List Mgmt. 2017 Draft Discussion (cont in Pt 2)

[LeonardHayes87]

Then why isn't he in the mix for pick 1 when he has all these other terrific attributes and posted similar or better numbers than all those expected to go top 5?

Surely all those recruiting for the clubs have seen these highlights vids as well?

Why didn't Pendlebury go pick 1 in his draft? Why didn't Zach Merrett go pick 1 in his draft?
The best players aren't always in the mix for pick 1. And who cares if he is or isn't.
You've got boys who have played with him for years (Bonar and O'Brien) saying he's the most skilled and best kick in the draft - I'll back their judgement.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Sloane, Dangerfield, Parker, Merrett, Fyfe. Not every great player gets picked at very top of draft. And again, recruiters don’t solely choose players on what they have achieved so far, it’s as much to do with what they believe the players could achieve in AFL footy.

Of course, I understand all that, I've been following the drafts closely for over 20 years, but for every one of those you mentioned there are probably 3 or 5 or 20 Josh Saunders, who we wondered how we could get so lucky to have landed in the 40's after seeing his highlights vids, where he was slicing teams up with his run and hitting up targets.

Only to get him and realise, oh, OK, this is why he he didn't go earlier, because he's scrappy as all hell.

Or thinking how lucky we were to have gotten Acres who was being described by some as an "elite kick" prior to his draft. Only to find that he was a fair way from it.

There has to something missing with Hunter or he would simply be in the same mix with all the others who play a similar role and who played at a similarly very high level. Clubs spend thousands of man hours on this stuff, they don't just miss these things.

The way it works is that the ones who go highest are the ones with the least holes or who are seen to have the highest upside, so with Hunter there has to be a hole.

It doesn't mean he won't or can't be the next Sloane or Lenny, it just means he's seen as less certain to be than the other 5, because there is something in or missing in his game that makes him less certain in their expert eyes.

Something that some who have become so caught up in him that they seem to believe he's perfect and has no flaws are unwilling or unable to acknowledge. That's the only issue I have.

It doesn't mean that I don't like him or want him, but I'm just not buying this "he's perfect in every way" thing, because if he was he'd be in the mix for pick 1 in this draft that's not the best.

 

[TheJackal]

Sloane, Dangerfield, Parker, Merrett, Fyfe. Not every great player gets picked at very top of draft. And again, recruiters don’t solely choose players on what they have achieved so far, it’s as much to do with what they believe the players could achieve in AFL footy.

So recruiting is often just gut feel?

 

[triggering bro]

Of course, I understand all that, I've been following the drafts closely for over 20 years, but for every one of those you mentioned there are probably 3 or 5 or 20 Josh Saunders, who we wondered how we could get so lucky to have landed in the 40's after seeing his highlights vids, where he was slicing teams up with his run and hitting up targets.

Only to get him and realise, oh, OK, this is why he he didn't go earlier, because he's scrappy as all hell.

Or thinking how lucky we were to have gotten Acres who was being described by some as an "elite kick" prior to his draft. Only to find that he was a fair way from it.

There has to something missing with Hunter or he would simply be in the same mix with all the others who play a similar role and who played at a similarly very high level. Clubs spend thousands of man hours on this stuff, they don't just miss these things.

The way it works is that the ones who go highest are the ones with the least holes or who are seen to have the highest upside, so with Hunter there has to be a hole.

It doesn't mean he won't or can't be the next Sloane or Lenny, it just means he's seen as less certain to be than the other 5, because there is something in or missing in his game that makes him less certain in their expert eyes.

Something that some who have become so caught up in him that they seem to believe he's perfect and has no flaws are unwilling or unable to acknowledge. That's the only issue I have.

It doesn't mean that I don't like him or want him, but I'm just not buying this "he's perfect in every way" thing, because if he was he'd be in the mix for pick 1 in this draft that's not the best.

Despite not being in the top 5 conversation, Clark is still highly rated though. Twomey has him at 9, Anderson 15 & Bishop 11.

I can only guess why Clark isn’t rated as highly as a few others because it’s nothing that obvious that stands out.

In today’s footy there is so much emphasis on ‘speed’ & ‘power, which Dow, LDU & Rayner have in spades. Cerra is a high kicking ratio player & together with his class makes him an extremely damaging player.

Brayshaw has kind of come out of nowhere & from the eye looks to be on a similar level to Clark & below the ‘big 4’ imo.

I guess when recruiters are looking at the pointy end of the draft they are looking at a trait or traits that is elite & separates them from the rest.
Rayner - powerful/damaging
Dow - explosive
LDU - explosive
Cerra - clean/classy/damaging
Brayshaw/Clark - vanilla (I know some don’t like that terminology)

I think there’s a number of groups of draftees & withinh each group there is a lot of evenness meaning Clark could go 7 or 15 & Rayner 1 or 4. Having picks 7 & 8 puts us right in the sweet spot.

