nutbean

And it is even harder to crystal ball who is the best available at 3..( it is impossible to crystal ball who will turn out to be the best from the draft - history tells us that it is less than a 50% chance that it will be the player whose name is called out as number ne) I have been consistent suggesting that no one has the slightest idea on who will be the best available at pick 3. I have been consistent suggesting that any of the top ten picked can wind up being the best out of the draft ( and there will be others outside the top 10 who completely fly under the radar like Fyffe). History absolutely highlights this. So in the top 10 we have some talls and we have mids. We need everything but our most pressing need is mids.

tell me about it... missed it by thaaaaaat much...

I'm not sure I'd be putting that in print....

Fabulous idea ( soured a little by the exclusion of Danny Seow)

I am not paid to have ulcers over the clubs finances - but PJ is. When you suggest that we let PJ worry about the commercial side I will suggest that that is exactly what he is doing after seeing our draw - worrying.

i agree - but I see the big contradiction in post - Drafting is far from an exact science/ I hope the selectors are more gifted. One may profess to have a system to win tattslotto but at the end of the day, its still tattslotto. What I am more bullish about is for the first time we have a development team in place that can extract the talent from draftees and take those glimpses of quality that made them high draft picks and polish them into reality - the reality being fine AFL footballers.

Just watched Petracca's clip for the first time - very nice overhead and can find the ball but geez - a 5 minute highlight reel and they couldn't find any clips of him hitting a target ? Going purely on the clips (my big disclaimer) -Brayshaw vs Petracca - do you want Swan getting the ball 40 times or Pendlebury getting it 30 times - I know which one i prefer.

Sylvia will be great next year - if he can get a solid preseason behind him.

Just looked at Lever's highlight reel - again, I am only going off what 2 minutes of tape but looks so impressive. If his knee op has had no ill effect on his movements, he looks a pearler. Great pair of hands combined with excellent judgement.

and humbug ?

But you can't argue with historical data - not only are the odds heavily against our recruiters, the odds are against any recruiter making the correct decision. It has happened in almost draft to date - why should that change. What I am hoping for is draft pick that can be a valuable 10 year player. What I dream about is an elite superstar. I look forward to the five phases of recruiting according to demonland phase one - everyone having an expert opinion on immature, under-developed 18 year olds coming from a competition where defensive efforts and two way running are a mystery. ( these opinions in the main are gathered from a 2 minute highlight reel and the musings of so called experts who have not got it right from day one) phase two drafting the players phase three - immediate outrage over who we should have taken and who we missed out on phase four - two seasons on - outrage over who we should have taken and who we missed out on ( which are a completely different set of players than those mentioned in phase 4) phase five - ongoing and continued depression on why we can't get a draft pick right

My first year of my dad taking me to the footy was 1965 - go figure....

Read the above - are you confident who the best talent is at number 3 ?

The trouble is that history has shown us that players that recruiters believe to the third best footballer have a varied success rate of turning out that way. To date - IMO 2013 draft - pick 4 bontempelli is the standout 2012 draft - pick 7 Wines 2011 draft - wow - really hard - maybe we now have the steal of the draft Tyson at number 3 or Toby Greene at 11 ? The point is we make such a big deal about the difference between what predraft are considered the 3rd best and 4th, 5th or 6th best when in reality the careers of what was picked as the 3rd , 4th ,5th or 6th best never play out in that order. So would we be ridiculous taking a Laverde over McCartin because McCartin is considered 3rd best and Laverde 5th best ? absolutely not - history tells us that there is as much chance that Laverde should be a number 3 pick. Edit - I went back to 2000 on number one draft picks and on careers to date I could argue the case for three (maybe five) being the correct choices ( Of course this is retrospective) - 2010 - Swallow ( I think Heppel is better though). 2003 - Cooney ( Mundy ?) 2002 - Goddard is still the pick , 2001 - Hodge ( Judd ?), 2000 - Reiwoldt. Again on history and the odds - there will be a better player in this draft than Petracca.

probably the answer is that the need to acquire McCartin has diminished because we have got Hogan.

Due to global warming and the indications of a scorching hot summer we need to burn the track up early before total fire ban days are enforced.

I think he has all the attributes to make it except at certain times he looked like he was absolutely spent - ie - he needs to develop a tank. And he need to remain injury free. One more thing I would like him to do in the ruck and I have mentioned it before. Compare him to Sandilands ( and yes Sandilands has much more meat on his bones) - the one thing Sandilands does is use his height to advantage - he stands up straight - put his arms up straight - he uses his full extension. Maxy at times is almost quasimodo like in that hunches and losses the advantage he has of being so tall.

Successful or not successful mids ( I am hoping we get it right = successful) - it's not really the point IMO. We had the worst inside 50 count by a long way in 2014, equal bottom with GWS in 2013, and 3rd worst to the GWS, Suns in 2012. Your crying out for mids comment is spot on. If you can't get the ball into the forward half, it doesn't matter how good your forwards are unless the conversation rate is spectacular and I am not convinced a 1st year draftee will be the spectacular difference for a few years at least. Drafting an instant "champion" forward might improve your conversation - aka Buddy. I back the "new" club to finally do the right things at this time of the year but won't be highly critical around the debate on who we should and shouldn't be taking as I am purely a 2 minute highlight watcher. I like the look of 3 mids being Petracca, Brayshaw and Laverde. If it was me I would opt for two mids. We have lots of needs but to me this is the most pressing.

Saty's bacccckkkkkk He was delisted but re-rookied as "the devil inside"

I must be reading something different to you. I have seen him described as not worthy of a pick 1-3 and overrated as a top 3 pick but I am haven't heard described as a dud..

Amen to that !!

no - 3 years at $170,000 with a one year kicker and $50,000 for top ten B&F finish with a $10,000 penalty per week for weeks suspended

fire brigade need to be called to put out a track this is apparently burning up ?

not sure he was under specific instructions - i dont think that he knew any other way. Good coaches use the carrot and the stick. IMO Neeld only knew the stick

We have all have our opinions - I think we can all probably agree he was out of his depth. I don't have intense dislike for him however on the other hand I wouldn't want him back at our club.