have nominated for the National Draft? I've been trying to find out if Luke has OFFICIALLY nominated for the National Draft. I know the media are saying, but I want the official list from the AFL before I worry if he wants to play for us or not. That said, I would love to see him come to Melbourne, even if it were via the ND. I don't believe that he has a maximum of 5 years left, I would say he has 5 years of his best footy left, then could play a great back pocket role for another 2 or 3 after that, and let's face it, his best footy would go close to winning our B&F - just need to see his Grand Final effort to see that this is a possibility. So, would we risk an early pick for him over a junior? Well, I think a lot depends on the progress of Mitch Thorp. If it was assured that we will pick Thorp up in the PSD, I would snap Ball up at pick 11. Now, before we all jump up and down, this is just an opinion of mine. I feel that the 5 years of his best footy will benefit the Club and Team. Reality is we need a balance of youth and experience, the latter is something we don't have a great deal of. While I can understand this youth policy and building for the next 10+ years, we still need to win games NOW. Ball will assist in this and maybe in 4-5 years (while he is still performing at 100%), we just might get a crack at a Grand Final. If we take the punt on a young midfield-type, reality is unless they are like Daniel Rich, Joel Selwood, and hopefully our boys Tom & Jack, they will still take maybe 2-3 years to develop. In that time, they wont be a vital player for us, therefore, wont play a huge part in us building that winning culture. It is a very big decision for the club. Both sides of this argument have a lot of merit, but instead of being a fence sitter, I went the way of picking him up. The question that people will be asking me (hopefully) is about my reasoning for pick 11 as opposed to 18. I would like to see Vardy come to us at 18 (just don't think I'd use pick 11 on him). As BP said in his interview today (as well as other things), our ruck stocks could do with topping up. Hopefully if we pick Ball at 11, it will make him realise we are fair dinkum about him playing for us and he should return the favor. The only club he has publicly nominated as preferred is Collingwood, but regardless of what Club he went to, he will play at 100%. If he looked Dean Bailey in the eye and said "I DON"T WANT TO PLAY FOR MELBOURNE", then I'd have a different opinion of him - I just don't think he is that type. Here is my dream result; Pick 1 - Scully/Trengove Pick 2 - Scully/Trengove Pick 11 - Luke Ball Pick 18 - Vardy Pick 34 - Joel McDonald Pick 50 - Cousin Liam PSD 1 - Mitch Thorp One last thing I want to add, I am amazed at people saying how young draft kids are happy to come to Melbourne. Of course they are bloody happy to come to Melbourne, it's the AFL, they are 17 years old, they would be happy to be picked up by any club. They are also educated to say that they would be happy to play for us - haven't you heard the standard answer of "I'll just take it as it comes and be happy to be picked up"? Can't imagine Scully, Trengove or any other kid for that matter come out and say "I would hate to be picked up by the MFC, they have won back-to-back wooden spoons, and I'm far too good to play for them". Don't think they will last in the system that long, and if they did, I would love to see Beamer and Co line up on them in their first season.

Thanks Hoopla. Goes to show the level of some people on this site. In my post it quite clearly stated that I had no idea what the news is going to be, and was searching for someone else that might be closer to the Club than I to maybe give us a hint, but it still managed to bring out the idiots. For a minute I thought I actually posted it on the Magpies website. Redleg - In regards to the "good authority", not once did I mention that I spoke directly to the person, but to put your tiny little mind at ease, the email was from my mother, and it was her (who is also a Melbourne member) that was speaking to this "good authority". I have learned the hard way that if you put up peanuts, you will definitley attract monkeys.

If the mods could please delete this thread, as it is going to clog up this site. If I receive any further news with more substance, I will happily post it to keep all informed. I aologise for wasting everyone's time regarding this matter.

