DeeSpencer

Kentfield is a non factor, a throw at the stumps who might be something in a few years. Armstrong would be somewhat redundant with JVR, Turner and Jeffo but Clayton Oliver was the same when we had Tyson, Tracc, Gus, Viney. I suspect he won’t but if JT loves him then take him and sort the rest out later

Daniher rucks too but he was excellent forward and won them the game against GWS to even make the prelim. Brisbane have gun mediums too but that isn’t an argument against good talls. Hawks had Dear, Chol and Gunston and often times rucked Weddle or Nash to keep that forward set up in tact. Or sent Sicily forward after Gunston was subbed. Mobile skilled key forwards are only getting more value. Sydney’s talls lack mobility and skills. I’m suspect on Armstong’s skill level and just how mobile he is but if JT thinks he’s the real deal we should take him.

At pick 5, a gun midfielder like Harvey Langford, Jagga Smith or Josh Smillie would be handy. At pick 9, Melbourne would surely have to look at Sandringham Dragons key forward Harry Armstong if he was still available. There’s nothing new, insightful or possibly even likely there.

- January birthdate who’s finished school and spent the year training giving him a significant development advantage - Average speed, no power, good agility/endurance - very little creativity - very poor value per possession, prefers to handball, often goes laterally or backwards - doesn’t drive his legs through a stoppage or fight through tackles to release runners forward of the contest - no kicking penetration - no aerial game We could do with a balanced midfielder but his inside work is going to need a heap of development to stack up at afl level yet alone become a strength and his outside work is undermined by being so safe, bland and lacking oomph.

Well we should probably draft someone with aggression, pace and kicking skills rather than out the Backa Jagga. Every comparison to Butters hurts my brain.

Arrrgghh FOS, Lalor and Langford cementing themselves as the best 3 available and even with Tauru to North looking as likely as anything we are 1 pick short. No idea where we go with 5 if the top 3 are gone. Draper’s perhaps the safest bet of the second string mids. Smillie maybe. I have no interest in Jagga. Bo Allen seems too big a gamble on fixing that decision making. I wouldn’t be shocked if we went all the way down to Jesse Dattoli chasing a mid/forward with some aggression and skills.

From what I’ve seen of his decision making if he left Melbourne heading for Perth he’d end up at Casey so it wouldn’t be too much of a worry

12 disposals. 0 percent efficiency

I’d be surprised if Smith goes top 5, and Richmond could do anything at 6 including a trade. Smith would fit there depending what they do at 1 but with more picks to come they might go tall if they don’t trade. St Kilda with Sos and Dalrymple from dogs/swans I’d expect to target pace and big bodies with at least one of their picks. Maybe not Armstrong, key back and small forwards are other needs. Travaglia and a Berry/Hannaford could make sense If we take Smillie or one of the other mids I wouldn’t be surprised if we still pass over Smith or use him falling as a trade chip to to get a great deal to move back.

I believe Alix Tauru and Christian Moraes are both in the Hawks NGA but not eligible for draft concessions. Then again, St Kilda have a kid who's parents were born in Switzerland. It's inconsistent and frankly stupid to have advantages that don't include Pacific Islanders in Melbourne's South East, but some of the conspiracy whinging stuff is sooking. Brad Green has enough to worry about before getting to NGA eligibilities.

It’s not our style but if Langford, Lalor and FOS are off the board I’m making that trade right away. 5 or 10 are worth about the same. Then moving 11 for the Eagles future first and hopefully something (F3) that gets us in the draft in the 40’s if possible. 9, 10, 45 and the eagles future first covering the loss of our future first. That would be good list managment.

He’s an oversized flanker. Not an aerial defensive bone in his body. Has to improve that but more than anything needs to show the run and skills that saw him drafted.

I know it’s local footy but this was his debut as a 17 year old. Looks natural as a forward. There’s something about the way he reads the footy in the air that just feels really special to me.

The interview and background with coaches will be critical to Smillie, why, when pencilled in to the number 1 spot did he not attack the champs to sure up that spot? The lack of movement around stoppages is what concerns me. Dominating stoppages has to be his great strength and he didn’t do that in the back half of the year. He probably has enough strengths and weaknesses that counter each other out in the rest of his game if he’s consistently strong at the stoppages.

Bengals, Jets, Chargers

I know he might not ever be back but did 2021 Salem not exist?

Sorry I meant Richmond would make a token offer for 2 of 6 and 24. Unless they love their top 2 picks on the board they aren’t all that incentivised to help North out.

I just wonder how much Richmond will care to pay up if North have telegraphed their pick. Richmond might well say, go ahead, take your guy at 2 and we’ll have someone fall out. They’d probably make an offer of something like 2 and 24 but there’s less incentive for Richmond to really push hard.

I’ve seen him linked, along with Lalor and FOS. I reckon they’re a clear top 3 and only North’s need for a tall will see Tauru slot in with them. Carlton moving up the obvious link is they think FOS is there at 3, but they’d probably be just as happy for Lalor or perhaps even Langford At this stage I’d probably predict it goes: Rich - Lalor North - Tauru Carl - FOS Adel - Langford Melb - ??? OR Rich - Langford North - Tauru Carl/Adel - FOS/Lalor Melb - ???? I’m actually ready for a Jase Taylor special at 5. One of the on ballers will make it to 9

Billings and Laurie shouldn’t be on AFL lists, or at least not ours. But given they are we probably have to lean on them as depth rather than add in more depth players. Obviously we hope young guys come through ahead of them if they don’t improve. I still have some small hope for Laurie if he adds a more physical edge now he’s starting to become a man not a boy. Small hope. I’d actually return AMW to the forwards this season because we need someone else with some speed and spark. Either way he needs a big preseason to get an afl level tank, if that happens he might be something.

Skinny, not overly tall, doesn’t win the ball in the air, doesn’t use it well. He looked great as an underage draft prospect but stalled in his draft year and just hasn’t improved.

And? We target a type of tall forwards and Sam was one of those types when we drafted him. Others disagree but I thought Weid never had many issues with attacking the ball or man. He just couldn’t do a lot of the rest of the game for the reasons I outlined.

Everything from our trade period suggests we aren’t that keen on free depth. Tom Campbell was important to cover Max. Otherwise I expect to see Laurie, Billings, Woey, AMW and even Kynan Brown, Sestan getting chances rather than Narkle level guys. We might have 1 spot for a ready made mid if we go for 2 raw players in the draft, otherwise I expect see 5 and 9 added to the depth list too.

Everyone always focusses on the mongrel like it’s 1985 but to me big Sam had 3 issues: 1. Confidence, you could see it drain from his body. Even with a fresh start at Essendon he looked so much better until the year went on and he struggled again 2. Mobility. This was hurt by the repeated injuries he suffered, even before he was drafted. You have to be able to turn, jump, explode on the lead to beat key defenders these days. Young Weid had a bit of burst but it never developed. 3. Reading of the play. Was never easy in the Melbourne forward line but Sam always seemed a step behind the play to lead up at the ball or to pick the flight of the footy in the air. He wasn’t overtly physical but he was brave in the air and could crash a pack, but so often defenders had done him in before the contest was even occuring.

Mac’s deal apparently has language for retirement due to concussion. And yeah it’s 5 years until he’s a free agent with another 4 as an option post that. If free agency came at 24 he’d sign until he was 24 then do 5+ years from there. And I’d be happy to restrict that to 5. Actually refining the system what I’d suggest is free agents can only be offered 5 years. But teams can resign their own players the year before they hit free agency. So a 23 year old can sign with their current team for what is effectively 6. But once they’re 24 it’s 5 years. Really what I want to see is clubs encouraged to have their best players signed from 24-29 and massive deals for young players <23 who haven’t earned them or super long deals for 26 year olds that go until guys are well over 30 are discouraged.