Hot Topic 2016 DRAFT

[Blue__Balls]

Look at the top 10. GC will be contending with names like McCluggage, Ainsworth, Taranto, Scrimshaw, SPS, Logue, English and then Bowes, who is about the same stature as Brodie and arguably a more complete mid (though perhaps not as much of a bull on the inside).

Combine that with Touk Miller, and that they're hunting Barlow, and I don't see the point of Brodie. He just doesn't have enough about his game on the outside to warrant being a top pick. He can run in a straight line sure, but he doesn't demand the football there, and he doesn't do enough to give himself space to dispose free of pressure on the inside, nor does he dispose well under pressure on the inside.

He's athletic for the position, but otherwise a bit of a battler. If they get a free hit at 4 I see that as the likely death knell for Brodie to GC, because they will get yet another capable clearance mid, likely one who will have a higher rate of contested possessions that lead to clearances than he will at AFL level.

But that has nothing to do with whether Bowes has attracted a bid before pick 4 - that's simply your opinion on Brodie.

See, my read on Bowes is that he's more outside than in, and therefore would be a complementary pick to Brodie. Barlow isn't in the bank yet, and even if they pick him up he's only a temporary solution.

Let's say McLuggage, McGrath and Ainsworth go top 3.
Gold Coast take Brodie at 4.
We bid on Bowes at 5, they match with 6.
We subsequently take SPS.
Freo nab English at 7.
Gold Coast take Scrimshaw.
Sydney go with Logue.
Gold Coast have pick 10 for Taranto or a bolter (Hayward?)

Net result for Gold Coast is:
Brodie (inside mid)
Bowes (balanced mid)
Scrimshaw (HB/mid)
Taranto (HF/mid)

Seems to give them a good spread. If they pass on Brodie at pick 4 and we take him, there aren't many other inside mid options that they'd consider with a top 10 pick. I think that their problem in the last few years is that they've gone for too much outside run and class, and not enough grunt to actually feed the ball out.

 

[Jimmae]

I think that leaves them incredibly imbalanced with someone like Logue sitting on the board, and a lack of a secondary ruck option.

The guy that is least useful, and least talented, is arguably Brodie. It's a shitfight between him and Taranto in that regard.

Are people just watching Brodie videos and watching him burst out of centre clearances with good service or running up the wing? Watch where most of the kicks go, and watch how he tries to kick the cover off the ball. Watch how easily he is corralled, leaving him opting to handball 20m backwards.

It all looks high octane, but where does the footy wind up?

 

[Arr0w]

Brodie at pick 4 when no one has bid on Bowes? I don't see it.

Not too forget Setterfield of course

5. Brodie
25. Drew/Gallucci
48. Kerr
63. Rioli
66. Strnadica
70. Byrne (rookie upgrade)

I would be concerned with the foot skills of the first 2 picks

 

[bmaurizio]

If it must be firstly Brodie the elite extractor enforcer II and then Rioli scintillating skills.

 

[Funk]

Been giving this some thought.

Since SOS took over, we seem to have tightened up on the draft-related leaks. Given Gold Coast have Picks 4, 6, 8 and 10, and will most likely base their draft order around who the clubs in-between their picks are likely to take (ala Carlton taking McKay before Adelaide's pick, knowing they wouldn't take Curnow), I suspect a lot of the rumours filtering out are likely misinformation to hinder GC's planning.

The more players we're linked with, the more likely they are to just take their first preference with 4 rather than playing games.

It would be brave of GC to pick SPS.

They have lost 2 super talented indigenous WA boys to "go home" factors in 2 years plus traded out Pickett.

Will they play safe or chase the talent again?

Will be interesting to see what they do and whether recent experience influences their decisions.

 

[teagueyubeauty]

Well if GC weren't going to take SPS before, they are now: they just released Garlett for personal reasons, and he is apparently not going to play for another 2 years because of them.

2 years for personal reasons?

Not contaminated meat again....

 

[La Dispute]

It would be brave of GC to pick SPS.

They have lost 2 super talented indigenous WA boys to "go home" factors in 2 years plus traded out Pickett.

Will they play safe or chase the talent again?

Will be interesting to see what they do and whether recent experience influences their decisions.

There isn't a go home factor for SPS anywhere and Pickett came from GWS. They might be a bit risk averse at this stage though; albeit having 4 Top 10 picks gives them some security.

Plenty of talk that Brisbane won't bid on Bowes, which means he may slip.

 

[Sector 7G]

I think that leaves them incredibly imbalanced with someone like Logue sitting on the board, and a lack of a secondary ruck option.

The guy that is least useful, and least talented, is arguably Brodie. It's a shitfight between him and Taranto in that regard.

Are people just watching Brodie videos and watching him burst out of centre clearances with good service or running up the wing? Watch where most of the kicks go, and watch how he tries to kick the cover off the ball. Watch how easily he is corralled, leaving him opting to handball 20m backwards.

It all looks high octane, but where does the footy wind up?

I reckon you are a tough marker if you wouldn't want the Will Brodie in this clip in Navy Blue. They are only junior footballers.Plenty to love.

 

[Jimmae]

I reckon you are a tough marker if you wouldn't want the Will Brodie in this clip in Navy Blue. They are only junior footballers.Plenty to love.

He hits his kicks flat with regularity, but look where they go. This is exactly the stuff I'm talking about. There's about 4 good moments out of some glorious centre square opportunities and limited opposition pressure, in a Champs that has rules specifically in place to prevent extra defenders.

 

[Blue__Balls]

I think that leaves them incredibly imbalanced with someone like Logue sitting on the board, and a lack of a secondary ruck option.

The guy that is least useful, and least talented, is arguably Brodie. It's a shitfight between him and Taranto in that regard.

Are people just watching Brodie videos and watching him burst out of centre clearances with good service or running up the wing? Watch where most of the kicks go, and watch how he tries to kick the cover off the ball. Watch how easily he is corralled, leaving him opting to handball 20m backwards.

It all looks high octane, but where does the footy wind up?

Again, your debating the merits of Brodie himself.

My original point was that if we're too transparent with our preferences, GC may be able to (and therefore choose to) make their picks strategically to strengthen their draft haul. If we rank our three preferences as SPS > Taranto > Brodie, then they can get both SPS and Brodie by taking SPS first. If we rank them in the reverse of that order, then they can still get SPS and Brodie, but would need to take Brodie first.

I'm not saying that I think GC will necessarily take Brodie. Personally, from the very (very) little I've seen and the reports from the experts, I'd assume he's a definite top 5 prospect. If GC can get two top 5 prospects who fill different roles in their midfield, using picks 4 and 6, they're further ahead than if pick 6 is used on a player who is rated in the next bracket between 6 and 12. They may not want Brodie, I don't really care either way, I'm just spitballing on how they can game the draft given their selection of picks.

 

[Jimmae]

Again, your debating the merits of Brodie himself.

My original point was that if we're too transparent with our preferences, GC may be able to (and therefore choose to) make their picks strategically to strengthen their draft haul. If we rank our three preferences as SPS > Taranto > Brodie, then they can get both SPS and Brodie by taking SPS first. If we rank them in the reverse of that order, then they can still get SPS and Brodie, but would need to take Brodie first.

I'm not saying that I think GC will necessarily take Brodie. Personally, from the very (very) little I've seen and the reports from the experts, I'd assume he's a definite top 5 prospect. If GC can get two top 5 prospects who fill different roles in their midfield, using picks 4 and 6, they're further ahead than if pick 6 is used on a player who is rated in the next bracket between 6 and 12. They may not want Brodie, I don't really care either way, I'm just spitballing on how they can game the draft given their selection of picks.

Freo and Sydney will completely screw them over if they do that, and for all we know SOS might bid on Bowes at 5.

 

[bigdog43]

Friend of mine has a lot to do with the Under 18 Vic Metro boys and believes that Taranto will be the pick of the crop. Can mark, win his own footy and kick goals. He also believes that Scrimshaw could be the best player to come out of this years draft but did mention the lack of motivation he sometimes has when it comes to footy. Believes that in order to thrive he needs to go to a club that will bring out the best in him like a Sydney, Hawthorn ect. I'd still personally like Brodie but if it's not him I think it has to be Taranto.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Freo and Sydney will completely screw them over if they do that, and for all we know SOS might bid on Bowes at 5.

Quite the opposite, I'd assume. Both clubs have traded to get the picks they now have, so presumably have fairly specific targets in mind.

Freo probably chasing English - local lad who would replace Sandilands. If SPS slid they'd have a tough decision to make.
Sydney, not so sure, but a few people seem to think they're into Logue.

If GC know who Carlton, Freo and Sydney want, they can structure their picks in a way that maximises their return from the draft. If they want Bowes, SPS, Logue and one of Scrimshaw, Taranto or Florent (next grouping?), they can make it happen.

GC take SPS at 4.
We bid on Bowes, GC match with 6.
We take Brodie.
Freo take English.
GC take Logue.
Sydney have to take their next preference - no idea who that is.
GC still have at least two of their next three preferences.

We can haggle specific scenarios all day - my point is that the more players we're linked with, the harder it is for GC to determine our true intentions, and the less opportunity they have to do to us what we did to Adelaide last year (taking McKay before them, knowing we'd still get Curnow).

 

[Funk]

Quite the opposite, I'd assume. Both clubs have traded to get the picks they now have, so presumably have fairly specific targets in mind.

Freo probably chasing English - local lad who would replace Sandilands. If SPS slid they'd have a tough decision to make.
Sydney, not so sure, but a few people seem to think they're into Logue.

If GC know who Carlton, Freo and Sydney want, they can structure their picks in a way that maximises their return from the draft. If they want Bowes, SPS, Logue and one of Scrimshaw, Taranto or Florent (next grouping?), they can make it happen.

GC take SPS at 4.
We bid on Bowes, GC match with 6.
We take Brodie.
Freo take English.
GC take Logue.
Sydney have to take their next preference - no idea who that is.
GC still have at least two of their next three preferences.

We can haggle specific scenarios all day - my point is that the more players we're linked with, the harder it is for GC to determine our true intentions, and the less opportunity they have to do to us what we did to Adelaide last year (taking McKay before them, knowing we'd still get Curnow).

We'll thought out posts BB.

Completely out of place here!!!!

 

[ParapMarkets]

Who would he take otherwise?

I actually think Scrimshaw is a Clayton "type". If we give the impression that we will bid on Bowes then I could see GC taking scrimshaw, Clayton could be worried that either us or Freo would take him before they have another pick.

 

[Sector 7G]

He hits his kicks flat with regularity, but look where they go. This is exactly the stuff I'm talking about. There's about 4 good moments out of some glorious centre square opportunities and limited opposition pressure, in a Champs that has rules specifically in place to prevent extra defenders.

I guess we see what we want to see (me included). Pretty much every touch in the first quarter had a positive impact for Country even the rushed kick forward that Ainsworth marked. Wins clearances and links up. Missed one pass from a kick in space to a leading forward whose man was infront. Watch any game and you will see players make mistakes. He will be a gun.

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

Quite the opposite, I'd assume. Both clubs have traded to get the picks they now have, so presumably have fairly specific targets in mind.

Freo probably chasing English - local lad who would replace Sandilands. If SPS slid they'd have a tough decision to make.
Sydney, not so sure, but a few people seem to think they're into Logue.

If GC know who Carlton, Freo and Sydney want, they can structure their picks in a way that maximises their return from the draft. If they want Bowes, SPS, Logue and one of Scrimshaw, Taranto or Florent (next grouping?), they can make it happen.

GC take SPS at 4.
We bid on Bowes, GC match with 6.
We take Brodie.
Freo take English.
GC take Logue.
Sydney have to take their next preference - no idea who that is.
GC still have at least two of their next three preferences.

We can haggle specific scenarios all day - my point is that the more players we're linked with, the harder it is for GC to determine our true intentions, and the less opportunity they have to do to us what we did to Adelaide last year (taking McKay before them, knowing we'd still get Curnow).

Does it really matter that GCS know our true intentions and who we want at pick 5? Why bid on Bowes? Why don't we just pick the player we want at 5 and be done with it? Our sole first round pick is hardly going to have any bearing on what GCS do with their 4 first round picks. I just don't get all these scenarios about making other clubs use their picks by bidding on academy players. It seems a whole lot of messing around for a very minimal return.

The AFL should stamp out all the rubbish by making clubs allocate which of their draft picks they will be using to secure their nominated academy players. If you wish to nominate academy players for selection then you also need to nominate which pick will be used to secure them.

 

[Jimmae]

I actually think Scrimshaw is a Clayton "type". If we give the impression that we will bid on Bowes then I could see GC taking scrimshaw, Clayton could be worried that either us or Freo would take him before they have another pick.

SPS is even more of a Clayton type. They're two I like as well, but not for the same reasons as Clayton (at least historically). What compounds his errors is the unimaginative ball of wax, skin and anger that is Rocket Eade.

 

[Jimmae]

I guess we see what we want to see (me included). Pretty much every touch in the first quarter had a positive impact for Country even the rushed kick forward that Ainsworth marked. Wins clearances and links up. Missed one pass from a kick in space to a leading forward whose man was infront. Watch any game and you will see players make mistakes. He will be a gun.

I reckon you're being pretty generous with the phrase 'positive impact' there. Even for metres gained, a very simple metric, it's not that flash given how often he handballs backwards, sideways and for less than 2 metres.

Does it really matter that GCS know our true intentions and who we want at pick 5? Why bid on Bowes? Why don't we just pick the player we want at 5 and be done with it? Our sole first round pick is hardly going to have any bearing on what GCS do with their 4 first round picks. I just don't get all these scenarios about making other clubs use their picks by bidding on academy players. It seems a whole lot of messing around for a very minimal return.

The AFL should stamp out all the rubbish by making clubs allocate which of their draft picks they will be using to secure their nominated academy players. If you wish to nominate academy players for selection then you also need to nominate which pick will be used to secure them.

The whole point of it is for us to bid for the player where we would be happy to take him. You don't bid to play mind games; you bid because you like him. If they're not prepared to pay, you get the player. It's worked great so far.

 

[Gavstar]

2 years for personal reasons?

Not contaminated meat again....

Contaminated meat is a 4 year deal these days isn't it? Hmmm.....

 

[MileHigh]

Wanted Brodie and was chuffed when suggestions were he could slide to us at pick 5. Now im starting to come round to SPS being our guy. SOS has proven he is happy to go after an athletic, indigenous type when taking Pickett with pick 4 and just feel like he might do the same here.

 

[zeeCFC]

Been giving this some thought.

Since SOS took over, we seem to have tightened up on the draft-related leaks.

Except for when the same leaks happened last year and then we had our whole women's draft strategy leaked on the internet.

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

I reckon you're being pretty generous with the phrase 'positive impact' there. Even for metres gained, a very simple metric, it's not that flash given how often he handballs backwards, sideways and for less than 2 metres.


The whole point of it is for us to bid for the player where we would be happy to take him. You don't bid to play mind games; you bid because you like him. If they're not prepared to pay, you get the player. It's worked great so far.

Either way I think GCS will get the players they want regardless of our pick 5. Picks 1, 2 and 3 are pretty much set in stone IMO and I don't see Essendon, GWS or BL bidding on Bowes. It makes zero sense to do so. GCS pick before we do, with their pick 4 I reckon they will take Brodie or Taranto, they wont risk SPS, not with him waving his I want to play in Melbourne flag loudly and proudly. Leaving SPS for us at 5. We can waste our time and bid on Bowes which just means we take SPS at 6 anyway. Freo take English, then GCS take the leftover one of Brodie/ Taranto from their first pick. In any scenario, whether we bid on Bowes or other clubs before us do. GCS still will more than likely not end up with Bowes, Brodie and Taranto. They possibly even end up with Scrimshaw.

 

[Jimmae]

Either way I think GCS will get the players they want regardless of our pick 5. Picks 1, 2 and 3 are pretty much set in stone IMO and I don't see Essendon, GWS or BL bidding on Bowes. It makes zero sense to do so. GCS pick before we do, with their pick 4 I reckon they will take Brodie or Taranto, they wont risk SPS, not with him waving his I want to play in Melbourne flag loudly and proudly. Leaving SPS for us at 5. We can waste our time and bid on Bowes which just means we take SPS at 6 anyway. Freo take English, then GCS take the leftover one of Brodie/ Taranto from their first pick. In any scenario, whether we bid on Bowes or other clubs before us do. GCS still will more than likely not end up with Bowes, Brodie and Taranto. They possibly even end up with Scrimshaw.

The only scenario in which I see Brisbane not bidding on Bowes, is if Essendon select McGrath and GWS select Ainsworth.

 

[TerryWallet]

I'm not saying this from a CFC POV, but i think it is a near certainty that Brisbane bid on Bowes.

It is in the northern clubs own huge interest for the 20% discount to remain on academy players. For the southern clubs to continue allowing this, the bidding system must not only be legit, but seen to be legit.

I'm not fussed enough to argue this and other reasons in detail, but i'm confident that Brisbane will bid on Bowes at 3 and GC will snap match.