2012 Draft Discussion

[BuntonRules]

I think you guys have misread Bunton there.

It looked to me that he was saying historically, Longer aside, we probably would have been better off overall going with mids over talls with our early picks in recent drafts.

Exactly. Name me 1 other club that has basically gone tall with first pick. Apart from Rich & Polec we have 10 years of it. IMO this has unbalanced our list. What we need is 1 top 5 quality, not 2 x 20's good players.

Dunno how you read that, everyone knows I am a big fan of Billy. Got money on him for the rising star.

It does seem like we have plenty of midfield types but what we need an elite midfielder.

Persactly.

 

[BigCat2]

Exactly. Name me 1 other club that has basically gone tall with first pick. Apart from Rich & Polec we have 10 years of it. IMO this has unbalanced our list. What we need is 1 top 5 quality, not 2 x 20's good players.

Don't know it's necessarily the drafting of talls with our first round picks, rather our inability to hold onto them / turn them into good footballers.

Of 1st round picks between 2001-2007, only Leuenberger is still there. Gone are:
2001: J Gram
2002: J Brennan
2003: L Spaanderman
2004: C Wood
2005: M Clark
2007: L Henderson

I don't know any club who loses 6 out of 7 1st round draft selections can have a list that has quality and depth.

As for why we continued to draft tall - well it's because our earlier tall selections were no good. Had Spaanderman been good for example, it's doubtful we would've picked up clark.

Quality talls are harder to get later on in the draft, so you can't understand why people spend early picks on them. Look at our current list, and its major hole with KPPs. Well if we had M Clark (non-sulking version) at CHF and L Henderson at CHB I imagine you'd feel better about our list.

But yes, for many years we went with 'best available' without looking at where our list was, and what was needed.

At least now I know, from reading Rob Kerr's draft analysis, there is a rigorous process in place to decide which players to draft. And even prior to recruiting Longer, they at least had thought long & hard as to how he would work with Leuenberger. This gives me more confidence.

 

[BigCat2]

Just had another look. Between 2001 and 2007 our 2nd draft picks:

Wright, Selwood, Moody, Garner, Mills, Proud, Collier.

All gone too.

Wow, only 1 of 14 top draft picks still remaining. That's got to be some sort of record. No wonder we're struggling.

 

[patfullfankezz]

Please... a first year midfielder is not the difference between success and failure this year. You don't draft for instant results.

I remember the last time we tried that...I can't believe people would be suggesting going down that path again!

 

[weevil]

Just had another look. Between 2001 and 2007 our 2nd draft picks:

Wright, Selwood, Moody, Garner, Mills, Proud, Collier.

All gone too.

Wow, only 1 of 14 top draft picks still remaining. That's got to be some sort of record. No wonder we're struggling.

Yep it's a monumental disaster, everyone is obsessed with 09 but it pales in comparison.

 

[chopperduck]

Our drafting is something i've brought up time and time again, and until people actually have a look at it, you really don't realise how far out our list is. The players in this 02-07 period should be our core group of senior players carrying the club forward, with the young players 08-now adding what they can. It's worse when decent players we nabbed in this period like Riska have also left, we just dont have anything in this age or experience group. The fact that we have so many players playing in our best 22 from drafts 08-onwards speaks volumes of our previous drafting and list management.

As Weevil mentioned, the 09 draft period didn't put us back 10 years, our list managment over this time did. Really wish someone would do a bit of a story on this to help change peoples expectations.

Best available in the draft for me. If there is a great KPF there about pick 6 or what ever we end up with, go it, otherwise best pacy mid.

 

[Toffee Lion]

Our drafting is something i've brought up time and time again, and until people actually have a look at it, you really don't realise how far out our list is. The players in this 02-07 period should be our core group of senior players carrying the club forward, with the young players 08-now adding what they can. It's worse when decent players we nabbed in this period like Riska have also left, we just dont have anything in this age or experience group. The fact that we have so many players playing in our best 22 from drafts 08-onwards speaks volumes of our previous drafting and list management.

As Weevil mentioned, the 09 draft period didn't put us back 10 years, our list managment over this time did. Really wish someone would do a bit of a story on this to help change peoples expectations.

Best available in the draft for me. If there is a great KPF there about pick 6 or what ever we end up with, go it, otherwise best pacy mid.

Raines was drafted in 2003.

