Hot Topic 2016 DRAFT

[Blue_Fusion]

I cannot understand this line of thinking at all.
Why would we not trade for someone we felt to have been a #5 in his draft year for what may be a #5 this year?
On what basis do we know this group of players to be better? Because they haven't played AFL yet?

....and it's not just as though we're seeking Marchbank alone. We rated Tomlinson last year....enough to offer up our pick #12.........and then there's a hard inside mid in Steele.
If the logic is that they're not getting games in the GWS side, what guarantees us that this crop of mids would be? Is this our measure?

Come on Harks, obviously there's never any guarantees when it comes to the draft. But imo, there's less guarantee with the GWS4.

Steele is a decent mid no doubt, but he isn't the elite talent that we desperately need. If he was, he'd be a regular in the GWS side by now.

 

[bad setanta]

I cannot understand this line of thinking at all.
Why would we not trade for someone we felt to have been a #5 in his draft year for what may be a #5 this year?
On what basis do we know this group of players to be better? Because they haven't played AFL yet?

....and it's not just as though we're seeking Marchbank alone. We rated Tomlinson last year....enough to offer up our pick #12.........and then there's a hard inside mid in Steele.
If the logic is that they're not getting games in the GWS side, what guarantees us that this crop of mids would be? Is this our measure?

Steele is not what we need...he's good but he's another another one pace mid that doesn't break the lines nothing outstanding about his disposal either at this stage, as for Marchbank he's not a mid we have plenty of his size defenders now, Tomlinson maybe but we get him cheap or not at all.

 

[HARKER]

Steele is not what we need...he's good but he's another another one pace mid that doesn't break the lines nothing outstanding about his disposal either at this stage, as for Marchbank he's not a mid we have plenty of his size defenders now, Tomlinson maybe but we get him cheap or not at all.

So who do we 'need' then?
Tell me the player and not a number that will make us immediately better.

Cripps needs support no doubt and if we're talking about line breakers, we did draft Cuningham last year and have Boekhorst in the wings.

I keep saying that we here have little idea of what SOS has in mind for not just this year, but next year and the one after that.
That's how you have to think as a list manager and not just bring in one hero at a time. That would take 166 months.

 

[HARKER]

Come on Harks, obviously there's never any guarantees when it comes to the draft. But imo, there's less guarantee with the GWS4.

Steele is a decent mid no doubt, but he isn't the elite talent that we desperately need. If he was, he'd be a regular in the GWS side by now.

Here's the problem with your way:

If we had picks #6, #12 and ~#10, we'd be over the moon. Right?
Now we attach names that have been in the system for a year or two to those numbers and it's just not as shiny: Marchbank, Tomlinson & Steele.
You see. It's not as much fun now. Steele was rated by some to be around a pick #10 in his draft year, but GWS got him through their academy.

I don't care either way but I'd go with someone whose full-time job to assess talent and trade possibilities with three years in mind, as opposed to someone who can't see beyond a 6 month period. That makes sense, doesn't it?

 

[Jimmae]

Daniel Hanna is the player listed in the squad. Not sure if that's Mil's son or not.

Nephew

(cc Pafloyul)

 

[RoyalParade]

Came in here to write exactly that. Venables or Drew for me please.

Yep liked venables work. Is he more pf a 2nd rounder though?

 

[TerryWallet]

Here's the problem with your way:

If we had picks #6, #12 and ~#10, we'd be over the moon. Right?
Now we attach names that have been in the system for a year or two to those numbers and it's just not as shiny: Marchbank, Tomlinson & Steele.
You see. It's not as much fun now. Steele was rated by some to be around a pick #10 in his draft year, but GWS got him through their academy.

I don't care either way but I'd go with someone whose full-time job to assess talent and trade possibilities with three years in mind, as opposed to someone who can't see beyond a 6 month period. That makes sense, doesn't it?

From memory, Jack Steele was #24. Not around #10.

Richmond bid on him, and GWS matched.

And according to AFL Trade "expert" Nick Bowen, Richmond is where he will likely end up at years end.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

Here's the problem with your way:

If we had picks #6, #12 and ~#10, we'd be over the moon. Right?
Now we attach names that have been in the system for a year or two to those numbers and it's just not as shiny: Marchbank, Tomlinson & Steele.
You see. It's not as much fun now. Steele was rated by some to be around a pick #10 in his draft year, but GWS got him through their academy.

I don't care either way but I'd go with someone whose full-time job to assess talent and trade possibilities with three years in mind, as opposed to someone who can't see beyond a 6 month period. That makes sense, doesn't it?

Look there's pros and cons like with everything.

If pick #6 yields Brodie or McCluggage, #10 yields Venables and #12 SPP Then that's likely going to benefit the team more than the GWS4. If Drew, Sharenberg or Gallucci slip to our second rounder as well we'd be incredibly unlucky if they all bombed out at AFL level.

I just want to know what have the GWS4 shown at AFL level so far? Sure their NEAFL games have been quite good, but at AFL level? They haven't shown much either. They've had their chance to break into the GWS side and they've struggled to do so, so what evidence do we have that they will be able to get us over the line against GWS if we're playing finals in a few years time?

Both Cameron and Patton didn't really devastate us yesterday. The quality of entry i50 that the Giants had rendered our defenders useless because it was too good. Unless Marchbank can dig underground and then pop back up in front of the chest of their leading forwards then there's nothing he could've done either.

Our midfield has no depth and not enough quality either. The only way to stop those sort of entries is to apply pressure on the kicker. The way that they were spreading our mids were completely lost. When Marc Murphy is down we bring in the likes of Graham and Tutt who are clearly not up to it. Kerridge is average as well. Judd and Carrots gone. Murphy constantly getting injured and soon to be in the twilight of his career. Who do we have coming up? What's Steele going to do?

That leaves us with Cripps, Curnow and Gibbs. Ed doing well as a shutdown player. But I saw Shiel bump Gibbs off the ball easily because he is harder at the contest. So with Cripps as our only inside mid capable of winning possession and clearances we are dead set going to get mauled in the middle every week. Even freaking Brisbane were killing us in that department ffs.

Giving away our top 2 picks in a draft filled with midfield talent just seems like the dumbest thing we can do. We've got 2 third round picks which I think we'd be wise to spend on a fb and a ruckman which we can develop. With talent like Docherty, Plowman and Weitering in the backline, the full back does not necessarily need to be a top 10 pick talent, we've got greater needs that we should be addressing with that sort of a draft pick.

Also, we are basing this GWS4 trade on inside info which is not concrete.

 

[HARKER]

From memory, Jack Steele was #24. Not around #10.

Richmond bid on him, and GWS matched.

And according to AFL Trade "expert" Nick Bowen, Richmond is where he will likely end up at years end.

That's why I wrote: ~#10.
Many had him rated at around that mark and I don't recall but if Richmond did bid for him, it would have been with their #12
They didn't have another pick between 12-24.

 

[HARKER]

Also, we are basing this GWS4 trade on inside info which is not concrete.

It doesn't matter but just discussing the principle rather than for any facts.

I can understand us 'helping' GWS out, in order for them to 'help' us.
That's what comes about through good communication, awareness of what's possible and mutual respect. Has SOS got that? I don't know.

 

[TerryWallet]

That's why I wrote: ~#10.
Many had him rated at around that mark and I don't recall but if Richmond did bid for him, it would have been with their #12
They didn't have another pick between 12-24.

Yeah,by memory it was either Richmond at 12 or maybe NM at 16. One of them. But i think it was Richmond.

I don't think Steele will be at Carlton.

 

[HARKER]

Look there's pros and cons like with everything.

If pick #6 yields Brodie or McCluggage, #10 yields Venables and #12 SPP Then that's likely going to benefit the team more than the GWS4. If Drew, Sharenberg or Gallucci slip to our second rounder as well we'd be incredibly unlucky if they all bombed out at AFL level.

That's the other thing: We won't have those three picks.
We'll have a pick around the 6 mark and then around the 30 mark and there's no guarantees that others will bid on the Academy kids either.
That won't help our cause and this number 6 will have to be an out and out gun to make us immediately better.

 

[HARKER]

Yeah,by memory it was either Richmond at 12 or maybe NM at 16. One of them. But i think it was Richmond.

I don't think Steele will be at Carlton.

He may not be but we are discussing the principle of a multi-bet.

This deal has gone some way down the track but all it needs is one cog to drop and the mechanism fails.

Who knows what may be shaken from the tree, but at least SOS was smart enough not to wait until trade period to get things going.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

That's the other thing: We won't have those three picks.
We'll have a pick around the 6 mark and then around the 30 mark and there's no guarantees that others will bid on the Academy kids either.
That won't help our cause and this number 6 will have to be an out and out gun to make us immediately better.

Yeah I know we won't have those picks, was just speaking hypothetically.

It's why I said previously we should try and get another top 10 pick this year. With the amount of midfield talent we have in this year's draft, we need to go all out even if it means giving up something valuable.

Also, I'm not looking for us to be immediately better. We are in a rebuild which requires patience to be done right. I'm happy to give whatever dps we get the time to develop. Expecting a dp to make an immediate impact is crazy talk. Sure some of them can but it's not a realistic expectation.

 

[Heres Waite]

That's why I wrote: ~#10.
Many had him rated at around that mark and I don't recall but if Richmond did bid for him, it would have been with their #12
They didn't have another pick between 12-24.

I'm fairly sure it was North that bid on him at about pick 15.

 

[BRADLESTICKS]

Yeah,by memory it was either Richmond at 12 or maybe NM at 16. One of them. But i think it was Richmond.

I don't think Steele will be at Carlton.

The bidding system in Steele's draft year was done on the monday before the draft, North Melbourne bid their 1st rounder which was number 15 prior to the draft which GWS matched with a 2nd round pick.

 

[Jimmae]

Yeah,by memory it was either Richmond at 12 or maybe NM at 16. One of them. But i think it was Richmond.

I don't think Steele will be at Carlton.

North at 15.

 

[The Grover]

I notice a lot like Gallucci and it is hard not to like his athleticism, him popping up in different parts of the ground and his smooth movement. For someone with good skills, he burned it a bit against the Allies, especially running towards goal but also spotted up some Inside 50 targets. I'm not adverse to something that works hard to get around the ground and also has good speed.

He and Venables seem to have a little bit of mongrel in them too which is vital for us.

Where I am not sure about Gallucci is he is an outside mid from what I have seen. Starts every centre bounce from the edge of the square. Venables is either forward or at the coalface. His will to extract the ball or his ability to lay a crunching tackle have him in front.

Powell-Pepper's disposal issues really seem to be hurting his rating at present. Mind you, Brodie is highly rated and wasn't too accurate either.

I think I want someone that can go inside but not be a Cripps clone. More speed, more outside ability, more versatility but strong in the clinches as part of the rotation would be more complimentary for mine.

I noticed Gallucci butchered a few kicks in last qtr. But he was everywhere in last qtr.

Venables is intriguing, had a bit of Dangerfield, Martin about him. But would like to know if he is capable of racking up disposal numbers.

 

[HBF]

What do people think about Jack Graham, looked terrific on Friday as a high production mid? The blues need players with pace who work as we have too many who float in and out of games.

Gets alot of the ball, but the query is his kicking. We need mids with elite kicking.

 

[PumpyChowdown]

Any chance the GWS4 could be Coniglio, Shiel, Kelly and Zac Williams?

I kinda would like that. Jeez we need mids and run and precision disposal.

 

[TerryWallet]

I notice a lot like Gallucci and it is hard not to like his athleticism, him popping up in different parts of the ground and his smooth movement. For someone with good skills, he burned it a bit against the Allies, especially running towards goal but also spotted up some Inside 50 targets. I'm not adverse to something that works hard to get around the ground and also has good speed.

He and Venables seem to have a little bit of mongrel in them too which is vital for us.

Where I am not sure about Gallucci is he is an outside mid from what I have seen. Starts every centre bounce from the edge of the square. Venables is either forward or at the coalface. His will to extract the ball or his ability to lay a crunching tackle have him in front.

Powell-Pepper's disposal issues really seem to be hurting his rating at present. Mind you, Brodie is highly rated and wasn't too accurate either.

I think I want someone that can go inside but not be a Cripps clone. More speed, more outside ability, more versatility but strong in the clinches as part of the rotation would be more complimentary for mine.

To me, Gallucci physically and mentally looks like the finished product already. Don't think there is much upside.

See him being a list clogger at AFL level. Sorta Jimmy Toumpas like.

Just my educated/uneducated opinion.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

Any chance the GWS4 could be Coniglio, Shiel, Kelly and Zac Williams?

I kinda would like that. Jeez we need mids and run and precision disposal.

LOL if only! I'd even throw in Tutt to seal the deal.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I noticed Gallucci butchered a few kicks in last qtr. But he was everywhere in last qtr.

Venables is intriguing, had a bit of Dangerfield, Martin about him. But would like to know if he is capable of racking up disposal numbers.

Agree on Gallucci, was everywhere ... back, forward, flashing through the midfield. Like his attitude, like how smooth he plays, like the kicks that find the target. Good vision. Just butchered a few that took away from reports I had read, looks a little more slight but they say he is an athlete and he is definitely more outside than in. So while I would be happy to get him, he doesn't tick all the boxes. We still need another gun inside mid with pace.

With Venables I was watching more than his stats. He was buzzing around the contests but it wasn't coming to him. Whether he is positioning poorly or playing to instruction I am not sure. When he does go inside and gets the ball, he is like a bull and he is ferocious when a tackle is on offer. Hard to tell about his defensive running as he was regularly rotating up forward. Wasn't scared to go for a fly in front of the big boys vs the Allies, just didn't bring it to ground. Goal kicking looks decent. I am intrigued by having a physically developed youngster in our side and not having to wait a couple of years. As I said earlier, has been likened in style to Petracca on the drafts board.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

To me, Gallucci physically and mentally looks like the finished product already. Don't think there is much upside.

See him being a list clogger at AFL level. Sorta Jimmy Toumpas like.

Just my educated/uneducated opinion.

I feel like you would use #15 on him, not #5 or #6 or wherever we end up. Should fall between our picks assuming we don't trade them out and get something in this range back.

 

[Old navy]

I feel like you would use #15 on him, not #5 or #6 or wherever we end up. Should fall between our picks assuming we don't trade them out and get something in this range back.

IMO if you have a pick inside the top 5 you don't trade it unless it an offer to good to knock back.
But a pick outside the top 5 is a different story. Would be happy to trade it because I'd be fairly sure SOS would be getting them to give us a late first back or trade us back into the first round some how.
I'd offer our 1st and 2nd the doggies 3rd and may be our 4th rounder as well.
For Marchbank Tomilinson plus whoever else need to get off there list and one of the 3 first rounders they hold.
Pick 14- 18
May be we could even throw in a future pick and ask for the Collingwood pick as the first rounder which would be top 10.