Blaine Boekhorst - oooops

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
master bate said:
To put it simply, an A grader is worth more than 2 B graders and a C grader. Because you can use late picks and rookie picks to find the B and C graders.

That's what every non Carlton supporter is thinking.

Whiley could be the next Anthony Miles, but better odds is he's a role player, a tagger or limited big body at the stoppages. Jaksch looks like he could play well at either end, but not to the highest level. He's a poor man's Lachie Henderson. BB looks like he can run and kick, but unless he has elite endurance and ball finding ability he might lack the ability to win enough of his own ball on the ground or in the air. Something like a taller Andrew Gaff or a Lewis Jetta, but not really an Isaac Smith.

Unfortunately for Carlton you will get judged on every player picked between picks 7 and 19 as been the one that got away. Peter Wright, Lever and Cockatoo would scare me the most. They're probably the riskiest selections in that bunch but also are the ones who could be A graders IMO. It would be fairer to Carlton to at least just pick 1 of the draftees and call him pick 7, seeing as Carlton was in to Marchbank it might be fair to compare in 10 years time how many games Marchbank played compared to the 3 Carlton recruits whilst at the same time comparing how many of them were high level games. If Marchbank makes the AA squad a couple of times in a career of 150 or so games then that obviously beats out the 3 Carlton guys playing 100 games each but not being significant players.

The other factor would be if you get an A grader from all your other picks. It wont matter too much if Whiley, Jaksch and BB are just role players if DVR or Clem Smith are stars of the comp!

And the other thing to remember is it's true when BB recommended via twitter that you sack the whole list, because a 3 for 1 trade helps you turn over a lot more dead wood! You've taken his advice!
Click to expand...
So you say we should have picked Lever who you freely admit is one of the riskiest selections who could be anything or nothing? Why wouldn't we take a risk on 3 guys who could be good or crap players for us? Either way it's a risk and right now we need good depth, and not to mention Lever has had his share of injury issues this year. Both options involve risk, we just chose to take a different option that gave us the best chance of scoring some best 22 players.

Marchbank is pointless to talk about, he was selected at Pick 6 so we would never have had a chance at him regardless of our selection.
 
yaco55 said:
Do you research before you post, or do you throw darts in the air, and hope that one lands on the target. I am not so childish as to accuse a poster of criticising a decision because of a certain club unless they had proven form ! Strangest thing is that I supported the recruitment of Broekhurst ( but never questioned ( because he's a Carlton player) but questioned the trading of in of Jacksh - You might concern that I have no concerns about Whiley who could make it as a tagger.

Anyway continue to attack the poster, instead of the argument.
Click to expand...

When the poster is making a moronic argument, then there is not much point really giving too much thought.

That's why no one is really bothering to argue with you.
 
master bate said:
To put it simply, an A grader is worth more than 2 B graders and a C grader. Because you can use late picks and rookie picks to find the B and C graders.

That's what every non Carlton supporter is thinking.

Whiley could be the next Anthony Miles, but better odds is he's a role player, a tagger or limited big body at the stoppages. Jaksch looks like he could play well at either end, but not to the highest level. He's a poor man's Lachie Henderson. BB looks like he can run and kick, but unless he has elite endurance and ball finding ability he might lack the ability to win enough of his own ball on the ground or in the air. Something like a taller Andrew Gaff or a Lewis Jetta, but not really an Isaac Smith.

Unfortunately for Carlton you will get judged on every player picked between picks 7 and 19 as been the one that got away. Peter Wright, Lever and Cockatoo would scare me the most. They're probably the riskiest selections in that bunch but also are the ones who could be A graders IMO. It would be fairer to Carlton to at least just pick 1 of the draftees and call him pick 7, seeing as Carlton was in to Marchbank it might be fair to compare in 10 years time how many games Marchbank played compared to the 3 Carlton recruits whilst at the same time comparing how many of them were high level games. If Marchbank makes the AA squad a couple of times in a career of 150 or so games then that obviously beats out the 3 Carlton guys playing 100 games each but not being significant players.

The other factor would be if you get an A grader from all your other picks. It wont matter too much if Whiley, Jaksch and BB are just role players if DVR or Clem Smith are stars of the comp!

And the other thing to remember is it's true when BB recommended via twitter that you sack the whole list, because a 3 for 1 trade helps you turn over a lot more dead wood! You've taken his advice!
Click to expand...

So instead of picking up 1 risky selection (i.e. Lever), we picked up 3 for that 1 pick...
 

Log in to remove this ad.

master bate said:
To put it simply, an A grader is worth more than 2 B graders and a C grader. Because you can use late picks and rookie picks to find the B and C graders.

That's what every non Carlton supporter is thinking.

Whiley could be the next Anthony Miles, but better odds is he's a role player, a tagger or limited big body at the stoppages. Jaksch looks like he could play well at either end, but not to the highest level. He's a poor man's Lachie Henderson. BB looks like he can run and kick, but unless he has elite endurance and ball finding ability he might lack the ability to win enough of his own ball on the ground or in the air. Something like a taller Andrew Gaff or a Lewis Jetta, but not really an Isaac Smith.

Unfortunately for Carlton you will get judged on every player picked between picks 7 and 19 as been the one that got away. Peter Wright, Lever and Cockatoo would scare me the most. They're probably the riskiest selections in that bunch but also are the ones who could be A graders IMO. It would be fairer to Carlton to at least just pick 1 of the draftees and call him pick 7, seeing as Carlton was in to Marchbank it might be fair to compare in 10 years time how many games Marchbank played compared to the 3 Carlton recruits whilst at the same time comparing how many of them were high level games. If Marchbank makes the AA squad a couple of times in a career of 150 or so games then that obviously beats out the 3 Carlton guys playing 100 games each but not being significant players.

The other factor would be if you get an A grader from all your other picks. It wont matter too much if Whiley, Jaksch and BB are just role players if DVR or Clem Smith are stars of the comp!

And the other thing to remember is it's true when BB recommended via twitter that you sack the whole list, because a 3 for 1 trade helps you turn over a lot more dead wood! You've taken his advice!
Click to expand...
Why are Jaksch, Boekhorst and Whiley riskier than Cockatoo, Lever or Wright?

At least one should make it. All about the big picture and having a competent around team rather than chasing youth and anointing the next messiah.

Isn't beyond reason that Jaksch could play at the highest level like Rance and Hooker who have been AA. They took their time to developing as mobile defenders. Better kick than these two who used to burn the ball in their first few seasons. Jaksch shouldn't be discredited compared to Marchbank who isn't a soda to be elite and AA.

Even Carlton have found more good talls than the Bombers have found gun flankers.

Arguably riskier to take so called great talents who slide down the order like Laverde, Lamb, Goddard, and R.McKenzie, yet are still marked down as a win for their clubs. Easier to improve your fitness with Smith a slider and a good kid.

Yarran goes alright for a player who break the lines with speed and skill, yet lacks the elite endurance and ball winning ability of an Isaac Smith.

Meh.

Boekhorst doesn't struggle to find the ball in the WAFL. Cockatoo gets the wraps for his junior pedigree when he was ineligible and playing well against an AIS team. We were looking at Boekhorst last year before he improved this year.

I wanted a quick mid like Cam Guthrie who can find the ball and isn't a downhill skier.

GC and GWS had the picks to take the likes of Marchbank, Wright, Garlett, Jack Steele who was overlooked last year and an unknown cricketer in the top 25. They didn't need to address their needs and list balance after they dumped a talented young mid in Adams for Shaw. They gave up pick 21 for Patfull and wanted to get another veteran in Johnson.
 
Last edited:
SterlingArcher said:
When the poster is making a moronic argument, then there is not much point really giving too much thought.

That's why no one is really bothering to argue with you.
Click to expand...

How is it a moronic argument - 2015 is light on for talls - That's when you should should have looked at trading in a developing tall from another AFL list - There were enough tall options in 2014 to draft a tall and no reason to trade in a tall.
 
yaco55 said:
How is it a moronic argument - 2015 is light on for talls - That's when you should should have looked at trading in a developing tall from another AFL list - There were enough tall options in 2014 to draft a tall and no reason to trade in a tall.
Click to expand...

Question i have for Bombers supporters, rumours have it that Essendon recruiters received inside information of what Shane Rogers recruiting preferences were the night before the draft

as per the Essendon board and other sources were that Blues first pref was Kyle Langford in the draft (subject to change on who else is available), Blues eying Boekhorst at pick 28 but will turn into 19 if Langford not available

Looking at draftees other options for Bombers. Instead of Langford and Laverde combination, how would Bombers feel with

- Goddard & Tom Lamb or
- Goddard & Alex Neal-Bullen?

I feel that Bombers went in more best available rather than needs basis, just looking at your list and feel my option better suit Bombers needs.
 
Last edited:
gillo94 said:
Question i have for Bombers supporters, rumours have it that Essendon recruiters received inside information of what Shane Rogers recruiting preferences were the night before the draft

as per the Essendon board and other sources were that Blues first pref was Kyle Langford in the draft (subject to change on who else is available), Blues eying Boekhorst at pick 28 but will turn into 19 if Langford not available

Looking at draftees other options for Bombers. Instead of Langford and Laverde combination, how would Bombers feel with

- Goddard & Tom Lamb or
- Goddard & Alex Neal-Bullen?

I feel that Bombers went in more best available rather than needs basis, just looking at your list and feel my option better suit Bombers needs.
Click to expand...

I'm very happy with Langford and Laverde.
Best available all the way thanks, reaching for a player like Lamb would feel like reaching for Steinberg all over again.
 
gillo94 said:
Question i have for Bombers supporters, rumours have it that Essendon recruiters received inside information of what Shane Rogers recruiting preferences were the night before the draft

as per the Essendon board and other sources were that Blues first pref was Kyle Langford in the draft (subject to change on who else is available), Blues eying Boekhorst at pick 28 but will turn into 19 if Langford not available

Looking at draftees other options for Bombers. Instead of Langford and Laverde combination, how would Bombers feel with

- Goddard & Tom Lamb or
- Goddard & Alex Neal-Bullen?

I feel that Bombers went in more best available rather than needs basis, just looking at your list and feel my option better suit Bombers needs.
Click to expand...

Obviously it is far too early to tell. Laverde is a high risk/high reward type player, so a lot will depend on Laverde fulfilling his potential.
Neal-Bullen looks a relatively safe option, I think any combination of Neal-Bullen and another consistent ball winner - would be a good draft.
As is though, Essendon drafted well, either of Laverde/Langford could turn into elite footballers. Whereas I just don't see that in Boekhorst.
 
I think Boekhorst was safe bet for Blues, other option Laverde which as you Stated high risk big reward
 
The Old Dark Navy's said:
Just as Collingwood and Sydney thanked the Crows for taking McKernan ahead of Beams and Hannebery I guess. There are a plethora of examples of this sort of thing. Is that what every draft thread has to turn in to?
Click to expand...

... and the bombers will thank the crows for giving up such a superstar like McKernan for nothing ... just like Freo got Gumby :(
 
I am Jack said:
Obviously it is far too early to tell. Laverde is a high risk/high reward type player, so a lot will depend on Laverde fulfilling his potential.
Neal-Bullen looks a relatively safe option, I think any combination of Neal-Bullen and another consistent ball winner - would be a good draft.
As is though, Essendon drafted well, either of Laverde/Langford could turn into elite footballers. Whereas I just don't see that in Boekhorst.
Click to expand...

Im beginning to love this quote. The kid was an All Australian. he can play.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

fishardansin said:
I'm not sure if someone who has become a proficient player at state league level is a safer bet than someone who's made AA for u18 level.
Click to expand...
I'd call BB the riskier option too, simply for the fact it was the unfashionable choice. If it doesn't work out we will cop a lot more for it, and fair enough too.
 
Sublime said:
I'd call BB the riskier option too, simply for the fact it was the unfashionable choice. If it doesn't work out we will cop a lot more for it, and fair enough too.
Click to expand...

Yes making an unorthodox selection and it not paying off does draw flack. However, I do get it that Carlton has seen that Boekhorst has grown into his body and is mature enough to keep at it for a number of years past the age of 18. I think that a lot of the kids who don't make is purely because they couldn't cope with putting on muscles and building up a big base while suffering knocks each week and/or they mentally couldn't handle footy being all day everyday.
 
fishardansin said:
Yes making an unorthodox selection and it not paying off does draw flack. However, I do get it that Carlton has seen that Boekhorst has grown into his body and is mature enough to keep at it for a number of years past the age of 18. I think that a lot of the kids who don't make is purely because they couldn't cope with putting on muscles and building up a big base while suffering knocks each week and/or they mentally couldn't handle footy being all day everyday.
Click to expand...
It was his first real crack at taking footy 100% seriously and he made some great improvements this year. He should be pretty well ready to go from early in the year. If he can come in and make an instant impact it'll be a great selection as too many talented young kids get swallowed up playing VFL footy as 18 year old draftees and just don't seem to come out the other side. Nothing more frustrating putting 3-4 years of development into a young guy and then delisting them at 22. I think the idea is to bypass all that and jump straight to the point where we have a player ready to go. Time will tell though!
 
Sublime said:
It was his first real crack at taking footy 100% seriously and he made some great improvements this year. He should be pretty well ready to go from early in the year. If he can come in and make an instant impact it'll be a great selection as too many talented young kids get swallowed up playing VFL footy as 18 year old draftees and just don't seem to come out the other side. Nothing more frustrating putting 3-4 years of development into a young guy and then delisting them at 22. I think the idea is to bypass all that and jump straight to the point where we have a player ready to go. Time will tell though!
Click to expand...

As he was almost certainly going to be there for your second rounder though, you could look at more as a comparison between Laverde and homo-Rainbow or any of the other guys you got late. When you look at it that way, how do you feel about it?
 
fishardansin said:
As he was almost certainly going to be there for your second rounder though, you could look at more as a comparison between Laverde and homo-Rainbow or any of the other guys you got late. When you look at it that way, how do you feel about it?
Click to expand...
I think there is every chance we just didn't particularly rate Laverde that much. There must be a reason why he slid from possible top 5 all the way to 20. That's a lot of teams who passed on him, including Essendon who actually selected him. To be honest i think we had our preference list, and selected the players in that order. If we rated Boekhorst highest of the remaining players on our list, and he ticks the boxes of what we're looking for, why not select him?
 
fishardansin said:
I'm not sure if someone who has become a proficient player at state league level is a safer bet than someone who's made AA for u18 level.
Click to expand...
In 2010 Matthew Watson made AA u18....in the same draft a proficient state player was drafted....Isaac Smith....
 
etsal1 said:
In 2010 Matthew Watson made AA u18....in the same draft a proficient state player was drafted....Isaac Smith....
Click to expand...

If developed right at the right club Watson should have been a good player. Isaac Smith and Hill are players who work well in the system at Hawthorn but would probably be exposed elsewhere.
 
fishardansin said:
If developed right at the right club Watson should have been a good player. Isaac Smith and Hill are players who work well in the system at Hawthorn but would probably be exposed elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Whether that is right on, or way off the mark, the logic is sound.

Several things conspire to make the player, as not all will have the mental strength of a Hodge, Selwood, or Judd to break through all barriers.

Development and opportunity are very important factors in a players fortunes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top