Wisbey Profiles

[Wayne's-World]

Thought you might find this an interesting read:

Date Posted: 16:11:00 11/29/05 Tue
Author: Colin Wisbey
Author Host/IP: c211-28-121-197.eburwd3.vic.optusnet.com.au / 211.28.121.197
Subject: Profile: Cleve Hughes

Cleve Hughes (Norwood)

192/84 top-age right foot (dual-sided) CHF/FF.

*STYLE LIKE: early Tredrea

*MY RANKING (not meant to reflect appropriate draft pick to use): 13

*PROBABILITY OF AFL CAREER: Likely. Ready year 2.

- Within an AFL team list, could prove capable of SUSTAINING a ranking of 5-15.

*HURT FACTORS (Offensive/Defensive/Negative): MH / LM / L

*TRADEMARK:

- Strong high mark on a very well-timed, purposeful lead up the corridor. Then long straight shot for goal.

*SUMMARY ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATION:

- Fast-lead marking key forward. Very top-age but intensity, an historic issue with him, is very much on the up ... and his potency with it.

Not the most consistent type around (is a bit of a confidence player) but on his day (and that's now often) he

Is agile
Is clean at all levell
Times his leads extremely well and straightens his team up
Shows good judgement overhead
Has nice kicking style and is usually an accurate kick.
Generally makes the right decisions.

Improvement trend line is very encouraging, including in intensity. When his confidence is up, he leads with purpose and up the corridor whenever possible.

- Even though he is 11 months older than Dowler, I have him a bit ahead of Dowler in my rankings:-

1. Although Dowler is 3cm taller, I am confident (unconfirmed) he has a few cm reach disadvantage (compared to the average player of his height) that at least cancels out the height difference.

2. Dowler can use his non-preferred foot to some extent in an emergency. Hughes doesn't often need to but is genuinely dual-sided.

3. Hughes is better below-the-knee ability IMHO and, although others would disagree, has better agility, especially recovery agility and ability to quickly make multiple leads for the same play

4. I suspect that, although a natural leading forward, he may have greater potential versatility, even though Dowler has played both ends.

5. Both are slim but Hughes is proven against men.

(Dowler's injury did not factor into my ranking of Dowler). I just think Hughes has more tricks.

- I could imagine Hughes might be the top name on the Christmas card list of some coaches or some team-mates and that his intensity and efforts until recently have sometimes looked dodgy, even seemingly sulky or a bit spoilt brattish. And he is very top-age. However he has recently given every indication on-field that things have just clicked with him. I thought he was useful some earlier games this year, good in the U18 Champs, and very good and sensational (respectively) in 2 SANFL Reserves games later in the year.

I think he looks as good a leading forward prospect as we've seen for some time. Because he is slim build and has to prove he can maintain his current intensity and ethic, I can't call him "definite" AFL long -termer but I do think it likely. I would take him around my ranking number of 13 and even a few picks earlier, depending on need.

*DISPOSAL:

- Very accurate set kick. Generally accurate non-set kick. Good at kicking a weighted pass to a lead.

- Terrific set kick for goal, regardless of angle. Also good on the run, even outside 40m

- Consistently handy depth. Comfortable range seems to be about 55m.

- Excellent kicking style for set kicks.

- Genuinely dual-sided.

- Good by hand - accurate, good power, quick hands, good hurt factor.

*DECISION-MAKING, SMARTS:

- Generally good decision-maker. (Makes the occasion mistake eg trying to bump instead of laying a tackle, but he is usually solid). Good vision. Often thinks quickly.

- Regularly displays good poise under pressure.

- As a leading forward, regularly tries to lead up the corridor. This not only straightens his team up but means that a high percentage of Hughes' set shots for goal are from a comfortable angle. Excellent judgement of when, where and how to lead, Great timing. His leads demand to be honoured.

- I'd like to see him feed off a bit more often.

*HANDS:

- Very clean hands - all levels.

- Extra clean off the carpet on the run, even under medium-great pressure.

*OVERHEAD MARKING:

- Routinely one-grab overhead, even under great pressure.

- Excellent judgement.

- Usually attacks a contested mark situation.

- Can take a big grab from behind but, pleasingly, prefers to play from the front (not only, but especially, from a lead)

- Holds his ground.

*ATHLETICISM:

- Big leap. (He is also handy as 3rd man up at stop plays).

- Very good pace overall - better than his handy DC times. Very good acceleration and speed on a lead, even against a smaller quick opponent like Josh Eddy.

- Very good agility. Excellent recovery agility for his size.

- Very good reflexes.

- Nice height but only 84kg. Is athletic enough that he doesn't need to become a 100+kg build. I can see no reason why he'll not manage to hit the mid-high 90s but it will take time.

*INTENSITY, ETHIC:

- Seems to be a bit of a confidence player but has significantly lifted his work-rate and hardness at the ball throughout the past year to the extent that it is now (as in latter part of this season) usually at least OK, sometimes very commendable. I

Due to the inconsistency of intensity/ethic prior to recently, its a bit hard to say he is now "good"/"very good" etc. What I can say is that, although I can't recall a smother or a huge number of chases, he has shown recently (even if not routinely), that he is prepared to show desperation, attack the ground ball, get the hard ball, attack the spoil, put in 2nd efforts, etc. He still has to work a bit on his attack on the man but he is usually an effective tackler.

*CONSISTENCY:

- Improving. I had concerns a while back but I ma fairly comfortable now.

*AFL VERSATILITY:

- Options will depend on how he goes with bulking up. Assuming no problems there (not that its really a given):-

- Natural FF or CHF.

- Could certainly play FP, or even HFF on the right opponent.

- If he gets his strength right and, more importantly, his intensity and ethic, he would have the skill set to play CHB, FB, 3rd tall defender, or perhaps even HBF on the right opponent. That list is a long way off being realistic at this stage but all are potential possibilities. You would waste his goal-kicking value and his ability on a lead though.

Bottom line is that I see him as a very appealing forward.

*CSI (COMPARATIVE SCOPE for IMPROVEMENT):

- No special factors.

*QUERY:

- Intensity / maintenance.

*SOME STATS:

- Stats summary '05 U18 Champs:
Averaged 11 disposals and 7.3 marks in his 3 games. (Best TD 13).
Kicks per 20 disp: 18.
Kicks long vs short: 15-8 (7 long per 10 kicks).
Ineffective kicks: 5/28 (1.8 per 10 kicks), incl 1 clangers (0.4 per 10 kicks).
Ineffective handballs: 0/4 (0.0 per 10 handballs), incl 0 clangers (0.0 per 10 handballs).
Ineffective disposals: 5/32 (3.1 per 20 disp), incl 1 clangers (0.6 per 20 disp).
HandBall Receives: 3/32 (2 per 20 disp).
Hardball gets: 1/32 (1 per 20 disp).
S.P. clearances: 0/32 (0 per 20 disp), incl 0 BU (0 per 20 disp), incl 0 CBC (0 per 20 disp).
Tackles: 2 (Avg 0.7 per game).
Marks: 22 (14 per 20 disp), incl 4 contested (1.8 per 10 marks).

*OTHER STUFF:

- All Aust TY.
- Promising SANFL Res form '05.

[Wayne's-World]

Author: Colin Wisbey
Author Host/IP: c211-28-121-197.eburwd3.vic.optusnet.com.au / 211.28.121.197
Subject: (Oops. lead-finger)
In reply to: Colin Wisbey 's message, "Profile: Varcoe" on 16:09:07 11/29/05 Tue

Travis Varcoe (Central District)

179/71 bottom-age right foot (has other foot if necessary) dashing wingman/hff.

*STYLE LIKE: D Wells

*MY RANKING (not meant to reflect appropriate draft pick to use): 12

*PROBABILITY OF AFL CAREER: Likely. Ready Year 2.

- Within an AFL team list, could prove capable of SUSTAINING a ranking of 5-10.

*HURT FACTORS (Offensive/Defensive/Negative): M / M / M

*TRADEMARK:

- Flash by traffic to cleanly scoop at top speed without breaking stride, then scoot over the turf for 30m and kick a floater.

*SUMMARY ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATION:
(This assessment makes the assumption that the significant foot injury that ended his '05 early in the season has now been given the medical "all clear" and that he is likely to be as good as ever in time).

- Electrifying skinny dasher with exciting upside. Needs to improve his kicking consistency big-time however.

- Over the past couple of months, I've had Varcoe as early as about 6 and as late as about 25 in my rankings, a reflection of the NQR flavour of this draft and of Varcoe's current less than convincing mix of the freakish and the "special" (elite quality upside) with the "not up to scratch". In the end, upside won out but he has to reduce his incidence of errors in various areas.

- I have compared his style to Daniel Wells. Some might compare it to Aaron Davey but Varcoe is much more pro-active and gets his own ball much more than Davey and potentially has a more rounded game, albeit it with a current sub-optimum split of hits to misses during a match. Note that I am rating Varcoe's "style" as being similar to Wells but the track record that Wells took to his draft was much more impressive than Varcoe's, even allowing for Varcoe having missed most of this season through injury. Here is an excerpt from my '02 draft profile of Wells:-

"Very young, very silky instinctive midfielder / flanker with blistering pace and acceleration, fierce tackling and 2nd/3rd/4th efforts (when it suits) and excellent all-round skills. Nice height although skinny. Does his own thing and backs himself every time. 2nd in WAFL Sandover Medal. Definitely worth 2nd pick in the draft and will be a serious AFL talent. Skill-wise, is ready-made and may get games next year but really needs at least a year to get some physical maturity."

To best describe where Varcoe is at now and what he brings to the draft table, I think it is worthwhile comparing '05 Varcoe to '02 Wells throughout this profile. That's not to say that Varcoe needs to be as good as Wells in order to be worth drafting early or to predict his AFL upside or longevity. A highlights tape from either at the same age would be equally impressive (although Wells' tape would run longer) and both show(ed) great upside as very bottom-age draftees.

Some general comparisons:-

1. Almost identical size, build, age and speed.

2. Like Wells, Varcoe too is a very young instinctive ball-carrying midfielder / flanker with blistering pace and acceleration. Wells was more routinely silky than Varcoe. Varcoe's best deeds are every bit as impressive as Wells' but he currently "gets it wrong" more often than Wells - more "hit or miss". Wells could generally be relied upon for the bread 'n butter stuff. Varcoe less so.

3. Both are slippery game-breakers. Like Wells, Varcoe will be capable of turning an AFL game with 3-4 bits of magic within a few minutes.

4. Both players have instinctive magic - the capability to do some freakish things in many games that most other players will never be able to do. At any given moment, Wells and Varcoe can make most opponents look pedestrian of mind or/or foot.

9. Varcoe will presumably go around where I have him (12) or maybe even earlier but would be highly unlikely to be top 10 or 12 in some other drafts. Wells, drafted at 2, was always at least a top 5 and with confidence and with tangible evidence for that confidence, evidence not available with Varcoe. eg Were Varcoe from WA instead of SA, he is a mile off getting many votes in the Sandover Medal. Remember, I'm not talking potential here - just where he is at the moment.

FWIW, both players had foot injuries in their draft year - Wells minor, Varcoe season-ending in round 6.

I expect that many of Varcoe's current deficiencies / inconsistencies will improve once he adds enough weight and has enough exposure to senior footy to give him more confidence in his physical resilience.

*DISPOSAL:

- Both are 80m players (run 30-40m then kick 40-50m) but Wells a very much more reliable kick (Varcoe has to lift his hit rate) and with greater power. Both capable of 50m goals on the run at top speed but Varcoe has more than his share of floaters, mongrel wobblers or miss-kicks - even under no pressure.

- Quite a few of Varcoe's kicks, especially on the run, are mongrels or floaters but he gets quite good depth with other kicks.

- Wells genuinely dual-sided. Varcoe more one-sided, although he does have a left foot for emergencies.

- "Deft touch" style - hand or foot.

- Both have very quick hands and good vision.

- Like Wells, some of Varcoe's feeds are special but his reliability is not. The good with the bad.

*DECISION-MAKING, SMARTS:

- Wells is routinely a good decision-maker. Varcoe often is.

- Both often display very quick brains, even under great pressure.

- Both often display excellent vision, particularly in close, but Varcoe sometimes has tunnel vision on the run.

- Wells typically gives the impression of feeling in control. More often than not, Varcoe does too but he does have occasional moments of apparent near-panic, sometimes resulting in a panic or "bang the ball onto the boot" disposal.

- Varcoe often commits himself "all or nothing". He will charge past an anticipated spill at pace in the hope of a collect but, if the ball doesn't pop out where he hoped it would, he has often over-committed and sailed way past the play, leaving his opponent as an extra number still at the play. When it comes off, Varcoe can look scintillating. When it doesn't, it can be costly. To this stage in his career, the rate of success isn't bad but, for AFL, it either must improve a fair bit or he must be more judicious in choosing when to take all-or-nothing risks.

