AFL Player # 2: Sam Draper

[Dave]

Contract Status: Out of contract 2025
My Boy Draft 2024: Pick 20, TheUnicorn

 

[rumply]

Yeah looked bad at the time, he may well be fine but reckon we are expecting too much for him to be right for Friday.

 

[Mercurial89]

Doesn’t look too bad, but knowing our luck I assume he’s already at the glue factory.

He competed in the next contest and his knee gave out. That's what I'd be worried about.

 

[60sbomber]

The mid-season draft is a rookie draft. Upgrading a rookie makes a space. And I think we already had a space anyway.

We need another ruckman for depth regardless. We don't need an LTI to a ruckman to inquire about another one. Correlation does not equal causation.

What else have you heard that makes you think Draper even has an injury?

As I understand it, the total no. of players on the list, inclusive of cat A rookies (but not inclusive of cat B rookies, which are "costless" add ons) is limited to 44 (or maybe 45?). The mix of main list and category A rookies is flexible, but the total of the two is fixed.
The MSD was introduced to enable a club to add to that number to replace a player on the LTI, or to bring them up to that no. in the event that they had less than the limit without any LTI.
So, for example, Hawthorn would get a pick to replace Mitchell (if they hadn't already done so pre season).
In our case, if McNiece had come off the cat A rookie list to replace Mutch, we would have a spot open in the MSD.
But McNiece was a category B rookie and so no spot is created by promoting him.
So, if we are talking to Knoll, another spot would have to have opened up.

 

[Donakebab]

As I understand it, the total no. of players on the list, inclusive of cat A rookies (but not inclusive of cat B rookies, which are "costless" add ons) is limited to 44 (or maybe 45?). The mix of main list and category A rookies is flexible, but the total of the two is fixed.
The MSD was introduced to enable a club to add to that number to replace a player on the LTI, or to bring them up to that no. in the event that they had less than the limit without any LTI.
So, for example, Hawthorn would get a pick to replace Mitchell (if they hadn't already done so pre season).
In our case, if McNiece had come off the cat A rookie list to replace Mutch, we would have a spot open in the MSD.
But McNiece was a category B rookie and so no spot is created by promoting him.
So, if we are talking to Knoll, another spot would have to have opened up.

We could always cut another one of Myers' fingers off.

 

[brutus76]

If hes right play him.

If not didnt BZT play Ruck/Forward for Sturt?

 

[Red Black and Blue]

On the Sash podcast Conners said he was doing laps after the game with no issues but said they are still going for scans anyway.

 

[BrunoV]

If he is injured I can't help but wonder whether we are reaping what we sow. There is always a point that someone should be playing. We almost always wait. Injury becomes almost inevitable.

I suspect it is genuinely physiological. Players not on edge enough at a contest or trying too hard.

An example that comes to mind is the Allblacks before they started this dominant run. Wrapped up players in cotton wool in preparation for a world cup and they struggled with injury.

What exactly is the point of playing a player for a half basically telling him to save himself for an AFL match the next week?

Has Draper even looked like getting injured playing large game time on ball in his first 3 years? He rucked 90% game time in year 1.

 

[Howard Moon]

If hes right play him.

If not didnt BZT play Ruck/Forward for Sturt?

he was miles off in the 2s - coasting about, fumbling, running under easy marks

next.

 

[fairbump_playon]

If he is injured I can't help but wonder whether we are reaping what we sow. There is always a point that someone should be playing. We almost always wait. Injury becomes almost inevitable.

I suspect it is genuinely physiological. Players not on edge enough at a contest or trying too hard.

An example that comes to mind is the Allblacks before they started this dominant run. Wrapped up players in cotton wool in preparation for a world cup and they struggled with injury.

What exactly is the point of playing a player for a half basically telling him to save himself for an AFL match the next week?

Has Draper even looked like getting injured playing large game time on ball in his first 3 years? He rucked 90% game time in year 1.

Psychological? Tend to agree that being in cotton wool does somehow bring out the bad luck and that weird half games are pointless.

However this:
There is always a point that someone should be playing. We almost always wait.

