The Chazz

In response to... a) Yes, I'm sick of not playing finals, hence my annoyance that we are still getting excited about top picks b) We did actually trade up to pick 3, so we are making progress c) I would not be picking any of this year's draft picks in our top 25 The fact we haven't played finals for 10 years, yet we are still relying on this year's top draft pick to help take us there, probably proves my point. I'm over the amount of years it's taking us to build through the draft. All due respect to Clayton Oliver but we should've had our "top draft pick" fill 2 years ago minimum. I don't apologise for my patience wearing thin.

Here's a tip Billy, Hawthorn and Geelong see action in September because of what they did in November many years ago. I know that Clint. I'm hoping that what we did in November of 2012/13/14 is what will cause our premiership tilt. The fact that some are STILL interested in our drafting is basically admitting we still have that "saviour" mentality. We should have enough young talent on our list by now (prior to this year's draft) to be looking not too distant in the future for success. That said, the FD obviously believe that we still needed top end talent from this year's draft before we can stop relying on the pointy end of the draft. This is proven by trading our 1st round pick from next year away. Perhaps next year others will stop obsessing about our draft picks.

Haven't read many of the posts on this thread, but this year's draft selections have left me quite uninspired. Not sure why, maybe the talk of it being a shallow draft, and in Oliver's case, that he was deemed a bolter by some people. To be honest, I think I'm just over frothing about high draft picks, and just want us to bloody win games of footy. I work with Hawthorn and Geelong supporters - for the past decade they have no idea who their teams have drafted, their real season starts in the following March, and generally concludes late September. It's generally the only time they take interest in footy. We have become far to obsessed with the silly season that takes place at draft time. I know it's not as black and white as that, but I can't help feeling a bit "Meh" about our picks this year. Sorry!

Welcome Jake - hope you're not allergic to leather... Edit - because he will be the new DL whipping boy. Nothing to do with touching the footy, or ideas BBO has for you...

Thanks Azz. Not sure about anyone else, but it would give me great pleasure if we did what I suggested above. Although we do owe them a favour for giving Neeld a job...

Can't be bothered going through the 57 pages (sorry), but is Melksham out of contract? If so, and Essendon what to be royal pricks about doing a trade (even if they aren't acting in such a manner), should we just totally shaft them and tell Jakey to go to the PSD? From memory he would nominate his asking price, so that would rule out any club before us, meaning we would get him for no cost other than his contract. And for the CAS/ASADA/WADA junkies out there, is the PSD held before or after the CAS hearing?

Yep, like we did with Frost last year? Last minute trade, had to give up 23 as we didn't "collect" any other more "market value" picks for him. Sometimes you just have to pull the trigger. With Melksham, we will likely have the deal done tomorrow morning, meaning we can now focus on our next target. We're not flucking around anymore. We know what we want to do, and we go out and do it.

Ah, so you want to get in to specifics about what steak knives are going to be added. FMD, thanks for wasting my time. Appropriate avatar.

Yeah, but our 2nd rounder next year will be approx. Pick 36... And maybe the players we want to trade out are already linked to different clubs.

If we wanted to do the trade now, we have either Pick 25 or 43 to offer. Essendon won't accept 43, so if we REALLY want him, we can only pay what we have in the bank, which is Pick 25. While it may be considered "overs", there's nothing we can do about it, unless we orchestrated a deal for us to get a late 2nd round pick from somewhere. It seriously isn't that hard to understand.

Does anyone see Melksham playing a dedicated HBF so if Howe does the right thing, we have a ready made (better) replacement? Will probably be costing us the same amount that Howe is asking for, and will free up H to go in to the midfield (where he was originally recruited to play). Our side looks better with him in it and Howe out of it.

I wonder with the WADA stuff; if a "guilty" player has elected to move from the toxic environment that saw them found guilty, to a brand new club, if WADA will offer leniency toward a potential sentence. Kind of the player saying "The club gave me something that I didn't know was illegal, so instead of remaining "loyal" with said club, I got out at my earliest convenience". Not clutching at straws, just thinking out loud. Surely the MFC has done their due diligence on potential outcomes in November.

So Richmond, West Coast, Port, North, Carlton, the Bulldogs and Sydney had poor leadership too? For a different argument, we didn't get rid of Bruce - he left. We offered him what he was worth, he knocked it back. We won in that situation, mainly because he was a turnover merchant, a soft player and not a leaders [censored]. How did he fare at Hawthorn? Play some good footy?

Played an important role in our win v Geelong.

