Who do we take with pick 5? CLOSING SOON please move discussion to new thread

Who will it be?

  • Petracca

    Votes: 36 10.2%

  • McCartin

    Votes: 24 6.8%

  • Heeney (N/A)

    Votes: 9 2.6%

  • Brayshaw

    Votes: 28 8.0%

  • Wright

    Votes: 42 11.9%

  • Pickett

    Votes: 35 9.9%

  • Laverde

    Votes: 181 51.4%

  • Lever

    Votes: 34 9.7%

  • Weller

    Votes: 22 6.3%

  • Durdin

    Votes: 10 2.8%

  • Ahern

    Votes: 21 6.0%

  • De Goey

    Votes: 16 4.5%

  • Duggan

    Votes: 11 3.1%

  • Lamb

    Votes: 13 3.7%
  • Total voters
    352

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Copeland said:
At the draft camp, Jarrod Pickett - 2.87 for 20mts, equal second. Agility - 8.13sec.
Click to expand...

Though from being from WA. He could get Home Sickness
 
Frankie23 said:
Came here to say I've heard from a decent source we're into Kyle Langford and see it's already been mentioned...interesting (was told last week). Also add Ed Vickers-Willis to your lists, however more likely at 30 if available...
Click to expand...

Hmmm.

The highlights are sound but nowhere near as sexy as some of the boys in the top 4. I can only assume that Hine and his boffins and the supercomputer hidden in the Westpac Centre have calculated that by sometime next year he will be totally awesome.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Woops, got my facts mixed up. Thought west coast were interested him because he's from WA.
 
Langford at 5 would be the biggest left field pick ever, the kid looks second rounder at best.

Durdin is still my preferred choice with Ahern not too far away, Laverde and Pickett the next best.
 
Vinnie Vegas said:
Was Pendles a reach at #5 in 2005? Plenty of people said it was at the time, but obviously even with the benefit of hindsight, we had no guarantees of getting Pendlebury later in the draft, and we rated him as highly as pretty much anyone.

It would have been a reach at #2, but at #5 it was the latest we could safely wait.

Obviously if we were to draft De Goey at #5, it'd be basically the same situation - An indication we rated him so highly.
Click to expand...

Well yeah at the time it was a reach because he would have been available at 10. Much the same as Beams would have been a reach at 11 in 08.

If we've had designs on De Goey and rate him high enough to be in contention at 5 why not orchestrate a trade with GWS of 5 and 30 for 7 and 23? I'd personally be shocked if GWS pulled the trigger on De Goey so this is mutually beneficial to both clubs because it leaves GWS with 3 in a row plus we get our teeth further into that second round where the real value is in this draft, IMO. If we ultimately miss Cockatoo, Menadue or Garlett by a pick or two I'll be bleeding because I'm already deeply concerned with our off-season and all 3 offer exactly what we need, but may not be on the board at 30.

At the end of it in relation to my original point I'm accepting of a reach to a degree with ONE selection, but when you're reaching with all 3 picks you're flirting with danger. Personally I don't rate either of Langdon or Dear in the top 50 (which were the two picks I was more concerned with anyway) because I believe there'll be far more likely types than Langdon in Anderson and McLean at 30 plus I hate when clubs go tall beyond the second round, unless its on a ruckman, because the real quality talls are either first rounders, scholarship players or father sons...

FWIW if Collingwood are seen to reach on a kid this year my money is on Langford. If he is viewed as a mid long term I'd say he's one of few in this pool with genuine star quality.
 
Scodog10 said:
Well yeah at the time it was a reach because he would have been available at 10. Much the same as Beams would have been a reach at 11 in 08.

If we've had designs on De Goey and rate him high enough to be in contention at 5 why not orchestrate a trade with GWS of 5 and 30 for 7 and 23? I'd personally be shocked if GWS pulled the trigger on De Goey so this is mutually beneficial to both clubs because it leaves GWS with 3 in a row plus we get our teeth further into that second round where the real value is in this draft, IMO. If we ultimately miss Cockatoo, Menadue or Garlett by a pick or two I'll be bleeding because I'm already deeply concerned with our off-season and all 3 offer exactly what we need, but may not be on the board at 30.

At the end of it in relation to my original point I'm accepting of a reach to a degree with ONE selection, but when you're reaching with all 3 picks you're flirting with danger. Personally I don't rate either of Langdon or Dear in the top 50 (which were the two picks I was more concerned with anyway) because I believe there'll be far more likely types than Langdon in Anderson and McLean at 30 plus I hate when clubs go tall beyond the second round, unless its on a ruckman, because the real quality talls are either first rounders, scholarship players or father sons...

FWIW if Collingwood are seen to reach on a kid this year my money is on Langford. If he is viewed as a mid long term I'd say he's one of few in this pool with genuine star quality.
Click to expand...

You can get quality KPD's outside of the first round, agree re: KPF though. Tippett is handy (I think he was around 30ish?) but outside that there aren't many you'd take that were picked outside the first round/father son/zone selections.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Bard said:
You can get quality KPD's outside of the first round, agree re: KPF though. Tippett is handy (I think he was around 30ish?) but outside that there aren't many you'd take that were picked outside the first round/father son/zone selections.
Click to expand...

I personally lean towards it being top 30 or rookie with KPD's as well, but like most things you do find the odd player that goes against the grain Hooker and Lake are the only ones that immediately springs to mind. All of Taylor, Reid, Henderson, Talia, Mackenzie, Frawley, Rance, Hurley and McPharlin were taken in the top 30.
 
Copeland said:
At the draft camp, Jarrod Pickett - 2.87 for 20mts, equal second. Agility - 8.13sec.
Click to expand...

I like Pickett and wouldn't be unhappy if we got him, although would prefer Laverde/Ahern/Weller ahead of him.
But there's a few things to bear in mind when it comes to Combine Results, as mentioned by Matt Rendell in a recent interview re: this years combine.

-We place about 20-25% on their physical attributes
-More emphasis on how they interview and their mental toughness.
-In terms of testing we look more at their beep and 3km results as it requires them to tough it out.
-Agility, 20m sprints and repeat sprints are of less significance.

Obviously testing is more important for the less fancied players, as this year, like many years, we saw quite a few of the top echelon not even participate, and that will have no bearing on them being selected high up.
 
Hine must surely be thinking pulling a pendlebury like left field pick at 5. It will certainly be a player who will be expected to have an impact straight sway instead of being a project type player with huge cieling
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

TradeDraft
  • Poll
Prediction What will we do with Pick #19?
Replies
22
Views
1K
Dead Eye Didak
Dead Eye Didak
Anzacday
Analysis Draft Pick Discussion - Do Early Picks Guarantee Success?
2
Replies
45
Views
1K
sr36
sr36
steviewonder36
How do we copy the Geelong and Swans models of not bottoming out?
2 3
Replies
60
Views
1K
VinnieB
VinnieB
I
Expecting a ban soon but it was worth it .
2 3 4 5
Replies
107
Views
4K
Fat Jesus
Fat Jesus
The Phantom
Injury The Concussion Discussion.
Replies
12
Views
717
The Royal Sampler
The Royal Sampler
76woodenspooners
Opinion 2024 Leadership discussion
Replies
4
Views
476
caloschwaby
caloschwaby
Mostfamousclub_Pies
Do we have too many players over 30 years of age?
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
178
Views
5K
Aussie pie
Aussie pie
Back
Top