 

[JG22]

Looking forward to Twomeys phantom

He's usually pretty spot on for the top 10

 

[Joffaboy]

Joking surely? He's a beautiful kick off both feet and plays a mix of inside and outside. Will be a star.

This. I am an expert on Hunter Clark, just ask me, I have dissected his 3 minute highlight reel watched in my phone and can GAURANTEE you he will be a star [emoji15] [emoji15] [emoji15] [emoji15] [emoji15] [emoji106]

 

[triggering bro]

So recruiting is often just gut feel?

It’s why so much emphasis is put on character which was an area likely neglected a number of years ago. It’s one thing having the talent but another thing having the ability to fulfil it. Imagine Tambling with Hayes’ drive.

Bottom line, the most talented player in the draft could be a bust cos they don’t cope with the rigours of a pro environment. A guy with less talent might be the best cos they flourish in such environment. Every draftee has a risk despite what they’ve achieved at u18 level.

 

[gringo2011]

Then why isn't he in the mix for pick 1 when he has all these other terrific attributes and posted similar or better numbers than all those expected to go top 5?

Surely all those recruiting for the clubs have seen these highlights vids as well?

It's like group think. You see it with established players. Perhaps he played a shocker or even one shocking piece of play that has tainted his standing. Perhaps recruiters fox and he will go to a club before us. Sometimes it's size, sometimes that they were played in a position that some see it hard not to pigeonhole them in. Sometimes hype makes them bolt but it can work the other wY too. Someone mentions a negative and you look for it. The individual brilliance can make players magic but can make them hard to manage too.

 

[gringo2011]

Of course, I understand all that, I've been following the drafts closely for over 20 years, but for every one of those you mentioned there are probably 3 or 5 or 20 Josh Saunders, who we wondered how we could get so lucky to have landed in the 40's after seeing his highlights vids, where he was slicing teams up with his run and hitting up targets.

Only to get him and realise, oh, OK, this is why he he didn't go earlier, because he's scrappy as all hell.

Or thinking how lucky we were to have gotten Acres who was being described by some as an "elite kick" prior to his draft. Only to find that he was a fair way from it.

There has to something missing with Hunter or he would simply be in the same mix with all the others who play a similar role and who played at a similarly very high level. Clubs spend thousands of man hours on this stuff, they don't just miss these things.

The way it works is that the ones who go highest are the ones with the least holes or who are seen to have the highest upside, so with Hunter there has to be a hole.

It doesn't mean he won't or can't be the next Sloane or Lenny, it just means he's seen as less certain to be than the other 5, because there is something in or missing in his game that makes him less certain in their expert eyes.

Something that some who have become so caught up in him that they seem to believe he's perfect and has no flaws are unwilling or unable to acknowledge. That's the only issue I have.

It doesn't mean that I don't like him or want him, but I'm just not buying this "he's perfect in every way" thing, because if he was he'd be in the mix for pick 1 in this draft that's not the best.

To me the things that make HC creative and elusive make him erratic as well. It's weighing up the positives against the negatives. Fyfe and Danger do it too, they back themselves to leave a player and win the contest, the downside is if it doesn't come off you are exposed.

 

[SK_MD_#7]

Saint Bonar

 

[bird_man]

Joking surely? He's a beautiful kick off both feet and plays a mix of inside and outside. Will be a star.

Why would I joke?

I’ve heard from some that he is a beautiful kick on both feet but he clearly had an issue kicking whilst playing through the midfield. This has been mentioned by many draft experts, I wouldn’t make it up mate.

 

[Crusty Undies]

Joking surely? He's a beautiful kick off both feet and plays a mix of inside and outside. Will be a star.

No... Kicking is actually one of the big queries on Clark, especially under pressure.

 

[gringo2011]

Of course, I understand all that, I've been following the drafts closely for over 20 years, but for every one of those you mentioned there are probably 3 or 5 or 20 Josh Saunders, who we wondered how we could get so lucky to have landed in the 40's after seeing his highlights vids, where he was slicing teams up with his run and hitting up targets.

Only to get him and realise, oh, OK, this is why he he didn't go earlier, because he's scrappy as all hell.

Or thinking how lucky we were to have gotten Acres who was being described by some as an "elite kick" prior to his draft. Only to find that he was a fair way from it.

There has to something missing with Hunter or he would simply be in the same mix with all the others who play a similar role and who played at a similarly very high level. Clubs spend thousands of man hours on this stuff, they don't just miss these things.

The way it works is that the ones who go highest are the ones with the least holes or who are seen to have the highest upside, so with Hunter there has to be a hole.

It doesn't mean he won't or can't be the next Sloane or Lenny, it just means he's seen as less certain to be than the other 5, because there is something in or missing in his game that makes him less certain in their expert eyes.

Something that some who have become so caught up in him that they seem to believe he's perfect and has no flaws are unwilling or unable to acknowledge. That's the only issue I have.

It doesn't mean that I don't like him or want him, but I'm just not buying this "he's perfect in every way" thing, because if he was he'd be in the mix for pick 1 in this draft that's not the best.