Have a look at the players picked in 2009 from 1-20; Scully - was always going to be pick 1 Trengove - barely been on the park Martin - star Morabito - unknown Cunnington - starting to show good form Rohan - not in Sydney's Top 10 Shepphard - solid without shining Butcher - minimal impact Moore - struggles to hold his spot Melksham - good but not great Gysberts - no comment Lucas - bust Talia - star Jetta - inconsistent Howard - delisted Pittard - solid contributor Menzel - could be anything Tapscott - no comment Griffiths - can't crack it consistently Fyfe - star Not many stars amongst them, a couple of unknowns due to injury (of which you have to include Trengove in that category). A number of clubs had a bust in that first round, it's just a shame we had 2 outstanding duds. (I don't call Scully a dud - he'd be handy in our team at the moment, but not as handy as what we got for him). Let's not also forget that BP picked up Gawn in the same draft, and Fitzy (not saying he was a star, but he was terribly managed in his time at the club).

Let's see Vanders make an impact in 2016, and ensure he's not depth by the end of the season. (Nb. I actually said he could be depth this time next year). Reality is, most of those players you mentioned are depth as well, although I would argue that Jetta is by far our best small defender. But you are proving my point - when players like Watts, Howe, Lumumba and Grimes are our depth players, mainly because players like Vanders have gone ahead of them, we are starting to get decent depth. If we Vanders is playing poor and we can replace him with Lumumba, then we should see a more consistent team performance.

Like the other 19 opportunities presented to other clubs that didn't take him? Not saying you didn't see the talent in him prior to the draft, but a lot of it is revisionism at its finest, and like the Wines/Toumpas argument, and many other similar ones, it gives me the shits.

I've kind of covered it in an earlier post, STMJ, but it's quite possible that by the end of 2016, ANB, Stretch, Vanders, Harmes and White could become our "bottom" depth. And before any of you jump up and down, these are basically 2nd year players, it's totally acceptable that they haven't consolidated their spot in the best 22 - that's what happens to most young players at the good clubs!

It's possible that Fyfe would turn it over because of the heavy tackle that Trengove put on him, which spilt it out to Toumpas, who put it down Watts' throat, who went back and kicked his 150th for the year, giving Freo their first flag. Moral - it's just as effing irrelevant.

I didn't say Harmes wouldn't be elevated. From memory we need to go to the draft with three live selections. I'm not sure if a promoted rookie counts - if so, Harmes may still get promoted this draft. Ideally we keep him on the RL, but if we can't, then I too would be staggered if he wasn't elevated. With regards to the names you mentioned, you can tell our list is in a much better state, especially if Grimes and Toumpas are in the "bottom" group of depth players. Grimes in particular is generally reliable (kicking not so much), but you know he puts in 100% when he gets the opportunity. If he's one of the weaker players on our list, that's when we're starting to get "better" depth. If the likes of he, Toumpas, MJones and Terlich don't step up next year, they will go. All of a sudden, our "bottom" depth will be the likes of Newton, Michie, JKH, even potentially Melksham. Given those four I just named have shown ability at senior level, if they are all of a sudden the weakest links, we're well on track. Just need to develop those "mid-range" kids (Stretch, ANB, White, Vanders, etc), so that they don't become our bottom depth. I know it's a Captain Obvious call, but our success will rely on Viney, Brayshaw, Tyson, Petracca and Salem becoming high quality players (better than Vince in 2015 and Jones in 2014). If that happens, and the Stretch/ANB/White/Vanders group become solid, best 22 players, that's when we will be a serious chance. It's exciting, but we've been here before so I'm not reaching for the tissues, yet...!!!

I spoke with someone in our FD before the start of this season, and one thing he pointed out was that 2015 would be a bit rocky, mainly because the team had played bugger all footy together. However, he did say that 2016 was going to be the start of the exciting times for us (implying the team will know each other better after 12 months with each other). Keeping that in mind, and the fact that we've had 6 players gone already, I'd be surprised if there will be too many more list changes, unless the "deal of a lifetime" comes up. While we still need to remove a number of players to improve, we also need stability. The upside of keeping the likes of Matt Jones and Dean Terlich around for another season is that they will play a lot of footy at Casey in 2016, but if needed in the seniors, they will know the role they need to play, and will know the players around them. That's not to say they'll play that role well, but there were games this year where M Jones wasn't a liability. Doing this will then see us needing to move only a handful on at the end of next season, giving all players the opportunity to develop as a team. With AVB being upgraded, we have 5 spots on the list. I'd imagine we will be trying to get two players during the Trade/FA period that will be starting 18, leaving 3 spots to take to the draft. If we find other "starting 18" players wanting to join us, then the likes of MJones/Terlich will be pushed out, otherwise, they'll be with us in 2016.

While I don't think we would trade Tommy, WTF has Oscar got to do with any of this, Redleg? Far from some of your best work.

Ironically, "Olisik" liked this post...