List Mgmt. 2015 general list discussion and speculation - PLEASE START NEW THREAD ON BREAKING NEWS

How did you rate Geelong's trade and free agency period?


  • Total voters
    151
Status
Not open for further replies.

Pivo

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Posts
10,390
Likes
11,036
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
WWT Eagles; Detroit Pistons
Dees supporters don't think he's up for trade either. One guy even suggested Murdoch for him.

However, they will get a rude shock if they think they are going to get anything like decent return on their investment in Watts, Trengove etc etc etc. You had the cash purchased the wrong stock and it plummeted... move on.
I reckon Trengove can play a bit.

Watts I'm not as sure on. Serviceable but not too sure he'll be too much more.

I think Grimes has played some good footy as well.

Earlier in the week I posted about Melbourne's request for a priority pick. In it I suggested that the issue might be more with the development/culture rather than the selections.

I think if you go back you'll see a lot of the guys they picked were highly regarded.

Once at Melbourne they seem to stagnate or, in some cases, go backwards.

That's why I don't think a Priority Pick would help that much.

If nothing else it'll make for an interesting trade period.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

manboob

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Posts
28,075
Likes
34,782
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
#rompingwins
Completely, priority pick is a waste at the Dees it just consigns some poor guy to the AFL scrapheap. Seriously if I was a drafted by the Dees and then delisted after a year or two during their "inglorious period" I'd sue them. **** it and them.
 

Lana

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Posts
8,764
Likes
15,785
AFL Club
GWS
Melbourne bypassed Wines because they had a similar type coming to them in Viney.

2 years on that might not look like a great decision but at the time it was fair I reckon.

Duncan is a bit more contested but that isn't a bad comparison.

When I've seen Toumpas play well, the guys I think of are Dal Santo and Pearce.

He probably doesn't have the speed of Pearce but I think Toumpas shares some traits of those guys.

The trick is harnessing it.
While Duncan has been a lot better this year with his contested work, he used to play so outside that he was almost in orbit. In his second year( the same stage Toumpas is) he averaged 17 touches a game, 5 contested. I don't know how further outside a player can be, besides Issac Smith.
 

Lana

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Posts
8,764
Likes
15,785
AFL Club
GWS
I reckon Trengove can play a bit.

Watts I'm not as sure on. Serviceable but not too sure he'll be too much more.

I think Grimes has played some good footy as well.

Earlier in the week I posted about Melbourne's request for a priority pick. In it I suggested that the issue might be more with the development/culture rather than the selections.

I think if you go back you'll see a lot of the guys they picked were highly regarded.

Once at Melbourne they seem to stagnate or, in some cases, go backwards.

That's why I don't think a Priority Pick would help that much.

If nothing else it'll make for an interesting trade period.
They need to do what Carlton did, throw everything at a Judd level player, Money and Draft picks), who can provide leadership on and off the field and carry the team on his shoulders. I don't know too many players who would fit the mold. Selwood and Dangerfield come to mind and It is very very rare that one would leave there club in it's prime.
 

manboob

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Posts
28,075
Likes
34,782
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
#rompingwins
They need to do what Carlton did, throw everything at a Judd level player, Money and Draft picks), who can provide leadership on and off the field and carry the team on his shoulders. I don't know too many players who would fit the mold. Selwood and Dangerfield come to mind and It is very very rare that one would leave there club in it's prime.
This is why GWS threw all that money at Bartel a few years ago.
 
Last edited:

Pivo

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Posts
10,390
Likes
11,036
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
WWT Eagles; Detroit Pistons
They need to do what Carlton did, throw everything at a Judd level player, Money and Draft picks), who can provide leadership on and off the field and carry the team on his shoulders. I don't know too many players who would fit the mold. Selwood and Dangerfield come to mind and It is very very rare that one would leave there club in it's prime.
The Judd trade is interesting to sit back and think about.

As great as Judd was I look at Kennedy and wonder if Carlton would have been better off keeping him instead of getting Judd and using their picks.

Carlton fans would be better placed to answer (and Judd in his prime was great) but Kennedy is going really well at West Coast and still has a few years in him. And good talls are hard to come by.