Didn't say he was perfect, no player is. I and assuming the good things he does have, will translate well to AFL. Same as you with Brayshaw, I can't see what he does that makes him a sub teens pick. Sounds like his character is outstanding but he's just a soldier to me on field.

 

[gringo2011]

No... Kicking is actually one of the big queries on Clark, especially under pressure.

This is a both right situation, since moving to inside mid his kicking has suffered. He is an excellent distributor by foot from half back our when he breaks away from trouble.

 

[WhiskySaint]

Of course, I understand all that, I've been following the drafts closely for over 20 years, but for every one of those you mentioned there are probably 3 or 5 or 20 Josh Saunders, who we wondered how we could get so lucky to have landed in the 40's after seeing his highlights vids, where he was slicing teams up with his run and hitting up targets.

Only to get him and realise, oh, OK, this is why he he didn't go earlier, because he's scrappy as all hell.

Or thinking how lucky we were to have gotten Acres who was being described by some as an "elite kick" prior to his draft. Only to find that he was a fair way from it.

There has to something missing with Hunter or he would simply be in the same mix with all the others who play a similar role and who played at a similarly very high level. Clubs spend thousands of man hours on this stuff, they don't just miss these things.

The way it works is that the ones who go highest are the ones with the least holes or who are seen to have the highest upside, so with Hunter there has to be a hole.

It doesn't mean he won't or can't be the next Sloane or Lenny, it just means he's seen as less certain to be than the other 5, because there is something in or missing in his game that makes him less certain in their expert eyes.

Something that some who have become so caught up in him that they seem to believe he's perfect and has no flaws are unwilling or unable to acknowledge. That's the only issue I have.

It doesn't mean that I don't like him or want him, but I'm just not buying this "he's perfect in every way" thing, because if he was he'd be in the mix for pick 1 in this draft that's not the best.

I’m definitely no expert.... and am a fan of HC and see him as a player that could have a great career on the outside.

But to me the difference between the top mids in this draft and HC is that while he has good speed, the explosiveness over the first 3 paces isn’t as good as say the top 4.

Watching the vids that’s how I see it.

But again, I’m no expert.

 

[bird_man]

This is a both right situation, since moving to inside mid his kicking has suffered. He is an excellent distributor by foot from half back our when he breaks away from trouble.

The thing is though, he apparently didn’t really perform that well until they changed it up and played him as an inside mid.

So the problem is, he seemed to use the footy well off half back but didn’t play as well as he liked and then found more of the footy when he moved into the middle but had poor disposal.

Hard for me to get too excited about that.

 

[StCicatriz]

We won’t be taking Murphy

Noooooòoooooooo

 

[triggering bro]

Footy prophet currently running a mock draft, we took Brayshaw & Clark & overlooked Cerra. FMD what a joke!

 

[bird_man]

Footy prophet currently running a mock draft, we took Brayshaw & Clark & overlooked Cerra. FMD what a joke!

What footy prophet?

I will cry like a bitch if we pass on Cerra. **** me, surely Cerra and Brayshaw don’t make it to our pick though?

 

[Smoke_Me_AKipper]

Footy prophet currently running a mock draft, we took Brayshaw & Clark & overlooked Cerra. FMD what a joke!

Yeah I saw that - no way does that happen. Begs the question though. Would we take Brayshaw and Cerra if both were available?

BTW - Footy Prophet had Rayner, LDU, Dow, Stephenson, Fogarty, Naughton being taken before our picks

 

[bird_man]

Yeah I saw that - no way does that happen. Begs the question though. Would we take Brayshaw and Cerra if both were available?

BTW - Footy Prophet had Rayner, LDU, Dow, Stephenson, Fogarty, Naughton being taken before our picks

That would be amazing.

Yep I’d definitely take the two if available.

 

[SaintSteele9]

Yeah I saw that - no way does that happen. Begs the question though. Would we take Brayshaw and Cerra if both were available?

BTW - Footy Prophet had Rayner, LDU, Dow, Stephenson, Fogarty, Naughton being taken before our picks

Those six isn’t entirely out of the question either, although it seems the mail on Brayshaw going before our picks is strong. I would take Cerra and Brayshaw in a heartbeat

 

[bird_man]

I see Knightmare has us taking Brayshaw and Stephenson. FMD these campaigners are starting to get my hopes up!

 

[Smoke_Me_AKipper]

That would be amazing.

Yep I’d definitely take the two if available.

Yes but would the club? I thought I read somewhere that some people were saying we take the best mid at 7 and then someone like a Bonar at 8. I suppose that might all go out the window if both Brayshaw and Cerra were still available. I would like to think the club would take both and run away laughing. Also it meant we could go tall at 34 and 45 if need be

 

[Smoke_Me_AKipper]

Those six isn’t entirely out of the question either, although it seems the mail on Brayshaw going before our picks is strong. I would take Cerra and Brayshaw in a heartbeat

Yeah agreed - it could quite easily go like that. Fogarty is an interesting one - whether Freo take someone like that or whether he last to Carlton at 10