poita

Really didn't warrant his two AFL games, but long term it should be a good thing for him. He now knows the level he needs to get to and where he is currently at, so presumably he will start next year at Casey and work on closing that gap. Hopefully can be a long term key defender for us.

25 career games as a midfielder for an average of 9.5 disposals a game is all you need to know about Riley. Too small, too slow, can't find the football at AFL level, doesn't have the endurance to play four quarters. The effort is okay, but he simply doesn't have the tools to be an AFL footballer. Will be a great pickup for a state league club.

A shining light in what was a fairly mediocre defense for the most part. Looks capable of becoming one of the truly elite defenders in the competition, particularly if our midfield can break even most weeks.

Seems to be doing everything right in his recovery. We might look back in a few years and think that the injury wasn't such a bad thing in the context of what is hopefully a long and brilliant career.

One day someone will have to take the football department staff list and set out in plain English exactly what each person is paid to do, because it seems to me that one of the almost 40 existing members of the football department could take care of game analysis and education co-ordination. For example one of the five people with the word development in their job title.

Very disappointing second year. I'm just not sure what characteristics he possesses that will allow him to thrive at AFL level: smallish, not quick, doesn't get heaps of the footy, doesn't work overly hard defensively. May end up being handy depth, but hard to see him being best 22, as the likes of Stretch, Neal-Bullen, Harmes and others go past him.

I was one who was critical of him in 2014 due to his lack of defensive work, but he was exceptional in that regard this year. Probably only a couple of quiet weeks kept him out of the All Australian squad, and a deserving B&F winner. More of the same next year please Bernie.

I thought West Coast were using their first pick on Lewis Jetta, so presumably they couldn't beat us to Redden. Redden would be a much better option for pick 24 than Melksham / Bastinac / insert other dud here.

I can't see Michie ever being better than the 25th-30th best player on our list, so the question becomes whether you give him games ahead of guys like Neal-Bullen and Harmes who have more upside. If we draft / trade well he could sit outside our best 30 players, in which case you would think his current contract would be his last. He has been in the system long enough now that he is not going to have the breakout season that we had previously hoped for, he'll just be a plodder.

Far better value than either Dawes or Frost as a key forward / ruck option, and I can't understand why he was not in the team from round 1. I'm not sure why he hasn't been given a new contract yet given our lack of options in these positions.

I'm not sure what part of the (proposed) Melksham deal is worst - the four years, the $$$, the second round pick or the player himself. It is a shocker in every respect. And whilst some around here are in love with Roos and co, I think our trading last year was a bare pass at best. Lumumba was a clear fail, the jury is out on Frost, Newton has been disappointing, and Garlett is a clear win.

We could do plenty worse than Hartlett, but I'm not sure he's worth pick 6 unless we think he is capable of being an every week top 3 midfielder. I certainly wouldn't pay that much for a half back flanker. If Port were to throw in a pick or a player, I'd say yes.

I wouldn't give up pick 100 for Yarran, let alone the first round pick that Carlton want. Could you imagine Lumumba and Yarran prancing around on opposite flanks, trailing their men in by five metres and generally looking disinterested? No thanks.

I rate Suckling below Lumumba, and I definitely don't rate Lumumba. Suckling is a soft, unaccountable receiver who looks good with ball in hand because he has smart players feeding him the ball in good positions. In a poor side, every player needs to be able to defend his man, and Suckling can't do that.

I thought he was pretty solid for the most part, which was reflected in his B&F finish. I would be disappointed if he left with the future looking positive after suffering through nine years of mediocrity.

Gave everything he had to the club and the reception he received in the final game is evidence of the high esteem in which he is held. That said, he looked dreadfully slow by year's end and his disposal had slipped alarmingly, so the decision not to offer a new contract was the right one. I wish him well for whatever comes next.

Not sure what the logic was in playing a key defensive prospect as a forward / ruck, but I'm yet to be convinced that he is a long term key defender at AFL player. I'm not saying he isn't, just that we haven't seen the evidence yet. Of course, if they can't get his toe right, it doesn't matter what positions they see him in.

I expected more from a player in his fourth year in the AFL system. Yes, he can find the goals, but his defensive work is basically non-existent and he doesn't get enough of the football to not contribute defensively as well. I would expect him to struggle for a game if Petracca comes in and we can land a couple of midfielders in the trade period.

He showed enough this year to suggest he can be a very good player. Clearly needs to go from 10 touches a game to 20 plus for this to happen, but there is plenty to work with.

I don't understand the love that people around here have for Kent. Been on the list three years and averages 10.7 disposals, 0.8 goals and 1.8 tackles a game, and even less than that this year. Everyone seems to want to get rid of Toumpas, but he averaged 15 touches and 3 tackles a game this year. Yes, Kent is capable of kicking goals on the run from outside 50, but he is also capable of spraying three more shots out on the full or going missing for half a game. He would want a big year in 2016.

If McCartney is the bees knees, why are we so keen to offload Watts & Toumpas? Wouldn't it be better to give McCartney a couple of years to work his magic with them?

I'm a little surprised to see Fitzy moved on as we don't have great depth in key positions or in the ruck, and he can play in all of those. Nevertheless, after six years, he can hardly complain. The other three had their cards marked a long time ago.

So, are we just throwing up names for the sake of looking like we are doing something useful, or is there actually more than a miniscule chance that we can land someone who can lead this club out of the mire? Because Melksham is far closer to the Newton / Michie / Dawes / Lumumba level of recruit, than the level of Dangerfield or O'Meara . If Goodwin, McCartney & co are as good as everyone says they are, shouldn't they be able to realise the potential of a Toumpas or a Watts, rather than talking up their value to another club? By all means move on Watts, Toumpas & co as part of a trade for a big fish, but what's the point of moving on a player of Watts' ability for pick 43 in a weak draft or a nobody like Melksham?

Nice work if you can get it, being paid $1m a year plus and you get to hand over most of your responsibilities to your successor.

It remains incredible to me that a bloke who is slow, poorly skilled and doesn't get enough of the football was given a three year contract, presumably on decent money. Thanks for that, Neeldy. That said, Jordie was a much better player in his first four years than some around here give him credit for, and he probably deserved more than a quarter of senior football this year to save his career. Thanks and good luck, Jordie.