BF Phantom Draft

[The Doctor]

There will be a phantom draft conducted here on BF on Nov 17.

I've been asked if I would like to represent the Bulldogs and have agreed to do it if available on that day. But if anyone else, Old School or someone else is keen to have a go I am happy to step aside. It would be better if one of us Bulldogs folk did our choosing.

Otherwise it would be good to get some general consensus on what everyone thinks we ought to do.

At this stage we have picks 1,4 and 50. THere could be more if we make further delistings.

So put forward your ideas on which players or player types we should be targetting and at what stage of the draft we should prioritise their selections. What your plan B is if the kind of player/s you would prefer has or have all been taken.

Other issues could be

* should we just draft locals?
* should we take any recycled players?
* what player types we don't need at all?

It can be a bit of fun so put forward your ideas.

[Captain Sensible]

OK IMO from my very poor knowledge of whats on offer

#1 will be Cooney
#2 Sylvia/Chaplin/Bradley or Walker (in order)
#50 best recycled player perhaps Paxman or Bassett (is he even on offer?)



Is Dean Whitten a chance at #50?

Are we doing rookie draft as well?
If so Lachlan Mc Ghie should be considered.

[scooter600x]

#1 Cooney

#4 Sylvia, Tenace, Walker, Clarke (in order)

#50 No-one re-cycled! Is Michael Johnson being too optimistic? This is where we need your expertise, Doc.

[The Doctor]

Originally posted by localyokel

Are we doing rookie draft as well?
If so Lachlan Mc Ghie should be considered.

no just the national draft, but we can consider McGhie in this one.

[SCRAY72]

We have picked up Koops, Street and Morgan in trades. No need for another recycled player at 50.
Grab a smokie.

Number 4 will be interesting.

[Captain Sensible]

Originally posted by The Doctor
no just the national draft, but we can consider McGhie in this one.


I reckon he might well be available at #50. I saw a fair bit of him at West Footscray this year. Good overhead, strong, determined and intimidating but lacks a bit of pace. Good footy smarts.

[Sedat!]

#1 - Cooney
#4 - Tenace (just a feeling that he has gone down the pecking order behind Sylvia and Walker - Bradley will go at 5 and Clarke will be picked up by the Bombers at 6 - I'd personally take Sylvia if available)
#50 - No need for another recycled player. Grab a kid with footy smarts but with one deficency (ie: too short or lacks pace). Rodan, because he was short, was taken in the 40's. If he was 6ft, he would've been top 10. A smart footballer is always welcome.

[SCRAY72]

Originally posted by Sedat!
#1 - Cooney
#4 - Tenace (just a feeling that he has gone down the pecking order behind Sylvia and Walker - Bradley will go at 5 and Clarke will be picked up by the Bombers at 6 - I'd personally take Sylvia if available)
#50 - No need for another recycled player. Grab a kid with footy smarts but with one deficency (ie: too short or lacks pace). Rodan, because he was short, was taken in the 40's. If he was 6ft, he would've been top 10. A smart footballer is always welcome.

Do we need a player like Tenace?

Why not Brock McLean if we pick a midfielder. Inside player who I have heard barracks for the Dogs.

[Isdogisgood]

Originally posted by The Doctor
Other issues could be

* should we just draft locals?
* should we take any recycled players?
* what player types we don't need at all?

It can be a bit of fun so put forward your ideas.

It would be silly to limit the selections to locals. No recycled players....there is trading and the preseason draft for that. IMO we should target inside midfielders...Westy will not be around forever unfortunately.

[brother fish]

What about Herrington at pick 50?
It's certainly taking a chance, but a true small forward might be a go. On the basis that some of our other smalls will develop more towards the midfield...

This is only going on what I've read on bf, have seen nothing, so that'll be my one comment on the drafting....

[stefoid]

Interesting that people seem to have gone off Bradley. Why is that?

I would have thought the the chance to grab the best midfielder and the best tall in a draft would be the way to go. You cant say that walsh, minson, wight, harris, bowdo are definately going to be the star talls that teams need to win premierships. If we get 1 quality player and 2 regulation battlers out of that lot, we will have done well, but you cant rest on that.

I reckon you have to keep drafting all sorts of players in a mixed balance - keep cycling them through and putting competition on all spots in the team.

This is a rare draft for us where we do get the chance to pick the best tall available. I reckon we shouldnt pass on it.

[GOALden Hawk]

Don't mind me, just doing a bit of opposition scouting. ;)


Hawthorn have 25, 42 and 51 so I'll be interested to see who you take with 50. Have a few thoughts in mind but we'll see.

I wouldn't be taking Dean Whitten. McGhie on the other hand could be worth a punt.

[SCRAY72]

Originally posted by stefoid
Interesting that people seem to have gone off Bradley. Why is that?

I would have thought the the chance to grab the best midfielder and the best tall in a draft would be the way to go. You cant say that walsh, minson, wight, harris, bowdo are definately going to be the star talls that teams need to win premierships. If we get 1 quality player and 2 regulation battlers out of that lot, we will have done well, but you cant rest on that.

I reckon you have to keep drafting all sorts of players in a mixed balance - keep cycling them through and putting competition on all spots in the team.

This is a rare draft for us where we do get the chance to pick the best tall available. I reckon we shouldnt pass on it.

All depends on what direction Carlton and Melbourne take.

[Captain Sensible]

Originally posted by GOALden Hawk
McGhie on the other hand could be worth a punt.



Have you seen much of him GH? What is your view of him?

[GOALden Hawk]

Originally posted by localyokel
Have you seen much of him GH? What is your view of him?

Seen quite a bit of him. Initially I wasn't impressed, he looked overweight and unfit. He would basically stand there and tap the ball then couldn't move after that.

However, he took a couple of months off to play basketball for Victoria and came back looking much fitter and played well at the end of the year.

His favourite trick is to grab the ball out of the ruck and boot it long on his left boot. Is a long kick and a very good tap ruckman. Uses his body well.

However, he is a big boy at TAC level so has an unfair advantage. Still very raw, not sure about his mobility either.

I think he has another year so I'd prefer to see him a few more times before passing judgement, but he might be worth a punt on a rookie list.

[Kretiuk #35]

Originally posted by The Doctor
There will be a phantom draft conducted here on BF on Nov 17.

I've been asked if I would like to represent the Bulldogs and have agreed to do it if available on that day. But if anyone else, Old School or someone else is keen to have a go I am happy to step aside. It would be better if one of us Bulldogs folk did our choosing.

Otherwise it would be good to get some general consensus on what everyone thinks we ought to do.

At this stage we have picks 1,4 and 50. THere could be more if we make further delistings.

So put forward your ideas on which players or player types we should be targetting and at what stage of the draft we should prioritise their selections. What your plan B is if the kind of player/s you would prefer has or have all been taken.

Other issues could be

* should we just draft locals?
* should we take any recycled players?
* what player types we don't need at all?

It can be a bit of fun so put forward your ideas.

Looks like my "cracking the $hits" in the draft forum worked, I'm glad we have a good representative

Obviously Cooney is #1 choice

#4, Sylvia would be the best if available as hes tough and hard player that bursts through the packs, I believe we have enough "stand outside" players already... Bradley would be the second option, if we do improve next year into the top 8, it'll be the last time for a long time that we have the opportunity to take the #1 ruckman in the draft for along time, so this needs to be taken into serious consideration... Street could be a dud!?

#50, for me i'd go with herrinton from what people are saying, or maybe Shane Harvey if hes available... We need a goal sneek, Brown, Kolyniuk huddo have all left us, we need a player to forfill this role, I wouldn't like Garlick to be the one that has to do all this workload for the obvious reason

Those are my thoughts, reinforcing to delist wiggins if anyone, goodluck Doctor or OS or whoever takes it up:)

[blah..blah]

Id think lawrance from stkilda at pick 50 would be a good choice if you can keep him off the ****.

[Sedat!]

God, I'd rather pass than get that p***head loser from St.Kilda. Short, no pace, kicks nothing but floaters. Him being in the AFL system for 8 years is the biggest mystery since Justin Peckett managed to play over 200 games!

[blah..blah]

Originally posted by Sedat!
God, I'd rather pass than get that p***head loser from St.Kilda. Short, no pace, kicks nothing but floaters. Him being in the AFL system for 8 years is the biggest mystery since Justin Peckett managed to play over 200 games!
Bullsh*t
there is no way this guy won't be picked up hes a tough "go and get the ball" midfielder/small forward type as opposed to all these guys standing around waiting to get the ball like garlic.

He was regular starter until he lost the plot and hit the p*ss and who knows what else. but do you reminder martin pike ? (maybe cos hes been on the TV for 4 of the last 6 GF's and probably cos he has a similar profile and turned it around) I for one would play him, I suggest you watch some of the stkilda matches from this year he averages 15 possessions a game, which is about the same as eagleton and guess what about the same as nathan brown. he also kicked 50something goals in 02 which is also about the same as brown in 03.
gimma a break

[Tank]

With Scott Clayton's record with late picks,

1999
Pick #66 Ryan Hargrave

2000
Pick #70 Wayde Skipper

2001
Pick #71 Brian Harris

2002
Pick #49 Cameron Wight

I say pick a youngster in 2003.

[stmookeyj]

Shaun Hilderbrant from Peel Thunder with our late pick if he's available. We all know what one's going to be. With 4, I'd pick Farren Ray or Tenace if he is still available.

[Dry Rot]

Originally posted by stmookeyj
Shaun Hilderbrant from Peel Thunder with our late pick if he's available. We all know what one's going to be. With 4, I'd pick Farren Ray or Tenace if he is still available.

Not Sylvia?

[Dry Rot]

Originally posted by Tank
With Scott Clayton's record with late picks,

1999
Pick #66 Ryan Hargrave

2000
Pick #70 Wayde Skipper

2001
Pick #71 Brian Harris

2002
Pick #49 Cameron Wight

I say pick a youngster in 2003.

But how does the overrall quality of the 2003 draft compare to those years?

[Captain Sensible]

Is Hudson from Werribee worth a punt with #50? The couple of times I saw him this year he seemed to go alright and he was also runner up in the B&F IIRC.

[stmookeyj]

Originally posted by Dry Rot
Not Sylvia?

I think that he will be taken earlier than 4 for some reason.

[OldSchool]

Originally posted by Dry Rot
But how does the overrall quality of the 2003 draft compare to those years?

It's not to bad, plenty of bargins to be had.
I'm sure Clayton will get a decent player with the number 50 pick. In one way it was a shame to lose so many picks because I think Clayton would have had a great draft day.

[Tank]

Originally posted by Dry Rot
But how does the overrall quality of the 2003 draft compare to those years?

At that late in the draft, the quality is virtually gone, no matter what year it is, it's up to the recruiter to pull something out of the hat and take a punt on someone.

The only year I can recall a high number of really good players being taken after pick 50 was in 2001, in what was quoted as being the best draft ever. Some examples:

Pick #55 Brad Miller Melbourne
Pick #56 Paul Medhurst Fremantle
Pick #58 Dane Swan Collingwood
Pick #60 Adam Schneider Sydney
Pick #69 Matthew McCarthy Geelong
Pick #71 Brian Harris Bulldogs:D
Pick #72 Tristen Walker Collingwood

But having a look at Scott Claytons record, I can safely say that I am happy with all the picks I quoted before and have no doubt he will do it again.

[murphy2bedabest]

Originally posted by Kretiuk #35
Looks like my "cracking the $hits" in the draft forum worked, I'm glad we have a good representative

Obviously Cooney is #1 choice

#4, Sylvia would be the best if available as hes tough and hard player that bursts through the packs, I believe we have enough "stand outside" players already... Bradley would be the second option, if we do improve next year into the top 8, it'll be the last time for a long time that we have the opportunity to take the #1 ruckman in the draft for along time, so this needs to be taken into serious consideration... Street could be a dud!?

#50, for me i'd go with herrinton from what people are saying, or maybe Shane Harvey if hes available... We need a goal sneek, Brown, Kolyniuk huddo have all left us, we need a player to forfill this role, I wouldn't like Garlick to be the one that has to do all this workload for the obvious reason

Those are my thoughts, reinforcing to delist wiggins if anyone, goodluck Doctor or OS or whoever takes it up:)

luke herrington at pick 50 and i have been saying it for a long time now thank you!!!!

- lets see he won the goal kicking with about 60? goals and missing 5 games in the tac cup and was named at ff in the team of the year
- for vic metro he kicked 17 goals in 3 games, 9 at the "G" and came 2nd with cooney(number1 dp) only behind bradley (a top 10 dp) in the larke medal
-is one of the smartist footballers i have ever seen (afl included)
- will one day kick 100 goals in a year mark my word!
- now with brown gone u can play him 1 out in the forward 50 with a rawlings type player

if we are lucky enough that he is still there at 50 pick him up!!!

[Sedat!]

murph, credit where credit's due, you've been singing Herrington's praises for a long time. But according to other forum's he looks likely to be gone by pick 50.

[murphy2bedabest]

Originally posted by Sedat!
murph, credit where credit's due, you've been singing Herrington's praises for a long time. But according to other forum's he looks likely to be gone by pick 50.
the word i have is even top 20????

[Dog Town]

Originally posted by murphy2bedabest
luke herrington at pick 50 and i have been saying it for a long time now thank you!!!!

Whats the name Amon Buchanon mean to you?What about Kane Pettifer?

[stmookeyj]

Originally posted by Dog Town
Whats the name Amon Buchanon mean to you?What about Kane Pettifer?

A definite No Thanks to either.

[Dog Town]

Originally posted by stmookeyj
A definite No Thanks to either. I dont want them either!Making the comparison between the players.IMO drafting specialist small forwards is an extremely dangerous ploy.

[OldSchool]

Originally posted by Dog Town
I dont want them either!Making the comparison between the players.IMO drafting specialist small forwards is an extremely dangerous ploy.
Dangerous ploy ? We might not require a small forward but it is hardly a dangerous ploy

[Dog Town]

Originally posted by OldSchool
Dangerous ploy ? We might not require a small forward but it is hardly a dangerous ploy Yes it is because history shows us that they rarely come through with the goods.Most of the small forwards around now in the afl played midfield as juniors.The same raps were all over Pettifer and Buchanon but they have done SFA!

[OldSchool]

Originally posted by Dog Town
Yes it is because history shows us that they rarely come through with the goods.Most of the small forwards around now in the afl played midfield as juniors.The same raps were all over Pettifer and Buchanon but they have done SFA!
Positioning ourselves to draft Rawlings the way we did might be classed as an 'extremely dangerous ploy' but drafting a small forward is not. We don't need one because we have Faulkner as an emerging small forward specialist

[Dog Town]

Originally posted by OldSchool
Positioning ourselves to draft Rawlings the way we did might be classed as an 'extremely dangerous ploy' but drafting a small forward is not. We don't need one because we have Faulkner as an emerging small forward specialist Maybe we put a different value on draft picks but as I said I class using any pick on types of players that almost without exception fail to deliver as a dangerous ploy.

[OldSchool]

Originally posted by Dog Town
Maybe we put a different value on draft picks but as I said I class using any pick on types of players that almost without exception fail to deliver as a dangerous ploy.
'Using any pick on a player that without exception fail to deliver' is a waste of a draft pick.

[IA CORN]

I agree with pick 1 being Cooney

Pick 4 should be Sylvia or Walker

Pick 50 how about Tom Logan, Zac Dawson, Jed Adcock? Any of them worth a look at pick 50 if any of those would be available.

[murphy2bedabest]

Originally posted by IA CORN
I agree with pick 1 being Cooney

Pick 4 should be Sylvia or Walker

Pick 50 how about Tom Logan, Zac Dawson, Jed Adcock? Any of them worth a look at pick 50 if any of those would be available.
i have huge raps for both zac dawson and jed adcock and have said it a few times dawson has been playing ruck for the cannons this year but at 194 prob a kpp, he has a gr8 leap and mark and is a good follower of the ball (know where to go to get it)

as for herrington he can play in the midfield, but up forward gives so much if he was 194cm he would go top5. the on thing herrington has is football smarts which makes him a handy pick up, he just reads the play so well

[stefoid]

Initially I was keen on Bradley, but reports on the main draft board say he isnt a ruckman, and hes not a great contested mark.

Hes another one of these athletes that uses his speed and height to get a lot of posessions and marks, and is OK off the deck, but an average kick.

Kind of sounds like a skinny bandy doesnt it? This kid will take a looooong time to come good.

Given that, a 200 game midfielder who is big bodied and close to playing straight out of the box is starting to look pretty good. even Tennace, who is real fast and a thumping great kick, but though there are questions over his ahrdness. some say he is hard, some say he isnt. Sounds like Akermanis maybe to me - hard when he has to be but otherwise his value is accererating away from the packs and disposing by foot.

[OldSchool]

Originally posted by stefoid
Initially Given that, a 200 game midfielder who is big bodied and close to playing straight out of the box is starting to look pretty good. even Tennace, who is real fast and a thumping great kick, but though there are questions over his ahrdness. some say he is hard, some say he isnt. Sounds like Akermanis maybe to me - hard when he has to be but otherwise his value is accererating away from the packs and disposing by foot. Thats not a bad description of Tenace because he can be the in an under player when required but is often given the job of being the ball carrier. Great burst of speed

[The Doctor]

Originally posted by stefoid
Initially I was keen on Bradley, but reports on the main draft board say he isnt a ruckman, and hes not a great contested mark.

Hes another one of these athletes that uses his speed and height to get a lot of posessions and marks, and is OK off the deck, but an average kick.

Kind of sounds like a skinny bandy doesnt it? This kid will take a looooong time to come good.



Bradley would go close to playing seniors next year. He would need some muscling up but I'm sure he could make the grade.

He is basically a ruck rover, not suited to a KP at this stage.

He can ruck but he will also rove his own ball. His ground level skills are phenomenal for a such a big bloke.

The talk of him not being good overhead is nonsense. He has the longest arms which he uses to reach over the top of packs to take marks. He is a superb reader of the play. Almost impossible to tackle.

In fact he is a playmaker. He plays a bit like the way Grant does when he is in defence. Creative, energetic, lots of flair. 3rd man into contests, a bit of ruckwork, a bit of everything. Runs his opponent off their legs. He is also unpredictable and awkward in style making it very difficult to match him up.

[desipura]

Having seen Bradley play a number of occasions, he definately stands out in terms of his agility for someone his size. At this stage of his development he is a great athlete!

He definately needs to build up to play AFL footy, and when he does he may lose some of that athleticism. It's still questionable whether he will become a KPP.
I do not believe he is a natural footballer (unlike some), therefore if he was not to become a KPP, would not have the footy smarts to play onball.
IMO we should not pick him at pick 4 as I see him becoming more of a Craig Ellis type.
There are more naturally talented footballers that will be available at that pick and you will find that Scott Clayton rates a few others ahead of him.

[The Doctor]

The PD was held last night and we came away with the following;

1. Adam Cooney
4. Kepler Bradley
50. Darren Brackenridge
62. Joel Campbell

was happy to pick up those last 2 with such late picks. I had a midfielder, Michael Sumner from Sturt, earmarked for the last pick but couldn't pass up Campbell who is quite a dynamic hal forward from NT.

[Bloody-Redhead]

I noted that someone asked about Huddo from weribee.

I reckon he is worth a late pick as he is mobile, a good ruckman and puts in.

However when I made those comments to a WB Source he said 'no - can't really kick under pressure.'

Now I know he has some basis in being right but you have to say he has alot more going for him then quite a number of kids that are around that mark.

Also some people here are talking like we have picks 1 and 2.
We have 1 and 4!

Cooney is certainty -from the time the u18 started in june/july our recruiters eyes were all over him.

4 - Walker and Silvia will most likely be gone by 4.
If not, get the kid (one at least will have to go!)
Hope for Carlton to do its usual style (ie stuff up) or for melbourne to pick a smokey!

[Captain Sensible]

Originally posted by The Doctor
50. Darren Brackenridge



Tell us about Brackenridge Doc.

[The Doctor]

Originally posted by localyokel
Tell us about Brackenridge Doc.

A good accountable! defender. He is a strong mark and uses his body well in one on one contests. He can also play forward. He is a versatile mid sized player standing at around 187cm and I saw him as either a replacement for Kritter or someone to do a specific job. He took the highly rated Fergus Watts (194cm) to the cleaners at the nationals and battled well against Bradley who ran him all over the park. Lowered his colours to Bradley (mind you the height difference was about 11cm) but stuck to his task manfully and did a pretty good job. Was in my All Aussie team from the nationals

[Captain Sensible]

Originally posted by The Doctor
A good accountable! defender. He is a strong mark and uses his body well in one on one


Whats an accountable defender? I seem to remember them back in the deep, dark mists of my mind but I might be imagining it.

[HK_Bulldog]

There's some free video footage of the kids at:

http://afl.com.au/default.asp?pg=draft

Ray looks impressive. Very good overhead and glides across the turf. Looks awkward on his left at pace but seems to hit his targets.
Bradley also looks the goods. Dodges and weaves like a rover. Looked like a leader out there.

[Bloody-Redhead]

No such thing as accountable.
All it means is counting the times you get our butt smacked and then lose morale over it.

Reliable is the closest the words DOGS and DEFENDER can get

[BatteredBulldog]

The smokey will be:-

Clarke to Melbourne with pick 3!

[The Doctor]

Originally posted by BatteredBulldog
The smokey will be:-

Clarke to Melbourne with pick 3!

based on what?

Why would the Demons take Clarke at 3? Do they genuinely fear the Bulldogs were going to take him at 4?. The Bulldogs are supposedly all over Ray if you believe the media and Big Footy!
Melbourne could just take him at 5.

But I would love that to happen as it would set up a most fascinating selection decision for us at 4. It would mean one of Sylvia or Walker would still be available and we would have to decide to choose between them or Ray (or whoever else we may have earmarked).

[OldSchool]

Originally posted by BatteredBulldog
The smokey will be:-

Clarke to Melbourne with pick 3!
It's a big call but I suppose it is possible. I would have thought that getting a player like Sylvia or Tenace/Ray might have been a higher priority for the Dees.