2012 Draft Discussion

[BigCat2]

I see Knightmare has given us these players in his latest mock draft:
#8 Sam Mayes
#24 Mason Shaw
#33 Tanner Smith
#53 Jordon Bourke

Would be perfect for our needs! *Starts to dream*

 

[dlanod]

If I had a say i would base the compo on what the club orginally intend to pay as the contract, i.e Goddard's offer from the saints is say $500K instead of $800K, why should the saints recieve a higher pick when they only valued him at $500K.

That's what the original proposal for GC/GWS uncontracted players were to receive, but it was deemed unfair precisely because other clubs with more spare salary cap can come in and offer more than the original club can, period. St Kilda might value Goddard at $800k but simply don't have the cap to pay him that.

 

[Bucking Beads]

I think Stringer is the way to go if he is there at 8. I reckon the Bulldogs might take him though.

 

[chopperduck]

I would prefer a more inside type mid, but wouldn't be shattered if we had to 'settle' for Mayes.

 

[Banana Boots]

I would prefer a more inside type mid, but wouldn't be shattered if we had to 'settle' for Mayes.

I'm still hoping for Plowman and O'brien.

 

[Dan12]

If I had a say i would base the compo on what the club orginally intend to pay as the contract, i.e Goddard's offer from the saints is say $500K instead of $800K, why should the saints recieve a higher pick when they only valued him at $500K.

Only 500? Rockliff, Rich, Leuenberger, Redden, Hanley are all probably on less than 500k. If we lost them (god forbid) in FA I hope the AFL would be kind enough to give us a first rounder (or perhaps pick 1 if it was Rich). 500k+ is given to very high quality players.
I don't see why people are aghast at the formula. It values players predominantly on what they are paid by their clubs. Young and Murphy weren't getting paid much at Hawthorn and Moloney wasn't at Melbourne. So the compensation is valued at where their club 'values' them financially. That's also why Port got such good picks. The alternative is that they award picks at how much they think they are worth. This is subject to a lot of bias and everyone would award it differently. IMO well done by the AFL

 

[Grimreepah]

Rights lads, collingwood have come out on AFL.com that they are interested in packaging 18,19 and 21 for a higher pick.

Gee, that'd be tempting, although perhaps it suggests a drop off in quality at those picks.

 

[chopperduck]

Could be more so that they don't want or need to use so many picks, so would be happy to package them up for 1 higher pick. Would be tempting, but I think we need to keep a top 10 pick.

 

[Grimreepah]

What's better:

a) #8, #24, #33, #53, #73

or

b) #18, #19, #21, #24, #33?

 

[Hollow Knight]

Depends on whether you nail pick 8 or not.

I think rebuilding during compromised drafts has resulted in us having limited opportunity to pick up a few genuinely elite prospects.

The three Collingwood picks wold be nice for building depth and its harder to blow three picks entirely than one.

That said, I want the better chance of an A grader. There are some really exciting options available to us there. Keep pick 8.

Trading pick 8 for 12 and 14 on the other hand... That appeals to me.

 

[Bucking Beads]

I would think maybe the Bulldogs would be keener on making a deal for those picks from Collingwood??

 

[cotter101]

What's better:

a) #8, #24, #33, #53, #73

or

b) #18, #19, #21, #24, #33?

I may be on my own, but I would pick option b.

With option B, we could still probably get guys like Hrovat, Vlastuin, Shaw, Colquhoun, Membrey, Broomhead, Smith, White, Towers. The list goes on.

 

[jjami15]

Can't believe I'm going to say it but.......lock in B Kerr.

 

[The Flying Belgian]

I think Collingwood would be looking a bit higher than our 8...

 

[borrat]

if it was nearly any other club i would LOVE to swap 8 for 18,19 and 21

but the thought of them getting an absolute gun with pick 8 makes me very very sick

 

[theteamtobeat]

I hate Collingwood. They now have Swan, Thomas, Pendlebury, Ball, Beams, Young and Sidebottom as their midfield unit and now they can added to that with picks 18, 19, 21, 24, and 33.

 

[Dan12]

I hate Collingwood. They now have Swan, Thomas, Pendlebury, Ball, Beams, Young and Sidebottom as their midfield unit and now they can added to that with picks 18, 19, 21, 24, and 33.

We have 24 and 33 8 and 24 for 18, 19, 21 and 42 could work.

 

[whatboutbob]

Good write-up on Stringer here.

 

[theteamtobeat]

After reading this article there is a good chance that Stringer will be avaliable at pick 24. Stringer is a talented player, but every time he gets a knock on the leg, he limps. He is a high risk high reward type player, but I'm concerned when he starts playing senior football, that players will start targeting that leg. I would loved it if we picked him up at pick 24.

 

[POBT]

Gotta say that I don't agree with those saying we "must" take a midfielder on the basis that we're short in that area. For the past several years, we've pretty much only taken mids or utilities with our first few picks in each draft. Longer is the only one who is not a midfielder or capable of playing there. Rich, Redden, Bartlett, Polec, Karnezis, Lester, Green, Docherty, Yeo are all midfielders or midfield capable.

You can never have too many elite mids so I certainly won't be upset if we end up drafting another one. But I don't believe it is a non-negotiable as a few seem to be intimating.

 

[Quigley]

Given the way we draft I think Stringer would be my favourite to go to us at pick 8.

Vossy has been trying to manufacture a big bodied mid for a while. With Stringer we don't need to make someone into something he is not. Whilst he develops he can play as a third tall forward and be effective doing it and provide some of the goals we need. He showed good improvement toward the end of the year and over the last few years that has been something we have valued very highly. There is very good reason why he has been slowed this year and with a proper preseason there is every chance to think he can play up to his very high ceiling.

He is not my choice for pick 8 but I am thinking the stars are aligning for it to happen. Voss wants a Kennedy / Watson type mid and Stringer is the closest to that we have seen in a couple of years (I thought Darling might have been another but he went the forward route).

 

[POBT]

He is not my choice for pick 8 but I am thinking the stars are aligning for it to happen. Voss wants a Kennedy / Watson type mid and Stringer is the closest to that we have seen in a couple of years (I thought Darling might have been another but he went the forward route).

Tom Collier would have been perfect for this. If only he could actually play footy......

 

[Quigley]

Reading the prospectus the other day. Mason Shaw picked up 76 goals in the Colts last year as a bottom aged player and yet looked like crap this year. Bloody hell he is hard to get a read on.

 

[cotter101]

Reading the prospectus the other day. Mason Shaw picked up 76 goals in the Colts last year as a bottom aged player and yet looked like crap this year. Bloody hell he is hard to get a read on.

He sure is, could very well go anywhere from 8-25 IMO.

 

[irel]

Reading the prospectus the other day. Mason Shaw picked up 76 goals in the Colts last year as a bottom aged player and yet looked like crap this year. Bloody hell he is hard to get a read on.

Pick 8 Quigs. There is no ifs or buts.