DeeSpencer

The best reason not to panic about picking a key forward if they aren't there..... Christian Petracca. He kicked 41 goals in 17 games as a 17 year old in the TAC cup. Yes, long term he shapes as a midfielder, but whilst he builds his fitness he'll play closer to goal and if not next year then in a year or two he could easily kick 30 goals as a forward if his development goes to plan. All a forward line needs is multiple dangerous options to function. They don't have to be tall, in fact it's better to have a mix. If Hogan, Garlett and Petracca can all kick 30+ (but hopefully 40+) then we have options and then the other taller types don't need to be stars. We will need a good role playing 2nd tall or 2nd tall/ruck and I won't at all be disappointed if we take Curnow or Weideman, but the need isn't that dire.

So there's been heated discussion about foot injuries and injury prevention with some experts (Webber etc) providing their opinion. I thought the following post on Rob Jackson's instagram @robjackson.com.au - might be of interest to many. No idea what a lot of that means but great insight none the less. Check out his insta for some great pics and vids of the guys training in the gym.

Isaac Smith the only one there who doesn't go to water in big games. Also both Smith and Jetta were drafted as mature agers and Hill a late pick up. Maybe that's not a coincidence. We do have those late 2 picks to target some speed. .

That was a glorified VFL game given the crowd and how many good players both teams had out. I'd be careful reading too much in to it. Dunn may go forward, but otherwise he, Tom McDonald and Garland will be the starting defenders. With Frost and Oscar Mc providing depth. Lumumba can play 3rd tall as well on the right match up. Given Frost and the 2 McDonald's are both pretty young I think the priority for adding a defender would be a 3rd tall type who provides rebound as well. No point turning in to Essendon this year with 3 key defenders but no versatility and pretty much forcing one out of the club. Francis is the best option if he fits at 3 or 7, not sure who else is in the draft. Brandon White looks like a good type who might be available. I think the club rates Mitch White's ability to play tall as well, but at 188cm he'd be pushing it as a 3rd tall.

Can you imagine Roughead as a midfielder at 18? Would've been terrible. I think Curnow has more midfield potential than just his running ability. He seems to know how to throw his body in naturally and I think he does ok when linking up. Plenty of deficiencies, but a lot can be taught if he has the appetite to learn things like how to pick it up and how to handball on his left. But to get to 50 games at AFL and start to feel comfortable he'll have to make it as a forward first, that I agree with. So he'll have to get the ball on the lead as well as learn how to out body much stronger opponents. Which is something he can do because even at 191 he looks like he'll have strong endurance mixed with a very solid frame.

No Matt Jones. Poor bloke. She's leaning towards Oliver and hedging her bets with the rest of the top rated prospects and I can't blame her. It's clear we haven't leaked. A lack of names for the late round picks as well. Agree we need a ruckman, but it might be in the rookie draft. Besides that the main list needs are definitely a 2nd key forward, more outside run/skilled kicking and then we could probably do with starting to develop some 3rd tall types at either end if we think Dunn and Garland are moving towards the end of their careers and Watts isn't ever going to be the forward.

Yep. Agree 110%. I was sure the picks couldn't be taken away from them because I heard Brett Clothier say they had permission to take them to the draft on the AFL Podcast. But then 42 disappeared. Now it's still there but hidden. Mind numbing. I understand they don't want to sit through 16 teams passing on the night but I don't think this is an appropriate solution.

So EQ is on to it again. 42 has disappeared off the list but Brisbane still have it and will likely use it. http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-draft-2015-what-are-hidden-afl-draft-picks-20151120-gl4ecy.html As for the picks: GWS will pick 2 or 3 kids (Hopper, Kennedy +/- Himmelberg) using 10, 34 and 42 - we move up 0 or 1 pick Brisbane will pick 2 kids using 38, 39, 40, 41, 42 - we move up 2-3 picks Sydney will pick 1 or 2 kids (Mills +/- Dunkley) using 33, 36, 37 and 43 - we move up 2-3 picks I'd be surprised if our picks don't end up 40/41 and 45/46.

If we do recruit Parish I can see him spending a lot of time at half back rotating in spurts on to a wing. He'll build strength and stamina in time to play wing/midfield permanently but without a stand out factor it might take a while. Just having another natural run and carry player with good skills will help the team a lot, it's just more about how good he can become and whether he's worth the early investment.

I didn't. And a quick internet search shows Ed Curnow listed in several Indigenous players listings but also not mentioned in Carlton articles about Betts/Yarran/Garlett and talk about him being Mauritian. As far as I care the Curnow's are from Geelong. I consider that a separate racial grouping.

Imagine if Petracca has convinced his old school and team mate to tank the beep test and we were in on it. Wouldn't that be something. Come to pick 7 Sam.

Emma's latest thoughts. Which players will help shape the AFL draft order? Sounds like Weideman and Oliver would be our picks if we had 3 and 4 and confidence in Sam's ankle and fitness. But it's not like she's definitive. Essendon's priorities seem to be Oliver, Francis/Curnow. That makes sense to me. As much as I want to know who we are picking I love that the club is holding it's cards so close.

If the draft goes: 3 - Parish, 4 - Oliver, 5 - Francis, 6 - Milera and we've ruled out Weid - injuries and Curnow - character then we might have to draft outside that range! And that group of 6 seems to conform just a little too perfectly with a lot of the medias phantom drafts. If the MFC were holding on to an outside the box choice I don't think they'd let it leak to a supporter group.

We do and we don't. For example in Francis' best position Garland and Dunn can keep us in games. If Francis significantly out played those 2 in year 1 I'd be surprised. The squad we have now with the addition of Petracca and the 3 trade ins has to be good enough to at least back up 7 wins and hopefully push towards finals next year (8-10 wins would be satisfactory). We need unexpected guys to improve to help keep momentum, but it could come from the late picks (another Neal-Bullen) or the rookie draft (like a Vanders) or someone like Jayden Hunt or Mitch White really lifting.

I just don't seem his a forward or midfielder. He looks much more settled in the backline and when he jumps up from kids or SANFL to AFL footy I think he'd struggle in other positions. He reminds me a lot of Jared Rivers. If we drafted him I think he'd take that 3rd defender role and play 10 years there, which would be pretty handy. It's just I think we can fill that role through later picks and need elite forwards and midfielders if available. If not, that's fine, get him.

Not the first or last to do something stupid at this schoolies time of year. To be honest I'm more disappointed that he didn't just take the breatho and take his medicine. Why compound the problem by refusing the test? 1 mistake I can live with, but the decision making to compound the mistake is not wise.

Naughty boy

I'm guilty of it as much as anyone but there's way too much talk of needs going on here for 2 top 10 picks. Best available is the way to go. We need 2 high end talents no matter the position. Of course we need a 2nd tall forward and that's a priority. You are kidding if you don't think that. But it's still best available unless we rate 2 prospects as equal, then we go the tall. Taylor has already said that.

The Vic Country stuff is irrelevant. He clearly wasn't the same player when carrying a bit of weight, battling OP and building fitness in the first half of the year. Look at these stats: http://www.foxsportspulse.com/team_info.cgi?action=PSTATS&pID=197829314&client=1-118-10450-339768-20320221&ocompID=339768 Second half of the year he's hitting the scoreboard regularly, taking more marks, drastically increasing his kick to handball ratio. And after his 2 game stint in the VFL he reels off 3 best on grounds and then two 2nd best on grounds to finish the season. I'm not saying I know the answers on whether he's the right pick or not but the Vic Country stuff doesn't bother me at all.

The interesting thing to me is that the club doctors and physio's would each have their own opinions but really the only people fully qualified to account for the risk would be specialist ankle surgeons. You'd think the one who did Weideman's surgery would issue a favourable prognosis, but I wonder how the 18 clubs assess it. Do they each hire their preferred surgeon? Do a group of them share the same advice from one surgeon whilst others use another? Or do they almost all end up with the same level of risk and then make a decision based on that. I'm thinking our history with Trengove would probably have us on the conservative side with Wedieman, especially for pick 3.

Heaps of misses with key forwards at the first round. But still: N Riewoldt, J Riewoldt, Kennedy, Franklin, Roughead, Daniher, Lynch, Stringer, Pavlich, McCarthy, Darling, Schulz Father son's who would've gone first round: Cloke, Hawkins, Waite Mini draft/undrafted: Cameron, Hogan Even if it's a 50% strike rate if you get it right you've got a great player. That's the reality with key forwards, they are either boom or bust. If our recruiters don't rate Weideman and Curnow that's fine. But if they do I'd almost live with a bust knowing that we had a crack. They don't have to be superstars either. Taking the extra pick a year earlier, having Dawes and Pedersen who both aren't great but at least provide some depth, the extra interchange spot and mainly the Hogan factor mean we have much better development circumstances than the Lucas Cook debacle.

Is it the same footage as on the afl draft machine?Because if not you should watch it. Sometimes he uses his physical size and hardness, but most of the highlights are his smarts and athleticism. He might not have the same ability on his left foot or amazing tackling but his highlights show more class than Brayshaw's did last year, and I wouldn't mind 2 Brayshaw's!

That's the way I see it. Because if we rate a tall at 7 we are almost certain to rate them at 3 and somewhat duty bound to take them. The only way I see it otherwise is if we rate a midfielder as a standout pick and rate the talls either: - Not at all, so won't pick any of them - Equally, so we can take whomever gets through - Rate 1 (or 2) of them enough for 7 but just not worth missing out on the mid at pick 3.

His handballing seems a bit funny but his kicking is quite fluent. But where I see class is the way he moves in traffic, the way he knows who is around him and in his marking. In his AFL highlights video there's some clever tap ons, some really smart gathers, especially the way he gathers and changes direction and a bit of cheek as well. That's his class. I think the combination of a big strong clearance winner with decent skills who also has the agility and vision to move in to open space and buy time is a pretty special package and why he's rated top 10.

If Oliver, Weideman, Parish and Curnow are gone (one of them to us) then who do we take at 7? Is it one of the South Australian's in Francis or Milera? Is it big H McKay? Are the next best options Darcy Tucker and Ryan Clarke? They might be my choices of the rest. More skill from half back or elite gun running through the midfield would fill needs. We seem very focussed on the 4 players - 2 forwards, 2 mids. Is anyone willing to make a case for someone else?