poita

Why on earth would we give Hunt another year on the senior list? He has done nothing at all to date to suggest he will be an AFL player. Three years is what we gave Toumpas to prove himself, and he showed a million times more promise in that time than Hunt has. Really disappointed that the club has not come out and justified the Terlich contract either given that one year contracts are in vogue at present. Why was Dean given two years on the back of an underwhelming 2014 season? How many memberships are covering the cost of his contract? PS. I actually like Terlich as a player, but I'm not sure why he was contracted for two years when the coach doesn't rate him.

Let's be honest, we'll get at least 7 (maybe 8) home games against interstate sides. Most of these will be on Sundays. Aside from Collingwood, we'll get Richmond if the Anzac eve game is shared, and probably one of Carlton and St Kilda given their ladder positions. Everyone wants to host the big Victorian clubs, and we're just not a priority for the fixture team. I can't see us getting any Friday nights, certainly not as the home team. At least if we host the interstate teams it limits the number of interstate games we have to play. If we get away with one trip to Adelaide and one to Perth it would be a good result. Our number one request should be to get more games on Channel 7, particularly against decent sides. We were about 20 rounds in before I could watch a game at home with my son this year.

JKH needs to develop a stand out quality (or two), because at the moment there is nothing about him that suggests he is more than handy depth. There is nothing seriously wrong with him, but nothing exceptional either. He definitely has to find a way to get more involved in the game, because 10 touches a game doesn't cut it unless you are kicking multiple goals or providing serious defensive pressure. He currently does neither. I wouldn't object to him being tried in defense, because I'm no great fan of Jetta as a small defender and I think Jay will take the game on more.

Pretty tough on James making him wait 7 weeks to know whether he has a spot on the list for next year, but I'm sure the club has its reasons. Hopefully he can continue his good form from round 23 - it's been a while since one of our rookie elevations really had a decent career, most lately have been in the Evans / Nicholson / Clisby mould of doing nothing once they reach the senior list. Does no announcement re Vandenberg mean that he will start 2016 on the rookie list? Perhaps not a bad idea, as they can leave a spot open on the senior list and promote the best performing rookie prior to round 1.

The reality is that for the better teams players 18-28 on the list are fairly interchangeable. In our case it is probably players 10-28 that are fairly interchangeable. We have a small amount of top end talent, and a large amount of players who are either not good enough or who are still developing. We haven't traded in anyone who is better than average, so they'll just add to the pool of mediocre players clogging up the middle of our list. All three recruits are good enough to play senior football in a poor side, but will hopefully get squeezed out over the next few years. Until the likes of Petracca, Stretch, Neal-Bullen and this years draftees can step into that top tier, we will continue to struggle. Hogan, Brayshaw and maybe Salem stood up last year, hopefully a few more join them this year.

Are we able to bid on more than one academy player? For example, we put a bid in for Mills with pick 3. Sydney match our bid. Can we then go again with Hopper, and Kennedy potentially, before we finally take Parish? I would hate for some of these guys to slip through to 7 or 8 before someone puts a bid in, and Sydney get more freebies. It seems as though Carlton and Brisbane are both set on their picks, so we might be the first club that can stir up some trouble for other clubs.

Shaun Smith looked 40 when he was 25, but he hasn't aged a day since. Good luck to Joel.

Are we sure Michie is out of contract? I had always thought he received a three year deal. Otherwise he might be in trouble, particularly if we come up with a pre season draft prospect. I'd be amazed if Hunt was retained. Maybe as a last round rookie pick if nothing else is available, but he just doesn't seem to have a body for top level football. Harmes would be dreadfully unlucky not to be upgraded given the lack of quality amongst our bottom 6-8 players.

I love the way that Demonland sentiment ebbs and flows as it suits the individuals involved. First, public concensus was that we needed a big fish, and that Roos / Taylor / Mahoney were the men to get the job done. Then, people got over that idea and were happy to bolster the list with a solid group of experienced players. That didn't really happen so people started to think that it might be good idea to give ourselves a strong hand in the 2016 draft which is supposed to be comparatively strong. That didn't happen either so suddenly we are back to taking a punt on kids in a weak draft (hello 2003!) being the best idea ever. I personally think that for a team in our position to trade out a future draft pick is just plain dumb. Firstly, we have no idea of its true value, but it may very well be top four if things go poorly next year. Best case scenario it is probably about pick eight if we get to ten wins. Secondly, we limit our ability to land the big fish that we hope to attract if we become a "destination" club. Ultimately we finished 2015 with a list that was comfortably in the bottom 6. Nothing about our trade period changes that situation one iota. Melksham and Bugg will probably match the contributions of Cross and Howe. Kennedy is a fringe player at this point in his career. Hopefully he doesn't become another Michie / Newton / Riley disappointment. It's all pretty underwhelming, but I accept that the recruiting staff have a tough time bringing quality players to the club at present because our on field performances are so dismal. Given the above, I don't see the trade period as a win, and maybe a break even at best. Rating to this point = C-

Just to clarify, Carlton just traded (effectively) a second round pick and some nothing late picks for four players (two of whom were top 10 draft picks), and we still can't get Tom Bugg traded in for a third round pick. I hope we are looking to add something juicier in to the deal, rather than GWS dragging their feet.

