If we end up with pick 5 in the draft again...

[PJ Power]

Nine rounds to go, but if we ended up as we did in 2006, should we go for the best available again, or absolutely, positively make sure we pick up the best available key forward?

As far as I can see we are desperate for the best available key forward, ruckman and inside midfielder.

But surely, surely, this year it has got to be about recruiting a power forward.

[Eddie Woloschek]

Nine rounds to go, but if we ended up as we did in 2006, should we go for the best available again, or absolutely, positively make sure we pick up the best available key forward?

As far as I can see we are desperate for the best available key forward, ruckman and inside midfielder.

But surely, surely, this year it has got to be about recruiting a power forward.

At this stage, pick 5 might be pessimistic. We won't be storming home.

[Jakko]

We need A KPP, preferably the best CHF in the draft pool.

A sliding gun ruckman could be a decent alternative.

IMO, we will have a pick 6-8, not top 5.

[Ebert80]

Corey McKernan's brother sounds good.

[Predator.]

Definitely need to have a go at getting our next decent tall forward KPP.

[*PAF]

A proper KPP forward instead of an inbetweeny or ruckman come pinch hitter would be my number one option.
Number two (or one if the first isn't available) would be a proper small back with defensive instincts and skills as compared to an athletic semi skilled midsized HFF/part time midfielder with 2 legs and no other position to go to since our other midsized HFF/part time midfielders have slightly better skills and take up those spots first.

[Black 18]

It won't matter what number we get in the draft, or who we trade for. Unless we replace the coach or Choco completely throws out his coaching philosophy then things won't change.

[BWST]

IMO, we will have a pick 6-8, not top 5.

You must be joking right !!

[Power King]

grab the best available kpp forward

[Total Power]

We will draft another flanker and project player i bet.I have nothing against choco but our first round selections had been _________ poor.I bet its gonna be another surprise pick, a name no one ever heard of and its gonna be another 5 year project player :rolleyes:.No offence but Matthew Lobbe (not saying he is a dud, but a project player with a first round pick??) at pick 14 is a complete waste, when we could have drafted him with a second rounder.

[PJ Power]

We will draft another flanker and project player i bet.I have nothing against choco but our first round selections had been _________ poor.I bet its gonna be another surprise pick, a name no one ever heard of and its gonna be another 5 year project player :rolleyes:.No offence but Matthew Lobbe (not saying he is a dud, but a project player with a first round pick??) at pick 14 is a complete waste, when we could have drafted him with a second rounder.

Have to agree with your comments re Lobbe.

[powaflag08]

And another no name M.Westhoff could've waited until our last pick, but we got Farmer who is a gem anyway.

Why would we be looking at a ruckman when we have Brogan, Lade, De Luca and Cockshell who are all good rucks and ____ can play CHF as well.

I say we get the BEST avaliable Tall Back, Tall forward or Inside Mid.

[Capital Power]

I don't care what position we fill, so long as we fill it with a player who bleeds teal. We have precious few of these right now ...

[Powerade 08]

Why would we be looking at a ruckman when we have Brogan, Lade, De Luca and Cockshell who are all good rucks and ____ can play CHF as well.

How did Lade, De Luca and Cockshell go in the AFL this week?

[Black 18]

We will draft another flanker and project player i bet.I have nothing against choco but our first round selections had been _________ poor.I bet its gonna be another surprise pick, a name no one ever heard of and its gonna be another 5 year project player :rolleyes:.No offence but Matthew Lobbe (not saying he is a dud, but a project player with a first round pick??) at pick 14 is a complete waste, when we could have drafted him with a second rounder.

We could have got Lobbe as a rookie. FFS, the guy averaged 6 or 8 stats a game despite being a giant for that age. Hardly stats that suggest anything other than a big kid.

Lobbe was nothing more than Choco seeing he was big, knowing he could run, and then thinking his "education" system could teach him everthing else needed to be a good AFL footballer. You CAN'T teach natural talent, or instinct, or desire. Lobbe is nothing more than Choco being so full of himself, and his ability to see, and then make, a footballer that nobody else could have. He also fits perfectly into Choco's bizarre world that all footballers should just be able to run, if they can run then Choco can have his gameplan do the rest.

[Total Power]

Exactly black18, looking at some of the draftees around pick 15-30 range last year, they have gone past Loobe already.What shits me is every year choco makes the same mistake, Boak with pick 5 (although he is a gun, but we could have had Thorp, a KPP we are crying out for or Selwood), in 2004 Adam Thomson, (again, he is a gun, however we could have drafted him as a 2nd rounder as well). So many wasted 2nd rounders as well, Westhoff was a complete shocker.I bet we will have a surprise first round pick this year as well, my money is on a half back flanker or a tall project player :rolleyes:

[Porthos]

Lobbe isn't the one I'd be querying at this point (except that he looks likely to play any tall position EXCEPT key position forward). Nick Lower in the second round in 2005, however...

As for `best available', we've been picking `best available' for 11 drafts. Still haven't drafted a decent KPF. I think 11 drafts is enough of an acid test, don't you?

[Bresh]

Has anyone got a quick rundown of a predicted top 5 (just so that we can know who we will the opportunity to, but won't, pick.)

Obviously there is Naitanui and Rich from WA. Aren't there a couple of CHF/CHBs from WA also in the reckoning?

[Ford Fairlane]

Has anyone got a quick rundown of a predicted top 5 (just so that we can know who we will the opportunity to, but won't, pick.)

Obviously there is Naitanui and Rich from WA. Aren't there a couple of CHF/CHBs from WA also in the reckoning?

Here you go, work your way thru this thread (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=451174).

Essendon beat Carlton today to draw level with us on wins.

[hereselmo1]

Interesting to hear a few other clubs say they need mids not KPP. Could be a good year for a good KPP to slide to us or maybe even do a trade for a young KPP.

[dyertribe]

Interesting to see Ayce Cordy - 200cm+ future man mountain ruck prospect - is probably off to the Doggies on the father/son. Which means he'll be just coming good as an AFL player as Hudson winds up and Minson approaches his prime.

It just keeps coming up roses for the Victorian clubs in this regard.

[P.A.F.C]

Total Power has no clue. The only other key forward that was drafted anywhere near Lobbe was Notte who is skinnier than Lobbe and won't play AFL for years.

In 2006, we should have taken Thorp over Boak? What a joke, he didn't even want to come here. I suppose we could have taken James Sellar or another half forward flanker to team up with Westhoff in Jack Riewoldt.

In 2004, we had Tredrea, Thurstans and White all looking good but of course, we were screaming out for a key position player and not a replacement for Francou/James/Carr. Only key position forwards after Thommo were Lynden Dunn(Who has now turned into a tall midfield tagger), Willits(Who we took) and Rusling(Chronic injury problems).

Bottom line if Total Power was our recruiting manager we would have:
Notte
Thorp(Would be organising his trade this year)
Dunn/Rusling

Instead of:
Lobbe
Boak
Thomson

And that's WITH the benefit of hindsight.

If you look at where the real great promising key forwards have come from, they are usually in the top end of the first round. We've been extremely unlucky to miss out on some of the best ones even when we've had a pretty high pick.

