DeeSpencer

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.

Yes we can and hopefully we do. With Sydney trading with Essendon and us trading with GWS their might be an understanding not to bid between those teams. But we traded pick 7 for 10 with GWS. I don't see use owing GWS anything when it comes to pick 3. So I hope we bid for all 3, one after another. Of course we'd have to rate the kids, and hope they are keen to move to Melbourne (the GWS boys being from the Riverina I'd suggest they'd have no issues) and deal with the blow back if we bid on all 3 and didn't get them. I'd worry about the psychology it puts on the kid who we eventually take if he knows he's our 4th choice. But at the same time we can deal with that.

Sydney were meant to pay more than the pick 18 they used last year for Heeney to get Mills this year. That's the point of it. Yet with pick 14 plus Craig Bird, Sydney traded for extra points in a deal that still went against them to get 25 and 44 or whatever it was. Now as Sydney can match up to pick 5 just by using those points. So if for some reason we don't bid on Mills with pick 3 it's very likely that Sydney will get Mills for picks 14 and Craig Bird. That's a bit ridiculous and not how the system was designed to work. To get an elite junior they were meant to give up a lot more than pick 14 and a steak knives player. It was meant to cost them their entire draft if they didn't have a high pick. I think if you want a player in the first round then you should at least have to keep a first round pick to form part of your bid. You can manipulate the points after that but at least give up the value as it stands of the first round pick without double dipping by moving it back in the draft for extra points.

True. But at the same time Melbourne getting Viney for a cheap price, the Dogs getting both Wallis and Libba in the same draft and Essendon getting Daniher at pick 10 were a bit of a joke. I don't mind the points system. Where I think the farce has come in is letting the academy teams stock pile points by trading out high end picks for a collection of crap picks. That goes against the intended aim. It helped the clubs who did the trades with them (namely Melbourne, Essendon, Carlton) but it's a bit of BS.

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?

His playing career alone might have been enough to set him up as a media personality and he did a great job at the Dogs. Funny how he gets the blame for things going sour when it probably should've been on both parties. Richmond and he went down together. They did start the same process of multiple picks under 20 they just took 4 guys who couldn't play. Just like Melbourne would later do to Bailey. Pick 1 - Deledio Pick 4 - Tambling Pick 12 - Danny Meyer Pick 16 - Adam Pattison Pick 20 - Dean Polo Their next draft was even worse. Besides Deledio the rest were plonkers. The thing that annoys me about Wallace is that he's gone for the list management pathway and working with croc media where the strength of his coaching was probably tactical analysis. But he does have a pretty solid handle on the draft, players across the league, list management priorities and he's even worked out the academy stuff way ahead of most.

They already have Spangher and Litherland to come in to the backline. And could play Frawley, Gibson and Stratton most weeks as well wiithout adding another tall. Fitzy certainly got good reviews for his defending this year, but given his age he should've smashed it at VFL level. Most truly good AFL players (including talls) show they are too good for the VFL in their first 2 years or maybe 3rd year. He had a lot of injuries but it probably took him until 2013 or 2014 to regularly impact as a forward/ruck and it shouldn't be a surprise that he played well in the VFL down back, it's just more of a question as to whether it would mean anything for AFL.

We've done well out of being friends with GWS. They are now down on list numbers and about to start drafting much more home grown talent. It would be a nice time to end that relationship.

Francis looks very much a half back flanker/3rd tall defender and maybe midfielder at AFL level. I don't see him being a forward and certainly not a key forward. Intercept marking and using his size inside seem more his go. I think his size stands out at junior level but at AFL level he won't be all that imposing and might suffer from limited athleticism

I'd like to go: Pick 3: Hopper - GWS match Pick 4: Kennedy And hope GWS decide not to match the second pick.. Kennedy has size, marking ability, a good dash of pace and kicks goals. If that were to happen then Essendon and Gold Coast would take their pick of 3 of Parish, Weiderman, Curnow, Francis, Milera and we'd get whoever was left. Curnow or Milera would be my pick of that lot. Goal kicking forwards with excitement and athleticism to play in the midfield. Parish is a good player, but I'm not sure he's the dynamite running and silky skilled midfielder we need and he might be a bit small and slight for half back or inside mid. On limited vision I've seen he reminds me of Adam Treloar more than the dashing wingman we need. If that's the case I think we should draft him as best available more than for a needs basis.

I think Salem will stay at half back for at least another year. We still need kicking there. Melksham half back taking Howe's spot, Bugg floating between midfield/wing/half back depending on who needs tagging ie the Cross role. Lumumba will either play on the wing or if Stretch/ANB/Newton all come on quickly then he'll be at Casey.

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

It's pick 80 OR PSD pick 6 OR best available delisted free agent OR 3rd round rookie spot (we can have an extra rookie). The main reason I'd give him the boot is from the outside he looks like he'd just be playing out time and I can't see how that helps our culture. If from the inside the club genuinely thinks he's a chance to get back in contention for games and is a leader at Casey then they should keep him.

I think Gold Coast would love Curnow. They were in to Howe and Scotty Clayton loves his athletic types. I wonder if Essendon will think Curnow is a bit similar to Laverde and Langford.

FB: Jetta Dunn Garland HB: Salem McDonald Melksham C: Stretch Viney Brayshaw HF: Kent Hogan Vanders FF: Garlett Pedersen Petracca Foll: Gawn Vince Jones Int: Tyson Kennedy Bugg Watts Backs; Lumumba Grimes Frost OMac White Terlich Mids: ANB Harmes Trengove Michie Newton M Jones Fwds: JKH Dawes King Hunt Ruck: Spencer Included the new boys as Roos has a track record of playing the guys he recruits. Not a whole lot of structural change in the talls but there should be competition for spots especially down back. The main thing I'm hoping for is increased speed and endurance and hopefully more goal kicking power.

Yes I've heard they have a couple of guns next year.

Nope. Hence why they haven't downgraded it. They don't have a first round rated academy kid. Not sure they have one at all. Half of Queensland isn't as fertile a ground as the NSW Riverina, who'd have thought!

Amen. Said the same thing to someone earlier. Not only are they paying coins but using a dodgy exchange rate. To claim your academy/father son player you should have to use a pick in that round in the draft. It opens it right up when these clubs have worked out how to slide down the order. Luckily we are switched on this year and getting in on the deals. Carlton, Essendon and us have now all used the clubs with academy picks to make win-win deals. In fact we probably got the lesser one of the bunch. Essendon and Carlton had huge steals.

46 and 50 combine for 604 points which is just short of pick 31. I wonder if we could trade them for pick 32 and then promote both Harmes and Vanders, use just the 3 live picks in the ND and use a PSD or delisted free agent pick up if we decide to move another player on. At this stage I wouldn't think so as I think we will move any of Hunt, Terlich and Matt Jones either out or back to the rookie list, but it has to be under consideration.

Melb Spine: FF: Pedersen HF: Hogan R: Gawn HB: T Mc FB: Dunn Casey spine: FF: King HF: Dawes R: Spencer HB: O Mc FB: Frost And that's before draft picks where I hope we take a ruck and key forward at some stage in the draft or rookie draft. No need for Fitzy any more. But he'll kill it at Box Hill and probably get a game at some stage if Ceglar or McEvoy are injured.

I don't think Hogan needs a tall forward partner of certain quality. He is the quality. He is the tall forward! Now at some stage we need to draft someone as well as Max King to help play 2nd ruck and to be a tall in the forward line besides Dawes and Pedersen. And if that player is there at pick 3 then that's fine. But what we really need is players who move the ball quickly and create scores and goal kicking power. That might mean a nuggety inside mid who dominates clearances but more likely it's either a forward (and I don't think size is that relevant) or a player who can move the ball, break the lines and create scores. What I'm saying is, I'd be more than happy with Parish and Milera if they are the ones we rate even if we pass up Curnow and Weiderman.

Seems spot on. Wouldn't worry too much about Fitzy and 94. We win on the players. If we draft well and improve next year we will win on the picks too. If we draft poorly and go backwards next year we are in a bit of trouble!

I like that we don't have to play slow players like Grimes or Cross on someone like Brent Harvey or Dalhaus or any one of the quick half forwards that usually kill us any more. We have a legitimate lock down back flanker or wing/centre square tagger. He came cheaply and is capable of filling a need. Plus he's young enough and skilled enough to be an option going the other way. Even if he's not a great kick a left foot is handy to provide balance and we are now getting up to a decent number of left footers.

Out: Howe, Toumpas, 64 In: Melksham, Kennedy, Bugg Out: 2016 Rd1, 6, 25 In: 3, 7, 50 It's nice work. But I'm not overly impressed. We gave up players for different players, that's part of trade week. Then we made the bold call to swap next years first rounder out and use associated picks to then upgrade that to pick 3. Overall I'd rather the 3 players we get than the 2 we did have. So that's nice. Personally I'd rather have grafted a little longer on the early deals and tried to get better than picks 46 and 50. If those picks were lower I'd feel more confident about getting talent to increase our depth. Especially as we will have needs to make with some of those selections or rookie picks - mainly outside run, key forward, ruck. It's a B+ week that sets up for a bumper draft.