Draft Review 2007 - Redo the 2007 Draft

[srv23]

Re: re do the 2007 draft now that we know what we know

Because West Coast don't already have enough key defenders to warrant us drafting 3?

Otten played as a third tall defender in 2009 but he was drafted as a genuine tall midfielder and was training with the mids in preparation to move into the midfield rotations this year prior to him doing his knee. Davis had been earmarked to take his spot in defence when he moved into the midfield.

 

[Slattery_20]

Re: re do the 2007 draft now that we know what we know

Because West Coast don't already have enough key defenders to warrant us drafting 3?

Keeping in mind that's for 2007.
So you also had Glass & Hunter.

 

[Barry_Badrinath]

Re: re do the 2007 draft now that we know what we know

A number of players from this years draft have stepped up this year. My latest take at it:

1. Cotchin
2. Dangerfield
3. Ward
4. Taylor
5. S.Selwood
(Taylor Walker - Not sure anyone else had access to him though)
6. Rioli
7. Rance
8. Kreuzer
9. McEvoy
10. Ebert

 

[cmndstab]

Re: re do the 2007 draft now that we know what we know

Correct weight on Walker, he was locked away under the NSW Scholarship program.

 

[Ambrosia]

From an essendon perspective I would probably have Hooker in the top 10 with Pears and Belchambers in the top 15.

 

[Ambrosia]

Hooker will continue to be under rated. Has yet to have more than three goals kicked on him this year.

 

[DapperDon]

Re: re do the 2007 draft now that we know what we know

You didn't need to say 'from an Essendon perspective', the content of your post made it obvious. No way is Cale Hooker ahead of any of them.

Do you not rate him because he was drafted in the 50's or have you not actually seen him play this season?

There are a few reasons we are 8-1, and Cale's form down back is quite significant to the teams form. Underrate him at your will, but I advise watching him beforehand.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

Re: re do the 2007 draft now that we know what we know

Grimes will feature if he can get some luck with injuries!

 

[DapperDon]

Re: re do the 2007 draft now that we know what we know

Didn't know when he was drafted. Admittedly I haven't seen him play much this season, but to be anywhere near worthy of a top 10 pick he'd have to have improved a hell of a lot from what I've seen of him in previous seasons.

I'd have himself and Rance performing about equal at the moment, both for me sitting outside the top 10 but if continue to improve could sneak in. Can't see them getting top 5 at all though.

 

[DapperDon]

Re: re do the 2007 draft now that we know what we know

Grimes will feature if he can get some luck with injuries!

I agree, I rate Grimes pretty high. As you said, just needs a good run and he'll feature heavily.

 

[yaco55]

Re: re do the 2007 draft now that we know what we know

I'd have himself and Rance performing about equal at the moment, both for me sitting outside the top 10 but if continue to improve could sneak in. Can't see them getting top 5 at all though.

Would have Hooker and Rance on a similar rating - maybe Hooker a touch ahead - and Pears is a bit behind both.

 

[Monkey King]

Sorry Baz, with what I know now, I'd take Kreuzer ahead of Rance every day of the week.

 

[Tazwegian]

Cotchin is way ahead of Rioli at this stage.

 

[Slattery_20]

Re: re do the 2007 draft now that we know what we know

You didn't need to say 'from an Essendon perspective', the content of your post made it obvious. No way is Cale Hooker ahead of any of them.

His opponents seem to have these very odd short patches of bad form when they get him, then return to form a week later. It's odd and I can't quite work it out.

Easily been our best, most consistent tall defender, in one of the league's leading defences. He's been very, very good this year.

Conversely, Pears has done nothing.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

Re: re do the 2007 draft now that we know what we know

I think Hooker is a good defender, but you'd take guys who are a more complete package in terms of offensive play before him.

Not unlike a Jared Rivers type.

 

[Colin D'Cops]

Rivers usually takes the 2nd/3rd best tall forward doesn't he? Maybe a small on occasions also?

Hooker takes the oppositions best tall forward every week and is doing a bloody good job. Just ask Jack Riewoldt.

 

[mufassa]

Re: re do the 2007 draft now that we know what we know

Do you not rate him because he was drafted in the 50's or have you not actually seen him play this season?

There are a few reasons we are 8-1, and Cale's form down back is quite significant to the teams form. Underrate him at your will, but I advise watching him beforehand.

Nothing to do with his draft position - maybe it has to do with your own team wanting to get rid of him and a draft pick for a unproven kid. He is an average footballer that tries really really hard.

 

[Danger in Texas]

My take:

1: Harry Taylor.

BEFORE you criticise me, I think that Carlton would seriously be lacking defensive depth now if Jamison hadn't lived up to his expectations. Taylor would give the Blues' backline a boost.

2: One of Dangerfield or Cotchin. The other one would be picked up by Melbourne at 4. Both Melbourne boys, both need mids.

