View Full Version : First draft pick
Flag Man
31 May 2006, 22:56
I am pretty much resigned to both of our clubs finishing in the bottom 4 this year, so I am wondering what type of player your supporters think you would take with your first draft pick.
I have you pegged for a quality midfielder (Gibbs or Selwood)
Thoughts?
Longy413
31 May 2006, 23:04
If we have one of the first two picks, I'm tipping we'll end up with either Gibbs or Hansen.
Flag Man
31 May 2006, 23:10
I figure with Fletcher, Lucas, Lloyd, Hille, Bradley, Johns, Ryder & Cartledge that you would have most of your tall options covered.
No doubt you could do with some class in the middle, so that's why I assume you will go for Gibbs or Sellwood (depending on where you finish of course)
Then again, Sheeds has always shown a preference for talls.
Longy413
31 May 2006, 23:21
From what I've heard, they're the best two going around.
If Hansen is the best at pick 2 and can play CHB, we'll go for him.
Lee, Hansen, Bradley would give us a pretty solid tall back setup for the future.
That being said, I doubt we'd look past Gibbs if he was there.
LukeHodge15
31 May 2006, 23:29
if u have a one pick in the first 2, no doubt u will pick up a tall with that pick.
its early days but its looking like the talls in this years draft could something special.
Stealth bomber
1 Jun 2006, 00:15
I'd go for midfield regardless....it's tempting to take a tall if he's there, but I feel like we've used too many first round picks on talls lately.
KPPs are more of a risk, I think. I'm not sure we can afford to take too many risks in this draft if it is as good as they're saying it is.
just pick the best player available regardless of what position he plays
Longy413
1 Jun 2006, 08:50
KPPs are more of a risk, I think. I'm not sure we can afford to take too many risks in this draft if it is as good as they're saying it is.
The reason they are saying it's as good as it is, is because of the KPP's.
Philzsay
1 Jun 2006, 09:05
I have a feeling by the time draft day comes around anyone who regularly reads these boards/threads/posts will know the pros and cons of Gibbs, Hansen et al extremely well. Too well.
How many threads will we have about this before draft day? 20? 30? 800? 2000?
I would say that I am looking forward to draft day so that all the speculation over who to recruit is over. However once the draft is over I feel we may have several years of debates over whether we drafted the right or wrong person...
Sorry if this post is a bit negative, I got out of bed on the wrong side today. :eek:
Anyway I would simply pick the best player available. I would also like to see how they all play for the rest of this year as well.
Warrack Eagles
1 Jun 2006, 09:14
Theres a young man playing for north ballarat rebels bout 187 and 79kg he has all the things that a clu is looking for but i reckon in a couple of years or maybe by the end of this year he could be a star in the making. Kyle Cheney can play midfield but manliy in the back line half back, Bombers could use a player like this sort of like an Embley type of player
Thoughts???:D
Go for the best available IMO, add as much talent to your football club as you can and the positions will work out for themselves.
If the KPP's are as good as they say they are in this draft, and we had pick 2 you'd have to serioulsy consider Hansen assuming Gibbs was gone. If and I say if Hansen was good enough to hold down CHB I'd say jump on him. Bradley IMO isn't going to make it as a gun CHB but can be a very solid HBF taking the teams 3rd or 4th defender, imagine a HB line of: Bradley Hansen McPhee, assuming Hansen is that good, it would be tempting
mustapha
1 Jun 2006, 12:21
I hope we pick someone who knows how to play football. I don't want a champion rower or a champion marathon runner from Sudan. I hope that we go for the most highly rated player available (by several sources, not just our own). No surprises please.
Our midfiled weakness isn't as bad as it has been in the last few years. Stanton and Watson should continue to improve and Jason Johnson should eventually return to form (you don't forget how to play football and he is not old yet). Monfries, Winderlich and Dyson will only get better with more game time.
CHB is still a worry so if a quality tall is available I wouldn't be surprised if we went for them.
Can somebody explain why we would get the 2nd pick.
Is this just hope that we don't finish last, or is there still a priority before the 16th teams first pick?
Can somebody explain why we would get the 2nd pick.
Is this just hope that we don't finish last, or is there still a priority before the 16th teams first pick?
most of us are confident we can still climb above Carlton at least
most of us are confident we can still climb above Carlton at least
And you probably will.