[Macca19]

I too have concerns about Lobbes ability to play as a KPF. I think he'll most likely play AFL, but hes not going to be the physical forward we need.

[dyertribe]

If you look at where the real great promising key forwards have come from, they are usually in the top end of the first round. We've been extremely unlucky to miss out on some of the best ones even when we've had a pretty high pick.

Or either via father/son, start-up concessions or brown paper bags.

Adelaide: Hodges, Modra (both start-up concessions)
Brisbane: Brown (father/son)
Carlton: Fevola (pick #38, 1998)
Collingwood: Rocca (heavily traded for, was originally Sydney's pick #2, 1994)
Essendon: Lloyd (Trade receive as a result of Freo concessions), Lucas (pick #4, 1994)
Fremantle: Pavlich (#4, 1999)
Geelong: Hawkins (father/son)
Hawthorn: Franklin (#5, 2004), Roughead (#2, 2004)
Melbourne: Neitz ('Non Draftee')
North Melbourne: Carey and Longmire ($10000 to the Swans)
Port: Tredrea (start-up)
Richmond: Richardson (father/son)
St. Kilda: Riewoldt (#1, 2000), Koschitzke (#2, 2000)
Sydney: Hall (heavy trade, was originally St. Kilda's pick #19, 1995)
Western Bulldogs: Grant (#120-odd, 1988)
West Coast: Sumich (start up concessions).

Fev is basically the only elite KPF running around today or in the recent past who was acquired via conventional means.

[Crow-mo]

Or either via father/son, start-up concessions or brown paper bags.

Adelaide: Hodges, Modra (both start-up concessions)
Brisbane: Brown (father/son)
Carlton: Fevola (pick #38, 1998)
Collingwood: Rocca (heavily traded for, was originally Sydney's pick #2, 1994)
Essendon: Lloyd (Trade receive as a result of Freo concessions), Lucas (pick #4, 1994)
Fremantle: Pavlich (#4, 1999)
Geelong: Hawkins (father/son)
Hawthorn: Franklin (#5, 2004), Roughead (#2, 2004)
Melbourne: Neitz ('Non Draftee')
North Melbourne: Carey and Longmire ($10000 to the Swans)
Port: Tredrea (start-up)
Richmond: Richardson (father/son)
St. Kilda: Riewoldt (#1, 2000), Koschitzke (#2, 2000)
Sydney: Hall (heavy trade, was originally St. Kilda's pick #19, 1995)
Western Bulldogs: Grant (#120-odd, 1988)
West Coast: Sumich (start up concessions).

Fev is basically the only elite KPF running around today or in the recent past who was acquired via conventional means.

the thing is, those non-conventional means are now out the window and their equivalents will be gotten in more ordinary ways.

and in more ordinary ways, there will always be a high bust rate for KPP drafted as 17yr olds.

Look at Hawthorn. absolutely nailed 2004 with Roughead (massively underrated player) and Franklin. but subsequently, dowler & Thorp haven't done so much; neither have their rucks.

which is fine, but what if you can't afford to end up with dowler & thorp?

drafting KPP is never going to be for the feignt of heart.

[TheFridge]

I have said my piece on the myth of poor KPP recruiting before...

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=441380

If we end up with pick 5 again, I suppose it will depend upon who has been taken with picks 1 to 4, but in terms of type, I really hope we end up with either a strong KPP or ruck prospect. However, should that be the case, we will need to be patient and have no expectation that he make any impact for 2-3 years....

Food for thought - given the perceived premium value on early draft picks this year, could we get a bargain at the trade table for an earlish pick?

[Crow-mo]

I have said my piece on the myth of poor KPP recruiting before...

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=441380

If we end up with pick 5 again, I suppose it will depend upon who has been taken with picks 1 to 4, but in terms of type, I really hope we end up with either a strong KPP or ruck prospect. However, should that be the case, we will need to be patient and have no expectation that he make any impact for 2-3 years....

Food for thought - given the perceived premium value on early draft picks this year, could we get a bargain at the trade table for an earlish pick?

yes, but your point was just as flawed then as it is now.

you've only gone in one direction with your analysis, which is: we didn't have too many chances to get one. and there is certainly some truth to it.

however it's incomplete. you also need to look at it from the direction that you needed one, and did you do enough to be able to get one?

the draft is only one mechanism.

what matters is the need, all else is subordinate to the need. you have placed one method of getting one, as the first building block of your argument.

what I am trying to say is this: it is not enough to say we did not have easy opportunities to get something of need, because either you decided you did not really need a KPP or you did not do enough to get one.

that's true for every club BTW, not just yours.

perhaps a slightly simplistic analogy would be this: a young lad wants the latest grand theft auto IV video game. it is $100, and he has $50. he looks in the paper, looks in the shops and no one will sell it to him for $50. another week, he tries again. still no. and so forth.

eventually he decided he did everything he could, and that was that.

is it as simple as that, if he really wanted it - couldn't he have gotten some work, did some jobs around the house etc?

if you need something you have to try to make it happen - sometimes (and for KPP the answer seems to be most times) that is still not enough; but just sitting back and hoping it falls into your lap, isn't everything you could've done. my draft picks weren't enough (my $50 wasn't enough) is only side of the story.

and as I said, same goes for everyone else too.

[Porthos]

Holy shit. Crow-mo posted that?

These truly are the end times.

[Bresh]

He actually can be of some use when not being a girl's rudey bits.

[Jakko]

You must be joking right !!


No Im not. Pick 6 is much more likely that 8 though obviously.

Its just I can see a scenario close to late 2005, when Chocco declared finals out of the question, started giving younger guys a go (like Pearce coming from rookie list). We actually played better with the new direction and less pressure, and ended up making the finals after declaring it out of reach.

I think that the release of pressure on some of our more mentally fragile players will result in better football, and maybe sneak some wins. We still have the weapons to win games.

Im sorry if my thoughts werent "doom and gloomy" enough for you. :cool:

[Eddie Woloschek]

We will never know this because the only way into the AFL system is the draft, but I suspect that if we could grab a first rounder and forget the rest of the picks, then supplement the numbers from players not drafted, we'd be no worse off. Look at the number of formerly rookied-players who make bigger names than those drafted. Scouting is under-developed, they all swap dance cards, use the same info. So many decent kids never get a look in because of the system. I say, anyone who nominates for the draft and misses is a free agent and can sign with any club. We'd soon see the scouts doing their job better.

[PJ Power]

No Im not. Pick 6 is much more likely that 8 though obviously.

Its just I can see a scenario close to late 2005, when Chocco declared finals out of the question, started giving younger guys a go (like Pearce coming from rookie list). We actually played better with the new direction and less pressure, and ended up making the finals after declaring it out of reach.

I think that the release of pressure on some of our more mentally fragile players will result in better football, and maybe sneak some wins. We still have the weapons to win games.

Im sorry if my thoughts werent "doom and gloomy" enough for you. :cool:

There's a good chance you're right. I'm not sure if late wins though will make me feel alot better, as it will only confirm our inability to perform under the pressure of expectation. When the pressure's released, the players and coaches find their ability to express themselves again and play better footy.