3: Rhys Palmer. I don't think that Mark Harvey developed Palmer as well as he could have. Worsfold is a genuine coach, and Palmer could succeed under him more than any other coach. Plus, he gets to stay in WA.

4: The remaining one out of Cotchin and Dangerfield.

5: Scott Selwood. The perfect heir for Lake and Gilbee.

6: Taylor Walker or, if he would still be a NSW Scholar with us, Jarrad Grant. Both would need a few years to develop and could be a replacement for Lloyd and Lucas.

7: Cale Morton. At his best, he can be a ball-winning machine. Gets to stay in WA, be the focal point of Freo's midfield, and becomes a star. That is, if they don't draft Hill and Fyfe.

8: Cyril Rioli. At the moment, Brisbane are lacking competitive small forwards other than Banfield, who still hasn't lived up to his potential. Cyril could top off a potent Brissy forward line, along with Brown and Fev.

9: Matthew Kreuzer. Best ruck available at this point, and (other than King) the Saints have had no good ruck options in the past 5 years.

10: Can't decide between Callan Ward, who would be a VERY good replacement for Dangerfield, and Jack Grimes. Both would be potential leaders for the club.

Just my two cents.

 

[Slattery_20]

Dogs would go Walker, with hindsight (assuming he's in the pool). Just about the only good big forward there.

 

[Slattery_20]

Re: re do the 2007 draft now that we know what we know

I think Hooker is a good defender, but you'd take guys who are a more complete package in terms of offensive play before him.

Not unlike a Jared Rivers type.

He's a proper full back. Not much flashy. Doesn't go for the mark often (from what I've seen Rivers is more likely to drift across and go for marks himself).
Just big, committed, contested and makes them earn every kick.

Has not been beaten yet, so I don't particularly care whether people rate him as "elite" or not.

 

[mufassa]

My take:

1: Harry Taylor.

BEFORE you criticise me, I think that Carlton would seriously be lacking defensive depth now if Jamison hadn't lived up to his expectations. Taylor would give the Blues' backline a boost.

2: One of Dangerfield or Cotchin. The other one would be picked up by Melbourne at 4. Both Melbourne boys, both need mids.

3: Rhys Palmer. I don't think that Mark Harvey developed Palmer as well as he could have. Worsfold is a genuine coach, and Palmer could succeed under him more than any other coach. Plus, he gets to stay in WA.

4: The remaining one out of Cotchin and Dangerfield.

5: Scott Selwood. The perfect heir for Lake and Gilbee.

6: Taylor Walker or, if he would still be a NSW Scholar with us, Jarrad Grant. Both would need a few years to develop and could be a replacement for Lloyd and Lucas.

7: Cale Morton. At his best, he can be a ball-winning machine. Gets to stay in WA, be the focal point of Freo's midfield, and becomes a star. That is, if they don't draft Hill and Fyfe.

8: Cyril Rioli. At the moment, Brisbane are lacking competitive small forwards other than Banfield, who still hasn't lived up to his potential. Cyril could top off a potent Brissy forward line, along with Brown and Fev.

9: Matthew Kreuzer. Best ruck available at this point, and (other than King) the Saints have had no good ruck options in the past 5 years.

10: Can't decide between Callan Ward, who would be a VERY good replacement for Dangerfield, and Jack Grimes. Both would be potential leaders for the club.

Just my two cents.

Wow - Morton in front of Kreuzer and Rioli!! Palmer in front of one of Dangerfield and Cotchin. Morton will be luck to be on an AFL list by seasons end and Palmer is terrible.

 

[Danger in Texas]

Wow - Morton in front of Kreuzer and Rioli!! Palmer in front of one of Dangerfield and Cotchin. Morton will be luck to be on an AFL list by seasons end and Palmer is terrible.

The list explains where players should have gone in 2007 based on needs, not totally on the players' abilities. I mean, if Cotchin went to the Blues, their midfield would be overloaded and the rest of the team would be terrible.

 

[mufassa]

The list explains where players should have gone in 2007 based on needs, not totally on the players' abilities. I mean, if Cotchin went to the Blues, their midfield would be overloaded and the rest of the team would be terrible.

Sorry - at the time draft.

Henderson and Jamison if both fit fill the 2 key back positions. I still think Kruze goes one. Take the best player.

 

[Danger in Texas]

Okay, I'll do one based on ability, but technically this is top 10 players from 2007 draft, not 2007 draft re-do.

1: Cotchin
2: Dangerfield
3: Walker
4: Selwood
5: Rioli
6: Ward
7: Kreuzer
8: Taylor
9: Ebert
10: McEvoy

 

[jaitachi]

I think Kreuzer wouldnt go number one to Cartlon as they have 3 (including kreuzer) ruckmen right now.. If im not wrong 3 played on the weekend? Kreuzer Hampson Jacobs .. overkill.. pass one to Hawks please?