Draft Review 2005 - Redo the 2005 Draft

[Monkey King]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

i always said they were fairly even talent wise, very different mids though.

Which is my point when assessing the "best player" from a draft. If the world was to end tomorrow and I had to pick who was better this instant, then I'd happily nominate Pendles.

But I'm nominating who I think is the best player from this draft; and everything I've seen from a fit Murphy at the least matches Pendles up until injury.

Plenty of Blues fans agreed that Murphy was ready to take off last year before injury precluded it. Now I just want to see what level he can perform to this season, unencumbered, before making broad conclusions.

For this reason, I'm not splitting them at this point. And I think that's reasonable enough logic, even if you don't agree with it.

 

[The OBSTacle]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

Swallow is still the massive bargain of this trade.

 

[Ysaye]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

If this is a draft redone, then surely we need to incorporate the clubs and what was their desires at the time:

My weak attempt is this is below (Player type that I am guessing they were after in brackets):

1. Carlton (Midfielder / Utility) Pendlebury
2. Collingwood (Midfielder / Utility) Murphy
3. Hawthorn (Midfielder / Utility) Hurn
4. Carlton (Tall) Clark
5. Collingwood (Midfielder / Utility) Higgins
6. Hawthorn (Tall) Ryder
7. Essendon (Best Available) Thomas
8. Richmond (Midfielder / Utility) Vince
9. Brisbane (Tall) Kennedy
10. Fremantle (Midfielder / Utility) Ellis
11. Bulldogs (Midfielder / Utility) Varcoe
12. Melbourne (Midfielder / Utility) Priddis
13. Hawthorn (Midfielder / Utility) Duffield
14. Geelong (Midfielder / Utility) Birchall
15. Adelaide (Midfielder / Utility) Ibbotson
16. Adelaide (Midfielder / Utility) Dempsey
17. Hawthorn (Tall) Bailey
18. Essendon (Midfielder / Utility) Jack
19. Carlton (Tall / Defender) Gilbert
20. Collingwood (Best Available) Porplyzia
21. Richmond (Tall) Anthony
22. Lions (Midfielder / Utility) Swallow

 

[Riders of Rohan]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

Seems very reasonable Ysaye, though I would switch Ellis with Swallow. I think 10 is still paying too mch for him.

 

[smiddaz123]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

Collingwood would stick with Thomas at 5.

 

[schimma2snake]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

Collingwood would stick with Thomas at 5.

You might, but I'm not so sure Collingwood would do the same.

Drafting Swallow at 5 means that Collingwood don't have to worry about drafting Ball further down the track.

Thomas is a very good player and all, but the Pies already have a few of his type.

Likewise, Essendon would also take Swallow at pick 7. I have no doubt about that. Swallow and Watson would give Essendon a brutal clearance combination.

 

[smiddaz123]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

You might, but I'm not so sure Collingwood would do the same.

Drafting Swallow at 5 means that Collingwood don't have to worry about drafting Ball further down the track.

Why would that be a worry?

Thomas and Ball>>Swallow and some kid drafted at pick 30.

Why would we deviate from two players who helped deliver a flag? Nothing needs changing from our first round.

 

[WN123]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

You might, but I'm not so sure Collingwood would do the same.

Drafting Swallow at 5 means that Collingwood don't have to worry about drafting Ball further down the track.

Thomas is a very good player and all, but the Pies already have a few of his type.

Likewise, Essendon would also take Swallow at pick 7. I have no doubt about that. Swallow and Watson would give Essendon a brutal clearance combination.

I think we might take Thomas first but I'd defintely take Swallow before Higgins. Higgins promises much but Swallow is a much safer bet.

 

[TownleyTime]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

Swallow is a fine player but he lacks the match winning class that Thomas has.

 

[Greg Brady]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

Swallow is much more valuable than Thomas.
Dale had a good year, deflected the "b**ch" tag he used to carry with some good games off the HBF and two good performances in the Grand Finals. However, Swallow had a better year in the centre of the ground winning the hard stuff and feeding it to players like Thomas for the roos.

