2012 draft

[Riskingheadandshin]

Geez I'd just delist some dud like McGoof to make room and grab Iles as a FA. Be very surprised if he was still available for the rookie draft - or at least at our pick in it.

Nov 1 - 13 there is a delisted player free agent period, where blokes who have just been chopped can be picked up obviously without dealing with clubs, trades etc.

 

[tigs2010]

I hope we are looking at Piers Flanagan closely. Been injured but good talent. Was delisted today by GC.

 

[Damo80]

I hope we are looking at Piers Flanagan closely. Been injured but good talent. Was delisted today by GC.

We're almost at the point now (aren't we?) where every extra player we take, we have to free up a spot on the list so we can still take our 3 draft picks. So it's not just whether Flanagan (or Iles etc) is worth looking at in their own right, but whether they add more to our list than the guy who would have to make way to fit him - Post, White, Dx, McGuane etc. I'd not be against delisting but retaining on the rookie list guys like Gus or Dx, McGuane, White, or Flanagan/Iles, which I believe could be possible.

 

[FootyIcon4]

We're almost at the point now (aren't we?) where every extra player we take, we have to free up a spot on the list so we can still take our 3 draft picks. So it's not just whether Flanagan (or Iles etc) is worth looking at in their own right, but whether they add more to our list than the guy who would have to make way to fit him - Post, White, Dx, McGuane etc. I'd not be against delisting but retaining on the rookie list guys like Gus or Dx, McGuane, White, or Flanagan/Iles, which I believe could be possible.

Id only look at Flanagan as a rookie, hasnt shown enough to warrant a main list spot

 

[tigs2010]

We're almost at the point now (aren't we?) where every extra player we take, we have to free up a spot on the list so we can still take our 3 draft picks. So it's not just whether Flanagan (or Iles etc) is worth looking at in their own right, but whether they add more to our list than the guy who would have to make way to fit him - Post, White, Dx, McGuane etc. I'd not be against delisting but retaining on the rookie list guys like Gus or Dx, McGuane, White, or Flanagan/Iles, which I believe could be possible.

I doubt Flanagan would last rookie unless his body is rooted and then we wouldn't take him anyway. Iles could last. I think we should keep Post. One of Gus or Derickx should go as well as White and probably McGuane too but looks like he'll be retained.

 

[theflea]

Just have to pull you up on this, no inclusion (within reason) is pushing Tuck out next year. Especially a kid from the draft.

tuck will retire.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

If we got 12 +14 I would say take Vlaustin with one (since it seems like we are looking to take him at 9), then since we have already got the player we wanted it would be ok to take a risk with Stringer or Menzel. Then if they didn't turn out great we would be in the same position we would ave been with just pick 9. So basically no risk for high reward.

Lowering the first round pick for to firsts further increases the need IMO to take solid safe choices . The club would have the chance to add to best 22 players , going the risk option we could gain zero(0) best 22 . Our top end is fine we need foot soldiers , we don't have to trade or take huge risks on gaining superstars . In Cotchin , Jack , Lids and Dustin we have our superstars .
Stringer and Garlett are well suited to the port , Wb , Dees or even the Bumbers who need top end talent or one 1 of the top 4 sides who can take a risk , to reach the top of the mountain , not RFC IMO .

 

[Mr Magic]

To be honest, I think we need a pure inside, not another inside/out. We are well acquitted in that area. We have Cotchin, Conca, Martin and sometimes even Deledio who play that role, would rather Wines/Vlastuin.

Disagree, we can get pure mids later. Conca is a pure mid, Deledio is not an inside player, not wrapped up in Haynes nuos from the vision I have seen so I would only consider him with a later pick and Rodan to me makes little sense.

bottom line is we are not building a team for next year but in 3-4 years or slightly longer so players like Garlett, Kennedy, Menzel maybe Stringer(big issue is the injury) apart from the obvious more highly rated propects would not be bad selectons

 

[tigs2010]

Lowering the first round pick for to firsts further increases the need IMO to take solid safe choices . The club would have the chance to add to best 22 players , going the risk option we could gain zero(0) best 22 . Our top end is fine we need foot soldiers , we don't have to trade or take huge risks on gaining superstars . In Cotchin , Jack , Lids and Dustin we have our superstars .
Stringer and Garlett are well suited to the port , Wb , Dees or even the Bumbers who need top end talent or one 1 of the top 4 sides who can take a risk , to reach the top of the mountain , not RFC IMO .

Where's the clapping emoticon? Well said. Trading down for 2 picks doesn't mean we should try and risk them both. If say we want Vlastuin at 9 and he's still there at 12 then I'd be happy with Garlett with one pick but not Stringer as well. Even then there's still bound to be a slider somewhere that we could snap up. ie. Adams nearly lasting till pick 15 despite him being talked up as a top 10 pick and getting a last minute call up to go to Sydney for draft night.

 

[avengers]

What are the chances of Grundy sliding to 9? if it did happen does anyone believe we would pick him up?

 

[tigs2010]

What are the chances of Grundy sliding to 9? if it did happen does anyone believe we would pick him up?

Zero and Yes.

 

[Danog]

My ideal scenario:

Pick 12 - Vlastuin
Pick 14 - Stringer
Pick 30 - Lonergan
Pick 32 - Towers
Pick 40 - McBean

 

[Put a Lids on it]

My ideal scenario:

Pick 12 - Vlastuin
Pick 14 - Stringer
Pick 30 - Lonergan
Pick 32 - Towers
Pick 40 - McBean

That would be amazing.

 

[TiggerMan22]

Lowering the first round pick for to firsts further increases the need IMO to take solid safe choices . The club would have the chance to add to best 22 players , going the risk option we could gain zero(0) best 22 . Our top end is fine we need foot soldiers , we don't have to trade or take huge risks on gaining superstars . In Cotchin , Jack , Lids and Dustin we have our superstars .
Stringer and Garlett are well suited to the port , Wb , Dees or even the Bumbers who need top end talent or one 1 of the top 4 sides who can take a risk , to reach the top of the mountain , not RFC IMO .

But if we get 12+14 we will get Vlaustin (the safe option who we will probably take at 9 anyway) and then a more risky but high reward player with the other. So instead of getting Vlaustin with 9, we get Vlaustin with 12 and someone like Stringer at 14.

 

[TiggerMan22]

Where's the clapping emoticon? Well said. Trading down for 2 picks doesn't mean we should try and risk them both. If say we want Vlastuin at 9 and he's still there at 12 then I'd be happy with Garlett with one pick but not Stringer as well. Even then there's still bound to be a slider somewhere that we could snap up. ie. Adams nearly lasting till pick 15 despite him being talked up as a top 10 pick and getting a last minute call up to go to Sydney for draft night.

Thats what I was saying. I didn't mean take 2 risky players with 12+14, I meant Vlasutin with one pick and a risky player with the other.

 

[Stylo]

I have this wonderful inkling that GWS are dead keen on Stringer, but don't think he'll be available at 12 though he likely will at 9. So they'll either be forced to use 3 on him or improve pick 12...

I have based this on absolutely nothing

 

[Wallaby]

Sorry - I'm too lazy to go through the last 60 pages. Can someone confirm - i think we still have a 2nd Round compensation pick from GC as fallout from the Tambling deal. Is the plan to use that this time?
So far, by my reckoning, we have turned Tambling into Hellbig and Elton - who admittedly haven't produced anything yet, but there's hope.......

 

[Put a Lids on it]

I have this wonderful inkling that GWS are dead keen on Stringer, but don't think he'll be available at 12 though he likely will at 9. So they'll either be forced to use 3 on him or improve pick 12...

I have based this on absolutely nothing

Fair to say you're probably right on the money there. I would take Stringer with 9 if he's still there unless O'Rourke is available. Icing the cake can't get that quality at 12 although a Vlastuin and Gartlett would more than suffice.

 

[_RT_]

Our new picks are 9 32 34 & 43

 

[strauchy]

Jake Stringer will be the best from the draft. Mark my words. so much goddard in him and pavlich. Can play anywhere too.
Would be disgusted if we passed him. I have a feeling we will so I like the look of Macrae. Ive seen quite a few highlights of some of the main contenders..but anyone know where we can see majority of them. They arnt up on youtube

 

[Tomnat Tigers]

Jake Stringer will be the best from the draft. Mark my words. so much goddard in him and pavlich. Can play anywhere too.
Would be disgusted if we passed him. I have a feeling we will so I like the look of Macrae. Ive seen quite a few highlights of some of the main contenders..but anyone know where we can see majority of them. They arnt up on youtube

Is your opinion based on youtube videos? Or have you actually seen him live.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

But if we get 12+14 we will get Vlaustin (the safe option who we will probably take at 9 anyway) and then a more risky but high reward player with the other. So instead of getting Vlaustin with 9, we get Vlaustin with 12 and someone like Stringer at 14.

Sorry but no this isn't the draft to be taking risks untill you reach the 3rd round IMO

 

[strauchy]

Is your opinion based on youtube videos? Or have you actually seen him live.

no I havent gone to see him live...about 3 percent of the people here probably would. Im basing my opinion on lots of readings and what people have been saying around him along with highlights. Ive heard only amazing things about him for quite a while - before his injury too. Look im not making a final statement..im just basing what I think we should do and who I think will be the best. Nothing else can be said on a thread like this..
Also interesting to see what we do now with pick 43. Will we use it?

 

[MR]

no I havent gone to see him live...about 3 percent of the people here probably would. Im basing my opinion on lots of readings and what people have been saying around him along with highlights. Ive heard only amazing things about him for quite a while - before his injury too. Look im not making a final statement..im just basing what I think we should do and who I think will be the best. Nothing else can be said on a thread like this..
Also interesting to see what we do now with pick 43. Will we use it?

It's a bit far-fetched to say that he will be the best of his draft when you haven't seen him live, let alone his Championships which are available online. I'd have a good 6-7 players ahead of him even when counting potential. I'm not a fan to be honest and I HAVE watched him play.

 

[Damo80]

Ive heard only amazing things about him for quite a while - before his injury too.

If you've only heard amazing things, I don't think you've looked hard enough. At the very least, a lot of people have question marks over how complete his recovery will be from the bad leg break, which I wouldn't lump in the "amazing things" basket