DeeSpencer

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!

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.

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!

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.

I don't know. In the NBA or NFL you are comparing college kids who have played in all sorts of different leagues. There are some who played for top programs against elite competition and some who played for small schools against much weaker competition. It's worth weighing up the competition this year but I think at least the kids come together for the national carnivals which provide a good look. That's an advantage over the American leagues. I think this trade isn't about getting in kids who are just way better than every other teams (although that would be nice), but about getting a core group together of good players. If we pick up 2 more very good kids then we'll develop a team and culture with a lot of exciting young players and they'll work it out between them as to who becomes the stars.

We trade our first rounder next year (likely 3-8) for pick 3 and a couple of downgrades. Carlton trade Geelong's first rounder next year (likely 8-14) for pick 8. I'm warming to this bold decision we've made but if anyone thinks it's a win based purely on the trade they are wrong.

The way I see it is I think we thought: Pick 6 this year v Pick 10 this year = same same, no real difference between who will be available at each pick. Weiderman might be the guy for us at either of these picks Pick 29 this year v Pick 43 this year = both pretty ordinary. Pick 3 this year v 1st rounder next year = we can get a good kid in now instead of waiting. It's the pick 3 that will make this trade. Poor kids going to have some pressure on him but we can diffuse that externally by pointing to the rest of our good kids and pick 10.

No. But the system is rigged to favour the academies.

Yep I do. We could've used 25 to get one of the 3 Gold Coast 2nd round picks next year instead of pick 43. Getting back a 2nd rounder next year in a deeper draft would've helped us mitigate against the loss of the 1st round pick. Now we are stuck with pick 43 in a draft with very little Vic Metro talent which means it's a pretty useless pick.

The Dogs just made finals without a good ruckman. Maybe it's a gamble worth taking. History says if you assemble a good side that a ruck will be there to join you when you need one.

I don't think a PR campaign would make much difference this year. It's time to sit back and go about our business quietly. We don't have to do anything amazing to land a big recruit, just make steady improvement and have the cash ready and I think we will get someone.

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?

There is such a thing called the salary cap that will eventually catch up with some of these clubs (maybe, probably not). But I can see the OP's point. It's a bit like the property market, even if a mortgage is tight on your bottom line just getting in and starting to get the capital gains and an asset is worth a lot long term. So I'd gladly trade a first rounder for a gun player if it makes our list better because that could flow on to becoming a destination club and all the benefits associated. Of course it still has to be the right deal.

He then replied to a moronic Carlton supporter saying it was only in reference to Port and nothing against Melbourne. Ports inside mids: Boak, Gray, Wines,........... Colquhoun, Moore Outside mids: Ebert, Polec,....... White.........., Young, Mitchell Forward mid: S Gray, Monfries, Amon, Ah Chee, Half back: Hartlett If Port use Hartlett at half back (or rotate him with Polec) then they probably aren't as deep as some think through the middle. A fantastic top 5 mids that's for sure. The bottom couple of spots in their midfield mix is fairly open with quite a few guys fighting for games and not cementing a spot. I think the Toump might actually get a decent run if he can string together some good SANFL footy. I don't want him to make us look silly by being a star but I wish him all the best and think if he does make a career for himself it's a good thing not a bad thing. The circumstances weren't looking good for him staying here.

Which club is going to accept picks 29 and 50 if they could've got 21 and 32? The whole 'everything must be seen as an overall package' doesn't make a lot of sense unless you are planning on screwing someone with a late trade. I don't mind the Howe trade as there were 3 players involved for us and multiple picks. It's the kind of deal you sing off on to get it done. But the Melksham deal was an isolated one for one deal where we had the player lined up for us. We were in the position of power there.

I think we might have to put up with the odd mistake in order to get him to flourish. He'll be frustrating the crap out of us then he'll start to find the tempo at AFL level and work out when to try some tricks and when to play the percentages. Speed and footskills. It's what we need.

Like we did with Morton or Strauss or Blease? Or like Carlton did with Kane Lucas? Or like how Gysberts kicked on at North? He's shown something, but if we rated Kennedy higher then we make this trade.

Brisbane and GWS do. They have 2 each inside the first round/early 2nd round. It's up to us to see if we can upgrade pick 29 with either of them.

Brent Harvey's been running around for 20 years smaller than that. He's a high half forward/midfield rotation player. He has speed. Almost every team has 1 player that size in their team. The Hawks have 2.

My main concern with Ben Kennedy is I think he's more a half forward/inside mid than a pure wingman. But I don't know if Toumpas was either although he had a couple of games this year that looked solid. Finding guys who are genuine outside running mids with elite endurance, a dash of pace and reasonable skills isn't easy.

The simplest way to see it is Kennedy for Toumpas IMO. I think that's worth the risk. Why keep a player who hasn't progressed when he's been fit and available. I'm calling that a win. 29 and 50 for Howe is a little unders. But if we can package them up for a pick 20 then it's about right. A bit of a loss, but this draft isn't so bad that you can't find a good player with an early 20's pick if we can combine the 2.

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.

Buckley said Freeman will take some of his issues with him to his next club. Without looking it up that's almost a direct quote. I'm not sure he would've said that if he was just referencing the hamstring injuries. I've now heard it from a few sources that Freeman like a drink and a night out. Not uncommon with young footballers. But when injured you are meant to be ultra disciplined.