2017 Draft rumours

[Snake_Baker]

It's less about position per se, and more the nature of the player. He strikes as the type who can contribute immediately, rather than taking time to bulk up and grow into his size as KP types tend to.

He'll start on a flank, and then he looks like a player that could be utilised to capitalise on match ups a la Goodes.

 

[Mofra's son]

 

[Matty411]

The problem with Allen is he is such an awkward size. He is too big to be a midfielder, but he isn't big enough to be a proper key forward. Really he needs to either be about 4cm shorter, or ideally about 4cm taller.

Patrick Cripps says hi. Or any number of 190cm+ midfielders.

 

[Groin guru]

My mail says North take LDU at pick 4. Don't shoot the messenger. Just passing on what i heard.

 

[Snake_Baker]

My mail says North take LDU at pick 4. Don't shoot the messenger. Just passing on what i heard.

 

[RUNVS]

Patrick Cripps says hi. Or any number of 190cm+ midfielders.

Except Cripps was drafted as a midfielder.

 

[TerryWallet]

Why? Look at Carlton's current build - they've loaded up on talls, used the extra development time they needed to continue being crap and are now halfway through building their midfield stocks with high picks. In another year or two that broad cohort of players will all come on together. Or, for more complete examples, GWS, who took Patton, Cameron and Lobb in their early years and have continued to fill out the smalls since then, or Adelaide, who had their spine in place before capping off the midfield with the Crouch brothers.

If you load up on midfielders first then sure, you become competitive more quickly, but that diminishes your capacity to then get hold of the elite tall prospects - witness the no man's land Collingwood (who topped up with midfielders) and St Kilda (whose tall picks haven't come on) are stuck in.

Now, if there are no appropriate talls at your picks, or you can't afford to be uncompetitive, then by all means take midfielders - but midfield over spine as a broad strategy is no recipe for success.

Post is good

 

[Danger in Texas]

James Worpel's sister came into my cousin's work today. She said that Adelaide had the most contact with him, followed by the Eagles. Bombers keen on him but think he will be gone before their pick.

Bicks

 

[GapInIkonPark]

Literally all those blokes don't work as recruiters.

Buckenara sprouts senile shit 99% of the time.


The only recruiters that matter are the 18 in that room tomorrow night.

If none of them bid on him in the top 25, he's not a top 25 pick. Simple.

He might be number 8 on a recruiter’s list.
The recruiter might have Pick 29 and chooses the player that is number 6 on his list as the first 5 are already gone.
We would never know.

 

[Bicks]

Don't knock Jake Lloyd as he is a very solid player for the Swans.

Brother Matty Lloyd played some decent footy for the GWV Rebels this year in his under age year, played mainly across half back but I expect he'll get a run through the midfield in 2018.

 

[Thewlis Dish]

Why? Look at Carlton's current build - they've loaded up on talls, used the extra development time they needed to continue being crap and are now halfway through building their midfield stocks with high picks. In another year or two that broad cohort of players will all come on together. Or, for more complete examples, GWS, who took Patton, Cameron and Lobb in their early years and have continued to fill out the smalls since then, or Adelaide, who had their spine in place before capping off the midfield with the Crouch brothers.

If you load up on midfielders first then sure, you become competitive more quickly, but that diminishes your capacity to then get hold of the elite tall prospects - witness the no man's land Collingwood (who topped up with midfielders) and St Kilda (whose tall picks haven't come on) are stuck in.

Now, if there are no appropriate talls at your picks, or you can't afford to be uncompetitive, then by all means take midfielders - but midfield over spine as a broad strategy is no recipe for success.

It's less about position per se, and more the nature of the player. He strikes as the type who can contribute immediately, rather than taking time to bulk up and grow into his size as KP types tend to.

But you're missing the whole point, which is that there isn't a tall prospect worthwhile at four. The best case is a tallish utility player who had probably the weakest under 18s season of all the top 15 propects. If we get to pick four and the decision is an elite mid vs an elite tall, then you might have an argument, but it isn't.

Suggesting we should reach for Fogarty on the basis that he might become someone like Pavlich (when we have an elite tall forward in Brown and developing talls in Durdin, McKay and Wood) while our midfield stocks consist of Cunnington and no one, would be seriously irresponsible list management.

Also not sure I would use Carlton's recruitment strategies as any sort of a yardstick for success.

 

[Wild Bill]

Is he key position though? Seems like a tall mid/utility from what I've read.
So it's just the lack of a viable key forward at 4? Fogarty would be the guy, if you see him as that Pavlich or Hogan type forward. If not, best available mid makes sense.

Mid is a bigger hole to fill than forward. We can score. We don’t have quality ball use. We have bulls but little class.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

But you're missing the whole point, which is that there isn't a tall prospect worthwhile at four..

I expressly acknowledged that in the third paragraph, as well as in prior posts. I'm more interested in the broader philosophy.

 

[the big lebowski]

But a midfield alone doesn't win flags, or Collingwood and Melbourne would've at least played finals. You need a good balance across the field, and key position players, even the elite ones, take 4-5 years to really get going, whereas midfielders and other smalls can contribute from game 1 and in earnest within a year or two.

You seem to be arguing against yourself.

As you were told 2-3 years ago we went tall heavy. We have Brown plus 3 top 25 in draft KPPs under 21 plus another 2 KPP under 21 taken later in the draft. If it takes 3-4 years for KPPs to get going why would we use pick 4 in a poor KPP draft (albeit some good KPD value around).

Coupled with our massive lack of genuine young midfielders I can assure you that pick 4 will be a mid or someone we think is capabale of being a mid.

 

[Taylor]

I might be alone here but I think Fogarty would make quite a good clearance mid

 

[Thewlis Dish]

I expressly acknowledged that in the third paragraph, as well as in prior posts. I'm more interested in the broader philosophy.

In this specific draft we should be drafting a midfielder. Whether talls or midfielders are more important to building a successful side is a chicken and egg argument, but right now our list is reasonably well stocked for developing talls and very bare in terms of midfield class.

 

[Thewlis Dish]

I might be alone here but I think Fogarty would make quite a good clearance mid

He certainly has the tools. I'd rather punt on a kid who has already shown that ability in his junior career though. Our inability to develop genuine mids has been an issue for a while now.

 

[Le Grille]

Dan

 

[HumanMeatball]

My mail says North take LDU at pick 4. Don't shoot the messenger. Just passing on what i heard.

You know reading phantom drafts that everyone here has seen doesn’t make it your mail right?

 

[HumanMeatball]

North must seriously hope to assemble the slowest midfield in afl history if they pick Constable. Zeiball, cunnington, Constable among other slow mids is very yuck

 

[JG22]

Twoomey has Stephenson sliding to 17.
What exactly is his heart condition?

Let's just say you'll need a defib with him.

 

[JG22]

John Smith is bolting into first round calculations.

 

[Groin guru]

You know reading phantom drafts that everyone here has seen doesn’t make it your mail right?

My mail was also sent to the Phantom drafters.

 

[Kreuz Control]

But a midfield alone doesn't win flags, or Collingwood and Melbourne would've at least played finals. You need a good balance across the field, and key position players, even the elite ones, take 4-5 years to really get going, whereas midfielders and other smalls can contribute from game 1 and in earnest within a year or two.

Agree with this, the Bombers did it well and it's exactly how Carlton are building as well. Talls have to come first.

 

[Scodog10]

Why? Look at Carlton's current build - they've loaded up on talls, used the extra development time they needed to continue being crap and are now halfway through building their midfield stocks with high picks. In another year or two that broad cohort of players will all come on together. Or, for more complete examples, GWS, who took Patton, Cameron and Lobb in their early years and have continued to fill out the smalls since then, or Adelaide, who had their spine in place before capping off the midfield with the Crouch brothers.

If you load up on midfielders first then sure, you become competitive more quickly, but that diminishes your capacity to then get hold of the elite tall prospects - witness the no man's land Collingwood (who topped up with midfielders) and St Kilda (whose tall picks haven't come on) are stuck in.

Now, if there are no appropriate talls at your picks, or you can't afford to be uncompetitive, then by all means take midfielders - but midfield over spine as a broad strategy is no recipe for success.

It's less about position per se, and more the nature of the player. He strikes as the type who can contribute immediately, rather than taking time to bulk up and grow into his size as KP types tend to.

Ripping point! When you’re early in a re-build you start with your talls because they tend to take a couple of years longer. This results in the mids you take in the following years maturing at a similar point in time so you have a group ready to breakout and have career years along a similar timeline.

The key to all of this and the reason I highlighted the paragraph I did is that coaching and development needs to be spot on as well or you’re wasting your time. I can’t speak on behalf of St Kilda, but if Collingwood’s coaching and development were even average over the past 2-3 years they would have been in finals contention at the very least. I seriously doubt there’s a premiership in the current Collingwood group because they never went tall early draft (Moore aside), but a good FD would have them in a much better state.