View Full Version : Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls
White Czar
26 Nov 2005, 10:35
Can someone who has been following the draft tell me about this lad. Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls
:)
White Czar
26 Nov 2005, 10:47
& also Cleve Hughes if anyone has seen much of him.
:)
coasting
26 Nov 2005, 11:03
I said after draft camp that he would go top 10, he is the most explosive player in the draft. Will need time to develop though.
Treasurer
26 Nov 2005, 12:23
I umpired this kid many times even gave him a red card once but thats a different story. Kid Certainly is talented and has good pace and good skills but is very soft Similar to Fiora. I would of Certainly never thought he would of been picked up from his form in Junior Football but from waht i have seen in the WAFL he is very talented.
Treasurer
26 Nov 2005, 12:24
But Coasting is Right Certainly won't set the World on fire when he starts playing Senior footy will need 3 years i reckon.
Oaks was a great player for East Perth colts this season and got into the colts team of the year. Played league football with the league side in the later stages of the year.
Played through the midfield and loves carrying the ball, usually was dropped a kick behind play and swept across half back. His pace is an asset and he has smooth silky skills added to the flair that most Aboriginal players have. Doesnt like to handball the footy prefers to kick it long but if needed he can handball it.
Only problem is he has a very small frame which in the AFL might be exposed but he copped the hits in league and colts so im sure he is more then up for it.
Great kid in general aswell.
Coughlan
26 Nov 2005, 14:29
But Coasting is Right Certainly won't set the World on fire when he starts playing Senior footy will need 3 years i reckon.
Do you think he could start in the FP/HFF?
philhawk
26 Nov 2005, 14:37
Richmonds midfield is starting to look very potent with the youngsters they have picked up in the last few years ...
La Vache
26 Nov 2005, 14:42
Saw footage of his carnival. He had a good old-fashioned UNDERCUT.
Great to see. I'm tired of all this mohawk, mullet nonsense. Bring back the undercut, the worst hair style EVER.
Undercut + Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls = Good for Football
Coughlan
26 Nov 2005, 14:48
Saw footage of his carnival. He had a good old-fashioned UNDERCUT.
Great to see. I'm tired of all this mohawk, mullet nonsense. Bring back the undercut, the worst hair style EVER.
Undercut + Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls = Good for Football
LMAO, that was very funny hair cut but doesnt have it any more, should get it back and he'll be a Richmond cult figure as well as AFL no matter if he makes it or not.
I said after draft camp that he would go top 10, he is the most explosive player in the draft. Will need time to develop though.
Probably less than you might think though. He won't need heaps of physical development because we won't play him in the traffic anyway.
Richmond won't ask him to win his own footy, just park him in the BP and get him to run the ball out of defence. Or park him out on a wing and switch play through him.
He is one of those guys who is probably better suited to AFL footy than he is to state league footy. The kind who will play better for Richmond than he could at Coburg. The fast running, fast moving, zonal type football in the AFL will suit him perfectly.
Tigerbob
26 Nov 2005, 15:39
Probably less than you might think though. He won't need heaps of physical development because we won't play him in the traffic anyway.
Richmond won't ask him to win his own footy, just park him in the BP and get him to run the ball out of defence. Or park him out on a wing and switch play through him.
He is one of those guys who is probably better suited to AFL footy than he is to state league footy. The kind who will play better for Richmond than he could at Coburg. The fast running, fast moving, zonal type football in the AFL will suit him perfectly.
Bingo ;)
La Vache
26 Nov 2005, 17:58
LMAO, that was very funny hair cut but doesnt have it any more, should get it back and he'll be a Richmond cult figure as well as AFL no matter if he makes it or not.
Gutted
So Weaver, is he gonna be our BP while developing?
theorangeapple
26 Nov 2005, 19:40
I dont mean to alarm Richmond people but if I was to pick a player who might want to come home, JOK would be the one (closey followed by Mitch Clarke).
I dont think he will like Melb and he is very, how can I put it, homely. I get the feeling he isnt very well traveled and doesnt have a whole lot of life experience. He will need alot of help adjusting. I also saw his family on the news, it is a big family.
We hear the same sh it every year
Save it
I dont mean to alarm Richmond people but if I was to pick a player who might want to come home, JOK would be the one (closey followed by Mitch Clarke).
Can't think of any players Richmond has lost to homesickness. Peter Wilson left because we were rubbish, Merenda because he was a cripple. Probably have to go back to the 80s almost and someone like Rob Wiley.
With our record we'll take our chances.
So Weaver, is he gonna be our BP while developing?
Only in the same way that Fiora and Tivendale were used in the back-pocket.
theorangeapple
26 Nov 2005, 20:35
Can't think of any players Richmond has lost to homesickness. Peter Wilson left because we were rubbish, Merenda because he was a cripple. Probably have to go back to the 80s almost and someone like Rob Wiley.
With our record we'll take our chances.
I wasnt refering to Richmond's ability to keep players. My comment was based on the various articles and news reports over here in the west. He comes across very neive. He had WCE bed sheets that 6 year olds use. He said he was happy going to Melb because it would be 'fun'. I wouldnt be suprised if the only time he has been outside WA was for the u18 champs.
I wasnt refering to Richmond's ability to keep players. My comment was based on the various articles and news reports over here in the west. He comes across very neive. He had WCE bed sheets that 6 year olds use. He said he was happy going to Melb because it would be 'fun'. I wouldnt be suprised if the only time he has been outside WA was for the u18 champs.
And he obviously enjoyed it if he thinks VIC will be fun ;)
I didnt think he would go this high, in front of Hurn and Jones. But well done to the kid.
I wasnt refering to Richmond's ability to keep players. My comment was based on the various articles and news reports over here in the west. He comes across very neive. He had WCE bed sheets that 6 year olds use. He said he was happy going to Melb because it would be 'fun'. I wouldnt be suprised if the only time he has been outside WA was for the u18 champs.
Nah, no big deal. If he wants to make it, I'm sure he is professional and mature enough to overcome this (doesn't even sound like he doesn't want to leave anyway, so I don't see the big deal).
BTW, article about McKinley in today's Age. He has a bombers curtain in front of his bedroom door. And the contents of his room "the equivalent of an Essendon merchandise shop", seem to suggest the same immaturity.
What about the quote from his dad "We're such a close family that I almost, I mean I shouldn't say this, but I almost wish he didn't get drafted."
Should we be concerned by this?
theorangeapple
27 Nov 2005, 12:28
Nah, no big deal. If he wants to make it, I'm sure he is professional and mature enough to overcome this (doesn't even sound like he doesn't want to leave anyway, so I don't see the big deal).
BTW, article about McKinley in today's Age. He has a bombers curtain in front of his bedroom door. And the contents of his room "the equivalent of an Essendon merchandise shop", seem to suggest the same immaturity.
The actual material posessions isnt the issue. It was how he came across. Very neive, I dont think he new what he was in for. McKinley is the complete opposite, very articulate, very intelligent, almost too confident. He knew what he was in for. In many ways I would rather that so that he comes across prepared as opposed thinking it will be 'fun'.
What about the quote from his dad "We're such a close family that I almost, I mean I shouldn't say this, but I almost wish he didn't get drafted."
Should we be concerned by this?
I think Ben could have handled it much better. He has been drafted to an awesome club, awesome facilities, awesome players, awesome player welfare staff, awesome coach. The way he was talking you would have thought he had been drafted to the dockers or something :p
And also, Ben isnt critical to our future. He was only pick 29, if he turns out to be a bust, its not a huge deal. I think JON is much more important to your side future than McKinley is to ours.
I dont mean to alarm Richmond people but if I was to pick a player who might want to come home, JOK would be the one (closey followed by Mitch Clarke).
Douglas >>> Tigers
Hurn >>>> Crows
Oakley-Nichols >>> Eagles
How about it?
And also, Ben isnt critical to our future. He was only pick 29, if he turns out to be a bust, its not a huge deal. I think JON is much more important to your side future than McKinley is to ours.
I think his goal kicking attributes will be vital as a forward option for the eagles in the future. If not, why draft the forward? Why not go for a Lucy who will fill the FB hole for you? My point is, why draft the player if you can't see him slotting into the side? It's just drafting for drafting's sake otherwise.