Sorry belzebub59, if you re-read my post it clearly states that it is higher up than player management, so that will eliminate the "cost of a pie" question and the draft & players concern. If you also re-read my post, I state that what I have put in the original post is all that I have. This is a quote from the email that I have received... "Have you heard anything about the MFC? Something is going on. A fella came in today - very up on the club - and said there is something huge happening but he wouldn't tell me what!! Sworn to secrecy. Said that all would be known within the week." While my post has minimal substance, I did ask if anyone had any SERIOUS opinions on what it could be. Again, I'm happy to apologise for wasting peoples time if nothing is announced, but thought I'd share it with you all anyway. Atleast if there is news, I can say you heard "it" from me first - just a shame I can't tell you what "it" is!!!

At the risk of being shot down in flames, I have had it on good authority that there is a big announcement from the MFC next week. At this stage, that's all I've got - I'm sorry. So, because of that, does anyone have any SERIOUS thoughts on what this could be. I have been told it has nothing to do with players, it is considerably higher up than that. Sorry folks, it's all I can get. I've never been the rumor-starting type, just thought I'd pass on "something" that I have heard. Can't even name the source. Sounds like a bullsh!t thread, but we'll see what happens.

Straight back at ya Chief!

Gee, you guys in here are far too serious. I was taking the pi$$ out of Dean Chiron. Although, had I remembered that Newton wears 29, I would have asked him to pass it down. I guess that's what happens when you only play for Casey!!!

Sorry RR, going to disagree on this one. We had PJ and Meesen already contracted, Stef Martin as a back up, and that left Jamar who they offered a 1 year contract to. So, does that mean they would have got rid of Jamar to elevate Spencer? I'd personally hope not, but they may have traded if the rumors about him going home were correct. I think the rookie list rule change saved Spencer. I'm not sure why the criticism of Meesen either. I think he showed a lot of improvement in the handful of games he played. I will be watching him in 2010 to hopefully see him have an injury free year. I think my main issue with Spencer is the fact that while he played for Casey, according to the numerous coaches reports posted on the MFC website by Peter German, he was always being asked to do more but very rarely did. There weren't many times where he actually got a good compliment. I seriously hope I'm wrong and that Jake is the answer to our ruck issue. I'll be more than happy to apologise to his face if need be. While I have probably come across fairly harsh in my criticism, I'm just saying that I don't think he has got what it takes to be an AFL ruckman. Would rather see him delisted and Vardy drafted.

I guess I'm still blown away by the fact we didn't chase Mumford. He was Geelong's "project player", who has turned out to be a reasonable ruckman, and is just 23 so wel and truly fits in our premiership/youth window. Would have saved us the 3 years of developing Spencer to find that he'll turn out a dud. The sad part about Spencer is that when we need a great ruckman the most - when our mids are the best in the league in the next 2-3 years, they wont have first crack at centre bounces. What would I prefer, pay out Newton to free p a spot for Spencer, or put up with both of them? Oh well, I suppose every club has to have a couple of "those" players! Best part is that Newton is OOC next year and 2010 will be make or break for Spencer as he will need to be elevated or let go. One last thing, I believe I can spot potential or not, but being realistic at the same time. Jurrah, Wonna, Grimes, Watts, Maric, Morton, these blokes have great potential, sadly IMO Spencer doesn't have any. Of course he will develop and may be competitive in a couple of years, but not to the level we need him. Those names that I listed as having potential realistically are only that, POTENTIALLY good players for the club with the odd one potentially being a champion (Grimes, Watts).

Some useless info in regards to the whole KPF type. There is nothing to say that they have to be around that 195cm mark. Brendan Fevola is 191cm, but has a big body (100kg). Regardless of how much of a d!ck he is, he's in the top 3 KPF in the league. I think we could really get away with Green on a HFF, Jurrah in a pocket, Miller at CHF and Stef Martin at FF. The thing I have serious issues with is the fact that the top sides have great defenders. It would mean our key match ups could potentially be Martin vs Scarlett, Miller vs Harry Taylor, etc. This doesn't give me much confidence in our ability to kick a big enough score against the elite teams. Hence my posts in the Draft/Trade section about us having a crack at Bradshaw.