DeeSpencer

Do we get this London game on Yahoo tonight? Guess we will find out. Hungover as can be but might watch the first quarter if it's on.

Both could impact next year or take 5 years, you never know with big blokes. My main concern on Weideman is he looks like a big tall but not a 2nd ruck. So if you have him, Hogan and a 2nd ruck in a forward line how will they work together? North played 3 talls this year but Waite, Petrie and Brown are all very mobile and they didn't need a great 2nd ruck given Goldy can do so much. If our future plans right now are the 2 Max's ruck combination and Hogan, then that would be better complimented with a 3rd tall like Curnow than a 197cm player.

I'm staying away from the Bills in a London game with a chance their QB isn't right. Sea Hawks Falcons Vikings

Under 19's last year, so has anyone worked out how old he is? 18, 19, 20, 21?

Dees sign SOS aka Son of Smith Interesting. About time we used a Category B spot. Anyone know any more?

I amazed that you or anyone else don't. AFL footy is such a tough industry and games every week are decided by small margins. Clubs scrap for every dollar from us fans, they scrap for every dollar to spend on coaches and fitness staff and so on. Collingwood could've accepted picks 5 and 25 for Beams last year but instead asked for more and got Crisp who now looks like a very good player who should play 100-150 games for them. I'm all for paying up in a trade when it's needed. But when it's not then why pay more than you could?

GWS are all about the points. So every bit matters to them. We can offer them 29 and 45 for 22 and Bugg. They might say no. If we offered 25 and 50 that could be more points.

So if we waited until now we could trade pick 29 for Melksham and keep pick 25. Small difference, but every inch counts. Could be the difference between picking and missing a star player, like when we wanted Jack Redden and Brisbane pounced and we got Jamie Bennell.

Cincy Houston NE

Tyson's best (last year) was much better. More prolific ball winner. Better hands in close. Goal kicking from stoppages. Reads the ball from the ruckman better. He had a down year this year but is 22 and can likely spring back. If he had 2 more average years then he'd be where Melksham is. Melksham hasn't elevated his game in the midfield. Isn't winning big numbers, isn't dominating through great ball use. So he's getting reinvented through a move to half back and can hopefully step up a level with that chance.

Incredibly unlikely they win the division but the 2nd wildcard spot seem pretty open. Who's looking at better than a 9 win season from (taking out the Packers and Cardinals): NFC North - Vikings maybe NFC East - whoever wins, plus Cowboys if they get hot late NFC south - one of Carolina/Atlanta yes NFC West - Seahawks capable, Rams possible With 2 wins the Saints are now tied for the 2nd wildcard spot for wins. Going 7-3 and 9 wins isn't impossible if they start to clean up in the division. I love the wildcard system, it's going to be a good race in the AFC as well. Steelers, Chargers and Jets probably the favourites, but Bills, Browns, Raiders all in contention for a wildcard spot is fun for their fan bases.

Jack Watts has played 100 games and is a walk up start in our 22. No other club would touch him for that price. The 100 games is a statistic. It means nothing on it's own. He was a high draft pick that was ready to play early and mostly played in a mid level team or below that never had huge pressure for spots. Certainly at no stage did Essendon have a deep midfield. The experience means he knows what it takes to play AFL but we are moving his position which counters against that.

Taking a C grade midfielder who doesn't make great decisions, giving up a good pick and hopefully turning him in to a solid defensive and attacking back flanker. It's an interesting tactic. Half back isn't a bad spot for us to bring in a mature player, I'm just not sure he's the right one.

What is a success though? Besides landing a gun free agent (and for free not in a match and trade) I think success is hard to judge. Because to win a trade you almost have to have the club on the other end stuff up. Even if you get a superstar to nominate you like Brisbane and Beams it costs a hell of a lot to get them. We've made some really good moves over the last few years. But when you break them down almost every deal has cost something to get something which is how it's meant to work. Our best deals: Letting Sylvia walk for pick 23 Garlett Our very good deals: The Vince trade with the Sylvia pick Signing Crossy Letting Frawley walk The Salem Tyson for 2,20 deal We can't recreate any of those this year it seems and that might be disappointing, but it's also about opportunity and needs. There isn't a Garlett this year as far as I can tell. We don't have a Sylvia to flick or a Frawley. We don't have the need for Crossy type. Trying such an ambitious move as the Tyson trade isn't really on the table. I find it hard to think Howe and Toumpas out for Kennedy, Bugg and Melksham makes our list any worse. I'm a touch disappointed we didn't have someone better than Melksham lined up knowing Howe would leave. But then I look around at the trades and I struggle to see who it would be. For the late 1st to 2nd round market (because we aren't signing a star this trade period) there's: Henderson, Yarran, Zac Smith, Redden (left for success), Jetta, Sinclair (contracted, would avoid us), Bennell (no), Ben Lennon (unlikely). It's not a great bunch. Aish and Freeman are the 2 young players out of contract, leaving cheaply and possibly available that could fit our list build and have great upside. But I'm not exactly disappointed we didn't get them. I don't think West Coast made a single trade last year and they jumped right up the ladder. The Dogs traded out Cooney and Griffen for Boyd (who rarely did anything) and jumped up the ladder on the back of their kids improving not trade ins really. Hamling was a nice find as a delisted free agent and that was about it.

Stephen Hill or Jack Ziebell Andrew Gaff or Josh Caddy The skinny smaller guys might be a bit hit or miss but they are also incredibly valuable to your team. By the way Kelly isn't a Bont (in size or ability) but he's not exactly small. Even with the growth in size of midfielders 183cm isn't going to be small and he's skinny but not tiny and is building his frame. Treloar leaving will only up a spot for him to get more midfield time and I think he'll develop pretty nicely.

No but if we trade up the supporters will

I'm a little worried about moving up to pick 3 to take this kid or any kid, because I think it's a throw back to the messiah days. Especially given our need for pace and skill I think a lot of pressure on him to improve our ball movement which is quite ridiculous given there are 18 players on the field at once. If we did do it and it's a decision based on a player we think is head and shoulders above the rest then I still think he'd need to be managed cleverly. The idea that a kid is going to step in on to a wing in his first season and revitalise a stagnate team is quite silly.

they want to bend us over before we wake up to our own stupidity

The man swallows helium like it's going out of fashion.

The half back talk does give me some hope, with Howe and Cross leaving. If we play 3 talls defenders and Jetta in a back pocket then we are left with: Salem, Lumumba, Mitch White, Grimes, Terlich. The last two aren't AFL grade. White is a rookie who might be good enough to play more next year but probably isn't a full time starter. So Melksham would slot in to a starting role. I just hope he can adapt and play it well. He's ok but not amazing in the air and doesn't make good decisions under pressure from what I've seen. But maybe the space at half back and being able to kick off both feet might help him.

Later picks I agree, but even in a weak draft you are a chance at a good player with pick 25 and there should be ways to find guys good enough to fill gaps with late picks. I think the need to find more quality players should trump the need to find decent depth in the 22, especially when it's a player in Melksham who hasn't demonstrated any leadership ability or other intangible quality as far as I know. We are banking on improving Melksham and/or reinventing him in a new role and that's a dangerous game to play I think.

Should've gone Bills or Cardinals, darn it. I thought the Lions turned it around last week, obviously not. Cincy and Dalton getting it done in a big game might be the story so far, particularly with the Ravens losing again. Can anyone else see parallels between Denver and Freo? Are the 4 AFC divisions and the NFC North all decided?

Anyway. Pats Broncos? And why not. Jaguars!!

The Colts are the anti-Melbourne. They've swallowed all our bad luck. They dodged Ryan Leaf, tanked for Luck, can't draft any decent talent for the O line or defense but play in such a dumpster fire of a division they still make finals every year. We are the oldest team in the comp, the Colts stole a historic team from another city. It all makes no sense.

Pick 4 v Pick 10. Cale Morton v Patrick Dangerfield. What does that matter. Same for 3 years v 6 years. Neither look all that likely to make it at their current clubs. I rate Melksham at about pick 40 and I'd rather something a little more than Toumpas but I wouldn't be holding my breath. If we end up trading Toumpas for either of Kennedy or Melksham that doesn't bother me too much even if it's slight unders.