View Full Version : Draft Picks 2006 -The Scott Gumbleton Report
Having seen this kid play over here for Peel Thunder a few times this year and listening to others who have had an eye on him,I think he would be sound investment for the EFC.
He has played in a team that was seen as a basket case last year(they won one game) and has been a big part of Peel's improvment with his attacking style at the ball and goal kicking.They play a top 4 team in Claremont this week and it will be interesting to see how he applys himself for the last few games of the year before he gets drafted.I will be going down to have a real hard look at him.
We need more taller players who can run and kick goals.We need a c/half forward and a c/half back.This kid is about 6ft'4 and with a few added kilos shouldn't find it hard to get to his body big enough to play on the big boys in the AFL.
Gibbs is supposed to be good,but i think we can keep developing our own midfielders next season with Stanton,Dyson,Watson,Lovett, and JJ having a fresh start.Even NLM should get a go in the square....and don't forget Hird's control of centre bounces.
Everyones talking about pace and how draftees need to be good runners,but lets not forget how important tall skillful players are needed in the modern game.This club sure needs em.................
dodgyJim
28 Aug 2006, 17:38
Lucas - CHF
Lloyd - FF
Hird - HFF
Johns - HFF/FP
Lovett - FP
Monfries - HFF/FP
I think our forward setup is OK. What we need is a CHB.
Lucas - CHF
Lloyd - FF
Hird - HFF
Johns - HFF/FP
Lovett - FP
Monfries - HFF/FP
I think our forward setup is OK. What we need is a CHB.
Add Kepler to hopefully play HFF at times and we can realy stretch some defences next year. McVeigh is also a nice replacement for Monfries if he is in the midfield or having a rest, especially if Cole can hopefully step up next year, or depending where the coaches want to use Slattery
What we need is a Scott Lucas type player.
Someone with good hands,leads to the ball and kicks goals.
And someone who can do it week after week,year after year.
Lucas - CHF
Lloyd - FF
Hird - HFF
Johns - HFF/FP
Lovett - FP
Monfries - HFF/FP
I think our forward setup is OK. What we need is a CHB.
In four years time Hird, Lloyd and Lucas may all be retired. Gumbleton would have just turned 21 and become our new star. You don't draft for the next year, you always look 4 or 5 years down the track and see what your list might look like then.
No doubt we need a CHB but would you choose one at the expense of a potentially great power forward?
windyhill
28 Aug 2006, 19:10
What we need is a Scott Lucas type player.
Someone with good hands,leads to the ball and kicks goals.
And someone who can do it week after week,year after year.
They are once in a life time type players.
What we need is a Scott Lucas type player.
Someone with good hands,leads to the ball and kicks goals.
And someone who can do it week after week,year after year.
We already have one
Scott Lucas
We already have one
Scott LucasAs has already been mentioned we wont in 4 yrs time.
Audemars Piguet
28 Aug 2006, 21:56
Just imagine they hadnt changed the Priority Picks rules.
1. Carlton: Gibbs
2. Essendon: Hansen
3. Carlton: Gumbleton
4. Essendon: Selwood
blumfieldisback
28 Aug 2006, 22:53
argh yes lets look at west coast, adelaide, Freo, bulldogs, sydney, melbourne, saints and the brisbane lions and richmond.
Now tell me which ones have the dominant forward and which teams are sucessfull, it favours the far more midfield oriented teams that are evenly spread. Brisbane has the most dominant forward when he is fit and firing well brisbane are competitive, when west coast, adelaide, the bullies midfield is fit and firing well its a whitewash.
argh yes lets look at west coast, adelaide, Freo, bulldogs, sydney, melbourne, saints and the brisbane lions and richmond.
Now tell me which ones have the dominant forward and which teams are sucessfull, it favours the far more midfield oriented teams that are evenly spread. Brisbane has the most dominant forward when he is fit and firing well brisbane are competitive, when west coast, adelaide, the bullies midfield is fit and firing well its a whitewash.
Still yet to win flags recently with their much vaunted midfields. The fact is if WC had a decent forward they would have won last years flag. You can win all the ball you like but when september comes history shows you need a viable target up forward to get you over the line.
Longy413
28 Aug 2006, 23:01
Sydney's midfield isn't that great.
They do have a handy forward line though.
Sydney's midfield isn't that great.
They do have a handy forward line though.
And have the underrated and undersized Leo barry and average Lewis Roberts-Thompson as their key defenders.
blitzer
28 Aug 2006, 23:36
Theres no doubt that it's been our defence that has been lacking all season. We have had more points kicked against us by miles than any other team and despite missing Mathew Lloyd all year as far as the bottom eight of the ladder go we are second highest in points scored. Not to mention we continiously see players like solomon line up on far taller opponents in the backline and its becoming increasingly evident that kepler bradley is not going to be the answer for our backline and actually seems more potent as a half forward option.
austinthedog
28 Aug 2006, 23:41
From what i saw of the u18 championships, gumbleton played well in both attack and defence. I think he would be a huge assett and versatile enough to play at either end
Daytripper
29 Aug 2006, 00:14
Key position players chosen top ten in last 6 drafts.
*Nick Riewoldt
*Justin Koschitzke
Luke Livingston
Graham Polak
Luke Molan
Tim Walsh
Jason Laycock
Kepler Bradley
Jarryd Roughead
Lance Franklin
Tom Williams
Josh Kennedy
Beau Dowler
*Exceptional players. Dominated from year 1.
With the exception of Riewoldt, Kosi and possibly Franklin not a whole lot to write home about really. I understand that some players take time to develop but we would want to be very, very, very sure about Gumbleton.
Remember its easy to dominate at junior level for some kids purely because they are bigger and stronger than others.
KPP's are also more likely to be complete flops (Molan, Walsh) and injury prone (Koschitzke, Williams, Laycock).
Does the above also indicate that we are moving towards an era where these types of players are no longer important ?
danzan22
29 Aug 2006, 00:31
if we do get gumbleton, we can put lucas in chb were he is just as good there as chf
Daytripper
29 Aug 2006, 00:32
Still yet to win flags recently with their much vaunted midfields. The fact is if WC had a decent forward they would have won last years flag.
Have to disagree with you there marcuz.
If Braun didn't miss the Grand Final and Kerr played four quarters instead of just over one, there is no doubt in my mind that the Eagles would be going for back to back this season.
As has already been mentioned we wont in 4 yrs time.
Don't see it mentioned anywhere about 4 years time?
Plus it wouldnt surprise me to see scotty play for longer than people think
Key position players chosen top ten in last 6 drafts.
*Nick Riewoldt
*Justin Koschitzke
Graham Polak
Luke Molan
Tim Walsh
Jason Laycock
Kepler Bradley
Jarryd Roughead
Lance Franklin
Tom Williams
Josh Kennedy
Beau Dowler
*Exceptional players. Dominated from year 1.
With the exception of Riewoldt, Kosi and possibly Franklin not a whole lot to write home about really. I understand that some players take time to develop but we would want to be very, very, very sure about Gumbleton.
Remember its easy to dominate at junior level for some kids purely because they are bigger and stronger than others.
KPP's are also more likely to be complete flops (Molan, Walsh) and injury prone (Koschitzke, Williams, Laycock).
Does the above also indicate that we are moving towards an era where these types of players are no longer important ?
Don't forget Luke Livingston (taken astutely at #4 in 2000) ... surely he'd be borderline "exceptional" ... maybe just behind Riewoldt on current form.
Daytripper
29 Aug 2006, 01:00
Don't forget Luke Livingston (taken astutely at #4 in 2000) ... surely he'd be borderline "exceptional" ... maybe just behind Riewoldt on current form.
Edited.
How could I forget ?:D
Have to disagree with you there marcuz.
If Braun didn't miss the Grand Final and Kerr played four quarters instead of just over one, there is no doubt in my mind that the Eagles would be going for back to back this season.
So you disagree that if WC had a good key forward they would have won?
Remember its easy to dominate at junior level for some kids purely because they are bigger and stronger than others.
KPP's are also more likely to be complete flops (Molan, Walsh) and injury prone (Koschitzke, Williams, Laycock).
They also have the biggest upside and importance to a team's structure. Gumbleton at the carnival played on kids just as big as he was and played well, he isn't like kepler who didnt have an opponent at the carnival and starred.
Does the above also indicate that we are moving towards an era where these types of players are no longer important ?
Another fallacy, last friday nights game is proof that a dominant big forward line will overcome a great midfield.
I'd love to have gibbs at the club as he looks a real talent, unfortunately it looks like Carlton will grab him after they loaded up on talls last year. The fact is the next best 3 or 4 footballers are talls. Best we grab one early and then dine out on the quality mids left at our next pick/picks.
Philzsay
29 Aug 2006, 10:26
I think you are kidding yourself if you think having a key forwrd is no longer important.
Last 7 premierships teams main forward:
Hall, Tredrea, Brown, Brown, Brown, Lloyd, Carey...
Hmm, I do notice a pattern there...
I think you are kidding yourself if you think having a key forwrd is no longer important.
Last 7 premierships teams main forward:
Hall, Tredrea, Brown, Brown, Brown, Lloyd, Carey...
Hmm, I do notice a pattern there...
exactly, and most of those teams had multiple key forwards. Midfield dominance is great but it all comes to nothing if you have no targets to kick to.
Even if your big forwards dont kick a goal their sheer presence ensures that they drag one or two more defenders away freeing up other forwards to become targets.
Daytripper
29 Aug 2006, 10:36
So you disagree that if WC had a good key forward they would have won?
Yes - the loss of Kerr cost them the flag.
I think you are kidding yourself if you think having a key forwrd is no longer important.
Last 7 premierships teams main forward:
Hall, Tredrea, Brown, Brown, Brown, Lloyd, Carey...
Hmm, I do notice a pattern there...
Its changing slowly but surely.
Hall kicked two goals in last years GF.
Tredrea kicked one goal in 2004. Midfielders kicked 12 of Port Adelaide's 17 goals.
Another fallacy, last friday nights game is proof that a dominant big forward line will overcome a great midfield.
Bulldogs form over the past month has been getting worse. Players are tired and the injury list is taking their toll.
I'd prefer to look at what a seriously good midfield (West Coast) did to St Kilda one month prior.
They dismantled them.
WCE's midfield is a scary, but in reality a one off. How are we or any team in the near future going to recruit a midfield with the likes of Judd, Kerr and Cousins, not to mention Cox.
It was emntioned WCE destroyed a team a month ago, this also shows how a good midfield can be hot and cold and certainty to run away to a flag, they were just dismantled by Freo while the all-day running Bulldogs were taken apart by the Saints.
Sure Kerr missed a lot of the GF, but if Hall also played as well as he is capable of Swans would have won again.
The fact is the Bombers are top 6 in clearances, first possession and inside 50's with a young and improving midfield, the better or forward targets are and forward set up is,the more dangerous we are, we also need to fix our leaky defense, the midfield is the least of our worries IMO
Yes - the loss of Kerr cost them the flag.
Had there been a dominant forward down there the loss of kerr wouldnt of mattered. Remember they didnt exactly have any issues getting the ball down there, scoring off that dominance was their problem. Kerr would not have helped in that regard.
Bulldogs form over the past month has been getting worse. Players are tired and the injury list is taking their toll.
I'd prefer to look at what a seriously good midfield (West Coast) did to St Kilda one month prior.
They dismantled them.
I could use the same excuse for the saints as you used for the dogs. WC have continually come up short the last few years for one reason, they know it and their opponants know it.
Daytripper
29 Aug 2006, 11:06
As I've said before, if it was 1996 instead of 2006 I would not have a problem taking Gumbleton or Hansen.
However football has changed (for the worse in my opinion) and unless they change the kick-in rule for a start and make a host of other amendments its only going to increasingly favour runners over footballers.
I was talking to one of Geelong's recruiting guys the other day and asked him about Leroy Jetta. He told me that the way football is now and the type of player coaches are now looking for, he would not be surprised if he goes top 5 !!!!
WeneedyoungJarmans
29 Aug 2006, 11:07
from an non-supporters point of view, I think the player that would add the most value to the Essendon side in future is Lachlan Hansen.
when you look at your back 6, Fletcher is the anchor. Fletcher in my opinion is the best full back I've ever seen play the game. He basically covers full back and centre half back, whilst he marshalls the troops and setups up plays with his raking long zone breaking kicks.
the best thing for Essendon is to draft a super defender! Lachlan Hansen is the answer. Chris Grant levels of contested marking, coupled with Chad Cornes levels of athleticism and run, run, run!
