2007 Draftees

[bloods01]

The most anticiapted day on the football calendar has arrived. Lets try and keep it to one thread for the discussion of today's draftees. :thumbsu:

[bloods01]

The most anticiapted day on the football calendar has arrived. Lets try and keep it to one thread for the discussion of today's draftees. :thumbsu:

11. PATRICK VESZPREMI

Northern Knights, VIC, Small defender/forward, September 1 1989, 181.2cm, 84.8kg

Bio: A strong, versatile player who influences the game with his exceptional ball use. Veszpremi was a standout for the Knights in their victory in the first qualifying final against Gippsland, booting eight goals. He is a graduate of the 2006/07 AIS-AFL Academy program and toured South Africa in April. From St Mary's FC.

[bloods01]

26. BRETT MEREDITH

Northern Knights, VIC, Small defender, January 20 1989, 181.2cm, 81.5kg

Bio: Versatile type who is an excellent kick and dangerous around goal. Vic Metro U18 representative this year. From Bundoora FC.

[grimlock]

What did I say in the other thread? This is not a surprise. Expect us to get some mature talls in the rookie draft.

[bloods01]

I cannot beleive that we used both out live picks on midfielders. We are in desperate need of KP player's and yet again we opt for midfielders. Very dissapointed!

[is2SWaNz]

Hm... I'd thought we were going for taller defenders. :confused: Roos, you amaze me.

[bloods01]

Hm... I'd thought we were going for taller players. :confused: Roos, you amaze me.

Tell me about it? He was interviewed on SEN before the draft and hinted that they would go best available at 11 and then assess it at 26. If they got a midfielder at 11 then they would look at a tall at 26. Soon we will have a team of 180cm midfielders playing in key positions.

[bloods01]

59. CRAIG BIRD

Nelson Bay, NSW, Small midfielder, January 21 1989, 178cm, 76kg

Bio: Small ball-winning midfielder who had outstanding 2007 NAB AFL U18 Championships, winning the Harrison Medal (Div 2 B & F) and back-to-back All-Australian honours. He also captained NSW/ACT to Div 2 title and accumulated 85 disposals (third most overall) at an average of 28 per match. Also won Alan McLean Medal in 2005 NAB AFL U16 Championships (Div 2 B & F). Graduate of the AIS/AFL Academy.

[is2SWaNz]

More info about Veszpremi (from Vic Crow)

He has confidence by the bucket load, loves to tuck the ball under his arm and back himself in and has explosive pace. Runs a sub 3.00 20m sprint. He is aggressive, an arrogant sort of footy player, has plenty of X Factor and I am convinced that he will be a superstar. Thing is, he is not really talked about as a really early selection and I think he will fall to Pick 10. In my mind we would be mental not to take him.

Now for a bit of excitement. Today in the TAC Cup Qualifying Final the Knights were struggling in the first. He started on the bench and had an immediate impact in the forward line. He rotated between the bench and the forward pocket and kicked 8.4 off 14 kicks.

He can play anywhere. Great in the guts and has a very strong upper body so he does plenty of grunt work. His pace off the mark and strength often allows him to bust through traffic with the ball. I've seen him play in a sweeping role across the half back flank and when he pinches up forward he's always good for some goals. Today was the first time I've seen him spend a sustained period of time up forward and he finished with 12 scoring shots (8.4) in swirly conditions at Optus Oval.

[Maestro15]

More info about Veszpremi (from Vic Crow)

He has confidence by the bucket load, loves to tuck the ball under his arm and back himself in and has explosive pace. Runs a sub 3.00 20m sprint. He is aggressive, an arrogant sort of footy player, has plenty of X Factor and I am convinced that he will be a superstar. Thing is, he is not really talked about as a really early selection and I think he will fall to Pick 10. In my mind we would be mental not to take him.

Now for a bit of excitement. Today in the TAC Cup Qualifying Final the Knights were struggling in the first. He started on the bench and had an immediate impact in the forward line. He rotated between the bench and the forward pocket and kicked 8.4 off 14 kicks.

He can play anywhere. Great in the guts and has a very strong upper body so he does plenty of grunt work. His pace off the mark and strength often allows him to bust through traffic with the ball. I've seen him play in a sweeping role across the half back flank and when he pinches up forward he's always good for some goals. Today was the first time I've seen him spend a sustained period of time up forward and he finished with 12 scoring shots (8.4) in swirly conditions at Optus Oval.

Sounds good:thumbsu:

[FM0226]

Wow, that's really as horrible as it gets.
I can live with Veszpremi at #11, he sounds like a good prospect.
But getting a small defender at 26 as well? And with Craig Bird already picked?

Murphy better turn out to be able to play KPP, and Jesse White better turn out better than we thought, otherwise I'll hate to see what we kind of list we have for 2009.

[bloods01]

Wow, that's really as horrible as it gets.
I can live with Veszpremi at #11, he sounds like a good prospect.
But getting a small defender at 26 as well? And with Craig Bird already picked?

Murphy better turn out to be able to play KPP, and Jesse White better turn out better than we thought, otherwise I'll hate to see what we kind of list we have for 2009.

My sentiments exactly. Veszpremi could be a fine for us. But surely we could have better used pick 26. It's nothing against young Meredith, we don't know much about him, but we desperately needed height on our list.

[FM0226]

And especially when the next pick is Andy Otten, he's not a KP prospect but seem to offer something different to us than Meredith might. Swans' recruitment team better hope young Meredith turns out better than Ottens.

And it's not exactly a great surprise that all half decent KP prospects are gone by 26 while Rance and Collier were still on the board at 11. I just hope we got a few spaces on the Rookie draft to hopefully grab a few talls.

I guess we can just hope that Hall and C.Bolton can keep playing at a high till their mid-30s.

[bloods01]

And especially when the next pick is Andy Otten, he's not a KP prospect but seem to offer something different to us than Meredith might. Swans' recruitment team better hope young Meredith turns out better than Ottens.

And it's not exactly a great surprise that all half decent KP prospects are gone by 26 while Rance and Collier were still on the board at 11. I just hope we got a few spaces on the Rookie draft to hopefully grab a few talls.

I guess we can just hope that Hall and C.Bolton can keep playing at a high till their mid-30s.

The Crows snapped Otten up very quickly. He stood at 188cm and 91kg and would have been ideal for us.

We might have to ask Dunkley to come our of retirement and take a KP defensive post. I'm so dissapointed after today.

[FM0226]

The Crows snapped Otten up very quickly. He stood at 188cm and 91kg and would have been ideal for us.

We might have to ask Dunkley to come our of retirement and take a KP defensive post. I'm so dissapointed after today.

Make that two of us.
Maybe Roos wants to come out of retirement himself, that's why he's relunctant to draft KP prospects so that he doesn't have to compete with them for a spot. :D

[liz]

And especially when the next pick is Andy Otten, he's not a KP prospect but seem to offer something different to us than Meredith might. Swans' recruitment team better hope young Meredith turns out better than Ottens.

If Otten isn't really a KPP, I can't see why we should think he'd be a better option than Meredith. Of course he may become a better player but none of us will have a clue for a few years. We already have Malceski and Mattner at a similar height, plus the taller Goodes and Barlow offering taller midfield options.

I just hope we got a few spaces on the Rookie draft to hopefully grab a few talls.




We only have one pick in the main part of the rookie draft. With O'Loughlin and Barry now 'outside' veterans, we only get 4 non-NSW rookies. Smith, Orreal and Murphy already occupy 3 of those spots.

Wonder if there are some tall NSW "gems" hidden away...

If Rowe qualifies to be taken as a local player, I'll be surprised if he's not re-rookied. There's not much flair to his game but I reckon he could yet become a very solid, no-nonsence key defender.

[Benevolent Ert]

Patrick Veszpremi – Northern Knights
Ht: 181 cm Wt: 83 kg
Junior position – Midfield/ Utility
AFL position – Midfield/ Utility
A footballer’s footballer. Tough, smart, hard, skilled and extremely determined. Injuries curtailed his output this year. Firstly a thumb injury and secondly a bad shoulder which he played with till the end of the year.
Strengths: Strong body who attacks each contest with fierce desire. Good kick and mark for his size. Pace is good enough and could play back, forward or midfield in the AFL. Think of a bigger, quicker Gary Moorcroft and you are on the right track.
Weaknesses: Hard to rate where his endurance fitness is at because he has had such an interrupted year. If he tests lower than he should (may not test at all because of shoulder surgery) I wouldn’t be concerned. Veszpremi will work and work until he improves. Veszpremi also has a tendency to break tackles and packs (and mostly succeeds) however against AFL bodies he will find it a tougher ask.
Question marks: Has he been a man playing against boys?
Draft Prediction: 15-35
Stats: TAC 2007. Must be remembered that Veszpremi played many games hurt and deep forward. However, Veszpremi’s disposal by foot is elite. 130 effective kicks with only 36 ineffective kicks. He was less efficient by hand with 35 effective handballs compared to 23 ineffective handballs. Veszpremi kicked 34 goals from 11 games which included 8 goals in a wonderful solo performance.



Brett Meredith – Northern Knights
Ht: 182 cm Wt: 81 kg

Junior position – HBF/ Midfield

AFL position – Small Defender/ Midfield

Meredith is a skilled medium sized utility which are a dime a dozen in the TAC competition. He has spent time at Half Back and Ruck Roving during the year and gets a lot of the footy.
Strengths: Meredith is a smooth mover who is usually in the right spots on the footy field. Meredith gets plenty of the footy playing either in the backline or on the ball. He is equally at home playing across half back and on the ball. He looks best suited to the rebounding small defender AFL role if he is to make it.
Weaknesses: Meredith can be a little loose when playing back or on the ball- he could work further on the defensive side of his game. Meredith is inconsistent with his kicking. Can have good and bad days by foot. He doesn’t have anything athletically special about him to separate him from the glut of players his size.

Question marks:

Draft Prediction: 50+/rookie/undrafted
Stats: TAC 2007. Meredith had 130 effective kicks compared to 49 ineffective which is only average. He averages 8 handball receives which shows he gets to contests and is willing to run forward. Only 6 contested marks from 14 games when playing a fair amount of time Half Back is a query on his one on one skills I feel.

