2012 Draft Discussion

[Offsider]

Height is the only issue with Plowman, if he was another 4cm taller then no one would have an issue with him. It would be a concern with him lining up on some of the Key forwards of the comp who are 195cm +, but there are still some KPF who are under that height and he could line up on those, or he could play as a third tall with his versatility.

 

[Ruse]

Pick

Height is the only issue with Plowman, if he was another 4cm taller then no one would have an issue with him. It would be a concern with him lining up on some of the Key forwards of the comp who are 195cm +, but there are still some KPF who are under that height and he could line up on those, or he could play as a third tall with his versatility.

Pick 8 is kinda excessive for a third tall type. He'll be lining up on the new modern day monsters like Clark, Lynch and Daniher who are 200+cm tall would be hard to compete when you're giving up 10 cm.

 

[Offsider]

Pick

Pick 8 is kinda excessive for a third tall type. He'll be lining up on the new modern day monsters like Clark, Lynch and Daniher who are 200+cm tall would be hard to compete when you're giving up 10 cm.

I don't think Pick 8 is excessive for a potentially elite player regardless of what position he plays. Plowman would have the option of playing as either a CHB, not on the tall opposition forward but maybe on the smaller key forwards. He is also capable of playing as a third tall similar to Sam Fisher and Josh Gibson, he would provide us with an elite rebounding defender as well, I would rate him one of the best rebounding defenders, small and tall, in the draft.

 

[crispy creme]

Plowman is basically the same size as Matthew Scarlett and Ben Rutten, both of whom have done good jobs on Browny over the years. At the same stage of his career I would have him well ahead of both of those mentioned. On a best player available basis, I would pick him over most others mentioned around pick 8 without hesitation.

 

[POBT]

There are an awful lot of quality key defenders who aren't much more than 191cm. Scarlett, Richards, Patfull, McPharlin, Thompson, Glass, Jamison, Frawley, Gibson, Rutten, are all 193cm or below. Obviously, you'd prefer it if he was taller but I'd be more interested in how he competes against taller opponents, what his reach is, how strong he is, how he is athletically, how well he reads the play etc. If he plays like a true key defender, then I don't think a centimetre or two makes a massive difference.

I also think it is about a combination. I don't think you need 2 gorilla defenders.

I do accept that forwards seem to be super-sized more and more these days. But I'd counter that, for as long as I've watched footy, defenders have regularly been shorter, slower or less skilled than their opponents and sometimes all three...I think that's why they become defenders!!!

 

[POBT]

I hadn't thought through this possibility but free agency will still affect draft position. eg if Goddard leaves St Kilda, they'll likely get a 1st round pick immediately following their current pick 12. That obviously bumps everyone else down a pick.

 

[whatboutbob]

I've assumed FA compensation picks are tradeable, but can anyone confirm?

 

[POBT]

Are FA compensation picks tradeable?

dlanod normally knows this stuff.

 

[Offsider]

There are an awful lot of quality key defenders who aren't much more than 191cm. Scarlett, Richards, Patfull, McPharlin, Thompson, Glass, Jamison, Frawley, Gibson, Rutten, are all 193cm or below. Obviously, you'd prefer it if he was taller but I'd be more interested in how he competes against taller opponents, what his reach is, how strong he is, how he is athletically, how well he reads the play etc. If he plays like a true key defender, then I don't think a centimetre or two makes a massive difference.

I also think it is about a combination. I don't think you need 2 gorilla defenders.

I do accept that forwards seem to be super-sized more and more these days. But I'd counter that, for as long as I've watched footy, defenders have regularly been shorter, slower or less skilled than their opponents and sometimes all three...I think that's why they become defenders!!!

Agreed I think that Plowman could be an excellent part of a defence and really standout. He has a really well rounded game with no obvious weaknesses, he is strong overhead and looks to be developing a strong body. Athletically I think he is well above average, his pace and agility are great, he looks to have a decent vertical leap, and he reads the play very well as he can zone off his man and be the third man up at the contest quite a bit.

 

[dlanod]

dlanod normally knows this stuff.

The rumour (I haven't seen this confirmed by the AFL) is that the compo picks from free agency are for that year only, same as the NFL who's free agency system we stole. They can't be banked. If that's the case, they'd just be run of the mill picks tradeable between the 19th and 23rd of October because they'd be assigned on the 19th, once free agency closes for the year. This is speculation at this point though.

