View Full Version : picks other than thorp???
lion_gooner
23 Sep 2006, 15:31
i know alot ofyou think brisbane should get mitch thorp but who would you want in case essendon or north get him??? i wouldnt mind gumbleton :D
sherminator
23 Sep 2006, 16:03
i know alot ofyou think brisbane should get mitch thorp but who would you want in case essendon or north get him??? i wouldnt mind gumbleton :D
Lachlen Hansen, Joel Selwood, James Sellar, Gumbleton.
TheBrownDog
23 Sep 2006, 16:07
If THorp and Gumbelton were both available at pick 4, I reckon we'd take Gumbelton.
He wont slip to 4th though.
Grimreepah
23 Sep 2006, 18:16
I think it's good having pick 4 because the top 4 seem to be stand out players - Gibbs, Gumbleton, Hansen, Thorp (although Leuenberger could go anywhere). So if someone else takes Thorp I would have thought we will just take whoever is left.
lion_gooner
23 Sep 2006, 18:45
gumbleton can play at both ends cant he? the same with hansenam i right? where as thorp is purely a key backman?
lion_gooner
23 Sep 2006, 18:46
they wouldnt need luenbgerger would they not with charman and wood and hopefully clark
I'd say it is very unlikely to pick up a ruck with our first pick again. Our ruck stocks are still lookin pretty good even with keating out.
Grimreepah
23 Sep 2006, 19:06
gumbleton can play at both ends cant he? the same with hansenam i right? where as thorp is purely a key backman?
That's not what I have heard. I've been hearing that Thorp can play anywhere along the spine, and in fact is even more versatile than Gumbleton and Hansen because he has supreme athleticism for a big man and can play in the midfield as well. Not that he is a better player necessarily, but a lack of versatility is not a problem.
lion_gooner
23 Sep 2006, 19:25
wow :O thorp could be like adem goodes that would be sweet as :D:D:D:D
Bobby Beecroft
23 Sep 2006, 19:26
That's not what I have heard. I've been hearing that Thorp can play anywhere along the spine, and in fact is even more versatile than Gumbleton and Hansen because he has supreme athleticism for a big man and can play in the midfield as well. Not that he is a better player necessarily, but a lack of versatility is not a problem.
Ive seen in play in the VFL & in one of those games he played up both ends forward & back. Finished in their best players on that day, & was great up either end.
Tom Hislop was also impressive on that occassion, & would also be a handy pick-up.
sherminator
23 Sep 2006, 19:39
wow :O thorp could be like adem goodes that would be sweet as :D:D:D:D
I LOL'd at this. I dont know why :thumbsu:
Grimreepah
23 Sep 2006, 20:18
wow :O thorp could be like adem goodes that would be sweet as :D:D:D:D
Matthews has said he wants runners, so Thorp seems better suited to our needs than Gumbleton and Hansen as well. He has been likened to Pavlich but I can see him being used more like Goodes if he joins the Lions.
The other players that I have heard as possibilities for our first round pick are Selwood, Jetta, Leuenberger and Proud.
lion_gooner
23 Sep 2006, 21:42
yeah obviously thorp would be the best choice but yeah i wanted to see who everyone else thought brisbane should get should essendon or north get him
roostersgal4eva
24 Sep 2006, 16:03
AAron Edwards
Im listening to the roosters play cause im layed up in bed...(we r winning btw :D) and hes having a corker of a final
BigCat2
24 Sep 2006, 16:08
I hope the Lions take whichever of Gibbs, Gumbleton, Hansen and Thorp is available. Given the first three have been bracketed as 'the top 3', I think Thorp is most likely.
With the top 3, there's a very, very good chance they'll become good/great players in AFL. With Thorp, there is more risk that he won't turn out decent, but his overall package also means that he has the potential to be something special. Slightly higher risk for great potential is still very much worth a punt.
Warwick
24 Sep 2006, 16:25
I've just got this strange feeling we will end up taking Leuenberger. I know we don't need a ruckman, but Matthews loves them.