Maguire was drafted in 2001.

Staker was drafted in 2002.

The lesson here is that we're missing a lot of players from 01-07 draft yet we traded for some serviceable players to help our younger kids.

The 09 trade disaster was only that because of Fev, otherwise it was a win going forward - We need these bigger bodies to help our young kids and when their time is up (Goose, Stakes, Raines, Black, Brown) they will move on, which will be in the next couple of years when our boys are ready to take the mantle.

 

[POBT]

Quality talls are harder to get later on in the draft, so you can't understand why people spend early picks on them. Look at our current list, and its major hole with KPPs. Well if we had M Clark (non-sulking version) at CHF and L Henderson at CHB I imagine you'd feel better about our list.

Exactly. Trading these two guys set our list development back substantially. But that doesn't make the drafting strategy wrong. Hindsight suggests that Hendo should never have been traded and we clearly wanted to keep Clark but had no choice but to grant him a trade. Put those two back in our side and we are structurally fine. Without them we look deficient with an ageing defence and an attack bereft of quality (outside Brown).

 

[Haggis McHaggis]

Lol Poor ol' Wayde. Magnificent work ethic & commitment. If only the talent had been there. We need KP, but I really would like a Dangerfield or Lewis Jetta type. We have a severe lack of express pace. One is more inclined towards the 1st receiver/goal kicker role, the other a burst out mid that can win the clearance & run it away.

 

[Swanny10]

Shane Kersten kicked 6 in the VFL on the weekend. Not sure which pick he was taken but it was over 30. Could be a good value KPF pick late in the draft, I know TBD was pretty keen on him.

Would be very nice to still have Henderson but forget Clark we wanted to keep him but couldn't convince him to stay.

 

[Leuy LongerCombo]

Exactly. Name me 1 other club that has basically gone tall with first pick. Apart from Rich & Polec we have 10 years of it. IMO this has unbalanced our list. What we need is 1 top 5 quality, not 2 x 20's good players.

Persactly.

Adelaide

2003 Pick #14 Watts
2004 Pick #8 Meeson
2005 Pick #14 Douglas Pick #15 Pfeiffer
2006 Pick #14 Sellar
2007 Pick #10 Dangerfield
2008 Pick #10 Phil Davis
2009 Pick #13 Daniel Talia

2004 Pick #24 Nanthan Van Berlo
2005 Pick #32 Bernie Vince
2006 Pick #32 Kurt Tippett
2007 Pick #27 Otten
2008 Pick #28 McKernan
2009 Pick #29 Jack Gunston

Been pretty dedicate to draft tall in general, even their 2nd round picks have been for talls

 

[POBT]

Shane Kersten kicked 6 in the VFL on the weekend. Not sure which pick he was taken but it was over 30. Could be a good value KPF pick late in the draft, I know TBD was pretty keen on him.

Would be very nice to still have Henderson but forget Clark we wanted to keep him but couldn't convince him to stay.

Kersten is on the Geelong list - fairly sure he won't be up for trade.

 

[POBT]

Lol Poor ol' Wayde. Magnificent work ethic & commitment. If only the talent had been there. We need KP, but I really would like a Dangerfield or Lewis Jetta type. We have a severe lack of express pace. One is more inclined towards the 1st receiver/goal kicker role, the other a burst out mid that can win the clearance & run it away.

Agree on Jetta but not sure if a Dangerfield type really fills the need. I see that Rocky is similar to Dangerfield - not quite as robust but is the same "type".

 

[Bucking Beads]

Problem for us is that almost all the talls we have drafted with our first pick are no longer at the club or have failed completely.

 

[3KZ is Football]

Backline, Backline, Backline!

We need to bolster our list in terms of players with key position defensive potential and rebound / running defenders.

 

[darooda]

In draft order (draft pick/games), BOLD = Gone, UNDERLINE = to another club (from memory)


National Draft picks: (from footywire)

2001 - J Gram (19/2), Wright (35/0), N Clarke (45/0)
2002 - J Brennan (3/119), Selwood (19/75), Merrett (30/119), Corrie (44/53)
2003 - L Spaanderman (18/3), Moody (23/34), Adcock (33/126), Logan (49/3), Rischitelli (61/111)
2004 - C Wood (18/16), Garner (27/0), Sherman (45/114), Attard (50/5), Forsyth (64/0)
2005 - M Clark (9/82), Mills (25/16), Hooper (41/48), Patfull (56/123),
2006 - M Leuenberger (4/69), Proud (22/29), Schmidt (34/2), Hawksley (38/28), Tyler (54/0), Sheldon (70/43)
2007 - L Henderson (8/15), Collier (25/27), Polkinghorne (41/65), Dalziell (52/15), Austin (56/15)

Rookie selections
2001 - no one of note (total of 5 games between them)
2002 - Joel McDonald (70/80)
2003 - no one of note (4 games between them)
2004 - Josh Drummond (60/82), Scott Harding (66/48)
2005 - Roe (6/50), Stiller (49/99)
2006 - no one of note (picked corrie up on rookie)
2007 - Hanley (38/40)

Between 2001 - 2007 the players picked should have been the players that would have had 100-200 games experience today thus forming the nucleus of our rebuilt team. In real terms we have had 32 picks in the national draft over this time yet we only have 7 still playing with us with only (arguably) 4 of them in our starting 22.

The rest of the players have been made up by people we have traded in.


Understand that the nature of drafting would dictate a small percentage actually make it but having a little over 12% of our draft picks over this period being represented in our starting 22 is an interesting stat?

 

[Haggis McHaggis]

Agree on Jetta but not sure if a Dangerfield type really fills the need. I see that Rocky is similar to Dangerfield - not quite as robust but is the same "type".

The difference is mostly pace. Rocky has a lower centre of gravity & creates space more through awareness & smarts. Dangerfield tends to run through or around congestion, and uses longer kicks. They are similar types, but they'd certainly compliment each other. Another goal kicking mid certainly wouldn't go astray.

 

[Toffee Lion]

In draft order (draft pick/games), BOLD = Gone, UNDERLINE = to another club (from memory)


National Draft picks: (from footywire)

2001 - J Gram (19/2), Wright (35/0), N Clarke (45/0)
2002 - J Brennan (3/119), Selwood (19/75), Merrett (30/119), Corrie (44/53)
2003 - L Spaanderman (18/3), Moody (23/34), Adcock (33/126), Logan (49/3), Rischitelli (61/111)
2004 - C Wood (18/16), Garner (27/0), Sherman (45/114), Attard (50/5), Forsyth (64/0)
2005 - M Clark (9/82), Mills (25/16), Hooper (41/48), Patfull (56/123),
2006 - M Leuenberger (4/69), Proud (22/29), Schmidt (34/2), Hawksley (38/28), Tyler (54/0), Sheldon (70/43)
2007 - L Henderson (8/15), Collier (25/27), Polkinghorne (41/65), Dalziell (52/15), Austin (56/15)

Rookie selections
2001 - no one of note (total of 5 games between them)
2002 - Joel McDonald (70/80)
2003 - no one of note (4 games between them)
2004 - Josh Drummond (60/82), Scott Harding (66/48)
2005 - Roe (6/50), Stiller (49/99)
2006 - no one of note (picked corrie up on rookie)
2007 - Hanley (38/40)

Between 2001 - 2007 the players picked should have been the players that would have had 100-200 games experience today thus forming the nucleus of our rebuilt team. In real terms we have had 32 picks in the national draft over this time yet we only have 7 still playing with us with only (arguably) 4 of them in our starting 22.

The rest of the players have been made up by people we have traded in.


Understand that the nature of drafting would dictate a small percentage actually make it but having a little over 12% of our draft picks over this period being represented in our starting 22 is an interesting stat?

So depressing to look at.

Shows how good our drafting has been in the past couple of years though in comparison.

 

[darooda]

So depressing to look at.

Shows how good our drafting has been in the past couple of years though in comparison.

Interesting to note that those wonderful years were under the watchful eye of Gubby Allen and since Hadley has come into the mix in 2008 we have seen some real wins.

 

[Leuy LongerCombo]

I am not sure why this forum believes we should pick up a KPF. Brisbane's current major problem is the midfield and there are several issues. The major issue in the midfield is work rate. If I compare Brisbane against all sides, this is where the difference is. Work rate will fix disposal and composure. The reason why Brisbane always look rushed is because they have not been coached what it takes in 2012 in relation to work rate.

This work rate is reflective with our forward players. As the midfield is always rushed, this leads into our side not hitting targets in forward line. We have several KPF on our list. Brisbane will not know how good they will be while the delivery is so poor.

The only way to fix this is to get more pace in the midfield, this will leads to greater work rate, fixing disposal and composure when delivering the ball inside 50.

Drafting KPF to take Browns spot while the midfield has bad work rate will achieve absolutely nothing in my eyes.

Vossy- Read this.... Work Rate is your answer.

Yes the midfield is one of our problems, but we already have some reasonable prospects on our list that could address these problems in the coming seasons.

Adcock, Rich, Redden, Rockliff and Polec you could also throw in Zorko, Bartlett, Harwood, Green, Yeo as depth and we have a midfield with potential.
Future drafts(2013/14) we could get that real A grade midfielder like a Dangerfield (big fan as his great around clearances and has pace)
Also there can be some real gem midfielders found around our 2nd pick Fyfe, Zaharakis, Beams, Robinson we even got Redden with a mid 20 Pick.

Our Backline will be serviceable for a few years, we could slowly draft a few prospect to replace Merrett / Staker / Patful / Mcgrath.

Our forward line is where most of our problems are, Ace has only just been able to break in to the side and Retzlaff and Lisle still yet to make an appearance for the year is a little worrying. As we have seen with Longer the big blokes takes a few years, this is why we need one now to atleast try and develop our own before we “poaching” someone elses

One avenue we could go down is to draft another 24/25 year old midfielder, we’re yet to see what Zorko will bring but these type of players are normally seasoned. If we were able to get a Barlow, Magner, Curnow or even Horsley type it would be a great benefit to our midfield group. Best thing is we generally don't need to use our premium picks we could use a Rookie selection (instead of going for a project player)

 

[Caiphus]

So depressing to look at.

Shows how good our drafting has been in the past couple of years though in comparison.

Have to wonder though has our recent drafting really been "good", or just "good-in-comparison-to-our-previous-record"? With us missing the core of a team and so many young players getting a go before they are really ready we haven't had the depth to send these guys back to the magoos to work on their deficiencies in a lower pressure environment.

We've been building some grunt, but we are still missing x-factor and I am worried that we don't have the role models/expertise to develop them properly and cushion them from overly harsh criticism when we do draft them. I have a feeling we are heading into North type irrelevance where our list is full of honest tryers and solid B graders while being remarkably short on genuine class and game breakers.

I feel like we might peak at just outside the top 4 from this rebuild and it won't be until the next cycle that we can start pushing at the very top again.

 

[Toffee Lion]

Have to wonder though has our recent drafting really been "good", or just "good-in-comparison-to-our-previous-record"?

I said in comparison to our previous drafting of 01-07.

 

[crispy creme]

IMO we need a bit of everything, with a definate emphasis on versatile KPP's and O/S mids with class and pace. With a pick in the region of 4-7, we may be paying too much for a KPP, as from my reading there isn't a great deal in that range - SHAW being the possible exception. Some of the better mids in this years' draft(especially VIC based) appear to be inside mids that lack pace -which goes against what I think we will be after. Some seriously good talent is available in this years draft, so whoever we get with our first pick should be an asset whichever way we go. Personally I say we still go with best available talent - which may mean an inside mid, as I'm not as sold on the notion that we have enough good players of that type.

I note with interest that people have mentioned Jake Stringer as a possible first round pick for us. Agreed he is a serious talent but from what I've seen this year, he looks a long way off a full recovery from his horrendous leg break from last year - hopefully for the lad he makes a full recovery and we can all see what a great talent he is.

 

[Offsider]

Jake Stringer should definitely be one of Brisbane's targets IMO. He can play as a tall forward with a super mark, as a very good midfielder with excellent ground skills. Similar to Pavlich in a lot of ways. His two games back he is playing under duress in a not so good team and still kicked 10 goals and 4 goals 6 behinds which showcase his ability.

 

[dlanod]

Have to wonder though has our recent drafting really been "good", or just "good-in-comparison-to-our-previous-record"? With us missing the core of a team and so many young players getting a go before they are really ready we haven't had the depth to send these guys back to the magoos to work on their deficiencies in a lower pressure environment.

If you have a look at our 2008 draft, that was good in a purely unbiased way. We pretty much nailed our picks that year. 2009 our picks were somewhat affected by trading, and 2010 and later it's probably too early to tell.