Preview National Draft discussion (Picks 14, 35, 43, 58)

[AFC979810]

No it's his decision Lowden +!Cheney + 14 + 35 is better than 10 + 31

FFS how hard is it

Obviously pretty hard.

My point is that in my opinion that Lowden + Cheney + 10 + 47 is better than what we have now. You seem to think that in no way could we have achieved this scenario - when we absolutely could have.

Although our club obviously pulled the trigger on both trades and the two trades were linked in our clubs strategy. Its my opinion that we would have been better off picking at 10 and 47 than 14 and 35.

 

[AFC979810]

That's exactly the thing with Wells, he doesn't necessarily go by the book. His last truly good 1st round picks were Selwood and Taylor in 06/07, both being a little risky/out of the box.

Bit of a misleading statement there considering he has had 5 first round picks since then 07 with none being better than pick 15. Its far far too early to tell on both Thurlow and Lang. So basically he has had 3 first round picks that we can look at since Selwood/Taylor. 1 was a resounding failure, 1 looked to be just as good as Selwood/Taylor and the jury is still out on the 3rd.

2008 - #15 - Mitch Brown - Failure

2009 -Pick #17 - Daniel Menzel - looked to be an absolute gun. Played 18 games and cemented himself in Geelongs 2011 premiership side in his second year picking up a rising star nomination and 3 brownlow votes in round 22 against Collingwood. Then did his ACL in the qualifying final and has had 4 Reco's since then. This looked to be a brilliant pickup at #17.

2010 - Pick #15 - Billie Smedts - Has played 33 games across 4 years on Geelongs list. Will need a big season in 2015 to justify his selection on the list.

2011 - No first round draft picks.

2012 - Pick #16 - Jackson Thurlow - 10 games across two years.

2013 - Pick #17 - Darcy Lang - 1 game in 2014.

 

[AFC979810]

Given the amount of high profile draft experts and whatnot harping on about the even-ness of this draft and the amount of prospects that are all considered relatively equal, I'm willing to back our clubs/Walsh's decisions that we made on trade day.

Fair enough.

I disagree with the clubs decision - even though I understand the reason why they made the decision. Unfortunately - there will be absolutely no way of knowing whether it was the right decision or not.

So many people around BF seem to be viewing it very much on a numerical basis, 10>14 therefore our trade was stupid....

As stated, we have performed well in the drafting/trading department previously and from what I'm reading from the real experts about this years draft, I am more than happy to go in with 14 and 35 rather than 10 and 47.

Its interesting that many on here say that in the past we have performed well in drafting. Yet there is no discussion that in 2012 we fired our head recruiter in charge of our drafting and have a new person in charge of our recruiting. So as a club under Ogilvie we have had two drafts in which we were severely limited due to draft restrictions. Ogilvie has brought in 10 players over those two years and those players have played a combined 25 games between them (so basically its waaaay to early to tell on Ogilvie).

 

[AFC979810]

I would think such a deal would at least be run past the AFL Admin and most probably signed off on.

I am sure there would be a handshake agreement, but to put it in writing surely becomes draft tampering?

 

[AFC979810]

Imagine the sh!tfest if Geelong reneged on a deal like that and took the player that AFC were after ... how cut-throat is the AFL as a business coz I can tell you there is no way I would take someone's word for something as important as this in the business world. I'd be called naive.

It would be such an interesting dynamic to see.

I think that the AFL is such a small industry - that you can't afford to screw people over. If Geelong did what happened above - all of the recruiters / list managers would hear about it and it would severely limited Geelongs ability to trade in the future. Would not be worth it.

Would be very interested in seeing how close these guys are and the politics of the recruiting / trading teams.

For instance would West Coast be filthy at the Crows? If the rumours are to true - we effectively allowed Geelong to move up and select WA prospect Jarred Pickett.

 

[Red mist]

This kid seems to be everyone's booby prize - thought it was worth having a look

Yeah he's our pick in a lot of phantom drafts. Mainly as they have Goddard picked earlier.
Much earlier in this thread I wanted him over Goddard as I thought he used his body better to mark.
Then I read up more and found he has had limited game time through injury over the last 2 yrs. Back and something else. Then there's been loads of posters who have replied please not him without reasons.
If we are going KPD with #14 then wether people like it or not, Marchbank must be in the mix.

 

[Gets!]

Durdin was gone at the pick before ...

Talking real life mate

 

[Johnny Rutten]

Yeah he's our pick in a lot of phantom drafts. Mainly as they have Goddard picked earlier.
Much earlier in this thread I wanted him over Goddard as I thought he used his body better to mark.
Then I read up more and found he has had limited game time through injury over the last 2 yrs. Back and something else. Then there's been loads of posters who have replied please not him without reasons.
If we are going KPD with #14 then wether people like it or not, Marchbank must be in the mix.

He may have had injury issues, but Marchbank looks like a bloody decent player. Uses his body really cleverly and is a solid mark. Very mobile too. A certain Chris Judd had injury issues before he was drafted. I wouldn't be discounting an elite young talent based on a few injuries. Do the medical, tick the boxes, etc, etc... then pick on talent. Of course, if it's a lineball decision between Marchbank and another player who hasn't had injury problems, then go with that player.

 

[Tex200]

Obviously pretty hard.

My point is that in my opinion that Lowden + Cheney + 10 + 47 is better than what we have now. You seem to think that in no way could we have achieved this scenario - when we absolutely could have.

Although our club obviously pulled the trigger on both trades and the two trades were linked in our clubs strategy. Its my opinion that we would have been better off picking at 10 and 47 than 14 and 35.

Look we all speculate on here, that's a given. Sometimes we do get some facts to help. Noble in his interview says he was told by Walsh we had to stay in the second round.

My guess is that the Hawks trade stalled because 31 was a sticking point which we eventually let go of on the basis we had 35 coming. Second round pick not negotiable.

So the real comparison here is

10 and 31 v Cheney, Lowden, 14 and 35

 

[Mismatched]

Bit of a misleading statement there considering he has had 5 first round picks since then 07 with none being better than pick 15. Its far far too early to tell on both Thurlow and Lang. So basically he has had 3 first round picks that we can look at since Selwood/Taylor. 1 was a resounding failure, 1 looked to be just as good as Selwood/Taylor and the jury is still out on the 3rd.

2008 - #15 - Mitch Brown - Failure

2009 -Pick #17 - Daniel Menzel - looked to be an absolute gun. Played 18 games and cemented himself in Geelongs 2011 premiership side in his second year picking up a rising star nomination and 3 brownlow votes in round 22 against Collingwood. Then did his ACL in the qualifying final and has had 4 Reco's since then. This looked to be a brilliant pickup at #17.

2010 - Pick #15 - Billie Smedts - Has played 33 games across 4 years on Geelongs list. Will need a big season in 2015 to justify his selection on the list.

2011 - No first round draft picks.

2012 - Pick #16 - Jackson Thurlow - 10 games across two years.

2013 - Pick #17 - Darcy Lang - 1 game in 2014.

Plenty of good talent was selected after those players, Taylor himself was pick 17.

Our picks in those years were, per:

2008 - #10 - Phil Davis (Players available after Geelongs pick: Shuey, Ballantyne, Trengove, Zaharakis, Redden, Beams, Hannebury, Sloane)

2009 - #13 - Daniel Talia (Fyfe, Bastinac, J. Carlisle, Gunston, S. Reid)

2010 - #14 - Brodie Smith (Atley, I. Smith, Darling, Parker)

2011 - #27 - Sam Kerridge

2012 - No first rounder (Grundy, Kennedy, Broomhead, Hrovat)

2013 - #23 - Matt Crouch (Certainly too soon to judge)

Certainly I think our recruiters work stacks up, in fact better with similar picks, over that same period of time.

I'm not saying Wells is a bad recruiter, not by a long shot, just that his work of late is nothing special, certainly his work in the first round is nothing to write home about. In fact his better picks of late seem to be his later picks. He's picked guys like Motlop, Horlin-Smith, Guthrie, Duncan, Christenson and Vardy. Geelong's success was very much built off the back of excellent drafting in the early 2000's, very astute trading, some Father-Son Guns and an absolute elite culture.

 

[Red mist]

He may have had injury issues, but Marchbank looks like a bloody decent player. Uses his body really cleverly and is a solid mark. Very mobile too. A certain Chris Judd had injury issues before he was drafted. I wouldn't be discounting an elite young talent based on a few injuries. Do the medical, tick the boxes, etc, etc... then pick on talent. Of course, if it's a lineball decision between Marchbank and another player who hasn't had injury problems, then go with that player.

For sure. You can teach a player to defend and position himself against a forward. However from what I see he has the ability to also read the flight of the ball better. Thats his forte. That's a natural ability and it gives a defender slightly more time to execute re spoiling or out marking. He has sticky hands. Every draftee can work on their disposal so that will improve. The reason he is sliding down and being a worry for people must be the limited games over the last 2 seasons re injury. The recruiters have done their homework and will know best.

 

[baldandbroke]

Obviously pretty hard.

My point is that in my opinion that Lowden + Cheney + 10 + 47 is better than what we have now. You seem to think that in no way could we have achieved this scenario - when we absolutely could have.

Although our club obviously pulled the trigger on both trades and the two trades were linked in our clubs strategy. Its my opinion that we would have been better off picking at 10 and 47 than 14 and 35.

No problems with having a different point of view - can you explain to me why you think that 10 and 47 are better than 14 and 35?

The other alternative is 10 and 31 and 47 with no Lowden or Cheney - if we needed to stay in the second round.

 

[Elite Crow]

Going to be an interesting draft day

 

[baldandbroke]

Talking real life mate

Ahhh - your comment followed on from the pick in Phantom

In real life - who the heck knows what is going to happen ... can be sure that a lot of us will be confused no matter which way it twists and turns !!

 

[Freddy Bassett]

I am sure there would be a handshake agreement, but to put it in writing surely becomes draft tampering?

Not sure it would be an agreement... It would just be an understanding of who they want..
These recruiters are at the same boring games all year round.. They would all know who everyone wants...
I bet Noble could name 19 out of the top 20

 

[boffo]

For those who are interested in how accurate the phantom drafts are check out Knightmare's from 2010. He got the first 7 spot on, as did Faith's phantom draft of 2009.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/knightmares-2010-mock-draft.768543/

His comments on Brodie Smith, which he had going at #24 are generally spot on. Don't think I've ever heard the term 'inside receiver' though. And how could he be so wrong about Brodie's kicking! Rendell knows best.

#24 (St Kilda) – Brodie Smith (SA)
Height: 189cm, Weight: 79kg, DOB: 14/01/1992
Recruited from: Woodville West Torrens
Style: Chris Judd
Range: 14-31
Why: Good clearance player with elite first step and breakaway speed. Exceptional work rate around the clearances. Runs hard. Continuously wins the contested footy and gets it forward. Competitive, a good mark and strong in contests with the ability to shrug tackles with a shake of the hips. His ability to shake tackles effortlessly is probably close to the best I have ever seen. Always seems to be moving which I think makes him even harder to catch and almost makes for the illusion that he is faster than what he is. He’s fast and he hits the ball at pace. Is good at clearances and contested ball and grabs the ball and runs with near electrifying speed. Has the ability to burst packs. Can also play down back, but I like him most as an inside receiver. Not a big fan of his kicking but otherwise a very good package who could become a star with some of the attributes he possesses, but with that said I’m not certain Smith is a sure thing which is why he could slide to here.

 

[Pugsley]

For those who are interested in how accurate the phantom drafts are check out Knightmare's from 2010. He got the first 7 spot on, as did Faith's phantom draft of 2009.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/knightmares-2010-mock-draft.768543/

His comments on Brodie Smith, which he had going at #24 are generally spot on. Don't think I've ever heard the term 'inside receiver' though. And how could he be so wrong about Brodie's kicking! Rendell knows best.

#24 (St Kilda) – Brodie Smith (SA)
Height: 189cm, Weight: 79kg, DOB: 14/01/1992
Recruited from: Woodville West Torrens
Style: Chris Judd
Range: 14-31
Why: Good clearance player with elite first step and breakaway speed. Exceptional work rate around the clearances. Runs hard. Continuously wins the contested footy and gets it forward. Competitive, a good mark and strong in contests with the ability to shrug tackles with a shake of the hips. His ability to shake tackles effortlessly is probably close to the best I have ever seen. Always seems to be moving which I think makes him even harder to catch and almost makes for the illusion that he is faster than what he is. He’s fast and he hits the ball at pace. Is good at clearances and contested ball and grabs the ball and runs with near electrifying speed. Has the ability to burst packs. Can also play down back, but I like him most as an inside receiver. Not a big fan of his kicking but otherwise a very good package who could become a star with some of the attributes he possesses, but with that said I’m not certain Smith is a sure thing which is why he could slide to here.

The survey says !!!!!!

 

[FAITH]

For those who are interested in how accurate the phantom drafts are check out Knightmare's from 2010. He got the first 7 spot on, as did Faith's phantom draft of 2009.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/knightmares-2010-mock-draft.768543/

His comments on Brodie Smith, which he had going at #24 are generally spot on. Don't think I've ever heard the term 'inside receiver' though. And how could he be so wrong about Brodie's kicking! Rendell knows best.

#24 (St Kilda) – Brodie Smith (SA)
Height: 189cm, Weight: 79kg, DOB: 14/01/1992
Recruited from: Woodville West Torrens
Style: Chris Judd
Range: 14-31
Why: Good clearance player with elite first step and breakaway speed. Exceptional work rate around the clearances. Runs hard. Continuously wins the contested footy and gets it forward. Competitive, a good mark and strong in contests with the ability to shrug tackles with a shake of the hips. His ability to shake tackles effortlessly is probably close to the best I have ever seen. Always seems to be moving which I think makes him even harder to catch and almost makes for the illusion that he is faster than what he is. He’s fast and he hits the ball at pace. Is good at clearances and contested ball and grabs the ball and runs with near electrifying speed. Has the ability to burst packs. Can also play down back, but I like him most as an inside receiver. Not a big fan of his kicking but otherwise a very good package who could become a star with some of the attributes he possesses, but with that said I’m not certain Smith is a sure thing which is why he could slide to here.

I rated Smith top 5 equal with Polec and Heppel was i think my 3rd fav in the draft.

 

[Mismatched]

I was reading Quigleys assessment of Smith the other day, he also likened Smith to Chris Judd in his ability to read the fall of the ball around stoppages, hit it at speed and break away from the pack. This is something we've only seen glimpses of since his arrival at AFL level. It also seems like he's tidied up his kicking too, was always a massive hoof of the footy, but he's been able to start hitting targets regularly.

I'd love to see us work Smith into our midfield rotations. Danger, Sloane, Mith, B.Crouch, Thompson and Douglas with Jacobs as ruck gives us an A-Grade 1st and 2nd ruck midfield, with guys like Kerridge, Grigg, M.Crouch, Lyons and van Berlo in support.

 

[Mismatched]

Reece McKenzie certainly seems an interesting one. Goes against our immediate needs of KPD and midfield pace/class. However in Walker and Jenkins, we don't really have that big contested pack marking monster. McKenzie certainly sounds in the mould of a Hawkins, Cloke or Tippett type, where you can bomb the ball in the general area, as we like to do, and have a fair belief that he'd still mark it.

We've also just delisted McKernan and Johnston, with Pods only having 1 year left. We're light on in talls all over the ground. Key defender is the more immediate need, but then the draft isn't exactly the place for "immediate needs" unless you're targeting a mature aged type.

 

[MyLittleSloaney]

I was reading Quigleys assessment of Smith the other day, he also likened Smith to Chris Judd in his ability to read the fall of the ball around stoppages, hit it at speed and break away from the pack. This is something we've only seen glimpses of since his arrival at AFL level. It also seems like he's tidied up his kicking too, was always a massive hoof of the footy, but he's been able to start hitting targets regularly.

I'd love to see us work Smith into our midfield rotations. Danger, Sloane, Mith, B.Crouch, Thompson and Douglas with Jacobs as ruck gives us an A-Grade 1st and 2nd ruck midfield, with guys like Kerridge, Grigg, M.Crouch, Lyons and van Berlo in support.

On Smith, I think you're underestimating how good his kick was as a junior, as many 'experts' like Knightmare did. The only thing about Smith's kick is that it's a very natural and slightly ungainly technique. Some people didn't like the look of it and assumed it wouldn't stand up at AFL level.

 

[azza77]

I was reading Quigleys assessment of Smith the other day, he also likened Smith to Chris Judd in his ability to read the fall of the ball around stoppages, hit it at speed and break away from the pack. This is something we've only seen glimpses of since his arrival at AFL level. It also seems like he's tidied up his kicking too, was always a massive hoof of the footy, but he's been able to start hitting targets regularly.

I'd love to see us work Smith into our midfield rotations. Danger, Sloane, Mith, B.Crouch, Thompson and Douglas with Jacobs as ruck gives us an A-Grade 1st and 2nd ruck midfield, with guys like Kerridge, Grigg, M.Crouch, Lyons and van Berlo in support.

Ohh boy so would I. Here's hoping the addition of a medium defender in Cheney, a fit Hendo and maybe a new draftee off the HBF such as Menadue/Voijo-Rainbow, that we do see this happen. Im sure there are many rewards to be reaped if Smith moves into the midfield fulltime.

 

[azza77]

He may have had injury issues, but Marchbank looks like a bloody decent player. Uses his body really cleverly and is a solid mark. Very mobile too. A certain Chris Judd had injury issues before he was drafted. I wouldn't be discounting an elite young talent based on a few injuries. Do the medical, tick the boxes, etc, etc... then pick on talent. Of course, if it's a lineball decision between Marchbank and another player who hasn't had injury problems, then go with that player.

His kicking and decision making has been his biggest question mark. Maybe a great defender but we already have someone like that in Talia. Hartigan also a promising lockdown defender too if he tidies up his confidence and disposal issues.

Like the look of Goddard more and am very weary of Marchbank due to this. Would much rather a KPD who has a great all round game and can be damaging with the ball in hand. We all know Talia isnt the greatest user of the ball....

 

[danger_to_walker]

On Smith, I think you're underestimating how good his kick was as a junior, as many 'experts' like Knightmare did. The only thing about Smith's kick is that it's a very natural and slightly ungainly technique. Some people didn't like the look of it and assumed it wouldn't stand up at AFL level.

I think a lot of the people who underestimated Smith's kicking pre-draft did so off the back of his Champs performances. For SA he played as an inside mid, winning a heap of clearances. He had a habit, however, of managing to get the ball on the boot, with quick kicks out of congestion. Combined with his aforementioned 'ungainly' kicking style, it was an easy enough assumption to make that his kicking wasn't a strength. When playing at WWT though, he was able to display his vision, decision making, and kicking ability.

Quite torn as to where Smithers is best for us. Would love to have him penetrating inside 50 more often, but his drive off of half back is extremely valuable. Would love another one of him!

 

[Johnny Rutten]

Reece McKenzie certainly seems an interesting one. Goes against our immediate needs of KPD and midfield pace/class. However in Walker and Jenkins, we don't really have that big contested pack marking monster. McKenzie certainly sounds in the mould of a Hawkins, Cloke or Tippett type, where you can bomb the ball in the general area, as we like to do, and have a fair belief that he'd still mark it.

We've also just delisted McKernan and Johnston, with Pods only having 1 year left. We're light on in talls all over the ground. Key defender is the more immediate need, but then the draft isn't exactly the place for "immediate needs" unless you're targeting a mature aged type.

Be nice if he still there at 35, but unlikely. We need a young key forward. This shouldn't be underestimated.