BigCat2
24 Sep 2006, 16:29
I've just got this strange feeling we will end up taking Leuenberger. I know we don't need a ruckman, but Matthews loves them.
Does that mean Lenny Clark gets the boot? Otherwise 5 ruckmen is way too many, even for Matthews.
In our golden years, we had Crackers, Beau, Charman and Knobel/McLaren. We almost always had one or more ruckmen injured in that period too.
4 or 5 fully fit ruckemn sounds like too many, given how few vacant spots we have on our list.
Grimreepah
24 Sep 2006, 16:35
I've just got this strange feeling we will end up taking Leuenberger. I know we don't need a ruckman, but Matthews loves them.
What makes you say Matthews loves them?
Presuming all ruckmen are fit, who would be our starting ruckmen? If it is Charman and Wood, then they may choose to delist Beau and develop Lenny Clark, and also take Leuenberger.
Warwick
24 Sep 2006, 16:51
When Matthews came to the club we had Keating and McDonald. Since that time we have drafted or traded for Carey, McLaren, Knobel, Charman, Wood, and Clark. He also brought in Merrett, Brennan and Spaanderman who could play in the ruck. I think he definately understands the important role they play in a team, and has not been afraid in using high picks to get them (4 of those players were selected with our first pick in the draft).
I'm not complaining, because our flags could, in part, be attributed to such a strong ruck depth. Look at Collingwood and St Kilda - their lack of quality big men has been one of their downfalls (Collingwood in 02-03 and St Kilda 04-06).
BigCat2
24 Sep 2006, 16:57
We picked up Spaandermann (shudder) and Wood only because we had such late picks, and at the time they were seen as good pick ups. Certainly in the case of Wood we couldn't believe that he slipped so far and were more than happy to take him.
We picked up Mitchell Clark mainly as a key forward. At this stage the club wouldn't use him excessively in the ruck.
Even when we had 4 ruckmen, Keating and Beau were already well established, with the other 2 being developing rucks. Right now, we have Charman and Beau as the established big men (Beau being injured a lot). Woody has shown development but isn't the finished project yet, while Lenny Clark has potential. Just not sure even Leigh Matthews would want too many developing ruckmen at the same time, because it isn't necessary.
Warwick
24 Sep 2006, 17:22
I meant Lenny (even though we got him as a mature rookie), not Mitch (even though, when i think about it, Mitch could be used in the ruck if needed). If you included Mitch, that makes 5 players picked up with our first pick in a draft that could play in the ruck (i know he is being groomed as a key forward, and will probably not play in the ruck again, i am just saying).
I am just making a point, that it is not impossible that we may consider Leuenberger with an early pick (possibly if we get another one). Matthews values ruckmen which has been shown to be an effective strategy. If Leuenberger is being compared to Cox (running, possession ruckman with great skills), and Charman continues to improve as a forward, i think there could be room to have Charman, Leuenberger and Wood in the one team. When Charman rests from the ruck, he goes up forward to provide a target, while Leuenberger and Wood interchange in the ruck. I'm not saying this will happen (particularly after the call to grab more running midfielders), but i wouldn't be shooting myself if this were the case.
We need to add more speed to our team, and i personally hope we take either a KPP with pick 4 or a hard-running midfielder. If a couple of our ruckmen get injured, we can always use Merrett or Brennan as emergencies. In saying that, even if i don't agree, i would not be the least surprised if we pick up a ruckman somewhere in the draft.
I don't understand why there is such a reluctance to draft ruckmen, particularly if they are quality. I know they will never appear on t-shirt commercials or win the brownlow, but they are often some of the most important players in the game (Cox, Darcy, Charman, Sandilands, White, Jolley etc). I am just glad we have Charman and Wood.
Grimreepah
24 Sep 2006, 17:38
The bash and crash ruckmen are being phased out of the game with the advent of the 4metre circle (bad luck for Crackers). This favours the tall ruckmen because their opponents can't outbody them in the contest anymore, and we can see Sandilands is utilising this to full advantage now.