 

[Hollow Knight]

People seem to be of the impression that the free agency compensation picks are going to be less generous than the ones given out for GC and GWS uncontracted signings.

 

[Quigley]

The AFL have said that is going to be the case.

 

[whatboutbob]

The rumour (I haven't seen this confirmed by the AFL) is that the compo picks from free agency are for that year only, same as the NFL who's free agency system we stole. They can't be banked. If that's the case, they'd just be run of the mill picks tradeable between the 19th and 23rd of October because they'd be assigned on the 19th, once free agency closes for the year. This is speculation at this point though.

People seem to be of the impression that the free agency compensation picks are going to be less generous than the ones given out for GC and GWS uncontracted signings.

Link

 

[dlanod]

Link

Thanks bob. Hadn't seen that before, which basically confirms my speculation above stands. Even though people are calling them "compensation picks", they're a very different beast to the GWS/GC compo picks. They'll just be "pick 18", as per that link.

 

[mish33]

There are an awful lot of quality key defenders who aren't much more than 191cm. Scarlett, Richards, Patfull, McPharlin, Thompson, Glass, Jamison, Frawley, Gibson, Rutten, are all 193cm or below.

All fantastic KPD, so I wouldn't argue that height is a limiting factor on success as a KPD, but I think it's important to remember that we're talking about pick 8.

Of the players listed above, only McPharlin was picked in the top 10 (he was 10th and picked as a forward option I think). Patfull, Jamison, Gibson and Rutten all came from the rookie draft.

You could probaly argue that most of those players took a while to develop to the elite level (Gibson for example - never really rated him at North, perhaps he's benefitting from a stronger midfield in front of him).

So is it worth using a such a high pick for a player who will probably struggle for the first 3-4 years in the back line?

I guess what I'm saying is you'd have to be sure he was the second coming of SOS for it to be worth it IMO.

We've already put a first rounder into the backline last year, I would want more bang from pick 8 - midfield or forward, best available.

 

[Grimreepah]

All fantastic KPD, so I wouldn't argue that height is a limiting factor on success as a KPD, but I think it's important to remember that we're talking about pick 8.

Of the players listed above, only McPharlin was picked in the top 10 (he was 10th and picked as a forward option I think). Patfull, Jamison, Gibson and Rutten all came from the rookie draft.

You could probaly argue that most of those players took a while to develop to the elite level (Gibson for example - never really rated him at North, perhaps he's benefitting from a stronger midfield in front of him).

So is it worth using a such a high pick for a player who will probably struggle for the first 3-4 years in the back line?

I guess what I'm saying is you'd have to be sure he was the second coming of SOS for it to be worth it IMO.

We've already put a first rounder into the backline last year, I would want more bang from pick 8 - midfield or forward, best available.

What matters is how good they are, not where they were taken. If recruiters are getting it wrong when it comes to "undersized" key position players, then it doesn't make sense to follow suit.

Mish, why do you think he will struggle for 3 to 4 years?

 

[POBT]

All fantastic KPD, so I wouldn't argue that height is a limiting factor on success as a KPD, but I think it's important to remember that we're talking about pick 8.

Of the players listed above, only McPharlin was picked in the top 10 (he was 10th and picked as a forward option I think). Patfull, Jamison, Gibson and Rutten all came from the rookie draft.

You could probaly argue that most of those players took a while to develop to the elite level (Gibson for example - never really rated him at North, perhaps he's benefitting from a stronger midfield in front of him).

So is it worth using a such a high pick for a player who will probably struggle for the first 3-4 years in the back line?

I guess what I'm saying is you'd have to be sure he was the second coming of SOS for it to be worth it IMO.

We've already put a first rounder into the backline last year, I would want more bang from pick 8 - midfield or forward, best available.

Yeah, that's my concern. Is pick 8 too high for a defensive role?

What I would say is that, based on history, taking a key position defender in the first dozen picks tends to work out pretty well. While clubs don't tend to take key defenders early, when they do they get a good un. 2006 is a case in point - Reid (although was more a forward when drafted), NBrown and Frawley all taken with top 12 picks. Phil Davis was taken at pick 10 in 2008. And Talia was taken at pick 13 the following year. Lots of successful picks, not so many fails. When you throw in a converted forward like Henderson, you've got a pretty good strike rate when you pull the trigger earlier on a tall defender.

