Review 2016 AFL National Draft ( incl Rookies and reviews)

[GHS33]

Has that been confirmed?

Yep.

"Those rules introduced last season state that clubs must make at least two first-round selections in each four-year period or face restrictions from trading any further first-round draft picks..."

Source: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-08-12/the-futurepick-puzzle

 

[Stan The Caddy]

I thought Chris' interpretation was what was true also. I thought one of the papers reported we wouldn't need to trade back in?

Of course we don't have to.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

I'll watch with interest. But this could get very ugly for a guy (Tuohy) that really shouldn't have required the use of a first rounder.

And I'm not sure why we recruited Tuohy with Thurlow returning coupled with the drafting of Stewart. Whilst being good depth, it doesn't warrant parting with a first round draft pick.

 

[Old_Man_James]

I can't understand people of all clubs losing their minds over draftees. Unlike the trade period where you are dealing with people of a known quantity and skillset, there is so much unknown about the prospects that you just have to back the recruiters in. Nobody really knows much about their attitude and skillsets, potential elite qualities, and even I could look good in a 5min video if you gave me a few days and a camera.

There is also some strange fan logic in relation to bolters and sliders. Somebody drops 10-20 places and people on club boards get all excited like they've just bought in Chris Judd for pick 34. Conversely draft a player nobody has heard much of and its wrist slitting and recriminations towards club officials and doom that "we have overpaid"

It couldn't possibly be that there is a REASON player X slid down the draft order and maybe isn't as good as people think and conversely the player that the club has REACHED for may just have some star quality that caused them to get picked where they did.

The recruiters don't wake up the day after the draft, look at the draft list and think "s**t, forgot about him"

 

[Turbocat]

This is being built up on here to be a much bigger issue than it really is. If we don't trade in any first round picks the only penalty is that we can't trade out future firsts in the next 4-year period, hardly even a punishment. Even if we decide we do want to trade in a first rounder, we have Carlton's 2nd round next year which will likely be pick 19-23, it really wouldn't take much to upgrade that to a first round.

GHS33 , I seem to be insync a lot with you ,but we see this one a bit different.

First this requirement and restriction puts an artificial value around a pick being R1 which I have come to dislike ..that a P18 is classified as R1 and would qualify , and P19 a R2 pick would not ...Id say most would agree that the value of these picks , and the talent add that the will have are so similar... so I think the rule is flawed. If the intent is to ensure a club doesn't trade away its future under the hand of all for now administrator.. the criteria of R1 is loose ..as we have seen with the likes of Smedts , just having R1 alone is not guarantee of a quality future list. So I guess this is why I previously was reasonably happy with the tactic trading for the now.

But the finals of 2016 changed my mind a bit... there could not have been a better trade in than Danger in 2016, yet still there is doubt about the quality of our group and I believe that once you start doubting the quality of your group , then just adding players thru trade should not be the main approach. Add FA's ..yes OK I can handle that but trading out R1's is what you do as a final icing on the cake tactic. I feel we are treading a very fine line atm. This trade period we have seen plenty of youth brought in ... yet Im concerned about so much and so many late pick players the last couple of years. Are we really just trying to beta the GWS surge? Do we honestly think this is the best modern method. I don't know but I do know I feel less enthused about football with this approach.

In the end what its gets down to is will we get enough games of a good enough quality from late picks in the years when we have traded our R1. If we can do that that then it is a winwin..as there is little doubt about the quality of Dangers games.

 

[GHS33]

GHS33 , I seem to be insync a lot with you ,but we see this one a bit different.

First this requirement and restriction puts an artificial value around a pick being R1 which I have come to dislike ..that a P18 is classified as R1 and would qualify , and P19 a R2 pick would not ...Id say most would agree that the value of these picks , and the talent add that the will have are so similar... so I think the rule is flawed. If the intent is to ensure a club doesn't trade away its future under the hand of all for now administrator.. the criteria of R1 is loose ..as we have seen with the likes of Smedts , just having R1 alone is not guarantee of a quality future list. So I guess this is why I previously was reasonably happy with the tactic trading for the now.