[RUNVS]

Patrick Veszpremi
- Was Predicted that he would go between picks 15 and 35
- We got him for pick 11


Brett Meredith
- Was predicted he would be picked after pick 50
- We got him at pick 26

[ssfc0203]

Patrick Veszpremi
- Was Predicted that he would go between picks 15 and 35
- We got him for pick 11


Brett Meredith
- Was predicted he would be picked after pick 50
- We got him at pick 26
Still, they're only opinions.

As it said, Veszpremi was injured throughout most of the year, and has shown the tendency to work hard at it and improve. Maybe if he had been at full fitness he would've gone on to a higher pick?
Personally, I was hoping for either him or Rance, with a tall option at #26. Have to hope and pray the rookie draft will be as good a turnout as it has been in past years.

[bloods01]

Patrick Veszpremi – Northern Knights
Ht: 181 cm Wt: 83 kg
Junior position – Midfield/ Utility
AFL position – Midfield/ Utility
A footballer’s footballer. Tough, smart, hard, skilled and extremely determined. Injuries curtailed his output this year. Firstly a thumb injury and secondly a bad shoulder which he played with till the end of the year.
Strengths: Strong body who attacks each contest with fierce desire. Good kick and mark for his size. Pace is good enough and could play back, forward or midfield in the AFL. Think of a bigger, quicker Gary Moorcroft and you are on the right track.
Weaknesses: Hard to rate where his endurance fitness is at because he has had such an interrupted year. If he tests lower than he should (may not test at all because of shoulder surgery) I wouldn’t be concerned. Veszpremi will work and work until he improves. Veszpremi also has a tendency to break tackles and packs (and mostly succeeds) however against AFL bodies he will find it a tougher ask.
Question marks: Has he been a man playing against boys?
Draft Prediction: 15-35
Stats: TAC 2007. Must be remembered that Veszpremi played many games hurt and deep forward. However, Veszpremi’s disposal by foot is elite. 130 effective kicks with only 36 ineffective kicks. He was less efficient by hand with 35 effective handballs compared to 23 ineffective handballs. Veszpremi kicked 34 goals from 11 games which included 8 goals in a wonderful solo performance.



Brett Meredith – Northern Knights
Ht: 182 cm Wt: 81 kg

Junior position – HBF/ Midfield

AFL position – Small Defender/ Midfield

Meredith is a skilled medium sized utility which are a dime a dozen in the TAC competition. He has spent time at Half Back and Ruck Roving during the year and gets a lot of the footy.
Strengths: Meredith is a smooth mover who is usually in the right spots on the footy field. Meredith gets plenty of the footy playing either in the backline or on the ball. He is equally at home playing across half back and on the ball. He looks best suited to the rebounding small defender AFL role if he is to make it.
Weaknesses: Meredith can be a little loose when playing back or on the ball- he could work further on the defensive side of his game. Meredith is inconsistent with his kicking. Can have good and bad days by foot. He doesn’t have anything athletically special about him to separate him from the glut of players his size.

Question marks:

Draft Prediction: 50+/rookie/undrafted
Stats: TAC 2007. Meredith had 130 effective kicks compared to 49 ineffective which is only average. He averages 8 handball receives which shows he gets to contests and is willing to run forward. Only 6 contested marks from 14 games when playing a fair amount of time Half Back is a query on his one on one skills I feel.

Our entire team is basically filled with medium sized utilities. Gourids and Geartner are two guys that were very highly rated coming into today and they both missed out. Surely either of those two guys would have been a better option than Meredith in terms of a needs basis.

[ssfc0203]

Still, they're only opinions.

As it said, Veszpremi was injured throughout most of the year, and has shown the tendency to work hard at it and improve. Maybe if he had been at full fitness he would've gone on to a higher pick?
Personally, I was hoping for either him or Rance, with a tall option at #26. Have to hope and pray the rookie draft will be as good a turnout as it has been in past years.
Wanted to ask another question, how does the scholarship scheme work? Is it like hunting around for talent and pre-selecting?

[liz]

Our entire team is basically filled with medium sized utilities. Gourids and Geartner are two guys that were very highly rated coming into today and they both missed out. Surely either of those two guys would have been a better option than Meredith in terms of a needs basis.


15 other clubs didn't seem to think they warranted a spot either. Maybe that is because they are not as good as BF "opinion" suggests.

[liz]

Wanted to ask another question, how does the scholarship scheme work? Is it like hunting around for talent and pre-selecting?

Only available for players in Northern NSW. Not sure exactly where the line across the state is drawn but the ACT and Riverina areas aren't included, while Broken Hill is.

It is aimed at clubs identifying talent between 14 and 17 yos - ie usually two to three years before they are draftable, and then providing some assistance (monetary and maybe coaching / training camps) while they develop. The objective is to identify talent that may be swayed towards another sport and encouraging them to stick with (or maybe even convert to) AFL.

Once a player reaches drafting age, the sponsoring club can pre-select that player onto their list (senior or, if they are old enough, rookie) and use their last pick in the draft to take them. I presume the player has to agree to this so that a club can't force a player to join them as a rookie if he thinks he has a decent chance of getting drafted onto a senior list, or if he's decided he hates his sponsoring club.

At the moment clubs can take up to 2 players a year as new scholarship holders.

Craig Bird was not a typical selection last year since he was already of draftable age when he was taken. So he wasn't really within the intended spirit of the scheme.

The Swans have two more on their list - a ruckman with a double barrelled name that puts LRT to shame (RBN or RNB?) and a smaller running player from the central coast area (Jay Lewis).

Others of note who may get drafted next year include Scott Reed (who Collingwood fans are convinced is the best thing ever - well, since Marty Clarke, anyway) and Ranga Wickirama (I know I've spelt that incorrectly) who is a lively midsized half forward who played a few games with the Swans reserves early in the season and had one very good game in this year's U18 championships.

[FM0226]

If Otten isn't really a KPP, I can't see why we should think he'd be a better option than Meredith. Of course he may become a better player but none of us will have a clue for a few years. We already have Malceski and Mattner at a similar height, plus the taller Goodes and Barlow offering taller midfield options.


We also have around 16 players on our senior list that are sub-184cm (and a high proportion of our younger players being so) and most of which are small defenders/midfielders. We have also drafted 6 players that are mediums in the first two rounds since 2002, and none of which had turned out to be the top level midfielder (yet) we seem to be forever searching for.

We already have trouble finding a senior place for the likes of Schmidt, Jack and Moore in the side, with Thornton and Brabazon yet to get a game. If Crouch is fully fit and with LRT going back to CHB and Craig Bolton going back to playing on medium forwards, Bevan is in the mix as well and of course we have Daniel O'Keefe who we drafted in the super-draft. Bird is practically a second-year player for us and we need to give him some playing time sooner rather than later.

With Kirk being outstanding. J.Bolton sighing a new contract and Fosdike and Matthews being seemingly undroppables. Where do we find space to play these players? How about Buchanan who is in and out of the side last year, but one of our best players in the past few years?

What Otten can offer us is flexibility. If he is as Pendlebury like as reported, than obviously we don't need to argue much. But at the very least, he's tall enough and can hold down a flanker spot and free up Malceski to go up forward more in the bigger grounds and if good enough, provide us with some marking ability in midfield.

Last year we played J.Bolton a lot in the forward flank which I thought was an utter disaster. Fosdike also ends up there a lot and I have severe questions about his disposal skills. Somewhere down the track, we might want to trial Barlow at FF, which might be the spot that can fully utilise his skills - creativity, a good lead, and a good set shot.

No, Otten probably doesn't solve or address our needs right now, but offers us more flexibility than another small/medium will at this moment in time.

[scottwade]

I saw Veszpremi play a bit in 2006 and he was very good. Coming into the year he would generally have been seen as a top 5 draft candidate, but he had a few injuries (shoulder & thumb) and the WA guys went past him.

No problems with him @11, although he doesn't fill a need.

Meredith I know nothing about, but as everybody else has said another small.

If the belief was that no tall was going to be good enough @ selection 26, given our dearth of talls then we should have swooped @ 11.

Veszpremi is certainly a good player and Meredith may be (according to the AFL's draft guru Burgan, one recruiter likened Meredith to Nick Stevens*), but Barry, Everitt, Hall, & O'Loughlin are KPP/Rucks in our best 22, who may well all be gone by the end of next season.

In truth I am more pissed off that we passed up Mitch Brown or Chris Dawes last year. Last year was seen as arguably the best KPP draft ever and we chose an outside midfielder. :mad:




* Wonder if it was one of our guys?

[Maestro15]

Do any of you think that Craig Bird will get a game next year? I really hope he does.

[bloods01]

We also have around 16 players on our senior list that are sub-184cm (and a high proportion of our younger players being so) and most of which are small defenders/midfielders. We have also drafted 6 players that are mediums in the first two rounds since 2002, and none of which had turned out to be the top level midfielder (yet) we seem to be forever searching for.

We already have trouble finding a senior place for the likes of Schmidt, Jack and Moore in the side, with Thornton and Brabazon yet to get a game. If Crouch is fully fit and with LRT going back to CHB and Craig Bolton going back to playing on medium forwards, Bevan is in the mix as well and of course we have Daniel O'Keefe who we drafted in the super-draft. Bird is practically a second-year player for us and we need to give him some playing time sooner rather than later.

With Kirk being outstanding. J.Bolton sighing a new contract and Fosdike and Matthews being seemingly undroppables. Where do we find space to play these players? How about Buchanan who is in and out of the side last year, but one of our best players in the past few years?

What Otten can offer us is flexibility. If he is as Pendlebury like as reported, than obviously we don't need to argue much. But at the very least, he's tall enough and can hold down a flanker spot and free up Malceski to go up forward more in the bigger grounds and if good enough, provide us with some marking ability in midfield.

Last year we played J.Bolton a lot in the forward flank which I thought was an utter disaster. Fosdike also ends up there a lot and I have severe questions about his disposal skills. Somewhere down the track, we might want to trial Barlow at FF, which might be the spot that can fully utilise his skills - creativity, a good lead, and a good set shot.

No, Otten probably doesn't solve or address our needs right now, but offers us more flexibility than another small/medium will at this moment in time.

FMO226 you make some outstanding observations. It's pretty much along my train of thought. I'm not that dissapointed about Veszpremi. I would've preffered a Rance becuase we have no key backman. But I can live with his selection. But at least level things out with a tall at 26 considering we already had Bird with 59. I think some serious questions have to be asked about our recruting policies.

[RUNVS]

Do any of you think that Craig Bird will get a game next year? I really hope he does.

I think he will.

[bloods01]

I saw Veszpremi play a bit in 2006 and he was very good. Coming into the year he would generally have been seen as a top 5 draft candidate, but he had a few injuries (shoulder & thumb) and the WA guys went past him.

No problems with him @11, although he doesn't fill a need.

Meredith I know nothing about, but as everybody else has said another small.

If the belief was that no tall was going to be good enough @ selection 26, given our dearth of talls then we should have swooped @ 11.

Veszpremi is certainly a good player and Meredith may be (according to the AFL's draft guru Burgan, one recruiter likened Meredith to Nick Stevens*), but Barry, Everitt, Hall, & O'Loughlin are KPP/Rucks in our best 22, who may well all be gone by the end of next season.

In truth I am more pissed off that we passed up Mitch Brown or Chris Dawes last year. Last year was seen as arguably the best KPP draft ever and we chose an outside midfielder. :mad:




* Wonder if it was one of our guys?

Spot on. Neither of these two player's fill a need. I also was hoping that we picked up either of the Brown brothers last year also. We missed the boat with Rance though. He's a Darren Glass type defender and the Tigers would be rapt with him.

[bloods01]

I think he will.

He's no chance if we go by our "a year in the reserves" policy. Not many play the next year anyway.

[bloods01]

15 other clubs didn't seem to think they warranted a spot either. Maybe that is because they are not as good as BF "opinion" suggests.

I'm not going on BF opinion. It's based on expert analyisis, not conjecture.

[Quigley]

Murphy and Bird in the one year is a fantastic result for you guys. Anything else is gravy.

[SamSwan]

Schneider + Dempster = Brett Meredith - Not a great result.

Should of kept Schneider if we are not replacing him with KPP.
In reality Meredith needs to be a 100 Gamer for this deal to have benefitted the Swannies.

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Can someone tell me why we passed on Rance?

[RUNVS]

Schneider + Dempster = Brett Meredith - Not a great result.

Should of kept Schneider if we are not replacing him with KPP.
In reality Meredith needs to be a 100 Gamer for this deal to have benefitted the Swannies.

True. Also could Meredith have a girlier last name?

[bloods01]

Schneider + Dempster = Brett Meredith - Not a great result.

Should of kept Schneider if we are not replacing him with KPP.
In reality Meredith needs to be a 100 Gamer for this deal to have benefitted the Swannies.

It's early to call but that pick should have been used on a KP player. It's only logical.

[bloods01]

Can someone tell me why we passed on Rance?

I have been asking myself the same question all day. Big, strong, tall defenders dont grow on trees. Where as small, medium sized players do, and we have an abundance of them.

[DeadlyAkkuret]

I have been asking myself the same question all day. Big, strong, tall defenders dont grow on trees. Where as small, medium sized players do, and we have an abundance of them.

I was thinking, there's no way he'll be available at pick 11, but if he is we should definitely take him. Instead we go for another medium. Let's hope he turns out to be the next Chris Judd lol.

[is2SWaNz]

He's no chance if we go by our "a year in the reserves" policy. Not many play the next year anyway.

I never knew we had such a policy. Phillips, if i remember correctly, played 4 senior games in his first year with us? I also think that Bird may have a stab at the senior level next year.

I was thinking, there's no way he'll be available at pick 11, but if he is we should definitely take him. Instead we go for another medium. Let's hope he turns out to be the next Chris Judd lol.

Murphy will be the next Chris Judd, well according to Tadhg.

[Corpuscles]

Can someone tell me why we passed on Rance?

The only things I can think of to justify our short selections.

1. Maybe the key question these days is "are you prepared to relocate and settle in Sydney"?
- Maybe Rance had indicated a "Rocca like" stance?
- There were as someone pointed out some WA lads (KP back) that missed altogether

2. Maybe they had set their hopes on Tom Collier snatched at 25?

3. Maybe they think they have got future KP's covered in the existing group?
- doesn't seem to be though:o

4. Maybe " The Vesper" is the next superstar and couldn't resist taking him?:thumbsu:


I wish there was a decent journalist and/or decent Swans publicity focus in Sydney who would ask the hard questions or tell us all why they draft the way they do and give some indication of how the replacements of the future is planned!

[ssfc0203]

The only things I can think of to justify our short selections.

1. Maybe the key question these days is "are you prepared to relocate and settle in Sydney"?
- Maybe Rance had indicated a "Rocca like" stance?
- There were as someone pointed out some WA lads (KP back) that missed altogether

2. Maybe they had set their hopes on Tom Collier snatched at 25?

3. Maybe they think they have got future KP's covered in the existing group?
- doesn't seem to be though:o

4. Maybe " The Vesper" is the next superstar and couldn't resist taking him?:thumbsu:


I wish there was a decent journalist and/or decent Swans publicity focus in Sydney who would ask the hard questions or tell us all why they draft the way they do and give some indication of how the replacements of the future is planned!
Unless we're stacking up on midfielders in the midfielder strong drafts and putting our eggs in a couple of baskets of drafts in the future that (through monitoring by the recruitment department) may be KPP rich.

[ssfc0203]

True. Also could Meredith have a girlier last name?
Henrietta? Georgia?

[liz]

I'm not going on BF opinion. It's based on expert analyisis, not conjecture.


How can it be based on expert analysis if no other club thought he was worth a spot on a senior list. There are only 16 groups of experts whose opinions count and none of them agreed today with this so-called "expert analysis".

[Jizza9]

Patrick Veszpremi – Northern Knights
Ht: 181 cm Wt: 83 kg
Junior position – Midfield/ Utility
AFL position – Midfield/ Utility
A footballer’s footballer. Tough, smart, hard, skilled and extremely determined. Injuries curtailed his output this year. Firstly a thumb injury and secondly a bad shoulder which he played with till the end of the year.
Strengths: Strong body who attacks each contest with fierce desire. Good kick and mark for his size. Pace is good enough and could play back, forward or midfield in the AFL. Think of a bigger, quicker Gary Moorcroft and you are on the right track.
Weaknesses: Hard to rate where his endurance fitness is at because he has had such an interrupted year. If he tests lower than he should (may not test at all because of shoulder surgery) I wouldn’t be concerned. Veszpremi will work and work until he improves. Veszpremi also has a tendency to break tackles and packs (and mostly succeeds) however against AFL bodies he will find it a tougher ask.
Question marks: Has he been a man playing against boys?
Draft Prediction: 15-35
Stats: TAC 2007. Must be remembered that Veszpremi played many games hurt and deep forward. However, Veszpremi’s disposal by foot is elite. 130 effective kicks with only 36 ineffective kicks. He was less efficient by hand with 35 effective handballs compared to 23 ineffective handballs. Veszpremi kicked 34 goals from 11 games which included 8 goals in a wonderful solo performance.

I have highlighted the reasons I think he was selected. While he may not be the hight we needed. He apparently has the foot disposal and ability to break up play that we needed in the midfield.

[ssfc0203]

I have highlighted the reasons I think he was selected. While he may not be the hight we needed. He apparently has the foot disposal and ability to break up play that we needed in the midfield.
speed? saw his name in a couple of the sprints

[Jizza9]

speed? saw his name in a couple of the sprintsWell thats another positive. He sounds like a Judd clone to me.:thumbsu:

[ssfc0203]

Yeah, go look up couch coach's consolidated draft profile's.
Opinions and comments on vesz on the second page.

Btw, it says he has great acceleration but can't maintain it for long, so will be great to burst out of packs. Did well in the 20m sprint, i think.

[Gun Barrel Straight]

4. Maybe " The Vesper" is the next superstar and couldn't resist taking him?:thumbsu:

I'm hoping this was the decision why.

2 clubs passed up on Judd because of troubling injuries and they both must be thinking of what could have been. Let's hope this time it's 10 clubs thinking about what could have been. :thumbsu:

[bloods01]

I'm hoping this was the decision why.

2 clubs passed up on Judd because of troubling injuries and they both must be thinking of what could have been. Let's hope this time it's 10 clubs thinking about what could have been. :thumbsu:

I hope your right. I was fortunate enough to speak to a guy who is well knowledged in the TAC Cup competition. He was full of praise for Veszpremi. He said he could be a gun and if it wasn't for the fact that he played all year with a dodgy shoulder and that Trent Cotchin was his teammate at the Northern Knights, he would have been seen much differently by the recruiters. His foot skills are exceptional and he can play anywhere.

[ssfc0203]

Still, we need to either get a KPP in the rookie draft, or wait until next years draft. If we don't, it'll be players not suited to the position filling in.

[rancidpants13]

Can someone tell me why we passed on Rance?

yeah, this was my first thought on hearing the players picked after No 11....
i have no problem with veszpremi, the reports are good and he seems a goer, but to then go and get another bloke barely 6 feet tall, knowing our other draft pick was bird, geez, it makes you wonder
the only thing i can think is roos and our recruiters know what they have up their sleeve at the club, in the likes of talls such as jesse white, brendan murphy and dan currie.....anyway, let's wait and see
i did read that meredith is apparently one of veszpremi's best mates....surely THAT was not the deciding factor

[rancidpants13]

The only things I can think of to justify our short selections.

1. Maybe the key question these days is "are you prepared to relocate and settle in Sydney"?
- Maybe Rance had indicated a "Rocca like" stance?
- There were as someone pointed out some WA lads (KP back) that missed altogether

2. Maybe they had set their hopes on Tom Collier snatched at 25?

3. Maybe they think they have got future KP's covered in the existing group?
- doesn't seem to be though:o

4. Maybe " The Vesper" is the next superstar and couldn't resist taking him?:thumbsu:


I wish there was a decent journalist and/or decent Swans publicity focus in Sydney who would ask the hard questions or tell us all why they draft the way they do and give some indication of how the replacements of the future is planned!

tim morrissey and nikki tugwell t the tele and jenny macasey at the oz are good, they'll be asking at some point soon

[snappy]

tim morrissey and nikki tugwell t the tele and jenny macasey at the oz are good, they'll be asking at some point soon

Translation:confused:

Anyway i have copied an article from todays Herald Sun.

Roos may rue bagging kids' lottery
25 November 2007 Sunday Herald Sun
Jon Ralph

EVEN by the most generous interpretation, Paul Roos's outburst that kids are over-rated in the AFL is plain silly.

If you are inclined to judge Roosy harshly, you could mount the case he shows a healthy disregard for Sydney's monumental dose of fortune in recent years.

Boiled down, his argument on Thursday was this: Rebuilding via a bunch of kids is a lottery; young talent is taken too early; it's not worth taking high picks.

The problem with Roos's analysis is that through a unique combination of circumstances, the Sydney coach has never been in a position where his junior drafting strategy has been tested.

Even given Sydney's superb injury management, it couldn't have hoped for better luck with keeping its players on the park.

In its premiership year it used only 32 players, the second-lowest in the competition.

In 2006 it got to the Grand Final with only 31 players, a competition-low.

And this season, despite the perception injuries had derailed its premiership bid, Sydney used only 33 players, equal second-lowest after Geelong.

So Sydney has never had to call on the kids so many other clubs are forced to test early in their careers when injuries bite hard.

This year the Swans had the oldest team in the competition, yet still didn't play a 2006 draftee, and blooded only one from the year before.

The day when Roos realises youngsters are the lifeblood of a redeveloping side might come sooner than he thinks.

Almost without fail, Roos is admired across the competition, both as a bloke and outspoken lateral thinker.

But the problem with this week's comments is it gives off the aura he is not grateful for what he has been given.

He has never had to build a side from scratch, or rebuild one for that matter.

That is his challenge in coming years, and one he will face without fitness expert Dave Misson, credited with Sydney's outstanding fitness management.

I can understand his sentiments to a certain degree, though i dont agree that we shouldnt go for KPP on the fact that they take longer to develop than smalls do, which has been implied before. After all its a gamble no matter who we draft big or small.

[Here It Is]

Interesting to note that a player mentioned on here by quite a few people - 200cm Tasmanian ruckman Thomas Bellchambers - was ignored altogether.

[rancidpants13]

Translation:confused:

Anyway i have copied an article from todays Herald Sun.

Roos may rue bagging kids' lottery
25 November 2007 Sunday Herald Sun
Jon Ralph

EVEN by the most generous interpretation, Paul Roos's outburst that kids are over-rated in the AFL is plain silly.

If you are inclined to judge Roosy harshly, you could mount the case he shows a healthy disregard for Sydney's monumental dose of fortune in recent years.

Boiled down, his argument on Thursday was this: Rebuilding via a bunch of kids is a lottery; young talent is taken too early; it's not worth taking high picks.

The problem with Roos's analysis is that through a unique combination of circumstances, the Sydney coach has never been in a position where his junior drafting strategy has been tested.

Even given Sydney's superb injury management, it couldn't have hoped for better luck with keeping its players on the park.

In its premiership year it used only 32 players, the second-lowest in the competition.

In 2006 it got to the Grand Final with only 31 players, a competition-low.

And this season, despite the perception injuries had derailed its premiership bid, Sydney used only 33 players, equal second-lowest after Geelong.

So Sydney has never had to call on the kids so many other clubs are forced to test early in their careers when injuries bite hard.

This year the Swans had the oldest team in the competition, yet still didn't play a 2006 draftee, and blooded only one from the year before.

The day when Roos realises youngsters are the lifeblood of a redeveloping side might come sooner than he thinks.

Almost without fail, Roos is admired across the competition, both as a bloke and outspoken lateral thinker.

But the problem with this week's comments is it gives off the aura he is not grateful for what he has been given.

He has never had to build a side from scratch, or rebuild one for that matter.

That is his challenge in coming years, and one he will face without fitness expert Dave Misson, credited with Sydney's outstanding fitness management.

I can understand his sentiments to a certain degree, though i dont agree that we shouldnt go for KPP on the fact that they take longer to develop than smalls do, which has been implied before. After all its a gamble no matter who we draft big or small.

"translation"???
i was responding to someone who wanted to know if there was a "good journo" in sydney who'd ask some tough questions of the swans recruiters about why they went for more little squat fellers
and that was my answer
tim morrissey's a good man, and jenny and nikki are good swans reporters who don't overhype or overdump on the club, like a lot of the melb footy writers fluctuate between

[FM0226]

I can understand his sentiments to a certain degree, though i dont agree that we shouldnt go for KPP on the fact that they take longer to develop than smalls do, which has been implied before. After all its a gamble no matter who we draft big or small.

Exactly. And it has taken Schmidt 4 years to clock up 16 games, Moore took 3 years for 9 and Laidlaw 2 years for 1 - so the small/mediums we've drafted since 2003 hasn't exactly develop at a rapid rate either.

In fact, there was felt to be a need by the coaching staff to actually trade for a mature midfielder flanker to strengthen our midfield despite all the investment we have put into these youngsters - to me, that's a sign that they don't trust the talent they have drafted and developed.

In my view, we are going to run out of luck using this strategy of trying to recycle other club's unwanted KPPs (and players). We have got away with it because Hall had been dominating and injury-free while the freakish talent of C.Bolton pretty much held our defence together all by himself.

Ted Richards is servicable, but hardly an out-right success while Chambers and Spriggs was utter disasters (though Spriggs did help our youngsters develop - apparently). We can only hope that Playfair is really forced out of the Geelong side because of their great talent depth rather than the lack of talent of the players (Spriggs' kicking skills - or lack of it while Chambers just lack any skills really).

[snappy]

"translation"???
i was responding to someone who wanted to know if there was a "good journo" in sydney who'd ask some tough questions of the swans recruiters about why they went for more little squat fellers
and that was my answer
tim morrissey's a good man, and jenny and nikki are good swans reporters who don't overhype or overdump on the club, like a lot of the melb footy writers fluctuate between

Wouldnt it be nice if they brought back the "ask Roosey" section on the swans web site.. I know i got a few tough ones for him..

[ssfc0203]

Wouldnt it be nice if they brought back the "ask Roosey" section on the swans web site.. I know i got a few tough ones for him..
Maybe thats why they took it off in the first place, lol.

[liz]

Not sure I understand the point of Ralph's article.

Roos was interviewed at the draft yesterday about his comments and noted he was responding to a question put to him about whether he thought the draft age was too low.

In any case, whether he phoned up a journo to make the story or was responding to a question, I don't see how an opinion that the draft age is too low equates to Roos not believing in young players. It is true that he's not been forced to call on many in recent years. It is true that he is slow to show faith in some of them. It is true that some day he is going to have to start blooding them more quickly.

But how does that negate his view that picking kids at 17 is too early?

(irrespective of whether one agrees with that view or not)

[rancidpants13]

Not sure I understand the point of Ralph's article.

Roos was interviewed at the draft yesterday about his comments and noted he was responding to a question put to him about whether he thought the draft age was too low.

In any case, whether he phoned up a journo to make the story or was responding to a question, I don't see how an opinion that the draft age is too low equates to Roos not believing in young players. It is true that he's not been forced to call on many in recent years. It is true that he is slow to show faith in some of them. It is true that some day he is going to have to start blooding them more quickly.

But how does that negate his view that picking kids at 17 is too early?

(irrespective of whether one agrees with that view or not)

i think it's another anti-swans beat-up, by a bloke (a carlton fan, i believe) who is one of quite a few at the HS/Sun HS who seem to only write about the swans when they're sticking the boot in
i read the article and was trying to remember whether there was even a report of roos' original comments, and if there was, it can't have been a big deal...unless it was simply another negative swans article beaten up for the sake of a "new angle" leading into the draft
if the gist of his comments was that you cannot rely on the draft, and on untried youngsters, to rebuild a club, that's hardly wrong
what ralph said about roos not having had to do the hard stuff and build a club from the bottom overlooks the fact he inherited a team going backwards and, without the help of high draft picks, not only turned it around without having to "bottom out" but he took us straight to finals (in his first full season) and won us a flag

i'd have thought it wasn't very wise to be questioning roos' theories or methods....terry wallace would be a better target, for starters

[mj23]

haven't really seen many of these players but Brad Ebert was still avalible I thought we would have taken him for sure

[rancidpants13]

haven't really seen many of these players but Brad Ebert was still avalible I thought we would have taken him for sure

apparently the whole of south australia is up in arms that the crows picked a victorian kid, dangerfield, when ebert was still available.....from what i have read and heard today, dangerfield is already under massive pressure while tears are flowing for ebert, described as a readymade player and future AFL captain
we obviously gave him a miss coz ... what is he? 188cm?...yeah, that's far too tall for us

[FM0226]

Not sure I understand the point of Ralph's article.

Roos was interviewed at the draft yesterday about his comments and noted he was responding to a question put to him about whether he thought the draft age was too low.

In any case, whether he phoned up a journo to make the story or was responding to a question, I don't see how an opinion that the draft age is too low equates to Roos not believing in young players. It is true that he's not been forced to call on many in recent years. It is true that he is slow to show faith in some of them. It is true that some day he is going to have to start blooding them more quickly.

But how does that negate his view that picking kids at 17 is too early?

(irrespective of whether one agrees with that view or not)

Agree completely. There was a thread about this on the general board and I was amazed to see people saying he's whingeing. All he said pretty much was that the draft age could be risen, so that both the clubs and the players will have better ideas at whether they can cut it at AFL level.

One of the closer comparisons of the AFL draft is the NBA draft and they have just risen the age limit so that draft prospects will get at least one year in college before entering the draft.

In my view, since most draftees are not ready to play immediately and is likely to spend one year in the reserves anyway, it would be benefitial to both the clubs and the player himself to spend a year (or an extra year) playing senior football at VFL and the other leagues. It will give the clubs a better idea at how the kid's are going to turn out, while the prospects can goto uni or pick up a trade so they have something to fall back on if they cut it at the AFL (and give them some sense of reality outside football).

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Not sure I understand the point of Ralph's article.

Roos was interviewed at the draft yesterday about his comments and noted he was responding to a question put to him about whether he thought the draft age was too low.

In any case, whether he phoned up a journo to make the story or was responding to a question, I don't see how an opinion that the draft age is too low equates to Roos not believing in young players. It is true that he's not been forced to call on many in recent years. It is true that he is slow to show faith in some of them. It is true that some day he is going to have to start blooding them more quickly.

But how does that negate his view that picking kids at 17 is too early?

(irrespective of whether one agrees with that view or not)

Your thoughts are far too measured and logical for that article, Liz.

[Bloods boy from the Bush]

Being a Victorian I watched alot of TAC Cup footy and saw alot of the Knights particularly in the Finals. Veszpremi played one of the best games I have seen at this level in the First Final at Optus Oval kicking 8 goals on and off the bench (Shoulder Injury that he was carrying all year). Only a brilliant 40 disposal game from Cotchin stopped people talking Veszper right up. On the same day Brett Meredith went from possible draftee to early third round to late second rounder with a 30+ possesion game at close to 100% efficentcy only for the remarakable performance of Cotch & Veszper to allow his outstanding day to slip under the radar.

[EatBig Australia]

Veszpremi played one of the best games I have seen in the First Final at Optus Oval kicking 8 goals on and off the bench (Shoulder Injury that he was carrying all year). Only a brilliant 40 disposal game from Cotchin stopped people talking Veszper right up. On the same day Brett Meredith went from possible draftee to early third round to late second rounder with a 30+ possesion game at close to 100% efficentcy only for the remarakable performance of Cotch & Veszper to allow his outstanding day to slip under the radar.

That's great to hear. I am excited about seeing each of them grow and get amongst it at senior level, hopefully sooner rather than later.

[Mick Oxlong]

Last time I saw a team of midfielders do well, they beat us by a point to win the GF. Judd, Kerr, Cousins, Fletcher, Waters, Chick, Armstrong, etc... What midfielders will do is alter our playing style and isn't that what everyone has wanted for a while?;)

[Bloods boy from the Bush]

Last time I saw a team of midfielders do well, they beat us by a point to win the GF. Judd, Kerr, Cousins, Fletcher, Waters, Chick, Armstrong, etc... What midfielders will do is alter our playing style and isn't that what everyone has wanted for a while?;)
Especially these two particular midfielders both lioke to run and carry not play our traditional ball - up stoppage style game.

[FM0226]

Last time I saw a team of midfielders do well, they beat us by a point to win the GF. Judd, Kerr, Cousins, Fletcher, Waters, Chick, Armstrong, etc... What midfielders will do is alter our playing style and isn't that what everyone has wanted for a while?;)

Well I would have been happy with these picks if we didn't pick a small/medium in the first round 2006, three medium players in 2005, a small in our highest pick in 2004, our first and second picks on small/mediums in 2003 and our no.5 pick on McVeigh in 2002.

I know it's hindsight, but if we had swapped our priorities and went for a KP at 15 instead of 65, we would have gotten Mitch Brown, Daniel Currie, Malcolm Lynch (best small/medium prospect at that point) and Jess White. And I would be absolutely delighted to have these two kids on board.

[scottwade]

Whilst most here considered we would draft at least one KPP, it appears Roos, Ireland & the recruiting team never thought so.

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/happy-swans-join-in-saturday-knight-fever/2007/11/25/1195975871152.html

I went down on Friday to speak to a few kids, and the ones I spoke to were Veszpremi, Meredith, [Andy] Otten [pick 27 to Adelaide] and [Jack] Grimes [pick 14 to Melbourne]," Roos said. "So we targeted four and got two of them, so that gives you and indication of how highly we rated those four, and they were the only four I spoke to on Friday.Of those 4 the only player over 187cm is Otten and his TAC coach referred to him as a tall midfielder, who can also go forward or back. An indication that he was played as a midfielder is that he averaged 26 poss. in the TAC Cup.

More worrying for me was Roos response to our lack of talls.

There had been suggestions the Swans should have gone for key position players to prepare for the retirements in coming years of Michael O'Loughlin, Leo Barry, Peter Everitt and Barry Hall, but Roos said those matters had been addressed during the past year with the recruitment of Jake Orreal, Irishman Brendan Murphy, Peter Faulks, Luke Brennan, former Geelong tall Henry Playfair, and the emergence of 196-centimetre Ed Barlow.To put those guys in perspective;
Barlow has played 4 AFL games
Orreal & Murphy have played a total of 3 Aussie Rules games between them
Faulks, to date, has shown no likelihood of stepping up
Playfair spent the season in Geelong's reserves, playing 1 senior game in 2007
Brennan stands 186cm and plays no taller.

Lets remember who Roos sees those guys replacing; Barry, Everitt, Hall & O'Loughlin.

10 All-Australian guernseys, 4 B&Fs, 8 leading goalkicking awards, 983 AFL games.

And they are going to be replaced by guys like Orreal & Murphy who in their lifetime have played 3 games of Aussie Rules football.

BIZARRE.

[RUNVS]

More worrying for me was Roos response to our lack of talls.

To put those guys in perspective;
Barlow has played 4 AFL games
Orreal & Murphy have played a total of 3 Aussie Rules games between them
Faulks, to date, has shown no likelihood of stepping up
Playfair spent the season in Geelong's reserves, playing 1 senior game in 2007
Brennan stands 186cm and plays no taller.

Lets remember who Roos sees those guys replacing; Barry, Everitt, Hall & O'Loughlin.

10 All-Australian guernseys, 4 B&Fs, 8 leading goalkicking awards, 983 AFL games.

And they are going to be replaced by guys like Orreal & Murphy who in their lifetime have played 3 games of Aussie Rules football.

BIZARRE.

I agree it is very weird. Paul Roos either has a plan to create a entirely new strategy in AFL which requires fewer key position players or he has completely lost the plot and needs to be sent to the nearest funny farm.

[mj23]

The only thing I can think of is when say Hall Everitt and blokes like that retire it frees up alot of money then we can poach ready made forwards and backs and we don't have to waste time bringing them through. Just a thought our last 2 full forwards were ready made.

[Bloods boy from the Bush]

More worrying for me was Roos response to our lack of talls.

To put those guys in perspective;
Barlow has played 4 AFL games
Orreal & Murphy have played a total of 3 Aussie Rules games between them
Faulks, to date, has shown no likelihood of stepping up
Playfair spent the season in Geelong's reserves, playing 1 senior game in 2007
Brennan stands 186cm and plays no taller.

Lets remember who Roos sees those guys replacing; Barry, Everitt, Hall & O'Loughlin.

10 All-Australian guernseys, 4 B&Fs, 8 leading goalkicking awards, 983 AFL games.

And they are going to be replaced by guys like Orreal & Murphy who in their lifetime have played 3 games of Aussie Rules football.

BIZARRE.
So you would rather have a couple of 18 year olds with potential and no gurantee of ever playing AFL football ahead of the names you mentioned. I agree I expected us to take at least one tall but given the lack of depth in this draft particularly in the KPP department I'd say it was a good idea not to. All of the above names have bah Brennan who as you say is too short and not Leo Barry the rest are all better options IMO than a majority of the KPP's in this draft from pick 25 onwards.

[bloods01]

The only thing I can think of is when say Hall Everitt and blokes like that retire it frees up alot of money then we can poach ready made forwards and backs and we don't have to waste time bringing them through. Just a thought our last 2 full forwards were ready made.

We can't rely on poaching player's for ever. We poached Lockett. We poached Hall. We poached Williams. We poached Davis and son on. I would like to see the club create their own superstars and the only way to do that is at the draft table.

[FM0226]

The only thing I can think of is when say Hall Everitt and blokes like that retire it frees up alot of money then we can poach ready made forwards and backs and we don't have to waste time bringing them through. Just a thought our last 2 full forwards were ready made.

Quality KPPs don't grow on trees - Even with salary cap room, trying naming one or two quality KP players that we actually stand a chance of stealing - in my view there's very good reasons why every club except us is trying to load up on KP prospects - it's obvious that probably only 1 in 5 KP prospects will turn into geniue stars while the rest are either servicable or simply rubbish and I have a lot of trouble remembering a club that failed to hold onto their quality KP players in the past 5 years.

We got lucky with Lockett. We paid a high price for Hall and he was no guarrentee of reaching All-Australian quality (we got very lucky with him as well). Craig Bolton was an unwanted MIDFIELDER/flanker at Brisbane. Ted Richards is probably the type of quality that we are likely to get from trading a first round pick.

At this point stage, I feel that we have relied on too much luck in getting the list we have today (where most of the better players in our side are late picks/rookie list players/recycled players while our early picks all tend to be merely servicable players).

If this years draft is envisioned to be lacking in quality KPs, then our recruiting staff should have had a good idea and we should have been looking at KP prospects at last year's draft (I'm still a bit filthy about missing out on Mitch Brown).

[FM0226]

So you would rather have a couple of 18 year olds with potential and no gurantee of ever playing AFL football ahead of the names you mentioned. I agree I expected us to take at least one tall but given the lack of depth in this draft particularly in the KPP department I'd say it was a good idea not to. All of the above names have bah Brennan who as you say is too short and not Leo Barry the rest are all better options IMO than a majority of the KPP's in this draft from pick 25 onwards.

At this stage Barlow is being liken to Adam Goodes and Murphy to Chris Judd. At this point in time, I don't see them being able to become top level KP players (though I would love to try Barlow at FF and see how he goes).

Yes, the 18 year old prospects may not ever get to play a game at senior level, but that's a risk that we have to take to take (and all other clubs except us seem to be willing to take). The draft is a lottery, but we have to take a risk before being able to get anything in return.

If anything, because we got Bird with our apprenticeship and a quality (he better be!) midfielder prospect with our first pick, we could have gone crazy with our #26. (It's our last live pick in the draft) I have have gladly taken a punt with someone like Scott Simpson or Gourdis.

No there's no guarrantee that they can make it at AFL level. But nor is there any guarrantee that Meredith is going to be better than Thornton or Brabazon either.

And we probably would not be involved in this conversion if we had picked up Mitch Brown at #15 or Westhoff at #65 or if we drafted Warnock instead of getting Torture - yes this is all hindsight, but the fact is that because of this recruiting strategy that we are presisting with (and I haven't seen any particular outstanding results in the past 4 years), we are never in a position to allow these possibilities to happen.

[Bloods boy from the Bush]

Before I go on let me just say I too was disappointed in the lack of KPP drafting in the past two years I was merely pointing out to the previous poster that the name he mentioned are just as good as second round and beyond KPP prosects that doesn't mean I didn't want us to draft any.

[rancidpants13]

We can't rely on poaching player's for ever. We poached Lockett. We poached Hall. We poached Williams. We poached Davis and son on. I would like to see the club create their own superstars and the only way to do that is at the draft table.

two words....jesse white
wait and see, i believe he will prove the real deal (i HATE that expression)
i am also very confident dan currie and dan o'keefe will prove very good drafts from 06, but white is going to be a star
reports also suggest brendan murphy is going to be good, and i think we all agree barlow is on his way

[scottwade]

So you would rather have a couple of 18 year olds with potential and no gurantee of ever playing AFL football ahead of the names you mentioned. I agree I expected us to take at least one tall but given the lack of depth in this draft particularly in the KPP department I'd say it was a good idea not to. All of the above names have bah Brennan who as you say is too short and not Leo Barry the rest are all better options IMO than a majority of the KPP's in this draft from pick 25 onwards.

The guys Roos mentioned were already on our books.
Having those players on our list (primary/rookie) in no way precluded us selecting a KPP/Ruck @ pick 26.

My main point was that Roos saw Barry, Everitt, Hall & O'Loughlin eventually being replaced by Faulks, Orreal, Murphy, Playfair, Barlow & Brennan.

It seems to me that Roos has unrealistic expectations of some players. For example, Murphy is obviously a fine athlete and good Gaelic footballer, but he has NEVER played a game of Aussie Rules. To suggest that he is a replacement for, say, Hall is nonsense. None of the players Roos has mentioned deserve, at this stage, to be mentioned in the same breath as the 4 guys, all who could be retiring at the end of next season.

It would be terrific if White & Currie (both of whom Roos overlooked), Barlow, Murphy & Orreal were stars in a couple of year's time, but it is simply impossible to justify such hopes at this point of time.

To predict/assume that champion players, with nearly 1000 AFL games experience, could be replaced by his nominated players is, as I have said, bizarre.

Since the 2001 draft we have never selected a KPP/Ruckman prior to selection #47. That is 6 consecutive drafts.

Not every year will have KPP/Ruckmen that are more worthy of early picks than midfielders, but I find it inconceivable that can be the case for 6 consecutive drafts.

We have traded away 1st & 2nd rd picks for Jolly, Richards, Everitt and pick #35 for Chambers. The policy to date has been relatively successful, but we are the exception to the rule. The other successful clubs in recent years (Brisbane, Port, WCE) have collectively, since 2004, traded away only two 1st Rd picks.

In truth this year Veszpremi/Meredith may well have been the best players available, but that certainly can not have been the case for the previous 5 years.

In particular, last year, in arguably the strongest ever 'tall' draft pool we passed on players such as Mitch Brown & Chris Dawes and selected an outside midfielder.

We are consequently left in the ridiculous position that 2 of the players that our coach nominates to replace 4 champions are guys who have played a total of 3 games of Aussie Rules in their lifetime.

Bizarre.:)

[FM0226]

The guys Roos mentioned were already on our books.
Having those players on our list (primary/rookie) in no way precluded us selecting a KPP/Ruck @ pick 26.

My main point was that Roos saw Barry, Everitt, Hall & O'Loughlin eventually being replaced by Faulks, Orreal, Murphy, Playfair, Barlow & Brennan.

It seems to me that Roos has unrealistic expectations of some players. For example, Murphy is obviously a fine athlete and good Gaelic footballer, but he has NEVER played a game of Aussie Rules. To suggest that he is a replacement for, say, Hall is nonsense. None of the players Roos has mentioned deserve, at this stage, to be mentioned in the same breath as the 4 guys, all who could be retiring at the end of next season.

It would be terrific if White & Currie (both of whom Roos overlooked), Barlow, Murphy & Orreal were stars in a couple of year's time, but it is simply impossible to justify such hopes at this point of time.

To predict/assume that champion players, with nearly 1000 AFL games experience, could be replaced by his nominated players is, as I have said, bizarre.

In particular, last year, in arguably the strongest ever 'tall' draft pool we passed on players such as Mitch Brown & Chris Dawes and selected an outside midfielder.

We are consequently left in the ridiculous position that 2 of the players that our coach nominates to replace 4 champions are guys who have played a total of 3 games of Aussie Rules in their lifetime.

Bizarre.:)

Can't agree more, absolutely spot on.
KP players/Rucks are extremely hard to develop and to put all our eggs into a small basket, expecting everyone to cut it at AFL level - not only that, but to replace someone who is a top CHF for a large chunk of our successful years is purely bizarre.

In Murphy, from what we have seen and heard, is a skillful, quick type of player. But he's only been kicking the sherrin for a couple of months and we have absolutely no idea how strong or durable his body is going to be. In my opinion, even if he makes it in the AFL, there's probably more chance of him turning into a good tall-midfielder than a KPP. Height alone does not make a prospect into a KPP - just look at K.Bradley. And even our own Adam Goodes wasn't particularly effective when he tried the KP positions.

I like the look of Jesse White, but that's mainly from the NAB cup last year, but that hardly guarrantees him to be a star - Grundy looked good in his few senior games, now he's fighting for his future in the AFL.

Orreal is essentially a volley-ball kid - we don't have an precedent in actually making skinny kids work - is he even going to be as good as Erikksen? In my view, if we get 50 games out of this kid, it's a success.

Barlow's the tricky one, I have high hopes for him, but are they going to throw him into the key positions or is he going to nutured into a goodes/O'Keefe type of tall, running midfielder/flanker?

And injures plays a huge part. Fitzgerald (of the big brother variety) actually looked really good in the beginning - if I remember correctly, he kicked 4 goals on debut and showed very good hands and looked to be at least a 100 gamer. Than injuries ruined him, ditto Heath James and Doyle.

And that's why we can't expect our current depth (or the lack of it) to cover for the inevitable retirements coming up. In my opinion, the quality of KPPs that we are able to recycle is going to worse in three years time. Polak is the best 'recycled' KPP in the last few years and on paper, Playfair is already the best recycled KPP this year with K.Bradley coming second.

And that's the kind of quality we should be expecting in three year's time - not Hall or Lockett.

[bloods01]

Can't agree more, absolutely spot on.
KP players/Rucks are extremely hard to develop and to put all our eggs into a small basket, expecting everyone to cut it at AFL level - not only that, but to replace someone who is a top CHF for a large chunk of our successful years is purely bizarre.

In Murphy, from what we have seen and heard, is a skillful, quick type of player. But he's only been kicking the sherrin for a couple of months and we have absolutely no idea how strong or durable his body is going to be. In my opinion, even if he makes it in the AFL, there's probably more chance of him turning into a good tall-midfielder than a KPP. Height alone does not make a prospect into a KPP - just look at K.Bradley. And even our own Adam Goodes wasn't particularly effective when he tried the KP positions.

I like the look of Jesse White, but that's mainly from the NAB cup last year, but that hardly guarrantees him to be a star - Grundy looked good in his few senior games, now he's fighting for his future in the AFL.

Orreal is essentially a volley-ball kid - we don't have an precedent in actually making skinny kids work - is he even going to be as good as Erikksen? In my view, if we get 50 games out of this kid, it's a success.

Barlow's the tricky one, I have high hopes for him, but are they going to throw him into the key positions or is he going to nutured into a goodes/O'Keefe type of tall, running midfielder/flanker?

And injures plays a huge part. Fitzgerald (of the big brother variety) actually looked really good in the beginning - if I remember correctly, he kicked 4 goals on debut and showed very good hands and looked to be at least a 100 gamer. Than injuries ruined him, ditto Heath James and Doyle.

And that's why we can't expect our current depth (or the lack of it) to cover for the inevitable retirements coming up. In my opinion, the quality of KPPs that we are able to recycle is going to worse in three years time. Polak is the best 'recycled' KPP in the last few years and on paper, Playfair is already the best recycled KPP this year with K.Bradley coming second.

And that's the kind of quality we should be expecting in three year's time - not Hall or Lockett.

I could not have said it better myself. People seem to be deluded and think that another Hall or Lockett is just going to bob up. Unless we take a punt and develop our own, what are the chances that a Pavlich will be on the market? Lets not kid oursleves and expect playe's such as White, Orreal and Murphy to burst onto the scene and be absoulte stars. The chances of that happening are slim at best. All three player's come from different sporting backgrounds and are basically novices in the game. Lets pick a young KPP and give the kid a chance to develop and grow. It's the only way to go.

[Corpuscles]

Interesting posts ScottWade & others:thumbsu:

I think I have shared similar concerns, but we shouldn't forget that:-

we got a flag not by the best players but by a clever relatively unique game plan and a culture of all in together and committment!!!. (Look at our 2005 & 2006 lists compared to E-girls... we love'swannies but bloody good opposition that ought shade us ON PAPER!)

As someone else said better in the thread earlier Roosey never tells the truth (even vaguely like) to media and this is not Bizzare it is BS!

SW has outlined clearly why it is, but poster Bollox who doesn't post on this board but replied on mainboard to a question I raised re KPP depth at Swans ( he knows footy it is obvious) that this draft was NOT a KP draft I dunno but maybe that was the general feeling and mail they got?

They really did show that a champion team can beat a team of champs ( drilled into me since a kid ) and never saw it happen until MCG last day Sept 2005!

Roosey did not mention Grundy or Laidlaw who I think are KP's if they get their sh it together! I know Platfairs background NSW Captain and could be turned around but is a long shot

Bloody hell I never liked the Spida deal even though he did super over the odds ie well first year and always worry about how long Leo (ustar!) can carry Dunkleys mantle he clearly struggled last year as did Hall so KIRK IS CAPTAIN!!!!

I do trust them... but Roosey owes the team & club to leave it in good shape....when and if he goes/... maybe same time as Kirk Hall Barry MickyO Matthews Crouch and Spida.... with others not far off:eek:

I reckon with some of the northern concessions salary cap gone they are atm struggling with the cap and have to wait another year for seniors to retire (or be retired) till they can cope with major recruits or first yearers who have chance of playing many games 1st year


Train hard boys!:thumbsu:

[liz]

People say we haven't drafted a ruck with an early pick for 6 years, but we have. We used pick 16 (or thereabouts) to acquire Jolly. We used second round picks for Everitt and Chambers. Everitt should maybe be left out of the equation since he was always a short term option, but in terms of value for money, Jolly was an excellent use of a pick 16. We knew he probably wasn't going to be a superstar and he was ready to go straight away and was a big competitive body. Which is essentially what you really need in a ruck. Only Cox of the current rucks really has claim to being much more than that. He was moderate return but also very low risk compared to drafting an 18yo with that pick.

Compare what a couple of other non-basket cases have done re drafting young rucks. Brisbane used 18 on Wood and then traded him without getting more than a handful of games from him. Although it wasn't an exact swap, in terms of what they got for him it was equivalent to their trade for Johnston. So for that pick 18 they got someone taking up a spot on their list for two relatively unproductive years and then swapped him for a flaky, soft (albeit highly skilled), injury prone, work-ethic challenged medium midfielder from whom they may get two or three years good service.

Meanwhile Adelaide used a top 10 pick on Meeson and then lost him for a 3rd round pick (or was it a 4th?)

Port used pick 15 to draft Barry Brooks a few years ago. The next year St Kilda were daft (or desperate) enough to trade a top 10 pick for him. He's now on the scrap heap.

Richmond used around pick 20 on Pattison. He looks a long way off being a decent AFL ruck to me.

North used two top 10 picks in consecutive years on Hale and McIntosh. McIntosh had a break out year in 2007 but there weren't many signs of it happening before this year. Hale is very much a so-so ruckman.

Essendon used a top 10 pick on Laycock - he has some talent but he's taking an awfully long time to put things together.

Meanwhile some of the better, more consistent rucks in the competition are Cox, Sandilands, Brogan, our own Jolly, Campbell, Simmonds and Ben Hudson.

Hudson was a 4th round pick. Simmonds a pre-season draft pick originally and all the rest were originally rookie elevations.

Gardiner, White, Fraser and Leuenberger are examples of very high picks that have become (or look like becoming) at least half decent rucks. But they were exceedingly high picks - of the type Sydney hasn't had access to for a decade.

The two highly competent rucks I have left out of my comments - Everitt and Lade - are both too old to be assessed within the current draft structure.

The facts very much support Sydney's strategy towards acquiring rucks.

I reckon you could do a pretty similar analysis in respect of KPPs too with almost the same conclusion. Sure there are the Franklins, Pavlichs and Riewoldts of this world (very very high picks.) But for every Riewoldt there is a Fitzgerald, a Watts, an Angwin, a Tim Walsh. And then there's a Brendan Fevola (3rd round pick), Nathan Thompson (7th round pick), Hentschell (pre-season pick), Bradshaw (4th round pick), a Lynch (rookie pick), an O'Loughlin. Look through a list of the even competent key forwards currently playing and you'll find very few taken originally with picks in the teens to 30s. Barry Hall is probably around the only one (though admittedly father son / concession picks for Brown, Ablett, Hawkins, Lloyd) skew things a bit.

On the other hand, my gut feel is that a correlation between quality and draft pick for midfielders will show something approaching a positive correlation - though of course there are multiple 'outliers' at both ends of the draft.

[mj23]

I could not have said it better myself. People seem to be deluded and think that another Hall or Lockett is just going to bob up. Unless we take a punt and develop our own, what are the chances that a Pavlich will be on the market? Lets not kid oursleves and expect playe's such as White, Orreal and Murphy to burst onto the scene and be absoulte stars. The chances of that happening are slim at best. All three player's come from different sporting backgrounds and are basically novices in the game. Lets pick a young KPP and give the kid a chance to develop and grow. It's the only way to go.
I think we are taking the punt with J White and Grundy. Teams like hawthorn have alot of options up forward and may look to offload one cause in the next few years they might have salary cap troubles with the likes of Buddy Hodge Mitchell. They have Buddy Roughhead Boyle so someone like a Mitch Thorp might be looking for better oppurtunities. By the way I didn't say we should jus poach players for key position I said thats what they might be thinking

[FM0226]

People say we haven't drafted a ruck with an early pick for 6 years, but we have. We used pick 16 (or thereabouts) to acquire Jolly. We used second round picks for Everitt and Chambers. Everitt should maybe be left out of the equation since he was always a short term option, but in terms of value for money, Jolly was an excellent use of a pick 16. We knew he probably wasn't going to be a superstar and he was ready to go straight away and was a big competitive body. Which is essentially what you really need in a ruck. Only Cox of the current rucks really has claim to being much more than that. He was moderate return but also very low risk compared to drafting an 18yo with that pick....

Liz, I agree with you regarding ruckmen, especially pure ruckman prospects and therefore I think there's a trend to draft 'tweeners (prospects that can be developed into KPPs but can ruck a bit) over pure ruckman types. But for every Jolly, there's also a Paul Chambers, so they are a lottery, even after they have developed physically. If Jolly or Everitt break down next year, I will not be surprised if Playfair becomes our second ruckman and I will not be surprised if he does a good job (or fail miserably), you just can't tell. Melbourne has picked up both Jamar and Jolly from the rookie list, same as Cox and Sandilands - but we have had much less success with our young rucks off the rookie list.

Draft in the old days is a total lottery in any position - Thompson belongs in the same era as Hird and Buckley so I probably will disregard him in the discussion. My take on it that the draft is indeed a total lottery after #10, but you're not going to get anything in return if you're not prepare to invest - and we haven't done a lot of investment in terms of KP prospects recently.

And I probably will be fine with the strategy if we are actually good at evaluting midfield talent - My big concern is that for all the recent small/medium types we have drafted with high picks, none of which have turned into an AA level players - McVeigh, Fosdike, J.Bolton, Crouch are top 10 picks - all servicable/role players, but none of which will qualify as our top 5 players at any time (Bolton is probably the only one that came close in 2005).

With all their talk of evaluating small/mediums is easier: Willougby was a failure while Adcock is looking to be an absolute star. Even with all his injuries, most people would still rate Prismall over Moore. If it is indeed a lottery, why don't we invest in more equal proportions in small/mediums vs talls, instead of the direction we seem to have stubborn taken without any outstanding results for as long as I remember.

And in my view, and there are a lot more small/medium gems hidden in the later parts of the draft (and the rookie list) than KP prospects - Cameron Bruce is pick 64, Ben Johnson is pick 62, Bateman, Enright and Gilbee are all 40+, Johncock is #62, Daniel cross is #56, Chris Newman is #55, Adam Selwood is #53 while Simpson is #45 in 2002. Raines is #76, Rischitelli is #61 and a bunch of very good players like Davey, Carrazzo (who I rate quite highly), Lockyer all came off the rookie list.

And I'm not surprised that there could be a lot of hidden small/mediums all plying their trade in the secondary leagues that could have done a very good job if they were given a chance at AFL (which the Davey brothers have taken with both hands).

[liz]

And in my view, and there are a lot more small/medium gems hidden in the later parts of the draft (and the rookie list) than KP prospects - Cameron Bruce is pick 64, Ben Johnson is pick 62, Bateman, Enright and Gilbee are all 40+, Johncock is #62, Daniel cross is #56, Chris Newman is #55, Adam Selwood is #53 while Simpson is #45 in 2002. Raines is #76, Rischitelli is #61 and a bunch of very good players like Davey, Carrazzo (who I rate quite highly), Lockyer all came off the rookie list.



But doesn't that just reflect the relative numbers of tall vs medium / small players in the game. In most teams' best 22 you'd have two rucks, a maximum of four true KPPs and maybe a very tall mid / utility. So that is about 7 players out of 22. If lists reflect the make-up of the best 22, that means most clubs will have around twice as many smaller players as talls. And so on sheer numbers, you're going to get more small hits from low down in the draft.

I still reckon though that, despite the outliers, the correlation is stronger for smaller players than taller ones, especially for the absolute best of them.

[rancidpants13]

I think we are taking the punt with J White and Grundy. Teams like hawthorn have alot of options up forward and may look to offload one cause in the next few years they might have salary cap troubles with the likes of Buddy Hodge Mitchell. They have Buddy Roughhead Boyle so someone like a Mitch Thorp might be looking for better oppurtunities. By the way I didn't say we should jus poach players for key position I said thats what they might be thinking

i can assure you thorp will not be leaving hawthorn soon, unless he kills someone or proves a bust on the field, which seems unlikely
boyle, m williams and roughhead will be moved on before the hawks entertain thoughts of trading thorp, he's regarded among their best
boyle was on the table in trade week, and there were offers for williams and roughhead, i think, but not taken (obviously)

as many including myself have said, we need to give as many of our own young blokes a go so we know where they are in terms of ability and progress, otherwise what's the point having them?

[rancidpants13]

But doesn't that just reflect the relative numbers of tall vs medium / small players in the game. In most teams' best 22 you'd have two rucks, a maximum of four true KPPs and maybe a very tall mid / utility. So that is about 7 players out of 22. If lists reflect the make-up of the best 22, that means most clubs will have around twice as many smaller players as talls. And so on sheer numbers, you're going to get more small hits from low down in the draft.

I still reckon though that, despite the outliers, the correlation is stronger for smaller players than taller ones, especially for the absolute best of them.

it'd be a reflection of society generally...there's more people of average height than in the skyscraper category

on your previous post on rucks, liz, i feel sorry for jason laycock coz he seems in a similar situation to the luckless stephen doyle....laycock can obviously play, is a good ruck and very classy marking forward but he can't get on the field long enough

by all reports, dan currie is one we can get excited about....he's apparently very skilled, very athletic and maybe still growing, but at 200cm he's surely a genuine ruck prospect
when do you think we're likely to see him in seniors? preseason competition?

[FM0226]

But doesn't that just reflect the relative numbers of tall vs medium / small players in the game. In most teams' best 22 you'd have two rucks, a maximum of four true KPPs and maybe a very tall mid / utility. So that is about 7 players out of 22. If lists reflect the make-up of the best 22, that means most clubs will have around twice as many smaller players as talls. And so on sheer numbers, you're going to get more small hits from low down in the draft.

I still reckon though that, despite the outliers, the correlation is stronger for smaller players than taller ones, especially for the absolute best of them.

True. But that also means that there would be a lot more small/midfield prospects (if not more as a ratio) at junior level and therefore, there sh(c)ould be a lot of handy/decent small/medium talent at the later parts of the draft and on the rookie list (as oppose to KP prospects).

What I'm trying to say is that the draft is really a lottery, for both talls and smalls, but not the spin about "It's easier to evaluate small/mediums" that they are selling - because there is no clear evidence that they really evaluate small/medium better than the talls.

As I said before, I would not have much complaints if we simply changed the order of priorities last year (or if Faulks actually looks like a KP prospect which he clearly is not at this stage) or the years before. What I'm worried about is that the recruiters/management thinks that they have seemingly beat the system (lottery) when our decent/good list, in my view, is constructed via a big chunk of luck rather than great
management/recruitment. I believe the fact that the better players we have on our list right now that recruited in the national draft are mostly later picks suggests that is the case rather than the opposite.

We have been lazy - we didn't want to go through the painful process of picking absolutely duds or waiting 5/6 years to get an return on our KP investment. Instead we have relied heavily on 'out-sourcing' our key positions and that might come back to haunt us.

We got extremely lucky with Hall and Bolton. But in my views, chances of being able to recruit similar quality of players in two/three years' time are very slim. I believe we have a good list, but it's also an ageing list when niggling and on-going injuries is going to have a bigger impact on our team.

We might still be alright next year, but things looks a tad scarier the year beyond that and the year beyond that.

[The natural]

Liz, I agree with you regarding ruckmen, especially pure ruckman prospects and therefore I think there's a trend to draft 'tweeners (prospects that can be developed into KPPs but can ruck a bit) over pure ruckman types. But for every Jolly, there's also a Paul Chambers, so they are a lottery, even after they have developed physically. If Jolly or Everitt break down next year, I will not be surprised if Playfair becomes our second ruckman and I will not be surprised if he does a good job (or fail miserably), you just can't tell. Melbourne has picked up both Jamar and Jolly from the rookie list, same as Cox and Sandilands - but we have had much less success with our young rucks off the rookie list.

Draft in the old days is a total lottery in any position - Thompson belongs in the same era as Hird and Buckley so I probably will disregard him in the discussion. My take on it that the draft is indeed a total lottery after #10, but you're not going to get anything in return if you're not prepare to invest - and we haven't done a lot of investment in terms of KP prospects recently.

And I probably will be fine with the strategy if we are actually good at evaluting midfield talent - My big concern is that for all the recent small/medium types we have drafted with high picks, none of which have turned into an AA level players - McVeigh, Fosdike, J.Bolton, Crouch are top 10 picks - all servicable/role players, but none of which will qualify as our top 5 players at any time (Bolton is probably the only one that came close in 2005).

With all their talk of evaluating small/mediums is easier: Willougby was a failure while Adcock is looking to be an absolute star. Even with all his injuries, most people would still rate Prismall over Moore. If it is indeed a lottery, why don't we invest in more equal proportions in small/mediums vs talls, instead of the direction we seem to have stubborn taken without any outstanding results for as long as I remember.

And in my view, and there are a lot more small/medium gems hidden in the later parts of the draft (and the rookie list) than KP prospects - Cameron Bruce is pick 64, Ben Johnson is pick 62, Bateman, Enright and Gilbee are all 40+, Johncock is #62, Daniel cross is #56, Chris Newman is #55, Adam Selwood is #53 while Simpson is #45 in 2002. Raines is #76, Rischitelli is #61 and a bunch of very good players like Davey, Carrazzo (who I rate quite highly), Lockyer all came off the rookie list.

And I'm not surprised that there could be a lot of hidden small/mediums all plying their trade in the secondary leagues that could have done a very good job if they were given a chance at AFL (which the Davey brothers have taken with both hands).Agree whole heartedly with what you have said,but your observation of Prismall being rated superior to Moore has been made based upon Prismall actually being given opportunity to play senior footy where Moore clearly has not.Yes he has had some injury problems but every time he got a senior opportunity he had limited ground time and didnt do much wrong only to see himself omitted.Its been typical of Roos approach to some of the developing players over the last couple of seasons.Schmidt was hard done by a couple of times this year and was made the scapegoat after a loss when other mids namely McVeigh or even Bolton during some stages of the season could have easily been dropped.Roos mantra of sticking with the tried and true has really worn thin with alot of people and for mine the jokes up.I say let some of this young talent off the leash this year and see how they fare.If their development program continues in the same vein over the next couple of years things will get as bleak as some people on here are predicting.Start blooding a few and dont bloody die wondering.

[mj23]

i can assure you thorp will not be leaving hawthorn soon, unless he kills someone or proves a bust on the field, which seems unlikely
boyle, m williams and roughhead will be moved on before the hawks entertain thoughts of trading thorp, he's regarded among their best
boyle was on the table in trade week, and there were offers for williams and roughhead, i think, but not taken (obviously)

as many including myself have said, we need to give as many of our own young blokes a go so we know where they are in terms of ability and progress, otherwise what's the point having them?
I was using Thorp for an example but Hawks will have salary cap pressure in the next couple years one of there key forwards may want to leave because of lack of opportunities. don't bite my head off because we won't have enough time to train a key forward up before Hall retires.

[Bloods boy from the Bush]

Will people stop talking about Hawthorn who yes have a number of young KPP's they also have had about 250 early draft choices in the last couple of drafts where as the Swans usually only use the minimum three picks and most of them late in the Draft.

I too like everyone else on this board wished we had been able to take at least KPP in this draft but if anyone can name 3 options who were availble at pick 26 that we could of taken and would have been worth that pick feel free.

[rancidpants13]

Will people stop talking about Hawthorn who yes have a number of young KPP's they also have had about 250 early draft choices in the last couple of drafts where as the Swans usually only use the minimum three picks and most of them late in the Draft.

I too like everyone else on this board wished we had been able to take at least KPP in this draft but if anyone can name 3 options who were availble at pick 26 that we could of taken and would have been worth that pick feel free.

don't look at me, i'm irrelevant

[FM0226]

Will people stop talking about Hawthorn who yes have a number of young KPP's they also have had about 250 early draft choices in the last couple of drafts where as the Swans usually only use the minimum three picks and most of them late in the Draft.

I too like everyone else on this board wished we had been able to take at least KPP in this draft but if anyone can name 3 options who were availble at pick 26 that we could of taken and would have been worth that pick feel free.

I would have taken Scott Simpson, Gourdis, Gaertner - even prospects like Mulligan, Smouha and maybe even Dawson Simpson. They are unproven, but in my view Meredith is every bit as unproven as they are (in terms of succeeding in AFL level). Especially if he's not going to be a major upgrade on the likes of Thornton or Brabazon or Jack (or even Nick Smith) which are already on our books.

With Bird safely in our pockets and a good small/medium prospect in the first round - it was the perfect year to take a punt - something our recruiters are too afraid to do. It's our last 'live' pick and using it on a #30 prospect or #50 prospect is no different - and given that we seem to get better players in our later picks than our earlier picks, maybe it will actually work out.

[Bloods boy from the Bush]

I would have taken Scott Simpson, Gourdis, Gaertner - even prospects like Mulligan, Smouha and maybe even Dawson Simpson. They are unproven, but in my view Meredith is every bit as unproven as they are (in terms of succeeding in AFL level). Especially if he's not going to be a major upgrade on the likes of Thornton or Brabazon or Jack (or even Nick Smith) which are already on our books.

With Bird safely in our pockets and a good small/medium prospect in the first round - it was the perfect year to take a punt - something our recruiters are too afraid to do. It's our last 'live' pick and using it on a #30 prospect or #50 prospect is no different - and given that we seem to get better players in our later picks than our earlier picks, maybe it will actually work out.
Scott Simpson i'll admit may have been better option purely on a need basis but Gourdis and Gaetner well I haven't seen much of Gourdis but given his Draft Camp results I'm guessing he must be a bit of a dud footballer if he didn't get drafted and Gaetner I have seen and well if you want a bloke who might win the 3k time trial he would be great but if want a player who can the footy and use it then I would touch this bloke with pick 76 let alone pick 26.

[mj23]

Will people stop talking about Hawthorn who yes have a number of young KPP's they also have had about 250 early draft choices in the last couple of drafts where as the Swans usually only use the minimum three picks and most of them late in the Draft.

I too like everyone else on this board wished we had been able to take at least KPP in this draft but if anyone can name 3 options who were availble at pick 26 that we could of taken and would have been worth that pick feel free.
why not bring up hawthorn who cares how many draft picks they have had they have an excess of kpp and we could try and lure one for more opportunites. our strike rate with training up kpp is shithouse!

[FM0226]

Scott Simpson i'll admit may have been better option purely on a need basis but Gourdis and Gaetner well I haven't seen much of Gourdis but given his Draft Camp results I'm guessing he must be a bit of a dud footballer if he didn't get drafted and Gaetner I have seen and well if you want a bloke who might win the 3k time trial he would be great but if want a player who can the footy and use it then I would touch this bloke with pick 76 let alone pick 26.

I'm more than happy to take a punt since we have had two solid small/medium prospects in the bag at that time. Travis Cloke can't kick straight to save his life but have been quite valuable to the Collingwood. Remember that since #26 is our last live pick, that's really AS good as a pick 76.

And to be honest even if Gourdis and Gaertner are duds, they probably won't be as bad as Faulks that somehow the management/recruitment thinks he has a chance of filling a KP spot.

[FM0226]

why not bring up hawthorn who cares how many draft picks they have had they have an excess of kpp and we could try and lure one for more opportunites. our strike rate with training up kpp is shithouse!

Who do you actually think we can get hold of off them? Dawson? Boyle? Hardly players to get excited about. We probably have a slim chance of getting Roughead - and they will probably ask for an arm and a leg for him - remember what they wanted for Hay (and I don't rate Roughead highly at all).

[mj23]

Who do you actually think we can get hold of off them? Dawson? Boyle? Hardly players to get excited about. We probably have a slim chance of getting Roughead - and they will probably ask for an arm and a leg for him - remember what they wanted for Hay (and I don't rate Roughead highly at all).
I was using hawthorn as an example, quality players come up for trade every year. when we get salary cap space when hall and everitt retire we make plays at big forwards that we need thats the way the swans have done it for over ten years!who said anything about Boyle or Dawson?

[Bloods boy from the Bush]

I'm more than happy to take a punt since we have had two solid small/medium prospects in the bag at that time. Travis Cloke can't kick straight to save his life but have been quite valuable to the Collingwood. Remember that since #26 is our last live pick, that's really AS good as a pick 76.

And to be honest even if Gourdis and Gaertner are duds, they probably won't be as bad as Faulks that somehow the management/recruitment thinks he has a chance of filling a KP spot.
I really don't understand why you keep saying that pick 26 was our last live pick that has nothing to do with the argument we took the best available player with our pick that was Brett Meredith just because we dont have anymore picks doesnt mean we just throw it away on some dud who was never going to get drafted. Pick 26 is slightly different to pick 76 in that 50 players are no longer available at pick 76.

If your theory is correct lets just say a team has two first round selections and a father son player with their last making their last live pick about pick 13 or 14 should say ah well its our last live pick we might as well pick some random dud who more than likley will never get a game.

I'm by no means saying Meredith will be gun but the chance are he has a 95% better chance than Gourdis and Gaertner at this stage.