List Mgmt. 2013 DRAFT

[Quazza]

So seems it's between Cripps and Dunstan

Dunstan was the SA Captain........

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

curious - if we weren't interested in Cripps, where would mocks have him going?

Just "feels" like a bit of a reach

3 weeks ago with all the championship stats available to them, the AFL site 'experts' had him going in the 21-40 range. It is fair to say that nothing has happened since then to elevate him except for our recruiters thinking he is exactly what we need. However if it is 21, then 13 is not a massive reach. I think the issue is the highly touted mids that will still be around. It's not as though we are throwing away our pick. If he makes it, he will be exactly the type of inside mid we need and he may free up Juddy and I mean no disrespect, but replace having to play Bell, Cachia, Curnow, maybe Robinson and McLean in the same side. Just an incremental improvement in a key area that could make all the difference.

 

[choo]

I was told today
Bontempelli
Salem
Freeman
Cripps
Dunstan

in that order
I

 

[Doro]

3 weeks ago with all the championship stats available to them, the AFL site 'experts' had him going in the 21-40 range. It is fair to say that nothing has happened since then to elevate him except for our recruiters thinking he is exactly what we need. However if it is 21, then 13 is not a massive reach. I think the issue is the highly touted mids that will still be around. It's not as though we are throwing away our pick. If he makes it, he will be exactly the type of inside mid we need and he may free up Juddy and I mean no disrespect, but replace having to play Bell, Cachia, Curnow, maybe Robinson and McLean in the same side. Just an incremental improvement in a key area that could make all the difference.

Well, need to disagree with this pick downgrade. History says one of the highly touted bunch will slide tomorrow, and I don't have the faith in our recruiters reaching.

 

[Silvagnis]

Dunstan was the SA Captain........

And?

Cripps was WA's VC.

Reckon you can give an 18 year old a pass with his endurance if he's 192 cms and lugging around 90 odd kgs. Cripps is nearly KPP height and weight. He isn't as slight or as tall as Acres, Hartung, Freeman, Taylor and the other mids. Plus he's a country footy player from Northampton, rather than the TAC Cup. Cripps must have a great footy brain if he can win 40 touches against his peers on WA's fast tracks.

 

[zeeCFC]

Dunstan was the SA Captain........

yeah I get him and Sheed mixed up...

 

[Go_Blues!]

Sadly, that's because it is.

I doubt that is right. He would go around 13. If there is a slider and we get someone else instead, pretty sure he will go prior to 17

 

[zeeCFC]

And?

Cripps was WA's VC.

Reckon you can give an 18 year old a pass with his endurance if he's 192 cms and lugging around 90 odd kgs. Cripps is nearly KPP height and weight. He isn't as slight or as tall as Acres, Hartung, Freeman, Taylor and the other mids. Plus he's a country footy player from Northampton, rather than the TAC Cup. Cripps must have a great footy brain if he can win 40 touches against his peers on WA's fast tracks.

he was replying to me mistaking Dunstan as a WA kid.

 

[etsal1]

I doubt that is right. He would go around 13. If there is a slider and we get someone else instead, pretty sure he will go prior to 17

I would honestly love someone to convince me he is not a reach. I want to be excited about a potential Carlton player.

 

[BlueTongue]

3 weeks ago with all the championship stats available to them, the AFL site 'experts' had him going in the 21-40 range. It is fair to say that nothing has happened since then to elevate him except for our recruiters thinking he is exactly what we need. However if it is 21, then 13 is not a massive reach. I think the issue is the highly touted mids that will still be around. It's not as though we are throwing away our pick. If he makes it, he will be exactly the type of inside mid we need and he may free up Juddy and I mean no disrespect, but replace having to play Bell, Cachia, Curnow, maybe Robinson and McLean in the same side. Just an incremental improvement in a key area that could make all the difference.

You make it sound so reasonable ODN, but that fact he tested poor in the Draft Combine, and the fact that we have so many B grade mids, means I think we should be going after a Gun Mid or McCarthy.
Funny how 'Best Available' seems to be a perfectly reasonable selection process only when it comes to drafting a KPP, yet we seem to make allowances to that rule for mids.
I'll be pissed if we don't take 'Best Available' in this senario, as McCarthy is clearly a better option.

 

[Go_Blues!]

And?

Cripps was WA's VC.

Reckon you can give an 18 year old a pass with his endurance if he's 192 cms and lugging around 90 odd kgs. Cripps is nearly KPP height and weight. He isn't as slight or as tall as Acres, Hartung, Freeman, Taylor and the other mids. Plus he's a country footy player from Northampton, rather than the TAC Cup. Cripps must have a great footy brain if he can win 40 touches against his peers on WA's fast tracks.

Well, clearly it is a plus for a player if they have leadership traits that resulted in them being picked as captain......similarly for vice captain (Cripps). Both would be good choices; personally hoping for Bontempelli but I think that is very unlikely.

 

[etsal1]

I was told today
Bontempelli
Salem
Freeman
Cripps
Dunstan

in that order
I

Herald Sun phantom has Freeman sliding to the Swans and us taking Cripps at 13. Surely we wouldn't overlook Freeman for Cripps.

 

[Go_Blues!]

Herald Sun phantom has Freeman sliding to the Swans and us taking Cripps at 13. Surely we wouldn't overlook Freeman for Cripps.

Freeman has got some question marks about him though. For a start he is not the best kick in the draft and I think that could have a big influence on where he goes. I think Freeman could go as low as 18.

 

[Silvagnis]

he was replying to me mistaking Dunstan as a WA kid.

Fair enough.

 

[Jeremias]

Herald Sun phantom has Freeman sliding to the Swans and us taking Cripps at 13. Surely we wouldn't overlook Freeman for Cripps.

Why not?

There's only so much we should look into phantom drafts.

People have favourites they like to push as well as not being privy to the full set of information provided to clubs.

If we take Cripps at 13 it's because we believe he's the best fit for the club. I'll take that over anything any amateur phantom drafter or youtube watcher offers up.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Well, need to disagree with this pick downgrade. History says one of the highly touted bunch will slide tomorrow, and I don't have the faith in our recruiters reaching.

Yeah but we do buy into the hype of the touted bunch every year. Patrick Dangerfield was taken at #10 in the 2007 draft.

The BF phantom draft had him at #36
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/bigfooty-trial-phantom-draft-2007.358174/

Here he was #35 (Aaron Joseph was #31 incidentally)
http://www.aflinsider.net/afl-mock-draft-2007-all-the-picks/

#37 here just a few days out from the draft
http://www.aflcentral.com.au/2007-11/

Then all the whispers started and the usual late phantom drafters with the club contacts started to take note. Burgatron had him #14 late with inside info and the Crows struck even higher.
http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/8446-matt-burgans-phantom-draft/

 

[Bradschi]

Just a few points of Patrick Cripps:

- He went to boarding school so don't think home-sickness will be much of an issue as some posters have pointed out his cousin went back to WA after being drafted by St Kilda. Plus we have been pretty good with western australians over the years and there are plenty of them at the club so that can be put to rest.

- The thing with Cripps as others have mentioned is that he is still growing into his body, and his endurance can be built on, partnering him to certain players on the list such as Walker or Curnow over the next couple of pre-seasons will do him a world of good.

- From the interview poster on the AFL website, states that he wants to grab the opportunity with both hands, that hints a willingness to work hard. He also mentioned his style of game is like Oliver Wines so that'll be a good addition

- Doesn't rely on his strength that much in contests, so once he gets used to his bigger frame and learn to use that to his advantage it'll add to his strengths, no pun intended. Has footy smarts and instincts to play and that is very important to have.

- At about 190-192cm, dependent on which source is correct, he's already at 90kg. Once he is put into an AFL environment, he'll be shedding a few kgs and improve his running ability. Over the next 2-3 years or so he can continue to add on muscle mass while improving his aerobic capacity further, e.g. Gibbs last pre-season.

- People who are saying this is a reach for the club, well it is fine to have your view on the matter, however it is important to keep in mind that not many of us know the club's plans or what they see in a potential draftee, so whoever we choose at our selections will be the best fit for our club and the culture from the view of our coaches and recruiting team. As Rogers said, there is a big difference between best available, and best available for the club.

 

[etsal1]

Why not?

There's only so much we should look into phantom drafts.

People have favourites they like to push as well as not being privy to the full set of information provided to clubs.

If we take Cripps at 13 it's because we believe he's the best fit for the club. I'll take that over anything any amateur phantom drafter or youtube watcher offers up.

My concern is Cripps at 13 appears like a needs pick. Not best available. First pick should always be best available.

No one hear even mentioned Cripps until we begun to be linked to him. Did anyone hear rate him for pick 13 after watching him play? As ODN said on previous page, what has changed in the last couple of weeks to make him suddenly a first round pick?

 

[choo]

Herald Sun phantom has Freeman sliding to the Swans and us taking Cripps at 13. Surely we wouldn't overlook Freeman for Cripps.

Dogs want Bontempelli
Melbourne are gooey for Freeman
Ninthmond want Salem

 

[Go_Blues!]

Yeah but we do buy into the hype of the touted bunch every year. Patrick Dangerfield was taken at #10 in the 2007 draft.

The BF phantom draft had him at #36
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/bigfooty-trial-phantom-draft-2007.358174/

Here he was #35 (Aaron Joseph was #31 incidentally)
http://www.aflinsider.net/afl-mock-draft-2007-all-the-picks/

#37 here just a few days out from the draft
http://www.aflcentral.com.au/2007-11/

Then all the whispers started and the usual late phantom drafters with the club contacts started to take note. Burgatron had him #14 late with inside info and the Crows struck even higher.
http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/8446-matt-burgans-phantom-draft/

Yeah, but Dangerfield was a bit of a special case. Adelaide obviously put a power of work into getting him over because only the best of them could have seen what they saw in in Dangerfield. He looked like he would snap at any moment and had no power in his game.

However, your point is absolutely right. Phantom drafts are written by people with no responsibility (and sometimes not much knowledge). Clearly all clubs put a lot of work into the first round and I think that phantom drafts are entertaining rather than accurate. EQ is an obvious exception.

 

[Silvagnis]

My concern is Cripps at 13 appears like a needs pick. Not best available. First pick should always be best available

Same type of player as Dunstan.

You don't know anything about Cripps.

How can any of us criticise the pick?

The big boys aren't phantom drafters playing dreamteam for fun.

No one hear even mentioned Cripps until we begun to be linked to him. Did anyone hear rate him for pick 13 after watching him play? As ODN said on previous page, what has changed in the last couple of weeks to make him suddenly a first round pick?

Good.

No sneaky leakers.

 

[Go_Blues!]

My concern is Cripps at 13 appears like a needs pick. Not best available. First pick should always be best available.

No one hear even mentioned Cripps until we begun to be linked to him. Did anyone hear rate him for pick 13 after watching him play? As ODN said on previous page, what has changed in the last couple of weeks to make him suddenly a first round pick?

I think you are making too much of "needs" vs "best available" If we really needed young ruckman to draft and develop and drafted one at 13, I think that would be taking "needs". Given the choice of midfielders we are going to choose between, this comes down to best fit and who we like. I dont think this is needs vs best available.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

My concern is Cripps at 13 appears like a needs pick. Not best available. First pick should always be best available.

No one hear even mentioned Cripps until we begun to be linked to him. Did anyone hear rate him for pick 13 after watching him play? As ODN said on previous page, what has changed in the last couple of weeks to make him suddenly a first round pick?

As I also pointed out though ... what changed to make Dangerfield worth a top 10 pick after he was touted to go in the 30s?

Maybe Carlton don't need a half forward type who knows where the goals are with Menzel on the list? Maybe they don't need an inside mid who lacks size because we have Curnow and Cachia? Maybe they don't need a utility runner having added Everitt? Remember people do talk about being able to throw a blanket over a lot of these guys. I saw Crouch going around our pick and now I see him going in the 20s. Seems like a guessing game of degrees.

 

[Bradschi]

My concern is Cripps at 13 appears like a needs pick. Not best available. First pick should always be best available.

No one hear even mentioned Cripps until we begun to be linked to him. Did anyone hear rate him for pick 13 after watching him play? As ODN said on previous page, what has changed in the last couple of weeks to make him suddenly a first round pick?

The two posts above yours, from both ODN and myself are examples of the difference between people within the club knowing what they're doing and outsiders that are making educated guesses, exactly why the recruiters get paid the big bucks.

As I also pointed out though ... what changed to make Dangerfield worth a top 10 pick after he was touted to go in the 30s?


Maybe Carlton don't need a half forward type who knows where the goals are with Menzel on the list? Maybe they don't need an inside mid who lacks size because we have Curnow and Cachia? Maybe they don't need a utility runner having added Everitt? Remember people do talk about being able to throw a blanket over a lot of these guys. I saw Crouch going around our pick and now I see him going in the 20s. Seems like a guessing game of degrees.

I'm assuming when you say size of Curnow and Cachia you mean their height and not their bulk because both those blokes have plenty of that.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Yeah, but Dangerfield was a bit of a special case. Adelaide obviously put a power of work into getting him over because only the best of them could have seen what they saw in in Dangerfield. He looked like he would snap at any moment and had no power in his game.

However, your point is absolutely right. Phantom drafts are written by people with no responsibility (and sometimes not much knowledge). Clearly all clubs put a lot of work into the first round and I think that phantom drafts are entertaining rather than accurate. EQ is an obvious exception.

I'd say a 192cm midfielder who still thinks he is 172cm but is a size that would play for a bottom 8 club immediately, might qualify as a special case. Plenty of growth in his game to be had but could still play while he is developing because of his size.