2014 Draft Discussion

[dlanod]

Not certain he fits our needs anyway. Has a knack for getting the ball (or at least he did) but it's hard to identify any other genuine strengths in his game.

Turning over the ball by both hand and foot?

 

[Ironmonger]

Turning over the ball by both hand and foot?

You're right, the Western Bulldogs will be all over him.

 

[Haso]

You're right, the Western Bulldogs will be all over him.

Like a fat kid on cake.

 

[carnthemlions]

Turning over the ball by both hand and foot?

Sounds like a real upgrade on Raines to me!
Sign him up now!!

 

[POBT]

Thinking a bit on the Academy guys....

Clearly, if we have access to a very early pick, then one of the elite young forwards will probably come our way.

Looking purely at what our list appears to lack, I'd say we're missing some midfield depth/class, another ruckman and a small defender. They are gaps right now as well as something I don't really see developing from within.

Dawson might give us someone who can free up others to run through the midfield but, with lots of 3rd tall types and a fair bit of running height after the Kerr era, he doesn't fill a direct need IMO. However, it might be a case of too good to pass up.

I really don't think we need too many more developing KPPs which makes Hammelman a tough fit unless we discard a few similar types on our list. We've committed to Close for an extended period. Paine, McStay and Freeman have another year, Bourke was impressive in the pre-season and we appear to be sold on Clarke and Gardiner too, at this early age. Even if Lisle and Michael are delisted, we're still quite strong on talls aged 18-21ish, particularly the possibility of a Wright/McCartin/Goddard/Durdin on the list too.

In a perfect world, I'd like to see a draft which is something like this:

1st pick: Tall forward
2nd pick: Best available mid
3rd pick: Player with small defender potential
4th pick: Maybe a project ruck?

If we assume our second pick is going to be Dawson, it means that our other needs are met by lower picks.

 

[Billy Puller]

Thinking a bit on the Academy guys....

Clearly, if we have access to a very early pick, then one of the elite young forwards will probably come our way.

Looking purely at what our list appears to lack, I'd say we're missing some midfield depth/class, another ruckman and a small defender. They are gaps right now as well as something I don't really see developing from within.

Dawson might give us someone who can free up others to run through the midfield but, with lots of 3rd tall types and a fair bit of running height after the Kerr era, he doesn't fill a direct need IMO. However, it might be a case of too good to pass up.

I really don't think we need too many more developing KPPs which makes Hammelman a tough fit unless we discard a few similar types on our list. We've committed to Close for an extended period. Paine, McStay and Freeman have another year, Bourke was impressive in the pre-season and we appear to be sold on Clarke and Gardiner too, at this early age. Even if Lisle and Michael are delisted, we're still quite strong on talls aged 18-21ish, particularly the possibility of a Wright/McCartin/Goddard/Durdin on the list too.

In a perfect world, I'd like to see a draft which is something like this:

1st pick: Tall forward
2nd pick: Best available mid
3rd pick: Player with small defender potential
4th pick: Maybe a project ruck?

If we assume our second pick is going to be Dawson, it means that our other needs are met by lower picks.

Dawson can play that HBF/Small defender role really well. He has some real drive off the HBF as well as good defensive capabilities and an excellent mark.

 

[chopperduck]

In a perfect world, I'd like to see a draft which is something like this:

1st pick: Tall forward
2nd pick: Best available mid
3rd pick: Player with small defender potential
4th pick: Maybe a project ruck?

If we assume our second pick is going to be Dawson, it means that our other needs are met by lower picks.

Going off what i heard at the coaches club, the immediate player types we want are KPF, Mid and a hybrid defender. Hybrid defender they described as a 'Birchall type' and they did quote his name. Someone who is capable of playing as a medium type defender, but also offers plenty on the rebound including a very tidy kick. I'm certainly no expert on draftees, but i don't think Dawson quiet fits this, but is probably close enough that if we could get him with our 3rd pick we would be pretty happy with it. I think the way you have gone with your estimated picks, will be pretty close to what we will do come draft time. Will be interesting to see if there is any extra player movement via trade or even FA signings that might change this though. Outside of those 3 things, Leppa indicated he still wants another ruckman, and by ruck he means genuine #1 ruck position, not a Martin, West or Michael ruck forward. Someone who is a genuine tap ruckman. He also still wants another tall defender. I think project ruck could certainly happen at our 4th pick, and TBH, i would not be surprised if we manage to develop a tall defender out of all the 18-21 year old talls we do currently have. Maybe we draft Wright, Close as CHF and a 2nd ruck means someone like Hammelan, if we take him, might end up as a defender. The ruck and tall defender definitely felt as much less priority than the other 3 positions. Schwab is the one who actually listed the KPF, mid and hybrid defender as the player types we want to bring in.

TBH, i am hoping we can Dawson with our 3rd pick, leaving our first two picks for the KPF and the mid, which we should be able to get comfortably. Whilst Especially with so many talls up the top end of this draft, a mid around the early 20's at our second pick could be of very good quality.

 

[POBT]

Dawson can play that HBF/Small defender role really well. He has some real drive off the HBF as well as good defensive capabilities and an excellent mark.

I'm talking about a small defender playing on Rioli, Ballantine, Wingard etc. The role that needs more pace and agility than Harwood and Adcock possess. Golby doesn't seem in the equation for that position. Hence why I think it is a hole.

From what I've seen of Dawson he is remarkably agile for a player of his height and size but he still couldn't go with a genuine small forward.

I think we're relatively well equipped for the mid-sized running defender.

 

[POBT]

Going off what i heard at the coaches club, the immediate player types we want are KPF, Mid and a hybrid defender.

I'm not trying to suggest my view of the list equates with that of the club but I think that we've invested in a lot of running height so it won't take much to have one play as a defender. I'm really not seeing that as a great need.

FWIW, that Birchall role is exactly the role I think Dawson will be suited to in the seniors. If he plays that role, it might free up a Cutler, Mayes, Hanley etc to play midfield/wing/half forward.

 

[Quigley]

Talls out this year - Brown, Maguire, Martin and in real danger atm Staker, Michael, Lisle

I think we could bring in two or three tall newbies without too many list balance issues.

One thing I think we lag behind most of the top teams is in genuine leg speed. That is two or three players who can pick it up and are just not going to be caught. Green has a good burst but anything over 20 metres he is not really that quick. One who would fit the bill on that front is Jarrod Pickett. I like him but see him atm as falling between our picks. Worth keeping an eye on.

One guy who I am liking more and more all the time is Tom Lamb. Interestingly he was listed at 193cm the other day rather than the 190cm the AFL prospectus has him at. He is a bit of a Pavlich type and could be a great pick up. Atm he would be slated to go between say 5 and 10 but I could see him moving up lists if he continues his form.

 

[carnthemlions]

I'm talking about a small defender playing on Rioli, Ballantine, Wingard etc. The role that needs more pace and agility than Harwood and Adcock possess. Golby doesn't seem in the equation for that position. Hence why I think it is a hole.

From what I've seen of Dawson he is remarkably agile for a player of his height and size but he still couldn't go with a genuine small forward.

I think we're relatively well equipped for the mid-sized running defender.

If anything, I think being able to play Dawson off half back would enable us to use Rich and Hanley in as midfielders more often than they have been this year(obviously I'm assuming that Rich would've continued in that role if he hadn't gone down).
I think our midfield depth really won't be lacking when everyone's fit. Rockliff, Redden, Aish, Lester, Beams, Rich, Moloney(if he can get back into the team), Robertson, Mayes and even Paparone have all shown they can play midfield full time. Hanley, Green, Zorko, Taylor, Cutler, O'Brien(if he's upgraded) and Golby are all capable as well. Dawson apparently also has the potential to play midfield.
The question is really whether we have enough quality, we certainly don't lack in quantity.

 

[Ironmonger]

I'm finding it hard to figure out what our positional depth is really like. We seemed to be fine for small defenders until Golby and Harwood were dropped. We seemed to be okay for damaging midfielders until Rich, Hanley and now Mayes were all pushed into the backline. But whether that means there's a spot available or whether it means Leppa prefers damaging types to be behind the ball I'm not sure.

It's interesting to note that Freeman, Close (I think?) and McStay all seem to be getting trialled both forward and back in the ressies, along with Maguire at the start of the year, which makes me think that we really want a genuinely flexible swingman, which in turn makes me think we're a chance to try and draft one if we don't have much confidence in our current squad to produce one.

That seems to bode well for Hammelmann, from the bits and pieces I know about him.

I agree with Quigley that leg speed is likely to be a focus of our off-season recruiting. That seems to be a factor that's influenced selection decisions so far this year.

On that, it was interesting to read in David Epstein's The Sports Gene (compulsory reading for all sport fans, IMO) that leg speed is one physical factor that almost never improves relative to a young athlete's peers: as in, slow youths don't become fast adults. If you want more speed you have to draft it or trade for it - you can't develop it.

 

[Billy Puller]

If anything, I think being able to play Dawson off half back would enable us to use Rich and Hanley in as midfielders more often than they have been this year(obviously I'm assuming that Rich would've continued in that role if he hadn't gone down).
I think our midfield depth really won't be lacking when everyone's fit. Rockliff, Redden, Aish, Lester, Beams, Rich, Moloney(if he can get back into the team), Robertson, Mayes and even Paparone have all shown they can play midfield full time. Hanley, Green, Zorko, Taylor, Cutler, O'Brien(if he's upgraded) and Golby are all capable as well. Dawson apparently also has the potential to play midfield.
The question is really whether we have enough quality, we certainly don't lack in quantity.

Dawson is a real utility player, Quigley would know more but imo his best position is HBF. Which is what we are really struggling with his some quality HBF.

 

[Mavlions1961]

I'm a huge fan of the NFL draft but I don't think that format could work with the AFL.

The NFL draft can have that sort of spectacle because it comes off the back of the absolutely huge NCAA college football scene that feeds into the NFL.

The AFL pathway of 18 year old kids coming from state junior feeder competitions just doesn't provide that same excitement for the average punter.

It's a nice dream but not a realistic one.

So true TBD, the NCAA college footy over there is massive, try getting a ticket to any game and its impossible, some college stadiums seat over 100,000.

 

[Billy Puller]

So true TBD, the NCAA college footy over there is massive, try getting a ticket to any game and its impossible, some college stadiums seat over 100,000.

Its really awsome the way the colleges get round for the games. Having a packed out Basketball hall or Rugby Field for school sport has the best atmosphere. Wish the Lions could get an atmosphere similar to college games be amazing.

 

[Quigley]

Dawson is a real utility player, Quigley would know more but imo his best position is HBF. Which is what we are really struggling with his some quality HBF.

I don't really know to atm to tell the truth. He has played mostly up forward and is good there but he is pretty good down back as well and was named as an AA backman last year. Could go either way.

 

[dlanod]

So true TBD, the NCAA college footy over there is massive, try getting a ticket to any game and its impossible, some college stadiums seat over 100,000.

Six out of the top 10 biggest stadiums in the world are college football stadiums. The MCG is 10th at 100,024 by comparison.

 

[chopperduck]

And that's why they can hype up the draft. They are drafting ready made professional athletes. Very different to kids we draft in the AFL. Whilst the bar has probably been raised, and the under 18's program is a lot more professional, there is still a massive gap between the draft comp and the top comp. I don't think there is the money around at the level to make anything too much bigger than what it is. You would need some good advertising/sponsorship/media(tv) revenue to kick it up a notch i think.

I do like that they are talking about raising the draft age though.

 

[Happy_Neale]

And that's why they can hype up the draft. They are drafting ready made professional athletes. Very different to kids we draft in the AFL. Whilst the bar has probably been raised, and the under 18's program is a lot more professional, there is still a massive gap between the draft comp and the top comp. I don't think there is the money around at the level to make anything too much bigger than what it is. You would need some good advertising/sponsorship/media(tv) revenue to kick it up a notch i think.

I do like that they are talking about raising the draft age though.

Radical idea: tie players to universities ala the American system. In fact it's a little bit weird there is no university sport system IMO (apart from Uni games, which nobody goes to to play sport, if you know what I mean).

Could that work?

 

[dlanod]

Radical idea: tie players to universities ala the American system. In fact it's a little bit weird there is no university sport system IMO (apart from Uni games, which nobody goes to to play sport, if you know what I mean).

Could that work?

Is there actually university sports systems elsewhere in the world? Or is it purely a U.S. thing?

 

[jackess]

Yep we should become just like America

 

[Happy_Neale]

Is there actually university sports systems elsewhere in the world? Or is it purely a U.S. thing?

Not too sure. I think I remember hearing there is a few tournaments in Europe where universities all play against each other but I don't know of anything as structured as the NCAA system.

Yep we should become just like America

I did say it was radical and not 100% serious. It was more to address the drafting age.

 

[jackess]

I'd much, much, much rather see them play state league than a US college type match.

 

[Haso]

(apart from Uni games, which nobody goes to to play sport, if you know what I mean).

 

[Happy_Neale]

I'd much, much, much rather see them play state league than a US college type match.

What's the difference from a spectators point of view?