Update post-all drafts:
* Club has bolstered the 23-24 age bracket with 3 additions. Previously only had 4 players (ie. only 4 players from the 2007-08 drafts combined).
* Club has clearly targeted more tall midfielders this recruiting period (3 additions).
* 85-89kg bracket is clearly now the dominate mode on our list (17 players); Miles is the only player under 80kg on our list.
* I would predict the Club will target KPPs in the 2014 trade/FA/drafts period. Next year's draft is meant to have a number of KPPs available at the top end.
Excellent analysis MT 
Really highlights why we made the 8 this year and why why should make it next. Based on age alone, the percentage of our squad sits in the 'prime' or under age so we should expect to see some fruitful times over the next few years.
what real need was there to bolster the 23 to 24 age bracket. i would have thought as long as you have enough players in the 23 thr 28 age bracket you have enough mature players. we dont have any 29 yr olds do we need to go and get a couple.
All fringe players but we delisted 5 from our "prime" bracket and have since brought in 5 to replace them. So it could argued the club is trying to maintain the same quota with our 23-28 year olds.
what tall mids ben lennon and then who. even lennon has some questions about his ability to become a permanent mid.
lloyd gordon are most certainly forwards who ccan hopefully rotate thru the middle.
as for the rookies banfield is more a forward as well. only thomas who comes with his knockers and miles who is a small can be classified as genuine mids to date.it may change but lets at least call a spade a spade and not gloss over things.
bloody hell since when did batchelor, petterd, ohanlon, dea, lloyd houli morris newman king, s edwards, gordon , a edwards , and mcdonough become first and foremost mids. you could possibly add knights there as well.
My 'Mids' definition relates as much to mid-sized players which includes onballers, flankers, wingmen, utilities, etc ...
as for weight bloody hell the entire list averaged 188cm/89kg in 2013 id bet the height has shrunk and the weight a much of a much. taking nothing but mature players you would haope these areas dont go backwards.
It's probably not noticeable over the past year but there has been a definite shift towards bigger bodied mids since Dimma's first season in 2010.
finally of course we will target talls next draft. having ignored em this time around id say we have little choice. yet the need for genuine mids remains high.
about the only area we addressed was sml/med forwards we took them by the truck load.
Our small and mid-sized forwards let us down regularly so I understand the Club targeting them over the offseason. You only have to revisit the Elim. Final to see the crop we had this year had no idea where to position themselves in relation to our tall forwards. Being dront and square is a foreign concept to them 
. It can be argued that the Club has recruited so many in the quest to find a couple of decent small/mid-sized forwards out of the whole recruiting batch.
A Tiger-supporter caller to SEN on the weekend actually asked Rohan Connolly about this. Rohan reckons Dimma may be wanting to copy a Sydney-like forward line structure with two talls surrounded by marking mid-sized forwards with good footskills who know where the goals are (hence the drafting of Lennon).
as for ruckmen we cut a dead weight in derickx and replaced him with a bloke who has been nothing more than a battler to date thru his career. we sure as hell want to hope that changes.
Carlton arguably did worse. They've effectively swapped Hampson with Cam Wood 
.
we have atm jusrt 3 effective ruckmen maric hampson and stephenson. its pretty clear vickery is not a ruckman and will not anylonger be played as such. mcbean bloody hell if and i say if hes a ruckman hes 3 yrs away from the role. im happy to atm classify both as tall forwards thats the role they perform and until this changes or they show they can become good ruckmen its where i will logically place em.
to finish i say again as ive been saying for yrs the tall situation is dire the ruck situation almost as bad and we lack a minimum of 3 genuine mids if not more.
I agree that if Maric goes down for a lengthy period then our rucks stocks will be severely tested. None of the others have carried the majority of the ruckwork load for any significant length of time.
1/delisted fringe players or not, where was the great need to add 23 and 24 yr olds sto the list. with delistings and before the trade nd periods we still had 19 players aged 23 or more.
we also had another 5 who would turn 23 after the start of next season. was there really a need to target this age group with so many as you put it fringe players.imo no there wasnt.
2/ so in effect your mid definition is not specific and does include a shedload of players who are nothing more than flankers and players who spend little time in the midfield. my whole point is we do not have enough mids but too many flankers and part time mids.
3/ theres been a big shift toward bigger bodied mids and flankers for many yrs now by most clubs. we a barely catching up.
4/ agree our sml mids let us down in a big way. they have for yrs. why take so many though is a very legit question. sml forwards dont win you games of footy.
if the need was so great i ask again why not chapman and further develop the likes of mcdonough and take lloyd as a rookie. i dont believe you take limited sml/med forwards to the detrimnent of all other areas. do you.
5/ carlton have taken wood as nothing more than backup.yet one could say they rate wood better.i think with their ruck stocks now getting a bit low their situation is a bit like how we have orren.
thing is they have both warnock and kruezer hence why they could let hampson go. both are infinately better players to date than hampson.and both are only 24 and 26 yrs of age.
sydneys forward set up is very tall they use 4 talls with just two sml medium type forwards. im not quite sure what model of theirs we are supposed to be following.
6/we have just 3 ruckmen and we agree about where those capable of playing ruck are at.
i still firmly believe we need a young big bodied ruckman of marics ilk in our system right now and he should only be 22 23 at the most .i would also like a rookie ruckman as well.
stephenson 31 yr old and its not unfair to say hes a vfl ruckman. he has what just one more yr and thats being fair.
maric 28yo a bloke who has chronic groin problems whos career is likely to be on the short side rather than long. he could be gone in two yrs time and we do need to plan for this scenario now.not next yr or when he actually retires.
hampson 26yo who lets be totally honest has struggled to establish himself in 7 yrs at carlton. exactly what do we have here. the way our ruck stocks are we really cant afford to have him fail or the cupboard will be bare before you can blink. itslike we are putting all our ruck eggs in one very risky basket.
its funny we can take lots of sml/med forwards but we cant properly address ruck needs and kpp needs yet alone genuine mid needs.
it really is yep we sure can do with a decent mid or three but lets only take forwards who may or may not become mids at the level.
we sure could do with some more kpps with the way those we have are developing but no lets get some more sml forwards its laughable.