[Crow-mo]

He actually can be of some use when not being a girl's rudey bits.

you take that back!

1. I will not be accused of being useful
2. I am always a girls rudey bits

[Total Power]

Total Power has no clue. The only other key forward that was drafted anywhere near Lobbe was Notte who is skinnier than Lobbe and won't play AFL for years.

In 2006, we should have taken Thorp over Boak? What a joke, he didn't even want to come here. I suppose we could have taken James Sellar or another half forward flanker to team up with Westhoff in Jack Riewoldt.

In 2004, we had Tredrea, Thurstans and White all looking good but of course, we were screaming out for a key position player and not a replacement for Francou/James/Carr. Only key position forwards after Thommo were Lynden Dunn(Who has now turned into a tall midfield tagger), Willits(Who we took) and Rusling(Chronic injury problems).

Bottom line if Total Power was our recruiting manager we would have:
Notte
Thorp(Would be organising his trade this year)
Dunn/Rusling

Instead of:
Lobbe
Boak
Thomson

And that's WITH the benefit of hindsight.

If you look at where the real great promising key forwards have come from, they are usually in the top end of the first round. We've been extremely unlucky to miss out on some of the best ones even when we've had a pretty high pick.

Clueless? go play with yourself mate, i was merely stating my opinion,thats what these forums are for but anyway you forgot Alex Rance, didnt you? here is rawlings report on rance, last week.Could have been our third tall in defence, or maybe handy upforward as well.

Alex Rance

Among the best three players on the ground. Showed he was versatile enough to play on taller and smaller opponents. Had 35 possessions and five tackles in a top-class display. His improvement over the past month has been profound

in 2004, we could have selected Cameron Wood, instead of Thomson and could have drafted thommo with our second rounder or pick 19 (willits). Instead of whinging over DeLuca and Giles being a dud, Wood WAS the best ruckman alongside Meeson (as projected) who can take a strong grab as well :rolleyes: Wood was was supposed to be a 1st round pick, we had no backup for Lade and Brogan, now that Ladey is finished, Wood could have been our number 2 ruckman, instead, we are stuck with Deluca

2006 draft , Mitchell Thorp - do you know anything about him at all? the guy was injured last year, this is his first year virtually, and he is doing pretty well there.With Roughhead and Franklin up forward, his chances are limited.Surely you will agree, instead of having skinny flankers, or the likes of westhoff and cockshell up forward thorp was a better option?? boak is a solid player, dont get me wrong but he is not the type of player we need at the moment.Whether thorp was interested in port or not, thats a different story.

Instead of drafting outside players, like Boak, we could have drafted KP players, that is my point or hard inside players.FFS how many skinny outside players do we need?? Forgetting Nathan Brown, or Kurt Tippett (we could have used our 2nd pick on him)

Instead of :

Lobbe
Thomson
Boak and Stewart

We could have had:

Alex Rance (who is playing some solid VFL footy) and soon to get a richmond callup.
Wood AND thomson
Thorp or Selwood/Nathan Brown or Kurt Tipett

And yes ofcourse, franklin, roughhead, pavlich, reiwoldt who are the best in the AFL at the moment are not top 10 draft picks :rolleyes:I am just saying instead of drafting skinny outside players, we could have addressed our need.Hell if rance turns out to be a dud, so be it, atleast we addressed our need instead. How would you like, if we again select the best available and its a skinny outside player as well? its not what we need.There are no guarantees ofcourse, but atleast we addressed our needs.An example -I am not pissed off with Wilits as pick 19, i am pissed off with Thomson as pick 11, when we could have had wood and then thomoson as a second rounder.

If you disagree with me, thats ok, but dont whinge about our lack of forward 50 targets or rucks, may god help us with Willits, cockshell, deluca, giles as our "future" tall timber prospect :thumbsd:

[RangaInTeal]

Number two (or one if the first isn't available) would be a proper small back with defensive instincts and skills as compared to an athletic semi skilled midsized HFF/part time midfielder

Mitch Farmer anyone? Daniel Boyle... Jacob Surjan, Nick Lower... Hrmm...

[malcolm]

top 5 prospects at this stage (from afl.com.au)

Nick Naitanui
WA, 04/05/1990, 197cm, 95kgs

Daniel Rich
WA, 07/06/1990, 183cm, 83kgs

Chris Yarran
WA, 19/12/1990, 180cm, 84kgs

Hamish Hartlett
SA, 14/08/1990, 182cm, 74kgs

Jack Watts - full forward
Vic, 26/03/1991, 194cm, 85kgs

Jackson Trengove
Vic Metro, 02/11/1990, 196cm, 77kgs

[Andre]

Total Power has no clue. The only other key forward that was drafted anywhere near Lobbe was Notte who is skinnier than Lobbe and won't play AFL for years.

If you look at where the real great promising key forwards have come from, they are usually in the top end of the first round. We've been extremely unlucky to miss out on some of the best ones even when we've had a pretty high pick.
Partly true, in that we've had few high picks, due to our flag and the many years in the finals without a flag. That's all fine, but when was the last time we agressively traded for higher picks voluntarily?

We got picks 12 and change for Carr, nothing for Stevens. Stevens was always mentally fragile from the start, why not trade from a position of strength in 2002? Thurstans flukes a 3 goal GF performance after an average at best 2004 and many here could see his trade value would have been higher then it ever was before or would be since, but instead he gets a long term deal.

Again this year you can be sure we'll tinker at the edges and won't offer players that could net us something half decent, but are replacable, at trade week. Surjan, Pearce, Krakouer (just what Freo. are screaming for, a player who moves faster then my 94 yr. old grandma), Cassisi, Pettigrew. These are the guys still with some currency, another year or two in Choco's system and we'd be lucky to get a 4th round pick for the lot (... must restrain cynicism).

Pick 5 is like going out with a friend and hooking up with 2 girls, one hot, one not. You get the not - you are so close, yet so far away from the good. In 2006 there were 4 hot prospects and we had pick 5, most years there are usually only 2 or 3 'super' picks.

We want a decent KPF and we'll need to trade. Melbourne, Freo. and West Coast have a lock on 14-16, so we need to trade into a really good pick. And there's a simple test IMO as for whether a player has some currency. If you don't care if we lose the player, he has no currency, if you do, he has some, if you think he's essential to keep, then he's got decent currency.

Throwing up hypothetical trades at this time is fraught, but assuming the ladder stays as is, I'd bite the bullet and offer Freo #5 and our second rounder plus Krakoeur and Surjan for their 1st and 2nd rounders. Surjan is replacable immediately with Thomas and Krakoeur is an 'icing' player, not the inside midfielder, KPF or ruckman we most sorely lack. Fremantle's #1 problem is lack of speed, so he's exactly what they need.

[bringbackbucky]

Danyle Pearce will be no the trade table come the end of the year. Question is - does he still have any currency?

[FishingRick04]

Jack Watts - full forward
Vic, 26/03/1991, 194cm, 85kgs

Not related to Fergus by any chance?

I see there is a Pavlich at the Eagles, figures have been average, I wonder if it's a Brother? Maybe we could draft him so Matty wants to come home to play with his brother?

Ohh on another note, I understand the proposed changes, but we have to remember trading certain people could have a negative effect on the group due to respect and etc etc, so I would imagine that needs to be factored in also.

[RangaInTeal]

top 5 prospects at this stage (from afl.com.au)

Hamish Hartlett
SA, 14/08/1990, 182cm, 74kgs

Jack Watts - full forward
Vic, 26/03/1991, 194cm, 85kgs


Hartlett WILL NOT go top 5! Watts, is not worthy of a top ten pick from what I have seen, and opertunistic Full Forward, not the Brown/Fev/Lloyd/Franklin/Hawkins main target up forward...

[Porthos]

Ohh on another note, I understand the proposed changes, but we have to remember trading certain people could have a negative effect on the group due to respect and etc etc, so I would imagine that needs to be factored in also.Thats only a relevant concern when you're happy with the status quo.

[Black 18]

Not related to Fergus by any chance?

I see there is a Pavlich at the Eagles, figures have been average, I wonder if it's a Brother? Maybe we could draft him so Matty wants to come home to play with his brother?

Ohh on another note, I understand the proposed changes, but we have to remember trading certain people could have a negative effect on the group due to respect and etc etc, so I would imagine that needs to be factored in also.

Are you serious Rick? About time our "boys" learnt to be men. I think half our problem is that Choco hides them from any sort of pressure or negative vibes, he treats them like 14yr old schoolboys, and look how we go once pressure is applied.

If any of the players do get upset because we have to trade or delist our way out of this shit then throw them out too!

The playing group has no leg to stand on in relation to anything the club deems necessary to do at present. If it's all too upsetting for them then I suggest they get out now.

God, we are becoming soft in all areas.

There would be nothing better for our whole footy department than to see senior coaches get the axe, senior players axed or traded, juniors put on notice. Make every single person at Alberton start to realise the honour they have of being a part of our club, and make them fully aware that failiure & excuses won't be tolerated any longer. Especially the type that tarnish our club.

Enough of this nicely, nice shit.

[Macca19]

I wouldnt mind Watts, and his currency is growing. Hartlett has had a stinker of a Champs so far by all accounts so he might be a slider.

The Pavlich, Jake, is around 20 now and is a flanker. Not AFL standard.

[Pedro59]

It won't matter what number we get in the draft, or who we trade for. Unless we replace the coach or Choco completely throws out his coaching philosophy then things won't change.
so what are your main changes that you would like choco to adopt in his coaching (and not discussing player changes re thommo at this moment)

[Power Pete]

Our number one priority in the next draft is a strong young ruckman over 200cm who can play below the knees, like a Matthew Primus type player.

[Ebert80]

Our number one priority in the next draft is a strong young ruckman over 200cm who can play below the knees, like a Matthew Primus type player.

That will probably be Lobbe in 2 years. I think we're much better off going for a key forward with our first pick.

[Natman]

Our number one priority in the next draft is a strong young ruckman over 200cm who can play below the knees, like a Matthew Primus type player.

For the rest of the season, I would be more than happy to see if DeLuca can fulfill your requirements.

[MrMeaner]

Who would people be willing to part with for a first or second draft pick? I guess a related question is do we have anyone who we could trade to get a first or second draft pick?

As it is, I don't think that our current stock have much currency. If he was younger (and thus still had some value) I would consider offers for Chad. But he's now too old to trade to anyone except those teams who are within reach of a premiership already.

The only possibile trades that may improve our drafting position may be through trading one of those suffering 'second year blues' such as Westhoff. However, I'm not sure that he would fill a need for the teams below us. Boak might be a possibility but I don't think that we would actually achieve anything from trading him. Apart from that, our fringe players (and even some of those in the 22) do not appear to offer great value.

[dyertribe]

so what are your main changes that you would like choco to adopt in his coaching (and not discussing player changes re thommo at this moment)

Not see guys like Tredrea, Westhoff and Ebert running around on the HBF whenever a side gets a run on, whether we're leading or not.

It's infuriating - it happens every week and never ever ever ever works.

[ThunderPower_14]

Agree, we are the worst side at flooding and playing defensively in the league, so why do we bloody resort to it when we are conceding goals? We are far better off just trying to outscore them. If we are 100% committed to playing in a shootout and attacking at all costs, we will beat a lot of sides.

We have plenty of young midfielders. Our first few picks in this draft NEED to be key position forwards, and ruckmen.

[Macca19]

Who would people be willing to part with for a first or second draft pick? I guess a related question is do we have anyone who we could trade to get a first or second draft pick?

Shaun Burgoyne.

Melbourne, West Coast and Freo could all do with a player like him.

[RangaInTeal]

Who would people be willing to part with for a first or second draft pick? I guess a related question is do we have anyone who we could trade to get a first or second draft pick?

First and Seccond rounders...

Pearce, Boak, Gray, Salopek would all probably fetch late first round picks/early second round selections!Adam Thomson a mid-late second round pick! I could only see us letting Pearce go!

[P.A.F.C]

Clueless? go play with yourself mate, i was merely stating my opinion,thats what these forums are for but anyway you forgot Alex Rance, didnt you? here is rawlings report on rance, last week.Could have been our third tall in defence, or maybe handy upforward as well.

Alex Rance

Among the best three players on the ground. Showed he was versatile enough to play on taller and smaller opponents. Had 35 possessions and five tackles in a top-class display. His improvement over the past month has been profound

in 2004, we could have selected Cameron Wood, instead of Thomson and could have drafted thommo with our second rounder or pick 19 (willits). Instead of whinging over DeLuca and Giles being a dud, Wood WAS the best ruckman alongside Meeson (as projected) who can take a strong grab as well :rolleyes: Wood was was supposed to be a 1st round pick, we had no backup for Lade and Brogan, now that Ladey is finished, Wood could have been our number 2 ruckman, instead, we are stuck with Deluca

2006 draft , Mitchell Thorp - do you know anything about him at all? the guy was injured last year, this is his first year virtually, and he is doing pretty well there.With Roughhead and Franklin up forward, his chances are limited.Surely you will agree, instead of having skinny flankers, or the likes of westhoff and cockshell up forward thorp was a better option?? boak is a solid player, dont get me wrong but he is not the type of player we need at the moment.Whether thorp was interested in port or not, thats a different story.

Instead of drafting outside players, like Boak, we could have drafted KP players, that is my point or hard inside players.FFS how many skinny outside players do we need?? Forgetting Nathan Brown, or Kurt Tippett (we could have used our 2nd pick on him)

Instead of :

Lobbe
Thomson
Boak and Stewart

We could have had:

Alex Rance (who is playing some solid VFL footy) and soon to get a richmond callup.
Wood AND thomson
Thorp or Selwood/Nathan Brown or Kurt Tipett

And yes ofcourse, franklin, roughhead, pavlich, reiwoldt who are the best in the AFL at the moment are not top 10 draft picks :rolleyes:I am just saying instead of drafting skinny outside players, we could have addressed our need.Hell if rance turns out to be a dud, so be it, atleast we addressed our need instead. How would you like, if we again select the best available and its a skinny outside player as well? its not what we need.There are no guarantees ofcourse, but atleast we addressed our needs.An example -I am not pissed off with Wilits as pick 19, i am pissed off with Thomson as pick 11, when we could have had wood and then thomoson as a second rounder.