As for Duncan and contests. I must say that stat surprised me a bit. I was aware he was mostly outside but I thought he won a bit more contested ball than that early on (although I do tend to have blinkers on where it comes to Duncan). In my defence I was thinking of the 2014 Duncan rather than early days Duncan but still...little surprising.

Regardless, Toumpas only averages 3 and a half contested possessions in his games to date. He needs to pick that up like Duncan has.

Good outside runners can be weapons. And clubs do need them. A bit of the criticism directed at Varcoe recently has been his reluctance to carry the ball choosing instead to quickly give it off.

People like to knock Smith but he does that role well. Jetta has shown an ability to play it well too.

And Craig Bradley was a master at it.
 
Last edited:

Lana

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Posts
8,764
Likes
15,785
AFL Club
GWS
The Judd trade is interesting to sit back and think about.

As great as Judd was I look at Kennedy and wonder if Carlton would have been better off keeping him instead of getting Judd and using their picks.

Carlton fans would be better placed to answer (and Judd in his prime was great) but Kennedy is going really well at West Coast and still has a few years in him. And good talls are hard to come by.
The thing is that Judd provided more than his on field exploits which were at times like a one man army. He provides hope for the fans, and he protected Murphy and Gibbs on the field and provided a model off field to strive for. In my opinion if the didn't get him the development of Murphy and Gibbs would have most likely stalled as the would have been forced to carry the team well before they were ready to do so.

The reason why Melbourne players don't develop is that they are forced to do too much for the team on match day too soon and as such don't get enough off field training like extra weight seesions and running sessions. This is compounded by being played until their body breaks down, like Trengrove did last year.

As for Duncan and contests. I must say that stat surprised me a bit. I was aware he was mostly outside but I thought he won a bit more contested ball than that early on (although I do tend to have blinkers on where it comes to Duncan). In my defence I was thinking of the 2014 Duncan rather than early days Duncan but still...little surprising.
I like Duncan but he mostly still is an outside player averaging 22 disposals but only 7.5 of them are contested. The good thing is that we have plenty of other, better inside mids in the team, and if they are playing their role well he shouldn't need to win too much inside ball. He just needs to go in when it's his turn to do so. I'd rather he get 10 marks in a game than get 12 contested possessions. It would be indicative that he is playing his role perfectly.

Good outside runners can be weapons. And clubs do need them. A bit of the criticism directed at Varcoe recently has been his reluctance to carry the ball choosing instead to quickly give it off.

People like to knock Smith but he does that role well. Jetta has shown an ability to play it well too.

And Craig Bradley was a master at it.
Most of the criticism directed at Varcoe is based on a false premise, if you changed his name to David Wojcinski most people would be okay with his performance. He is playing the same role that Wojcinski is, he isn't playing amazing but he is doing his job. My dig at Smith wasn't completely serious, he plays a similar role to Duncan and gets similar output. When things are for going well a teams outside runners look worth a million dollars but in a even game where there is a lot of congestion like an even final they can go missing.
 

Moneypenny

Team Captain
Joined
May 29, 2014
Posts
440
Likes
1,287
Location
The Pimms Tent
AFL Club
Geelong
I think Melbourne has to finally deal with the fact that players are rarely just as good as their draft pick, but that it also goes both ways. Exhibit A: 1999 pick 47 - C. Enright.

The system is so arbitrary that after say, 5 years of being on an AFL list the combination of experiences, personality, development, coaching, outside influences etc it becomes a random number.

Even if you get the supposed #1 draft pick 3 years in a row that is no predictor that those 3 players will grow up to be the best of their year's cohort. High draft picks cannot save a club from all their woes. I don't know when a priority pick would be a good solution (perhaps a victim of trade season pillaging?), but it's certainly not Melbourne's situation
 

Turbocat

Premium Platinum
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
Posts
35,963
Likes
31,538
Location
Newtown
AFL Club
Geelong
I reckon Trengove can play a bit.

Watts I'm not as sure on. Serviceable but not too sure he'll be too much more.

I think Grimes has played some good footy as well.

Earlier in the week I posted about Melbourne's request for a priority pick. In it I suggested that the issue might be more with the development/culture rather than the selections.

I think if you go back you'll see a lot of the guys they picked were highly regarded.

Once at Melbourne they seem to stagnate or, in some cases, go backwards.

That's why I don't think a Priority Pick would help that much.

If nothing else it'll make for an interesting trade period.
In a way that's the downside of being early , very little upside in going your own way , they almost must follow the herd especially when they have failed so often. Like you said earlier Toumpas over Wines , a bit too clever for mine. Wines good mates with Viney , it just seem obvious. They hardly ever picked players that wee not rated Watts over NicNat because of go home but really it was not a great year to have #1

I posted this on the Melb board in regards to the PP request. Help yes. Another early pick No. (IMO)



True its sort of sets it up as a "Fire Sale" , the only thing I'll say is Roos is not at Melb for ten years, he will want to shake the tree.

I have not heard anyone say it but in regards to assistance id be all for a tradable pick like what GWS got. Its such an anomaly give help to a team that needs immediate help by giving them a kid. Seems contradictory to me . But give them a u17pick that must be traded , the best kid can be drafted (like Omera or Martin etc) by a team that trades for it , make it a criteria that you get players 22-28 and suddenly an immediate player infusion. Another thing id like to see is the AFL allow a couple of Rookies on your list and pay for them. Want a bargain , make it your self.

Melb is not alone is needing help but dolling out draft picks is a bit like feeding a starving man cake. If you really want to help bottom clubs thru the draft then the first round of the draft should only include the clubs out of finals , so the bottom clubs would get two picks in the top 20.
 

Turbocat

Premium Platinum
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
Posts
35,963
Likes
31,538
Location
Newtown
AFL Club
Geelong
While Duncan has been a lot better this year with his contested work, he used to play so outside that he was almost in orbit. In his second year( the same stage Toumpas is) he averaged 17 touches a game, 5 contested. I don't know how further outside a player can be, besides Issac Smith.
10lana..Whats Murda's figures?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Shai

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 30, 2013
Posts
4,570
Likes
3,521
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Oz Bball, Equest, Net, Tenn, Voll
The reason why Melbourne players don't develop is that they are forced to do too much for the team on match day too soon and as such don't get enough off field training like extra weight seesions and running sessions. This is compounded by being played until their body breaks down, like Trengrove did last year.

I like Duncan but he mostly still is an outside player averaging 22 disposals but only 7.5 of them are contested. The good thing is that we have plenty of other, better inside mids in the team, and if they are playing their role well he shouldn't need to win too much inside ball. He just needs to go in when it's his turn to do so. I'd rather he get 10 marks in a game than get 12 contested possessions. It would be indicative that he is playing his role perfectly.

Most of the criticism directed at Varcoe is based on a false premise, if you changed his name to David Wojcinski most people would be okay with his performance. He is playing the same role that Wojcinski is, he isn't playing amazing but he is doing his job. My dig at Smith wasn't completely serious, he plays a similar role to Duncan and gets similar output. When things are for going well a teams outside runners look worth a million dollars but in a even game where there is a lot of congestion like an even final they can go missing.
Pretty impressed with your logic, just like to point out that the same (bolded) could apply to GC which no1 wants to hear o_O
 

Lana

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Posts
8,764
Likes
15,785
AFL Club
GWS
I think Melbourne has to finally deal with the fact that players are rarely just as good as their draft pick, but that it also goes both ways. Exhibit A: 1999 pick 47 - C. Enright.

The system is so arbitrary that after say, 5 years of being on an AFL list the combination of experiences, personality, development, coaching, outside influences etc it becomes a random number.

Even if you get the supposed #1 draft pick 3 years in a row that is no predictor that those 3 players will grow up to be the best of their year's cohort. High draft picks cannot save a club from all their woes. I don't know when a priority pick would be a good solution (perhaps a victim of trade season pillaging?), but it's certainly not Melbourne's situation
When people say that this way, they are misrepresenting the value of early picks.

Think of the draft population as continuous probability function (a bell curve)

The probability that any single pick with be the best player drafted that year is low.

But the probability that a player drafted at pick number 1 will be in the top 10 best players drafted that is is significantly higher than a player drafted at pick 47.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Lana

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Posts
8,764
Likes
15,785
AFL Club
GWS
Pretty impressed with your logic, just like to point out that the same (bolded) could apply to GC which no1 wants to hear o_O
That's why they rotate their players heavily. They have so many early picks that they can rotate their many players out without a large drop in performance but a team like Melbourne can't since there replacement players are not good enough. The gap in output between the performance of Gold Coast's 22nd player and 30th player would be a lot less than Melbourne

10lana..Whats Murda's figures?
13 disposals a game of which just under 5 are contested.

.
 

Turbocat

Premium Platinum
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
Posts
35,963
Likes
31,538
Location
Newtown
AFL Club
Geelong
The thing is that Judd provided more than his on field exploits which were at times like a one man army. He provides hope for the fans, and he protected Murphy and Gibbs on the field and provided a model off field to strive for. In my opinion if the didn't get him the development of Murphy and Gibbs would have most likely stalled as the would have been forced to carry the team well before they were ready to do so.

The reason why Melbourne players don't develop is that they are forced to do too much for the team on match day too soon and as such don't get enough off field training like extra weight seesions and running sessions. This is compounded by being played until their body breaks down, like Trengrove did last year.



I like Duncan but he mostly still is an outside player averaging 22 disposals but only 7.5 of them are contested. The good thing is that we have plenty of other, better inside mids in the team, and if they are playing their role well he shouldn't need to win too much inside ball. He just needs to go in when it's his turn to do so. I'd rather he get 10 marks in a game than get 12 contested possessions. It would be indicative that he is playing his role perfectly.



Most of the criticism directed at Varcoe is based on a false premise, if you changed his name to David Wojcinski most people would be okay with his performance. He is playing the same role that Wojcinski is, he isn't playing amazing but he is doing his job. My dig at Smith wasn't completely serious, he plays a similar role to Duncan and gets similar output. When things are for going well a teams outside runners look worth a million dollars but in a even game where there is a lot of congestion like an even final they can go missing.
The bolded is a great point , was talking about it the other day. It would be interesting to look at games played in the first 3 or 4 years of a draftee by club over the last ten years or so. I know this can be a bit missleading in respect of some teams are harder to break into but its rare Geelong play a guy before he is ready. Melb guys have often looked not bad at the start but almost seem to burn out. I look at Hamling at Geelong and im sure he would have had games at some other clubs.
 

Shai

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 30, 2013
Posts
4,570
Likes
3,521
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Oz Bball, Equest, Net, Tenn, Voll
The bolded is a great point , was talking about it the other day. It would be interesting to look at games played in the first 3 or 4 years of a draftee by club over the last ten years or so. I know this can be a bit missleading in respect of some teams are harder to break into but its rare Geelong play a guy before he is ready. Melb guys have often looked not bad at the start but almost seem to burn out. I look at Hamling at Geelong and im sure he would have had games at some other clubs.
IMO this (bolded) is exactly why we r where we are now, the culture is superior to almost (if not all) other clubs..
 

Turbocat

Premium Platinum
Joined
Dec 10, 2003
Posts
35,963
Likes
31,538
Location
Newtown
AFL Club
Geelong
When people say that this they are misrepresenting the value of early picks.

Think of the draft population as continuous probability function (a bell curve)

The probability that any single pick with be the best player drafted that year is low.

But the probability that a player drafted at pick number 1 will be in the top 10 best players drafted that is is significantly higher than a player drafted at pick 47.
Thats a very statistical way of looking at :thumbsu: Im sure there a few analogy's , I sort think its like a race maybe a 10,000 M or a marathon etc. The best kid give you a head start but without working in the race the head start will mean little over the life of the race. Its not quite right , but the best talent in u18's rarely become the sole standouts.
 

Moneypenny

Team Captain
Joined
May 29, 2014
Posts
440
Likes
1,287
Location
The Pimms Tent
AFL Club
Geelong
When people say that this way, they are misrepresenting the value of early picks.

Think of the draft population as continuous probability function (a bell curve)

The probability that any single pick with be the best player drafted that year is low.

But the probability that a player drafted at pick number 1 will be in the top 10 best players drafted that is is significantly higher than a player drafted at pick 47.
That's probably true to some extent, as people will easily identify the obviously better players from the pack, but i don't think picks 1-5 or 6-10 are vastly different in terms of current or future ability. The point I was trying to make is that the value of early picks is there if you have the right structures at your disposal to take advantage of the opportunity, since the number a player is drafted at is a speculative value judgment based on the information at hand when the kid is 17/18.
 

Partridge

Hall of Famer
Joined
Nov 12, 2002
Posts
35,397
Likes
37,295
AFL Club
Geelong
Most of the criticism directed at Varcoe is based on a false premise, if you changed his name to David Wojcinski most people would be okay with his performance. He is playing the same role that Wojcinski is, he isn't playing amazing but he is doing his job. My dig at Smith wasn't completely serious, he plays a similar role to Duncan and gets similar output. When things are for going well a teams outside runners look worth a million dollars but in a even game where there is a lot of congestion like an even final they can go missing.
Completely disagree. Varcoe doesn't do anywhere near enough anywhere near often enough, and has endless excuses continually made for him. This isn't a 3rd or 4th year player either; he's in his 8th season of football, has played 134 games and is 26 years of age. He should be at his absolute peak. He's never had to earn his position in the team and has never had to deal with being dropped constantly either.

I find it pretty amusing that Duncan apparently needs to do more but Varcoe is travelling ok. Duncan - unlike Varcoe - has actually increased his output every single season since debut. And this season, his average kicks, handpasses, marks, goals and tackles per game are all at career-highs or equal to. In other words, exactly what you would hope for.
 
Last edited:

Lana

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Posts
8,764
Likes
15,785
AFL Club
GWS
Completely disagree. Varcoe doesn't do anywhere near enough anywhere near often enough, and has endless excuses continually made for him. This isn't a 3rd or 4th year player either; he's in his 8th season of football, has played 134 games and is 26 years of age. He should be at his absolute peak. He's never had to earn his position in the team and has never had to deal with being dropped constantly either.

I find it pretty amusing that Duncan apparently needs to do more but Varcoe is travelling ok. Duncan - unlike Varcoe - has actually increased his output every single season since debut. And this season, his average kicks, handpasses, marks, goals and tackles per game are all at career-highs or equal to. In other words, exactly what you would hope for.
When did I have a go at Duncan, he's doing a great job.

Next time you go to game live spend 10 minutes looking at Varcoe's running patterns. He covers a huge amount of territory he often dragging an opponent with him which clears space for others. He's clearly being told to play a role by the match committee where he is sacrificing his output so that other players gain an advantage. You'll see that he often makes large quick runs from D50 to our F50 on the opposite wing of the play leaving his direct opponent chasing him while he is ready for a switch. Also look at when the other team gets a fast break from their D50, he is often the player who harasses the ball carrier which buys our players time to flood back. If you put him on the wing for the whole game he would be winning a lot more of the ball but clearly Scott and the match committee value what he is doing now more than that.

There are things that the TV cameras which are zoomed in on the ball don't catch and that your can't read from a stats sheet.
 

Partridge

Hall of Famer
Joined
Nov 12, 2002
Posts
35,397
Likes
37,295
AFL Club
Geelong
Next time you go to game live spend 10 minutes looking at Varcoe's running patterns. He covers a huge amount of territory he often dragging an opponent with him which clears space for others. He's clearly being told to play a role by the match committee where he is sacrificing his output so that other players gain an advantage.
Ah yes, running patterns. I was disappointed in Caddy's game last week for the same reason. Very poor running patterns, he foolishly went and got the bal 28 times instead.
 

Footy Smarts

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Posts
6,698
Likes
9,499
AFL Club
Geelong
Completely disagree. Varcoe doesn't do anywhere near enough anywhere near often enough, and has endless excuses continually made for him.
You talk about output and then mention stats as evidence. Yet Varcoe's stats this year are almost identical to Wojcinski's in 2011 when they've been playing very, very similar roles (Wojak had 0.7 more disposals, 1.5 less tackles, etc). I assume you wanted Wojcinski dropped in 2011?
 

Pivo

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Posts
10,390
Likes
11,036
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
WWT Eagles; Detroit Pistons
First up 10lana, some really good posting there.

Well reasoned and thought out. It made for some excellent reading that made me sit back and think. :thumbsu:

The only thing I disagree with is your comment about Varcoe but, since uttering his name has the ability to change a thread's direction (see the above few posts) in a way that puts Billie Smedts famed agility to shame, I'll not pursue it further (there are plenty of other threads I can do that in but for the sake of this thread I'll park it).

I did want to echo and add some thoughts on this quote...

When people say that this way, they are misrepresenting the value of early picks.

Think of the draft population as continuous probability function (a bell curve)

The probability that any single pick with be the best player drafted that year is low.

But the probability that a player drafted at pick number 1 will be in the top 10 best players drafted that is is significantly higher than a player drafted at pick 47.
If the AFL tried to change the way the draft was run we'd see some vocal opponents.

Try and make the draft, say, a "cycle" (where every club gets the #1 pick every 18 years), and we'd see people argue that isn't fair, especially if a club is anchored to the foot of the ladder and had its #1 selection a couple of years prior.

Early picks give a club the best opportunity to select the cream of the crop. Draft position isn't a guarantee of "making it" but more really good players, in my mind, will have come from the top 20 or 30 over the years (that could be some homework for me to do to confirm). There will always be outliers and there will also be players inside the top 30 that don't make it but it sounds about right.

While Wells & Co. should be commended for their ability to find value with later picks I have voiced my thoughts that having to use more later picks probably isn't a sustainable model for success over time.

Geelong has defied conventional wisdom by having a long period at the top (remove the abnormality of 2006 and it dates back to 2004 and is still going) but I do think we have come back to the pack now when compared to '07-'11.

Part of that success means we don't have the same accessibility to top end talent over time. That will (should) see us slip down the ladder.

That is how it is designed after all.

With recruiting becoming more and more critical to clubs there is a lot more work being put in meaning it is trickier to find those "hidden gems" for yourself.

The other thing to keep in mind about having early draft picks; it gives a club a wider pool to choose from.

As Turbs mentioned regarding Wines & Toumpas, sometimes too many choices can play a bit of havoc and make a club look a bit foolish (Watts over Naitanui is another that comes to mind when discussing the Dees) but that is where the recruiters earn their crust and a club's development kicks in.

Given a choice, I think most recruiters and clubs would like to have their first pick inside the top 10 (or 20).

While there may not be much difference between 1-5 and 6-10 (or even 11-20) there is a difference between them and a kid picked at 50.

Consider last year - the top 10 was Boyd, Kelly, Billings, Bontempelli, Kolodjashnij, Scharenberg, Aish, McDonald, Salem and Freeman.

40-50 was Kennedy-Harris, Kolodashnij, Fuller, Barrass, Aliir, Harvey, Knight, Brown, Main and Gordon (with a pass from GWS).

I know which bucket I'd prefer to pick from (despite there being some decent players in that 40-50 range and despite the fact not all of those top tenners may work out).

The successes are more likely from the early picks.

In 2012 the top 10 was Whitfield, O'Rourke, Plowman, Toumpas, Stringer, Macrae, Wines, Mayes, Vlastuin and Daniher (a F/S who was tipped to be top 5).

40-50 was Murdoch (Brodie), Wood, McDonough, Saunders, Marsh, Colledge, Membery, Wilkins, Kent, Hunter (F/S) and Prudden.

In '11 names like Patton, Winguard, Tyson, Coniglio, Buntine and Longer can be found in the top 10 while the best names I can come up with between 40 and 50 is Jordan Murdoch and Sam Rowe.

The same trend appears in 2010 (although Luke Parker at 40 seems incredible now) with the top 10 of the draft looking to have the guys most likely.

Even in 2009 with Christensen, Stratton and Vardy aiding the 40-50 brigade the better bets appear early (injury hurting Trengove, Morabito and Rohan).

Not an exact science but the misses at the top end appear to be getting fewer and fewer in recent times.

Sorry for the longwinded ramble but it is a topic I enjoy discussing.

Perhaps I should have just wrote "+1" after the quote. :)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom