List Mgmt. 2013 Draft Discussion

[fronkalicious]

Does anyone know whether the dogs like Sheed? I find it bizarre that so many people rank him as a late first round selection. He's probably the best performed midfielder of the year and just about does it all. Is the knock on him just the speed issue (and he isn't even that slow)?

I've heard we like sheed. He's this years Ollie wines. He'll play and get a heap of the footy. But we need to take whoever we think will be the best player long term. Fwiw I'm still very confident macrae will end up a better player than wines, despite wines clearly having the better first year.

 

[BRG93]

WB Draft Potentials- Matt Scharenberg Highlights

 

[BRG93]

Highlights Ready to Go

 

[stefoid]

Contested ball is a state of mind. Just because Kelly doesn't have an 'inside' game now, doesn't mean he won't have one in the future.

You can be as willing as you like, but being effective requires skill that takes years to build up, just like anything else. Someone who is totally committed to attacking the ball but doesnt have the skill is just going to hurt themselves or give away frees.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

To be clear, all the information I'm hearing is Kelly is our number 1 guy, then it's Scharenberg. If those two are gone I'm guessing Aish, but I'm not so sure after hearing he's going to slide now. I haven't had any indication that we will be going for Lennon or Billings.

Wouldn't that be based on the fact that they expect Aish to have been picked?

 

[Godogs247]

Looked at all 4 top boys for 2years Boyd clear 1 and shoenburg is clear 2 scouts over thinking this one -we need outside but like hawthorn take them later shoenburg is as good as goddard but is a better person

 

[Chris Grant]

Wouldn't that be based on the fact that they expect Aish to have been picked?

No I don't think so. They might still go for Aish, but Boyd, Kelly and Scharenberg are the three which the recruiters see a class above the rest with the info I've been given.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

If Boyd was taken as we expect, my next favorite would be Scharenberg, who would go pass another Goddard.

 

[Dale4captain]

If Boyd was taken as we expect, my next favorite would be Scharenberg, who would go pass another Goddard.

Goddard didn't consistently perform for a long time. It was only in the years where Stkilda were in the granny's or very close to them where he reached his full potential.Before that, he was only ever just ok. If we got Scharenburg, I'd hope he came on quicker than Goddard. Don't really want to wait till he's 25 before he plays well.

I don't think Scharenburg will be a Goddard type anyway. More of a Sam Fisher. Is their any evidence at all that he can actually play forward?

 

[Dav1d]

That Scharenberg kick at about 2:50 in...wow; I wonder how he tested for endurance.

 

[total football]

You can be as willing as you like, but being effective requires skill that takes years to build up, just like anything else. Someone who is totally committed to attacking the ball but doesnt have the skill is just going to hurt themselves or give away frees.

No doubt. I'm sure you could call it a skill. And like any skill, it can be taught, practiced and perfected. But before you get to that point, you need to find a willing participant who is prepared to put in the dedication and effort to perfect it.

I'm fairly comfortable in the belief that if Kelly ended up at the Dogs that he would have the right mentors around him to teach him/enhance that aspect of his game. And I'd be fairly comfortable in the belief that he'd be prepared to put in the hard yards.

 

[timtamWB]

No doubt. I'm sure you could call it a skill. And like any skill, it can be taught, practiced and perfected. But before you get to that point, you need to find a willing participant who is prepared to put in the dedication and effort to perfect it.

I'm fairly comfortable in the belief that if Kelly ended up at the Dogs that he would have the right mentors around him to teach him/enhance that aspect of his game. And I'd be fairly comfortable in the belief that he'd be prepared to put in the hard yards.

Sometimes though it's just not there.

Say that there's a boy, and he decides to take up singing lessons because he wants to be able to sing. Now he corrects his technique, breathes correctly, and can hit each note correctly. But nobody likes his singing, because the tone of his voice is awful. Even though he's doing everything correctly, his tone is not good and he just can't fix that because it's who he is.

Now apply this to Kelly. There's no doubt that he is willing to work hard, and do the best he can to become more of an inside player. In the drills and at training he could do everything perfectly, but in actual matches he could always struggle with the inside game, because it's just not the sort of player he is.

It sometimes is just part of the player, for example Gaff, or Stephen Hill you would never in a million years dream of them playing inside.

I'm not saying this will happen with Kelly, but it's definitely a possibility. I'm playing a bit of devil's advocate here, but we know he is hard working. Why has he not been applying himself as hard as he can to become more inside and work on that side of his game previously?

 

[The_Bulldogs_Bite]

WB Draft Potentials- Matt Scharenberg Highlights

Thanks for that.

Looks very assured, wouldn't mind seeing some footage of Kelly as I suspect we'll take one of the two.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

You can be as willing as you like, but being effective requires skill that takes years to build up, just like anything else. Someone who is totally committed to attacking the ball but doesnt have the skill is just going to hurt themselves or give away frees.

This is what you've gotta ask though - does Kelly actually lack those skills, or is his lack of contested ball winning due to other reasons? Everyone is in agreement that he's much better on the outside - so is it so unreasonable to suggest that that's the role his coaches want him to play? He's an incredibly valuable weapon in space, so it's reasonable to suggest that they'd want him to work free where possible. Is it because he's slight? Some guys just aren't effective because of their body size, which (unless they suffer from Spindleshanksitis) can be worked on. Macrae is one guy who, despite his body size, was pretty good in contested situations this year - but then you've also got a case like O'Rourke who is decent inside but really got thrown around at AFL level. That doesn't mean he isn't going to make it, nor does it mean that he has no inside game.

I'm not saying that these factors explain it - simply that these are the questions that need to be asked before concluding that he doesn't have the skills required to win his own ball.

Pure inside midfielders - let's use Libba and Boyd as examples - have innate ball-winning skills that just simply can't be taught; you can't teach someone to become one of those players if they didn't have it to begin with (on a side note this is why I have a guy like Crouch reasonably high on my 'talent ladder' compared to others - a lot of the outside talents of today's game actually come from later picks than the inside talents; but that's another story). Kelly is not one of those players and never will be - but that doesn't mean he can't learn to win his own ball.

There are several reasons for a lack of contested ball winning that can't be fixed (or if they can, a negligible amount) from my perspective. The number one reason is a lack of courage or hesitation to put their body on the line; see Jason Tutt or Kane Lucas. These guys operate solely in space and appear horrifically hesitant to put their bodies on the line. Put Daniel across next to these two and they'll look like puppy dogs with their tails between their legs. Kelly is far from that kind of player; slight or not he still puts his body on the line. There are also players like Andrew Gaff who, despite reasonable pace and ability to read the play, just seem either physically or mentally incapable of getting to enough contests and when they do often unable to win their own ball. This is not Kelly at all. He gets to a lot of contests with his elite running, but doesn't often enter them - is that a lack of a skill set, or is it a coaching directive?

From my perspective, it's the latter. When he's required to, Kelly does enter contests and he does win his own ball (obviously not always and probably slightly less often than the average player - but you'd expect that of someone of his stature). So you've gotta ask yourself whether, with the correct coaching and through bulking up, he can become a more complete player.

Danyle Pearce has long been criticised for being a bit soft and a bit of a seagull - however under the right coach in Lyon, and after bulking up a little, he's improved significantly since his move to Fremantle, occasionally even being played as an on-baller this year. Sure, he's not someone you'd fear going into a contest - but he is capable of doing it.

I don't see any reason why Kelly can't become capable inside a contest. He'll never be anything special, and the team that takes him will have to understand that, however from my perspective he has all the tools to be capable - just not the body.

 

[total football]

Sometimes though it's just not there.

Say that there's a boy, and he decides to take up singing lessons because he wants to be able to sing. Now he corrects his technique, breathes correctly, and can hit each note correctly. But nobody likes his singing, because the tone of his voice is awful. Even though he's doing everything correctly, his tone is not good and he just can't fix that because it's who he is.

Now apply this to Kelly. There's no doubt that he is willing to work hard, and do the best he can to become more of an inside player. In the drills and at training he could do everything perfectly, but in actual matches he could always struggle with the inside game, because it's just not the sort of player he is.

It sometimes is just part of the player, for example Gaff, or Stephen Hill you would never in a million years dream of them playing inside.

I'm not saying this will happen with Kelly, but it's definitely a possibility. I'm playing a bit of devil's advocate here, but we know he is hard working. Why has he not been applying himself as hard as he can to become more inside and work on that side of his game previously?

Singing lessons is a funny example because people generally don't really get to choose what their voice sounds like. Whereas choosing to put your head over a ball, burrow into a pack of players and brace for contact is a conscious physical act. But I get what you're saying.

If anyone is concerned that it can't be taught, they need look no further than Ryan Griffen and they way he has transformed and elevated his game over the last 2 years.

 

[timtamWB]

Singing lessons is a funny example because people generally don't really get to choose what their voice sounds like. Whereas choosing to put your head over a ball, burrow into a pack of players and brace for contact is a conscious physical act. But I get what you're saying.

If anyone is concerned that it can't be taught, they need look no further than Ryan Griffen and they way he has transformed and elevated his game over the last 2 years.

I think you misinterpreted the analogy. I was talking more about his body type than his mindset. You're born with your vocal chords and your voice. Some people are born with certain body types, that you can't change. He's willing to do all the hard work, but due to something he's born with, vocal chords/body type, he'll never be able to do it well enough.

See Grant for example. Nobody expects him to be inside a pack, they want him to be outside the pack, leading at the ball, or ready to grab the ball if it comes flying out the pack. Or Murphy, his body type hasn't changed since he was 18! But you'd never expect him to burrow into a pack of players, or put his head over the ball.

Murphy gets away because he is so bloody smart. I don't think Kelly is that smart and so he might get found out a bit at AFL level. I'm confident he'll make it, but not to as high a level as you want with pick 4.

Kelly just doesn't have the body type. When trying to go inside, he's willing to do it, and he'll put his head over the ball. But he'll get pushed off too easily at AFL level when opposed to those inside types. He may become average at it, but never more than average, and I think you want more than that with pick 4.

 

[total football]

This is what you've gotta ask though - does Kelly actually lack those skills, or is his lack of contested ball winning due to other reasons? Everyone is in agreement that he's much better on the outside - so is it so unreasonable to suggest that that's the role his coaches want him to play? He's an incredibly valuable weapon in space, so it's reasonable to suggest that they'd want him to work free where possible. Is it because he's slight? Some guys just aren't effective because of their body size, which (unless they suffer from Spindleshanksitis) can be worked on. Macrae is one guy who, despite his body size, was pretty good in contested situations this year - but then you've also got a case like O'Rourke who is decent inside but really got thrown around at AFL level. That doesn't mean he isn't going to make it, nor does it mean that he has no inside game.

I'm not saying that these factors explain it - simply that these are the questions that need to be asked before concluding that he doesn't have the skills required to win his own ball.

Pure inside midfielders - let's use Libba and Boyd as examples - have innate ball-winning skills that just simply can't be taught; you can't teach someone to become one of those players if they didn't have it to begin with (on a side note this is why I have a guy like Crouch reasonably high on my 'talent ladder' compared to others - a lot of the outside talents of today's game actually come from later picks than the inside talents; but that's another story). Kelly is not one of those players and never will be - but that doesn't mean he can't learn to win his own ball.

There are several reasons for a lack of contested ball winning that can't be fixed (or if they can, a negligible amount) from my perspective. The number one reason is a lack of courage or hesitation to put their body on the line; see Jason Tutt or Kane Lucas. These guys operate solely in space and appear horrifically hesitant to put their bodies on the line. Put Daniel across next to these two and they'll look like puppy dogs with their tails between their legs. Kelly is far from that kind of player; slight or not he still puts his body on the line. There are also players like Andrew Gaff who, despite reasonable pace and ability to read the play, just seem either physically or mentally incapable of getting to enough contests and when they do often unable to win their own ball. This is not Kelly at all. He gets to a lot of contests with his elite running, but doesn't often enter them - is that a lack of a skill set, or is it a coaching directive?

From my perspective, it's the latter. When he's required to, Kelly does enter contests and he does win his own ball (obviously not always and probably slightly less often than the average player - but you'd expect that of someone of his stature). So you've gotta ask yourself whether, with the correct coaching and through bulking up, he can become a more complete player.

Danyle Pearce has long been criticised for being a bit soft and a bit of a seagull - however under the right coach in Lyon, and after bulking up a little, he's improved significantly since his move to Fremantle, occasionally even being played as an on-baller this year. Sure, he's not someone you'd fear going into a contest - but he is capable of doing it.

I don't see any reason why Kelly can't become capable inside a contest. He'll never be anything special, and the team that takes him will have to understand that, however from my perspective he has all the tools to be capable - just not the body.

You've also got to remember that if we draft Kelly he will be stepping into an environment that now prides itself on its competitiveness and work around the contest. 'Cracking in' when it's your turn to crack in is a non-negotiable. A basic requirement. Everyone around him will be doing it and the expectation will be that he will be doing it, too.

The other thing to remember is that as a basic requirement, the Dogs won't be drafting anyone that they don't think will be capable of fitting their system. So if he does end up at the Dogs, he will be there for a reason and we are going to have a very good player on our hands.

Jason Tutt and Kane Lucas are just rubbish footballers...

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

Kelly just doesn't have the body type. When trying to go inside, he's willing to do it, and he'll put his head over the ball. But he'll get pushed off too easily at AFL level when opposed to those inside types. He may become average at it, but never more than average, and I think you want more than that with pick 4.

Body type isn't enough of a reason in itself though, which is part of my point. Compare the two:

They aren't that different. Macrae was very good inside for a player of his body type/stature this year.

 

[timtamWB]

Body type isn't enough of a reason in itself though, which is part of my point. Compare the two:

They aren't that different. Macrae was very good inside for a player of his body type/stature this year.

Macrae seems to have the innate ability to create space, which I haven't seem from Kelly, which is going to help him inside. So I think his body type is a big reason why he's not so inside, that coupled with the type of player he is. Of course he'll crack in and put his body on the line, but when he burrows into a pack he'll negate his strengths. Kelly knows this so he just won't do it unless he absolutely has to, he plays to his strengths. He'll no doubt become capable because that's the type of person he is, willing to work at something and work hard. But he'll never be more than that so he will mostly be that outside player, and as I mentioned before, he'll play to his strengths.

But either way, whoever we choose I have full confidence in being the right choice. I actually have faith in our list managers now to nail this draft no matter who's available, and have full confidence in Macca to develop them.

 

[Scary_Foot_9]

WB Draft Potentials- Matt Scharenberg Highlights

He's an exquisite kick. I love that he backs himself, whether its kicking up through the corridor or taking tacklers on in his own defensive fifty, its what all good players do.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

You've also got to remember that if we draft Kelly he will be stepping into an environment that now prides itself on its competitiveness and work around the contest. 'Cracking in' when it's your turn to crack in is a non-negotiable. A basic requirement. Everyone around him will be doing it and the expectation will be that he will be doing it, too.

The other thing to remember is that as a basic requirement, the Dogs won't be drafting anyone that they don't think will be capable of fitting their system. So if he does end up at the Dogs, he will be there for a reason and we are going to have a very good player on our hands.

Jason Tutt and Kane Lucas are just rubbish footballers...

Absolutely, and that was intended as an extension to my "under the right coaching" section. Our coaching staff have made it very clear that you win contested ball or you will hardly play games - and they've also demonstrated how effective they are at 'teaching' it. If they take him in, a) he'll be fully aware of this, and b) they would have to believe that they can generate some sort of inside game for him - something that I trust them with.

They're not bad with no opposition. My point was simply that when they're given space they can do damage (watched Brisbane vs Carlton from round 9 again the other day; Docherty gave Lucas way too much space and he actually looked like something resembling a footballer), but are incapable of putting their bodies on the line. That's the risk you take with Kelly - but as I said, I don't agree at all that he's that type.

Macrae seems to have the innate ability to create space, which I haven't seem from Kelly, which is going to help him inside. So I think his body type is a big reason why he's not so inside, that coupled with the type of player he is. Of course he'll crack in and put his body on the line, but when he burrows into a pack he'll negate his strengths. Kelly knows this so he just won't do it unless he absolutely has to, he plays to his strengths. He'll no doubt become capable because that's the type of person he is, willing to work at something and work hard. But he'll never be more than that so he will mostly be that outside player, and as I mentioned before, he'll play to his strengths.

But either way, whoever we choose I have full confidence in being the right choice. I actually have faith in our list managers now to nail this draft no matter who's available, and have full confidence in Macca to develop them.

Kelly doesn't have Macrae's dynamic sidestep that we all love but the rare combination of pace and endurance allows him to find space really effectively. He's also a very smart footballer; finding space isn't what concerns me about Kelly. When he does win the ball he works it out quite easily.

Griffen negates his strengths when he burrows into packs - but he still does it. When he's in space he's incredibly dangerous, just like Kelly. He plays to his strengths, just like Kelly - but still does what's required of him. He's also built more of an inside game to allow him to be effective inside as well - there's no predicting that Kelly can't do that as well.

Totally agree with the bottom point though. There are a few around the mark that I'd rather not touch, but I trust the club's judgment in recent times.

 

[timtamWB]

Kelly doesn't have Macrae's dynamic sidestep that we all love but the rare combination of pace and endurance allows him to find space really effectively. He's also a very smart footballer; finding space isn't what concerns me about Kelly. When he does win the ball he works it out quite easily.

Griffen negates his strengths when he burrows into packs - but he still does it. When he's in space he's incredibly dangerous, just like Kelly. He plays to his strengths, just like Kelly - but still does what's required of him. He's also built more of an inside game to allow him to be effective inside as well - there's no predicting that Kelly can't do that as well.

Totally agree with the bottom point though. There are a few around the mark that I'd rather not touch, but I trust the club's judgment in recent times.

I mean Macrae has ability to find space in packs, while Kelly can find space effectively on the outside but I haven't seen him do it inside as much. It's not his finding space in general, it's him finding space in the middle of a pack that i'm not quite sure on, whereas i've seen Macrae do it a few times.

Griffen has built up his inside game so that it's not negating his strengths anymore, but rather it's just become part of his game. And I don't think Kelly has the potential to build it up to that level. I'm more than happy to be wrong though, and for him to become a good inside ball winner and become an elite player, he seems like a good kid.

 

[total football]

I mean Macrae has ability to find space in packs, while Kelly can find space effectively on the outside but I haven't seen him do it inside as much. It's not his finding space in general, it's him finding space in the middle of a pack that i'm not quite sure on, whereas i've seen Macrae do it a few times.

Griffen has built up his inside game so that it's not negating his strengths anymore, but rather it's just become part of his game. And I don't think Kelly has the potential to build it up to that level. I'm more than happy to be wrong though, and for him to become a good inside ball winner and become an elite player, he seems like a good kid.

I think it might be a little bit early to make a call on that one.

To be honest, between now and the draft everyone should just be going to bed and saying a little prayer that everything falls our way on draft day and we land Scharenberg.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

I mean Macrae has ability to find space in packs, while Kelly can find space effectively on the outside but I haven't seen him do it inside as much. It's not his finding space in general, it's him finding space in the middle of a pack that i'm not quite sure on, whereas i've seen Macrae do it a few times.

Griffen has built up his inside game so that it's not negating his strengths anymore, but rather it's just become part of his game. And I don't think Kelly has the potential to build it up to that level. I'm more than happy to be wrong though, and for him to become a good inside ball winner and become an elite player, he seems like a good kid.

Yeah, I see what you mean. Macrae will be an inside midfielder in the future though so you expect that of him - it's a bit different with a guy like Kelly. I can see what you're saying though, and it's something he does need to work on.

The latter is effectively my point: the disagreement between people on Kelly comes with whether they think he can build an inside game or not, which is part speculation. If he doesn't at all he's not worth pick 4, if he can build a solid inside game he could be one of the best out of the draft - just depends whether you see him taking that step though.

For what it's worth I'm still slightly hesitant and there are other players I'd prefer - but Kelly could be something genuinely special. It's rare you see a kid with such vision, such disposal, such speed and such endurance all wrapped into one.

 

[timtamWB]

I think it might be a little bit early to make a call on that one.

To be honest, between now and the draft everyone should just be going to bed and saying a little prayer that everything falls our way on draft day and we land Scharenberg.

I'm just going on what I've seen of him, and I haven't seen anything that lets me believe he could build up his inside game to that level.

But lets just pray it goes Boyd, Aish, Kelly, Scharenberg. As it really should. I still think the Aish sliding call is bogus.