A player like that playing under Fletcher for the next 2 yrs would be absolute perfect timing for the club. He is also a Gippsland boy, no go home risk. It would be a dream for the club.
I couldn't help read some comments about Kepler being used on a HFF and I will agree to disagree with that one. The modern day HFF needs speed and turn of foot. So does a HBF. Thats why Kepler isnt suited to neither. He is better played in the ruck where his 2nd and 3rd attempts in traffic coupled with throwing his weight around to shepherd come to the fore. That would free up Hille and Ryder to rotate through the ruck and forward line. Lloyd will be around for at least 5 more yrs so FF is covered. Don't assume that Ryder will only be a ruck option. He has the athleticism and height to play CHF.
I look at our 2 picks Roughead and Franklin for example. We drafted Roughead who played CHF as a junior but at AFL level lacks footspeed and defenders can close in on him. Unless he can build a big frame and get off the ground to take contested marks, he wont have a great deal of value in our forward line. Will more likely play CHB as he reads the flight well. Conversely, Franklin played more on a wing as a junior but has all the physical attributes required of a CHF. 2 yrs into the system, he's worked on many aspects of his game and is starting to play CHF, far better than Roughead at this stage.
Thats just to illustrate how things change. Don't pidgeon hole players. Look at the physical attributes they've got and their potential to improve their game.
Between Ryder, Hille, Johns, Lloyd, thats 4 KPPs that will be around in 5 yrs to play in your forward line. Conversely, no real certain KPPs for the defence. And don't say Austin Lucy - he's a bonus if it works out.
The writing is on the wall!
As I've said before, if it was 1996 instead of 2006 I would not have a problem taking Gumbleton or Hansen.
However football has changed (for the worse in my opinion) and unless they change the kick-in rule for a start and make a host of other amendments its only going to increasingly favour runners over footballers.
I was talking to one of Geelong's recruiting guys the other day and asked him about Leroy Jetta. He told me that the way football is now and the type of player coaches are now looking for, he would not be surprised if he goes top 5 !!!!
Both Hansen and Gumbleton can run anyway, high 14s or early 15 beep tests. Hansen in particular is plenty quick. They're built for the modern game.
Daytripper
29 Aug 2006, 14:04
from an non-supporters point of view, I think the player that would add the most value to the Essendon side in future is Lachlan Hansen.
when you look at your back 6, Fletcher is the anchor. Fletcher in my opinion is the best full back I've ever seen play the game. He basically covers full back and centre half back, whilst he marshalls the troops and setups up plays with his raking long zone breaking kicks.
the best thing for Essendon is to draft a super defender! Lachlan Hansen is the answer. Chris Grant levels of contested marking, coupled with Chad Cornes levels of athleticism and run, run, run!
A player like that playing under Fletcher for the next 2 yrs would be absolute perfect timing for the club. He is also a Gippsland boy, no go home risk. It would be a dream for the club.
I couldn't help read some comments about Kepler being used on a HFF and I will agree to disagree with that one. The modern day HFF needs speed and turn of foot. So does a HBF. Thats why Kepler isnt suited to neither. He is better played in the ruck where his 2nd and 3rd attempts in traffic coupled with throwing his weight around to shepherd come to the fore. That would free up Hille and Ryder to rotate through the ruck and forward line. Lloyd will be around for at least 5 more yrs so FF is covered. Don't assume that Ryder will only be a ruck option. He has the athleticism and height to play CHF.
I look at our 2 picks Roughead and Franklin for example. We drafted Roughead who played CHF as a junior but at AFL level lacks footspeed and defenders can close in on him. Unless he can build a big frame and get off the ground to take contested marks, he wont have a great deal of value in our forward line. Will more likely play CHB as he reads the flight well. Conversely, Franklin played more on a wing as a junior but has all the physical attributes required of a CHF. 2 yrs into the system, he's worked on many aspects of his game and is starting to play CHF, far better than Roughead at this stage.
Thats just to illustrate how things change. Don't pidgeon hole players. Look at the physical attributes they've got and their potential to improve their game.
Between Ryder, Hille, Johns, Lloyd, thats 4 KPPs that will be around in 5 yrs to play in your forward line. Conversely, no real certain KPPs for the defence. And don't say Austin Lucy - he's a bonus if it works out.
The writing is on the wall!
Thats the second good post from a Hawthorn supporter I've seen in the last week. What is going on ? :D
Agree with all you comments however I have a big problem drafting a CHB with no 2 overall. In my opinion its a waste in this day and age.
Just as an exercise does anybody want to name all the current CHB's and where they were drafted. I think you'll find most were drafted reasonably late.
Longy413
29 Aug 2006, 14:06
Chad Cornes was drafted inside the top 10.
Pavlich was an AA FB and drafted at pick 4.
Kossie played at CHB in his first season from memory, pick 2.
Polak pick 4.
Roughead has played more forward than back.
The difference in this draft is, that beyond Gibbs, the next best 3-4 players are KPP's.
FieryNayta
29 Aug 2006, 14:06
Just imagine they hadnt changed the Priority Picks rules.
1. Carlton: Gibbs
2. Essendon: Hansen
3. Carlton: Gumbleton
4. Essendon: Selwood
mmmmmmmmm *drools*
I think we'd come out of that one better than your lot but still nothing to sneeze at. Too bad for both our sakes it wont happen.
Also in regard to things that have been said previously. Gumbleton can also play down back as a CHB. So u dont always have to play him forward if your worried about congestion. He could plug holes between the forwardline and backline for a few years until lloyd/lucas retire, while he gains valuable experience all over the ground.
Daytripper
29 Aug 2006, 14:20
Chad Cornes was drafted inside the top 10.
correct
Pavlich was an AA FB and drafted at pick 4.
Thats a stretch Longy. Everyone knows that his selection at that position was a joke.
Kossie played at CHB in his first season from memory, pick 2.
Yes, played there Year 1 but hasn't played there since. Maguire is St Kilda CHB.
Polak pick 4.
can't get a game at Freo
Roughead has played more forward than back.
