Rookie Draft & PSD prospects

Remove this Banner Ad

According to player agent Connors there will only be about 15 live picks in the rookie draft. Not sure how he arrives at that figure but if it's true we may take one rookie at most you would think.
 
spotthedog1 said:
It's also worth remembering that Horse rucked a fair few games in the magoos this year.
Click to expand...

He can most likely fill in at ruck, but I'd like to see him develop as a gorilla KPD to eventually take over from Merrett. KPFs aren't getting any smaller and we need someone large down back.

In the same vein, I see Justin Clarke as Leppa's overdue replacement. I've been impressed by what little I've seen of this kid with his attacking run out of the backline.

I think Michael and Clarke as our future KPDs would set us up in that department for quite a few years.
 
Think after his strong finish to last year, the club will be keen to keep horse in that ruck/forward spot. Longer #1 ruck with horse the part timer paired up forward with Close. McKeever and Clarke the defensive posts. This leaves Lisle, Martin, Brown, Staker, Bergs as our rucks and forwards in Seniors. I think Staker can fit in playing as a smaller running lead up forward, but I question whether we can fit Brown, Lisle and Martin in the same side with Staker. Martin is very athletic, and being #2 ruck probably has to play. Will be interesting to see how we line up next year.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Kerr:
"As we look to the Rookie draft we are hopeful of adding a couple of additional players to our list. Certainly there were a couple of young players who we felt would be drafted who missed out and we feel could have futures at AFL level. The club will make a decision on whether we participate in the next week."
Can only mean "finances permitting".
 
You could be right but sounds like a money issue to me.
 
WhiteLionFeva said:
You could be right but sounds like a money issue to me.
Click to expand...

Hopefully not (although I can see how it might be), but would be dissapointing to miss out for a not particularly huge investment (in the scheme of things), especially given our recent Rookie sucesses....
 
Not having a pick after 32 it doesn't surprise me to hear there are some prospects they may have drafted if they had a later pick. It shows that there is a bit of an advantage in having draft picks spaced out so that you can best capitalise on sliders.
 
Bert Man said:
What are peoples thoughts on potentially re-rooking Scotty Clouston?
Click to expand...
Would've said yes every day of the week, but after recruiting Paparone and Close, is there room for that sort of player?
 
Karnezis_13 said:
Would've said yes every day of the week, but after recruiting Paparone and Close, is there room for that sort of player?
Click to expand...
Yes because the guarantee sign is not on either Paparone or Close. And if we rookie Clouston it could put even more pressure on Ace, Lisle, Martin and co. We are trying to get a forward to replace Brown the more promising forwards we have the more likely it is to replace Brown. I don't watch NEAFL but by looking at his impressive stats he could be close to making an impact at AFL level.
 
WhiteLionFeva said:
Kerr:
"As we look to the Rookie draft we are hopeful of adding a couple of additional players to our list. Certainly there were a couple of young players who we felt would be drafted who missed out and we feel could have futures at AFL level. The club will make a decision on whether we participate in the next week."
Can only mean "finances permitting".
Click to expand...
Maybe. As I think Chopper alluded to, it might come down to a value thing.

As an example, we might think Colquhoun is likely to make the grade, but is it worth filling the list spot with another HBF?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Karnezis_13 said:
Would've said yes every day of the week, but after recruiting Paparone and Close, is there room for that sort of player?
Click to expand...

I would've thought more after recruiting Martin.
 
I think that we should take a few rookies in the RD. It would be disappointing not to. We could unearth the next Golby, Crisp or Beams. If we can get some quality rookies that could become good players it would add to the big mountain of depth we already have. Unfortunately we could also rookie someone like Josh Dyson. We have had more rookies upgraded than delisted recently this is something else Kerr and co. Has gotten spot on.
 
Bert Man said:
Yes because the guarantee sign is not on either Paparone or Close. And if we rookie Clouston it could put even more pressure on Ace, Lisle, Martin and co. We are trying to get a forward to replace Brown the more promising forwards we have the more likely it is to replace Brown. I don't watch NEAFL but by looking at his impressive stats he could be close to making an impact at AFL level.
Click to expand...

Lists need to be balanced though. Clouston is in a different age group to Close and Paparone, but a mass injection of similar type players isn't ideal.
 
I don't really agree because I think our midfield group won't be so bad off in the long run if we don't get another mid. We still have Docherty, Polec, Karnezis, Golby, Beams and Yeo just to name a few with midfield potential who don't get games week in and week out. All these players will also improve with a solid pre-season. Then again its not healthy to rely on 19-21 year olds. I'm going to think this one through for a bit.

Edit: I was quoting Grimreepers post but forgot to quote the actual post
 
pauldrc said:
Hopefully not (although I can see how it might be), but would be dissapointing to miss out for a not particularly huge investment (in the scheme of things), especially given our recent Rookie sucesses....
Click to expand...

I think it's often underestimated how much it does cost to support these kids in addition to their salary.
 
Bert Man said:
I don't really agree because I think our midfield group won't be so bad off in the long run if we don't get another mid. We still have Docherty, Polec, Karnezis, Golby, Beams and Yeo just to name a few with midfield potential who don't get games week in and week out. All these players will also improve with a solid pre-season. Then again its not healthy to rely on 19-21 year olds. I'm going to think this one through for a bit.

Edit: I was quoting Grimreepers post but forgot to quote the actual post
Click to expand...

Ideally you'd like a mix of experienced players and a mix of developing players. This is beneficial long term in terms of succession planning, and it is also beneficial short term in being able to put out a balanced reserves side. I take your point Bert Man, that tall forwards are our weak spot, but I think adding another one would be overdoing it. Particularly with Clouston, who I'm not sure is a genuine key position candidate.
 
Grimreepah said:
Ideally you'd like a mix of experienced players and a mix of developing players. This is beneficial long term in terms of succession planning, and it is also beneficial short term in being able to put out a balanced reserves side. I take your point Bert Man, that tall forwards are our weak spot, but I think adding another one would be overdoing it. Particularly with Clouston, who I'm not sure is a genuine key position candidate.
Click to expand...
That is my main problem with Clouston. I would be very happy if we recruited either a mature tall or mid. I think that the more pressure that is put on Ace and Lisle will truly show us whether they are good enough to become regulars quicker. This would enable us to judge whether Lisle or Ace will be good enough.

KPF

Lisle
Ace
Michael
Close
Martin
Paparone?
Staker?

I dont think that any of these KPF are a sure thing and I would like to suss out the ones who arent good enough. I said earlier that Mitch Brewer could potentially be an option I wonder what other people think. Their is an abundance of dud forwards out there and I think only Kerr and co. will be able to make a good decision on who is the best KPF if we go for one.
 
I don't think you rookie for needs unless you have a big gap on your senior list. I have faith that they'll pick whoever they think has the best chance at making it at AFL level.

If we have/use a pick.
 
PattyKisagun said:
I would've thought more after recruiting Martin.
Click to expand...
Yeah, should've phrased myself better.
Since we recruited Paparone and Close following our trading coup in Martin, is there enough room?
I understand Bert Man 's point but wh deon't want to fill up like a fifth of the list with the same sort of player do we?
 
Grimreepah said:
Ideally you'd like a mix of experienced players and a mix of developing players. This is beneficial long term in terms of succession planning, and it is also beneficial short term in being able to put out a balanced reserves side. I take your point Bert Man, that tall forwards are our weak spot, but I think adding another one would be overdoing it. Particularly with Clouston, who I'm not sure is a genuine key position candidate.
Click to expand...
Agree with you about Clouston. Actually think the gap in our list now is key backs not forwards, which is why I was asking earlier what people think about Nick Rodda. Obviously has some weaknesses in the eyes of most clubs but is a good size in both height and weight so is ready physically to play and did well in the clean hands test and (ironically) the goal kicking test at the combine.
 
I will compromise. How about Alex Howson he can play KFP or KPB.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top