I must admit to finding it amusing when people go a bit over the top while being critical of others for..... going over the top.

I'm sorry because I've done the same thing going the other way but I'm a prick so I'm allowed.

We do the same thing every year. Even the kids we draft, almost every single one, there is an eye to slotting them in somewhere the following year, even if they 'take time'. I'm not saying that we should go mad with 'project' players but I am saying we should make an effort to get players that will be worth the effort, so to speak.

My problem at this stage is that we are taking pains to say (almost) every player is a 'required player'. That doesn't encourage other clubs to deal with us even if it wasn't true.

Our plans seem to be to improve the midfield as painlessly as possible (and randomly poach a true KPP or two from another club that may or may not make it) and that's it. It looks like we are being a bit more aggressive but apart from that, I don't sense any difference in our usual short term aproach at this early stage.

We seem to be reactive instead of proactive.

_________________
Just because I'm offended, doesn't mean I'm wrong.

...And we shouldn't. Building a list is more than being embarrassed that you couldn't put St Kilda away the last time you played them but that's how we approach it.

_________________
Just because I'm offended, doesn't mean I'm wrong.

Paf, I think Rogers has said only today that we've only got 6 or so untouchables and we were prepared to talk about anyone else...

you may get your wish.

Think of it this way: How many players can we realistically move in the one year?

To date we have 8 delisted and the likelihood of Scotland retiring. As it stands we should already have 9 new faces at the club next year.
We then also have Betts most likely to be gone along with the likes of Hampson, Lucas and maybe one more to be traded.

Even if that's all that transpires, we've already got 13 new faces needed at the club next year. (Well, 14 with Ciaran Byrne)

Can we really imagine more than 14 new faces at our club next year? It's a lot isn't it?

How do you expect to get Talia???

_________________
Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience!!!

After Monday and Tuesday, even the calendar says W T F .........
Visit http://fromthemoshpit.com/

I agree. I think the key point for me is we're prepared to listen to just about anything. We'll probably knock 90% of it back, but at least we are listening.

Throw Mitch into that list of possibles/probables...

Makes too much sense for him to head to Port. He can still hang out and smoke with Eddie over the preseason in Rundle Mall.

I wonder who the six are?

My guess:

Murphy
Judd
Gibbs
Kreuzer
Henderson
Menzel

I would put Judd and Kreuzer up.

It's been posted that we've had a word to a top ten mid from last year's draft.

Is the draft as weak as 2004 or 2005 after the first 19 picks?

Not too many wins and jaw dropping players taken after Pattison and Bower.

50-50 on Thomas, but if Daisy's body is fine, you wouldn't knock back a quality player.

Pies fans would be happier to keep Thomas.

Haven't seen any indication that we're not chasing younger players like Docherty, Adams and Jaksch. Nothing ruling out Carlton from getting Thomas and Docherty.

I guess so as anything's possible.
The only thing with Mitch though is that he is contracted and if he says no, then that may just be where it stops.

Hampson will either be playing at another club next year or largely in the VFL.
Lucas is uncontracted as we speak so it may be fair to assume he's likely to go onto the table.
Duigan also does not have a contract along with Ellard, White and Buckley.

If we start throwing in Gibbs and Yarran into the mix, we're talking about 20+ players. It's not going to happen, is it?

Let me see... Murphy, Judd, Henderson, Gibbs, Kreuzer, Simpson...






...we won't trade Menzal, Walker, Yarran or Robinson so I count 10.

_________________
Just because I'm offended, doesn't mean I'm wrong.

I think the Mitch talk got started because he was interested in moving. I'll stand corrected on that.

20+ players seems hard to believe, I agree -although I guess nothing can be ruled out. Mick is clearly not thrilled with the list. So if he felt that any given trade would improve what he had to work with, I can't see him knocking it back on the basis of us hitting a predetermined number of new faces.

Personally, i would be hoping every one of those five un-contracted players is moved on in some fashion from the club. Duigan would hopefully take on some role in the VFL team, the others add nothing to our scope for improvement.

Rogers also mentioned we were looking at about 15 players.Interesting to see how many of those 15 come to fruition.

2-3 max. maybe just 1. If not a free agent its very difficult to make a deal in trade week. Assume we want to keep our first pick. You need to cast your net wide to find a player who fits your need and who's club you can a deal with. So 15 is prob the number just for the chance to get 1 or 2.

_________________
TC suffers from the social media illness - the death of respect and constructive discourse by keyboard.

Henderson had talks with Carlton today

That's the thing, what do we use for trade? After the first two rounds, I shudder to think what we hope to find if it's really a shallow draft. That's especially true if we are determined to meet a quota of midfielders before we vary things a bit. We went in to the 2010 draft with modest picks and a single purpose - the outcome wasn't very pretty.

_________________
Just because I'm offended, doesn't mean I'm wrong.

Hopefully it was Lachy and hopefully it was about cloning.

_________________
Congratulations CK95

Hopefully it was Lachy and hopefully it was about cloning.

_________________
Congratulations CK95