List Mgmt. 2016 Potential Draft Picks

[Willsy10]

So our first is down to 16?

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

To be honest I would rather pick up English over Marshall.

English has more upside

 

[Holden Hillbilly]

So our first is down to 16?

Depends on bidding from sides on academy players.

 

[PJ Power]

I'd have misgivings about English simply because of the knocks on his body strength and marking, but both can improve in a tall skinny kid. The other three I would be happy to draft.

I still expect Hayward to go earlier than our pick and we take Witherden and Marshall.

Later picks I expect Clarke to be one we will draft. I think Parfitt will be gone but would draft him if he was there.

I think Parfit is a better player than his 2016 form suggests

 

[Honeyboy Wilson]

To be honest I would rather pick up English over Marshall.

English has more upside

Why does he have more upside?

 

[Lockhart Road]

Why does he have more upside?

He's taller.

 

[Honeyboy Wilson]

He's taller.

Haha, I'll pay that.

In the end, they're both tall, skinny boys with great athletic traits, tremendous agility below the knees and good field kicks. We know Marshall is a decent shot on goal, we don't know much about English with his shot on goal. We know Marshall has excellent hands for marking, we know English is closer to the concrete end of the spectrum.

So, it may well be that him being taller is the only thing he has more upside with.

 

[Portia]

Knightmare has us taking English, Hayward, Clarke, Parfitt with our picks. I can only imagine the melts if that happens.

I would definitely be melting, because we've gone with a true lucky dip with no focus in our recruiting goals if that happens.

We've traded next year's first, so this really needs to be a transformative draft that changes how our side plays and makes it genuinely competitive. Not just more plugging holes with...Clarke who is fine, but a ruck who can't ruck but he's good below the knees, a `flanker who might become a legit midfielder' (how often does that happen at Port?), and an undersized midfielder who had an ordinary season and lacks class disposal.

 

[Visenfest]

Who are you melting over?

A 204 cm agile ruck/forward clearly the best of his class when we have 3 rucks on our list?

A 187 cm forward mid who kicked 9 goals in a prelim and 4 in the GF?

The best clearance player at the national champs who had about 10 more clearances than anyone else even though the champs and this draft is supposedly stacked with clearance machines?

An inside mid who is so good he won Nightcliff's Senior A-Grade B&F at 16, debuted in the SANFL at 16 and was in his teams best on debut?

Seriously, if you're going to melt at that based probably on a few highlights and reading what others who watch a few highlights think, you have a problem.

The ruckwork of English isn't that good. It doesn't make sense to take an average ruck in the first round. A ruck such as Ladhams or Sweet who we take late or as a rookie will have just as much chance of success, for far less investment.

Clarke I don't have an issue with at 30 or 31, though I'd prefer Atley. I don't rate Clarke's ball use.

Parfitt is a poor ball user. Don't rate him due to that. The groin injuries are a concern too. There will be better options at 30 and 31.

Hayward is a medium forward who has been highly rated due to two great games at the end of the season. I don't see the consistency of performance which warrants being picked at 14 or 17.

As for the "you have a problem" comment at the end of your post: unwarranted. We're all amateur draft watchers relying on limited information here, yourself included. But if you're going to attack a comment, play the ball rather than the man.

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

Why does he have more upside?

a mobile ruckman that has the ability to find the ball (averaged 17 disposals for south fremantle this year), able to play multiple positions

v

Inconsistent tall forward that has never dominated/had a BOG performance.

English has more upside.

 

[Visenfest]

a mobile ruckman that has the ability to find the ball (averaged 17 disposals for south fremantle this year), able to play multiple positions

v

Inconsistent tall forward that has never dominated/had a BOG performance.

English has more upside.

That tall forward had next to no pre-season, so would have been absolutely spent not far into the season. He has enough natural ability to suggest he could be a good player once his fitness is built up. Of course, no guarantees with any player though.

 

[rumoursofwinter]

I'm going on another I don't understand rant.

Isaac Cumming. I don't understand. I watched him pretty closely in the all star game as he is brother of pap Harrison. I was thinking maybe a bro half back flanker for a late pick. He was woeful. Trotted around picking up some loose balls and linking in defence. Couldn't kick. No accuracy. No penetration. He was out of his depth. People are talking about him as possibly a pick in the teens? Crows might bid. Don't understand. Hurry up Draft night. I'm melting at the possibility of melting.

 

[Honeyboy Wilson]

a mobile ruckman that has the ability to find the ball (averaged 17 disposals for south fremantle this year), able to play multiple positions

v

Inconsistent tall forward that has never dominated/had a BOG performance.

English has more upside.

I haven't really heard of English having a dominating/BOG performance either. He does get a fair bit of the ball as a ruckman, but comparing disposal numbers between someone who was parked in the forward 50 almost exclusively, versus someone who was let loose around the ground isn't really apples and oranges.

 

[Willsy10]

3 elite mids (Judd, Fyfe, Ablett) and the next Warren Tredrea with our first 4 would be nice.

 

[Coobk001]

So our first is down to 16?

Looks most likely that we'll have 16, 18, 31 & 32

 

[Peck]

3 elite mids (Judd, Fyfe, Ablett) and the next Warren Tredrea with our first 4 would be nice.

I'd prefer the next Lance Franklin over the next Judd personally.

 

[Chizza12]

Clarke I don't have an issue with at 30 or 31, though I'd prefer Atley. I don't rate Clarke's ball use.

I'm perplexed by people who note that someone is a poor ball user but are still happy to draft them. People believe that once they're in an AFL system they'll somehow magically improve to be a good ball user. Is there an example of a poor kick at junior level who became a good kick, not acceptable but good? Could we please just focus on getting someone who's a good kick to start with...

 

[Chrizzt]

I'm perplexed by people who note that someone is a poor ball user but are still happy to draft them. People believe that once they're in an AFL system they'll somehow magically improve to be a good ball user. Is there an example of a poor kick at junior level who became a good kick, not acceptable but good? Could we please just focus on getting someone who's a good kick to start with...

Brodie Smith was a pretty inconsistent kick in juniors. Can't quite remember Aaron Young but his kick has certainly improved over time, Pittard is another in this category.

 

[x_les_x]

I haven't really heard of English having a dominating/BOG performance either. He does get a fair bit of the ball as a ruckman, but comparing disposal numbers between someone who was parked in the forward 50 almost exclusively, versus someone who was let loose around the ground isn't really apples and oranges.

Yet everyone wants to do it with hayward
(This isnt directed precisely towards you honeyboy; just frustrated with everyone undermining hayward)

On a side note whatever happens tommorow i hope we all get around the 4 kids we draft; putting biases aside whether its a board favourite like spp or a less popular player like witherden i know theyll make mistakes along the way but we should get around them because from 7pm onwards they will officially be representing our great club

 

[FallingLiefs]

I'm perplexed by people who note that someone is a poor ball user but are still happy to draft them. People believe that once they're in an AFL system they'll somehow magically improve to be a good ball user. Is there an example of a poor kick at junior level who became a good kick, not acceptable but good? Could we please just focus on getting someone who's a good kick to start with...

I'd still take a Fyfe, Dangerfield, Josh P Kennedy who lack polish in my team any day.

Even give me Cripps, Shiels, M.Crouch.

 

[ClickBOOM1870]

I'd prefer the next Lance Franklin over the next Judd personally.

Unfortunately theres no Lance Franklin types on offer this year

Pity though!

 

[Portology]

I'm perplexed by people who note that someone is a poor ball user but are still happy to draft them. People believe that once they're in an AFL system they'll somehow magically improve to be a good ball user. Is there an example of a poor kick at junior level who became a good kick, not acceptable but good? Could we please just focus on getting someone who's a good kick to start with...

frustrating topic, innit? "poor ball user" is such a vague knock that breaks down into so many possible sub-categories. we think we know "good" when we see it but we struggle mightily to classify "poor" by root causes, fixable or not. For every Pittard there are several O'Sheas. And there's only one John Butcher

 

[PJ Power]

I'm perplexed by people who note that someone is a poor ball user but are still happy to draft them. People believe that once they're in an AFL system they'll somehow magically improve to be a good ball user. Is there an example of a poor kick at junior level who became a good kick, not acceptable but good? Could we please just focus on getting someone who's a good kick to start with...

I don't consider Ollie Wines a good kick but I'd pick him again every day of the week. Clarke's ball drop is a bit like Ollie's.

The footage of his kicking shows a lot of hurried kicks when he's trying to clear the footy from a crowded stoppage and being tackled. It also shows other clearances where he links up with outside players by effective handball.

Clarke seems to kick well enough for goal, and his chipping of the ball when uncontested was effective enough in finding teammates without being elegant or pin point precise.

Watching Clarke had me thinking that I was watching a slightly rougher version of Ollie. Intense and hard in traffic, punchy with his handballs, awkward but passable with his kicking.

Clarke would become a very valuable pick up, if complemented by two of Gallucci, Witherden or Simpkin.

The fourth piece of the puzzle is someone bustling, explosive and powerful in the clinches. SPP is something else, but we won't get him and two of the three players above.

I'm leaning toward the strategy of targeting the better kicking mids-flankers with 14 and 17. Start with Simpkin or Witherden (preference in that order), then take Gallucci at 17.

Then Clarke (or Drew or Atley) at 30. Clarke's numbers are impressive, Drew's footy IQ and hand balling are impressive, Atley's team ethos is impressive.

Then Poholke for the power and bustle. A bit less explosive than SPP but may be more polish.

Pick 14: Simpkin or Witherden
Pick 17: Gallucci
Pick 30: Clarke or Drew or Atley
Pick 31: Poholke

 

[It Just Is]

I'm perplexed by people who note that someone is a poor ball user but are still happy to draft them. People believe that once they're in an AFL system they'll somehow magically improve to be a good ball user. Is there an example of a poor kick at junior level who became a good kick, not acceptable but good? Could we please just focus on getting someone who's a good kick to start with...

I guess you have to accept that at pick 30 whoever we select will have some areas of improvement.

What Clarke does well is he finds the footy better than anyone outside the top 3 picks. That's something we desperately need.

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

Clarke TAC stats are impressive,
Disposals: 29.4
Tackles: 7.9
Contested disposals: 16.6 (number 1 in TAC)
Clearances 6.8

Average disposals aside, still heaps to work with. Well worth a pick in the 30s.