Dale having the ability to take the odd screamer or kick a checkside goal doesnt mean he has more potential than Swallow. He has been a good pick for the pies but wouldnt make my top 5 of 05
GB

 

[The OBSTacle]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

Swallow is much more valuable than Thomas.
Dale had a good year, deflected the "b**ch" tag he used to carry with some good games off the HBF and two good performances in the Grand Finals. However, Swallow had a better year in the centre of the ground winning the hard stuff and feeding it to players like Thomas for the roos.

Dale having the ability to take the odd screamer or kick a checkside goal doesnt mean he has more potential than Swallow. He has been a good pick for the pies but wouldnt make my top 5 of 05
GB

Agree with that. DT will do the odd flashy thing which will get him more attention, and I was very impressed with his lift in intensity in 2010, but Swallow is still the better pure midfielder. Thomas is still best suited to tearing up the flanks and wings whereas Swallow is a died in the wool centre square grunt.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

I can't believe after the year Thomas had last year - that people are still calling him flashy.

He won a lot of his own ball, tackled hard - and hit contests harder.

People calling him soft and flashy obviously refused to change their opinion of him in the last 5 years

He' a dramatically improved and consistent player nowadays - hard as nails with still a bit of flair to add to his well rounded game. Lovely disposal as well.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

12. Melbourne (Midfielder / Utility) Priddis
13. Hawthorn (Midfielder / Utility) Duffield
14. Geelong (Midfielder / Utility) Birchall
15. Adelaide (Midfielder / Utility) Ibbotson
16. Adelaide (Midfielder / Utility) Dempsey
17. Hawthorn (Tall) Bailey

18. Essendon (Midfielder / Utility) Jack
19. Carlton (Tall / Defender) Gilbert
20. Collingwood (Best Available) Porplyzia
22. Lions (Midfielder / Utility) Swallow

Are you ****ing serious?

 

[Paddywhackers]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

If this is a draft redone, then surely we need to incorporate the clubs and what was their desires at the time:

My weak attempt is this is below (Player type that I am guessing they were after in brackets):

1. Carlton (Midfielder / Utility) Pendlebury
2. Collingwood (Midfielder / Utility) Murphy
3. Hawthorn (Midfielder / Utility) Hurn
4. Carlton (Tall) Clark
5. Collingwood (Midfielder / Utility) Higgins
6. Hawthorn (Tall) Ryder
7. Essendon (Best Available) Thomas
8. Richmond (Midfielder / Utility) Vince
9. Brisbane (Tall) Kennedy
10. Fremantle (Midfielder / Utility) Ellis
11. Bulldogs (Midfielder / Utility) Varcoe
12. Melbourne (Midfielder / Utility) Priddis
13. Hawthorn (Midfielder / Utility) Duffield
14. Geelong (Midfielder / Utility) Birchall
15. Adelaide (Midfielder / Utility) Ibbotson
16. Adelaide (Midfielder / Utility) Dempsey
17. Hawthorn (Tall) Bailey
18. Essendon (Midfielder / Utility) Jack
19. Carlton (Tall / Defender) Gilbert
20. Collingwood (Best Available) Porplyzia
21. Richmond (Tall) Anthony
22. Lions (Midfielder / Utility) Swallow

I reckon in all honesty that in hindsight, we'd still go Thomas at pick 2. Slipping him to seven is a bit ludicrous IMO. Maybe you don't see enough of Collingwood or something.

 

[Greg Brady]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

I reckon in all honesty that in hindsight, we'd still go Thomas at pick 2. Slipping him to seven is a bit ludicrous IMO. Maybe you don't see enough of Collingwood or something.

Or maybe he just doesnt rate him as you do.....it happens. I dont rate him as highly as you do and im the smartest person i know......and i know LOTS of people. GB 8========D

 

[Blueboys7]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

I can't believe after the year Thomas had last year - that people are still calling him flashy.

He won a lot of his own ball, tackled hard - and hit contests harder.

People calling him soft and flashy obviously refused to change their opinion of him in the last 5 years

He' a dramatically improved and consistent player nowadays - hard as nails with still a bit of flair to add to his well rounded game. Lovely disposal as well.

