well that was very much needed, well done tiges
Just dissapointed we're wasting 2 rookie spots on Hislop and Miller.
Can you imagine if Tuck, White, Graham & King didn't save/extend their careers this season? it would have been 15 changes - 29 changes in 2 seasons yikes! 
A bit of perspective for those who sometimes get ahead of themselves as to where this club is at
Good post. Istill think that people are judging the club's decision to take Miller and Hislop in the rookie draft is a bit harsh. I think if it was an uncompromised draft this criticism would be justified but given the diluted draft I think their inclusion is more than valid. While the talent pool in considered excellent this year in the early rounds, clubs are concerned about finding players in the later stages of the Nation Draft. By the time the PSD is finished the pickings will be incredibly slim come the Rookie Draft. Any players we would take in the 3rd and 4th rounds of the rookie draft would not even be speculative, they would be a waste if time and resources. At least with Hislop and Miller we can fill any holes for the short term until the draft is untampered with once again.
Godd delistings IMHO 
Stripes
Sorry Stripes but I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one. I understand what you're saying as far the talent pool is thin at late rookie picks. No issue with that. However, that doesn't mean we then clog our rookie list with mature players who we know 100% are not going to last. That is a waste of time, money and resources. Every year there are teenagers who are overlooked by every single AFL club in one draft year only to picked up in a later draft having shown form in a state league which finally attracts interest from AFL clubs - Michael Barlow, Liam Anthony, Harry Taylor, Jason Porplyzia, Matthew Priddis, Ben McGlynn, Nick Maxwell, Aaron Davey, Matthew Boyd were all drafted in subsequent drafts from state leagues after being overlooked at 18 years of age. Any of those players could have been picked up with a late rookie pick at 18 or even the year before they eventually were. Then there are just the good finds late in the rookie draft - in 2007 we re-rookied Cam Howat at pick 47 in the rookie draft using the insurance and weak pool arguments; at pick 57 Geelong drafted Shane Mumford from their VFL side. In 2008 we passed on our last rookie pick (67) yet Greg Broughton was picked up by Freo at 74 from East Fremantle. Sure the chance of finding a player with a late rookie pick is slim but it isn't 0% and the rewards are great for recruiters who can spot late developers before anyone else does. Clubs that put their faith and resources into the drafts are more likely to succeed than clubs that recycle known players with no future.
I can completely see where you are coming from MT but I juest think that Miller and perhaps even Hislop are more to do with protecting and developig our current players rather than finding new players in a position where it is likely such late picks will be just as bigger a waste. For every success story that comes from the rookie list their are scores who don't. More money is wasted on these prospective players than two mature aged players that can definately fill a short term need at the club.
If we were using all our rookie picks on Mature Aged players I'd be upset but the last two picks in an extremely dilluted talent pool I can certainly live with. I wouldn't recommend it in a normal draft but in the next two, I think most clubs will be looking to develop what they have rather than grab a player who is extremely unlikely to come on.
In my opinion I think we are still bringing in at least 5 young players through the ND, traded for 2 young midfielders and are rerooking one young player leaving us to bring in only one mature aged rookie/development coach. Seems like we are trying to make the most of an unusual position.
Just my opinion of course MT
Stripes