- Both have very good evasion and traffic management. On the run, they can seamlessly wrong-foot an opponent without losing momentum.

*HANDS:

- Both players capable of often being exceptionally clean in vacuuming the ground ball at top speed without breaking stride.

- Inside any sort of traffic, Wells more routinely clean. Varcoe sometimes very clean, sometimes seems overwhelmed and fumbles.

*OVERHEAD MARKING:

- Wells probably better overhead, although Varcoe can take a good grab on occasions, typically from behind. Not a big feature of either's game though. Varcoe will take his share of the ones you would rate him 50/50 to take.

*ATHLETICISM:

- Both often look lightning quick and both make full use of their pace, skimming over the turf, a la Andrew McLeod, seemingly effortlessly. I have a suspicion that Wells is the quicker in terms of all-round natural pace. Both players have excellent cruise speed and acceleration on the run. However, Wells is "never" run down from behind whereas Varcoe, over the first 20m from a standing start, occasionally is.

- Wells had outstanding endurance. I don't have a strong handle on a comparison between Wells and Varcoe, mainly through Varcoe's injury and the fact that his endurance hasn't been tested at the same standard of footy as Wells had. Certainly both cover(ed) a lot of ground in a game and do a fair bit of hard running. I suspect Varcoe's endurance might become one of his strengths down the track

- Both lack(ed) strength due to being skinny very bottom-agers. Wells was even slightly lighter than Varcoe bit has added about 12kg. Varcoe has a similar frame so should also finish up fine. The style of game that the slippery Wells and Varcoe play is such that neither player needs to bulk up to the size that many AFL players must.

At the moment, Varcoe often struggles to keep his feet body-on-body and had that problem at U16s. Could be a balance issue but I'm putting it down to lack of strength, in whicj case I'm not concerned long-term.

*INTENSITY, ETHIC:

- Both players work in both directions. Both are excellent natural breakaway swoopers but both also prepared to get their own ball instead of being purely outside receivers/gatherers - unlike many with their pace and build. Both happy to chase, have "whispering death" closing speed, and can be keen tacklers, although not all the time.

Wells the more routinely effective tackler, whereas a fair few of Varcoe's don't currently stick, although that will improve a lot with added strength. Varcoe displays greater accountability to his direct opponent than Wells did. Varcoe fairly accountable - something not always in evidence among flashy, run-the-lines dashers.

- Both not 100% players. i.e. chases, 2nd and 3rd efforts, desperation are not things they could be relied upon to do all the time but more frequently than most kids of their type and their best efforts both very impressive.

- Wells, although not perfect by any means either, committed himself to pressure situations more frequently and more convincingly. Varcoe commits his body more sporadically - sometimes looking hesitant and at other times showing determination and fairly often desperation.

- Varcoe needs to be more desperate more often and to more frequently commit to attack the ball.

*CONSISTENCY:

- Wells could go quiet during parts of some games but he rarely had a quiet game and never appeared to lose confidence or touch. I can't recall Wells ever appearing to be nervous. Varcoe does have some quiet games and does sometimes appear to lose confidence and touch and/or seem a bit nervous.

*AFL VERSATILITY:

- Wells the more versatile. Varcoe is made to be, in traditional terminology, a wingman. That suits him ideally. No reason why he couldn't also be a good HFF or FP. Perhaps in time he could play BP as McLeaod sometimes does. I'm not convinced of his potential to become a "centre bounce" type of onballer but it is a slight possibility. Wells was potentially almost equally suited to wing or CB onballer and, subject to accountability, always looked capable of playing anywhere down the flanks.

*CSI (COMPARATIVE SCOPE for IMPROVEMENT):

- Other than both being very bottom-age and Varcoe having missed most of his draft season, no particularly special factors for either.

*QUERY (re Varcoe):

- Kicking consistency.

*OTHER STUFF:

- AIS
- Reserves then Seniors Rnd 5. Succumbed to what appeared to be foot stress fractures in R6 but many weeks later the injury was found to be serious bone/ ligament damage so virtually all '05 was a write-off. N/A for U18 '05 Champs due to that injury. Had to wear medical proctective boot until very recently so presumably unlikely to train before early '06.

[Stiffy_18]

I was hoping he might have the profiles of our lads by now.

[Wayne's-World]

Date Posted: 10:10:22 11/26/05 Sat
Author: Colin Wisbey
Author Host/IP: c211-28-121-197.eburwd3.vic.optusnet.com.au / 211.28.121.197
Subject: Thomas profile

Dale Thomas (Gippsland Power)

183/75 mid-age right foot (dual-sided) HFF/ midfielder/ HBF.

*STYLE LIKE: undernourished Cooney

*MY RANKING (not meant to reflect appropriate draft pick to use): 17

*PROBABILITY OF AFL CAREER: Likely. Ready year 2.

- Within an AFL team list, could prove capable of SUSTAINING a ranking of 10-15.

*HURT FACTORS (Offensive/Defensive/Negative): M / M / L-M

*TRADEMARK:

- Speccy (for his size) or charge to collect the ball at pace, then take them on, dash away and kick direct and for length ... the keep running hard.
- Chase hard and tackle like a terrier, then pick himself up and run on.

*SUMMARY ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATION:

- Not special at anything but no major weakness either. A quickish terrier with a bit of everything.

Not silky in that "cool, always has plenty of time" sense but he does have quite good skills. Biggest assets are his consistency and ability to impact. He can inspire his team through sheer frenetic effort (both ways) and in-your-face daring.

- Not a ball magnet by any means. (see below). Averages 18 disposals, somewhat low for his type and abilities (even though he does play HFF a lot).

What you are buying is:-

1. A never-say-die who never plays a genuinely poor game. You can count on him to contribute to every game, albeit without often getting special stats or ever challenging for the Brownlow.
2. An almost 6' dasher who takes them on and runs the lines yet, unlike many for whom that description applies, is certainly not outside. Quick, slippery.
3. A terrier who attacks the man as keenly as he attacks the ball. Works hard both ways.
4. Work ethic.
5. Versatility.
6. Leadership and a nice, mature, sensible kid with infectious personality. A good personaility to have around a club.
7. A potential team lifter

- Fairly handy around goals but good in-close too.

- Most people would question why I have Thomas a bit earlier in my rankings than Xavier Ellis. (I often use Ellis as the yard stick for mids as he is well known and plays the same very week):-
-----------------
Ellis is a reliable kick, an elite reader of the player, a very good contested mark, and has wonderful vision. Not that Thomas is any slouch in these areas but Ellis is the better.

On the other hand, Thomas is a ball-carrier and, at times, a "run through the 50" goal-kicker, which Ellis is not.

Thomas is genuinely dual-sided. Ellis is basically one-sided.

Both get a roughly similar amount of the pill but, other than marking, Ellis relies mainly on receives and the mistakes of others. Thomas gets more of his own ball.

Thomas is fierce at both man and ball, which Ellis is not. Thomas' intensity is way ahead of Ellis'. He is routinely determined and desperate.

Thomas is accountable. Ellis is not.

AFL-wise, Thomas presents as much more versatility. He could play anywhere down the flanks and perhaps onball and or even run-with in time. Ellis' current outsidedness would have to radically change for him to have much versatility. It might, but it would be mere blind faith to state that it definitely will. Thomas's game is suited to team various game plans - from fast-moving / fast scoring to dour scrumby. Ellis' is not. In various Ellis games, it seemed that Ellis plays as if the team game plan comes to Ellis. Thomas adapts himself to the team game plan. Some of those comments may turn out to be unfair on Ellis. I'm just explaining how I see things based on what we have seen to date.

Ellis is average off the mark and has good pace after that. He doesn't currently do much of the "after that" though. Thomas is quicker than Ellis over ground and much quicker off the mark.

Ellis is taller and probably has the better leap.

Ellis is 8 months younger and hasn't had the depth of TAC experience that Thomas has.

Thomas has a frame that would appear to be more likely to finish up with a reasonable build --for AFL.
---------------------

- I've probably seen Dale about 30 times and I am a fan of the way he plays but I definitely feel that his very good TAC GF has significantly exaggerated anyone's perception of what he brings to the draft table. The same thing happened with Jordan Barham a few years ago. I thought Dale played a very good GF but I hope people don't see it as a sign that a star has emerged from nowhere. Let me add my reality check, so that we keep Thomas's capabilities in perspective:-

Goodes was arguably drafted mainly on his terrific TAC GF performance. However Goodes had had an interrupted year and his form was up and down. It was a case of "Will the real Adam Goodes please stand up?"

Thomas is different. His form and style of game have been consistent over 2 years. He is not a late bloomer or sudden improver. Dale is "what you see is what you get and you can count on him putting in a similar performance virtually every week, sometimes a bit quieter, sometimes a bit more impact". The GF was just the latter, albeit probably his best game. He gets around the 18-20 disposals most weeks as he did in the GF (20d). He kicked 4-0 in the GF, he kicked 2-3 two games earlier. Thomas gives you something every game and is good for a goal or so most games. Sometimes his shots go the wrong side of the post and sometimes (as in the GF) the right side. I thought he put in a very similar performance to the GF in R13 (19 disposals, 6 scoring shots) - it's just that on GF day his 4 scoring shots all went straight and resulted in 4-0 and in R13 he finished with 1-5. He was on fire for periods of the GF but, just the previous week, Bronik Davies did a very good job shutting him down (as much as you can shut Thomas down) and restricting Thomas to 13 disposals in what was the equal quietest game I saw from Dale all year. (Coincidentally, the other was also against Davies' team but I don't recall Thomas' opponent).

I don't say any of the above to discredit Thomas. I just want Thomas to be seen as the consistent "good" player that his is, not have fans' expectations hyped up by the GF so that he is unfairly expected to be the "next big thing".

Would I draft him? Definitely. Depending on need, I'd use any pick from about 12 onwards. I expect him to go at about 12-15. My rankings are never meant to reflect the draft pick I would use on a player but, in Dale's case, I think my ranking of 17 is a fair and reasonable price to pay.

I'm confident he will sustain an AFL career, probably noted, as it is now and as he is now, for its character.

*DISPOSAL:

- As with much of Dale's game, fairly reliable without being special - hand or foot.

- Rarely kicks a direct turnover but not many bullet-like 40m pin-point passes either and he can be prone to kick more than the odd floater/wobbler. Overall accuracy "good", rather than "very good".

- Struggles a bit for depth.

- Not a bad kicking style but could be improved. eg. Sometimes angles his plant foot too far outward, which can in turn drag the kicking leg around with it instead of it (the kicking leg) being able to stay in a more "straight through" arc.

- Dual-sided.

- Goal-kicking is mixed bag. Seems to be more reliable on the run (even from a fairly difficult angle 40m out under pressure) than set-shot (even <40m on an easy angle). That may or ay not be statistically correct but that's the way it has looked to me.

- Quick hands. Good power in feeds. Feeds often have a good hurt factor.

- Healthy mix of kicks to feeds.

*DECISION-MAKING, SMARTS:

- Usual theme - "fairly reliable" without being "very good". In particular, with respect to vision, quick thinking, poise / look for options.

- Rarely does anything genuinely dumb but occasionally goes with the wrong option (or fails to notice an option) or tries to do too much, or takes an imprudent risk, etc.

- Very sharp evasive skills - both in close and on the run. Often good traffic management.

- Tendency to charge through stop-play traffic in a cavalier "hit or miss" manner though - can be high return but also leaves the opposition still at the contest if Thomas has sailed by without the pill.

- Sometimes thinks very quickly under pressure.

*HANDS:

- Generally clean but not bullet-proof.

*OVERHEAD MARKING:

- Good overhead for his height. Attacks his marks (from front, side or behind), nice leap and judgement, hangs onto them.

*ATHLETICISM:

- Genuinely quick - both off the mark and over ground.

- Very good leap.

- Appears to be a latish physical developer so I suspect he may still have further growth to come. Appears to be quite strong. Was skinny last year and appears to be quite capable of bulking to a fair degree up over time. Build is OK but I suspect he has some scope for hardening his body as it doesn't look to be super-defined at the moment.

- Endurance is a current query. (Not a concern, just a query). Some players are born to have a greater motor than others but, subject to build (and that's not a perfect indicator by any means), commitment etc, I don't get too concerned about U18 endurance in most players as that's what AFL conditioning usually brings out. I can see no reason why Thomas won't have good endurance down the track.

*INTENSITY, ETHIC:

- Tick off just about everything re ethic / intensity, including 2nd efforts, courage (fearless), attack on ball and man, hardball gets, desperation.

- Works hard both ways.

- His physical appearance might suggest he is a bit wild but he is, in fact, a sensible, mature kid of good character. School captain and has shown leadership potential. My mail is that Dale is a kid who keeps himself in pretty good nick without being the type who are religious about diet, etc.