Seriously, that's just plain dumb. 2016 is supposedly a much stronger draft, we are currently 15th or 16th in premiership betting, and we're prepared to risk giving up a top four pick. Is Parish really that good? Potentially, IN picks 3, 10 and 43 in a weak draft; OUT pick 4 in a strong draft, 6 and 29 in a weak draft. How is that possibly a win for us?

Established players such as Michie, Riley, Newton and Ben Kennedy? He's just pulling names out of a hat as far as I can tell. If he keeps trying, perhaps eventually he'll find another Josh Kennedy, but I don't like his chances.

People are only viewing the trading of future picks negatively because we are not currently in a position to benefit from them. If we were in Geelong's position of having a queue of players lining up to come to the club, people would expect us to do anything possible to bring them in. If that means drafting away future picks, so be it. Better to lose an unknown kid, than established players.

The most positive I can be about our trade period to date is that it will be a bonanza for the Scorps. A bit similar to the coup orchestrated by Neeld of bringing Byrnes, Gillies, Pedersen and Rodan to the club in one glorious trade period not so long ago.

We are an injury to either Gawn or Hogan away from being absolute cactus. Really disappointed we didn't make a play for Smith instead of going after D grade midfielders.

As I said yesterday, this site is filled with a bunch of sensitive little petals. As soon as anyone says anything that is not 100% positive about the club, or the coach or the playing list, they all fall to pieces. The reality is that we are a bottom third side right at this moment. And nothing we have done since our last game (delistings, trades, etc) has changed that reality one iota. Some people don't like hearing that though.

There's nothing wrong with the timing of the delisting, because it has given other clubs a chance to look at him properly. The reality is that he has no trade value, so we haven't lost anything by moving early. Having said that, our ruck / key position stocks are wafer thin at present. You can pretty much guarantee that Gawn will be injured at some point next yearand Frost hasn't played since April. I think we might regret not keeping another tall on the list for an emergency situation.

As opposed to running around telling everyone that we've offered Melksham a four year contract? No wonder we couldn't get Essendon to budge on pick 25. This club has no idea at times. As for Howe, I'd still prefer to keep him as opposed to receiving low level draft picks / players in return. I'm expecting Kennedy and Collingwood's 3rd round pick at this point. Prove me wrong, MFC.

Lumumba Riley Michie Newton Cross (served a purpose but already gone) Frost (played two games) If that is "generally knocking it out of the ball park with trading and drafting", then you are very easily pleased. By my count we have brought in nine experienced players under Roos for three wins - Vince, Garlett and Tyson - and six that have been of dubious benefit. Forgive me for not doing cartwheels over any of Melsham, Kennedy and Bugg, particularly when Hawthorn are about to add Carlisle to their list and West Coast have picked up Reddan and Jetta.

Gee, there are some sensitive petals around here. Kent has been on the list three years and has done next to nothing thus far. He would need to improve markedly in 2016 to be guaranteed a new contract, which puts him very much in the same bracket as Jones and Michie. Stretch is a decent kick over short distances, but he is certainly not the long kick that he needs to be to be considered a line breaker. As a recruiter clearly Buckenara saw something from Toumpas in his draft year that has not been evident in his AFL career, but some people are more prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt than hours. Dawes is not a great player, but he plays an important role. Buckenara says as much.

So glad we spent the extra 3 and 1/2 days ironing out the kinks in that deal. At least our negotiators can feel like they've achieved something this week, whilst everyone else is circling the big fish.

Is Lennon really the sort of player we want? Firstly, he clearly has tickets on himself if he is expecting a massive pay rise after playing 9 games this year for 11 disposals per game . Secondly, I don't see him as a genuine midfielder and he's clearly not a key position player, so how does he fill a pressing need for us?

No, just no.

Very similar compensation to what we are proposing to spend on Melksham. I know which one I would prefer to take a punt on (hint: it's not the scrawny bloke with the WADA investigation hanging over his head).

If Collingwood won't accept a third round pick for Kennedy, then we move on. There are plenty more (small) fish in the sea, so we don't need to bend over backwards for clubs who routinely overvalue their players. Kennedy's career averages are 11 possessions, half a goal and under 2 tackles a game - pretty similar to JKH really. Hardly someone we should be getting giddy over.