2012 Draft wish list

[Nickos66]

"Best available" is always a subjective argument that leads nowhere. But I am pretty sure the consensus of opinion is that Darling was best available, not Pitt. And media speculation didn't have Ballantyne taken where we reached out and plucked him, but he met a pretty specific need for the club.

There are a heap of variables that come into deciding who is the best available, and especially in the debate about smalls vs talls. It is speculative and a cursory glance over the re-dos of drafts from years past shows that. I would be pretty sure that selecting Palmer at such an early pick over that years #17, Harry Taylor, had as much to do with our need for a hard running inside mid and the lack of need for a KPD as it did about best available.

I think there is a tipping point in drafting where the difference in "best"-ness becomes marginal when weighed against needs. It is why the draft is unpredictable after the first 10 or so selections. By pick 17 that is well and truly in the realms where picking for need comes into play when deciding between a highly rated small and a highly rated tall. We certainly won't be taking a ruckman even if they are rated best available, and I am tipping a small forward won't be on the cards regardless.

This was my point, hence the quotations used. Pitt would be the classic case of the more talented and perceived 'best available' player over the immediate need that Darling would have been. He was touted as a top 10 pick and an absolute steal at pick 20, whereas Darling was seen as having already hit his ceiling having been a man playing against boys, he was always going to slide. This directly plays into your point though and thus shows one clear perspective of going with the 'best available' approach.

As for Ballas over Swift, he was a 2nd rounder of which the speculated best available is a little harder to gauge, but he did appear to be more of a take or be taken pick, and one certainly needs based which again chalks up another for the needs over prospective 'best available'.

Palmer/Taylor - It's pretty easy to go that far back with the benefit of hindsight, we were always going to take Palmer with our pick. It was either him or Myers but he was taken just before our pick. Taylor was never in the picture for us having been taken 10 spots later than Palmer. I don't remember Key backs being the pressing need at the time though? All I remember was that our midfield was shown up as too small and too old in 2007. Our backs held valiantly under the barrage they received at the hands of the Palmer/Bell led midfield. Would this point still have been raised if we took for instance a Paddy Dangerfield, probably not.

I guess there really is no distinguishable more successful method, there will always be contraries to the rule. Often drafting on needs is seen as reaching and 'underselling' your position in the draft by not taking the player you deem that 17th best player in the draft. I bet Richmond wishes they didn't reach so high for Conca and just took Dyson Heppell with their pick, Conca's been sent to play the same role down at half back for which Heppell is clearly the better fit, but thems the breaks I guess. You make your decision and you have to live with it. I'd hazzard a guess without insult to Conca, it'd be harder to live with the reach of taking the lower rated player and failing than taking the player deemed the best at that spot and failing.

 

[Purpellian Anchor]

Nickos whats your view on best available but the player indicates he prefers not to be drafted by - say our club or he interviews poorly in terms of attitude etc - i suppose he is then not best available - was thinking of possible example Pitt or Darling So lot of these prospects one might have more ability but poor attitude and work ethic etc and another rated less highly those attributes for success What choice would you make then?

 

[theGav56]

This was my point, hence the quotations used. Pitt would be the classic case of the more talented and perceived 'best available' player over the immediate need that Darling would have been. He was touted as a top 10 pick and an absolute steal at pick 20, whereas Darling was seen as having already hit his ceiling having been a man playing against boys, he was always going to slide. This directly plays into your point though and thus shows one clear perspective of going with the 'best available' approach.

Are you serious? Darling slid because of attitude issues and the fact that he had, potentially, a significant brain injury. Apart from that he was a no-brainer as best available for us and every other club before Pitt.

I thought your "point" was that you think we always select best available "every time".

As for Ballas over Swift, he was a 2nd rounder of which the speculated best available is a little harder to gauge, but he did appear to be more of a take or be taken pick, and one certainly needs based which again chalks up another for the needs over prospective 'best available'.

You think pick 21 is very different to pick 17 just because one is in the first round and the other in the second? I am not comparing Ballantyne to swift by the way.

Palmer/Taylor - It's pretty easy to go that far back with the benefit of hindsight, we were always going to take Palmer with our pick. It was either him or Myers but he was taken just before our pick. Taylor was never in the picture for us having been taken 10 spots later than Palmer. I don't remember Key backs being the pressing need at the time though? All I remember was that our midfield was shown up as too small and too old in 2007. Our backs held valiantly under the barrage they received at the hands of the Palmer/Bell led midfield. Would this point still have been raised if we took for instance a Paddy Dangerfield, probably not.

You were talking about in recent memory, so I went for a standout choice that matched us in terms of need versus the actual best player available who went for the same pick we have in this up-coming draft. Palmer matched our needs perfectly and Harry would have been surplus to requirements.

I simply cannot see that the club always drafts for best available, and think they regularly draft with a strong eye for needs.

 

[Bulldocker]

Nickos whats your view on best available but the player indicates he prefers not to be drafted by - say our club or he interviews poorly in terms of attitude etc - i suppose he is then not best available - was thinking of possible example Pitt or Darling So lot of these prospects one might have more ability but poor attitude and work ethic etc and another rated less highly those attributes for success What choice would you make then?

The whole Darling thing was orchestrated by the egirls in cahoots with some in the WA media to provide enough "scare off" factor for the Vic clubs to steer clear of him in the draft. The whole bad boy image surrounding Darling was a beat up. The bloke has not put a foot out of place since being drafted.
Only thing is - I'm not sure if Freo fell for it too or if they did infact rate Pitt as a better prospect anyway?

 

[theGav56]

The whole Darling thing was orchestrated by the egirls in cahoots with some in the WA media to provide enough "scare off" factor for the Vic clubs to steer clear of him in the draft. The whole bad boy image surrounding Darling was a beat up. The bloke has not put a foot out of place since being drafted.
Only thing is - I'm not sure if Freo fell for it too or if they did infact rate Pitt as a better prospect anyway?

Fracturing a kids skull would have to be up there with one of the most devious draft manipulating ploys in history. Wonder if it will catch on?

 

[Nickos66]

Nickos whats your view on best available but the player indicates he prefers not to be drafted by - say our club or he interviews poorly in terms of attitude etc - i suppose he is then not best available - was thinking of possible example Pitt or Darling So lot of these prospects one might have more ability but poor attitude and work ethic etc and another rated less highly those attributes for success What choice would you make then?

IMO I guess it would depend on the type of attitude, whether it's of poor integrity, likely to be culture sapping or bring the playing list down to his level, or just a professional sounding kid who just isn't a fan of the club. The former would be a problem whereas the latter could be worked with.

It was probably perceived that Darling would be the former, or at least the media painted him this way. I wasn't really convinced he was as bad as everybody said he was, and like most others - I'd have loved to have taken the big bodied, home grown forward.

 

[Nickos66]

Are you serious? Darling slid because of attitude issues and the fact that he had, potentially, a significant brain injury. Apart from that he was a no-brainer as best available for us and every other club before Pitt.

I thought your "point" was that you think we always select best available "every time".



You think pick 21 is very different to pick 17 just because one is in the first round and the other in the second? I am not comparing Ballantyne to swift by the way.


You were talking about in recent memory, so I went for a standout choice that matched us in terms of need versus the actual best player available who went for the same pick we have in this up-coming draft. Palmer matched our needs perfectly and Harry would have been surplus to requirements.

I simply cannot see that the club always drafts for best available, and think they regularly draft with a strong eye for needs.

Like you said, "Best available" is a very subjective term and IMO the club thought they were getting the 20th best player in the draft that day.

21 in 2008 was not "best available" since we had so many decent picks so close together that day, Hill was what we deemed best available. Having had 24 too, I doubt the club saw Suban as "best available".

Nobody knew Taylor was the "best available" in 2007, because he wasn't the best available, in fact 3 months out from the draft he wasn't even in 1st round contention. Nobody had ever heard of him?! Pretty sure Palmer was deemed "best available" for pick 7, and 1 year out from that draft it appeared to ring true.

 

[Purpellian Anchor]

IMO I guess it would depend on the type of attitude, whether it's of poor integrity, likely to be culture sapping or bring the playing list down to his level, or just a professional sounding kid who just isn't a fan of the club. The former would be a problem whereas the latter could be worked with.

It was probably perceived that Darling would be the former, or at least the media painted him this way. I wasn't really convinced he was as bad as everybody said he was, and like most others - I'd have loved to have taken the big bodied, home grown forward.

Yes agree with all you said there. I recall when we drafted Joel Houghton - So much talent there but I somehow think his commitment and will to develop and be a successful athlete/footballer may have been lacking (nothing against Joel and I don not really know). If he had come on we would not be so concerned with a kpf now thems the breaks. But it all just shows that as supporters we just dont know much about that side of assessing potential draftees. Ta Nickos

 

[blue shark]

Yes agree with all you said there. I recall when we drafted Joel Houghton - So much talent there but I somehow think his commitment and will to develop and be a successful athlete/footballer may have been lacking (nothing against Joel and I don not really know). If he had come on we would not be so concerned with a kpf now thems the breaks. But it all just shows that as supporters we just dont know much about that side of assessing potential draftees. Ta Nickos

Joel was a third round pick, and was always going to take time to develop, which the club decided against, dont know
why, but must be a reason.
This is the risk you take with taking talls late, all picks are a risk, but you would think that the quality would be less after
pick 30.
Also Houghton is a fast leading, endurance forward, the game has changed, and now contested marking is crucial.

 

[Nickos66]

I'd say Paparone looks like a similar player to Houghton, big tank, tall and skinny and good below his knees but not your traditional marking forward and never will be.

 

[Andy Brennan]

I'd say Paparone looks like a similar player to Houghton, big tank, tall and skinny and good below his knees but not your traditional marking forward and never will be.

So we'll probably pick him then?

 

[Undertaker]

"Best Available" vs "Club Needs" is and will always be a subjective argument. If you look at a couple of the recent Premiership Teams "Club Needs" recruiting has played a significant role in their premiership success.
Collingwood were never going to win a premiership without a decent ruckman so they traded players out to get Darren Jolley.
Sydney Swans did the same recruiting the likes of Mumford, Kennedy, Shaw & Richards.
Geelong also recruited on a "Club Needs" basis when they used their 1st round pick on Harry Taylor.
Freo are also at that stage where they need recruit "Club Needs" KPF and KPD Pav & Maca have 2 years left in them MAX and we have no one to replace them. We will miss our premiership window and it's a long road back.
I realise we tried and failed with Mitch Clark and it will always be debatable why we missed out.
Cloke and Dawes were never going to leave Victoria to go West.
The Draft is our only hope and with the last 4 years being a compromised draft it has and will be difficult.
Good luck to to the recruiters I hope they can get it right but if they continue to go down the best available policy we are doomed.
BTW I also subscribe to the Jack Darling conspiracy, we got conned like everyone else.

 

[Arcassius]

You know our recruiters actually go and talk to the boys - not like us who rely on 2nd and 3rd hand information from the media with its inherent bias. To suggest the club was conned is a bit of a long straw

 

[Purple Suit]

Darling's fractured skull injury obviously gave the recruiters some concerns about on going issues. It looks like they were correct too, he's developed a flip top head.

 

[TheLastCall]

When you have team balance go best available, but this year we have an obvious problem. We must go KPF, anything else will be a problem. I hope we go KPF, KPF, KPB, or swap the last two if needs be.
I'll be happy if we end up with two potential KPF and one KPB. Remembering how often a young KPF can play KPB when developing.

 

[Undertaker]

You know our recruiters actually go and talk to the boys - not like us who rely on 2nd and 3rd hand information from the media with its inherent bias. To suggest the club was conned is a bit of a long straw

I love the "Conspiracy Theory" it always makes for a good discussion. I don't believe everything I read far from it but where there's smoke there's fire and there was a big smoke screen happening leading up to that draft.
I also subscribe to the theory that things happen for a reason.

 

[go_the_dockers]

A couple articles worth a read. You have to love when a players takes it upon himself to improve his game, in this case Shaw took it upon himself to have 50 kicks of goal a day. Great work.

I hadn't heard much of Rodda, but assuming he has the speed to play a KPD he looks like a great late pickup.



http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/a/-/afl/15347754/rich-pickings-for-clubs-in-young-wa-talls/

Melbourne chose 193cm Claremont forward Jesse Hogan in last month's mini draft and clubs are now considering South Fremantle's Mason Shaw (197cm), West Perth's Nick Rodda (194cm), East Fremantle's Marco Paparone (193cm), Perth's Brant Colledge (192cm) and Peel's Kamdyn McIntosh (190cm).
WA has rarely produced big numbers of tall draftees in a single year even though the likes of Lance Franklin, Mitch Clark and Josh Kennedy are among the best in the league.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sp...aft-hope-gives-it-his-best-shot-after-injury/

Mason Shaw is the first to admit he did not meet expectations this year.
Looking back, it was not for a lack of effort.
Touted as a possible top-10 draft pick pre-season, Shaw was sidelined for eight weeks after breaking a cheekbone in South Fremantle's final practice match.
He missed the AFL Academy's European tour, lost confidence and felt confused.
But Shaw knew full-forwards had to kick straight, so he to took 50 shots at goal every day for the rest of the season.
The result was 40.11 for South Fremantle's colts team and 10.4 for WA at a conversion rate of 76.9 per cent.

 

[Big Flappy]

The article also said Fremantle were unlikely to select a WA tall with our first pick.

 

[TheLastCall]

The article also said Fremantle were unlikely to select a WA tall with our first pick.

How much weight can you put on an article from the Worst. I'd be happy with Shaw at 17. Poparone at 37, Rodda at 40.

 

[DizzyHB]

I'm glad we're closing in now, so we can finally stop wondering.

A perfect draft for me would be something like:
17- Shaw>Jaksch>Clurey
37- Colledge>O'Brien>White
40- Rodda>Howsen>Paparone

Ofcourse, our recruiters would never pick solely from WA for a whole draft. We'll probably pick up some unknown midfielders from Vic and SA.

 

[Nickos66]

After all's said, i'd still be very happy if we picked up Shaw with our 1st pick.

10 days!

 

[Seppo]

These 10 days won't go quick enough...

We going to run a guessing comp to guess our Draft picks again?

 

[Nickos66]

That's not a bad idea actually, rig up a pts system and see who wins. something like 2 for correct player and draft possie, 1 for correct player etc.

 

[Seppo]

That's not a bad idea actually, rig up a pts system and see who wins. something like 2 for correct player and draft possie, 1 for correct player etc.

I might get around to it tonight.

We should have a fair idea of how many live picks we are going in with as of Wednesday 14th @ 2pm EST when List Lodgement 2 is due. Could be time to depart with Krytuicfgoirut%#$!^xoirtoN, Roberton and Anthony.

 

[freoextra]

I might get around to it tonight.

We should have a fair idea of how many live picks we are going in with as of Wednesday 14th @ 2pm EST when List Lodgement 2 is due. Could be time to depart with Krytuicfgoirut%#$!^xoirtoN, Roberton and Anthony.

Those 3 would be my pick to be leaving and Faulks possibly as well, but with training fast approaching and Faulks and Crimgngtgggggggnghgvf6kljuh still here, I think if they are dropped they will have the opportunity to train on to be rookie listed at worst.