May develop into a CHB. Personally I've got him down as a Drew Petrie type.
The difference in this draft is, that beyond Gibbs, the next best 3-4 players are KPP's.
Agreed but as you can see from the above the best we can probably hope for is a Chad Cornes type player. At worst we could get Graham Polak (incidentally taken pick 4 in the last so-called super draft) and who was touted at the time as the best KPP from that year.
That's enough alarm bells for me.
Longy413
29 Aug 2006, 14:26
Agreed but as you can see from the above the best we can probably hope for is a Chad Cornes type player. At worst we could get Graham Polak (incidentally taken pick 4 in the last so-called super draft) and who was touted at the time as the best KPP from that year.
That's enough alarm bells for me.
That's being a bit selective though, because you're looking only at the blokes who were taken early
I'd be happy with a Dustin Fletcher, Matty Scarlett type player.
Obviously they were both father-sons, but both worthy of Pick 2.
Leppitsch was a zone selection, but again would be happy with that at pick 2.
Rutten was a rookie, but if the Crows used an early pick on him, would they be disapointed?
Matt Maguire went in the early 20's, but if the Saints drafted him at pick 2 they'd be happy with his output.
Hansen and Gumbleton have proven they can both play at either end of the ground. Perhaps a Pavlich comparison in this situation is apt. If you can draft a player like Pavlich/Lucas that can play at either end, you've got not only a pretty rare player but also a very good one that you can build a team around.
The only midfielder that comes close to Gibbs has been injured all year, if we draft Jetta at pick 2, I'll be shattered.
This is getting repetitive. The next best 5 players in the draft are definately key position types. Leroy Jetta is a smaller, less skilled and less proven version of Andrew Lovett while Selwood has virtually missed the entire year.
A thought crossing my mind is do we trade someone like Coutney Johns to WC for someone like Rosa so we have a spot for Gumbleton or Hansen? We have some good talls that will need games such as Bradley, Ryder, Lee and Laycock and we will draft Darcy Daniher at the end of next year who is a 192cm key position who has been playing very well at chf in the TAC cup.
Thoughts????
Longy413
29 Aug 2006, 15:13
I'd rather trade Bradley than Johns, but I don't really rate Rosa as highly as West Coast fans seem to.
go_the_bombers
29 Aug 2006, 15:18
I'd rather trade Bradley than Johns, but I don't really rate Rosa as highly as West Coast fans seem to.
Can't see Bradley or Johns being traded! I havent seen enough of Rosa!
Thats the second good post from a Hawthorn supporter I've seen in the last week. What is going on ? :D
Agree with all you comments however I have a big problem drafting a CHB with no 2 overall. In my opinion its a waste in this day and age.
Just as an exercise does anybody want to name all the current CHB's and where they were drafted. I think you'll find most were drafted reasonably late.
I have to disagree, especially if you look at opposing lists at the moment....a third have a solid CHF with great athletic ability...so a CHB/KP will do our spine a world of good. Allow us to release Bradley into a more preferred running role...which would prove invaluable given his height and reach.
WeneedyoungJarmans
29 Aug 2006, 17:23
Thats the second good post from a Hawthorn supporter I've seen in the last week. What is going on ? :D
Agree with all you comments however I have a big problem drafting a CHB with no 2 overall. In my opinion its a waste in this day and age.
Just as an exercise does anybody want to name all the current CHB's and where they were drafted. I think you'll find most were drafted reasonably late.
I look at it differently. If its pick 2 you get, by taking Hansen, you are getting the 2nd best player in the draft. Its so so rare to find a player that can play FB/CHB or CHF. Hansen can do all of those things. The advantage he has over Gumbleton is he is very very quick! To get a player who can hold a key post and be super athletic is a rare find. I dont see a problem with that at pick 2.
Personally I think he'd solve Essendon more problems than Gibbs would in the long term. Sure whilst Fletcher is still there Gibbs would make a more immediate impact but the backline is a big big issue. When Essendon were at their best, they had Fletcher at FB and Wellman at CHB. Both very very good KPP defenders. In a couple of yrs, you will have none if you dont blood one.
Darealrath
29 Aug 2006, 17:32
I look at it differently. If its pick 2 you get, by taking Hansen, you are getting the 2nd best player in the draft. Its so so rare to find a player that can play FB/CHB or CHF. Hansen can do all of those things. The advantage he has over Gumbleton is he is very very quick! To get a player who can hold a key post and be super athletic is a rare find. I dont see a problem with that at pick 2.
I'm so easily persuaded by posts like this :D He sounds ace.
WeneedyoungJarmans
29 Aug 2006, 17:53
I'm so easily persuaded by posts like this :D He sounds ace.
see Mojos profile
1) Lachlan Hansen
Key Position player
195cms and 84kgs
17/8/88
Gippsland Power (TAC)
Tall key position player who is a very good mover. Played CHF early in the TAC and moved back to CHB for the 2nd half of last year. Dominated his opponents and marked everything that came his way. Skinny still but wont shirk the issue. Freak at his age and size. Best overall mark I have ever seen for his age. Superb judge of the flight of the ball and has a first class attack on everything in the air. Rarely out bodied even though he is still skinny. Beat stronger opponents in the TAC with superior body positioning and judgement.
Sometimes funny watching him anticipate the kick into the forward line quicker than his opponent when playing as a defender. Would be off and running before his opponent had even moved and take an easy uncontested mark from a opposition kick. Was the “wall” when playing at CHB.
Will likely play forward in 2006 and see how he develops. Shown enough to suggest he can play both ends and become a dominant KPP capable of playing anywhere in the 4 key posts if required.
As he fills out will likely change his style a little and use his body more and more rather than standing off his opponent a few meters and using superior anticipation and leap and body positioning to beat the opponent.
That is not to say he is an outside player at all. He just understand his game and realises that there is no point to getting into a wrestling match against some players who are much heavier and stronger than he was in 2005. Sort of like Dustin Fletchers style. Who does not do well in wrestling contests and gets slaughtered against bigger stronger opponents when caught out in that way (Sav Rocca and J Brown come to mind who seem to beat him to the point where Sheedy won’t play him on them now). The difference is that Hansen is 16 and will be filling out and won’t have to play that way in a few years.
Runs a very high beep test and has very good endurance, speed, and is a freak athletic package for his size. Showed his class at the U18 Championships despite being a year younger and looked up to speed and class at CHB. Should be dominant this year in the TAC and at the U18s and show what he is made of at CHF.
Got better and better as the season went on and was taking a lot of contested marks and getting a lot of the ball in the last few games of the TAC finals. A quite capable ruckman as well who got a number of hit outs and its not inconceivable that he will grow quite a bit more and develop into a ruck in time. He can tap to advantage and has a very big leap. A player who started out last year as an athletic tall who was struggling a bit and ended it as a dominant key backman who got more and more involved in the play and get stronger and more capable of controlling the corridor. Plays the game like Chad Cornes back there peeling off and taking strong marks. But has the added advantage of being able to play tight as well when needed but will still be prepared to back himself in to win the ball. Has all the instincts of a gun forward but needed to round out his development by playing as an attacking defender in 2005 and now is ready for a move forward for the upcoming season.
If its pick 2 you get, by taking Hansen, you are getting the 2nd best player in the draft.
That's the way I see it, the most important thing is that we take the 2nd best player in the draft rather than worrying which position that players fits in particularly as we have gaping holes all over the field.
As I've said before, if it was 1996 instead of 2006 I would not have a problem taking Gumbleton or Hansen.
However football has changed (for the worse in my opinion) and unless they change the kick-in rule for a start and make a host of other amendments its only going to increasingly favour runners over footballers.
I was talking to one of Geelong's recruiting guys the other day and asked him about Leroy Jetta. He told me that the way football is now and the type of player coaches are now looking for, he would not be surprised if he goes top 5 !!!!
I think you only had to watch St.Kilda v Bulldogs last Friday to show that talls still have a place in the game. Dont get sucked in to the hype that you need all runners.What you do need now is half forwards and backs who play like midfielders and add plenty of run but a half decent FF , CHF and FB are still pretty important.
It is funny you mention Geelong , their biggest problem is they havnt got a reliable forward to go to. It makes you look very slow if you havnt got a decent target to aim for.
I think Hansen is a must, sounds like the 2nd best player in the draft. Our defence needs tightening up, Lee looks good but isn't the answer to all our problems, especially with Fletch getting closer to the end. If we can eventually find someone to hold down CHB McPhee will thrive playing the 3rd tall and provide run from HB while Kepler will be able to float forward and kick some goals.
mcphee_is_a_gun
29 Aug 2006, 18:46
Gumbleton is better than Hansen. Both are similar but Gumbleton more versatile as he plays forward better than Hansen does and is just as good in defence.
Daytripper
30 Aug 2006, 09:40
I think you only had to watch St.Kilda v Bulldogs last Friday to show that talls still have a place in the game. Dont get sucked in to the hype that you need all runners.What you do need now is half forwards and backs who play like midfielders and add plenty of run but a half decent FF , CHF and FB are still pretty important.
It is funny you mention Geelong , their biggest problem is they havnt got a reliable forward to go to. It makes you look very slow if you havnt got a decent target to aim for.
Geelong are slow - iceberg slow.
They've got a plethora of forwards - Ottens, Kingsley, Playfair, N Ablett.
The best teams these days don't rely on KPP's. Its all about midfielders. The younger, smarter coaches (Wallace, Eade, Roos, Worsfold) are all drafting runners.
I reckon they'd know more about it than most of us.
By the way, has anyone actually physically seen Gumbleton or Hansen play yet ?
I look for Gumbleton's name in the WAFL best players each week and he is seldom there whilst Gibbs is consistently in the best for Glenelg. And there is a big difference in standard between the SANFL and WAFL.
Longy413
30 Aug 2006, 11:22
By the way, has anyone actually physically seen Gumbleton or Hansen play yet ?
I look for Gumbleton's name in the WAFL best players each week and he is seldom there whilst Gibbs is consistently in the best for Glenelg. And there is a big difference in standard between the SANFL and WAFL.
Gibbs is redundant though, because he'll more than likely go pick one.
The three next best players are all KPP's. Surely you can't disagree that an A grade KPP is better than a B grade midfielder, regardless of the current structure of your side or the trend of the game.
If Gibbs does go pick 1, we'll get midfielders later in the draft.
If all you need is runners just stick Ricky Dyson at CHB put Andy Lovett at HBF while Dempsey can come in to play FB, he's shown he can run the whole field
Longy413
30 Aug 2006, 11:32
Sydney also added two ruckman, a CHF and Ted Richards (whatever he is) to their list last season.
Sydney also added two ruckman, a CHF and Ted Richards (whatever he is) to their list last season.
Teddy is travelling ok at the moment. Good luck to him.
Longy413
30 Aug 2006, 11:36
Teddy is travelling ok at the moment. Good luck to him.
Indeed, that wasn't a crack at Ted.
Just not sure whether he's a tall forward or a tall back, although he's been playing back more than forward.
Geelong are slow - iceberg slow.
They've got a plethora of forwards - Ottens, Kingsley, Playfair, N Ablett.
The best teams these days don't rely on KPP's. Its all about midfielders. The younger, smarter coaches (Wallace, Eade, Roos, Worsfold) are all drafting runners.
I reckon they'd know more about it than most of us.
Yet Wallace had Pattison, Richardson, Schulz, Stafford and Simmonds all play in the forward line at some stage last saturday night. We beat richmond in clearances and first possesions and still lost the game becuase they had the better big target. To suggest that power forwards have no place in the game or that their impact is diminished is laughable.
By the way, has anyone actually physically seen Gumbleton or Hansen play yet ?
I look for Gumbleton's name in the WAFL best players each week and he is seldom there whilst Gibbs is consistently in the best for Glenelg. And there is a big difference in standard between the SANFL and WAFL.
Its much easier for a midfileder to impress at senior level earlier than a tall, Gumbleton actually has an accountable opponant every game. I prefer him over Hansen because of the way he plays, he hits the packs hard and has the potential to dominate a game up forward both physically and on the scoreboard.
I like Hansen also but he just doesnt have that phyiscal edge like Gumby has. As i stated before and as longy has also said you can forget about a midfielder, Gibbs will be gone and the next best talent are all 6"4+.
By the way, has anyone actually physically seen Gumbleton or Hansen play yet ?
Yep.
You can too if you like. afl.com.au has a couple of games from the u/18's championship available for free download.
Daytripper
30 Aug 2006, 12:52
2005
Bulldogs - Higgins (runner), Addison (runner), Baird (runner), West (runner)
Sydney - Laidlaw (runner), Thornton (runner)
Richmond - Oakley-Nicholls (runner), Hughes (KPP), Casserley (runner)
Eagles - Hurn (runner), McKinley (KPP), Spanghar (KPP)
Runners : 9
KPP : 3
2004
Bulldogs - Griffin (runner), Williams (KPP), Wells (runner), Tiller (runner)
Sydney - Moore (runner), Spriggs (runner), James (KPP)
Richmond - Deledio (runner), Tambling (runner), Meyer (runner), Pattison (KPP), Polo (runner), McGuane (runner), Limbach (KPP)
Eagles - Rosa (runner), Le Cras (runner), Morton (KPP)
Runners : 12
KPP : 5
Instructive also that most of the KPP have yet to play a game for these teams yet they are all fairly successful.
However most of the runners have played and a lot are already having a big impact - Griffin, Deledio, Tambling, Rosa, Higgins.
The Bulldogs have had 8 picks in the last 2 drafts and have picked 7 runners.
The Tigers have had 10 picks in the last 2 drafts and have picked 7 runners.
The Swans have not picked up a first year KPP in the last two seasons.
West Coast are 50/50 but with their midfield depth maybe thats not a surprise. Morton was father son anyway.
These four coaches are probably the most innovative in the AFL at present and all four are either on their way up or already there.
There is a pattern here.
go_the_bombers
30 Aug 2006, 12:55
Wells for the bulldogs is a KPP 195cm
And yet the Swans are screwed without Hall
The Tigers are screwed without Richardson
The Bulldogs would not be in the finals without Grant,
and the Eagles, while they have an awesome midfield, lost a GF because of no gun marking forward.
Not only will we add quality runners late in the draft, or evern with our 2nd round pick we will add a potential gun CHB/CHF
go_the_bombers
30 Aug 2006, 13:00
And yet the Swans are screwed without Hall
The Tigers are screwed without Richardson
The Bulldogs would not be in the finals without Grant,
and the Eagles, while they have an awesome midfield, lost a GF because of no gun marking forward.
Not only will we add quality runners late in the draft, or evern with our 2nd round pick we will add a potential gun CHB/CHF
Exactly take Hansen or Gumbleton with our first pick then take runners with the rest of our picks
Philzsay
30 Aug 2006, 13:03
All this talk in this and many, many other threads both on here and other websites about Gibbs, Hansen and Gumbleton reminds me of the weeks leading up to Christmas as a kid in a year when there are several 'must have' toys... Everyone is excited, but the kids start to get overhyped and the playground banter starts: "I want the Super Dooper Killing Robot!"... "No, don't get that trash, get the Play Station, its awesome"... "Well I'm getting a BMX!! So nerr..." "You nerd, a bike is so lame!" "Is not" "Is so" "Is not times infinity" "Is so time infinity plus 1"
Relax guys, It Christmas!!! Gibbs, Hansen, Gumbleton, whatever, its Christmas and we are getting a ripper present this year!!!
If the Bulldogs had a decent kp forward they would be higher on the ladder and possible premiers this year. A good midfield may get you into the 8 but it wont often win you a premiership without a gun forward. Surely everyone sees that!
Longy413
30 Aug 2006, 13:09
2005
Sydney - Laidlaw (runner), Thornton (runner)
They also added Richards, Wall, Chambers and Currie to their list.
Four talls.
The Bulldogs have had 8 picks in the last 2 drafts and have picked 7 runners.
Jesse Wells is a tall, West is a tall (both 195cm's), Tiller is 191cm's.
Wells was drafted as a ruckman, West a FF, Tiller a CHF.
Baird is 193cm and also plays tall.
So in last year's draft they drafted two mids and two talls. In the 2004 draft they drafted 1 runner and 3 taller players.
And for all their midfielders, they are 8th on the ladder and lacking in KPP's at both ends.
The Bulldogs have had 8 picks in the last 2 drafts and have picked 7 runners.
Make that 3.
The Tigers have had 10 picks in the last 2 drafts and have picked 7 runners.
That says more about Wallace than anything. But McGuane was also drafted as a tall, so make that 4 KP sized players.
The Swans have not picked up a first year KPP in the last two seasons.
They've also traded their early picks away the last two years for two ruckmen and Ted Richards.
There is a pattern here.
No different to most years, there are always more midfielders taken than KPP's. And no one is suggesting we should only draft KPP's. Just one, the best one available if Gibbs is gone.
Daytripper
30 Aug 2006, 13:23
Aaargghh - I'm banging my head against a wall here, aren't I ? :D
I think we all want the best for our football club and if the powers that be draft Hansen/Gumbleton or whoever then of course I will support them as much as I would any Essendon player.
Lets just hope that we are extremely careful though. The success of early KPP picks is not great. We had better hope against hope that either turn out to be a Franklin/Riewoldt and not a Roughhead/Polak/Walsh/Williams.
For me - I'd rather take that almost sure thing guaranteed midfielder. Not many have failed drafted top 6 in the last few seasons.
Audemars Piguet
30 Aug 2006, 14:18
If Gumbleton is as versitile as some are saying, ie a Pavlich / Lucas / C.Cornes type then I have absolutely no problem taking him.
go_the_bombers
30 Aug 2006, 14:34
If Gumbleton is as versitile as some are saying, ie a Pavlich / Lucas / C.Cornes type then I have absolutely no problem taking him.
I have no problem takin Gumbleton or Hansen
Just reading the last few pages and someone brought up the idea of us trading to get Matt Rosa from WC.
Hadn't thought about it before but now......................
Just about every time Rosa plays for Peel Thunder he dominates the midfield and is their best player with a stack of possesions.No one can catch him and his skills are outstanding.I rate him highly and if he was playing for anyone else but the Weagles he would play every week.
But he is finding it hard to slot into that WC midfield cause they all play so well every week.
Mmmmmmmmmm....will keep my eye on him as well as Gumbleton this Saturday if he misses out yet again for WC selection.
Look for my "GUMBO" report after the weekend.
Wish we could hear also from others who have seen other players in the draft playing this year.
Not just the top10, but other likely prospects that have gone unmentioned.
DaSawx is a very under-rated footballer who would be a steal in the 5th round.
Plays seniors at FF for the BigFooty Bombers who could be seen as a future replacement for Matthew Lloyd
go_the_bombers
30 Aug 2006, 15:54
DaSawx is a very under-rated footballer who would be a steal in the 5th round.
Plays seniors at FF for the BigFooty Bombers who could be seen as a future replacement for Matthew Lloyd
LOL:D Is that DaSawx the one that missed the shot from the goal square ;) :p
LOL:D Is that DaSawx the one that missed the shot from the goal square ;) :p
7 scoring shots none the less, wouldn't have won without me :thumbsu:
go_the_bombers
30 Aug 2006, 17:15
7 scoring shots none the less, wouldn't have won without me :thumbsu:
LOL ;)
Nuts4Bolts
30 Aug 2006, 17:27
For me - I'd rather take that almost sure thing guaranteed midfielder. Not many have failed drafted top 6 in the last few seasons.
But isn't that the thing, apart from Gibbs, the next 5 best players are KP's? So he wouldn't be a legitimate top 6 pick.
Daytripper
30 Aug 2006, 17:53
But isn't that the thing, apart from Gibbs, the next 5 best players are KP's? So he wouldn't be a legitimate top 6 pick.
The next two definite best players are KPP - Gumbleton and Hansen.
Then its a raffle.
Thorp (an inbetweener), Proud (midfield), Seller (ruck), Leunbeuger (ruck), Collard (onballer), Jetta (onballer), Selwood (onballer), Pettard (onballer), Benjamin (onballer).
Then you have the smokies. For example Pendlebury wasn't on anybody's radar this time last season and neither was Thomas to a lesser extent.
There were six scouts looking at Nathan Brown two weeks ago (none from Essendon). He could easily go top ten judging by the interest in him.
Why does everybody have this thing that this draft is all about KPP.
With the exception of Gumbleton, Hansen and if you want to include Thorp (I don't personally going from what I've seen of Tassie) there is no more than any other year.
Nuts4Bolts
30 Aug 2006, 18:00
The next two definite best players are KPP - Gumbleton and Hansen.
Then its a raffle.
So you want to pass up the next two definete best players and take a lucky dip?
go_the_bombers
30 Aug 2006, 18:00
The next two definite best players are KPP - Gumbleton and Hansen.
Then its a raffle.
Thorp (an inbetweener), Proud (midfield), Seller (ruck), Leunbeuger (ruck), Collard (onballer), Jetta (onballer), Selwood (onballer), Pettard (onballer), Benjamin (onballer).
Then you have the smokies. For example Pendlebury wasn't on anybody's radar this time last season and neither was Thomas to a lesser extent.
There were six scouts looking at Nathan Brown two weeks ago (none from Essendon). He could easily go top ten judging by the interest in him.
Why does everybody have this thing that this draft is all about KPP.
With the exception of Gumbleton, Hansen and if you want to include Thorp (I don't personally going from what I've seen of Tassie) there is no more than any other year.
what about Riewoldt (Tassie)?
How do you know that Essendon scouts werent watching Nathan Brown 2 weeks ago? Where U at the game? They could of already looked at him
Daytripper
30 Aug 2006, 18:05
So you want to pass up the next two definete best players and take a lucky dip?
I was just rebutting your comment that the five next best players after Gibbs were KPP's.
They're not.
Taking Jetta, Collard, Proud or Selwood is not a lucky dip.
How do you know that Essendon scouts werent watching Nathan Brown 2 weeks ago? Where U at the game? They could of already looked at him
They may already have done so. Who knows.
Just going on what I was told. Essendon weren't there.
go_the_bombers
30 Aug 2006, 18:08
Just going on what I was told. Essendon weren't there.
Okay then!
Nuts4Bolts
30 Aug 2006, 18:09
I was just rebutting your comment that the five next best players after Gibbs were KPP's.
They're not.
Taking Jetta, Collard, Proud or Selwood is not a lucky dip.
Fair enough, I don't know much about the draft except for what I read. But you are saying to pick a player at No. 2 when he doesn't deserve to be pick 2.
daveyboy3
30 Aug 2006, 18:45
The next two definite best players are KPP - Gumbleton and Hansen.
Then its a raffle.
Thorp (an inbetweener), Proud (midfield), Seller (ruck), Leunbeuger (ruck), Collard (onballer), Jetta (onballer), Selwood (onballer), Pettard (onballer), Benjamin (onballer).
Then you have the smokies. For example Pendlebury wasn't on anybody's radar this time last season and neither was Thomas to a lesser extent.
There were six scouts looking at Nathan Brown two weeks ago (none from Essendon). He could easily go top ten judging by the interest in him.
Why does everybody have this thing that this draft is all about KPP.
With the exception of Gumbleton, Hansen and if you want to include Thorp (I don't personally going from what I've seen of Tassie) there is no more than any other year.
Don't think he'll go top 10
Daytripper
30 Aug 2006, 19:05
Fair enough, I don't know much about the draft except for what I read. But you are saying to pick a player at No. 2 when he doesn't deserve to be pick 2.
I'm not going to rehash an old argument.
marcuz, Dasawx and Longy will kill me.
Longy413
30 Aug 2006, 19:16
Daytripper, if the draft was tomorrow and Gibbs goes at pick 1, who would you draft?
Daytripper
30 Aug 2006, 19:20
Daytripper, if the draft was tomorrow and Gibbs goes at pick 1, who would you draft?
Jetta.
The wraps on him are big.
Sorry.
Longy413
30 Aug 2006, 19:21
Jetta.
The wraps on him are big.
Sorry.
Don't be sorry, I've heard different though.
But who's to know.
Jetta.
The wraps on him are big.
Sorry.
I thought there where several better midfielders than Jetta during the carnival. I would be very disapointed if they took Jetta at number two.
Geelong are slow - iceberg slow.
They've got a plethora of forwards - Ottens, Kingsley, Playfair, N Ablett.
I didnt say they has no forwards , i said reliable forwards. St.Kilda are hardly speedy through the middle but have shown you can win with good talls.
The best teams these days don't rely on KPP's. Its all about midfielders. The younger, smarter coaches (Wallace, Eade, Roos, Worsfold) are all drafting runners.
I reckon they'd know more about it than most of us.
As Longy pointed out they are not only Drafting runners.All four of them have taken talls.
By the way, has anyone actually physically seen Gumbleton or Hansen play yet ?
I look for Gumbleton's name in the WAFL best players each week and he is seldom there whilst Gibbs is consistently in the best for Glenelg. And there is a big difference in standard between the SANFL and WAFL
Saw all of Gumbletons games during the under 18's carnival and he was pretty impressive.
Have seen Hansen play 12 or so games this year including the Carnival games and he is the one in the draft i like the most for our first pick.
I think we will do well picking up midfielders later in the draft plus the likelyhood of getting Aker for a second round pick.
I am simply not getting sucked into the notion that you need a team of 185cm speedstars to win footy. It has been shown that if you man up the flood and move the ball quickly to good tall forwards you can win footy games.
go_the_bombers
30 Aug 2006, 20:06
Jetta.
The wraps on him are big.
Sorry.
:eek: Jetta at 2
I'll be honest I'd like him at Essendon but not with pick no.2
mcphee_is_a_gun
30 Aug 2006, 20:24
this would be my dream top 3 picks (realistically)
Pick 2: Scott Gumbleton
Pick 18: Brock O'Brian
Pick 34: Robert Eddy
kelvin_sheedy
30 Aug 2006, 20:34
Pick 18: Brock O'Brian
We need footy players not porn stars!;)
Longy413
30 Aug 2006, 21:40
Pick 34: Robert Eddy
I like Eddy and I'd draft him, but IMO he'll slip deeper than that.
mcphee_is_a_gun
30 Aug 2006, 21:45
I like Eddy and I'd draft him, but IMO he'll slip deeper than that.
Probably would considering he was passed on last year which i have no idea why, can win the ball, great skills maybe lack of legspeed? but from the championships should have no problems getting drafted. Could well be a bargain for whoever gets him.
Longy413
30 Aug 2006, 21:52
Probably would considering he was passed on last year which i have no idea why, can win the ball, great skills maybe lack of legspeed? but from the championships should have no problems getting drafted. Could well be a bargain for whoever gets him.
It's not suprising he didn't get picked up last year, he didn't play much TAC Cup footy and because he was bottom age he couldn't be rookied.
I agree, he is a good ball winner and does have neat skills. Also has a good motor. I haven't seen much of him this year, outside the Championships, where he was impressive. But I think the query on his leg speed might see him slip to a bit later in the draft though.
mcphee_is_a_gun
30 Aug 2006, 22:05
It's not suprising he didn't get picked up last year, he didn't play much TAC Cup footy and because he was bottom age he couldn't be rookied.
I agree, he is a good ball winner and does have neat skills. Also has a good motor. I haven't seen much of him this year, outside the Championships, where he was impressive. But I think the query on his leg speed might see him slip to a bit later in the draft though.
I just hope we're the ones to pick him up.
Daytripper
31 Aug 2006, 00:13
I am simply not getting sucked into the notion that you need a team of 185cm speedstars to win footy. It has been shown that if you man up the flood and move the ball quickly to good tall forwards you can win footy games.
Where has that been shown ?
Which top 4 side these days has a conventional CHF & FF ?
Where has that been shown ?
Which top 4 side these days has a conventional CHF & FF ?
Which top 4 side is playing the game without two or sometimes three players over 190cm in their forward line? Just because they lineup differently it doesnt stop them from being tall. I dont recall anywhere stating that it had to be conventional although the sides who dont line up that way mainly do so because their star players are located elsewhere.
Daytripper
31 Aug 2006, 09:29
Which top 4 side is playing the game without two or sometimes three players over 190cm in their forward line?
190cm is only 6ft 2.
Most midfielders are that height these days.
Pevers-Legend
31 Aug 2006, 11:32
Please draft a CHB. Or at least a BIG STRONG kid. None of these project players like Bradley and Ryder and Laycock (not commenting on their ability in any way). I just want a guy who is big and destined to play big. Not ruckman size, and not wafer thin size.
Who do we have to play on the following, and who are the teams that constantly beat us:
who do we have to play on the following:
Hall, Tredrea, Brown, Franklin, Pavlich, Lynch, Gehrig, Thompson.
We will sturggle to win games if we can't at the least contain these guys. Bradley and Soloman can't do it, Fletch shouldn't have to do it with all of them, so who is left?
All our eggs are in the one basket with Lee and Lucy. Need to get more players.
190cm is only 6ft 2.
Most midfielders are that height these days.
Best get yourself a copy of an AFL guide then as you will find that most players are under 187cm ;)
Stargazer
31 Aug 2006, 14:36
Having seen this kid play over here for Peel Thunder a few times this year and listening to others who have had an eye on him,I think he would be sound investment for the EFC.
He has played in a team that was seen as a basket case last year(they won one game) and has been a big part of Peel's improvment with his attacking style at the ball and goal kicking.They play a top 4 team in Claremont this week and it will be interesting to see how he applys himself for the last few games of the year before he gets drafted.I will be going down to have a real hard look at him.
We need more taller players who can run and kick goals.We need a c/half forward and a c/half back.This kid is about 6ft'4 and with a few added kilos shouldn't find it hard to get to his body big enough to play on the big boys in the AFL.
Gibbs is supposed to be good,but i think we can keep developing our own midfielders next season with Stanton,Dyson,Watson,Lovett, and JJ having a fresh start.Even NLM should get a go in the square....and don't forget Hird's control of centre bounces.
Everyones talking about pace and how draftees need to be good runners,but lets not forget how important tall skillful players are needed in the modern game.This club sure needs em.................
I think you'll find that if he doesn't go at pick one, he will certainly be gone by pick two.
I think you'll find that if he doesn't go at pick one, he will certainly be gone by pick two.
Hansen's just as good a chance
I am simply not getting sucked into the notion that you need a team of 185cm speedstars to win footy. It has been shown that if you man up the flood and move the ball quickly to good tall forwards you can win footy games.[/QUOTE]
We lost one game in 2000 due to flooding...and we had stellar fowards. They choked our forward 50 forcing us to kick long and wide of the square