Draft Watcher Knightmare's 2012 Mock Draft

[Kretiukwasking]

Hey Knightmare,
Like most bulldog supports i am quite happy with our picks ATM. Once i watched the Stringer interview on Fox footy on the night i was RAPT to get him. As a person he appears exactly what we need.
I would like to thank you for your work through the year, i have throughly enjoyed reading your opinons. Dare i say it.....I look forward to next years!
Cheers

 

[juzzo]

2013 power rankings up to date and reasonably satisfied with that for a starting point going into next season.

I'm sure if I'm back again next year things will look very different this time next year with some improving, others going backward but this is a starting point and a group of players to look out for, for next year.

If you're back?

 

[davo99]

Hey knightmare what did you think of norths draft thought we got a steal with wood, dont now much else about the other picks could you please tell me more"?

 

[Knightmare]

Hey Knightmare,
Like most bulldog supports i am quite happy with our picks ATM. Once i watched the Stringer interview on Fox footy on the night i was RAPT to get him. As a person he appears exactly what we need.
I would like to thank you for your work through the year, i have throughly enjoyed reading your opinons. Dare i say it.....I look forward to next years!
Cheers

Thanks for the kind words.

Stringer is a beauty. I look forward to seeing what he can do at the next level.

If you're back?

I've got a new job for new full time job for next year and I'm committed to mastering it first. If I get time to continue posting on here that's just a bonus.

I will be available till the start of Feb I'm expecting so will continue posting until the start of next season.

Hey knightmare what did you think of norths draft thought we got a steal with wood, dont now much else about the other picks could you please tell me more"?

North Melbourne did well to get Wood mid draft after showing some interest in the first round.

Garner is a strong marking forward who can push into the mdifield and win his own ball. Has had some shoulder issues these past seasons so form less exposed than some others. If he can stay health looks like he could be a good get.

Ben Jacobs was previously a Port Adelaide footballer and only played those two seasons with them but wanted to move back to Victoria. Can play off a back flank or through the midfield. I think he is slightly better suited to playing through the midfield because off a back flank kicking and decision making can be lacking to play that role but through the midfield can win some ball and has an excellent running game with his elite endurance. At his best can find the ball pretty easily.

Wilkins is a small defender. Nice user of the footy and can play on various sizes. Missed the second half of the season with injury so North Melbourne clearly watched some of his early season footy and liked what they saw.

Daniel Currie previously played for Sydney as a ruckman but played in SA this year. Has some ability and can play no.1 ruck or no.2 ruck if required and can serve as an immediate depth type if Goldstein misses with injury at any stage. Reasonable tap ruckman and can also take a mark forward of centre.

Taylor Hine is another recycled type and previously played for Gold Coast. Can play down back or through the midfield but likely for North Melbourne looked at as a backman. More your shutdown defender as opposed to a rebounding type.

 

[Danair]

KM you're an absolute champion, great work once again this year, one last question....How did you think the Swans did with the picks we had?

I like the look of Harrison Marsh.

 

[Knightmare]

KM you're an absolute champion, great work once again this year, one last question....How did you think the Swans did with the picks we had?

I like the look of Harrison Marsh.

Dean Towers 1st round I felt was overs. He's come from a long way back as that late bloomer a little like Isaac Smith and has shown improvement but he feels like athlete over footballer and doesn't use his athleticism enough in game for my liking so I'm not sure how it translates to AFL level. I can see the club viewing him as a future back flanker so it will be interesting to see how he goes. Might have the ability to play a role.

The Swans were most happy with Tim Membrey who is an absolutely perfect fit for the Sydney system loving those stronger bodied types. He has a real man's body and plays with a great physicality. Has mostly played full forward and most think he will become more of a high marking forward and perhaps a later Ryan O'Keefe replacement. I'd like to see him developed into an inside midfielder though personally, I see plenty of Josh Kennedy as that powerful inside midfielder but it might take a couple of years for him to really establish that inside game. Once he does though with his ability when pushing forward with his strong marking game you could really have one of the bargains of the draft and I get the sense Sydney had Tim inside their top 15 which in the 40s is exceptional.

Sydney took Marsh before Membrey because they knew West Coast with that inbetween selection were interested. Marsh seems to have something also and is another I could see finding a role down back. More your high production rebounding defender with nice footskills and some athleticism. Has an ok 1v1 game also so there could be something to work with and if he continues developing certainly has the ability to find a role in the back half.

 

[Blackswan]

Sydney took Marsh before Membrey because they knew West Coast with that inbetween selection were interested. Marsh seems to have something also and is another I could see finding a role down back. More your high production rebounding defender with nice footskills and some athleticism. Has an ok 1v1 game also so there could be something to work with and if he continues developing certainly has the ability to find a role in the back half.

Sydney took Marsh because they've been all over him since the early part of the season.

Marsh is anything but high production as a rebounding defender, he is an accountable lock down defender but he does his best work as a clearance midfielder.

Sydney play 10+ games at the SCG, Marsh has a powerful build, an exceptionally strong core and a strong attack on the ball.

Marsh needs to work on his tank, he simply did not work hard enough in the WAFL colts this year when he had someone sit on him, needs to build the ability to sprint and sprint again.

His footskills are average, but his decison making is very good.

 

[GuyIncognito]

I probably won't do a full rookie draft but I might go club by club and list some who have been linked and name some of the best of the rest.

Pretty keen to get a review of the trade and draft period of this year as well as a review of 2010 with a fair bit of demand building for that also.



Caddy is worth somewhere around pick 10. Really excellent find for Geelong and perfect fit for that midfield needing that little bit more inside help to take some pressure off Selwood. I think he'll transition into that midfield from round 1 if his preseason goes well and with Geelong's strong development program I'd back him in to play close to 20 games as a regular.

I think a lot of clubs have really missed by passing on Grundy and I think hindsight will suggest that Grundy should have been a top 10 selection so we'll have to wait and see. Thurlow I don't rate nearly as highly as Geelong do but I have a strong respect for what Wells puts together for Geelong each draft period so I suspect he knows something I don't.

Thanks Knightmare.

 

[nimmy]

hey KM, I'm very passionate saints supporter, keen for your thoughts on the saints drafting. I see you got it right with Nathan Wright at 25, but you had Spencer White a long way down the order along with Murdoch, Saunders and Pearce listed as a possible rookie list pick up. Were you surprised that the saints didnt look at clurey or tanner smith for one of their first round selections given they were there. You might be on the money with them looking for a mature defender, as the rumour going around is that they have delisted winmar from their senior list

 

[Knightmare]

hey KM, I'm very passionate saints supporter, keen for your thoughts on the saints drafting. I see you got it right with Nathan Wright at 25, but you had Spencer White a long way down the order along with Murdoch, Saunders and Pearce listed as a possible rookie list pick up. Were you surprised that the saints didnt look at clurey or tanner smith for one of their first round selections given they were there. You might be on the money with them looking for a mature defender, as the rumour going around is that they have delisted winmar from their senior list

St Kilda have typically struggled finding talent through the draft and haven't had the success of some other clubs with Geelong, Adelaide and Collingwood who probably have been the standout clubs through the draft in recent times really finding high end talent despite not having those top selections. Hopefully things turn around for St Kilda in this area over coming years and there seems to be clear change in recruiting strategy these past two seasons with that more mature talent theme but I still question how good the talent identification is and I think some work still needs to go into this not only through the draft but also through trade.

I'm very surprised St Kilda passed on both Tom Clurey and Tanner Smith given the key defence needs and that lack of back half height. I think St Kilda made a mistake passing on Tom Clurey but we'll see in hindsight what happens there. I get the sense St Kilda in the end were frustrated that they couldn't get a key defender of their liking in the 40s with all those KPPs taken in the late 20s but no recruiter will ever say they were disappointed with the outcome because all clubs rate talent differently and with that will always get players rated higher on their list than the selection they are taken with.

Spencer White has some talent though and given the opportunity might develop into something up forward and he is one where if things work out, he could become a really special player with some of the things he can do so it will be interesting to see 3-4 years down the track to see what he can develop into.

 

[timmeh]

Where do you think O'Meara and Crouch would've gone in this draft?

Not sure how to do a search "inside" a thread.

 

[Knightmare]

Where do you think O'Meara and Crouch would've gone in this draft?

Not sure how to do a search "inside" a thread.

If O'Meara and Crouch were in this draft it likely would have gone:
1. GWS: Whitfield
2. GWS: O'Meara
3. GWS: O'Rourke
4. Melb: Toumpas
5. WBD: Crouch

 

[saintsrfreak]

St Kilda have typically struggled finding talent through the draft and haven't had the success of some other clubs with Geelong, Adelaide and Collingwood who probably have been the standout clubs through the draft in recent times really finding high end talent despite not having those top selections. Hopefully things turn around for St Kilda in this area over coming years and there seems to be clear change in recruiting strategy these past two seasons with that more mature talent theme but I still question how good the talent identification is and I think some work still needs to go into this not only through the draft but also through trade.

I'm very surprised St Kilda passed on both Tom Clurey and Tanner Smith given the key defence needs and that lack of back half height. I think St Kilda made a mistake passing on Tom Clurey but we'll see in hindsight what happens there. I get the sense St Kilda in the end were frustrated that they couldn't get a key defender of their liking in the 40s with all those KPPs taken in the late 20s but no recruiter will ever say they were disappointed with the outcome because all clubs rate talent differently and with that will always get players rated higher on their list than the selection they are taken with.

Spencer White has some talent though and given the opportunity might develop into something up forward and he is one where if things work out, he could become a really special player with some of the things he can do so it will be interesting to see 3-4 years down the track to see what he can develop into.

I'm not sure how you can question St Kilda's decisions last year (which was the first year of our new recruiting team I believe)
We effectively traded pick 20 for Seb Ross (pick 25), Terry Milera and Ahmed Saad, as well as drafting players that have already shown a lot of promise in Markworth, Newnes and Dunell. We also drafted Wilkes with a late pick and he's been serviceable.
Us St Kilda supporters are extremely happy with how our trade and draft period ended up last year and I trust that this year will be just as successful.

 

[aussierulesrules]

I'm going to do a Quigley here! (Saintsrfreak has said it pretty well and more concisely, but I'd written this before I saw his post so I'll post it):

I think most would agree that our drafting in the Lyon years was particularly poor (albeit we didn't have a lot of high picks in that time, due to finishing top 4 in 3 of those years). Having said that, we did manage to snare Jack Steven and Rhys Stanley in the 40's and they look like being very good value selections there and then we also got Arryn Siposs in the 70's and that is looking like extremely good value, as he probably has as much class as anyone we'd drafted in a long time to that point.

In particular, if you saw his games across HB in the last couple of rounds this year (his first two in that role for us in the seniors) you'll know how much ability and potential he has. Watching him do so well and look so at home there was one of the major things that made watching those "dead rubber" games much more worth being at. It was like watching a young Brendon Goddard across HB all over again. And like BJ, Arryn (who only just turned 20 today) has the ability and versatility to play up forward (where his deadly kicking for goal is such an asset), or on the wing, where his strong marking and pinpoint kicking up to 60m+ into the forward line can be such a weapon.

I've also been told that Ross Lyon overruled the recruiting team and demanded they take Tom Lynch in one of those drafts (at pick 13, which most seemed to think was a reach), when Beveridge wanted to take Zaharakis, as Ross had a bit of an "obsession" with finding us a "Ryan O'Keefe", who he worked with when he was at Sydney- Lynch ended up being one of many he tried in that role, along with the likes of Ryan Gamble and Charlie Gardiner, who he presumably wanted from other clubs, to see if they could do it.)

In the last 12+ months ago, though, we've had a new team in place under Chris Pelchan, headed by the extremely highly regarded Tony Elshaugh and last year we managed to get Seb Ross (who is apparently coming along nicely), Ahmed Saad (who averaged almost 2 goals a game this year, in only his 4th full season of Aussie Rules footy in his life) and Terry Milera (who also did very nicely this year and averaged over a goal a game in the seniors) for just pick 20 in the draft (we got all 3 of them for pick 20- please tell me a better deal than that! I would have been happy with just Saad for pick 20, as it's turned out). Now maybe you don't think that was a good deal, going by your comments above, but most others reckon it was a massive win for us.

We then got Daniel Markworth in the mid 30's, who I think you had at 15 in your mock (he is also apparently coming along well and was on the emergency list for several games this year) and then Jack Newnes at 37, who so impressed in his first pre-season that he was in the senior team by R2 this year, despite still looking very raw. There is even talk that he has future captaincy potential and everyone at the club seems wrapt with him and in particular his work-rate and attitude.

We then got Jimmy Webster in the 40's, who many apparently expected would go higher than that at the start of that 2011 season, but he has had a couple of heavily injury-interrupted years, so time will tell if he works out or not.

We then got Beau Wilkes in the 60's and that is looking like a very worthwhile pick, as he showed a fair bit at times this year and by the end of the year had pretty much pushed Kosi out of the side, despite the fact had had arrived at the club 12 months ago pretty out of shape, as he wasn't expecting to get drafted and has taken till pretty much now to shed some of the excess weight he was carrying.

Even as out of shape as he was this year he had a significantly better goals per game average than say Chris Dawes, despite the fact he was subbed off multiple times and had very little continuity of games played, due to all the byes in the VFL and going back and forth from the VFL to the seniors. We hear he's fronted up to preseason in great shape and slimmed down, though and that he is tearing up the track, so at worst he will give us good depth in case of injuries, or at best he will give us the big body and muscle we've probably lacked a bit up forward since Gehrig retired. He looks lost down back, but up forward he looks very much at home and from what I've seen he does most things to a perfectly acceptable AFL standard up there.

We then got Darren Minchington in the rookie draft, who started this year for Sandy with a bang, before getting injured and who Watters is apparently a big fan of, plus Sam Dunell, who was very impressive is his short stints in the seniors, after getting upgraded mid season and who has just been promoted officially to the senior list.

You'd be hard pressed to find anyone reasonably informed at St Kilda who isn't happy with how we did with the picks we had in last year's draft (plus the trade, which got us Saad and Milera for just a 5 pick downgrade in the draft) and most I've heard from look to be extremely happy with what we've done this year, as well.

We've effectively (or near enough to it) gotten Tom Lee, Tom Hickey, Nathan Wright, Spencer White and Trent Dennis Lane for picks 12 and 13. From what I've heard, we would have been prepared to use 12 or 13 for Lee and possibly even White on their own, if it came down to that, so getting the other three on top of them is fantastic value. (Although getting TDL raised quite a lot of eyebrows, given how many similar options we already have, so that looks more like a Scotty Watters request, as he coached him at Subi).

We've gotten the two who we apparently considered to be the two best "KPF's" available in the draft, to hopefully build our future forward line around (I don't think we particularly rated Jacksch- this I heard back when we still had pick 13 coming and he was expected to go around that number, and Brian told you a few weeks back how highly we and others like Shifter rated Lee, who we had to give up pick 12 for because at least one other team was going very hard for him and the fact we took White ahead of the likes of O'Brien, Membrey and Shaw shows you how highly we rate Spencer, who was reportedly found to be only using 60% of his lung capacity earlier in the season. Everyone saw what happened once that was treated better, so imagine how much scope for improvement there is for him if he gets a couple of AFL pre-seasons under his belt, using closer to his full lung capacity! If the extent of his asthma problems had been discovered earlier and he'd performed the way he did in the 2nd half of the year for more of the year, I dare say he would have been well off the table by pick 25, given the attributes he has and how well he tested at the combine.)

Then we've gotten Hickey, who gives us that ruck depth we needed so badly and also a possible 1st ruck option into the future, if the new ruck rules don't end up suiting McEvoy, plus Nathan Wright, who you said yourself you wouldn't hesitate to use a top 20 pick on, plus TDL, who may be a good option for us if Milne retires in 12 months time. At the very least he will give us some depth and give us the option of pushing someone like Milera and Schneider up to the wing and he didn't cost us much anyway (the pick we gave up for him we weren't even going to use in the draft. We only ended up using 75 because Gram got sacked late).

You may not particularly rate the others we've picked, but plenty of others do, including those that did so well recruiting for us last year, who are of course the ones who get to interview them and get to find out a lot more about their backgrounds, especially things like how much footy and so on they've played and what injuries they've had, etc, which you might not be fully aware of and which can paint more of a picture of how much scope for improvement they have.

I think if you want to judge those recruiting for us now, it would be better to wait until they are more than 12 or so months into the gig. You may not agree with the way they are going about it, but that doesn't mean it can't or won't work out, or that they don't know what they are doing.

As for Smith and Clurey, we didn't particularly rate Smith (in particular his kicking would not have appealed and then there is the fact he would be a good 3 years off playing a meaningful role and we need someone sooner- we'll most likely target Mitch Brown again next year, if we don't convert someone from our forward line successfully into our backline by then, which I hear is the plan, or if we don't find someone in the PSD- word is we've delisted Nick Winmar, so we may still get a Joel Tippett/Kyal Hartigan there) and Clurey is not the 195cm+ that Watters keeps on saying we want.

Clurey would have just added to Fisher (for the time being), Gwilt and Gilbert (who both just turned 26) and Simpkin, who impressed in his first year this year, as someone who was fighting for that 2nd or 3rd key role down back. We also have Ferguson, Lever and Staley progressing in the VFL and they are all apparently being groomed for the backline and are all listed at at least 194cm.

We reportedly went "best available" with our first two picks and it seems pretty clear that we didn't see Clurey (who was also a mad keen fan of St Kilda) as "best available", on top of him not being that 195cm+ that we were after.

We may have taken Smith in the 40's, or even Close (who went earlier than most seemed to expect), but neither would have solved our immediate needs for someone to play on the Kurt Tippett's of the AFL, so again, we'll probably be looking to develop someone from within to play that role, draft someone in the PSD to play that role, or go after a Mitch Brown or someone like that again in 12 months time. Getting someone in the national draft is not the option available to us.

 

[juzzo]

TLDR Boo Lyon, go saints

 

[aussierulesrules]

TLDR Boo Lyon, go saints

Too long for what, your attention span? Don't worry, I'm sure there are some text messages or tweets you can go back to.

And FWIW, very, very little of the post had anything to do with Lyon, so maybe if you aren't going to read something, you really ought not comment on its content?

 

[juzzo]

It was a good post, you seem to know your stuff.

 

[Knightmare]

If Ross Lyon had that much weight in recruiting decisions then that is the first mistake.

Coaches are coaches. Let the guys who see the kids play every week evaluate the talent, they know best. Coaches need to be able to trust others to evaluate the talent for them, and there are people skilled enough to do this effectively so if you have the right guys looking at talent then it's not a problem.

The scouts and list evaluators should have a strong feel for what the coach wants and which players are compatible with gamestyles but then what the club also need and most need to reach that next level.

I think ruling out a key defender because he is only 192/193cm (Clurey) is completely wrong. A guy can play, and if he can play then height doesn't matter. So many high level key defenders are 191/192cm Darren Glass, Ben Rutten, Sam Fisher. I don't see lack of height being a problem for any of these. At 18 guys can still grow and Clurey might just end up 194/195cm all things said and done. You just don't know and height as a KPP shouldn't even come into the equation.

When adding KPPs it's about adding the best quality player possible, regardless of height. West Coast did ok with Jack Darling (191cm). Tim Membrey despite measuring in at 189/190cm I also expect to have strong success at the next level as that wrongly evaluated undersized tall who clubs have wrongly passed over.

Sure if a guy can play and has extra height (Joe Daniher) that's just a bonus. Jeremy Cameron, Jonathan Patton, Kurt Tippett, Mitch Clarke. The list goes all they've all got it so that's fine.

But give me the 191cm play who can play over the 196cm, athlete who has done nothing and shown no/limited ability to play.

Hickey and Lee can go well. I'd still take Grundy and Clurey.

Different people evaluate talent differently and St Kilda are moving in the right direction and are now finding some players with more regularity which is a starting point. It's certainly a major improvement going state league talent now as opposed to recycled talent but I do feel St Kilda are still paying overs for the wrong talent at times and until St Kilda really have that solid 3-4 years where it's clear they are picking the eyes out of the draft they haven't and others clubs are still doing clearly better from where the selections are coming from.

If I had picks 12, 13, 36, 55 and 75 in St Kilda's situation I would have taken: Grundy, Clurey, Membrey, Garlett and Pongracic instead. I'd have much more confidence in this group than what St Kilda took this offseason.

As a hobby recruiter I'm hardly expecting to out-recruit an AFL club but it would be interesting to come back to some years down the track and see whether this group of players develop into something better than what St Kilda took.

In this response it will come accross that I'm coming down hard on St Kilda's recruiting. Certainly the previous history in the Ross Lyon period was absolutely terrible but St Kilda are on the up and progress is being made but still more needs to happen before St Kilda become an above average club when it comes to trading for new talent and drafting new talent.

 

[saintsrfreak]

I doubt we passed on Clurey simply because of his height, I think it was because we were drafting "best available" (according to Ammet Bains) and didn't want to reach for a player that we didn't see as best available because of the position he plays, because teams that do that often run into trouble.

And I think it's a little close minded to see it as just Hickey and Lee vs Grundy and Clurey, you have to take into account the picks we received as well. More realistically it's Hickey, Lee, Wright, White, Saunders and TDL for picks 12, 13 and 37.

 

[Studbuddy]

Bloody hell, we could have had Zaharakis. Oh well, I'm more than happy that we've moved on Lynch and got Newnes.

 

[Jordie_tackles]

Any information on your opinions of kent, Jones and Telrich would be greatly appreciated from an MFC perspective Knightmare, and thanks for all the effort this year regardless

 

[aussierulesrules]

If Ross Lyon had that much weight in recruiting decisions then that is the first mistake.

Coaches are coaches. Let the guys who see the kids play every week evaluate the talent, they know best. Coaches need to be able to trust others to evaluate the talent for them, and there are people skilled enough to do this effectively so if you have the right guys looking at talent then it's not a problem.

I don't think you'll find anyone arguing with that. I know I'm not. No one is suggesting that our drafting in the Lyon years (and I'm not suggesting it was his fault, they coincided with his time here. How much say he did or didn't have in it I'm not fully aware, but I have heard that he had a say in at least a couple of those decisions, presumably based on him wanting someone who filled a particular need, rather than us getting "best available") was any good. In fact, while I was writing my post last night, there was a whole 3 or so page conversation going on on our board about just how diabolically bad our drafting was in those years, particularly 2009 (apparently everyone we got in the drafts that year is gone, one way or another).

So you don't need to tell us how bad it was back then, because we are as aware of it as anyone else and it has been addressed. Having said that, our development of those we drafted was apparently also terrible and I've heard that at the end of last year there were at least 10 of the younger ones that wanted out of the club if Ross had stayed around for another year, so there were problems in most areas of recruiting and development in that time.

Scotty was apparently pretty shocked at how poor it was when he arrived, so it is great to see that we now have a development academy at the club, with full resources and specialist coaching staff, so not only do we believe we have a great team in place doing the recruiting now, but we will hopefully have the resources and know-how to develop them much better than they would have in the past with us, as well.

Again though, time will tell. I'm very, very confident about the way it is looking though.

I think ruling out a key defender because he is only 192/193cm (Clurey) is completely wrong. A guy can play, and if he can play then height doesn't matter. So many high level key defenders are 191/192cm Darren Glass, Ben Rutten, Sam Fisher. I don't see lack of height being a problem for any of these. At 18 guys can still grow and Clurey might just end up 194/195cm all things said and done. You just don't know and height as a KPP shouldn't even come into the equation.

I didn't say we "ruled out" Clurey because he wasn't 195cm+.

Firstly, we didn't pick him with one of our first two selections because we went "best available" with them and clearly didn't see him as the best option at that point.

Secondly, if we had wanted to "reach" for a KPD that we didn't rate as the best available talent at that point, it would have only been for someone who was around that 195cm+ mark, I imagine, because, as I said, we already have several not only on our list, but in our starting team, who play to that sort of height that Clurey is, so getting someone else like that was not a desperate "need". We may look at that as more of a need 12 months time, with Gwilt, Gilbert and co getting a bit older, but it wasn't this year.

So he didn't necessarily tick either the "needs" box, or the "best available" box.

As you said, he may grow, but on the other hand, he may not and if not he is likely to only be tall enough to play that 2nd or 3rd role down back, not the no.1 role that we are so lacking RIGHT NOW- as in we need someone either immediately, or at worst in 12 months time and someone like Clurey is probably 3 years off being ready.

I agree with what you're saying about how the likes of Rutten and Glass and Fisher have done extremely well over the journey, at their heights, but things are changing. Within a couple of years every single team is likely to have someone around that 200cm mark, or above, in their forward line (most do already) and this has not been the case for the duration of the careers of the aforementioned, I wouldn't think.

This year it was the "monsters" that gave us awful trouble down back, because we only had 191-193cm options to play on them and they were simply too short, generally. That is only going to get worse in coming years, especially with no teams have a "resting ruckman" on the bench any more, and with, as I said, most/all teams having someone around the 200cm mark up forward, going forward, like Kurt Tippett (202cm), Joe Daniher (201cm), Mitch Clark (200cm), Tom Hawkins (197cm) Nathan Vardy (198cm), Witts (209cm), Grundy (202cm), Hampson (201cm), Kruezer (200cm), Rhys Stanley (202cm), Paddy Ryder (197cm), Drew Petrie and Lachie Hansen (both 197cm), Ayce Cordy (203cm), Ty Vickery (200cm), Todd Elton (197cm), Jono Patton (197cm), Mike Pyke (201cm), Tom Lynch (Gold Coast version (199cm), Charlie Dixon (202cm), John Butcher (197cm), Mason Shaw (198cm), Nic Nat/Dean Cox (201cm/203cm).

This why we have been after someone that was at least 195cm this offseason and not someone else that is around that 192/3cm mark, which we already have plenty of, because they would have to be outrageously good to be able to compete one on one with the 200cm+ "monsters", going forward. Obviously we didn't consider Clurey to be "outrageously good" and weren't prepared to gamble that he would grow another inch or more.

Yet we would have added him if we considered him "best available", regardless of his height, but we didn't rate him that highly, so that was that.

When adding KPPs it's about adding the best quality player possible, regardless of height.

Correct, hence us taking Spencer White and trading for Tom Lee, who we rated higher/as the better prospects than the likes of Membrey, O'Brien, Shaw, etc, having presumably interviewed them all, dug deep into their backgrounds, etc.

Hickey and Lee can go well. I'd still take Grundy and Clurey. If I had picks 12, 13, 36, 55 and 75 in St Kilda's situation I would have taken: Grundy, Clurey, Membrey, Garlett and Pongracic instead. I'd have much more confidence in this group than what St Kilda took this offseason.

Fair enough, but as you keep on saying, everyone rates talent differently and it is yet to be seen whether you are better at it than our current team. I don't believe for a second that it is the case though, at least not with what you know about all their backgrounds, etc, compared to what they do.

For starters, you aren't aware of the reasons every single club in the league overlooked Garlett, I would suggest. Anyone who has paid any attention to what has been said by our recruiting team about basically everyone we've drafted in the past two years would be very well aware that strong character and work ethic are pretty much imperative for anyone we pick up now, so I dare say Dayle would not have ticked either of those boxes.

It has been reported that Nick Winmar has just been delisted for arriving at preseason training out of shape and not doing enough since then to get back in shape, so we are clearly cracking down on any bullshit and taking more of a strong "zero-tolerance" approach to anyone who isn't toing the line, yet you want us to take Garlett (who clearly has major issues for every club to have overlooked him and basically said they don't want him on their list, no matter how cheaply he comes)?

And every team in the league also overlooked Pongracic, so while you rate him at 32 on your power rankings, the best in the business don't appear to rate him anywhere near that high. Membrey is one that I would have been happy for us to have drafted, but I am thrilled that we saw White as the better option, because of what he has shown since his asthma was better treated a few months ago. I think he a much higher "ceiling" and I'm glad that we are backing ourselves to get him there.

You probably would also have had more confidence in those you suggested we get because they obviously appeal to you in a certain way and you can see what they are all about, and you don't see what it is in those we have picked up that we do, but we obviously do and that is why they are more likely to work for us, because we get what they are all about and believe they fit in with the direction we are heading.

That's why I think Grundy will work out a lot better at Collingwood, under Buckley, than he may have at any other team in the league. Because Buckley will get 100% where he is coming from and what he is all about. They sound like two peas in a pod. Grundy would have rubbed a lot of clubs up the wrong way and it would not have been particularly wise for those clubs to select him, because it would have been a good chance that he wouldn't work out as well there and that he could have been more of a distraction than he was worth for them. I think it's worked out perfectly as it is. Similarly, I think Membrey will suit playing at the SCG perfectly and I think that is the best outcome for him as well. I am confident that all 3 clubs will be very happy with who they have landed out of Grundy, White and Membrey.

If I had picks 12, 13, 36, 55 and 75 in St Kilda's situation I would have taken: Grundy, Clurey, Membrey, Garlett and Pongracic instead. I'd have much more confidence in this group than what St Kilda took this offseason.

I'm very, very happy to have Tom Lee, Tom Hickey, Nathan Wright, Spencer White, Brodie Murdoch, Josh Saunders, Lewis Pierce and Trent Dennis Lane in their place, although I would also have been very happy with the first 4 you mentioned (if it wasn't for the stuff that meant Garlett wasn't selected- but then again, if that was the case he wouldn't have lasted to our picks anyway, so that is moot.) in some capacity. Everyone would have wanted Garlett if it was just about talent, but it is not that simple. He has to fit into a professional club that has a lot of responsibilities, etc. Your club overlooked him 4 times too, remember, including at 39.

In this response it will come accross that I'm coming down hard on St Kilda's recruiting. Certainly the previous history in the Ross Lyon period was absolutely terrible but St Kilda are on the up and progress is being made but still more needs to happen before St Kilda become an above average club when it comes to trading for new talent and drafting new talent.

In your opinion, or is this an undeniable fact?

It's only 12 months since the first draft and trading period for our current group, so I think we might need to give it a bit more time to be able to see how successful or otherwise they have been. It's not how those we picked up performed at U18 level, or state/local level that matters, at the end of the day, it's how they perform once they get to an AFL club (particularly the one they go to) and after what we've seen so far from Saad, Milera, Newnes, Ross, Markworth, Wilkes, Minchington and Dunell, for instance, who we got with just 6 picks from 20 in the ND through to the rookie draft last year, I would suggest we are doing very, very nicely so far and are likely to be just as happy with what we've done this year, if not even more so, considering we had some higher picks to play with this year. I'm extremely confident that we will be.

We could debate this ad nauseum though, until we get to the stage where those we have picked up have had a good chance to show if they are going to make it or not, but I'd rather just say I'm very happy with what we've gotten and am perfectly content to sit back and watch how they all develop from here.

I haven't had this much confidence in a batch of "youth/newcomers" that we've had since the early 2000's (not saying they'll be as good, because we got most of the ones back then in the top 5 or so of the drafts, but the depth is probably better this time around and I won't be surprised in the least if one or more of them develop to the "elite" level, or close to it), so I'm very much looking forward to it.

 

[Knightmare]

In response to Aussierules, I'm not going to quote all that but with St Kilda it all remains to be seen. You need to see things 4 years down the track with talls or 2 years down the track with everyone else to get a gauge on whether St Kilda have got it right. In my view St Kilda are heading in the right direction which given where you came from at this stage is all you can expect. Are St Kilda better drafters than Geelong/Adelaide/Collingwood? I wouldn't bet on it and these are the teams who more years than not seem to in my view anyway really be the clubs who get it more right than any other club.

I consider it a bit like Richmond with their trading. Until it became obvious that they could trade effectively - Ivan Maric, Shaun Grigg, Bachar Houli they weren't. Now that they've proven they can trade with the best clubs in the league identifying talent others probably wouldn't recognise and they are now one of the very best.

St Kilda have that same opportunity. With mature age drafting which St Kilda are putting more into than the next club, it's a has a higher percentage return than the other forms of recruiting and St Kilda seem to have identified this and because that young-middle age segment of the list is non-existant it is a clear, and good recruiting strategy by St Kilda to build a competitive team post Riewoldt/Hayes/Fisher. There has been nothing to suggest a team can make a premiership team out of state leaguers because it hasn't been done, but it doesn't necessarily mean that it won't happen.

I one thing I'm not necessarily liking as much with St Kilda's recruiting and this is only my view is the overspending on mature talents (specifically Hickey from Gold Coast and Lee from the WAFL). Neither are proven and when spending that price you really need to be. State league recruiting while Geelong did exceeding well with Harry Taylor and Sydney did with Lewis Jetta early draft, it's still more effective when using late draft selections or rookie selections when the right talent has been identified. Sometimes there are times where it is right to use an early draft selection on a mature age type talent, but I don't believe Lee and Hickey while they can both make the grade are worth that level of currency spent and in a draft where there is such a significant different in the talent at 12/13 as opposed to around selections 25 I don't believe it was the right move. But this is only my opinion.

I'm not more qualified to give a judgement than anyone else and I by no means expect to outperform an entire football club when it comes to recruiting, I'm not a full time recruiter and with the amount of staff and the time those staff spend identifying and analysing talent it would be foolish to suggest that I alone can.

On Grundy I don't see him as a problem guy at all. He is a winner. In the post draft interview he was talking premierships. The guy is committed to his work and from what I understand scored and enter in the 90s so the guy is not only smart but also committed. Any ruckman who spends two years in the gym and can carry 100kg as well as he does and still retains his athleticism clearly has put in the time and that to me suggests he will continue to do the same at the next level.

On Collingwood since you have bought it up. Collingwood have always had the worst ruck development program and the worst ability of all clubs league wide to identify ruckmen. With Grundy and now Ben Hudson being bought in as a ruck coach to work with Grundy and Witts I'm hopeful that changes things but as demonstrated by Collingwood spending a premium to add Cameron Wood, Jonathan Ceglar, then a large number of ruckmen in years preceeding it's something Collingwood have just never been able to do often taking players with frames too light to ever put on the required weight, or when they did it meant because their bodies weren't made for it led to either a complete loss in previous athleticism or injury. Grundy is Collingwood's first ruck prospect, with perhaps Witts another where it could work because they both have those larger frames more naturally and won't have the problems the majority of those previous ruck prospects Collingwood had before them.

On the height of key defenders. Not happy with the 192cm Darren Glass' effort on Kurt Tippett where the big guy only had 4 disposals and no shots at goal?
Tom Hawkins had his worst games of the year against Darren Glass and Ben Rutten who are both 192cm. Against Glass only the two disposals, one goal. Against Rutten 8 disposals, no goals.
Being 10cm shorter doesn't matter if you can play. People don't go around calling Glass or Rutten too short. They make up for it because 1v1 they are so strong and can despite being shorter in many cases compete with any key forward they come up against because they don't get outbodied and with that the taller key forward has no advantage despite the height difference.

I doubt we passed on Clurey simply because of his height, I think it was because we were drafting "best available" (according to Ammet Bains) and didn't want to reach for a player that we didn't see as best available because of the position he plays, because teams that do that often run into trouble.

And I think it's a little close minded to see it as just Hickey and Lee vs Grundy and Clurey, you have to take into account the picks we received as well. More realistically it's Hickey, Lee, Wright, White, Saunders and TDL for picks 12, 13 and 37.

I suspect you are right. I rated Clurey. It appears AFL didn't and early draft it is always about going best available.

Before I was talking more if St Kilda didn't involve themselves in trade week with those monster Lee + Hickey trades then this might have been an alternative potential outcome that might have been better. It's certainly the way I would have approached it but it's something for hindsight where some years down the track it will become clear what the most correct course of action was.

Any information on your opinions of kent, Jones and Telrich would be greatly appreciated from an MFC perspective Knightmare, and thanks for all the effort this year regardless

Kent is a strong little contested ball winner. Has an explosive kick on him. Will likely play a role off a forward flank and potentially later career rotate into the midfield some. Has a hard edge to him I think Neeld will really like.

Jones could have the opportunity through the midfield to find a role as that taller mid and as that mature ager could find earlier opportunities depending on preseason form.

Terlich is another mature ager so it's clear Melbourne want that more immediate boost. Has a nice kick on him and will play in the back half. Had a strong finals series in the SANFL and with so many quality defenders coming out of that Norwood program in recent years don't be surprised if Terlich is another really good one who can play right away and play some good footy.

 

[Goatusboy]

Hi Knightmare,

I posted a while ago in this thread asking about your projections for ball-winning players in the draft and and you very kindly posted 3 detailed lists covering pure ball winning, long term ball winning and ability to play next year. Now the draft is concluded, I was hoping to bother you further by coming clean with my motives. I am football fanatic and one aspect of that is a long-term dynasty DT league. Without boring you with the details I was hoping you may be able to make me a similar combined list for our upcoming draft. So the real aspects to consider are ball winning ability first and foremost, whether cheap possessions or handballs from a pack, and then combine that with potential to play next year. Basically, I would love your thoughts on who will be the most dominant accumulators from this year's draft.

I realise this is a bit of a cheeky request considering the kind of thought and detail you put into your phantom draft and my concerns are more abstracted (being related to potential dream team scoring, rather than necessarily a player's athleticism or skill).

Whatever you could provide would be much appreciated.

Cheers

Goatboy

 

[Knightmare]

Hi Knightmare,

I posted a while ago in this thread asking about your projections for ball-winning players in the draft and and you very kindly posted 3 detailed lists covering pure ball winning, long term ball winning and ability to play next year. Now the draft is concluded, I was hoping to bother you further by coming clean with my motives. I am football fanatic and one aspect of that is a long-term dynasty DT league. Without boring you with the details I was hoping you may be able to make me a similar combined list for our upcoming draft. So the real aspects to consider are ball winning ability first and foremost, whether cheap possessions or handballs from a pack, and then combine that with potential to play next year. Basically, I would love your thoughts on who will be the most dominant accumulators from this year's draft.

I realise this is a bit of a cheeky request considering the kind of thought and detail you put into your phantom draft and my concerns are more abstracted (being related to potential dream team scoring, rather than necessarily a player's athleticism or skill).

Whatever you could provide would be much appreciated.

Cheers

Goatboy

I'm happy to answer dt/sc questions.

The ones I'll be looking at for my dreamteam and supercoach right now: Oliver Wines, Jack Viney, Brad Crouch (might be back eligable), Troy Menzel (might be forward eligable).*All look like high production options and could all play close to 22 games for their respective sides if preseason form looks good. All are good options in both games.

Whitfield, O'Rourke will both get good numbers but no sure they are worth the price of early draft selections in a fantasy football sense.
Toumpas same but again will get good numbers and be a regular.
Stringer and Macrae if forward eligable might be worth a look and might be worth consideration.
Vlastuin will receive games and if listed and a defender could be worth consideration.
Jesse Lonergan for Gold Coast won't play every week but I expect he will be in the side more weeks than not and as that stronger bodied inside mid will do pretty well. Consider.
Garner and Thurlow watch for preseason form.
Brodie Grundy should play at some point for Collingwood through the ruck and is ready to go when needed, may play 5-6 games but probably more as a no.2 ruckman.
Kennedy also a strong chance to play given he could what he could do even as a 17 year old. Could get 7-8 games but likely not round 1.
Hrovat is as ready to go as any but not sure he gets games in that deep, young WBD midfield so while I hyped him up a month ago probably not one I'd take anymore.
Dean Towers might be a chance to get some games off a back flank for Sydney as a mature ager but probably won't be the highest production mature ager.
Nathan Wright for St Kilda can play some games down back from next season but probably doesn't start round 1.

Ashby, Temay, Duffy, M.Wood, McDonough, Membrey, Kent can all play next year and might later in the season break in for some games depending on form.

Then the late draft mature agers all chances for games (all must be watched and preseason form will give best picture for where they fit in the teams plans): Van Unen (may get some opportunies off a back flank but don't expect round 1 start and don't expect to be a regular), M.Jones (may get some midfield games and as a taller mid may get more opportunity), Currie (likely ruck depth), Hutchings (if he gets games will be high production through midfield but probably doesn't start round 1 in a deep midfield), Terlich (defender - another I'm considering and may be the pick of the mature agers. Can play 22 games and produce good numbers), Kommer (will get games and should get ok numbers, round 1 possibly not and may have to produce at VFL level first).