Good call, his hardness and 2nd and 3rd efforts have been super impressive. We all know he can run and use his skill and speed but that is a side of his game that he has improved out of sight which has made him a much more valuable player.

 

[Roar Metre]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

I reckon in all honesty that in hindsight, we'd still go Thomas at pick 2. Slipping him to seven is a bit ludicrous IMO. Maybe you don't see enough of Collingwood or something.

It's hard to see him slip to 7, and that re draft effort is a mess. Some really good midfielders to come out of 2005 though. Based on the type of player that each team took.. would he be taken over Swallow/Jack/Vince/Higgins?

And if everyone took best available, would he be taken over Ryder and Mitch Clark?

Real quality came out of 2005.. and JON..

 

[souvo_fc]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

Pfft! And 5 billion flies eat shit. You keep wanting to play the bias card and I think that's pissweak considering I've laid out what I consider to be fair and logical reasoning and backed it up when called to. Why not make the effort to point out where my reasoning falls down exactly?

Pendles >> Murphy. No need to be so emotional

 

[Monkey King]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

Pendles >> Murphy. No need to be so emotional

Your one line response is about useless as the other one line responses.

As at last year when Murphy was injured; yes I agree. Prior to that, no way. I've put up my reasoning should you wish to seriously discuss this point. From this year when both play uninjured - no one knows, which is why I choose not to seperate them this year.

Am I being unreasonable? I don't think so. Aussie Guns, who is one of the most respected posters when it comes to this stuff, has put Murphy ahead of Pendles in his Top 10 player predictions for 2011. I won't go that far ... but I am prepared to wait before committing to which player I'd have rathered from this draft.

The emotional responses come from those who keep wanting to post >>> comments, without addressing the actual logic behind the decision.

 

[jabbers]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

Your one line response is about useless as the other one line responses.

As at last year when Murphy was injured; yes I agree. Prior to that, no way. I've put up my reasoning should you wish to seriously discuss this point. From this year when both play uninjured - no one knows, which is why I choose not to seperate them this year.

Am I being unreasonable? I don't think so. Aussie Guns, who is one of the most respected posters when it comes to this stuff, has put Murphy ahead of Pendles in his Top 10 player predictions for 2011. I won't go that far ... but I am prepared to wait before committing to which player I'd have rathered from this draft.

The emotional responses come from those who keep wanting to post >>> comments, without addressing the actual logic behind the decision.

On AFL 360 last night they were of the opinion Pendlebury is one of the top 5 players in the league. Fact is Murphy has not raised his game to the level Pendlebury has.

 

[TownleyTime]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

Drafting Swallow at 5 means that Collingwood don't have to worry about drafting Ball further down the track.

The trouble with drafting a pure inside player is the shelf life is limited.

 

[Monkey King]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

On AFL 360 last night they were of the opinion Pendlebury is one of the top 5 players in the league. Fact is Murphy has not raised his game to the level Pendlebury has.

Yes. That is a fact. It is not a fact that he won't or can't and certainly IMO last year was the first time Pendles got his nose in front.

Re-done draft threads include potential in assessments all the time, yet when I do that here people seem to get terribly upset; despite some pretty detailed posts laying out my reasoning; coupled with stacks of objective support.

Seems no one really wants to tackle that though. Just keep up with the "but Pendles played better than Murphy last year" comments. What is it you blokes don't get? You keep repeating shit I've already agreed with

 

[TownleyTime]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

Yes. That is a fact. It is not a fact that he won't or can't and certainly IMO last year was the first time Pendles got his nose in front.

Pendlebury was regarded with Selwood as the premier youngster in 07' (which was validated by his 2nd position in the RS). He was ahead of Murphy at this time.

 

[HFF]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

Collingwood would still take Thomas @ pick 2.

The only that would change is Pendlebury would go pick 1.

 

[Monkey King]

Re: 2005 Afl draft Re-Done

Pendlebury was regarded with Selwood as the premier youngster in 07' (which was validated by his 2nd position in the RS). He was ahead of Murphy at this time.

Hahaha! You goose! Murphy wasn't even eligible for the 07' award. Of course Pendlebury would be ahead in the voting. Seriously lol'd