pantaloons

There is some genuine comedy in this article. This gem on Melbourne's willingness to trade Brad Miller took the cake: "Melbourne will drive a hard bargain given their dearth of tall forwards but the Swans' second-round selection could sway them, even though the draft pool is thin." What's their second round pick - 21? Hmm, I think I could be swayed... As for the Charman snippet, I'm not sure why the writers are suggesting Melbourne 'should' go after him. I'd prefer they stick to reporting facts or even rumours doing the rounds than give their zany opinions.

Unless whoever's in charge of Melbourne's trading falls asleep and the Kangaroos get him to agree to the trade Weekend at Bernie's style, there is no way this could be allowed to happen. You do not trade away for pick 11 and then spend it (and a player) on a flaky, overrated, injury prone 25 year old. Pick 11 should be spent on a key forward unless something extremely special presents itself.

At the very least, having pick 1 in the PSD should ensure that if Davey has indeed cracked the sads and wants to leave, that we are adequately compensated via trade.

I doubt he'd worry about that, and I reckon he'd get the same treatment or worse from fans on any club forum. But I think you're right on Carlton being into him early.

Theoretically, that would be Brad Miller. I can't remember McLean's efforts in finals other than the magical St. Kilda final - his best career game. I'm ok with pick 11 for Brock, just not with the glee players seem to have at leaving the club.

I have no sympathy for the Dogs. They have defiantly avoided picking up a decent key forward for years, failing to do so via trade or the draft. Nick Riewoldt is an absolute superstar and the performance of he, Dal Santo and Hayes speaks volumes about the importance of having elite players in your side. Well done to the Saints and well deserved. We'll get the great Grand Final we should all be hoping for now.

From the Hun in the last couple of hours: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/hawt...f-1225774592765 Hawthorn's salary cap situation is going to be very interesting in the next couple of years. It strikes me as odd that a team can be going after the likes of Burgoyne, Sandilands and Gibson and yet still be able to accommodate the up and coming youngsters, many of whom are now premiership players.

No. Marrying a Melbourne supporter was part of my strict selection criteria for choosing a wife. And she puts together a mean PowerPoint presentation.

Buckley's had four years on the list. That's a fair amount of time to gain an assessment on a midfielder. Assuming we delist three uncontracted players, it's going to be very tough for him to keep his spot on the list. Trade week may shuffle some things around and make life easier for him, but realistically, he needs three of Miller, Bartram, McNamara or Cheney to go ahead of him. Only Miller has been at the club for a longer period than Buckley of that group. His pace is the only thing that would save him in my opinion, as his kicking is unreliable and he's highly prone to brain explosions, two damning flaws in today's football.

I believe the fairly bone-headed rule has been changed. I think the Steven King trade featured pick 90 which Geelong didn't use (from memory).

I just want to see the two best teams, St. Kilda and Geelong, make the Grand Final.

For some sad reason I still work out my own Melbourne B & F each season. Brock finished 6th in mine. The weighted system, which in some ways is similar to what I use, obviously helps those who play well in wins. Brock was in our best in three of our four wins by my calculations, which goes a long way to helping his score along. He didn't poll in too many games though. I guess the moral of the story is that if Brock McLean can have 25 blinders next season we can go 25-0!

I have seen enough of him to suggest that he won't make it. I'm happy for him to prove me wrong, but there's no way I can see that happening. That doesn't mean that a player isn't tradeable, it just means that clubs place different values on their own players. Just because Melbourne wouldn't trade Davey for pick 20 doesn't mean that we wouldn't trade him for pick 1, Gary Ablett and Joel Selwood. He is still tradeable - its just that he's worth more to Melbourne than other sides and no team would be able to come close to an agreement with us in all likelihood.

I think it was rpfc who mentioned in another thread that every player is tradeable and that we won't be trading Rivers unless its a very good deal for us, which I agree wholeheartedly with. I love Rivers as much as the next Melbourne supporter, but if the right deal came along you'd have to look at it. Just like if next year the Gold Coast asked for Jack Watts in return for picks 1, 2 and 3 you'd be crazy not to entertain the thought. I see Rivers as an important part of the team. I wouldn't be shopping/flaunting him around come trade week, but I'd be answering any questions other clubs may have, just like I would for all of the players on the list. If the deal wasn't a very good winner for the MFC, then I'd more than happily keep him. As for the likes of Bell, Newton and Miller, anything we get in return would suffice. For Newton in particular, we'd have to offer the other club an incentive to take him (ie. Newton & 50 for pick 60/70-odd, bearing in mind neither pick would be used by the MFC).

Given that he's contracted for 2010, West Coast would have to give us Staker and pick 55 for our pick 98 for us to even entertain the thought. Even then, I wouldn't clog the list with a struggler who is neither a key position forward or useful crumber.

There was a little snippet on one of the footy radio stations (MMM or SEN, one of the two) a couple of Sundays ago before the early game, that indicated West was keen for a larger coaching role at Melbourne. If he's being offered a larger role and more money at another club, he'd have to seriously consider it. Leaving the city of Melbourne for Perth would probably be a bigger drawback for a coach than leaving the Dees for Freo.

Excellent. We'll rename it the 'All-Australian Team for 3/4 of the League' as of next season. It's simply lazy. Do they actually watch the games, or go by generalised theories like the one you (hopefully sarcastically) spouted?

After a big last two rounds, Sylvia moved into 3rd in my reckoning. 1. Davey 2. Moloney 3. Sylvia 4. Warnock

It is a flat out disgrace, but I expected no less from those clowns. Hopefully one day our club commands the respect where our players aren't treated like dog excrement when it comes to these awards. That will likely only come from winning consistently. In the meantime, this has once again saved me valuable life hours not wasted watching a bland AA awards night on TV.

My apologies. Put it down to the early onset of senility.

Bate's omission secures the 2009 goalkicking award for 13-game Robbo. A pity for Whelan that he doesn't get a send-off.

Thanks for that, neita. The development of our backline has been one of the few bright spots of the past 18 months for Melbourne. Our regular defenders don't get belted one on one too often. Hopefully the midfield and forwardline can uphold their parts of the bargain soon, and we'll see the total points against column continue to plummet.

1. Davey 2. Moloney The first two in that order are pretty clear cut for me. After that, I'd have Bruce and Warnock, but from 3 downwards, not a lot would surprise me.

Read my post carefully. I never suggested the list managers weren't responsible.

Actually DD, I'd say that in a way his presence on the list is harmful. We're going to have a tough time delisting players this year, and he should be the first to go. If we're after 6 vacancies (1, 2, 18, 34, PSD 1 & 1 rookie elevation), then we need to find 3 characters to add to Robbo, Whelan and Wheatley. Obviously I'm not advocating dumping listed players, but there are going to be one or two stiff blokes next month.