As for the question, would have thought Essendon would go after Gibbs. Seem to have your taller options covered at the moment.
Longy413
1 Jun 2006, 13:36
Seem to have your taller options covered at the moment.
Would we be drafting for the moment?
Gibbs is the ONLY option!!
Gibbs is the ONLY option!!
1. He's not
2. He may not be there when our turn comes
3. Hansen, Sellar and Selwood are pretty handy players also
1. He's not
2. He may not be there when our turn comes
3. Hansen, Sellar and Selwood are pretty handy players also
If hes there and we dont take him, I for one wont be happy. If we got the ball out of the centre more we wouldnt have as much pressure on the CHB all the time. A few people said that the talls are that good, then why are the experts rating Gibbs higher? We must take him if hes available. No question. If he isnt, then i would want Hansen or Selwood.
Longy413
1 Jun 2006, 15:53
If hes there and we dont take him, I for one wont be happy. If we got the ball out of the centre more we wouldnt have as much pressure on the CHB all the time. A few people said that the talls are that good, then why are the experts rating Gibbs higher? We must take him if hes available. No question. If he isnt, then i would want Hansen or Selwood.
I don't think anyone is saying we'd take others ahead of Gibbs.
All that is being suggested is that there is more quality in this draft than just Gibbs, people are making the presumption that we won't have the first pick and if that is the case and Gibbs is gone, we won't necessarily take a midfielder for the sake of taking a midfielder, as the thread starter suggested.
If we have pick 2, chances are we will miss out on Gibbs but end up with a very, very talented tall.
If hes there and we dont take him, I for one wont be happy. If we got the ball out of the centre more we wouldnt have as much pressure on the CHB all the time. A few people said that the talls are that good, then why are the experts rating Gibbs higher? We must take him if hes available. No question. If he isnt, then i would want Hansen or Selwood.
Gibbs is looking a likely #1, I may be a huge optimist but I don't see us having the #1 pick, Hansen for mine.
Rucking is our main problem for not getting the ball out of the middle, Hille either needs to play most of his time IMO
I'm craving for someone to hold down CHB so Bradley and McPhee can either be used elsewhere or only worry about the oppositions 3rd and 4th best forwards.
I'm craving for someone to hole down CHB so Bradley and McPhee can either be used elsewhere or only worry about the oppositions 3rd and 4th best forwards.Good point...its not surprising that McPhee won the B&F when Wellman and Lucas were down back and he was used as the 3rd/4th in defence. Although IIRC Wellman did miss quite a bit of footy in that year.
Darealrath
1 Jun 2006, 16:45
Would Gibbs be rated no.1 if there wasn't the F/S controversy about him, like Murphy last year ?
i reckon we should get hansen. He is already 195cm+ and is liekly to grow more. He can play chb chf and ruck. Our second pick will be top 20 and there will be many midfielders in this draft to get around there. The talent at the top is with the talls and it is often hard to find an awesome tall that is versatile.
Andrew_5
1 Jun 2006, 20:30
I think we should go for the best midfielder available.. it's been a long time since we had a great midfield, then second pick go for a defender...
Would we be drafting for the moment?
Its only my opinion, but I just think the Bombers will take Gibbs if he is still available when you have your first pick. I just think you've got enough talls, especially when you've taken Bradley and Ryder as your first 2 picks in the last 2 drafts.
We should take Gibbs with our first pick, then with our second pick take the best available hard-nut mid.
With our next 2 picks we should take the 2 best running mids available.
Seeing a trend??
What we lack is getting obvious to all, and has been to most for long time.
The 195cm running player (ala Bradley) just hasn't worked.
Andrew_5
1 Jun 2006, 21:04
Its only my opinion, but I just think the Bombers will take Gibbs if he is still available when you have your first pick. I just think you've got enough talls, especially when you've taken Bradley and Ryder as your first 2 picks in the last 2 drafts.
Good shout there mate, I agree:thumbsu:
Longy413
1 Jun 2006, 22:10
Its only my opinion, but I just think the Bombers will take Gibbs if he is still available when you have your first pick.
If he's there, or if we have pick 1, very little doubt we'll take Gibbs.
But if Gibbs is gone, I doubt we'll overlook a quality tall to take a lesser midfielder just for the sake of taking a midfielder.
I just think you've got enough talls, especially when you've taken Bradley and Ryder as your first 2 picks in the last 2 drafts.
Bradley was 2003. We took Monfries with our first pick in 2004.
Obviously Aker or Wowoedin if any of the 2 became available. both have atleast 3 seaosns left in the AFL.
:thumbsu:
Dive Bomber
2 Jun 2006, 12:39
If you look at the ladder, with our percentage one win would put us to 3rd bottom, and if we manage to catch Port Adelaide on points then we move to 4th bottom. So instead of looking at the bottom pick we probably should be looking at the bottom 5 picks as any one could be our draft position at the end of the year.
My belief is that you take the best available talent, as by the time that they mature (2-3 yrs) your needs will change anyway such is the nature of AFL football these days. And if you have a surpluss of one type of footballer (talls) then you can trade one for a player who fills the needs of the club at that particular time.
i dont think we will get Sellar we already got Ryder last year so theres no use. I hope we get Hansen or Gibbs :thumbsu:
i no your all being realistic and looking at the perfect picks for us.. but shouldnt we have our heads up cop whats ahead and look at positives.. isnt talking about the draft conceding our season is over.. i really hope we win 3-4 in a row.. so i can post a thread "HA told you so" lol
Stargazer
2 Jun 2006, 18:11
A lot of things will change before National Draft Day. I'd take Joel Selwood if he is still there. But others will come to the fore in the coming months.
Wouldnt mind Gibbs in the centre roving tap outs being spoon fed to him by Paddy Ryder.
I just think Carrrrrlton might have its neck in front in the race for Gibbs..something tells me theres a stronger connection with Sticks involved.
Our ace in the pack would be Lloydy on the paddock again and hopefully Hirdy playing on...not to mention Sheedy hopefully awe strucking the kid.
Longy413
2 Jun 2006, 21:58
Our ace in the pack would be Lloydy on the paddock again and hopefully Hirdy playing on...
Or having the first pick...
Or having the first pick...
Tou che!
S.C[BANKS]
4 Jun 2006, 13:38
Man atleast were staying positive(well atleast some of us)
Thunderstruck
5 Jun 2006, 13:00
FYI guys, Sheeds watched Gibbs play on the weekend. Kid played pretty well, here are his stats:
11 kicks 13 handballs 3 marks 6 tackles.
Sellar on the other hand got bugger all gametime, after 22 touches and 11 marks 2 weeks ago only got 1 kick 2 handballs 2 hitouts.
Was a senior SANFL league game.
can we not place so much importance on one good draft
Accept that the year is over. Mediocrity, as in finishing 10th will give us nothing.
Finishing 16th will.
This is the way the socialist system of football that we are now in works.
If it were not for the salary cap and draft, Eseendon would have won 10 premierships in the last 15 years.
With the financial resources we have, we could do whatever we want.
This crap was introduced to stop the poor clubs dissapearing and we are forced to pay the current price to allow their pathetic clubs to remain afloat.
Remember, of all the Victorian clubs, i think Essendon remain the only one not to have had to go to the AFL or the public with the begging bowl.
All the others, including the so called other "power clubs" in Collingwood, Richmond and Carlton all have.
Not the way I would want it, but the way it has to be.
windyhill
5 Jun 2006, 20:51
coll/geel have never begged.
Sanguinarius
5 Jun 2006, 21:06
If it were not for the salary cap and draft, Eseendon would have won 10 premierships in the last 15 years.
dreaming. you're not the only rich club out there. you're just a big fish in a small pond
coll/geel have never begged.
You must have a very short memory. They have both had their noses in the trough.
dreaming. you're not the only rich club out there. you're just a big fish in a small pond
From a South Autralian thats gold. How big are your fish and what size is your pond?
Adelaide is not much bigger than Geelong. And 10 years behind.
windyhill
5 Jun 2006, 21:27
You must have a very short memory. They have both had their noses in the trough.
coll have never tin rattled or gone to the afl . geel were in huge strife , they have never tin rattled or gone to the afl. Both clubs took prudent measures IE, going back to 92% of the cap, cutting back on football operations, in general, cutting the fat.
Both did it off their own bat, the others did (beg/cap in hand to the afl) they didn`t.