But the finals of 2016 changed my mind a bit... there could not have been a better trade in than Danger in 2016, yet still there is doubt about the quality of our group and I believe that once you start doubting the quality of your group , then just adding players thru trade should not be the main approach. Add FA's ..yes OK I can handle that but trading out R1's is what you do as a final icing on the cake tactic. I feel we are treading a very fine line atm. This trade period we have seen plenty of youth brought in ... yet Im concerned about so much and so many late pick players the last couple of years. Are we really just trying to beta the GWS surge? Do we honestly think this is the best modern method. I don't know but I do know I feel less enthused about football with this approach.

In the end what its gets down to is will we get enough games of a good enough quality from late picks in the years when we have traded our R1. If we can do that that then it is a winwin..as there is little doubt about the quality of Dangers games.

I think we're arguing two different points. I'm saying that the worry that we'll be hamstrung at the trade table over the next few years is simply unfounded. We might be obligated to trade in a first rounder, but we won't have to sell the farm to do it, and if we're being held to ransom then we just won't go ahead and we'll accept the pithy penalty of not complying.

What you're saying is that by constantly trading in ready made players by trading first rounders we're not giving ourselves access to the best players of each draft. Hence, we're unable to develop a core of young, quality players. Which I agree with to an extent.

 

[Turbocat]

I think we're arguing two different points. I'm saying that the worry that we'll be hamstrung at the trade table over the next few years is simply unfounded. We might be obligated to trade in a first rounder, but we won't have to sell the farm to do it, and if we're being held to ransom then we just won't go ahead and we'll accept the pithy penalty of not complying.

What you're saying is that by constantly trading in ready made players by trading first rounders we're not giving ourselves access to the best players of each draft. Hence, we're unable to develop a core of young, quality players. Which I agree with to an extent.

You are correct. Probably two different comments... and points of issue.

 

[Turbocat]

And I'm not sure why we recruited Tuohy with Thurlow returning coupled with the drafting of Stewart. Whilst being good depth, it doesn't warrant parting with a first round draft pick.

I agree but Id question if my judgement is off. Id have said we could draft several players to do that HB running role , players like Walker... but he was not drafted so perhaps 2e offers something more than the drafted players on offer. R1 pick?.. Thats yet to be determined. I know it was not a pure R1 but still .. I feel Car have seen us coming 2 years in a row.

 

[year of the cat]

And I'm not sure why we recruited Tuohy with Thurlow returning coupled with the drafting of Stewart. Whilst being good depth, it doesn't warrant parting with a first round draft pick.

I agree but Id question if my judgement is off. Id have said we could draft several players to do that HB running role , players like Walker... but he was not drafted so perhaps 2e offers something more than the drafted players on offer. R1 pick?.. Thats yet to be determined. I know it was not a pure R1 but still .. I feel Car have seen us coming 2 years in a row.

I'd say, as you have alluded to Turbo, it's all to do with run. Whilst Thurlow is more your intercept marking, elite kicking half back, Tuohy's been recruited to provide both a hard edge to our backline and the run that we haven't had probably since Wojo. Stewart, from what I can tell, is more your old style, dour, hard as nails defender with nice kicking skills. He's not slow, but not going to be the player to consistently launch attack from defence.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

I agree but Id question if my judgement is off. Id have said we could draft several players to do that HB running role , players like Walker... but he was not drafted so perhaps 2e offers something more than the drafted players on offer. R1 pick?.. Thats yet to be determined. I know it was not a pure R1 but still .. I feel Car have seen us coming 2 years in a row.

My only concern is trying to fit them all into the one side. I'm of the belief that Mackie is finished as a footballer. He spends too much time going to ground when the heat's turned up which doesn't auger well for finals football as we seen against Sydney where he struggled. We didn't recruit Stewart at pick 40 to play in the VFL and Thurlow should slot back in all things being equal. Why then did we give up a first round draft selection for a player that fills a similar role to both, and taking into account that we really couldn't afford to give up another first round pick now we'll be chasing our tail trying to get one back.

Pick 16 could have nabbed a younger version from the Falcons.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

I'd say, as you have alluded to Turbo, it's all to do with run. Whilst Thurlow is more your intercept marking, elite kicking half back, Tuohy's been recruited to provide both a hard edge to our backline and the run that we haven't had probably since Wojo. Stewart, from what I can tell, is more your old style, dour, hard as nails defender with nice kicking skills. He's not slow, but not going to be the player to consistently launch attack from defence.

Good point.

 

[Live in hope]

Like the recruits. Maybe only question is could they have done better than Parfitt at that stage.

Except Abbott, Stewart and House (who are special needs) all others are pacy, agile and have good evasion skills even the tallest Henry. No one-paced, tall mid, aerobic types that used to mainstay of our mid recruiting. Wonder if that was a strategy or they were still simply going for "the best still available".

 

[year of the cat]

Like the recruits. Maybe only question is could they have done better than Parfitt at that stage.

Except Abbott, Stewart and House (who are special needs) all others are pacy, agile and have good evasion skills even the tallest Henry. No one-paced, tall mid, aerobic types that used to mainstay of our mid recruiting. Wonder if that was a strategy or they were still simply going for "the best still available".

I'm was critical of their selections but I wouldnt quite go so far as to refer to Abbott and House as "special needs".

 

[Stig_90]

And I'm not sure why we recruited Tuohy with Thurlow returning coupled with the drafting of Stewart. Whilst being good depth, it doesn't warrant parting with a first round draft pick.

I don't think Thurlow or Touhy are strictly backmen, Touhy will play midfield as well.

 

[Partridge]

I don't think Thurlow or Touhy are strictly backmen, Touhy will play midfield as well.

But wasn't he recruited to be an attacking defender?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I think all of that is probable. The clubs are so much better resourced now in their recruiting than 15 years ago that the "smokie" that actually turns out to be a gun is very rare.

Would love to know how many scouts other clubs have at present. I think we're on 4 including Wells. Interested to see if that's the norm nowadays or not.

 

[Stig_90]

But wasn't he recruited to be an attacking defender?

He was, but if you think long term we're going to be losing two more experienced defenders at the end of next season (most likely) in Mackie and Lonergan, so we could use depth there.

 

[Daniel McL]

I don't think Tuohy will attend one centre bounce this season. Will be starting at half back every game, every now & then pushing up to the wing (especially if someone like a Cunico surprises/impresses & gets at half back).

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

I don't think Tuohy will attend one centre bounce this season. Will be starting at half back every game, every now & then pushing up to the wing (especially if someone like a Cunico surprises/impresses & gets at half back).

Cunico done himself no favours by spending a large chunk of last season injured. It's put him at least another year behind which isn't a bad thing because he needs to develop a little more strength anyway.

Bob Murphy mk2.

 

[Cursed Cat]

Cunico done himself no favours by spending a large chunk of last season injured. It's put him at least another year behind which isn't a bad thing because he needs to develop a little more strength anyway.

Bob Murphy mk2.

I agree, he's a long way back in the queue.
hopefully plays regular VFL football in 2017 and finds some form. We've barely seen him.

 

[catswhiskers]

I agree, he's a long way back in the queue.
hopefully plays regular VFL football in 2017 and finds some form. We've barely seen him.

With a frame like this (taken about 10 months ago I think) Jordan will be physically ready by NAB cup time 2017. He now lacks 12 months preparation having missed most of last season. That's his challenge. He must treat every drill as if it is part of the games he missed last year.

 

[GFrost]

“I think I was brought here on past performances and playing off half back so I’m more than happy to stay doing that role,” Tuohy said.
“But I’ll play any position they want me to play.
“If the opportunity comes up to play a little bit through the midfield then I’ll be happy to do that as well.”

 

[The rabbi]

But wasn't he recruited to be an attacking defender?

Wasn't Lonergan recruited to be a key forward?

 

[Ikan Bodoh]

I don't think Thurlow or Touhy are strictly backmen, Touhy will play midfield as well.

Suspect Thurlow will see a lot of time on the wing, using those foot skills to address our deplorable entries into F50. I don't see Tuohy as a mid, but think he and Stewart will ensure Guthrie also plays further upfield in a similar role I have described for Thurlow.

 

[The rabbi]

With a frame like this (taken about 10 months ago I think) Jordan will be physically ready by NAB cup time 2017. He now lacks 12 months preparation having missed most of last season. That's his challenge. He must treat every drill as if it is part of the games he missed last year.

I would think that Cunico would be around 80 kgs now.