*CONSISTENCY:

- Quite consistent in that he doesn't have very poor games but not many blinders either. Has played 34 TAC games in last 2 years and 3 U18 Champs games this year and has never had fewer than 10 disposals or more than 25.

*AFL VERSATILITY:
(see above)

*CSI (COMPARATIVE SCOPE for IMPROVEMENT):

- No special factors.

*QUERY:

- (Nothing too serious)

*SOME STATS:

- Stats summary '05 TAC:
Averaged 18 disposals in 18 TAC games. 4.9 marks. 5.1 tackles (ranking No.10 in comp). Total goals 28-23. 14 kicks per 20 disposals. 5 marks per 20 possessions.
- Mid-way trend .. % change in disposals was + 10%. % change in marks was + 32%. % change in tackles was + 22%.
Never had fewer than 10 disposals or more than 25 in his last 2 years, incl U18 Champs. .
At least 20 disposals in 6 of his 18 games. 18-20d in 7 of his 18 games.

- Stats summary '04 TAC:
Averaged 15 disposals in 16 TAC games. 3.4 marks. 4.2 tackles. Total goals 11-18. 13 kicks per 20 disposals. 5marks per 20 possessions.
- Mid-way trend .. % change in disposals was + 9%. % change in marks was + 57%. % change in tackles was + 3%.

- Stats summary '05 U18 Champs:
Averaged 15 disposals and 3.0 marks in his 3 games. (Best TD 19).
Kicks per 20 disp: 10.
Kicks long vs short: 14-4 (8 long per 10 kicks).
Ineffective kicks: 4/22 (1.8 per 10 kicks), incl 0 clangers (0.0 per 10 kicks).
Ineffective handballs: 6/22 (2.7 per 10 handballs), incl 1 clangers (0.5 per 10 handballs).
Ineffective disposals: 10/44 (4.5 per 20 disp), incl 1 clangers (0.5 per 20 disp).
HandBall Receives: 10/44 (5 per 20 disp).
Hardball gets: 7/44 (3 per 20 disp).
S.P. clearances: 8/44 (4 per 20 disp), incl 2 BU (1 per 20 disp), incl 3 CBC (1 per 20 disp).
Tackles: 8 (Avg 2.7 per game).
Marks: 9 (4 per 20 disp), incl 1 contested (1.1 per 10 marks).

*OTHER STUFF:

- All Aust TY.
- TAC Team Of Year TY: W.
- Sister plays netball (Phoenix) and is about 183cm

[Wayne's-World]

Date Posted: 16:02:03 11/29/05 Tue
Author: Colin Wisbey
Author Host/IP: c211-28-121-197.eburwd3.vic.optusnet.com.au / 211.28.121.197
Subject: Profile: Swallow

Andrew Swallow (East Fremantle)

183/77 mid-age right foot (has other foot if necessary) onballer/small defender.

*STYLE LIKE: Taller Schammer

*MY RANKING (not meant to reflect appropriate draft pick to use): 18

*PROBABILITY OF AFL CAREER: Likely. Ready year 1.

- Within an AFL team list, could prove capable of SUSTAINING a ranking of 5-15.

*HURT FACTORS (Offensive/Defensive/Negative): M / M / M

*REACH (compared to the average player of his height): 3cm disadvantage .

*TRADEMARK:

- Attack the ball, take it (possibly from a contest) then a fast dash then an possibly iffy kick probably in the direction of his flight path.

*SUMMARY ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATION:

- 182cm quick, dashing inside goer. Would be very early in my rankings if his kicking had a higher hurt factor , if he made smarter use of his pace, and if he thought his way through situations better.

- What you are buying is
1. run-the-lines speed
2. tenacity
3. play-reading
4. ball-winning ability.
5. vision ... when not on the run
6. accountability
7. courage

He is not silky but he does have some smarts and very good vision ... when he chooses to exercise them. In those 3 respects, Marc Murphy is a long way ahead and Murphy is more slippery. I don't have Swallow all that many spots below Murphy in my rankings despite Swallow's kicking still needing a fair bit of work. By comparison with Murphy, Swallow is harder, much more inside and, when fit, has run-the-lines pace, a fair bit quicker than Murphy IMHO. In the '05 U18 Champs Swallow's hardball gets were at an impressive rate of 6 per 20 disposals, Murphy's 1 per 20d. Murphy links very well but doesn't first-possession contested ball often enough for my liking. Swallow gets plenty of first-possession contested ball but doesn't link often enough for my liking.

- Swallow is a hard-nut ball-magnet who has some smarts but too often doesn't play smart enough. People talk of his ball-carrying pace, hardness and ability to find the pill. I agree with that.

He has the potential to be a much better player than he currently is though:-

1. Needs to link more. He has very good speed but doesn't fully capitalise on it. Yes, he does carry the ball. However, his pattern is almost exclusively "get own ball, then feed off or take off with it". What is missing is a "linking through space" component. I admire Andrew's "contested ball" mentality but I'd also like to see him more frequently run hard into space, without the ball, to present as a potential ball-carrying linking option through space.

2. Needs to run smart, not just hard. While he does attack the ball, including bursting into/through traffic and taking on opponents (including oncoming), he has a history of too much tunnel vision by virtue of placing himself under unnecessary pressure when he decides to take off with it. He has definitely improved in that aspect, and in his kicking generally, but has some way to go. He is not a pretty kick and sometimes his kicking action does make accuracy a challenge. However, at top pace his main failing is inability/unwillingness to think and run hard at the same time. He just seems to run flat-chat with his only focus being on how much ground he can cover as quickly as possible without being caught from behind. He does have fairly good evasive skills yet, when confronted during a fast run, he regularly panic-disposes, kicking hard and direct in a rushed, cramped kicking action without a target in mind or without making any effort to slip his opponent in order to buy time to steady. To compound that problem, he turns off his awareness alert system on the run, as if the only pressure will come from a chaser. He seems to get caught by surprise when confronted by an opponent coming at him from the opposite direction or from the side. When he is "suddenly" confronted, he panic disposes. When on the run, I want Andrew to adopt a concerted policy of

"My purpose in running with the ball before kicking is to maximise the advantage to my team of the total yardage. Advantage becomes disadvantage if I waste the kick. Therefore I must aim to steady yet minimise the pressure I am under at the time I kick. I must always be on the alert for pending danger ahead and mentally prepared to exercise timely evasion if appropriate so I can slip into space and buy time to steady."

Andrew either has yet to grasp the importance of this policy or he is not mentally dexterous enough to routinely think his way through such situations. If he can and does implement this policy, his value to his team, and his own level of AFL career success, will improve significantly. If he does have an innate inability to think his way through such situations quickly enough or if his evasive skills in such situations are sub-standard (neither of which is probably likely but certainly possible), AFL tempo will expose it brutally.

To put his reputation for sub-standard kicking technique and accuracy into the above context, it doesn't matter how good your kicking technique is if you put yourself under too much pressure to utilise it. A "bang the ball onto the boot" panic kick carries greater risk of negative outcome than the risk of an evasion attempt not coming off.

- With his combination of speed, endurance, ability to push himself, self-discipline and accountability, he has the makings of at least a midfielder or BP. In time, I think he would make an excellent run-with, if not a genuine inside onballer in his own right.

I say that, but with one vital proviso - "if he can significantly improve his kicking outcomes". I think he can (see above and below). If I didn't, I would not be confident of him sustaining a long-term AFL career.

But that's the rub at the moment. His kicking has improved but is still somewhat sub-standard and his kicking action is still often out of synch. If it was good, he might be the ball-carrying, team-straightening, accountable quick that so many clubs are searching for, and I would rate him earlier. But it isn't, so I don't. I do rate him a good chance at AFL. If he significantly improves his kicking outcomes, I believe he will probably do well at AFL level. If not, he won't.

- On face value he might appeared to have not kicked on this year after a promising '04 WAFL Seniors debut year. However he carried a few injury niggles this year that clearly hampered his form. Even so he still had 33 disposals in Rnd 23 at WAFL Seniors level. (Coincidentally, his best game last year was also Rnd 23 Seniors - 24 disposals as barely a 17y.o.). Was clearly not as body fit this year. His DC results compared to last year bear this out. His speed times were a little worse but his beep went from very good to quite poor. He definitely seemed to be carrying extra puppy fat, especially around the bum.

- Is very level-headed. Very self-disciplined, on and off-field. Reliable, and a good time manager. Natural leader. These factors helped sway me in his favour.

*DISPOSAL:
(see above)

- Disposals are a healthy mix of kicks to feeds (about 10 kicks per 20 handballs). That may sound a bit low for his type (typically about 12 or so kicks per 20 feeds) but it plays to his strengths.

- Has a pronounced preference for kicking for length rather than short. Needs to balance this mix a bit better.

- Usually good by hand. Reliable, sharp. Quick hands, good power. (He did have a dirty day in Rnd 19 Seniors when he came on about 20min into Q1 and had 3 handballs in a few minutes, every one of which was a shocker - one into the oncoming opponent and 2 attempted 10m feeds that had no power whatsoever and dropped short. However he was on the bench until late each of the first 3 quarters and missed the next game so I assume injury was the cause of his uncharacteristic R19 problems).

- Unreliable by foot. He is more accurate this year but still has a long way to go. Kicks are too often inaccurate and lack depth and often power. They don't hurt nearly enough. His kicking outcomes are not a technique-only issue though. (see above).

- Noted a noted goalkicker. (In fairness, he doesn't often venture within close range).

- Has improved his terrible '04 kicking style a fair bit, and credit to him, but it is still quite flawed technically. I won't list all the things he does wrong but here's what I wrote last year:-
----------------
The gist of his problem is that he doesn't keep his centre of mass (COM) behind his plant leg long enough, primarily because he has a "bent forward" posture virtually throughout his action. The result is that he cramps his arc. His torso is too over the ball, forcing him to quickly rush his arc. He enters his kicking cycle too low/bent. His left leg is inclined to buckle - this has the effect that he kicks too much underneath the ball instead of through it, causing his kicks to have undue hang-time and too often become wobblers. It is important that the COM remains behind your plant foot until just prior to impact. Ideally, the plant leg should be very stable and supportive and the COM coming directly above it at roughly the time of impact. Swallow's plant leg buckles. Whether that is a cause in itself, or the result of his body posture and where he positions his COM, is "chicken and the egg" stuff. His arm action (a problem of "when" his arms do "what", as much as "what" they do) accentuates his kicking problems. If you picture someone suddenly throwing you a bag of wheat when you weren't completely ready for it, then you have a picture of Swallow's arms and body posture around the time his foot connects. His left arm is supposed to balance him but he instead throws it back way too early and too exaggerated, causing his body to virtually swivel to the left before he has even connected. This then throws other aspects out of synch.
--------------
I commend him on the ability (and willingness) he has shown since last year to modify his technique. His kicking accuracy is significantly better this year. Some games it has even been quite good. Sometimes though, mainly on the run, he slips back into old habits. AFL tempo will really test his ability to prove he has overcome his historical technical deficiencies.

In some respects, kicking technique shares some of the principles of running technique. (eg use of plant foot, forward drive, mechanics and timing of weight/power transference, maintaining squareness and balance, fluent movement, etc).

Swallow has an excellent running technique so presumably understands the principles of running. He needs to apply some of the same principles to his kicking technique. Equally, even if you are willing and ultimately able to change either your running technique or your kicking technique, sustained success, especially with non set kicks, usually takes a fair while. In particular, when on the run and/or under pressure, old habits often instinctively surface. So it is with Andrew at the moment.

He still has some flaws he hasn't started to address but he is on the way to implementing better technique.

On balance, I now rate his "under no pressure, not on the run" kicking technique and outcomes as "almost satisfactory, even for AFL".

It is his "under pressure and/or on the run" technique and outcomes that are still not good enough for AFL.

Note that I often referred to kicking "outcomes" not just "kicking accuracy". Swallow's sometimes sub-standard kicking "outcomes" are not always a result of technique deficiencies but of displaying poor smarts before delivery (see above). He has to eliminate/minimise both problems, not just kicking technique flaws, before he can routinely produce good kicking outcomes.

*DECISION-MAKING, SMARTS:
(see above)

- Other than on-the-run aspects discussed above, his decision-making is good. Looks for options, shows poise under pressure, thinks quickly. Generally makes the right decisions.

- Good vision when wanting to find an option.

- Very occasionally has lapses in concentration / risk assessment when deciding to take off to present an option without appropriately assessing the risk of leaving his opponent in a danger zone, or when visually focussing on the play nearby and only noticing at the last moment that his opponent is no longer next to him.

- Reads the play quite well.

- Doesn't have great awareness, at least at the moment. I don't think you can teach that. However, it does / should improve to some extent with experience at the higher tempos. Andrew lacks sixth sense awareness though so he is always going to be prone to getting nailed on occasions for not realising the pressure he is, or is about to be, under. (See above). Fortunately he is so quick that he can sometimes manage to find another gear when an opponent suddenly appears from nowhere.

- Doesn't exercise evasion quite enough. He can do it, but is currently too inclined to back his pace straight-line. (see above)

*HANDS:

- Generally clean, sometimes very clean. Is possibly even cleaner off the ground than at waist level. Clean at pace. He is not routinely "extremely clean" though.

*OVERHEAD MARKING:

- Not a big feature but I suspect he enjoys a grab. Hands and balance are good. Judgement is a mixed bag. A 3cm reach disadvantage (even though it may not seem much) doesn't help either.

*ATHLETICISM:

- When fit, he is extremely quick. His speed largely defines him. Possibly had the best running technique I saw during '04 but this year he has struggled with injury/fitness and that appeared to impact his ability to run as freely and with as smooth a technique.

- Nice build. Good strength and balance. Keeps his feet body-on-body and capable of shrugging tackles.

- Seemed to have quite good endurance last year so I'm going on that. Certainly didn't have that endurance in various games this year.

- Good agility.

- Shows a good leap on occasions.

*INTENSITY, ETHIC:

- Excellent ethic, on and off-field.

- Very tenacious. Excellent 2nd efforts, chasing, attack on the man. Strong and very effective tackler ... and frequent, even if he has to chase hard 40m to lay one. Excellent closing speed is a real plus.

- Attacks man, ball and marking spoils like there is no tomorrow.

- Courageous.

- Charges into and through traffic. Happy to attack the ball at pace even in the face of oncoming opposition.

- Runs hard both ways and runs on.

- Does the team stuff well. (Blocks, etc)

- Is very disciplined and accountable (to anyone's opponent, not just his own). As a defender or tagger, he generally tries to wear his opponent like a glove.

- Pushes himself hard in all respects.

*CONSISTENCY:

- Was quite consistent last year. Injury dogged his '05 season. Should be consistent.

*AFL VERSATILITY:
(see above)
(subject to kicking improvement)

- Might prove fairly versatile. Theoretically should be capable, in time and at least for periods, of various small/medium roles on the right opponent.

- I think he is ideally suited to BP, or a run-with role in time. Could play HBF (spent some time there this year) on the right opponent and give you run off half back. The big plus with Andrew as a defender is not just his pace but his accountability and self-discipline. Wing might also be a good fit but he is more your hard worker, hard runner than silky. Perhaps some other onball potential (much of his experience to date has been as an onballer) but his dubious evasion ability causes me concern in such role at AFL level.

*SCI (SCOPE FOR CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT):

- No special factors.

*QUERY:

- Kicking, mainly on the run - technique, accuracy, depth.
- Smarts on the run - evasive ability and frequency.

*SOME STATS:

- Stats summary '05 U18 Champs:
Averaged 19 disposals and 2.0 marks in his 3 games. (Best TD 22).
Kicks per 20 disp: 13.
Kicks long vs short: 20-6 (8 long per 10 kicks).
Ineffective kicks: 10/39 (2.6 per 10 kicks), incl 4 clangers (1.0 per 10 kicks).
Ineffective handballs: 2/19 (1.1 per 10 handballs), incl 0 clangers (0.0 per 10 handballs).
Ineffective disposals: 12/58 (4.1 per 20 disp), incl 4 clangers (1.4 per 20 disp).
HandBall Receives: 8/58 (3 per 20 disp).
Hardball gets: 16/58 (6 per 20 disp).
S.P. clearances: 14/58 (5 per 20 disp), incl 4 BU (1 per 20 disp), incl 7 CBC (2 per 20 disp).
Tackles: 18 (Avg 6.0 per game).
Marks: 6 (2 per 20 disp), incl 0 contested (0.0 per 10 marks).

- Stats summary '04 U18 Champs:
Averaged 7 disposals and 0.7 marks in his 3 games. (Best TD 12).
Kicks per 20 disp: 10.
Kicks long vs short: 5-2 (7 long per 10 kicks).
Ineffective kicks: 4/11 (4 per 10 kicks), incl 1 clangers (1 per 10 kicks).
Ineffective handballs: 1/10 (1 per 10 handballs), incl 0 clangers (0 per 10 handballs).
Ineffective disposals: 5/21 (5 per 20 disp), incl 1 clangers (1 per 20 disp).
HandBall Receives: 5/21 (5 per 20 disp).
Hardball gets: 5/21 (5 per 20 disp).
S.P. clearances: 3/21 (3 per 20 disp), incl 1 BU (1 per 20 disp), incl 1 CBC (1 per 20 disp).
Tackles: 8 (Avg 2.7 per game).
Marks: 2 (2 per 20 disp), incl 1 contested (5 per 10 marks).

*OTHER STUFF:

- AIS
- Exempted from draft age clause in '04 but overlooked.
- Colts, Reserves, Seniors '04 (24d Rnd23).
- In '05, Reserves then Seniors '05. 33d Rnd23 (Sen).
- WA captain 'U16 Champs '03 and U18 Champs '05.
- Won WA Champs's B&F '05.

[Wayne's-World]

Date Posted: 16:06:55 11/29/05 Tue
Author: Colin Wisbey
Author Host/IP: c211-28-121-197.eburwd3.vic.optusnet.com.au / 211.28.121.197
Subject: Profile: Oakley- Nicholls

Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls (East Perth)

188/75 bottom-age right foot (has other foot if necessary) outsidish mid / flanker

*STYLE LIKE: Rob Murphy

*MY RANKING (not meant to reflect appropriate draft pick to use): 5

*PROBABILITY OF AFL CAREER: Definite. Ready year 2.

- Within an AFL team list, could prove capable of SUSTAINING a ranking of 5-10.

*HURT FACTORS (Offensive/Defensive/Negative): M-H / M / L

*TRADEMARK:

- Casually pluck the ball out of the air or cleanly off the turf, then an even more effortless (no, make that "cocky") sell-the-dummy, then skim the turf for 30m then accurate fluent kick to a well spotted target.

*SUMMARY ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATION:

- Oakley-Nicholls is not a top 5 pick, or even top 10, in a typical year's draft. This year is as light on for obvious top 10 quality as 2000 but at least 2000 had Riewoldt, Didak and Kos who looked to be the clear top 3. I can't see Oakley-Nicholls going top 5 even this year but I rank him at 5 on the basis that:-

1. He has indicated an X-factor upside comparable with Ryder, Varcoe, etc but has the advantage that we have seen O-N's form this year offer greater concrete evidence. Any concerns re any disappointment with O-N not having been more consistent (eg not having played many genuine 4-quarter games) can also be levelled at those others with supposed X-factor upside who follow him in my rankings.

2. He has the tricks to turn a game in one quarter. He is genuinely classy. Clean, silky with a bit of magic.

3. No one after him in my rankings would appear to represent a better all-round package of attributes. Jarrad is a great height for a wing/flank, among other possibilities down the track. He also appears to have a reach advantage (unconfirmed). Reliable kick with high hurt factor. Lightning quick. Can take a huge grab. Excellent evasion. Happy to get his own ball. "Never" flustered. Plays in a manner that suggests he will thrive on AFL centre stage once he has settled in.

4. Only about 3 of the next 15 players in my rankings are similarly reliable all round kicks and probably none of those 3 are quite as good.

5. Despite his speed and silkiness, he wins much more than his share of his own ball - in one-in-one physical tussle contests or inside traffic etc. He is no downhill-skier or stranger to hardball gets or to displays of determination/desperation.

- From rural WA but, on-field, always looks self-assured and never seems flustered. One of those players, regardless of age, who just "moves" like an AFL player of class. I first liked him from the '04 U16 Champs. Back then, he was trying to manage problems with his left knee but he really looked "AFL".

If you had pick 5 and your next pick was beyond about pick 10, I think O-N is worth pick 5 thaer than taking the risk of him slipping through, even though that is shorter than his market value. I'm very confident of his AFL future.

*DISPOSAL:
(see above)

- U18 Champs stats were not representative of his kicking's usual accuracy or hurt factor. I would describe him as an "almost routinely excellent" kick - accuracy, hurt, power. Even on the run (as he often is). Economical kicking style.

- Can kick a big goal but is not in the "reliable around goals" class.

- His handballing is good but, in relative terms, possibly not quite as reliable as his kicking.

- Mix of kicks to feeds varies a lot, game by game.

*DECISION-MAKING, SMARTS:
(see above)

- Generally a good decision-maker. Generally displays poise and looks for options, even on the run.

- Good vision but not always good awareness.

- Uses his body well.

- His average stats are quite healthy and he has had some big games. However it bothers me, just a little, that he doesn't ROUTINELY get more of the pill. He gets his share when at the play but I suspect he needs coaching in where and when to run in order to be in the action more often. Providing a kid is coachable (can listen, understand and implement) I never get overly concerned about kids who tend to be in the wrong places around the ground at 17-18yo. Oakley-Nicholls seems to read the play well enough, especially when he finds himself fairly handy to it. Most kids should be able to improve their positioning if they get the appropriate "match scenario simulation and decision-making dry runs" at their AFL club.

- Importantly, he needs to demand the ball much more often and with more purpose. With his leg-speed he should much more often be running past to offer himself as a potential 80-90m option. Ditto for being more verbally demanding when in good position to have the ball delivered to him.

- Outstanding evasion. Routinely effective, excellent sidestep on the run.

*HANDS:
(see above)

- Routinely clean - ground or waist, on the run or static, under pressure or not.

*OVERHEAD MARKING:

- Very capable and reliable overhead, regardless of pressure. Usually clean hands, usually good judgement, holds his ground. Wins much more than his share of 50/50 contests. I saw him drop a sitter in one WAFL game but that's the only terrible result I can recall.

- He can take the big grab over the back of the pack but he arguably takes more from in front or mid-pack.

*ATHLETICISM:
(see above)

- Terrific athletic package.

- Lightning quick. He would be as quick as anyone in this draft. That's how he looks on-field. His DC times reflect that. 5m time among the top 3% ever and the further they go (over a sprint distance) the more elite his times (top 1% of all times over 20m).

- Offensive agility is excellent. Recovery agility disappointing at times.

- I'm still not sure what to make of Jarrad's leap. There are times when he takes some big grabs yet at other times he seems to struggle for leap. I just haven't been able to identify a pattern. Perhaps in certain body on body situations he waits a bit long to jump and finds the opponent(s) has already taken his vertical pathway, or something like that (?), or the cause may even just be injury at the time.

- Very skinny but looks to have a frame that will fill out OK. His game is such that it is not vital to add more than about 7kg. (Would be desirable though).

- Endurance query at the moment. Died in the bum late in various games this year and somewhat below average beep would either support this (no cause for long-term concern) or suggest he doesn't push himself out fully at this stage..

*INTENSITY, ETHIC:
(see above)

- Intensity is generally good except that he often seems unaccountable to his own opponent.. That bothers me in itself but O-N is no less accountable than many/most other similar-role contenders for 1st or 2nd (or even 3rd) round picks this year.

- For his "flashy" type, his "at the scene" intensity is surprisingly quite consistently good - Attack on ball, attack on man, ratio of 50/50 contests won, genuine desperation (including smothers etc).

- Tackling effectiveness needs improvement.

*CONSISTENCY:

- Not that consistent statistically. He had at least one 30+ disposals game this year and a couple high 20s but he is usually around the low-mid teens.

- I would say his effort level is pretty consistent. He is though, one of those players who, when hot, can be very hot. He can have a quiet quarter but then have (say) 15 minutes where he is on-fire.

*AFL VERSATILITY:
(see above)

- Outside mid ("wing") suits ideally but there are other roles at AFL where he could inflict serious damage.

- If he can adopt a more accountable mentality, he could be dynamite running off/through half-back. (That is the role I would like ti see him strat out in).

- He also shows some talent inside traffic so perhaps an onball role down the track (but he is a long way off that, endurance-wise).

- There is probably no reason why he couldn't handle AFL HFF or FP. However, I prefer him in a role in which he can see the play unfold essentially in his flight path and exploit his superior pace, especially direct, so that his main value is as a regularly 80-90m play-breaker.

*CSI (COMPARATIVE SCOPE for IMPROVEMENT):

- Probably normal.

*QUERY:

- Endurance.

*SOME STATS:

- '05 WAFL Colts:
Avg approx 17disposals (incl 3 marks) in his 15 Colts games. Also played 2 Seniors games.

- Stats summary '05 U18 Champs:
Averaged 7 disposals and 2.3 marks in his 3 games. (Best TD 12).
Kicks per 20 disp: 15.
Kicks long vs short: 3-9 (3 long per 10 kicks).
Ineffective kicks: 4/17 (2.4 per 10 kicks), incl 2 clangers (1.2 per 10 kicks).
Ineffective handballs: 3/5 (6.0 per 10 handballs), incl 1 clangers (2.0 per 10 handballs).
Ineffective disposals: 7/22 (6.4 per 20 disp), incl 3 clangers (2.7 per 20 disp).
HandBall Receives: 2/22 (2 per 20 disp).
Hardball gets: 2/22 (2 per 20 disp).
S.P. clearances: 2/22 (2 per 20 disp), incl 0 BU (0 per 20 disp), incl 2 CBC (2 per 20 disp).
Tackles: 4 (Avg 1.3 per game).
Marks: 7 (6 per 20 disp), incl 2 contested (2.9 per 10 marks).

*OTHER STUFF:

- Added to '05 U18 trial squad. DOB orig listed as 2/9/88 but should be 9/2/88.

[Wayne's-World]

Author: Colin Wisbey
Author Host/IP: c211-28-121-197.eburwd3.vic.optusnet.com.au / 211.28.121.197
Subject: Profile: Nathan Jones

Nathan Jones (Dandenong Stingrays)

179/85 bottom-age right foot (dual-sided) "ruck-rover" onballer.

*STYLE LIKE: Moloney/Chapman?

*MY RANKING (not meant to reflect appropriate draft pick to use): 6

*PROBABILITY OF AFL CAREER: Likely. Ready year 1.

- Within an AFL team list, could prove capable of SUSTAINING a ranking of 5-15.

*HURT FACTORS (Offensive/Defensive/Negative): M-H / M / LM

*TRADEMARK:

- Wrest the ball at traffic, or run hard to present and receive on the run, then a direct kick for depth ... then keep running ... and running.

*SUMMARY ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATION:

- "When only a ute will do. Clean. Low km. Extra bull-bar. Current RWC ".

- Indestructible, indefatigable self-made tank who runs hard all day, never gives up, is very clean, and drives the ball forward relentlessly. Ultra-consistent, running, inside ball magnet with great work rate. Routinely runs hard and smart to get, to link and to apply pressure. Hits the contest hard and with purpose and efficiency. What you are buying is not just a hard working genuine footballer with physical presence but an impact player - impacts for 4 quarters each and every week like clockwork. And a quality kid with leadership potential.

- On face value this year, he would seem to be a typical early developer ("man among boys"). The common disclaimer often made about Jones is that he would not have the same scope for development as most peers. That is too simplistic. I agree he is now physically strong and powerfully built. However he is not your traditional early developer i.e. the kid who is a big tank in grade 6 and who sees his ex 12yo peers go past him just a few years later. He is still bottom age and he is the build he is today because he has worked his bum of over the past year or so to get that way. As a 16yo in '04 he still had a nice frame but was only 74kg. To be able to bulk up so much within about a year yet still be able to maintain such a great engine is full credit to his off-field ethic. His current build should be seen as testament to his ongoing commitment and his relentless drive to improve. He should not be misrepresented as a stereotypical early developer.

- I ranked him at 6 but he is not a typical genuine #6 draft pick in that he is not X-factor, is not a reliably quality finisher and is only 179cm and not super quick or with huge untapped upside. It isn't that I thought he was the obvious candidate for rank 6 but that I couldn't find strong enough arguments to put others ahead of him. Essentially my rankings this year are a top 3 group of virtual equals, then a big gap. Mitch Clark at #4 because he could be anything if (!!) he gets it together, then Oakley-Nicholls because he will definitely make AFL and is super quick with great skills and exciting upside. After that, I could throw a blanket over the next 10. All have either shallow/sketchy CV's or are missing a key ingredient or two, or are "what you see is what you get" solid AFL investments albeit maybe not with "special" untapped silk. Jones fits into the last category. I put him at 6 but he could equally have been at almost 15 or in between. So it is with the others in that bracket.

Don't get me wrong. I really do find a lot to like about Jones and I believe he will be an AFL long-termer. It's just that I am not completely comfortable with having someone of his type at No.6 ranking. What swayed me towards putting Jones at the head of that queue?

1. The others. At least 3 of my 4-15 rankings are there almost purely on perceived upside. Clark, Ryder and, Varcoe have hardly (if at all) played an outstanding game (as compared to good quarters), at least since U16 Champs (2 year ago in Clark's case). I have Hurn at nominal #1 based on an expectation that he has much more to offer on the big stage than he has shown in most of his full games in the last two years. I put Clark in my top 4 but he, Ryder, Varcoe and Hughes all have intensity questions to one degree or another. I didn't want to have rankings 4-8 comprised of intensity-query kids. Somewhat against the odds, I really like Bailey and, completely against all the odds, I really like Arrmfield too but both are unheralded newcomers to the system without the 2-3 year track records of many others so I acknowledge they, especially Armfield, are already way earlier in my rankings than their reputations would indicate. Ditto Mills, a late starter footy-wise although I know he will walk over hot coals and he has proven he will make huge personal sacrifices to lifestyle to reach as high as he can. Murphy will be a good player but I see more of Cousins in his style than in his upside. (Predator rather than First Dibs, quick but not lightning, handy kick but not penetrating). Jones will get his own ball, bust packs and run hard all day to compete, link and provide physical presence. I really admire Kennedy in this regard but IMHO the main thing he brings to the draft table is a physical "what you see is what you get" safe dependability, rather than exciting upside. That gets back to Jones who, although much smaller, will get much more ball and probably cause more damage more often. Hence Jones didn't so much push himself in front of the others but more the others slipped behind him. If this was the 2001 draft, Jones would be nothing like as early in my rankings. Then again, nor would the others who sit under my 6-15 blanket.

2. Great work ethic, on and off-field. You know he will get the most out of himself and give the most of himself, whatever it takes. You also know that he will be flying the flag when all around him are flailing. Intelligent kid who will be a coach's dream. I compared his style to Moloney/Chapman as that's a good guide to how he operates at a particular play and the power he exudes. However, build and power aside, a better comparison re how he works around the ground (and off-field too, incidentally) would be Paul Licuria. Praise doesn't come much higher than that.

3. He is inside, usually First Dibs. Most of the other onball/midfield types are more Predator and, in some cases, very outside and, in some of those cases, not even ball-carriers. At least Jones will make the play, break the play open, and straighten his team up. And make some opponents think twice.

4. He has a proven motor and proven ability to accommodate physical pressure. And he exploits both to the max.

5. He is physically plug 'n play and, even footy-wise, I expect him to appear on an AFL field fairly by mid '06.

6. He is ultra consistent. Statistically, his quietest game all year, including U18 Champs, was 20 disposals. Averaged 29 in TAC and 23 in U18 Champs. But his consistency benefit goes way beyond stats.

7. He is a ball magnet. At least 28 disposals in 7 of his 11 TAC games. Importantly, the manner in which he gets his possessions at U18 level will work for him at AFL level as well. That can't necessarily be said of outside types, especially in this era of scrumby, no matter how skilled the player might be.

8. He has a good mix of getting his own ball and linking well with hard running and ball-carrying that can fragment the opposition zoning. 3.0 hardball gets per 20 disposals and 10 per 20d handball receives (often a good indicator of linking work-rate) at U18 Champs. I don't have a TAC breakdown but, from observation, I'd guess at about 5/20 HBG and about 8/20 handball receives.

9. He doesn't get his kicking accuracy, and corresponding hurt factor, routinely right at this stage but his hurt factor is arguably no, or not much, less than most of the other midfield/mid-size contenders for an early spot (Swallow, Dale Thomas, Pfeiffer, and even Murphy). Jones doesn't get enough kicks quite right at this stage but those that he does have a high hurt factor. He's regularly a 60-70m player. Ellis has a much higher hurt factor with his kicks but first has to show he can get plenty of ball at AFL level and stop opponents doing the same. Jones works both ways (if not to his direct opponent, at least to the nearest opponents) and will get at least as much of the ball. Higgins, only 6 weeks younger than Jones, is arguably a better user by hand than Jones but arguably not significantly more accurate by foot and he is arguably less First Dibs, his best disposals are quick feeds, he doesn't carry the ball, gets less of it (although still healthy) and has a much bigger difference between best and worst games.

- Were Swallow a reliable kick, he would be vying for an earlier ranking. In the '05 U18 Champs, Swallow, Jones, Murphy and Higgins (who only played one game) all averaged about 20 disposals per game. Swallow's hardball gets were at an impressive rate of 6 per 20 disposals, as were Higgins'. Murphy was only 1 per 20 disposals. Jones was in between at 3 per 20.

- Although Jones needs to hit more targets and is not genuinely quick, he has a lot of running power in his legs, a huge heart, huge motor, great ethic and leadership potential. I'm a fan of the way he conducts himself on and off field, although I do acknowledge his shortcomings. I'm comfortable with his pace. My only main query is him lifting the reliability and efficiency of his disposal a bit to extract maximum return from his very high possession rate. (See below)

*DISPOSAL:

- Nathan is not (yet, at least) an accurate enough kick but official stats might exaggerate his underlying inaccuracy somewhat as many of his kicks are the result of wresting the ball from a contested situation. He runs hard to link as well and it is mainly the return on those kicks that lets him down a bit too often. He is not a poor kick skill-wise. He just needs to better target a higher percentage of his kicks.

- Dual-sided. Good power, depth.

- What he MUST change is his kicking mix/predictability. At this stage, virtually all Jones' kicks are for depth. He does bring the runners into the game with his handballs but he needs to extend that policy by looking for the short option by foot more often instead of predictably kicking long and direct. He should also look to feed off more often when his only downfield options will be to a contest. His predictability makes it too easy for AFL coaches to work him out.

- Feeds are generally good. He is not in the "special" category by hand but is regularly at least good. Some of his individual feeds are actually special though.

*DECISION-MAKING, SMARTS:
(see above)

- Accept for not mixing his kicks up more (see above), Jones' decision-making and vision are good. Not routinely excellent, but usually good and sometimes excellent.

- Reads both play and ball very well.

- Runs to the right spots at the right time - either to attack the ball or to present as a linking option or to apply defensive pressure.

- Very good evasion, including sharp side-step under pressure. Very good traffic management.

*HANDS:

- Is routinely very clean, all levels, even under the greatest of pressure. You don't normally expect an U18 kid with his build to be as routinely clean at ground level on the run as Jones is. He might physically look like a "bull at a gate" tank but he has good touch.

*OVERHEAD MARKING:

- Not a big feature of his game but he holds his share and makes a contest even when he doesn't. Probably has a smallish reach disadvantage.

*ATHLETICISM:
(see above)

- Despite being powerfully built, he has outstanding endurance.

- Pace is OK but not flash. I suspect Jones may be naturally slowish. Perhaps that's how God designed him - "You can be a go-anywhere ute or a suburban sports car but not both". Jones recorded a 3.05sec 20m at DC - a time a bit below average for his height. However his 5m type was in the "good" category for his height. He can and does play at his DC speed in a game (unlike some other kids at each year's DC). It is to Jones' great credit that, despite bulking up heaps in the last year, he has lifted his 20m time very significantly since the '05 pre-season. 20m times aren't everything anyway. There will be many times when Jones gets to the pill before a quicker player because
(a) he will WANT it more and have greater passion to push himself at getting it, regardless of physical risk
(b) he will often already be on the run whereas sometimes a more outside and/or less intense player will wait before deciding whether to go for it.

There will be the odd time when Jones can't quite match it with a speedster on a long run but overall I don't share any of the concern that some people have over a perceived Jones' pace vulnerability.

- Excellent reflexes.

- Recovery agility is not always flash but no concern.

- Some DC results were a little below capability but he had a bit of a wog at the time.

*INTENSITY, ETHIC:

- Has most of the 1%ers covered.

- One query is "Does he lay enough tackles?". Officially a total of only 4 tackles in his 3 U18 Champs games and, of his 11 TAC games this year, credited with fewer than 2 tackles in 4 of them. On face value that might sound like a concern for AFL but I have no doubts he will address that if necessary. Credited with 5 or more tackles in 3 of his last 5 games. I am not unduly concerned by his statistical tackle frequency because orthodox tackles are just one part of his defensive kit. Firstly, he doesn't willingly allow opponents to get first hands on the ball. Secondly, he immediately applies full physically-aggressive pressure on an opponent who has just got the ball or is going for it. No stats ever get published for that but sometimes pressuring an opponent so he doesn't get the ball makes the need for a tackle redundant. Baker, Michael, Whelan, Jason Cloke, Riccuito, etc are good at that but without it showing up as a published stat.

- Courageous.

- Shows good on-field leadership. eg Good verbal directions to team mates warning them of pressure etc.

*CONSISTENCY:

- Ultra consistent. His quietest games are still good games. Never less than 20 disposals in a TAC or Champs game this year. BOG votes in 4 of his 11 TAC games and maximum Coach's Award votes in another game.

*AFL VERSATILITY:

- He is not perfect for any one role but at least very AFL-capable in 2 or 3.

- Down the track, he might be best in a run-with role (Great motor, physical presence, etc).

- He is not a silky inside midfielder but he will still get plenty of the ball in traffic as an inside onballer and he is clean, has good vision and very good traffic management. Excellent ability to get the contested ball under great pressure.

- Only 179cm and hasn't played a lot in defence but an attacking HBF is another possibility.

- Not genuinely quick or special overhead but his motor and work-rate would lend themselves to a "wing" role on the right opponent.

*CSI (COMPARATIVE SCOPE for IMPROVEMENT):

- Normal.

*QUERY:

- Kicking accuracy.

*SOME STATS:

- Stats summary '05 TAC:
Averaged 29 disposals in 11 TAC games (ranking No.1 in comp). 3.1 marks. 2.6 tackles. Total goals 5-4 . 13 kicks per 20 disposals. 2 marks per 20 possessions.
- Mid-way trend .. % change in disposals was -5%. % change in marks was -6%. % change in tackles was + 37%.
At least 20 disposals in every game. At least 28 disposals in 7 of his 11 games.

- Stats summary '04 TAC:
Averaged 12 disposals in 4 TAC games. 1.3 marks. 2.5 tackles. Total goals 1-0 . 13 kicks per 20 disposals. 2marks per 20 possessions.

- Stats summary '05 U18 Champs:
Averaged 23 disposals and 1.7 marks in his 3 games. (Best TD 27).
Kicks per 20 disp: 15.
Kicks long vs short: 34-4 (9 long per 10 kicks).
Ineffective kicks: 13/51 (2.5 per 10 kicks), incl 6 clangers (1.2 per 10 kicks).
Ineffective handballs: 4/17 (2.4 per 10 handballs), incl 2 clangers (1.2 per 10 handballs).
Ineffective disposals: 17/68 (5.0 per 20 disp), incl 8 clangers (2.4 per 20 disp).
HandBall Receives: 33/68 (10 per 20 disp).
Hardball gets: 10/68 (3 per 20 disp).
S.P. clearances: 10/68 (3 per 20 disp), incl 2 BU (1 per 20 disp), incl 4 CBC (1 per 20 disp).
Tackles: 4 (Avg 1.3 per game).
Marks: 5 (1 per 20 disp), incl 0 contested (0.0 per 10 marks).

*OTHER STUFF:

- All Aust TY.
- TAC Team Of Year TY: C.
- Missed a month July '05 after breaking a finger in game 3 of U18 Champs.

[Wayne's-World]

Author: Colin Wisbey
Author Host/IP: c211-28-121-197.eburwd3.vic.optusnet.com.au / 211.28.121.197
Subject: Profile: Scott Pendlebury

Scott Pendlebury (Gippsland Power)

190/81 bottom-age left foot "wing"/flanker

*STYLE LIKE: W Campbell

*MY RANKING (not meant to reflect appropriate draft pick to use): 36

*PROBABILITY OF AFL CAREER: Possible. Ready year 3.

- Within an AFL team list, could prove capable of SUSTAINING a ranking of 10-20.

*HURT FACTORS (Offensive/Defensive/Negative): M / M / L

*TRADEMARK:

- Somehow or other, effortlessly dance-step his way out of pending trouble as if the others were statues.
- Get/receive then show excellent vision and disposal skills to do a quick feed or chip to a runner to set up play.

*SUMMARY ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATION:

- Virtual footy newby wingman who picked up healthy stats all year and really made me sit up and take notice throughout a couple of games (especially Prelim Final) and at isolated times in almost every game. Nevertheless, "his type" always worries me re ability to adapt to AFL pressure.

Promising kid who knows how to find the footy and is improving virtually game by game. There are times when you can't help but admire the way he goes about his footy in various aspects. On these occasions, he gives 100% in terms of running from play to play and often working hard at/inside the play. There are other times though when he plays as a downhill skier.

Played footy as a very young kid but, due to concentrating on basketball (AIS basketball scholarship), had only played half a season of footy in 4 or 5 years prior to '05. Early in the season it sometimes showed, even though he was finding plenty of the pill but, as the season wore on he, was putting his hand up more and more as an AFL prospect.

What you are buying is

1. A play-creator. Vision, quick hands.
2. Link and run, especially from half-back
3. Very slippery evasion
4. Ability to find the ball
5. Good disposal over a short distance
6. Running work-rate and unselfishness.
7. 190cm (albeit skinny) versatility
8. All-round athleticism.
9. Upside
10. Attractive all-round range of other attributes.

At his best he is team-orientated and tries his heart out in a covering ground sense. Runs himself into the ground but still keeps pushing himself, mainly one way though.

- Given his newby status, it was a good effort to make the VC team in the U18 Champs and pick up 16 and 19 disposals in his 2 games. Furthermore, his TAC stats for a newby were very impressive. It's worth analysing his stats as they tell a lot about where he is now and what he has changed since mid-year:-
---------------------------
1. Averaged 23 disposals and, impressively, his quietest game was 17d. (He had 11d is R 5 but injured himself almost right on the ½ time siren and didn't reappear).He reads the play well, mainly from not forward of the centre line, and generally runs to the right spots but the underlying basis for that high possession rate is his running work rate. He uses every opportunity to run to present a linking option and often also to get to at least the edge of a contest, and he is often involving himself more intimately when at the contest now than earlier.

2. Averaged 4.8 tackles. Gippsland tackle stats are traditionally very generous but, even allowing for that, his tackle rate as observed in his games is now impressive, not just because of the number but especially due to the underlying cause of his tackle numbers. The real message from his tackle count is that it testifies to his current mentality of "accountability to any opponent in the nearby area or even further". The most meaningful stat re his tackles is that the tackle rate per game literally doubled in the 2nd half of the season. That is a good indication of his improvement in applying pressure and being less free-wheeling. He is still basically a freewheeler but now often doesn't let an opposition player get away with an unhurried disposal if there is the slightest opportunity for Pendlebury to pressure him. (At this stage he is actually not routinely a particularly good tackler though, mainly due to current lack of strength).

3. He maintained his possession rate right through the season. A fair few kids, especially those who play in the U18 Champs (and that involves trial games and other demands) and especially country kids, tend to wear out later in the season.

4. He had a very healthy balance of kicks to feeds. His average rate was 12 kicks per 20 disposals and he was around that mark in every game, including U18 Champs.
----------------------

He is definitely skilled and he is actually quite classy in terms of his traffic management and quick feeds from traffic.

I hate assessing his type and I always rank them conservatively. By "his type", I mean the type who (speaking generally):-

1. freewheel (perhaps around half-back / midfield), hanging back from traffic, devoid of much concept of accountability, intensity or urgency

2. don't routinely commit their body when an opponent comes from the opposite direction

3. try to delicately "pluck" the ball at a contest, instead of overtly displaying a passion to own it

4 spectate, or just saunter from one play to another and participate or observe depending how and when it suits them.

5. chase or not, depending on mood.

6. do a lot of "nothing" disposals, albeit accurate (eg 20m dinky chips under no pressure into the corridor)

Actually, no, I find it easy to assess guys who always play that way. I'm very hard on them and history suggests that even the very highly touted ones of that ilk have a disappointing AFL record in terms of living up to the U18 hype (eg S Power, Pettifer, Fiora represent the ones who have actually survived).

The ones who make it really hard for me are kids who usually display all/most of 1-6 (above) but break the pattern just often enough to make you wonder if generic labelling is appropriate in their case.

I especially hate otherwise apparently low-intensity kids who, every so often, fluke a special kick or goal or contested mark or steal or evasion or something that in isolation suggests "AFL". eg a lucky rushed blind feed under pressure out of traffic into space that flukily lands in the arms of an unsighted team mate. You notice how tinny some of those kids are because they fluke that type of thing surprisingly often. So it is with Pendlebury, as it is with Xavier Ellis. Another kid will rush a little kick out of traffic or do a huge blind handball to somewhere out of their line of vision and it will be end up in turnover city. Yet when Pendlebury and Ellis do that sort of blind disposal, by sheer fluke a team-mate usually just happens to be in the right area at the right time to run onto it and set up play downfield. When Pendlebury and Ellis do those sheer flukes maybe 10 times in a game, it is hard to ignore the possibility that they could fluke similar success rates at AFL level, even though you otherwise reckon they too often play too cheap and that their lack of urgency and intensity around the ground is exploitable at AFL level.

In the end, I struggled to come up with a satisfactory ranking for Pendlebury. as I did with Xavier Ellis. In most respects, I see Pendlebury as the home-brand Ellis.

Had he played "all game, every game" with the low level of intensity and ethic he often displayed this year, he probably wouldn't be in my rankings at all. On the other hand, had he played "most of the game, most games" with the impressive intensity he displayed on a smaller number of other occasions (eg during the Knights final), he would be in my top 15.

He gradually won me over and by season-end I was becoming a fan (or as much I can be of "his type"). He kept rising through my rankings and got to 20 just prior to the TAC GF because it seemed he was on the verge of becoming more routinely intense and with higher defensive work-rate. In that regard, his GF made me question that again so he slipped back (despite again being lucky enough on the day to get away with about 8 fluky things).

He is a newby who was getting his footy together as a total package better and better as he gained more experience. At the very least, he has indicated elite (AFL) quality of skill and vision on very many occasions this year.

Is the ethic he showed in the Prelim Final that which he is going to take into AFL, or is he basically a free-wheeler who lifted his intensity above normal capability that day?

I am still concerned about his accountability to his own opponent. Pendlebury gets a lot of possessions and sets up play but his direct opponent often does too.

His pace is quite good over distance but not over the first few metres.

He lacks strength, especially in tackling and in keeping his feet body on body.

His disposal efficiency is often excellent / elite over a short distance but can be a bit dodgy over a long distance, especially on the run.

Part of the problem in assessing Scott is trying to work out how far to extrapolate his impressive improvement trend curve and how much to discount my concerns re intensity for AFL.

In the end I ranked him at 36 but I acknowledge that is very conservative. One of my concerns is that, since Pendlebury's play creation is arguably his biggest asset, if he becomes more accountable, what effect will that have on the value of his best asset?

I suspect he will go about early 2nd round, maybe latish 1st round. I would definitely draft him with the right number. If the club strongly needed a player of his type, I would be prepared to pay early 2nd round but no earlier. That said, if he continues his improvement trend line, he could easily play 100+ games.

Here's how I described him in my mid-year summary:-
------------------------------
"Unaccountable wingman who gets a lot of the pill but mainly floating around half-back, mainly in space, and disposing well by hand and mainly with little centring chip kicks by foot. Reads the play well. Predator rather than First Dibs. When at traffic, routinely hangs around just outside the edge waiting for someone else to get the pill and get it out to him. Is adept at quick gives and chips when under even a bit of pressure. They are generally effective (sometimes very effective), including when he finds himself actually inside traffic. Lacks strength. Tackles don't stick quite enough. He is somewhat rag-dollish when tackled himself. Covers a fair bit of ground but mainly into space or to the edge of traffic and mainly between half-back (especially) and midfield. Pays his own opponent little/no respect. He might get a lot of ball in the back half but his opponents seem to get a lot of their own ball around wing because they let Pendlebury do his thing on the Gippsland backline and don't worry about him except when he ventures back towards midfield. Is a basketballer new to footy and plays that way (zoning off etc), although his hands and skills are quite good. Highly skilled and sharp so keep watching but he'll need to lift his hardness at man and ball a lot. Query".
--------------------------------

He is still largely unaccountable to his own opponent and he still plays somewhat loose man rather than as a genuine midfielder but his intensity in at least a couple of games has been quite good and his general improvement in smarts and even the small things has been good.

*DISPOSAL:
(see above)

- Disposal is routinely reliable over a short distance - hand or foot.

- The majority of his kicks tend to be short/shortish linking chips. The chips are usually accurate but quite a few don't have much hurt factor, little more than a handball. A good percentage though are very effective.

- His kicking over a short course is generally very accurate and occasionally very clever / creative.

When he goes for length, he gets nice depth, often with quite a good hurt factor. When on the run and kicking for length, accuracy is a mixed bag.

- Disposal by hand is accurate and often with good hurt factor, even under great pressure. Very quick. slick hands.

*DECISION-MAKING, SMARTS:
(see above)

- Usually seems very unphased. Either
1. you have it and he us going to try to strip you or give you a Buddhist's version of a hard time, or
2. he has it and is coolly arrogant as he does his basketball moves confident he will get away from you, or
3. he has it and you have him, in which case he will often calmly embrace surrender
4. the ball is in space, in which case he will run for it be probably coolly sit back and see what transpires.

- Generally good decision-making, although he has his moments of not so good. For someone who had hardly played footy for the previous 5 years, his smarts are quite impressive. Understandably, he does the odd non footy-smart thing (eg trying to do too much) but no real concern at this early stage and he will obviously improve even further as he gets more games under his belt.

- Very good evasion and traffic management. Has times when you can see he is going to get nailed but at the last moment he somehow slips the would-be tackle - the Teflon Kid (nothing seems to stick).

- Is too often easily wrong-footed. I'm not too concerned as, with experience, he'll pick up a better anticipation of what an opponent might try and how to be ready for it.

- Excellent vision. Creative. Good at setting up entries into the forward line.

- Awareness not great however. Sometimes gets run down from behind and/or stripped - too slow to dispose / poor awareness / trying to do too much / lack of desperation. (Most likely a combination but lack of desperation/urgency/willpower would be in there somewhere).

- Very good decision-making at and inside traffic. Thinks quickly, flicks out the quick feed or chip kick accurately and showing good vision. Very good at roving the spill, especially at the edge of traffic.

- In his typical role as a wing who plays mainly across half-back, he reads the play well and positions himself well. When he has spent time as a forward he has looked a bit lost.

*HANDS:

- Usually clean

*OVERHEAD MARKING:

- Averages an impressive 5.1 marks per game. The greater majority of his marks are uncontested marks linking up through space. Nevertheless he is competitive in 50/50 marking contests.

Does struggle to hold his ground on occasions and his hands are not routinely clean but overall he is fairly good overhead.

- I suspect he has a bit of a reach disadvantage.

*ATHLETICISM:
(see above)

- Pace is quite good once he has built up momentum after about 10m but acceleration off the mark and over the first 10 is not flash. Sometimes loses running form in a chase. Running technique could be improved - especially floppy, lateral arm action costs him drive and, like his brother before him, a tendency to overstride yet lean a bit too much also. He is one of those guys who appears to be quicker and with truer running technique when carrying the ball than when chasing. He should have some speed improvement in him through adding leg strength and refining his technique. Did 3.01sec for 20m at DC which puts in within the top 30 percentile for his height. I suspect that flattered him a little. .

- Very good agility. Very slippery in close (part physical agility, part mental agility)

- Very good endurance. And he now puts it to the test a fair bit game.

- I have a concern re his natural balance. He can be a bit "rag doll"ish at times

- Lacks strength. Struggles body-on-body at times, too many of his tackles don't quite stick, and he struggles at times to keep his feet when tackled. Is bottom-age and not super skinny but has narrow shoulders and I'm not convinced is likely to furnish into a particularly strong build.

*INTENSITY, ETHIC:
(see above)

- Excellent running ethic in a couple of his later games. Ran and ran and ran. Runs far and often. Most importantly, is starting to runs both ways more. Team ethic. Had many of the 1%ers covered in his later games. Glove spoils, blocks, etc


- Now sometimes takes it upon himself to be very accountable to any opponent within chasing distance and chases hard. Not a routine event though.

- Now gets the hard ball as well at the spill or link-in-space / outside-traffic ball.

- When cornered, he is more slippery eel than caged tiger.

*CONSISTENCY:

- Highly consistent, as evidenced by his stats (see above). Even during the first part when I was not that impressed AFL-wise, he never played a genuinely quiet game.

*AFL VERSATILITY:

- He seems to read the play much better from the back half than when he has been tried in the forward line and doesn't appear to be a natural forward, at least at this early stage.

- Is good inside traffic but not physically strong so wing would suit ideally. HBF suits his ability to create run or set up play into the forward 50 but he needs to be accountable.

- A very quick opponent bothers him.

*CSI (COMPARATIVE SCOPE for IMPROVEMENT):

- High, given his lacks of footy for almost 5 years prior to '05.

*QUERY:

- Accountability
- Physical intensity
- Urgency
- Awareness

*SOME STATS:

- Stats summary '05 TAC:
Averaged 23 disposals in 19 TAC games (ranking No.27 in comp). 5.1 marks (ranking No.29 in comp). 4.8 tackles (ranking No.18 in comp). Total goals 11-11. 12 kicks per 20 disposals. 5 marks per 20 possessions.
- Mid-way trend .. % change in disposals was + 1%. % change in marks was -15%. % change in tackles was + 93%.
At least 20 disposals in 14 games. At least 30 on 2 games.

- Stats summary '05 U18 Champs:
Averaged 18 disposals and 2.5 marks in his 2 games. (Best TD 19).
Kicks per 20 disp: 11.
Kicks long vs short: 5-9 (4 long per 10 kicks).
Ineffective kicks: 5/20 (2.5 per 10 kicks), incl 0 clangers (0.0 per 10 kicks).
Ineffective handballs: 4/15 (2.7 per 10 handballs), incl 1 clangers (0.7 per 10 handballs).
Ineffective disposals: 9/35 (5.1 per 20 disp), incl 1 clangers (0.6 per 20 disp).
HandBall Receives: 13/35 (7 per 20 disp).
Hardball gets: 5/35 (3 per 20 disp).
S.P. clearances: 4/35 (2 per 20 disp), incl 3 BU (2 per 20 disp), incl 0 CBC (0 per 20 disp).
Tackles: 4 (Avg 2.0 per game).
Marks: 5 (3 per 20 disp), incl 0 contested (0.0 per 10 marks).

*OTHER STUFF:

- Prior to '05, was elite underage AIS basketballer - Aust U19 rep as 15yo. Only played 1/2 season of footy in 5 years prior to '05.

[Wayne's-World]

Author: Colin Wisbey
Author Host/IP: c211-28-121-197.eburwd3.vic.optusnet.com.au / 211.28.121.197
Subject: Profile: Beau Muston (Written before latest setback)

Beau Muston (Murray Bushrangers)

189/79 top-age right foot (dual-sided) wing/utility.

*STYLE LIKE: Jarred Brennan

*MY RANKING (not meant to reflect appropriate draft pick to use): 3

*PROBABILITY OF AFL CAREER: Definite. Ready Year 1.

- Within an AFL team list, could prove capable of SUSTAINING a ranking of 1-10.

*HURT FACTORS (Offensive/Defensive/Negative): H / H / M

*TRADEMARK:

- Come from nowhere to vacuum the ball at pace without breaking stride.
- Come from nowhere to take a fearless screamer that he wasn't even entitled to get hands to.

*SUMMARY ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATION:

- A more prolific Jarred Brennan with even bigger "X" and hurt factors. Worth #1.

- A 90m player. A ball-carrying sizzling dasher. A jack-in-the-box. Dual-sided and has no trouble kicking 60m. Quick and clean. Gets his own ball. Not allergic to the corridor.

X-factor with a capital "X". Huge upside. Athletically, a cat trapped in a human's body. A bit skinny and not very footy smart but has a great combination of physical and skill attributes, together with ethic and courage.

For anyone who can picture a fully-fit Jarred Brennan in full flight, much of this profile will be superfluous.

- Expect the unexpected and fasten your seatbelts. Does Muston follow the textbook? He doesn't even know there is a textbook. He's a "make it up as you go along" guy, as Gary Ablett (Sen) was. At a game, don't briefly look away - you might miss the most spectacular mark or goal or breathtaking dash of the season. Or all three at once. Now I think about it, you can look away. He'll repeat the performance for latecomers before long anyway.

- Some players rely on footy smarts. Some don't have much of that but rely on instinct. Gary Ablett Sen may have been, like Muston, a "make it up as you go along" freak but he had both sharp footy smarts and sharp instinct. Beau is instinctive rather than footy smart. He does some very clever things, often left-field clever, but he's not naturally a player who consciously thinks things through tactically. Most good players have an inbuilt decision-making process that factors in the probability of success. Beau has no concept of risk, let alone the repercussions. He's a kelpi. "There's the ball, let's get it. There's someone with the ball, lets scoot after him." That sounds disparaging but it also happens to be his appeal. While other players are considering whether to stay or go, Beau's already swooped. You let the kelpi off his lead at the start of the game and watch him scoot around the park for a couple of hours. Doesn't yet understand your commands so don't expect him to "sit", "stay", etc like your other dogs. If you want to train him to conform to accepted park behaviour, perhaps obedience school offers a discount for 100 sessions. (Not that he is not keen to learn).

Beau is not a natural. Wasn't much of a footballer until it just seemed to "click" a few years ago. Cinderalla.

- Part of his appeal is that he does so many spectacular things on the charge. Once he decides to go, he virtually only has one gear and that's top gear. That's not a good thing in some circumstances however. There are indeed times when he needs to steady and play the percentages. When he should and doesn't, it can cost you. On the other hand, he'll turn a game in just a few minutes. His damage to the opposition will greatly outweigh any damage to his own team from his mistakes.

- Once I had done my assessments I had no hesitation in ranking him at in my top 3 (subject to medical clearance). Whether they are footy smart or not, currently injured or not, I reckon you shouldn't let the Beau Mustons and Jarred Brennans slip beyond the first few draft selections. Were Beau more footy smart he would have been my clear top pick. Even so, my top 3 (Hurn, McEntee and Muston) are really equal #1. Beau finished up with the #3 because I used the presumably slight query about risk of athleticism loss after knee reco to separate the 3 kids. Whatever pick a club could get him for, including #1, would be a pick well spent.

I've seen many players more than 20 times. Muston has only played 8 games in the system. I've seen 7 of those but I could have written the same profile even had I seen only two of his games. Any two, so routinely prolific and exciting is he.

- Despite my concerns re footy smarts (et al), any U18 kid, especially a country kid in his first TAC season and recovering from glandular fever, who can average 25d (incl 31d twice in 7 games and a quietest of 19d), over 6 marks, over 4 tackles, and almost 2g per game, must still be doing a helluva lot right. And his possession count would be even higher if he knew how to demand the ball (which he will learn quickly enough at AFL).

- He is by no means the complete player and he is not (in the true sense) footy smart. However, he is freakish, and so "routinely" freakish that he is not only definite AFL but a definite match-winner. Don't think you won't have your head in your hands at times though.

*DISPOSAL:

- Excellent kicking depth when under no pressure. Regularly capable of 60m+.

- Muston is certainly not a foolproof kick, or even close, and he is definitely no stranger to turnovers on the run (even under no pressure) but his good kicks are dynamite and there are plenty of them. With Muston's kicking, reliability is not his big selling point - it's the exceptionally high hurt factor from the many kicks he gets right.

At his best when not on the run, he breaks most of the rules but is testimony to the depth you can get if you observe what I consider to be the 2 of the main requirements (Andrew Swallow: take note):-
(1) get as much support as possible from your plant leg as your COM (centre of mass) is passing across the plant foot, and
(2) have yours arms so that, after release, they move in virtual unison to maintain your lateral and vertical balance so you stay as square on as possible.

While still on the positive side of the ledger with Muston, he has about the highest follow-through you'll ever see and he does some other things right too. On the non textbook side, he has a very early, loose release and he just hangs his arms up to dry as if he is doing a half-hearted Mexican wave. Even then, while neither arm does much work after that, they move in unison. That gives him the extra balance. None of this violently hurling the left arm back a mile then swooshing it across the body on its return.

While his arm action looks odd and is not necessarily the way I would ideally like it, I have no problem with it. It may not work for another player but it works well for him, doesn't seem to cost him any benefit, and achieves what arm movement is supposed to achieve. His early, loose release might make him vulnerable at AFL level, especially in close, and it would be good to address that but it's not a priority issue..

I wouldn't be rushing to change too much in the kicking style of a kid who can regularly kick 60m and dob goals from any angle, any distance.

- There are two main kicking scenarios in which Muston too frequently lets himself down:-
1. Under no pressure, even from a set kick, spotting a clear target at 45-90 degree. In those situations he has the time to square his body up before kicking so that he can kick "body over ball" but he too often doesn't, instead kicking with his torso unnecessarily side-on to the target. Inaccuracy rate in these situations is unnecessarily high.

2. On the run at pace, he sometimes doesn't steady and throws the entire textbook out the window. The result is sometimes a "very hunched, bang the ball onto the boot, rushed kick" sort of action that can result in a mongrel wobbler with limited depth and accuracy. I noticed this much less in his later games than his early ones so perhaps he has already been addressing this (?).

- Around goals, he is not bullet-proof but is reliable and regularly "special". Incredible goal sense. eg in one game this year he not only kicked a monster 60m goal on the run but also a snap from the 50m line on the right hand boundary (he's a right footer) under great pressure. I must emphasise that. Not a "mere" 50m running goal but an accurate snap from 50m on the boundary (!). In another game he snapped (yes, snapped again) one from the 50m line dead in front .... but this time on non-preferred left foot. Footy doesn't get much better than that.

Kicked goals in all but one of his 7 TAC games, including bags of 4 and 3, despite spending a lot of time as a midfielder.

- Most of his feeds lack power. I saw him do a ripper in one game but generally his handball action involves very little involvement from the punching hand. Main problem is weak connect. Also occasionally holds the pill at an inappropriate angle somewhat vertical. The lack of power, especially for AFL, can result in the recipient being put under unnecessary potential pressure or losing the chance to be off quicker. I don't see it as a strength issue, but more a technique problem (that should be relatively easy to address).

- Handball accuracy is mixed bag.

- Often displays quick hands.

- Good balance between kicks and feeds, although his kicks have a greater relative hurt factor (i.e. not just because kicks go further).

*DECISION-MAKING, SMARTS:
(see above)

- Lack of footy smarts is his Achilles heel.

My general observations are that, among other things,

1. he is not particularly wellattuned to where to position himself around the ground

2. he does not routinely position himself well at stop plays

3. he does not know when and how to demand the ball

4. footy-smart opponents often "catch him out". eg if he is minding someone in defence, he clearly tries to be accountable but while he is watching the play unfold, his opponent sneaks away 20m into space

5. he reads the immediate play well and usually reacts well accordingly but I'm not convinced he anticipates how the play further away might unfold.

6. Under pressure and with no time to think, he often does something instinctively clever, sometimes even freakish. Under some pressure and with just enough time to think it through, he can be inclined to do something fairly dumb, sometimes appearing to panic.

7. He doesn't exercise evasive skills often enough. He is too inclined to simply try to outrun opponents or run around/through them. When cornered, but in a situation where a smart player would try to exercise evasion, he too often tries to just rush a feed or kick. Doesn't seem to have a great concept of creating space / buying time. I've seen him show good evasion on some occasions, perhaps on instinct, but the frequency will have to lift for AFL. He doesn't mind a quick change of direction at pace, and can do it well. The evasion I'm concerned about though is his close-quarter evasion. Not that he is incapable (eg I've seen him show excellent centre-bounce traffic management a couple of times) - I suspect the issue is to exercise evasion more often. i.e. for AFL, he needs to have a stronger "alleviate pressure by first trying to create space" mentality.

I would never hang any player on one mistake but here's a minor specific example (vs Oakleigh). Murphy was awarded a free. (Muston wasn't involved). As Murphy started to walk to take his kick, Muston who was initially adjacent to him, ambled forward of Murphy with his back to Murphy and with his vision upfield in the expectation that Murphy would take the set kick and kick upfield. Murphy, realising that Muston, although only literally a metre away from him, had his back to him, immediately took off around the back of Muston into space in the corridor and spotted up a team-mate leading to the other side of the ground. Muston's action wasn't a hanging offence but it wasn't something you'd expect from a footy smart kid.

On another occasion, Muston was waiting on the edge of congested traffic with the ball locked inside it. Suddenly a team mate wrested the ball and forced his way out to the edge of traffic under pressure. He instinctively went to handball to Muston 2m away but had to check himself at the last moment because Muston was unprepared.

Muston is very inexperienced. We have to allow for that ... and I do. Perhaps he will finish up being very footy smart after he has had more coaching and experience. It's just that I am much more confident about a player improving even certain types of kicking technique flaws (eg) than I am in a player significantly turning around footy smarts. I'm never too concerned long-term if an U18 player doesn't run to the right spots and/or with the right timing. That should be addressable through simulations at training and through the coaches' match reviews of the player (assuming the player has the capacity to learn, which Muston does). However, other types of "footy smarts" problems in a player leave me much less confident in the probability of repair.

I suspect that the reason Beau often "comes from nowhere" to fly for a mark or collect the pill is that, in a fair few of such cases, a more footy-smart player would already be there. (In fairness, there are also heaps of times where his "charge in late" efforts are certainly nothing to do with any initial lack of footy smarts but are simply fantastic examples of electric intensity and dynamic passion to contest).

- Vision is mixed bag but sometimes brilliant.

- Routinely keeps his arms free, or calls on his "Indian rubber man" abilities to get them free.

*HANDS:

- Usually exceptionally clean, all levels. His hands on the run at top pace are routinely special, McLeod-like. He doesn't just scoop the ball up - he is a vacuum cleaner. And all without breaking stride.

- He can be special when the ball seems to be locked in under players too. An uncanny prolific ability to steal the ball, both one-on-one and when all around him are struggling to wrest the ball. When chasing down an opponent who has the pill or virtually has it, Muston gives you double benefit - not only runs them down with excellent closing speed and ultimate pressure but regularly finishes up with clear possession himself, as if the ball is attracted to magnets in his hands.

*OVERHEAD MARKING:

- If he doesn't get nominated for mark of the day within his first few AFL games, I will be amazed. At this stage he is a very good, but not fool-proof, mark in a physical body-on-body contest. However, give him any sort of run at it and he is regularly not only reliable but spectacular. And unlike many other players, that run doesn't have to be from behind. As silly as it sounds, he is just as comfortable charging in from an awkward angle from the side, including across the face of the pack or into the face of it. The pack can be at full stretch yet Muston can still sit on their shoulders and hang suspended.

*ATHLETICISM:

- Huge leap, even from an awkward angle or from a standing start. And I mean huuuuge.

- Pace is lightning (especially once he has momentum). When he runs, you don't see a powerhouse racehorse, you see a gazelle ..... and it will come from nowhere and make most players around him appear pedestrian.

- Excellent recovery agility. Cat-like all-round agility and reflexes. And not just when he is on his feet. Uncanny recovery agility when initially on the ground after a tackle etc to still remain active at the ball and somehow extract it. Has an amazingly flexible body. He seems to have rubber arms, able to stretch and catch the ball or an opponent after it initially appeared to be beyond reach.

- Within the context of someone who often launches himself through mid air, he has very good balance. When knocked off his line, his recovery agility is so sharp that he is not often stopped from still ultimately figuring in the contest.

- Endurance at this stage might be a slight query but not a concern. He runs so hard and covers so much ground from the first bounce onwards that he could be excused for running out of petrol after a while. He did do a poor beep test in March but he hadn't had the conditioning of most of his peers.. He may well still have a hangover from the glandular fever he developed in '04. Some days he seems to have more stamina than others. eg late in the early-May VC vs VC trial he looked stuffed even though it was only a 2-qtr game. On face value he generally appears to have very good endurance (and perhaps he does), I'd question how much at this stage is "comfortable" endurance (motor) and how much is sheer heart and ability to keep pushing himself. Unfortunately for AFL spectators, he will need to lean to ration his energy output to be able to run out AFL games, even when he is fully conditioned.

- Quite skinny but hasn't had much opportunity for physical development to this stage. Might always be more an athletic build than a Carey strongman. (God help his opponents if he ever gets to a Carey strength without losing his current attributes).

*INTENSITY, ETHIC:

- Excellent ethic and intensity, including off-field. Pushes himself to the max. Works hard both ways. Goes for both man and ball with fearless enthusiasm.

- Tick off most of the 1%ers. 2nd, 3rd and 4th efforts a speciality. Chases hard (excellent closing speed a la Aaron Davey). Keen (and usually effective) tackler.

- Gets his own ball.

- Courageous, often completely fearless.

- If there was a medal for routine ability to desperately launch yourself horizontally and somehow manage to do something effective, he would win in a canter.

- Not surprisingly, given his build, doesn't have physical presence at this stage. (Just an observation, not a criticism). Any current lack of strength is counterbalanced by his recovery agility, reflexes and special athletic qualities.

- Nice, unassuming kid, of good character. Keen learner, good listener and low maintenance behaviourally.

*CONSISTENCY:

- Hard to say categorically as he didn't play many games this year. What we have seen suggests he terrific consistency. Even at AFL level, he is rarely likely to be quiet all game. The quietest of his 8 games this year was the VC vs VC trial and he still did some good things in that, including (not surprisingly) mark of the day. In the statistically-quietest of his 7 TAC games, he still managed 19 disposals, 6 marks, 8 tackles and 3 goals. I'd happily take that.

*AFL VERSATILITY:

- He's been on the scene for such a short time (8 games) that it's hard to say for sure. On face value, one might be tempted to say he could play almost anywhere (on the right opponent) even though he is only 189cm.

- He is certainly a natural "wingman".

- He sounds like an ideal run-the-lines HBF, and he may be in time, but in his brief stint in defence this year, he appeared to have difficulty keeping track of his man (although he did show good intent) and often seemed unsure where to run.

- He has a fair way to go in terms of understanding footy tactics and positioning before he could be value, except pinch-hitting, as a genuine AFL inside onballer. That said, he did get a number of terrific CB clearances this year as an inside mid. It's just that he is not as routinely prolific / productive (at the moment) in that situation as various peers. In his favour is that he is prolific, sometimes uncanny, at extracting a ball out of very tight congestion. The key to him becoming an AFL inside may be mainly learning to position himself better at stop plays - both where he positions himself and his posture etc.

- He is so raw and with such a tantalising upside that, with experience and the right development, I wouldn't put any role (except ruck) beyond the realm of possibility down the track. In AFL terms right now (!), with the possible exception of "wing" or HFF, he is a (jumping) Jack of all trades, master of none. Even so, a "master of none" who could

1. potentially kick you 4 goals in a quarter (whether on the FF line or running through midfield or in between
2. take a couple of huge saving marks at the other end
3. continually run the lines at great speed then roost the pill 60m
4. create a 140m turnaround by running down an opponent after a big initial start and then gaining a positive 90m for his team
5. play an active part in clearing the ball from one end yet pop up to kick a goal at the other end during a single sequence of plays as your team moves the ball from one end to the other,

is more of an ace in the pack than just a Jack.

*CSI (COMPARATIVE SCOPE for IMPROVEMENT):

- High, despite being top-age. Played locally (Shepparton United) in '04 so this is his first year "in the system". Even so, he had contracted glandular fever last year and only lasted until late May this year before getting injured and subsequently undergoing a knee reco. Essentially then he's really only had a few months "in the system".

*QUERY:

- Footy smarts (in a tactical, positioning around the ground, etc sense).
- Evasion.
- Kicking on the run under pressure (Fixable).
- Handball power.

*SOME STATS:

- Stats summary '05 TAC:
Averaged 25 disposals in 7 TAC games (ranking No.10 in comp). 6.4 marks (ranking No.8 in comp). 4.4 tackles (ranking No.29 in comp). Total goals 13-7 . 12 kicks per 20 disposals. 5 marks per 20 possessions.

At least 25 disposals in 4 of his 7 games. Quietest game 19d. At least 6 marks in 5 games, including 14 in one game.

*OTHER STUFF:

- Played in Goulburn Valley league '04.
- Glandular fever '04.
- Knee injury late May '05 and had subsequent knee reco.

[Wayne's-World]

Author: Colin Wisbey
Author Host/IP: c211-28-121-197.eburwd3.vic.optusnet.com.au / 211.28.121.197
Subject: Profile: Danny Stanley

Danny Stanley (Geelong Falcons)

186/90 bottom-age right foot (dual-sided) HBF/utility

*STYLE LIKE: shorter Solomon (not really a good comparison)

*MY RANKING (not meant to reflect appropriate draft pick to use): 48

*PROBABILITY OF AFL CAREER: Query. Ready year 2.

- Within an AFL team list, could prove capable of SUSTAINING a ranking of 15-25.

*HURT FACTORS (Offensive/Defensive/Negative): L / M / M

*TRADEMARK:

- Crunch the contest (perhaps a marking contest), gather the spill, then charge off downfield and kick direct and for length but not necessarily ideally targeted.

*SUMMARY ASSESSMENT, RECOMMENDATION:

- Determined, strong goer with range of attractive attributes. I like a lot about him and I admire his approach to footy but I have 3 major concerns. In his case, my ranking does reflect what I think he is currently worth paying at the draft table but he will go very much earlier than I have him.

What you are buying is a bottom-age kid trapped in the body and demeanour of a 25yo who can't tick all the boxes for any specific AFL role but who:

1. routinely hits the contest (including pack) hard and has physical presence
2. is mentally and physically tough, always gives 100%, pushes himself hard, and will get the most out of himself
3. plays tall, is routinely competitive overhead and is also determined, aggressive, intelligent, and effective at spoiling/negating.
4. has defensive and play-reading smarts
5. can play on a range of opponent types and sizes
6. gets his own ball, at all levels
7. is physically almost plug 'n play.
8. shows front-line leadership.

I'd be more than happy to have him in the trenches with me but I don't rate him as early as "everyone" else does because (IMHO):-

1. He doesn't get nearly enough value from his possessions (Poor accuracy and I also query his disposal smarts i.e. the quality and timeliness of his decision-making when in possession - see below)

2. He frequently has difficulty staying on his feet (see below)

3. While I can see a number of AFL roles in which he might be able to pinch hit, I'm struggling to find one for which he is ideally suited.

The easiest way to encapsulate the plusses and minuses with Danny at this stage is to picture a game scenario. Here's one that Danny prepared earlier (an actual piece of play from a Ballarat game in early '05):-
-------------------------
It's a ball-up.
Danny roves the ruck contest cleanly at head height and in a First Dibs manner. <- That's good.
At that point, he is inside literally a circle of traf