There is the point in each player's development where they are ready for a shot. However there is the small matter of needing a best 22 that can go out and win AFL games. I love seeing young guys get games but if everyone who deserves a shot gets a shot immediately we would have 12 of our best 22 playing reserve grade each week. And I'm not just talking Myers and Baguley.

Injury becomes almost inevitable.
The injury risk is surely pretty similar at both levels. We can't promote players just so they don't get injured playing 2s.

 

[BrunoV]

Psychological? Tend to agree that being in cotton wool does somehow bring out the bad luck and that weird half games are pointless.

However this:
There is always a point that someone should be playing. We almost always wait.

There is the point in each player's development where they are ready for a shot. However there is the small matter of needing a best 22 that can go out and win AFL games. I love seeing young guys get games but if everyone who deserves a shot gets a shot immediately we would have 12 of our best 22 playing reserve grade each week. And I'm not just talking Myers and Baguley.

Injury becomes almost inevitable.
The injury risk is surely pretty similar at both levels. We can't promote players just so they don't get injured playing 2s.

I'm probably using the wrong terminology but I think of the cause of the injury as physical even if it starts in the mind.

That probably makes no sense.

On the topic of the best 22, I haven't proposed a change in about 2 years that I don't think would improve us short and long term.

Getting someone who isn't a witches hat to replace Baguley, for example, both improves the team and gives a player much needed exposure to AFL.

Last week Drapar was a better option than Francis for many reasons. He's played forward more, he runs much harder for much longer, his second efforts are the foundation of his game, he allows us to keep Daniher forward.

I'd say we're to conservative but it's a weird form of conservatism. It doesn't appear to be based in even a misguided belief in the past as much as it is a fear of the future.

 

[Howard Moon]

I'm probably using the wrong terminology but I think of the cause of the injury as physical even if it starts in the mind.

That probably makes no sense.

On the topic of the best 22, I haven't proposed a change in about 2 years that I don't think would improve us short and long term.

Getting someone who isn't a witches hat to replace Baguley, for example, both improves the team and gives a player much needed exposure to AFL.

Last week Drapar was a better option than Francis for many reasons. He's played forward more, he runs much harder for much longer, he is second efforts are the foundation of his game, he allows us to keep Daniher forward.

I'd say we're to conservative but it's a weird form of conservatism. It doesn't appear to be based in even a misguided belief in the past as much as it is a fear of the future.

a few weeks ago when I requested Clarke stay in for structure you scoffed saying JD was a far better choice - winning wasn't a good enough reason to stick..

now the structure is proved to be compromised without the 2nd ruck, allowing JD to play fwd (where he should be) and we look a little off..

I understand you want Draper in, (as do i) but he performs the same role structurally as Clarke did.

I feel like the rules change when its a player you like

 

[Jobe Watson]

ACL confirmed. Knee reconstruction to come.

Why, cruel world? WHY!?

 

[Bunk Moreland]

*

 

[eth-dog]

*.

 

[Runk]

**** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** **** !!!!!!

 

[DonsRule]

This is all Doss's fault.

 

[VelvetSledge]

GOD ******* DAMN *

 

[scottmclaren]

Poor guy

This ******* club

 

[SherbertLemon]

God damn it

 

[boncer34]

Not a great injury for a ruckman

 

[Howard Moon]

wouldn't have happened in the 1s

 

[BrunoV]

a few weeks ago when I requested Clarke stay in for structure you scoffed saying JD was a far better choice - winning wasn't a good enough reason to stick..

now the structure is proved to be compromised without the 2nd ruck, allowing JD to play fwd (where he should be) and we look a little off..

I understand you want Draper in, (as do i) but he performs the same role structurally as Clarke did.

I feel like the rules change when its a player you like

We've since lost Mitch Brown and have no leading targets?

In any event, you seriously want to have an argument that Clarke in isolation is better than Daniher for our structure?

 

[eDPS]

* AFL sometimes, hate seeing talented young players doing year ending injuries

 

[Howard Moon]

We've since lost Mitch Brown and have no leading targets?

In any event, you seriously want to have an argument that Clarke in isolation is better than Daniher for our structure?

id have both

but probably best not in here while we are grieving...

 

[rumply]

Damn it but really not surprised it's turned out to be serious, big guys doing that to a knee rarely plays out well.