If you disagree with me, thats ok, but dont whinge about our lack of forward 50 targets or rucks, may god help us with Willits, cockshell, deluca, giles as our "future" tall timber prospect :thumbsd:
We should have drafted a key defender in Rance? Right...

I also love your little hindsight pick of wanting to take Wood over Willits. You rant on about how we shouldn't take skinny kids and then say we should have taken a skinny ruckman over a massive key forward in Willits. Wood still isn't much bigger and is hardly setting the world alight at Collingwood.

Plus there's no guarantee that Thomson would have been available at the 2nd round pick. Sometimes the 'suprise' early picks are picked early because the so called experts don't have a clue with their fantasy drafts. Perfect example in Tom Bellchambers and Gourdis(sp?) this year who everyone had in their top 20. Both only got drafted in the rookie draft.

Also, Boak was hardly drafted as an outside player. He is less physically advanced than Selwood but i'm sure can become a classy user of the ball while still being an inside midfielder.

Also, amazing that Mitch Thorp debuted last year despite being injured the whole time. Also interesting that you think he's going alright this year, when he actually hasn't played yet. I assume you've been scouting him through the VFL? Also loved how you ignored my point in that he didn't want to come.

[MrMeaner]

Shaun Burgoyne.

Melbourne, West Coast and Freo could all do with a player like him.

Even with the question marks over his work ethic?*

If yes, I'd be tempted. If picks 1 or 2 are needed to get a crack at choosing a potential star forward, then I think it might be what we need to do, as distasteful as it might be.

* Note: I haven't seen too many games this year, so I am basing this on the assessments posted here.

[dyertribe]

First and Seccond rounders...

Pearce, Boak, Gray, Salopek would all probably fetch late first round picks/early second round selections!Adam Thomson a mid-late second round pick! I could only see us letting Pearce go!

A side like Melbourne, Richmond or Collingwood would offer a fair bit for Sal - they're all crying out for midfielders, he's a Victorian boy who has 76 games under his belt despite his bad luck with injuries down the years and only turned 23 a couple of days ago.

Top-5 pick easy - if not the primo pick plus a player, not that I'd take it.

[Natman]

A side like Melbourne, Richmond or Collingwood would offer a fair bit for Sal - they're all crying out for midfielders, he's a Victorian boy who has 76 games under his belt despite his bad luck with injuries down the years and only turned 23 a couple of days ago.

Top-5 pick easy - if not the primo pick plus a player, not that I'd take it.

So we are not going to demonstrate loyalty to a Victorian who ATM appears to be settled with us, to get a top 5 pick for another Victorian (most likely) who will wonder whether he might get the same treatment - what loyalty will he be expected to show?

[portentous]

Sala is now in the leadership group and I'd say he's an untouchable now.

[dyertribe]

So we are not going to demonstrate loyalty to a Victorian who ATM appears to be settled with us, to get a top 5 pick for another Victorian (most likely) who will wonder whether he might get the same treatment - what loyalty will he be expected to show?

No I know, as I said, 'not that I'd take it'.

Just making the point that Salopek is worth far more than a late 1st/early 2nd as the Ranga stated.

[Natman]

No I know, as I said, 'not that I'd take it'.

Just making the point that Salopek is worth far more than a late 1st/early 2nd as the Ranga stated.

Fair point - Sal is a top 5 pick who has actually gone on to "make it" and potentially be a 200 game player. At his age a top 5 pick or nothing in return, you know, like we should have got for the one who should not be mentioned.

[Macca19]

Even with the question marks over his work ethic?*

If yes, I'd be tempted. If picks 1 or 2 are needed to get a crack at choosing a potential star forward, then I think it might be what we need to do, as distasteful as it might be.

* Note: I haven't seen too many games this year, so I am basing this on the assessments posted here.

The fact hes got the potential (even though hes 25 now) to be one of the best players in the league should mean we could get a ____ing good pick for him. Even though he can be sulky, his form pre-suspension was very good. His form overall over the past 3 years has been outstanding.

Shauns one of my favourites, but he'd be the type of player we need to trade to get a top pick.

[Total Power]

We should have drafted a key defender in Rance? Right...

I also love your little hindsight pick of wanting to take Wood over Willits. You rant on about how we shouldn't take skinny kids and then say we should have taken a skinny ruckman over a massive key forward in Willits. Wood still isn't much bigger and is hardly setting the world alight at Collingwood.

Plus there's no guarantee that Thomson would have been available at the 2nd round pick. Sometimes the 'suprise' early picks are picked early because the so called experts don't have a clue with their fantasy drafts. Perfect example in Tom Bellchambers and Gourdis(sp?) this year who everyone had in their top 20. Both only got drafted in the rookie draft. 2004 draft was supposed to be the best drafts for ruckmen.. we should have picked a ruck

Also, Boak was hardly drafted as an outside player. He is less physically advanced than Selwood but i'm sure can become a classy user of the ball while still being an inside midfielder.

Also, amazing that Mitch Thorp debuted last year despite being injured the whole time. Also interesting that you think he's going alright this year, when he actually hasn't played yet. I assume you've been scouting him through the VFL? Also loved how you ignored my point in that he didn't want to come.

Wood had a cracking game yesterday, if you dont know, against solid rucks, the likes of Hudson and Minson:rolleyes: .If you check my post, i was really dissappointed when we took thomson. I remember dyertribes avatar saying "got wood" and i supported that.

There was no reason to believe thomson would have been snapped up.None of the mock drafts had thomson in the top 50.Again majority on the port board agreed (please check the draft threads) that time, however i know mock draft is not everything, but i am talking about evidences here. The evidences led me to believe thomson could have been ours with a 2nd pick.

Onto Rance, why not?? i have no faith in our talls, what if carlisle (sp?) goes down? back to thurstans and chaplin set up?? why not address our needs? why not move chaplin up forward and try something different? oh wait, we cant cause then our defence will be exposed.Surely wasting a first round draft pick on a project player is worth it? i can bet my whole mortgage on it that loobe would have been available around pick 30-35ish. Could have even drafted an inside midfielder, but hell....project player it is, why address our needs?? What part of Rance didnt impress you? the guy can play on talls and smalls, he is flexible and with our defence in shambles, you dont think there is no place for him? interesting.

As i said, thorp thing, if he didnt wanna come here, thats entirely different. Secondly he did debut last year but missed 4 months due to injury. A second year KPP what do you expect? to kick 10 goals? he is going alright in the 2s if you check.

[dyertribe]

I remember dyertribes avatar saying "got wood" and i supported that.

Haha. And what a terrible quality avatar it was too - thankfully I had plenty of upside.

[Total Power]

I just want to add P.A.F.C i am not the only one who was disappointed when we drafted Boak, 90% of the port supporters in the 2006 draft thread were pissed off to be honest. We didnt address our needs, we went for the best available, fair dinkum Boak is a gun but he is not the kind of player we need. Can you imagine if tredders goes down, we will have no talls up forward, not a single one.Who will come in?? wilits?? cockshell?? giles?? please dont make me laugh.If we had thorp, we could have given him a go, even nathan brown, mitchell brown, kurt tippett.......but nooo we wanted more half back flankers. :rolleyes: Like i said, its ok for you to disagree with me, however if you do, dont cry about our lack of tall timber up forward.

[PAFC_316]

As long as we don't draft a 190 + key position player who can blow over in a strong wind, or an "outside mid" who is quick but will snap in half at the 1st sign of physical contact then I'll be happy.

Key Forward, Key Defender and Aggressive Ruck (with Strength) would be my priority - with a Ruckman I would like to see if we can pick up a Ben Hudson type i.e an experienced Ruckman in the Ben Hudson mold (not with the 1st pick though).

[dyertribe]

Key Forward, Key Defender and Aggressive Ruck (with Strength) would be my priority - with a Ruckman I would like to see if we can pick up a Ben Hudson type i.e an experienced Ruckman in the Ben Hudson mold (not with the 1st pick though).

Is this where the lack of disposible cash in the football department hurts us?

From memory Adelaide had a dedicated scout or scouts who followed Hudson's progress at Werribee for a fair while - and as such were able to recognise his potential where others were agog that he was even taken.

Do we have the sort of resources to unearth a similar gem who has flown under the radar, or will we be forced to take a punt on a recognised SANFL/WAFL spud (experienced, AFL-ready bodywise) or simply draft for future years and risk having another Ackland who was never up to it?

[Ebert80]

First and Seccond rounders...

Pearce, Boak, Gray, Salopek would all probably fetch late first round picks/early second round selections!Adam Thomson a mid-late second round pick! I could only see us letting Pearce go!

Pearce would no longer be worth that, i'd say if we got a 3rd rounder for him, it would be a good deal.

[passion_1930]

Danyle Pearce will be no the trade table come the end of the year. Question is - does he still have any currency?

And what makes you so certain we want to trade him? Do you have an insight into the coaches discussions?

[P.A.F.C]

Wood had a cracking game yesterday, if you dont know, against solid rucks, the likes of Hudson and Minson:rolleyes: .If you check my post, i was really dissappointed when we took thomson. I remember dyertribes avatar saying "got wood" and i supported that.

There was no reason to believe thomson would have been snapped up.None of the mock drafts had thomson in the top 50.Again majority on the port board agreed (please check the draft threads) that time, however i know mock draft is not everything, but i am talking about evidences here. The evidences led me to believe thomson could have been ours with a 2nd pick.

Onto Rance, why not?? i have no faith in our talls, what if carlisle (sp?) goes down? back to thurstans and chaplin set up?? why not address our needs? why not move chaplin up forward and try something different? oh wait, we cant cause then our defence will be exposed.Surely wasting a first round draft pick on a project player is worth it? i can bet my whole mortgage on it that loobe would have been available around pick 30-35ish. Could have even drafted an inside midfielder, but hell....project player it is, why address our needs?? What part of Rance didnt impress you? the guy can play on talls and smalls, he is flexible and with our defence in shambles, you dont think there is no place for him? interesting.

As i said, thorp thing, if he didnt wanna come here, thats entirely different. Secondly he did debut last year but missed 4 months due to injury. A second year KPP what do you expect? to kick 10 goals? he is going alright in the 2s if you check.
And once again i'll say it, the only opinions that matter when it comes to drafting are those of the 16 recruiting agents and coaches. The club obviously felt there was too much of a risk in leaving Lobbe and Thomson for later picks and felt they were so good that it was worth taking them a bit early.

And we don't need a key defender. We have Carlile, Chaplin, Toby(Who could be decent backup) as well as Stewart, Lower and Pettigrew who are all capable of playing on both talls and smalls as well. Plus, I doubt you have even seen Rance play. Typical expert bigfooty recruiter, getting all second hand information from hack journalists at afl.com.

And hey Total Power, what was your opinion when we drafted David Rodan? I bet it was like 99% of the Port board who were absoloutley rubbishing the choice at the time. Would hate to think where we would be this year without D-Rod.

[PAFCsince1870]

A side like Melbourne, Richmond or Collingwood would offer a fair bit for Sal - they're all crying out for midfielders, he's a Victorian boy who has 76 games under his belt despite his bad luck with injuries down the years and only turned 23 a couple of days ago.

Top-5 pick easy - if not the primo pick plus a player, not that I'd take it.

spot on :thumbsu:

[Ford Fairlane]

PAFC, Total Power - I think your discussion is starting to diminish into ever decreasing circles now. Let it go or carry on by pm.

[Total Power]

PAFC, Total Power - I think your discussion is starting to diminish into ever decreasing circles now. Let it go or carry on by pm.

well you are the boss here, i will let it go through to the keeper, however, ford, do you agree that our strategy of drafting "best available" costing us at the moment? instead of "best avaiable to suit our needs"??

A note to PAFC - we all have different opinions and this is what these forums are for..if you dont care about other peoples opinion whats the point posting here?? just because port selected thomson it doesnt mean supporters cant hold a different point of view but anyway i will not be posting on this topic anymore

[Black 18]

No I know, as I said, 'not that I'd take it'.

Just making the point that Salopek is worth far more than a late 1st/early 2nd as the Ranga stated.

Hmmmmm, do you think?

He is a very good player, without doubt. Late 1st, early second would be on the money for Sal. He's no matchwinner or gamebreaker, so asking for anything in the top 10 wouldn't get a nibble. His pace is the one aspect that stops him from being an elite player IMO. Another aspect would be Sal's very unfortunate run of injuries, that would be something most clubs would be wary of.

IF, and that's a big if, if we even thought of trading Sal we would have to settle for something like 15-25 ish. No way would we get a top 10 for him, just isn't damaging enough.

[Ford Fairlane]

ford, do you agree that our strategy of drafting "best available" costing us at the moment? instead of "best avaiable to suit our needs"??



That’s tough to answer for a few reasons. One is that Port would employ a number of recruiting staff to go to games in a number of states – be it u17 to league in SANFL, I’d assume TAC Cup, and possibly various levels in other leagues, as well as U18 Championship games. They would get DVDs of quite possibly hundreds of players to watch and analyse. At a guess, it’s not unreasonable to say that between them, our recruiting team would look at thousands of hours of potential draftees. Then there’s draft camp with its interviews and fitness, psychological, and psychomotor testing. Who here has access to that level and breadth of information? What I know about these players is what I might read in amateur analyses on BF. So I stay away from commenting about drafting. I just don’t know enough about the players or the strategy the club is pursuing. In 2006 I thought the commentators at the draft were having a lend of themselves when they said Port were firming to draft Boak … and there you go.

It’s fine to say we should draft the best available tall, rather than the best available player, but when you compare even in hindsight, can you show that who we picked is not as valuable to us as who we didn’t? Who are the talls we missed out on, if that’s the strategy? Should we have uncontroversially selected James Sellar ahead of Travis Boak? As The Fridge pointed out in another thread, Port have drafted a number of tall KPPs across a number of drafts. But as dyertribe has shown, that as far as the draft goes, you have to have access to a zone selection, fluke a father-son, or have pretty much a top 3 pick (Buddy not withstanding) to get a tall that’s going to be a gamebreaker. And as crow-mo has pointed out, there’s also the trade side. To trade your way to a player or an early enough draft pick to get to a top level. That can be an extraordinarily expensive strategy or one fraught with danger if you pursue a player with known risk. Had we traded down to pick 2 or 3 in 2006, would Gumbleton or Hansen be adding to our team at the moment? Picking these 198+cm 17yo boys straight out of – or still in - high school is a huge risk. I’ve read Moneyball recently, and while it is about baseball, it does get you thinking at the AFL level about the risks in drafting (especially younger players), the information available, and how that information is used. Paul Roos is one of the better know advocates of Moneyball and you can see the strategies being applied to some extent in how the Swans go about supplementing their list.

And your thinking about finding the next big thing KPP forward smacks a bit of how I see Choco thinking. He appears to want to find the next Tredrea before he’ll settle such a KPP into the forward line. And yet teams have shown that just adhering to a simple KPP structure around a potent midfield can be as effective as you need. Adelaide, had it not been for their bogey team West Coast could have won 2 flags in the past 3 years. This is with McGregor, Perrie and Welsh as key forwards. Household names in much the same way the dunny is. And that nemesis had Lynch and Hansen as KPP forwards. Sure it had the most potent on ball division running around, but it shows what can be achieved with a decent balance. AT the end of last year, I’d have been happy to hear that Port were going to settle a tall forward structure around Willits, Tredrea and Westhoff, because they all bring complementary qualities to a forward structure that could work together. I know that a lot of people don’t rate Willits, but it was a case of the whole being more than the sum of its parts as I looked at it. But that would require a radical rethink of how we structure our forward line now, and that’s not going to happen.

Then of course, you confront the issue of how a coach reads the development of the game. I posted in another thread a few thoughts about the requirement of KPP forwards, particularly in Choco world. How I think we draft tall, skinny guys because we know they have the motor to do the running work required in modern AFL football and you can bulk them up enough and teach them to chase. I queried how effective the likes of Tippet and Hawkins would be as KPP forwards in the modern game and copped a bit of stick for that. Not that I don’t think they have talent, but size and one-on-one marking ability is now just a single aspect, which if not supplemented by other attributes, isn’t enough any more. Funnily enough, Hawkins was dropped not long after, and Tippet is under the pump. Even Chris McDermott noted in a recent crows game, Tippet is not a chaser.

I look at evaluating drafting strategy in hindsight as one of the more self-defeating hobbies. It’s nothing you can really do anything about, it’s just a blame laying exercise. You can’t go back and recruit Chris Lamb or Luke Penny instead of Michael Stevens, and would you? There’s only one of Port’s recruiting decisions that haunts me and that was overlooking Pavlich in the 1998 draft. Otherwise I don’t know enough about these kids even to go back and comment in hindsight. Whereas structure, gameplan, zoning, workrate etc are all things you can see and comment on to some extent. And they can all be modified in the here and now. No time travel required.

And recruiting, like the fitness excuse, is just a single aspect of how we are travelling at the moment.

[RussellEbertHandball]

Or either via father/son, start-up concessions or brown paper bags.

Hawthorn: Franklin (#5, 2004), Roughead (#2, 2004)
St. Kilda: Riewoldt (#1, 2000), Koschitzke (#2, 2000)

Fev is basically the only elite KPF running around today or in the recent past who was acquired via conventional means.

What is unconventional about Roughead's and Riewoldt's selection? If there was no priority selections, St Kilda still would have had pick 1 for finishing bottom in 2000 and Hawthorn still would have had pick 2 for finishing second bottom in 2004. And you'd reckon they would have made exactly the same selections.

[Total Power]

good post ford, but let me ask you this, say we have pick 2 (lets assume) in this years draft and the top pick nantanui is already gone, we are left with daniel rich (projected number 2 and best available) or the best tall available (lets assume) jack watts. Who would you select? at this stage given the circumstances that we are in at the moment? ofcourse i know nothing is guaranteed but if rich is rated higher than watts, will you go for Rich?

[Ford Fairlane]

good post ford, but let me ask you this, say we have pick 2 (lets assume) in this years draft and the top pick nantanui is already gone, we are left with daniel rich (projected number 2 and best available) or the best tall available (lets assume) jack watts. Who would you select? at this stage given the circumstances that we are in at the moment? ofcourse i know nothing is guaranteed but if rich is rated higher than watts, will you go for Rich?

Quite seriously I can't answer that - I know nothing about either player. I'd love to see us get a lock in future key forward, but I'm not going to pick one guy over another on the basis of one being 15cm (or whatever) taller than the other. If I knew there was little difference between the two in terms of testing, talent, observations etc, I'd probably go for the tall even if he was a bit behind. But if the difference is pronounced, I'd go for the best player. Tell me, who would you have drafted in 2001 - Judd (3) or Polak (4)?

[Janus]

good post ford, but let me ask you this, say we have pick 2 (lets assume) in this years draft and the top pick nantanui is already gone, we are left with daniel rich (projected number 2 and best available) or the best tall available (lets assume) jack watts. Who would you select? at this stage given the circumstances that we are in at the moment? ofcourse i know nothing is guaranteed but if rich is rated higher than watts, will you go for Rich?

Rich for me, hands down. Take a look at Geelong...their team is built on a solid core of midfielders in Ablett, Bartell and Corey. Brisbane was the same in their premiership years (fab four), so were West Coast (Judd, Cousins, Kerr) so were we. From what I can gather, Rich is an inside mid in the Hodge mould...exactly what we are crying out for. And as Ford said, the modern game has changed to the point where the role of the forward is to do ever so much more than just kick goals.

Who wouldn't want a midfield with Rich, Boak and Thomson? That's the sort of mid that wins premierships, IMO.

Of course, I wouldn't be disappointed if we drafted a KPF, though :D

[TheFridge]

Ford-on-fire with back to back quality posts!:thumbsu:

While I agree we have a glaring concern vis a via KPP forwards (and the future rucking combination, imo), I would hope we don't desperately take the next best tall option just because they are tall - and equally I hope that we are all prepared to be patient with any prospect KPP draftees, and not expect them to be an immediate solution to the concern. On that line, I am bemused at the posts in this thread that are hyper-critical of Lobbe, and note that the gun KPP forward recruits of 2006 in Gumbleton, Hansen, Thorp and Sellar are yet to be having a significant AFL impact.

Personally, I would not be concerned if we were to be able to engineer a suitable trade for our first rounder if it were to be used to address this issue with a suitable player (hypothetically such as a Mitch Clark or Justin Koschitske)

[dyertribe]

I still believe, as finbarr and a few others have alluded to, we should try to wrangle a trade for one of Hawthorn's excess KPP prospects in Beau Dowler.

It would be a punt, but one worth making provided he is relatively inexpensive (hands off our first rounder and guys like Thomson).

[Moo]

And we don't need a key defender. We have Carlile, Chaplin, Toby(Who could be decent backup) as well as Stewart, Lower and Pettigrew who are all capable of playing on both talls and smalls as well. Plus, I doubt you have even seen Rance play. Typical expert bigfooty recruiter, getting all second hand information from hack journalists at afl.com.


Was just searching for news on Rance and came upon this thread.

On drafting I still believe in the take the best player notion for at least rounds 1 & 2.

On last years draft I could not believe it when Rance fell to 18 it was a big shock (a big shock to him too as one club renegged on taking him but I understand why)- these are my views from last year and I had a fair bit of intel on the WA boys obviously.

OK draft talk is draft talk - it is all taken with a pinch of salt.

My view on the draft is it appears 1 & 2 seem to have a player associated with them (Kruezer and Cotchin) - lets put it this way they are the only 2 guaranteed not to be there by our pick 100%.

However when we consider picks 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 (likely to include Masten, Palmer, Morton, Ebert and Rance) - all have a relative equal chance of being very good players. I personally would rate it Palmer, Masten, Ebert, Morton and Rance....but I know others have Morton as the clear 3.

I would not be upset if we got Rance ...but I hope for Palmer/Ebert/Masten.


Rance I have no doubt will be a solid back KPP for the next 5-10 ....I got a hard on thinking he may drop to Freo at 24.

To me KPP's are rare and when you get a shot at a solid prospect you pull the trigger. Hurley is the one this year that I hope falls to Freo - they take 3 years minimum and so Pavlich/McPharlin will be just getting on a bit when they came on.

You guys at Port are lucky as this is a reasonably deep draft - however I think the quality is weighted towards the mids/utilities.

Hurley will be gone top 4 - Watts may be an option and seems a likely sort though wears the be warned signed of athletic (which often means fast and can jump but can't kick & mark).

If I was Port I'd grab a mid like Harlett and take a Cornelius or Johnstone with your 2nd. Your first pick just has to be a winner these days.

[RangaInTeal]

Rich for me, hands down. Take a look at Geelong...their team is built on a solid core of midfielders in Ablett, Bartell and Corey. Brisbane was the same in their premiership years (fab four), so were West Coast (Judd, Cousins, Kerr) so were we. From what I can gather, Rich is an inside mid in the Hodge mould...exactly what we are crying out for. And as Ford said, the modern game has changed to the point where the role of the forward is to do ever so much more than just kick goals.

Who wouldn't want a midfield with Rich, Boak and Thomson? That's the sort of mid that wins premierships, IMO.

Of course, I wouldn't be disappointed if we drafted a KPF, though :D

Rich is most like Kerr...

I would take Hurley with our first pick, even if it was at #2!

[Crow-mo]

I’ve read Moneyball recently, and while it is about baseball, it does get you thinking at the AFL level about the risks in drafting (especially younger players), the information available, and how that information is used. Paul Roos is one of the better know advocates of Moneyball and you can see the strategies being applied to some extent in how the Swans go about supplementing their list.


Worth noting that the moneyball draft was not very successful for the A's, and they now no longer follow those lines when it comes to drafting.

the guy they drafted out of high school the year before? jeremy bonderman has turned out a star with Detroit.

but never forget that moneyball is really about 2 things:
1. if you don't have a level playing field, you can't do what everyone else does.
2. in any market place certain things will be over/under valued.

Paul Roos has rather wisely realised that a first round draft pick is worth more on the trade table, than it is actually using it as a pick. though they tend not to have very high picks.

in essence moneyball is about doing things differently to the rest, because the only people who can win in a flat straight line race are the biggest and most powerful.

[finbarr]

I still believe, as finbarr and a few others have alluded to, we should try to wrangle a trade for one of Hawthorn's excess KPP prospects in Beau Dowler.

It would be a punt, but one worth making provided he is relatively inexpensive (hands off our first rounder and guys like Thomson).


My Dowler family connection is on the case m80 ;)

[dyertribe]

What is unconventional about Roughead's and Riewoldt's selection? If there was no priority selections, St Kilda still would have had pick 1 for finishing bottom in 2000 and Hawthorn still would have had pick 2 for finishing second bottom in 2004. And you'd reckon they would have made exactly the same selections.

Sorry, in that sense I meant unconventional as in you need the super-high pick(s) - ergo, finish bottom 1-3, sometimes with less than 5 wins (unconventional for any club worth its salt) - to get a genuine KPF superstar via the draft.

So you've either got to be really shit, purposely bottom out or trade awfully hard - or nab one via the father/son, or zone/start-up concessions.

Unlike with other positions, it's not as if in any given year you can unearth a truly elite one middle or late, like we've seen with the likes of Black, Goodes, Johncock, Ling, Kornes, S. Johnson, O'Keefe, et al.

Fevola is really the only pure example of a club that has taken an elite KPF outside of those circumstances - remembering Chris Grant was drafted at a time when the Draft was an absolute turkeyshoot.

[Crow-mo]

don't forget Goodes was recruited as a too small CHF/Ruckman.

[RussellEbertHandball]

Sorry, in that sense I meant unconventional as in you need the super-high pick(s) - ergo, finish bottom 1-3, sometimes with less than 5 wins (unconventional for any club worth its salt) - to get a genuine KPF superstar via the draft.

So you've either got to be really shit, purposely bottom out or trade awfully hard - or nab one via the father/son, or zone/start-up concessions.

Unlike with other positions, it's not as if in any given year you can unearth a truly elite one middle or late, like we've seen with the likes of Black, Goodes, Johncock, Ling, Kornes, S. Johnson, O'Keefe, et al.

Fevola is really the only pure example of a club that has taken an elite KPF outside of those circumstances - remembering Chris Grant was drafted at a time when the Draft was an absolute turkeyshoot.

Ok I see what you're getting at DT. So very good KPFs on average come from top 5 picks, zone selections and father sons. Top ruckmen come from top 5 picks, zones and rookie elevations. Midfielders from everywhere. So where do very good KPB's come from?

[Crow-mo]

of course as there are no more zone selections, where are the equivalent players now?

[TheFridge]

Ok I see what you're getting at DT. So very good KPFs on average come from top 5 picks, zone selections and father sons. Top ruckmen come from top 5 picks, zones and rookie elevations. Midfielders from everywhere. So where do very good KPB's come from?

For mine, with the amount of effort and resources directed at recruiting/drafting by all clubs now, the draft is more an exercise in risk management - assessing the potential for upside in a young player versus assessing their current status in their age group. The earlier the draft pick generally means the likelihood of success should be increased.

This doesn't strictly relate to ruckmen as their potential is just harder to judge from a young age, with the exception of those who just dominate and therefore are seen to be less of a risk. Thew remainder though, are clearly drafted with a degree of uncertainty and risk, meaning some, such as Dean Cox, Aaron Sandilands, Broges can even slide to the rookie lists.

Very good KPBs are often failed or flawed junior KPFs, and therfore don't demand the same premium at trade time. Hence, most are recruited later in the first round or in the second round. Think guys like Nathan Brown, Troy Chaplin, Stephen Gilham, etc. Of course, there are exceptions as guys like Carlisle.

Mid sized players are of course a different kettle of fish - and I would suggest the premium is paid for creativity, engine and genuine match winning ability. There are of course even more exceptions to the rule here, but in general, mid sized players taken later in the draft tend to play more negative roles, or specific roles (designated kicker, small forward who occasionally moves into the midfield, etc.). Basically, roles that can be specifically trained for.