He hasn't produced what he was drafted to do yet but he also wasn't drafted to do it in the first 2 years. Same goes for your boy Stringer who's meant to be a clearance machine but looked out of breath running from the bench to the centre square. Can certainly play forward though.You'd be 100% correct.Our 2 top end picks have more question marks over them than our later ones from last years draft IMO. (Hrovat, Hunter)
I'm not really sold on Macrae becoming a star just yet. His game seems to have translated into AFL level pretty well though. Has been producing what he was known for at junior level. Side steps, slippery customer with good skills. He's also got a decent inside game for an 'outside' player and actually averages more contested ball than Tyson.
Tysons game just doesn't seem to have made the transition from junior level to senior very well. He lacks explosiveness + pace and has been found lacking with his contested work which is why he was so highly rated pre draft IIRC.
*Spud was probably a bit harsh. He'll be a best 22 soldier type IMO. But not worthy of a high end pick.
I would say a decent case of shin splints in year 1 followed by a PCL in year 2 would effect his game. And there are more to winning a clearance than explosiveness and pace.
I agree he could turn out vanilla but I also see that at his best he has the rolls royce edge to him where he makes things look slow and easy but is actually being efficient. It's a fine line between the two some times.