As for JON, you may be right. I'm glad you rate him. Looking forward to seeing him play in Tiger colours.
theorangeapple
27 Nov 2005, 13:12
I think his goal kicking attributes will be vital as a forward option for the eagles in the future. If not, why draft the forward? Why not go for a Lucy who will fill the FB hole for you? My point is, why draft the player if you can't see him slotting into the side? It's just drafting for drafting's sake otherwise.
We can live without Mckinley, obviously we would love him to be a player but we didnt use a first round pick on him and we already have the 2nd youngest squad in the league.
We draft the best available. I would rather a good quality player who may not get as many games than a KP dud who is delisted in 2yrs. Yesteday, we took the best available and we have done that for the best 4yrs. Unlike most clubs, we continue our policy for the whole draft.
theorangeapple
27 Nov 2005, 13:14
Douglas >>> Tigers
Hurn >>>> Crows
Oakley-Nichols >>> Eagles
How about it?
From what Hurn has said about coming west, I dont think he will be leaving anytime soon. He seems like a bloke of real character and I cannot see him leaving lightly.
LukeHodge15
27 Nov 2005, 13:15
seems a little strange that the tigers by-passed a forward in mitch clarke 4 another terry wallace running wingman. amassing an awesome midfield but who is going to kick the goals?
LukeHodge15
27 Nov 2005, 13:16
From what Hurn has said about coming west, I dont think he will be leaving anytime soon. He seems like a bloke of real character and I cannot see him leaving lightly.
still shaking my head at hurn slipping to 13:eek:
seems a little strange that the tigers by-passed a forward in mitch clarke 4 another terry wallace running wingman. amassing an awesome midfield but who is going to kick the goals?
That was my concern too. But like the rest of us, I'm no recruiter. Miller and co rated Ryder, Kennedy and Dowler as the three best KP in the draft and would have nabbed one of them had they fell through. Miller loved Clarke this time last year, but had gone off him due to perceived attitude problems. More attitude problems are the last thing we need in the Richmond forward line wouldn't you agree? Cleve Hughes was rated he 4th best tall (over Clark) by the Tiges so to get him at 24 was a bonus.
Oakley-Nicolls was rated the best running wingman by Richmond in the draft. So with no talls left, we went for JON. A centreline of Tambling-Deledio-JON in 4 years time will hopefully reap us a few midfield goals.
We draft the best available. I would rather a good quality player who may not get as many games than a KP dud who is delisted in 2yrs. Yesteday, we took the best available and we have done that for the best 4yrs. Unlike most clubs, we continue our policy for the whole draft.
TOA, interested to hear your opinion on another WA boy the tiges picked up, Travis Casserley. Tiges were interested at 24, but grabbed him at 40 instead. Some people on PRE saying that he plays like young Selwood at WCE. What are your thoughts?
LukeHodge15
27 Nov 2005, 13:38
That was my concern too. But like the rest of us, I'm no recruiter. Miller and co rated Ryder, Kennedy and Dowler as the three best KP in the draft and would have nabbed one of them had they fell through. Miller loved Clarke this time last year, but had gone off him due to perceived attitude problems. More attitude problems are the last thing we need in the Richmond forward line wouldn't you agree? Cleve Hughes was rated he 4th best tall (over Clark) by the Tiges so to get him at 24 was a bonus.
Oakley-Nicolls was rated the best running wingman by Richmond in the draft. So with no talls left, we went for JON. A centreline of Tambling-Deledio-JON in 4 years time will hopefully reap us a few midfield goals.
hughes a good prospect leading chf so u might be on a winner there.
imagine clarke and hughes as ur first 2 picks. i would be salivating if i was a richmond supporter thinking of that forawrd line.
ur midfield starting to look like wallaces at the bulldogs
meyer
lids
tambling
oakley nicholls
couglan
tuck
hyde
johnson
krakeour
newman
tuck
hopefully for richmond one of the super draft 2006 talls falls ur way
hughes a good prospect leading chf so u might be on a winner there.
imagine clarke and hughes as ur first 2 picks. i would be salivating if i was a richmond supporter thinking of that forawrd line.
ur midfield starting to look like wallaces at the bulldogs
meyer
lids
tambling
oakley nicholls
couglan
tuck
hyde
johnson
krakeour
newman
tuck
hopefully for richmond one of the super draft 2006 talls falls ur way
You are missing the point. Why take a tall for a tall's sake? If we took Clark at 8, who's to say Brisbane wouldn't have taken him at 9? Or someone else would have picked up Hughes before then as a result of the change in draft circumstances? If we didn't rate Clark as a player, there is no point taking him just because he is tall.
Very happy with the way the midfield is panning out.
Looking forward to Pattison, Hughes, Schulz and Thursfield all stepping into KP posts over the next few years. Of course another KP in the 2006 draft would be handy!
seems a little strange that the tigers by-passed a forward in mitch clarke 4 another terry wallace running wingman. amassing an awesome midfield but who is going to kick the goals?
The midfield.
Expect a Swans type set-up with one key forward (eg Schulz) some mid-sized mobile guys who can mark and kick (eg Meyer, Deledio, JON), some mid-size guys like Brown and Pettifer, and some ground level roving from Tambling or Rodan.
Pattison, Simmonds can go there as a resting ruckman for an extra target.
Still have Hughes, McGuane and Limbach to try out as well.
imagine clarke and hughes as ur first 2 picks. i would be salivating if i was a richmond supporter thinking of that forawrd line.
Yeah but you are signed-up to the Hawthorn approach / tradition that has 3 big blokes at either end of the ground.
Richmond aren't going that way. We are going to be happy to have Bowden at CHF and conceed a couple of goals but get the run and possesion in return. Chances are Deledio, Tuck or Meyer will be our CHF.
If I was recruiting for Hawthorn then Clarke and Hughes would look good but that would be a lousy result for Richmond. On the other hand JON might be no gun, but suits our system perfectly.
coasting
27 Nov 2005, 14:00
I really like Oakley-Nicholls but Richmond made a mistake not taking Mitchell Clarke. He would have been the perfect replacement for Richo in a year or two. You don't get many chances at players of that quality.
theorangeapple
27 Nov 2005, 14:22
TOA, interested to hear your opinion on another WA boy the tiges picked up, Travis Casserley. Tiges were interested at 24, but grabbed him at 40 instead. Some people on PRE saying that he plays like young Selwood at WCE. What are your thoughts?
I havent seen anywhere near enough to comment. From what I have heard of him, Selwood seems a fair comparision. Both got good motors, nice heights etc. I think the Selwood twins are abit harder at it and more inside. But I think Casserly has more consistant disposal (I can only really speak for Adam but his disposal can be abit hit and miss at times).
White Czar
27 Nov 2005, 14:27
I really like Oakley-Nicholls but Richmond made a mistake not taking Mitchell Clarke. He would have been the perfect replacement for Richo in a year or two. You don't get many chances at players of that quality.
Shattered.
coasting
27 Nov 2005, 14:47
Casserly is a quick, skillful receiver with a good leap, good overhead. However, he can go missing a bit at times, a bit like Oakley-Nicholls.
Casserly is a quick, skillful receiver with a good leap, good overhead. However, he can go missing a bit at times, a bit like Oakley-Nicholls.
Thanks Coasting and TOA for that info. It seems as if we are mixing our solid ball winners with impact players.
Deledio, Tambling, Foley and Polo have been complemented in impact players Meyer, Casserley and J-O-N. Add experience Coughlan, Johnson, Newman and Tuck to that and you have a great mix of mids.
There are others, but I don't expect many of these to be more than periphery / depth players.
richcogs
27 Nov 2005, 17:01
Embers was saying yesterday Oakley-Nicholls was in his mind no dought the most talented player in the draft, but was a hugh risk. Can someone make some sense of this?
Shattered.
Get a grip mate. Typical pessimism that gives Richmond supporters a bad rep.
LukeHodge15
27 Nov 2005, 19:54
Yeah but you are signed-up to the Hawthorn approach / tradition that has 3 big blokes at either end of the ground.
Richmond aren't going that way. We are going to be happy to have Bowden at CHF and conceed a couple of goals but get the run and possesion in return. Chances are Deledio, Tuck or Meyer will be our CHF.
If I was recruiting for Hawthorn then Clarke and Hughes would look good but that would be a lousy result for Richmond. On the other hand JON might be no gun, but suits our system perfectly.
good point.
question 4 u weaver.
"which set-up do u favour in winning games and finals?"
i'm still of the favour in key position marking forwards winning u games.......just makes it so hard on the backman when the ball comes in quick and the key forward is one on one and has sticky fingers.
White Czar
27 Nov 2005, 22:50
A question for those of you which have seen young Oakley-Nicholls.
What player would you say he plays similar to, in terms of playing style that is currently playing AFL?
A Clarke, Johncock or Burgoyne for example?
"which set-up do u favour in winning games and finals?"
i'm still of the favour in key position marking forwards winning u games.......just makes it so hard on the backman when the ball comes in quick and the key forward is one on one and has sticky fingers.
I think a high quality KF like Hall or Tredrea is like gold. I think 2nd tier guys like Kingsley or McDougall may as well not take the field. I don't think so much about key forwards vs mobile forwards.
Personally I think it is about the midfield and always has been. If you can keep the opposition to forty inside-50s your defence can be rubbish and it doesn't matter. If you go inside-50 on sixty or more occasions your forwards can be rubbish and you can kick a winning score.
My concern about Richmond is not about forward set-ups or key defenders.
I think history says that good pressure teams beat good possesion teams. That a game plan bit around high possesion and executing skills under pressure goes to water in finals pressure.
I can see Richmond being a very exciting team that generates highlights but gets knocked out in week 2 of the finals as the wingers get sat on their backsides and can't win a kick when it matters.
But that is the gameplan, that is what they are building, and the pieces are coming together.
What player would you say he plays similar to, in terms of playing style that is currently playing AFL?
Tough one. A little bit of Nigel Lappin, Andrew Walker, Tadgh Kennelly or Travis Johnstone about him. Tall, quick, good kick. Not a pure centre-square player, more a wingman. Talking about playing style.
White Czar
27 Nov 2005, 23:30
Tough one. A little bit of Nigel Lappin, Andrew Walker, Tadgh Kennelly or Travis Johnstone about him. Tall, quick, good kick. Not a pure centre-square player, more a wingman. Talking about playing style.
So you consiter Oakley-Nicholls more a long term winger for the Tigers?
(starts to daydream about Tambling/Oakley-Nicholls on the wings, Deledio/Cogs/Tuck in the guts ;) )
From what i read of him in the paper he is sounds a half back flanker who cleans up and runs with decent speed & skill.
Mind you footydraft.com has him reckons "he dominated some games playing ruck, full forward, wing, rover and centre half forward. He looked a class above and proved to be one of the hardest players to match up on".
With Andrew Swallow rated higher by alot more poeple than Casserly was... why did we choose Travis Casserly when Swallow was still availble?? Both WA boys aswell.
Also whats Oakley-Nicholls 20m sprint time compared with Deledio's and Tambling's last year?
:::buddy38:::
28 Nov 2005, 09:12
With Andrew Swallow rated higher by alot more poeple than Casserly was... why did we choose Travis Casserly when Swallow was still availble?? Both WA boys aswell.
Also whats Oakley-Nicholls 20m sprint time compared with Deledio's and Tambling's last year?
20m sprint quiker than deledios and tamblings
jarred Oakley-Nicholls (East Perth) - 2.85sec
Richard Tambling (Southern Districts) - 2.87sec
Brett Deledio (Murray Bushrangers) - 2.90sec
And on why richmond took travis before swallow. They were going to take Travis with pick 24 they rated him that highly but when Cleve Hughes was still available they took him in hope that Travis would still be there at pick 40 and he was
20m sprint quiker than deledios and tamblings
jarred Oakley-Nicholls (East Perth) - 2.85sec
Richard Tambling (Southern Districts) - 2.87sec
Brett Deledio (Murray Bushrangers) - 2.90sec
And on why richmond took travis before swallow. They were going to take Travis with pick 24 they rated him that highly but when Cleve Hughes was still available they took him in hope that Travis would still be there at pick 40 and he was
Oakley-Nicholls is faster than Deledio and Tambling :eek:
Also read that he loves to carry the ball.
I think I can see what Wallace is doing, Deledio, Tambling and JON all super-quick, super-sillky skilled ball carriers running through the midfeild.
:::buddy38:::
28 Nov 2005, 09:38
Oakley-Nicholls is faster than Deledio and Tambling :eek:
Also read that he loves to carry the ball.
I think I can see what Wallace is doing, Deledio, Tambling and JON all super-quick, super-sillky skilled ball carriers running through the midfeild.
add Danny Meyer to that list, not as quik, but not slow either. He is just as skilled if not more skilled as JON and Tambo
LukeHodge15
28 Nov 2005, 09:43
I think a high quality KF like Hall or Tredrea is like gold. I think 2nd tier guys like Kingsley or McDougall may as well not take the field. I don't think so much about key forwards vs mobile forwards.
.
couldn't agree more.
getting a player like brown-tredrea-hall, just about guarentees u a finals berth and from there with a good injury run, anything is possible.
injurys play so much of role now with the competetion so even.
I think I can see what Wallace is doing, Deledio, Tambling and JON all super-quick, super-sillky skilled ball carriers running through the midfeild.
Welcome to the dark side Luke :)
Welcome to the dark side Luke :)
lol.
I actually see his game-plan working out okay.
The group that Wallace drafted to the bulldogs during his time, were a very VERY light group. Our group at the Tigers is much different and IMO far better skilled group.
But time will tell and hopefully prove Terry Wallace right.
Ragingbull
28 Nov 2005, 11:36
With Andrew Swallow rated higher by alot more poeple than Casserly was... why did we choose Travis Casserly when Swallow was still availble?? Both WA boys aswell.
The main difference between the two is that Casserley is a beautiful long kick and regularly hits his targets (took the kickouts for the Seniors and got 60 metres very easily). Where as Swallow is not the best kick going around and lacks consistency in hitting his targets. The scope with Casserley in terms of his body and growth is a lot larger than Swallow as well. Both have similar pace and both like to carry the ball.
The main difference between the two is that Casserley is a beautiful long kick and regularly hits his targets (took the kickouts for the Seniors and got 60 metres very easily). Where as Swallow is not the best kick going around and lacks consistency in hitting his targets. The scope with Casserley in terms of his body and growth is a lot larger than Swallow as well. Both have similar pace and both like to carry the ball.
So is Casserly a pure midfielder? And who was faster over 20m Sprint at draft camp?
So is Casserly a pure midfielder? And who was faster over 20m Sprint at draft camp?
Swallow higher in 20m sprint (4th) and agility (5th) - not sure where Casserley placed in these. not top 10.
Casserly higher in shuttle run (2nd) and 3km time trial (7th) - not sure where Swallow placed in these, not top 10.
blaisee
28 Nov 2005, 12:06
The only simirarity between Casserly and Swallow is that they West Australian.
Swallow is inside and outside is barely 6 foot, and can't kick.
Casserly is 6 foot 2, and is a magnificent kick on both sides of his body. The only reason why Casserly didn't go in the first round is his percieved..well ... how can I put this...dislike for body contact.
Richmond believe that his not inherently soft and he can improve on this. The rest of his game is first class!:cool:
Both players are super quick. Casserly's beep test was 15.2
Thanks for the info blokes. :thumbsu:
Could we say that Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls is a super-quick, super-agile version on Nathan Lovett-Murray?
Both 188cm tall...
TheGeneral
28 Nov 2005, 13:36
Is Oakley-Nicholls a better talent than the best tall defender who was available?
It doesn't appear that the Tigers and Pies have addressed the needs of their backline with their KPP in the age bracket of 27-30 years.With Deledio, Tambling and Meyer drafted last year it's a mystery why they picked another two.
Is Oakley-Nicholls a better talent than the best tall defender who was available?
It doesn't appear that the Tigers and Pies have addressed the needs of their backline with their KPP in the age bracket of 27-30 years.With Deledio, Tambling and Meyer drafted last year it's a mystery why they picked another two.
It all depends how you look at it, look at the Swans backline, you don't necessarily need 3 blokes that are 6'4 there. We are looking at being a strong rebounding side, when Gaspar and Kellaway are gone we'll still have Schulz and Hall as tall defenders, with Bowden also able to play on talls, and a bunch of rebounding medium and small defenders. It's all about the style of play the team is trying to play.
White Czar
28 Nov 2005, 13:47
Is Oakley-Nicholls a better talent than the best tall defender who was available?
According to the WC bloke whos posts in the Richmond board (Embers? Coasting? whos seen him he is the "most talented" player in the draft. Fingers crossed he has abit of skill.
It doesn't appear that the Tigers and Pies have addressed the needs of their backline with their KPP in the age bracket of 27-30 years.With Deledio, Tambling and Meyer drafted last year it's a mystery why they picked another two
Hall had a very solid 2005 and at CHB in the Lewis Robert Thompson/Staker/Bishop role. Not outstanding by any means but does the business
Over the next say 3 odd years we are going to lose our full back & 3rd tall
Out
- Gaspar
- Kellaway
You'd hope 1, maybe 2 of the following come good.
In
- McGuane
- Thursfield
- Moore
Schulz is the great white hope. Limbach & Hughes may be suited to the forward line but are also decent KPP prospects.
Look, overall I wanted a KPP @ 8. Mind you I would have been more than happy with Hughes at 8. To get him at 24 makes me pretty happy with the way things turned out. To get a couple more promsing 'Wallace types' is a bonus.
TheGeneral
28 Nov 2005, 13:53
It all depends how you look at it, look at the Swans backline, you don't necessarily need 3 blokes that are 6'4 there. We are looking at being a strong rebounding side, when Gaspar and Kellaway are gone we'll still have Schulz and Hall as tall defenders, with Bowden also able to play on talls, and a bunch of rebounding medium and small defenders. It's all about the style of play the team is trying to play.
Just an observation and I wouldn't put my house on the names you mentioned as the backline to take you into the finals.
Swans don't have many talls but Barry, Roberts-Thomson and O'Keefe are a premiership backline and all good overhead.
I see Bower, Thornton, Saddington (still only 26) and a gun tall from next year's crop helping to take Carlton forward.
White Czar
28 Nov 2005, 13:58
Just an observation and I wouldn't put my house on the names you mentioned as the backline to take you into the finals.
Swans don't have many talls but Barry, Roberts-Thomson and O'Keefe are a premiership backline and all good overhead.
I see Bower, Thornton, Saddington (still only 26) and a gun tall from next year's crop helping to take Carlton forward.
Barry is very short, close the shortest KPP in the league. Roberts-Thomson is their only true defender in the back 6. O'Keefe is as half forward flank as they come.
The Sydney back 6 is awsome. However, its really 1 bloke which does the defending in LRT and 5 bloke which run hard, fast and all day.
Exacly what Richmond seem to be emulating.
Think you might be overrated your lads, underrated other sides just a tad.
:::buddy38:::
28 Nov 2005, 13:59
Just an observation and I wouldn't put my house on the names you mentioned as the backline to take you into the finals.
Swans don't have many talls but Barry, Roberts-Thomson and O'Keefe are a premiership backline and all good overhead.
I see Bower, Thornton, Saddington (still only 26) and a gun tall from next year's crop helping to take Carlton forward.
And you think they will take you into the finals
TheGeneral
28 Nov 2005, 14:58
O'Keefe is as half forward flank as they come
Meant Bolton.:o
I may have over-rated my players but that's what we do at this time of the year.I don't think Hall's best is any better than Saddington who was considered close to AA a few years back.
Thornton is certainly a good tall defender who has been hit from pillar to post this year with injury.Did his knee in the Wizard Cup final and is certainly better than Thursfield and Moore IMHO.
I think it's been pretty clearly shown that Sydney have a very small backline and are still able to cope with sides with big key forwards. They rely on hardrunning to help out teammates and clear the ball out of defence. I see TW building the Richmond defence in a very similar manner. Whose to say Newman, Hartigan and Thursfield can't do the same job in a year or two that Bolton, Kennelly and Barry have done for the Swans?
Ghost of Punt Road
28 Nov 2005, 15:44
keep in mind that the fast midfield strategy which wallace is developing has more than one use.
Sure it can help beat a flood, keep control of the ball, and score more goals, but you can also use a fast light team to play 'shutdown' football if required, since you can always keep up with and run down the opposition.
Coaches these days don't play a one strategy team. The adapt to suit the opposition. If the Tiges aren't good enough to match a certain team they will use their pace to tag rather than score.
White Czar
29 Nov 2005, 16:00
One AFL club have JON at one it seems.
THE verdict came early for Hawthorn last year. Lance "Buddy" Franklin and Jarryd Roughead announced themselves as probable 200-gamers while Jordan Lewis was so mature in body and mind he appeared to have played 100 already.
As Alastair Clarkson noted at the club's parade of draftees yesterday, four of Hawthorn's six draft choices played 19 games or more in 2005 — a yield that reflected two facts: the quality of those kids and the lack thereof among the senior ranks on the Hawk list.
But the jury will have to wait some time before sentencing Hawthorn's 2005 draft class to stardom, solid citizenry or the scrapheap.
While the Hawks have again chosen for the long-term, this time their super six — all inside the top 22 draft choices — aren't going to feature as prominently as Buddy and the boys; injuries to the two Beaus, Muston and Dowler, and the school priorities of Xavier Ellis, mean three draftees mightn't represent Hawthorn much, if at all.
"If the improvement of the Hawthorn footy club is going to be based on these six lads around me, we're barking up the wrong tree," Clarkson said, flanked by the diverse half-dozen stocks his club had just invested a minimum of $200,000 each in.
There's a little bit of everything in this half-dozen: a key forward on crutches who's just survived a car crash (Dowler), a super-talented tall-runner who, depending on an imminent operation, might be anything or nothing (Muston), a 206-centimetre beanstalk custom-built for the revised ruck rules, the best bred colt imaginable — by Michael Tuck out of Fay Ablett (Gary, Geoff and Kevin's sister) — a Melbourne Grammar boy who moves like a gazelle and a tall, athletic Tassie kid.
"If you look across the table, there's a fair spread of different players that will fit our model pretty well," said Clarkson, who can only hope that his board, led by an activist president, will be as patient with his board as he must be with his draft haul.
Clarkson suggested that while some clubs chose not to dive into what they deemed a shallow draft, they might still envy Hawthorn's surplus choices.
Maybe. But judged by the noises emanating from within the 16 clubs, this draft promises to be the one of the most contentious of recent times. Hawthorn might have had the choice picks, but this year, no one seems to agree much on who they, Carlton, Collingwood and the rest should have chosen.
In most draft pools, there is a consensus about the top four or five players. Last year, almost without exception, any club would have
ranked Brett Deledio, Ryan Griffen, Roughead, Franklin and Richard Tambling as the fab five. The debate was only about the order, much like the Judd-Ball-Hodge super-draft of 2001.
This year, there was no such agreement and, indeed, the disagreements are quite violent among the various recruiting staff.
Some clubs, including Essendon, rated Patrick Ryder as this year's No. 1, while others were dubious he should be in the top 10. Carlton took Josh Kennedy at pick four and a couple of clubs thought him unworthy of the top 20.
If Marc Murphy (Carlton), Ellis and, to some extent Dale Thomas, were almost consensus top-10 picks, they were not considered stand-outs or laid-down misere superstars. Not every club placed each of them in the top half-dozen.
One club believed Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls was numero uno. He went at pick eight. Shaun Higgins (11) and Mitchell Clarke (9) were rated anywhere and everywhere, from top three to late first rounders. Collingwood was rapturous about Danny Stanley at pick 21, yet one of its rivals would not have drafted him at all.
The upshot is that reputations and careers — coaches, recruiters and maybe entire administrations — rest on the calls made on Saturday. Hawthorn dealt itself the best hand; in three or four years, we'll know if it played its cards right.
http://www.theage.com.au/realfooty/news/jake-niall/after-draftees-nervous-wait-its-a-clubs-turn/2005/11/28/1133026406150.html