mo64

Given our injury list, Billings is a lock for rd 1, but his disposal hasn't improved from last year. Under limited pressure he kicks the ball to the opposition far too often. And Woey was pretty quiet for mine. Turner is well ahead of Jefferson at this stage. I'd love to see a forward structure with Fritsch, JVR and Turner as leading forwards, and maybe use AJ as a 2nd ruck and a bash and crash forward.

Was disappointed when we didn't draft him. He addresses a need, and I reckon he'll play a lot of senior football this year.

Was disappointed when we didn't draft him. He addresses a need, and I reckon he'll play a lot of senior football this year.

If that's the case then about 30,000 members are ineligible to vote. We must have a lot of pets as members.

Just doing a quick maths calculation, and assuming that all voters would have endorsed Steven Smith, is it only members who have renewed for 2025 who are eligible to vote? Doing the maths, 23% of eligible voters voted, and Steven Smith received 8.3k, that puts our membership tally at around 36k. This aligns with the recently updated membership tally on Demonland. Our membership for 2024 was 67k, which means a lot of 2024 members weren't eligible to vote in a 2024 election. It doesn't bother me because my membership rolls over, but I'm curious if this is the case.

It's pretty damning that since we traded for him, we've drafted 2 players to play the same role as a forward 2nd ruck. Whilst he was underwhelming at Casey, I would have given him a game or two late in the year to see what he had to offer. I'd love to be proven wrong, because we are crying out for a capable ruck/forward, but I don't think Fullarton will be the answer.

Didn't see the point of re-signing Hore as a rookie. Petty and Turner can play back if the need arises, and we have ample key forwards on our list to replace them. Hore is 29 and had an injury interrupted season. Can't see any upside in the player we previously delisted. From what I saw of the Werribee finals, Henderson looks like a real talent, whilst Johnson didn't look AFL level. Our list management continues to be puzzling.

That's ridiculous. You don't waste a list spot for that. It's not the 70's VFA comp.

Statistically he's a key forward / ruckman who doesn't kick many goals, low possessions and seems too short to be a genuine ruckman. At 24, it's hard to get enthused by the pick. I'd rather we picked Henderson.

Bingo!!! The best mids currently in the AFL come in all shapes and sizes. Butters and Daicos are different to Bont and Cripps. Each have their strengths and weaknesses. Bont probably gets caught with the ball more than any mid, but is arguably the best player in the comp. If Langford turns out to be a 20-30 goal a season mid due to his aerial ability, I couldn't care less how fast he can run a 20m sprint.

The resident armchair draft experts on here wanted to use picks 5 or 9 on Harry Armstrong. As it's turned out, we could have kept our future 1st, and almost got him him with our original pick 28.

I'm just relieved that we picked up 2 mids. Based on his physique, I wasn't expecting Windsor to play from the get go. Hopefully LIndsay can do the same.

Your scenario is the exact reason why I'm questioning the idea of splitting pick 9. I'll concede that moving up from pick 28 would have been difficult. But essentially we are trading our future 1st and a raft of 3rd round picks for pick 13 or 14. That's a terrible trade. I've seen these sort of deals done on NBA Draft Night, and more often than not, they end up badly for the team that gets too cute.

You haven't answered my question. What high end picks do you seriously think a club will give up for pick 9? We acquired pick 9 assuming there'd be elite talent in the top 10. If we liked players that are projected to go late in the 1st round, we had pick 28 which we could have upgraded with the bunch of 3rd rounders that we gave away.

No club is going to do that deal.