Who did the best in the draft, and who did the worst?

[F-U]

You cant say your own club either,

Personally I think Essendon did the best out of everyone, Ryder and Dempsay Lonergan and Lucy are a very good crop there, A Ruckmen/KPP two midfielders and a FB, add Camporeale and Heff to add a bit more depth and they may still get a place in the 8

Worst was Fremantle, Passed on Swallow when they need pace desperatley in there team, picked up Drum who is very similiar to Mundy, playing two Mundys seems pointless, picked up Warnocock who is a poor mans Sandilands who wont play, didnt pick up Swallow, Ibbotson wud of been around for there rookie pick anyway. Poor effort by Freo all round.

[The_Bulldogs_Bite]

Best - Hawks. Hard not to be that though when you've got 5 picks within the top 20.

Worst - Freo. As stated in the above post.

[F-U]

Best - Hawks. Hard not to be that though when you've got 5 picks within the top 20.

Worst - Freo. As stated in the above post.

I meant in terms of best with what you had. Hawks are gonna be no 1 for everyone if its best overall, im rating recruiting officer not tanking.

[pinkus maximus]

Not sure how we did the worst. Drum is desribed as the best defender in the draft and his coach says he is probably the best player Murray has produced
Ibbotson is 17 with heaps of inprovement in him,maybe Swallow isnt that good?? And we needed a backup ruckman and we got one

[Eagle87]

I meant in terms of best with what you had. Hawks are gonna be no 1 for everyone if its best overall, im rating recruiting officer not tanking.

On that basis,my guesses (and really thats all we can do at this stage) are that Carlton did fine (and caught a break with Kennedy). Hawthorn did fine. Essendon did well with Ryder but need luck with the rest of their picks. West Coast did well with their first 2 picks.

The biggest risk was Collingwood - fair enough choosing Thomas - they weighed up 2 running players with different skill sets and picked one they think works for them (and was likely gone by 5). Thats ok, but picking a guy at 5 (pendlebury)that they could have got 7 or 8 picks later makes little sense. If that was their thinking why not trade down in trade week (i.e. swap pick 5 for say pick 10-13 + other picks or players)? Freo, WC etc would all have been in that to get one of the Perth based KPP's and Collingwood would still have got Pendlebury (As an example, I have no doubt that WC would have given up pick 13 and McConnell for pick 5 - Collingwood still would have got Pendlebury at 13 and had an extra player with talent). They basically used a pick 5 on apick 10-15 level player and used the argument of "drafting for need" - as a WC fan, I remember about 5 drafts in a row through the late 90's when we drafted for need (under Mick) and it didnt work very well!

Reality is that it could work and Pendlebury becomes a star, but that still could have happened if they got him 5, 6, 7 picks later - so it was a risky pick when they overlooked Ryder, Dowler, Clark, Muston, Hurn, Varcoe etc to take a player that no-one else was taking that high.

Cheers.

[Eagle87]

Not sure how we did the worst. Drum is desribed as the best defender in the draft and his coach says he is probably the best player Murray has produced
Ibbotson is 17 with heaps of inprovement in him,maybe Swallow isnt that good?? And we needed a backup ruckman and we got one

Not sure its fair to say Freo did the worst. The issues would: Drum - what position does he play? In TAC he could play a KP defensive role or the 3rd tall but at AFL level he would be undersized (189cm), He is shorter than Hunter at WC, who often struggles playing on much taller players. He isn't quick enough to play on smaller forwards. He can definitely play, but can he find a position at AFL level. Don't Freo have the 188-190cm defender role pretty well covered already?

Ibbotson can play, but he hasnt really proved himself yet and was probably still going to be around with your later picks.

The tall guy is the definitive project player and he wont even be a back up for 3 years or so.

Who knows how it will work out, but I suspect the above are reasons why some are underwhelmed by Freos picks!

Cheers.

[Waite30]

The best apart from Carlton was Hawthorn. and the worst was Freo but they always do poorly. how carlton did great i thought. Best Midfielder and Best KP Player and Best CHB!! What more could you ask for?? The best of the 3 most important positions doesnt come much better than that.

[Ysaye]

IMO West Coast did the best with the picks the had. got two guys who could be stars, one who might possibly play midfield and another reasonable key position player which they needed as much as Freo needed the extra Ruckman.

Maximus, Mundy was descibed as one of the best defenders in his draft in 2003 and we got him with pick 19. IMO the reason he fell so far in that draft was because he played a position that is easier to fill than say the role of Midfielder or key position. Reading some of the stuff written at the time convinces me that it was known Murphy was not as good a footballer but because he could play KP at both ends that brought him down to pick 12.

Drum seems to be a really good player and could be a star, but he doesn't currently play in a valuable position. I think the fact Connolly suggested he might play as a third forward was indicative of this.

I haven't seen Ibbotson but the fact that people say that he is a utility that plays half back flank (like McKenna) and "other positions" - sounds suspiciously like another HBF, but I can't judge till I see him play.

We got a ruckman as required.

We didn't get any of the midfielders which would have suited us (O-Nicholls, Pendlebury, Thomas all went early). We also didn't get another tall KP defender to stop clubs exposing our lack of height down back.

Weighing this up and looking what every other club got, I think it is likely history will show we didn't do too well out of this draft.

[OneEyedHawk]

IMO West Coast did the best with the picks the had. got two guys who could be stars, one who might possibly play midfield and another reasonable key position player which they needed as much as Freo needed the extra Ruckman.

Maximus, Mundy was descibed as one of the best defenders in his draft in 2003 and we got him with pick 19. IMO the reason he fell so far in that draft was because he played a position that is easier to fill than say the role of Midfielder or key position. Reading some of the stuff written at the time convinces me that it was known Murphy was not as good a footballer but because he could play KP at both ends that brought him down to pick 12.

Drum seems to be a really good player and could be a star, but he doesn't currently play in a valuable position. I think the fact Connolly suggested he might play as a third forward was indicative of this.

I haven't seen Ibbotson but the fact that people say that he is a utility that plays half back flank (like McKenna) and "other positions" - sounds suspiciously like another HBF, but I can't judge till I see him play.

We got a ruckman as required.

We didn't get any of the midfielders which would have suited us (O-Nicholls, Pendlebury, Thomas all went early). We also didn't get another tall KP defender to stop clubs exposing our lack of height down back.

Weighing this up and looking what every other club got, I think it is likely history will show we didn't do too well out of this draft.
Honesty and un-biased views like you've demonstrated above won't get you far on bigfooty.;)

[Crow-mosone]

best in terms of supposed talent: Hawthorn

Swing for the fences risk: Collingwood

even if it doesn't work out for Collingwood, at least I admire their willingness to bet big.

[Kristof]

best in terms of supposed talent: Hawthorn

Swing for the fences risk: Collingwood

even if it doesn't work out for Collingwood, at least I admire their willingness to bet big.

Yeah that's the kind of draft that either gets a recruiting manager hailed as a genius - or fired.

[irel]

I have consulted my crystal ball and it tells me that selections by all clubs turn out duds. However Freo's selections were the exception, as all of their picks will play record number of games and all turn out to be champions of the game before their careers end.

My Crystal Ball also tels me that the same richardheads on Big Footy that assessed only a day after the draft "Who did best in the draft and who did worst" will still remain richardheads by the time the players they predicted are duds retire"

[FIGJAM]

The biggest risk was Collingwood - fair enough choosing Thomas - they weighed up 2 running players with different skill sets and picked one they think works for them (and was likely gone by 5). Thats ok, but picking a guy at 5 (pendlebury)that they could have got 7 or 8 picks later makes little sense. If that was their thinking why not trade down in trade week (i.e. swap pick 5 for say pick 10-13 + other picks or players)? Freo, WC etc would all have been in that to get one of the Perth based KPP's and Collingwood would still have got Pendlebury (As an example, I have no doubt that WC would have given up pick 13 and McConnell for pick 5 - Collingwood still would have got Pendlebury at 13 and had an extra player with talent). They basically used a pick 5 on apick 10-15 level player and used the argument of "drafting for need" - as a WC fan, I remember about 5 drafts in a row through the late 90's when we drafted for need (under Mick) and it didnt work very well!

Reality is that it could work and Pendlebury becomes a star, but that still could have happened if they got him 5, 6, 7 picks later - so it was a risky pick when they overlooked Ryder, Dowler, Clark, Muston, Hurn, Varcoe etc to take a player that no-one else was taking that high.
Utter garbage!

You're basing your opinion on internet phantom drafts. But if you're going to do it, read Burgatron's phantom. He said that Collingwood were a big chance at 5 and Essendon at 7.

Pendles being worth about pick 13 is a product of your imagination.

[Pharaoh]

Draft Ladder


1. Hawthorn - Scared Collingwood into taking Thomas at 2 by threatening to take him at 3. I'm sure Hawks would have taken a KPP at 3 if Ellis wasn't available. Dowler was the obvious KPP choice for Hawks' needs. Lucky to get Birchall at 14 after West Coast took Hurn. Max Bailey is the monster ruck of the draft and Muston could be anything. Tuck an added bonus.

2. Carlton - Murphy and Kennedy fantastic pick-ups, reflective of picks 1 and 4. Bower another good KPP option.

3. West Coast - Considering where they finished on the ladder have done remarkably well. Hurn will slot straight into the team but won't be pressured to to play in the midfield because of their depth. McKinley is an obvious replacement for Matera. Spangher to strengthen defence.

4. Essendon - Lots of wildcard talent in Ryder and Dempsey. Lonergan and Lucy appear to be great value based on where they were drafted. Don't think that Neagle will make it, but a sentimental choice.

5. Richmond - Took a big risk not drafting a tall at 8, but getting Oakley-Nicholls and Hughes makes a great combination. Bit of luck there.

6. Brisbane - Will have been delighted to get Clark, although hopefully he won't be Des Headland mark II and want to go home just when he's starting to deliver. Mills is a great local boy, while Hooper could be a really interesting wildcard. Surprising they didn't take Lucy - must not have rated him.

7. Adelaide - Must have been thrilled to get local boy Pfeiffer and talented midfielder Douglas. Probably a bit disappointed that Varcoe didn't make it to 16.

8. Collingwood - Collingwood's strategy seems all over the shop given the high picks they had. Nevertheless, they still come out of the draft with a bunch of classy players in Thomas, Pendelbury and Stanley. Appeared to draft for need, not best available. This one could come back to haunt them.

9 - 11 - Hard to separate: Geelong, Melbourne, Kangaroos. All should get at least one good player out of the draft. Varcoe great for Geelong, Jones great for Melbourne and Swallow great for Kangaroos.

12. Bulldogs - Yes, Higgins was best available, but when are the Bulldogs going to get the quality talls they need? I guess West is the best option of the new batch. Maybe they are planning on trading some of their excess midfield talent for talls in trading periods to come.

13. Freo- Drum is a great pick-up, but Ibbotson at 26 could probably have been rookie-listed, Local boy Swallow was still available and Warnock will take a long time to develop, if at all.

14 - 16. Hard to separate: Port Adelaide, St Kilda, Swans. Nothing special. All had low picks and tried to spot bargains. Time will tell if any of these come through.

[FIGJAM]

1. Hawthorn - Scared Collingwood into taking Thomas at 2 by threatening to take him at 3. I'm sure Hawks would have taken a KPP at 3 if Ellis wasn't available.
You're talking ********. We were always going to take Thomas and Pendlebury. We got the guys we wanted and just because it didn't conform to the homogenous phantom drafts in here doesn't mean ********!

[saintlynewby]

[/Quote]
Reality is that it could work and Pendlebury becomes a star, but that still could have happened if they got him 5, 6, 7 picks later - so it was a risky pick when they overlooked Ryder, Dowler, Clark, Muston, Hurn, Varcoe etc to take a player that no-one else was taking that high.

Cheers.[/QUOTE]
I think everyone will be surprised in a couple of years with Scott Pendlebury. The kid is an absolutley fantastic player, athletic, agile and good Footy brains, he also has a lot of room for improvement. With the training he'll get at Collingwood, he can only improve mountains, I personally don't think he is any risk at all. And Dale Thomas, I don't think there are many kids out there that are as committed as he is to training and improving. I know he had a broken arm early last year and the kid turned up to every training session and just ran laps and practiced goal kicking the whole time until he was better. And they are both very nice kids to boot. Well done Collingwood!

[Nightwolf]

I meant in terms of best with what you had. Hawks are gonna be no 1 for everyone if its best overall, im rating recruiting officer not tanking.

How is trading off players for good picks considered tanking?

[RexHill]

best in terms of supposed talent: Hawthorn

Swing for the fences risk: Collingwood

I think it's Hawthorn for both of these categories.
They've picked a possible star at 6 (Dowler) who won't even walk for another 3 weeks due to a broken pelvis and a possible star at 22 (Muston) who has complications from a knee reconstruction which may require another reconstruction.
Best of luck to the 2 boys, I hope they both make a full recovery and have good football careers. There'd surely be a worry that one or both may never be right to play at senior AFL level due to their injuries though. Risk taken x 2.

[windyhill]

You're talking ********. We were always going to take Thomas and Pendlebury. We got the guys we wanted and just because it didn't conform to the homogenous phantom drafts in here doesn't mean ********!
I love it how touchy this bloke gets.

[Pafloyul]

Yeah, stuff Nick Hollond mark II; we should have nabbed Kouta #2 Scott Pendlebury.:mad:

[Freo Shark]

We will know who did better out of this in 1-3 seasons time.

As for Swallow not being picked, neither did any team in 2004 and in 2005 he was in the bottom half of the draft.

Freo would have had plenty of opportunity to see this guy play week in week out for two years. Theres obviously a reason why he went where he went.

This is not to say he couldnt be a star player and I hope he is!

Teams have a reasons why they draft certain players given who is available at the time based on what they need, balance and in what direction they see certain squad members progressing in.

As for drafting up front or rookie listing players well, its all percieved risk vrs opportunity. At the end of day you have to trust the recruiting dept, and Freo have done better than average overall.

[cro_Magnum]

Draft Ladder
7. Adelaide - Must have been thrilled to get local boy Pfeiffer and talented midfielder Douglas. Probably a bit disappointed that Varcoe didn't make it to 16..
Don't think Adelaide were after Varcoe. They've been burnt by injury prone players before eg Ryan Fitzgerald, and lost interest. Would've loved to get Hurn if he slid a bit further, and he would have suited us more than WC, but happy with Douglas and Pfeiffer

[skywalk750]

Isnt Swallow another David Clarke?

You cant judge how well a team has recruited without giving the players a few years.

If you want to see who did the best in the draft you need to base it on 01, 02 ect.

And no ******** Carlton and Hawthorn are going to do well, thats what you get if you tank and have first choice at taking kids.

Having said that WCE cleaned up in this draft.

[Eagle87]

Utter garbage!

You're basing your opinion on internet phantom drafts. But if you're going to do it, read Burgatron's phantom. He said that Collingwood were a big chance at 5 and Essendon at 7.

Pendles being worth about pick 13 is a product of your imagination.

Burgatron also said Hurn could go "top 5" and he went 13. (I am NOT basing my opinion on phantom drafts!)

The only teams who thought Pendlebury was top 15 were Essendon and Collingwood. Essendon were always going to take a tall if one was available (i.e. Ryder, Clark or Kennedy). So Collingwoods "risk" in trading down was only Essendon (and that wasn't much of a risk).

I think Pendlebury could be a very good player, but he isnt close to "5th" pick quality in this draft (although he could end up as a top 5 performer but so could pick 29 or 43 etc etc - doesn't mean you pick them at 5 now) - so Collingwood have taken a risk that they probably didnt need to take. Thats the point I was making and I stand by it.

Cheers :)

[vinnie_vegas69]

And what do we do if we trade down to get Pendlebury and then he begins to shoot up the order and we miss out on him?

You take the players you want, not according to where other teams or phantom drafts rate them. That's exactly why idiots on these boards should just cool off on judging the calibre of the players.

[theorangeapple]

Freo did alright. I think both Ibbotson and Warnock were risks but more than likely wont turn out (thats the harsh truth). Drum is a gun and will play alot of AFL. Sounds very similar to Mundy (as already stated), and I thought the stated publicly they were going to get some pace into their midfield. They certainly didnt do that in these drafts.

[Eagle87]

And what do we do if we trade down to get Pendlebury and then he begins to shoot up the order and we miss out on him?

You take the players you want, not according to where other teams or phantom drafts rate them. That's exactly why idiots on these boards should just cool off on judging the calibre of the players.

I agree - no-one takes players they don't want.

My point is, you take the best player available at the pick number you have. Using WC as an example, we had McKinley rated late teens to early 20's and were considering him at 13 (because we really wanted him), but when 13 came up and Hurn was still availble we took Hurn. We risked losing McKinley because he probably wasnt a "pick 13" quality player in the draft and because Hurn is clearly a "top 10" quality player in the draft i.e. you pick the best player available.

I genuinely believe that Collingwood have got a good player at number 5. In this draft they could have got that same player several picks later. In that sense they possibly didnt make the best use of that pick.

I do take your point that the period between the trades and the draft causes some problems (i.e. players can move "up" in that time). Thats why they should allow trading through to the draft - like they do in all the American Sports from which we "borrowed" the draft, trade and salary cap ideas!

I can understand why Collingwood took him at 5 - just saying its a high pick for him at this stage and Collingwood have taken a big punt!

Cheers. :)

[Freo Shark]

Freo did alright. I think both Ibbotson and Warnock were risks but more than likely wont turn out (thats the harsh truth). Drum is a gun and will play alot of AFL. Sounds very similar to Mundy (as already stated), and I thought the stated publicly they were going to get some pace into their midfield. They certainly didnt do that in these drafts.

Well Apple agreed they could have but the percieved best were taken before Freo. Ibbotson could play midfield but didnt because of the competition within the team. Thus he was pushed out to the flanks. So maybe this was a midfield option they took. Had he played in the midfield or with another team he would have risen alot higher in the rankings.

[FIGJAM]

I love it how touchy this bloke gets.
I'm hungover and angry today Bealey.

Just fed up with the nonsense that Hawthorn one-upped us, when we had the picks before theirs! We got who we wanted.

[The Old Dark Navy's]

The Pies have gone out on a limb here and so have their supporters in supporting the decisions. However, if it comes off, they are entitled to 100% bragging rights. It's not like Carlton fans having a dig if Murphy and Kennedy work out. If Thomas and Pendlebury prove their worth as picks 2 and 5, outside of the thinking of any phantom draft and any opposition recruiters, they can claim to have pulled off one of the best pieces of recruiting in the history of the draft.

I don't count picking up Hird or Kemp or Black with lower picks fantastic recruiting necessarily as those picks are speculative and the sacrifice minimal. What the Pies have done here shows a lot of balls and good on them for having the courage of their convictions.

I'm happy they did it because it did effectively get Kennedy to Carlton but if it works out better for them, I will be a tad envious for sure.

[bmwofoz]

The best appears to be Hawthorn.

Worst mm I'll come back to that in September.

[FIGJAM]

The only teams who thought Pendlebury was top 15 were Essendon and Collingwood. Essendon were always going to take a tall if one was available (i.e. Ryder, Clark or Kennedy). So Collingwoods "risk" in trading down was only Essendon (and that wasn't much of a risk).
How do you know this, and even more importantly, how are we supposeed to know this before the fricken draft camp and analyses by clubs have been completed?

For all you know, we may have ranked Pendlebury as the best player in the draft. It's a futures market and he has one of the largest potential upsides. So if we ranked him top 5, how is using pick 5 a waste, given that he was certain to be gone by our next pick??

Your logic is laughably ignorant!

[windyhill]

I'm hungover and angry today Bealey.

Just fed up with the nonsense that Hawthorn one-upped us, when we had the picks before theirs! We got who we wanted.
Love the cute nickname you have bestowed on me in more ways than one....Picture the scene , down the pub with the boys, scanning the next to jump in Sydney, what do I see ? BEALEY !!! Say to boys..." There`s some ********er on this footy website who calls me that , let`s back it"
Bealey salutes @ 12 bucks , magnificent, straight onto the spirits, boys send their thanks.

[moe sizlak]

And what do we do if we trade down to get Pendlebury and then he begins to shoot up the order and we miss out on him?

You take the players you want, not according to where other teams or phantom drafts rate them. That's exactly why idiots on these boards should just cool off on judging the calibre of the players.

Exactly, i think the mock drafts tend to turn every 'joe blow' into thinking they are a talent expert, when the reality is (and especially in a draft such as this.) The top 15 players in those mock drafts are all some sort of chance at making the the top 6 or 7.

[footyman]

12. Bulldogs - Yes, Higgins was best available, but when are the Bulldogs going to get the quality talls they need? I guess West is the best option of the new batch. Maybe they are planning on trading some of their excess midfield talent for talls in trading periods to come.

More the point, Higgins is a typical Scott Clayton mid 180cm, wiry framed midfielder. If any club needed a Nathan Jones or Shannon Hurn it was the Dogs.

But then Dylan Addison at 27? Another Scott Clayton type.

The Dogs must be expecting Williams, Wells and Tiller, and of course Tim Walsh to come good quickly cos they appear to have put plenty of faith in what they have got key position wise.

[crowsarethebest]

Hawks did the best. Of course they had awwsome picks but they picked well. Ellis, Muston, Dowler, Birchall, Baily and Tuck = Unlimited potential.

[Eagle87]

How do you know this, and even more importantly, how are we supposeed to know this before the fricken draft camp and analyses by clubs have been completed?

For all you know, we may have ranked Pendlebury as the best player in the draft. It's a futures market and he has one of the largest potential upsides. So if we ranked him top 5, how is using pick 5 a waste, given that he was certain to be gone by our next pick??

Your logic is laughably ignorant!

How do you suppose people do phantom drafts? Basically, recruiters (and clubs) do talk to each other and general consensus on players can be found - particularly in the first round. All clubs will try and get an advantage but the top 10 is usually reasonably clear with the order being the variable. To my knowledge, based on the discussions and chat, only 2 clubs had Pendlebury rated as a certain first rounder (Essendon & Collingwood).

The Draft Camp doesnt change the order much - this has been commented on by any number of recruiters over the years. It allows for comparisons between similarly rated players but usually the clubs short-lists are done before then.

Thats my logic and if its laughable then so be it. At least I am informed.

I am also not hungover and grumpy.

By the way, I reckon Hawthorn took a fair few risks also. They had the luxury of 5 top 20 picks, so they would have to get at least a couple right.

Cheers.

:)

[mattyc2422]

Figgers, don't pay too much attention to Hawks fans talking trash - think many are occupying the Richmond fan role similar to last draft. Silly stuff. Dale Thomas will be a superstar and I would have quite happily taken him at 3.

One of the big winners was definitely West Coast. Got a solid ready made mid/back that will slot into their team pushing for finals.
Needed goals desperately. Got a reliable goalkicker in McKinley. Also nabbed a versatile KP.

Rate Brisbanes draft. A player with huge potential in Clark and a reliable strong KP in Mills. Rhan Hooper has oodles of creativity and leadership. 2 local lads too.

Carlton and Hawthorn did very well. Hawthorn had 6 picks and had the ability to take a few punts. Ellis pretty much chose himself given our need for a quick running mid and Dowler fills another need of a big leading Full Forward. Birchall was lucky to fall to 14 and can play anywhere and Bailey fills yet another need of a ruckman. Muston is a risk, but we rate our medicos and Travis Tuck is a steal at 38 given some of the blokes that went before him.

[FIGJAM]

To my knowledge, based on the discussions and chat, only 2 clubs had Pendlebury rated as a certain first rounder (Essendon & Collingwood).
You haven't seen any recruiter's list. The end.

[pieman1]

I hate to admit it but Carlton were the clear winners on the day. I also find it funny how some people are ripping the Pies picks. Every good judge (and these are the guys who pick the players) has said numerous times in the print and electronic media how EVEN the first 15 players were and how you could throw a blanket over them. Thomas and Pendlebury were in that group of 15. Either accept the facts or continue to make a fool of yourself.

[Eagle87]

You haven't seen any recruiter's list. The end.

Incorrect.

I have tried being nice and simply arguing based on logic rather than "I know more than you because I am an insider"...

But since you want to be a prick about it. I know more than you because I am an insider.

So go away. The End!

Cheers. :)

[rgauci]

On first glance Freo did terrible. I woke up yesterday morning and was gutted we got Drum (Mundy mark 2), Ibbotson (another HBF), and Warnock (developing ruckman).

Then i took a closer look at the players and the draft and wasn't too upset. Oakley-Nicholls and Prendlebury were both gone by 10. Which were the only 2 pacy midfielders likely to slip through to 10. All the best KPP were taken in Ryder, Dowler, Kennedy and Clark. We are obviously looking for a fullback and any of those players could have played in that position.

At pick 10 we took the guy rated as the best defender in the draft. He stands 189cm at 18 years of age. He could very well have some growing left in him. Fremantle may have invested in bone scans or the cheaper version of body proportion measurements and may have taken the calculated risk he could grow a few cm's. Many of the best fullbacks in the league stand between 190cm (Mal Michael) and 192cm (Matthew Scarlett).

Drum may be the answer at fullback. Mundy has grown to 191cm since being drafted at 189cm. Those 2 youngsters could easily fill our key position spots down back. Drum at FB and Mundy at CHB.

Ibbotson at pick 26 was an interesting 1. He is bottom age, played soccer for the majority of his junior years and recently converted to football. He was pushed to the flanks by a talented young outfit at East Freo and is suited to playing midfield. He IS fast and versatile and could make the wing his own. Definately a development player.

Pick 42 was simple, after Sandilands and Longmuir there's nobody else to take the reigns. He stands 205cm tall and is a little thicker than the average garden hose. Introducing Robert Warnock. His skills at ground level are excellent for someone his size and he can run all day. Give the kid 3 years of gym and protein shakes and hopefully we'll have a good ruckman for the future. Another development player.

So not a bad crop at all really. Saying that it was a mistake to pass on Swallow isn't true. If anyone had a close eye on him over the past 2 years its us. He was overlooked last year and taken at pick 43 this year. His kicking is his deficiency and we can't afford to have another player on the list who can't kick. We've got enough of those running around in our best 22.

We don't expect any of our youngsters to play many games next year, they were all recruited looking towards the future.

i rate our performance quite low in comparison with other clubs. Most clubs did exceptionally this draft filling deficiencies as needed. Take Richmond for example, they needed a young tall yet took Oakley-Nicholls at 8. Then were very lucky Hughes was available at 24.

To rate us last is a little harsh, bottom 8 yes, but last i think not. It just seems most clubs either didn't partake in the draft (St Kilda, Sydney, Port) or had a plethora of early picks (Carlton, Collingwood, Hawthorn).

We should be rated against Essendon, Bulldogs, Brisbane and Richmond who had similar picks to us. Of whom i rate Essendon first, then Richmond followed by Brisbane, us then Bulldogs. Which isn't surprising because thats how we finished on the ladder.

[Pharaoh]

A lot of defensive Collingwood fans on this site. I'm not saying your picks won't turn out to be stars - I hope they do for your sakes.

I'm just saying that to overlook players like Ellis, Ryder, Dowler, Hurn and Clark because of your team needs is a risky strategy. The sort of drafting you did on Saturday will either be regarded as genius or stupidity in 3-5 years time. There is no middle ground.

For the record, I was unhappy when the Hawks chose Roughead at the expense of Tambling and Griffen last year. I'm still concerned. I understand why we felt we needed to do it and I'm optimistic from what I've seen from Roughy so far. That doesn't change the fact that it was a risky strategy that could seriously backfire.

Anyway, good luck with your picks. Thomas certainly looks like the next Daicos, if not better.

[Gopies 2002]

A lot of defensive Collingwood fans on this site. I'm not saying your picks won't turn out to be stars - I hope they do for your sakes.

I'm just saying that to overlook players like Ellis, Ryder, Dowler, Hurn and Clark because of your team needs is a risky strategy. The sort of drafting you did on Saturday will either be regarded as genius or stupidity in 3-5 years time. There is no middle ground.

For the record, I was unhappy when the Hawks chose Roughead at the expense of Tambling and Griffen last year. I'm still concerned. I understand why we felt we needed to do it and I'm optimistic from what I've seen from Roughy so far. That doesn't change the fact that it was a risky strategy that could seriously backfire.

Anyway, good luck with your picks. Thomas certainly looks like the next Daicos, if not better.
The next Daicos, if not better ? If Thomas is half the player of Daics, then we will have done very well. To suggest he will be better is somewhat over the top.

[FIGJAM]

Incorrect.

I have tried being nice and simply arguing based on logic rather than "I know more than you because I am an insider"...

But since you want to be a prick about it. I know more than you because I am an insider.

So go away. The End!
You're an insider at 16 clubs. OK then that makes sense.

There wouldn't be a more confidential document/file than the preferred draft list at a club, and I doubt there is anyone outside of each footy department who has access to it, before or after the draft. Indeed, if Derek Hine is handing this information out to people like you, I'll personally go down to the Lexus centre and tear him a new arse!

Out of interest, can you please post Scotty Clayton's list? Thanks in advance.

[TheGeneral]

Yeah, stuff Nick Hollond mark II; we should have nabbed Kouta #2 Scott Pendlebury.:mad:
:rolleyes:

We got the 2 players we rated as the best in this draft, so what more could you ask for?:confused:

[DynamoUltra]

I meant in terms of best with what you had. Hawks are gonna be no 1 for everyone if its best overall, im rating recruiting officer not tanking.

But we did the best with what we had. Sure, we had 5 picks in the top 22, but hell, we used them bloody well.

[raffrox]

I have consulted my crystal ball and it tells me that selections by all clubs turn out duds. However Freo's selections were the exception, as all of their picks will play record number of games and all turn out to be champions of the game before their careers end.

My Crystal Ball also tels me that the same richardheads on Big Footy that assessed only a day after the draft "Who did best in the draft and who did worst" will still remain richardheads by the time the players they predicted are duds retire"
Spot on.

Nothing more to say.

[Powers manager]

"F-U", they are my own club but the Hawks clearly have done the best

[dipper86]

"F-U", they are my own club but the Hawks clearly have done the best

I wouldn't say they have done the best but they are right up there with Carlton.

[philhawk]

I wouldn't say they have done the best but they are right up there with Carlton.

NO , we're not dipper - dont jump to conclusions yet mate - all of the players we chose might turn out to be crap next year - same with the Carlton players - wait , then see and judge ...

[dipper86]

NO , we're not dipper - dont jump to conclusions yet mate - all of the players we chose might turn out to be crap next year - same with the Carlton players - wait , then see and judge ...

mate relax just a touch, i am going by appearance, and so far Hawthorn and Carlton in my oppion have recruited the best., the future is a diferent story but going by the results and opinions of recruiters and there junior footballing history we have picked up alot of good players, weather they turn into great afl players is still to be seen.

[sabre_ac]

Few issues here....

Firstly how bloody boring is this thread...
"No my club did the best...yours did the worst".

Have any supporter base actually come out and said they were disapointed with their clubs recruiting?
I mean everyone is taking a swipe at freo for recruiting another Mundy and failing to address our pace issues.
But isnt the philosphy take the best player a avaiable? Was drum not the best? If not who should we have taken?
Swallow? No, though people rating swallow a top 10 pick you have to wonder about how much they actually knew about this guy, or how much they jumped on someone elses bandwagon on here. The kid obviously either cant kick and many recruiters question if that will be rectified.

Raw pace is not the be all and end all, skilful recievers certainly didnt do the Tigers any favour when everyone was having wet dreams over their "brigade fast skillful lefties", how about the grand final, I mean the swans certainly havent set the world alight pace wise. Freo recently have an excellent track record recruiting wise, I am certainly not going to question that as yet.

Lets do something interesting and find a thread like this from the 99 or 2000 draft. There is some decent discussion and reflection.

Or better yet lets have a laugh at some of the comments bandied around about Goddard :P
Jks

[Eagle87]

You're an insider at 16 clubs. OK then that makes sense.

There wouldn't be a more confidential document/file than the preferred draft list at a club, and I doubt there is anyone outside of each footy department who has access to it, before or after the draft. Indeed, if Derek Hine is handing this information out to people like you, I'll personally go down to the Lexus centre and tear him a new arse!

Out of interest, can you please post Scotty Clayton's list? Thanks in advance.

Fair point. You are of course right. No club has any idea whatsoever what any other club might do. Every club uses only their own people and shares nothing with anyone else. In fact no football club in history has ever disclosed anything to any other club that it didnt want everyone to know. I am quite sure that no recruiter in history has ever spoken to another recruiter.

In fact the entire draft was a surprise to all of them. I'm surprised that anyone knew Carlton was going to take Murphy - I mean right up until Draft day they said they woudlnt disclose their pick and Murphy said he didnt know where he was headed. Given that I was as shocked as anyone that Carlton took him.

The fact that people in the media were saying in the last couple of days that Collingwood were no longer certainties to take Ellis and, in fact, Thomas was being seriously considered and then your own Hotdogs site had a post the night before (its still on the site) saying they were gonna take Pendlebury at 5 (and Thomas at 2) - must have just been a series of lucky guesses. I mean this info would have been top top secret.

Amazing too that everyone knew Essendon would take Ryder at 7 if he was available (another lucky guess).

You are of course 100% right, how could anyone know anything about another team. Next thing some clown like me will be suggesting that teams know about other teams injuries before they are announced. When will these morons realise, there is no inside info, nothing ever leaks or is discussed outside the "inner sanctum".

I am glad you have showed me the light.

No wonder you call yourself Figjam - you are the master.

Cheers. :)

[worthy]

Fair point. You are of course right. No club has any idea whatsoever what any other club might do. Every club uses only their own people and shares nothing with anyone else. In fact no football club in history has ever disclosed anything to any other club that it didnt want everyone to know. I am quite sure that no recruiter in history has ever spoken to another recruiter.

In fact the entire draft was a surprise to all of them. I'm surprised that anyone knew Carlton was going to take Murphy - I mean right up until Draft day they said they woudlnt disclose their pick and Murphy said he didnt know where he was headed. Given that I was as shocked as anyone that Carlton took him.

The fact that people in the media were saying in the last couple of days that Collingwood were no longer certainties to take Ellis and, in fact, Thomas was being seriously considered and then your own Hotdogs site had a post the night before (its still on the site) saying they were gonna take Pendlebury at 5 (and Thomas at 2) - must have just been a series of lucky guesses. I mean this info would have been top top secret.

Amazing too that everyone knew Essendon would take Ryder at 7 if he was available (another lucky guess).

You are of course 100% right, how could anyone know anything about another team. Next thing some clown like me will be suggesting that teams know about other teams injuries before they are announced. When will these morons realise, there is no inside info, nothing ever leaks or is discussed outside the "inner sanctum".

I am glad you have showed me the light.

No wonder you call yourself Figjam - you are the master.

Cheers. :)
Yeah yeah, yadda yadda yadda now what about that list, that would be some interesting reading.

[Embers]

Few issues here....

Firstly how bloody boring is this thread...
"No my club did the best...yours did the worst".

Have any supporter base actually come out and said they were disapointed with their clubs recruiting?
I mean everyone is taking a swipe at freo for recruiting another Mundy and failing to address our pace issues.
But isnt the philosphy take the best player a avaiable? Was drum not the best? If not who should we have taken?
Swallow? No, though people rating swallow a top 10 pick you have to wonder about how much they actually knew about this guy, or how much they jumped on someone elses bandwagon on here. The kid obviously either cant kick and many recruiters question if that will be rectified.

Raw pace is not the be all and end all, skilful recievers certainly didnt do the Tigers any favour when everyone was having wet dreams over their "brigade fast skillful lefties", how about the grand final, I mean the swans certainly havent set the world alight pace wise. Freo recently have an excellent track record recruiting wise, I am certainly not going to question that as yet.

Lets do something interesting and find a thread like this from the 99 or 2000 draft. There is some decent discussion and reflection.

Or better yet lets have a laugh at some of the comments bandied around about Goddard :P
Jks

True, oh so true. I cant see how Collingwood could be happy with there picks, most were rated at bout 20 and they got em at 2 and 5, I cant see how Bulldogs cud be happy as they got no KPPs and already got a few players in a similiar mould to Higgins, I cant see how Crows cud be happy as they didnt replace Watts, I cant see how Sydney cud care less what they did. I cant see how Richmond cud be too happy as they got no defender even though Drum was still available.

Only clubs that can be truly happy I feel are Essendon, West Coast and Carlton. Essendon did well with there picks and got exactly who they wanted, Considering where West Coast finished on the ladder theyd be happy to get what they did get, got good players and filled weaknesses at the same time. Carlton got who they want too. No one else cud be reasonably happy cos Hawks took a ton of risks, as did most of the other clubs.

[dipper86]

No one else cud be reasonably happy cos Hawks took a ton of risks, as did most of the other clubs.

A ton of risks???

Dowler has already been checked out by the medicos and will make a full recovery, already on crutches, and will be walking without aid by Christmass.

Ellis, was always rated in the top bracket of draftees.

Birchall was actually going to be picked up by wst coast if hurn was not available

Bailey, Afew clubs had already declared they were going to pick him up including Fremantle and Geelong and Collingwood had also been very keen.

The only major risk was Beau Muston at pick 22 we took a gamble we already had 4 picks so we could afford to, if he does recover he is going to be one hell of a player.

So we drafted to exactly what we needed, and we got the players that we were after.

[Embers]

Risks in the sense that none of there 5 are certain AFL players, the certain players in this draft were really Murphy Hurn Ryder Jones and Pfeiffer, all the others have a bit of risk about them

What happens if Ellis doesnt fill out, ditto Birchall, There is no such thing as a pelvis injury that isnt serious. Muston is a huge risk. Bailey is already 19 and in reality is being picked solely on height.

[mattyc2422]

I cant see how Bulldogs cud be happy as they got no KPPs
Michael West.

[dipper86]

Risks in the sense that none of there 5 are certain AFL players, the certain players in this draft were really Murphy Hurn Ryder Jones and Pfeiffer, all the others have a bit of risk about them

What happens if Ellis doesnt fill out, ditto Birchall, There is no such thing as a pelvis injury that isnt serious. Muston is a huge risk. Bailey is already 19 and in reality is being picked solely on height.


Every player has a risk about them buddy, including the ones you just mentioned.

Pelvis injury? when its broken thats serious, when you have fractures its a diferent story and they heal, judging by the hawthorn medicos and the surgeons that checked him out he is making a quick recovery and is now out of the wheel chair and walking with cruthes.

Bailey- Most players after the top 15 were picked on a needs basis, Bailey is a ruckman, and this draft was probably the best to do this with, He is the best ruckman in the draft, well thats what atlest 3 to 4 clubs thought, he had a good draft camp being in the top 12% for speed and has improved considerably in what i have read about him, hawthorns intention was obviousley to recruit him and thought he was the best available out of the players they were in need off.

[desie]

From a North perspective I'm not too sure what to think about Swallow. Most discussion seemed to revolve around him being a first rounder, with some having him in the top 10. Late in the day he slipped on Footydraft and with Burgan into the 20's. The down side he's been overlooked once and in relative terms was overlooked again to a degree. He's very quick and has good evasive skills, is good inside, but is considered a poor kick. The first emotion when we picked him was very positive, the second was confusion.

Riggio we obviously rated highly and being an Academy graduate is a plus, although he did miss out on selection for the carnival.

Green is a so-so pick although being rated 20-25 on the Eagles list and having your last start being a good performance in a GF means he should have something to offer us.

Hutchison seems to be one of those who through injury has slipped under the guard. Was an U/16 SA rep but had OP this year. There are a couple of posts from the past few months around here that suggest this bloke could have been a high pick next year given an injury free season. Laidley said we'd take a developing tall beforehand and I'm happy to back their judgement given Stibbard's record with late picks in the past.

[Jimmy_the_Gent]

Green is a so-so pick although being rated 20-25 on the Eagles list and having your last start being a good performance in a GF means he should have something to offer us.

I imagine the general concencus among West Coast fans would be Green at 30+ on out list. However, he's a solid enough player and should play some good games for the Roos.

[TheReason]

They basically used a pick 5 on apick 10-15 level player and used the argument of "drafting for need" - as a WC fan, I remember about 5 drafts in a row through the late 90's when we drafted for need (under Mick) and it didnt work very well!
I could not believe during the draft telecast that MM comes on and says, "we picked the player that we most need".

WTF???

He was the one that came out in the late 90's at WCE and said, "We muffed it, we should have gone for the best player available no matter what their position".

That F***** C*** Sucking F***** ruined our club through dodgy drafting.

No different than Collingwood these days.

[morax]

That F***** C*** Sucking F***** ruined our club through dodgy drafting.

C'mon Reason, 2 flags a decade of finals...give the guy some credit.

On topic, carlton i believe have done very well. The worst, ask me in 3 years

[stefoid]

how the dogs did in the draft is very much dependent on the usefulness they get out of their 2 recycled picks. baird and monty.

considering how much baird has grown since he came to brisbane, I wouldnt be suprised to find him holding down CHF next season. If he could do that, it would be a huge plus for the dogs.

Monty will probably slip right into a HBF and give us two good quality seasons - only really a plus if he helps our backline stand up during finals.

[Rich01]

True, oh so true. I cant see how Collingwood could be happy with there picks, most were rated at bout 20 and they got em at 2 and 5, I cant see how Bulldogs cud be happy as they got no KPPs and already got a few players in a similiar mould to Higgins, I cant see how Crows cud be happy as they didnt replace Watts, I cant see how Sydney cud care less what they did. I cant see how Richmond cud be too happy as they got no defender even though Drum was still available.

Only clubs that can be truly happy I feel are Essendon, West Coast and Carlton. Essendon did well with there picks and got exactly who they wanted, Considering where West Coast finished on the ladder theyd be happy to get what they did get, got good players and filled weaknesses at the same time. Carlton got who they want too. No one else cud be reasonably happy cos Hawks took a ton of risks, as did most of the other clubs.

A nice simplistic view. I have read and re-read your last sentence and it still does not make sense. What do you mean?

[celtic_pride]

Only Time Will Tell for sure

[Jarka]

Collingwood basically did what Melbourne did with Brock McLean. They identified who they wanted and went after him knowing he wouldn't be around for their next pick. Nobody rated McLean as high as Melbourne did, the results have been outstanding.

The pies obviously have seen something in the kid they they liked and they went for it. Good on them for that, hope it works out for the kid and the pies.

I read somewhere that he's a big pies fan, is that correct?

[theorangeapple]

Collingwood basically did what Melbourne did with Brock McLean. They identified who they wanted and went after him knowing he wouldn't be around for their next pick. Nobody rated McLean as high as Melbourne did, the results have been outstanding.


Perhaps alittle strong. McLean has shown abit in his short career, but I want to see him handle teams attacking his weaknesses first. At the moment, he gets a free run. He was taken at pick 5, I wouldnt say the result has been outstanding. I would say you have got what one would hope from a pick 5.

[dackers10]

Pssst!! Dowler has been off crutches for over a week and will start running in 10 days :)

[Jabso]

Pssstt most of the draftees can already run ;).

[OZBomb]

I'm not sure what all the fuss over Collingwood's picks is.

I wasn't shocked in the slightest with Thomas and Pendlebury.

People still don't seem to get that this was the most subjective draft ever.

Football games aren't won at the draft camp, in phantom drafts or on Kevin Sheehan's PR.

If I hear one more person say "I read his profile on footydraft.com and he looks a gun..." I'll... well I'm not going to do anything but it ****s me.

[TheBrownDog]

I'll only comment on my team's draft.

Mitch Clark - really happy with this choice, alot of people claim he could have been a no.1. pick if it wasnt for some attitude niggles. If Lethal & co can iron those issues out he could likely be an absolute gun up forward or in the ruck.

Wayde Mills - I wanted us to take Mills at 25 and we did, so I'm very happy there. This kid is completely dedicated to getting the best out of himself and certainly already has the body and ticker to be a killer defender.

Rhan Hooper - great story, Indiginous kid from Rugby League stronghold Ipswich gets signed to the local AFL side. Chris Johnson and Darryl White have taken him under their wing and he is going to become a real fan favorite I feel.

Joel Patfull - been told by a few South Australians that we got a great deal getting him with our last pick. Reports from training show that he is extremely fit and trains well. Definately worth a punt.

[Batman]

More the point, Higgins is a typical Scott Clayton mid 180cm, wiry framed midfielder. If any club needed a Nathan Jones or Shannon Hurn it was the Dogs.

But then Dylan Addison at 27? Another Scott Clayton type.

The Dogs must be expecting Williams, Wells and Tiller, and of course Tim Walsh to come good quickly cos they appear to have put plenty of faith in what they have got key position wise.


You say 'Another Scott Clayton type' like a curse. I hope the curse sticks with us.

Clayton's strategy of picking is well documented. Not only that, it works. He picks players with plenty of blue sky, guys with talent but often not the body to play straight away - its like picking stocks he goes for value and buys low.

From all reports Higgins will be an inside midfielder who is virtually a guaranteed gun, a ready replacement for Scott West in three years. Addison could be anything. We have the KPPs drafted from a couple of years ago, hopefully they kick on. If not we may have to trade a first rounder and a fringe midfielder (read top midfielder for most other sides) for a ready made KPP - so what.

Clayton built Brisbane into a 3 time premiership side, one of the greatest we have seen.

Clatyon's currently got a side going that is labelled the most exciting in the league.

I am tipping Scott Clayton has forgotten more about selecting and drafting young talent than you will ever know Footyman:cool: