2012 draft

[tigs2010]

I've been told differently in terms of Elton at 15. We also see him being able to pinch hit. When I say Ruck/Fwd, more a Roughead type.

The first 4 we wanted were all smalls. (Ellis, Adams, Smith then back up of McKenzie) And drafting a Roughead type wasn't what I took from Dimma's comments. I think he means a pure ruck which is what Grundy is.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

If the reasoning behind these recruiters is that it's because he is a ruckman or that Richmond need an inside midfielder more, I would question their credibility.

I'd be very interested to understand why they think it would be a mistake.

You can question their creditability all you like , I doubt they are going to get to upset/ or actually take any notice, what someone thinks upon here TBH .

I'm sure they wouldn't, but you still haven't explained their reasoning.

I could say right now, I know a recruiter who thinks if Whitfield is available at 9, we shouldn't take him, because it would be a mistake. That opinion would mean SFA to you.

My opinion of Grundy would never change because a 'recruiter' with no real reasoning says it would be a mistake.

Thought from my response it was obvious their concerns are that Grundy would be a mistake due to need, my error in not making that clearer.
Not asking or suggesting your opinion should be altered by anyone elses thought just think it's a little self opinionated to suggest that recruiters would be stupid, or that no recruiter would ,or words to that effect, overlook Grundy at 9, like some have.

 

[MR]

Thought from my response it was obvious their concerns are that Grundy would be a mistake due to need, my error in not making that clearer.
Not asking or suggesting your opinion should be altered by anyone elses thought just think it's a little self opinionated to suggest that recruiters would be stupid, or that no recruiter would ,or words to that effect, overlook Grundy at 9, like some have.

It is not self-opinionated, because I'm sure there are many other people with similar opinions. I did in fact, speak to one of our recruiting officers, who said to me talent > need with first round. Grundy is a top 3-5 talent. You wouldn't ignore that. I used the same analogy a few pages back, it would be the exact same as Naitanui slipping to pick 8 in the 2008 ND.

 

[Wacky Tiger]

It is not self-opinionated, because I'm sure there are many other people with similar opinions. I did in fact, speak to one of our recruiting officers, who said to me talent > need with first round. Grundy is a top 3-5 talent. You wouldn't ignore that. I used the same analogy a few pages back, it would be the exact same as Naitanui slipping to pick 8 in the 2008 ND.

This is pretty much the way i see it. But also in saying that we are in NEED of both Midfielders and Ruckman plus the way i see football going is your all rounder type ruckmen will become the most valuable so you can have midfielders resting on the bench whilst your resting big man can rest in the pocket.

 

[Richo83]

It is not self-opinionated, because I'm sure there are many other people with similar opinions. I did in fact, speak to one of our recruiting officers, who said to me talent > need with first round. Grundy is a top 3-5 talent. You wouldn't ignore that. I used the same analogy a few pages back, it would be the exact same as Naitanui slipping to pick 8 in the 2008 ND.

This is what confuses me about GWS and Port passing on them, it's not as if they have decent ruckmen everywhere. Footscray is also in this boat, their best ruckman is Minson and guys like Roughead are expected to play back, I don't understand why all three clubs would pass on him. Melbourne I get, they're in love with Wines and at 29 years of age, Jamar can still play.

 

[tigs2010]

This is what confuses me about GWS and Port passing on them, it's not as if they have decent ruckmen everywhere. Footscray is also in this boat, their best ruckman is Minson and guys like Roughead are expected to play back, I don't understand why all three clubs would pass on him. Melbourne I get, they're in love with Wines and at 29 years of age, Jamar can still play.

Might say where he's rated amongst recruiters. Or rucks in general. ie. not highly.

 

[Richo83]

Might say where he's rated amongst recruiters. Or rucks in general. ie. not highly.

Then why is he being compared to Naitanui? It's just that I've heard this Naitanui comparison on bigfooty a few times now.

 

[tigs2010]

Then why is he being compared to Naitanui? It's just that I've heard this Naitanui comparison on bigfooty a few times now.

I have no idea. Just saying that would be why he may slide. No other explanation for it really.

 

[MR]

Perhaps those clubs aren't willing to take the risk.

If we take Grundy, and his development is successful, we will reap huge rewards. Having an elite ruckman can be so vital to a team's success. Sandilands and Cox have sometimes dragged their teams over the line in some games, it's an invaluable asset.

However, there has been several cases where ruckmen taken in the first round don't end up dominating, and have a much lower success rate than midfielders. Look at Wood, Meesen, Bailey, all relatively high picks, but all have failed or been disappointing in their AFL careers.

Port Adelaide have a first round ruckman in their stocks as Lobbe, who I rate and I'm sure they do too. Jarrad Redden also looks pretty good and they recently traded in Renouf.

Similarly with WBD, they recently used high picks on Cordy and Roughead and Minson has been a decent ruckman for them. They see more worth in taking a midfielder than taking Grundy.

 

[Wacky Tiger]

Might say where he's rated amongst recruiters. Or rucks in general. ie. not highly.

This too. Speaking to one recruiter they were of the opinion why spend years developing these young ruckmen when you can go out and trade / sign one when they are older and developed. Reckon free agency might see a lot more ruckmen moving places later in there careers

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

It is not self-opinionated, because I'm sure there are many other people with similar opinions. I did in fact, speak to one of our recruiting officers, who said to me talent > need with first round. Grundy is a top 3-5 talent. You wouldn't ignore that. I used the same analogy a few pages back, it would be the exact same as Naitanui slipping to pick 8 in the 2008 ND.

Potting someone with comments like they'd be stupid or the like , simply because someone doesn't share your opinion is self opinionated in my view .
You didn't need to speak to one of ' our recruiter officers ' to see that the club is looking to take best available over needs with first round pick , it's very common knowledge and IIRC has been released openly within the media .
The question is where people and the club rate Grundy , you say 3-5 , others don't rate him that high, with lots questioning whether the way the game is going whether it will suit a Grundy type in the future .

 

[the push up king]

I've found myself reading quite deeply into all comments made as it is really my only knowledge of draft. Just out of curiosity, and without feeling like they are pumping their own tyre's. Can a few of you with educated/ inside knowledge divulge your position or connections to put some perspective of info given.
Thanks

 

[Cotcho]

Sorry mate got a bit hasty on my phone and must have lost track of what you were talking about.

No dramas mate

 

[MR]

Potting someone with comments like they'd be stupid or the like , simply because someone doesn't share your opinion is self opinionated in my view .
You didn't need to speak to one of ' our recruiter officers ' to see that the club is looking to take best available over needs with first round pick , it's very common knowledge and IIRC has been released openly within the media .
The question is where people and the club rate Grundy , you say 3-5 , others don't rate him that high, with lots questioning whether the way the game is going whether it will suit a Grundy type in the future .

Very well.

To be honest, I've moved on from this little argument. However, you have raised an interesting point. 'Whether the way the game is going whether it will suit a Grundy type in the future.'

Do you think the game will suit a Grundy type? I'd like to know your opinion. What's the future for ruckmen?

Grundy is a mobile ruckman, and has the capability to be a damaging forward. As was evident in the SANFL. This means he could always be in rotation with Vickery, who would play a similar role to him. Are those ruckmen/forward types what the game will move on from, or are they the future?

 

[Wacky Tiger]

Very well.

To be honest, I've moved on from this little argument. However, you have raised an interesting point. 'Whether the way the game is going whether it will suit a Grundy type in the future.'

Do you think the game will suit a Grundy type? I'd like to know your opinion. What's the future for ruckmen?

Grundy is a mobile ruckman, and has the capability to be a damaging forward. As was evident in the SANFL. This means he could always be in rotation with Vickery, who would play a similar role to him. Are those ruckmen/forward types what the game will move on from, or are they the future?

The allrounder ruckman will become more and more important IMO

 

[_RT_]

For mine there is little point in reaching for a ruckman in the draft itself as I don't think we desperately need one. Maric Vickery and Derickx should be able to see us through as mature bodied rucks. If we are going to take one then perhaps take a rookie kid with lots of raw talent that we can tuck away at Coburg for a couple of years and see if they come on. If not then we can always go down the free agents path in years to come and recruit one to replace Maric once he moves on.

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

Very well.

To be honest, I've moved on from this little argument. However, you have raised an interesting point. 'Whether the way the game is going whether it will suit a Grundy type in the future.'

Do you think the game will suit a Grundy type? I'd like to know your opinion. What's the future for ruckmen?

Grundy is a mobile ruckman, and has the capability to be a damaging forward. As was evident in the SANFL. This means he could always be in rotation with Vickery, who would play a similar role to him. Are those ruckmen/forward types what the game will move on from, or are they the future?

I am not sold that he will be a damaging forward at AFL level, in fact I question his ability around the ground, although thats not to say others agree , as many like what your opinion appears to be don't.
IMO as the AFL looks to limit rotations I think you'll find that clubs redcue the amount of ruckmen upon their list in preference to players who can pich hit within the ruck.
It may be a fair stretch, but I think it's feasable, in years to come that clubs will go into games with a number of players who are equally as good as a ruckmen, CHF, CHB and 3rd tall forward or back.
We aren't badly placed with Maric, Vickery both capable of playing forward and within the ruck and both Astbury and Griffiths capable of playing forward or back and having had some experience within the ruck.
In saying that Post's greatest asset IMO was his versatility and he got arseholed so maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree ?

 

[Ancient Tiger]

For me if they are available in order of preference:
Grundy
Wines
Mayes
O'Rourke
Garner
Vlastoin
McCrae
Kennedy
Gartlett
Simpson

 

[bananatigz]

9- Grundy -> Vlastuin -> Macrae
32- Wright/Graham/Atkins
34- Pongracic/Broomhead/Towers
43- McDonough/Nelson/Sumner

Any combination of that i'd be happy

 

[Tomnat Tigers]

Would be happy if our draft ended up like this:

#9- Vlastuin
#32- Atkins
#34- Pongracic
#43- Boston

Take a couple of project big men in the rookie draft and get either Ben Ross or Nelson. Get a gun key forward in next year's draft where there is more depth.

 

[Tigerbob]

And who are they?

I am interested too. This goes against most of what I have heard and generally pther recruiters wouldn't know what other lists need and don't need..

If they think Grundy is a mistake at 9 for us, that's fine, it's an opinion, but I sure hope that person isn't employed by the RFC.

Lets see. How many times does a elite ruck/forward come past? Then you ask, how many times does a midfielder come across. Those wanting Vlastuin before Grundy. Wow. Mayes, Macrae, Garner? Really, in front of Grundy? I don't understand but fair enough.

 

[Calcium Man]

I have no idea. Just saying that would be why he may slide. No other explanation for it really.

Is Wines really worth a top 4 pick?? seems to be rated anywhere from 6-12 in general and maybe Melbourne are reaching for him a bit at 4??

I question it because WB and Melbourne both have a very poor recent history of first round picks.

Bulldogs lucked out with some father sons but guys like Howard, Grant, Everitt, Williams, Ray, Faulkner and to lesser extent clay smith show that their recruiting has been really poor in 2000's with Cooney, Griffen and maybe Higgins their only good selections and 2 were certainties.

These are the two i believe if Grundy slips past they are stupid, Port have Redden and Lobbe as young decent rucks and Brisbane have Longer and Leunberger. GWS lack a ruckmen but with so many young super mids and a few with go home factor trading for a Jolly, Ottens, Maric or jacobs in a few years makes sense.

 

[UpTheGuts]

I'd want Vlastuin ahead of Wines
And Grundy ahead of Vlastuin

 

[MR]

I am interested too. This goes against most of what I have heard and generally pther recruiters wouldn't know what other lists need and don't need..

If they think Grundy is a mistake at 9 for us, that's fine, it's an opinion, but I sure hope that person isn't employed by the RFC.

Lets see. How many times does a elite ruck/forward come past? Then you ask, how many times does a midfielder come across. Those wanting Vlastuin before Grundy. Wow. Mayes, Macrae, Garner? Really, in front of Grundy? I don't understand but fair enough.

+1. I've advocated us taking Vlastuin throughout this entire thread, but Grundy is a completely different level. To be honest, I've had him at 1 at various stages of the year and I still wouldn't know who I would take out of him and Whitfield if I had the choice. Having watched Vickery, Naitanui and Longer, I can confidently say that without a doubt, Grundy was a better junior than all of them.

 

[Tigerbob]

I'd want Vlastuin ahead of Wines
And Grundy ahead of Vlastuin

That's fair and I agree.

+1. I've advocated us taking Vlastuin throughout this entire thread, but Grundy is a completely different level. To be honest, I've had him at 1 at various stages of the year and I still wouldn't know who I would take out of him and Whitfield if I had the choice. Having watched Vickery, Naitanui and Longer, I can confidently say that without a doubt, Grundy was a better junior than all of them.

As I said, you would be foolish to turn Grundy down. He is a different level.