Charman being 197cm is a small ruckman these days although he seems to have a very good vertical leap. The others are Wood (204cm), Beau (204cm) and Lenny Clark (203cm) who are the probably the three tallest players we have ever had.
Leuenberger is already 202cm and you would think still has a fair bit of growing left in him. He also has the ability to cover the ground. The recruiters may think that the opportunity is just too good to pass up, because he is the prototype as far as ruckmen go nowadays. But I think it would be at the cost of either Beau of Lenny Clarke.
It would be an investment for the future, and the fans would have to be patient, but in 2 or 3 years the rewards may be very fruitful.
BigCat2
24 Sep 2006, 18:03
Warwick, you make good points for why ruckmen are important, and it is true that Matthews has gone down that path. I just think there comes a time when you have enough of something, you'll do something else.
It is true we have recruited ruckmen in the last few years. You say that this is an indication that we may recruit more ruckmen. My read is that it's an indication that we're already full of ruckmen.
It'd be interesting to see what happens. :)
lion_gooner
24 Sep 2006, 18:17
i doubt luenberger would still be available at pick 4 coz essendon and carlton need a good ruckman so i reckon he will go 1 or 2
sherminator
24 Sep 2006, 18:33
If we're going for ruckman it'll be in the rookie draft
Warwick
24 Sep 2006, 18:43
I bet we will take a ruckman in this year's draft.
sherminator
24 Sep 2006, 18:52
I bet we will take a ruckman in this year's draft.
*edit* Probaly rookie listed or PSD
Bobby Beecroft
24 Sep 2006, 19:00
Have I missed something or has Lenny Clark been upgraded to the senior list?
Seems as though ppl are taking this as done.
If Clark is upgraded, I would be extremely suprised if we took Leuneberger.
While on Ruckman Im of the opinion that it is negligent to ever be in the situation where we do not have a ruckman on the Rookie List.
I just think we will take whoever is left out of Gibbs, Gumbleton, Hanson & Thorp. If Leuneberger was to go top 3 then it would be interesting.
PS. The word is that there is two outstanding Ruckman up in next years draft.
sherminator
24 Sep 2006, 19:04
Have I missed something or has Lenny Clark been upgraded to the senior list?
Seems as though ppl are taking this as done.
If Clark is upgraded, I would be extremely suprised if we took Leuneberger.
While on Ruckman Im of the opinion that it is negligent to ever be in the situation where we do not have a ruckman on the Rookie List.
I just think we will take whoever is left out of Gibbs, Gumbleton, Hanson & Thorp. If Leuneberger was to go top 3 then it would be interesting.
PS. The word is that there is two outstanding Ruckman up in next years draft.
Kruezer is the one to look out for come enxt year, probaly going to be better than Leuenberger IMO. Very, very athletic.
BigCat2
24 Sep 2006, 19:06
Hopefully next year we finish high enough on the ladder. ;)
BB you're right - we're probably a bit premature in counting Lenny Clark, as he is still a rookie at the moment. He's too old to stay a rookie though, so something will happen to him regardless.
lion_gooner
24 Sep 2006, 20:01
hopefully he will get promoted in place of crackers :D
Yay! Go Lenny! I really hope so. Go the Lenny Clark Club!
lion_gooner
24 Sep 2006, 22:34
yes indeed go the lenny clark club why cant there be one for melbourne people :(
sherminator
24 Sep 2006, 23:53
yes indeed go the lenny clark club why cant there be one for melbourne people :(
Ditto. But we have the Sherman and Mitch Clark Club, lead by yours truly. :thumbsu:
Probably won't go first round, but there's a bloke from Gippsland Power called Eddy who goes alright. A tallish midfielder who's a ball-magnet. He might be a chance for the Aker replacement.
BigCat2
25 Sep 2006, 00:08
Probably won't go first round, but there's a bloke from Gippsland Power called Eddy who goes alright. A tallish midfielder who's a ball-magnet. He might be a chance for the Aker replacement.
We already have the new Aker in Sherman. :thumbsu:
Although more gun midfielders certainly doesn't hurt. ;)
lion_gooner
25 Sep 2006, 00:15
i reckon they need a player like shaun hart i think theres a rover kind of player like him from qld
Quigley
27 Sep 2006, 00:25
I agree with Sherm in that we should have a ruck on the rookie list and 3 rucks plus clark is probably enough.
Given they have changed the rookie list rules there is a chance that if the Lions thought highly enough of Clarke they could carry him as their mature age rookie next year.
For me I am pushing for Selwood at the 4. He could turn into a Voss like extractor and I think the team really needs that. He was talked about as a potential number 1 last year and is considered a great leader (always hard though with an older brother in the team).
If like Irel forecasts we lose Bradshaw we could well end with a couple of high first round choices (pick 7 anyone) in which case it is not beyond the realms of possibility that we could end up with Thorpe and Selwood or Proud.
BigCat2
27 Sep 2006, 00:34
At the moment, I think Braddy is a required player at the club, and he's never said he wants to leave (despite what Ron Joseph might have said). The only reason he'll be traded is if they can't agree on a sum.
Say he goes to Geelong for pick 7. Even with that pick we're guaranteed to get both Thorp and Selwood, as it's very possible for Port or Hawthorn to jump in.
TheBrownDog
27 Sep 2006, 00:47
Picture of Thorp in this article (http://www.examiner.com.au/story.asp?id=361436)
Very solidly built for a 17 year old. Like the look of him.
Grimreepah
27 Sep 2006, 00:55
Picture of Thorp in this article (http://www.examiner.com.au/story.asp?id=361436)
Very solidly built for a 17 year old. Like the look of him.
Read that he has put a lot of that bulk on in recent times - has gone from 80kg to 90kg in 12 months.
It's a shame he looks like Mark Bolton (especially in that Bombers guernsey).
BigCat2
27 Sep 2006, 01:05
It's a shame he looks like Mark Bolton (especially in that Bombers guernsey).
Once he pulls on the Lions jumper, he'll be good. Just you wait. :thumbsu:
Grimreepah
27 Sep 2006, 10:50
Once he pulls on the Lions jumper, he'll be good. Just you wait. :thumbsu:
pick 4 1997, Mark Bolton 195cm, 91kg (http://www.essendonfc.com.au/team/player.asp?id=7)
http://www.essendonfc.com.au/images/players2006/bolt.jpg
pick 4 2006, Mitch Thorp 195cm, 91kg (http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=12262):eek:
http://www.examiner.com.au/_ScriptLibrary/thumbnail.asp?id=361436
BigCat2
27 Sep 2006, 21:55
Ahh, but Mitch is such a cool name compared to ol' Mark...
And we'll train up the kid the right way at the Gabba, I have faith. :thumbsu:
Grimreepah
27 Sep 2006, 22:06
Ahh, but Mitch is such a cool name compared to ol' Mark...
And we'll train up the kid the right way at the Gabba, I have faith. :thumbsu:
Even though they are exactly the same height and weight (amazing coincidence I think) Thorp still has more growing in him.
It's funny I think of 195cm as a good height that could get a run in the midfield if athletic enough, but I think of a 200cm player as a monster and there's no way someone that size could play in the midfield. But 5cm isn't that much really.
Be interesting how much growing is left in him.
BigCat2
27 Sep 2006, 22:25
Height is really hard to say. I thought Leppa was a monster, but he's only 191cm. Chris Scott is 'tiny' at 182cm, yet he plays on tall forwards a lot of weeks.
For comparison's sake, Richard Hadley is 190cm.
Last year we also saw Browny get used in the centre to great effect (not recommended as far as health goes), but sometimes maybe we should think outside the square a bit.