We do need to plan for our defence's future though. All 3 of our tall defenders are of a similar age - within a few years of retirement. Plowman excites me because I think having a genuinely top CHB is a massive advantage when rebuilding a side. When a tall defender is spoken about as a possible top 5 player in a draft, and we have a long term need for a quality tall defender, I would be OK with the club pulling the trigger.

I do have to say that I don't agree with your comment about using a high pick on a player who'll struggle for a few years. I think this should be the expectation on any player drafted - that they'll need at least a couple of years to learn the trade. We should not draft with 2013 or 2014 in mind. We might hope that a draftee plays a role in that period but you can't expect it or rely on it.

And, in 2015, our current tall defenders all turn 31. Now is the time to be planning for their departure.

 

[POBT]

I'd add that the debate around Plowman is very similar to the discussions around Michael Hurley. He had pace/agility question marks, wasn't a superb height and couldn't leap tall buildings in a single bound. The positive - he was a bloody good footballer despite those "limitations".

 

[Grimreepah]

Has Plowman ever played forward, or is he a defender only?

 

[POBT]

Has Plowman ever played forward, or is he a defender only?

An interesting article that says he spent time in the midfield growing up.

 

[mish33]

Mish, why do you think he will struggle for 3 to 4 years?

I don't know of many KPD who do go well in there first few years. They seem generally under-sized and overawed. Frawley, Reid and Talia are probably exceptions there, but I'm thinking of someone like Andrew Watson. How does Plowman compare to him? I think Watson will become a handy backman, with elite backline distribution skills, but that doesn't discount the fact that this year, and probably for another couple, he's going to really struggle defensively.

On top of that, Plowman's not likely to get a game for the next couple of years as it is. I get that he could probably come in and play as a third tall at first with Merrett and Maguire there, but we've already got Patfull there as well. I just don't see where he can get a spot unless there are serious injuries to our other guys like Staker and Lester as well. Obviously we need to prepare for when Rog, Goose and JPat go, but I would much prefer to use our lower picks on backline players, trusting our recruiters to find more gems like Clarke.

You are totally right about quality being the most important thing, he does sound like an exciting talent and a good leader and if he's the stand-out player at that pick, then so be it. But without having seen any of these guys, I'd hope there'd be some high quality mids or forwards in there to choose from first.

 

[chopperduck]

Defenders aren't usually too flashy, especially KP defenders, i guess that's why if they stand out enough to be taken with a top 10 or so pick, they very rarely fail. A lot of key defenders are players who failed in other positions.

 

[mish33]

Yeah, that's my concern. Is pick 8 too high for a defensive role?

What I would say is that, based on history, taking a key position defender in the first dozen picks tends to work out pretty well. While clubs don't tend to take key defenders early, when they do they get a good un. 2006 is a case in point - Reid (although was more a forward when drafted), NBrown and Frawley all taken with top 12 picks. Phil Davis was taken at pick 10 in 2008. And Talia was taken at pick 13 the following year. Lots of successful picks, not so many fails. When you throw in a converted forward like Henderson, you've got a pretty good strike rate when you pull the trigger earlier on a tall defender.

We do need to plan for our defence's future though. All 3 of our tall defenders are of a similar age - within a few years of retirement. Plowman excites me because I think having a genuinely top CHB is a massive advantage when rebuilding a side. When a tall defender is spoken about as a possible top 5 player in a draft, and we have a long term need for a quality tall defender, I would be OK with the club pulling the trigger.

I do have to say that I don't agree with your comment about using a high pick on a player who'll struggle for a few years. I think this should be the expectation on any player drafted - that they'll need at least a couple of years to learn the trade. We should not draft with 2013 or 2014 in mind. We might hope that a draftee plays a role in that period but you can't expect it or rely on it.

And, in 2015, our current tall defenders all turn 31. Now is the time to be planning for their departure.

speaking a lot of sense here! I hadn't thought about Brown or Davis. Adelaide obviously subscribe to the high pick KPD strategy, and it's seemed to work for them (luckily considering Davis).

I guess I'm of the view that it's also possible to get good/very good key defenders later in the draft whereas true game changing midfielders or forwards are rarer.

 

[Grimreepah]

An interesting article that says he spent time in the midfield growing up.

I can just imagine Kerr's eyes lighting up. He loves players that can push into the midfield.

 

[The Flying Belgian]

I keep thinking of early 90s Brisbane Broncos winger (yes, that's right, winger) Brett Plowman: