Remove this Banner Ad

Game Day 2017 National Draft

The OP for our new picks must be accurate and informative. Who should do it?

  • Anyone

    Votes: 39 35.5%

  • Wait for TD

    Votes: 71 64.5%
  • Total voters
    110
  • Poll closed .

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

nahnah said:
I don’t get why people didn’t wanna take a risk at 6 in a weak draft with no real stand out kpp. We need superstars desperately, no point being conservative and picking an ok to pretty good safe selection in our current position.
Click to expand...
I agree with this.

No risk it, no biscuit.

17/18 teams fail every year, no point playing safe.
 
Lefthanded said:
Only concern I have with Murphy is that he was invited to the draft (potential top 10) yet no one else took him in first 38. You would think it must have been us, Saints, Dogs or Blues who had him in their top 10 list based on being the later draft picks. Saints didn't take him at 35, Blues didn't at 30, Dogs didn't at 16 so unless Dogs rated Richards very highly (I can't remember if he was invited to the draft but guessing he must have given a little bit of speculation we were into him at 6) than Pies have dodged a bullet that someone more highly rated was available at 6 (otherwise we might have taken Murphy there instead of 39).
Click to expand...
Best way to answer that is that everyone has their own opinion.
Adam Goodes was touted highly in his draft year after a fantastic TAC cup grand final if memory servers me correctly. Didn't go till pick 42 I think.
Everyone giotbthat wrong with their earlier picks.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Seedsfan said:
In a few years Dunn Reid and Cox will all be 30 plus and definitely two of them will be finished that leaves us with Moore
Click to expand...

McLarty?

McLarty and Moore can be the pillars of our defence for the next ten years. if we get Lynch, and it is a big if, then I think we are reasonably well positioned for talls going forward.

You can always add a good quality tall but were there any good ones available that were better than Stephenson who himself absolutely meets a need.

Personally I like the look of both Stephenson and Murphy. Stephenson has that outside pace and X factor we need, and Murphy already looks like he is one of the better kicks on our list.
 
The Royal Sampler said:
Based on champion data numbers, not scouting of any description as far as I could tell.
Click to expand...
I presume you mean his he was rated highly by commentators on stats rather than observation and recruiters didn't see so much in his football ability after watching him? That is probably the case. He must have some deficiency to be not taken much earlier though. It will be interesting to see how he develops. Sight unseen you'd have to back professional recruiters over media judges but it is still a huge discrepancy in his rating unless he has serious personality issues.
 
I am happy with our draft this year. I think the club made the right choice at all of our picks. I think we can sort out the kpp problem a little bit by getting some back up in the rookie draft and hopefully McClarty plays this year too. I would rather the club get the best quality players at our picks than go for more speculative kpp who might not make it.
 
MarkT2 said:
I presume you mean his he was rated highly by commentators on stats rather than observation and recruiters didn't see so much in his football ability after watching him? That is probably the case. He must have some deficiency to be not taken much earlier though. It will be interesting to see how he develops. Sight unseen you'd have to back professional recruiters over media judges but it is still a huge discrepancy in his rating unless he has serious personality issues.
Click to expand...
I gather Champion Data have some algorithm which crunches his stats and spits out a rating. There were some players whose ranking according to this algorithm was quite high, and yet they didn’t get picked up. It could easily be due to;
a) recruiters weighting attributes differently to Champion Data
b) recruiters having minimum benchmarks for height/weight/pace/VO2/etc. that these draftees failed to meet
c) shit attitude/not coachable/unprofessional
d) the player racking up stats in an inferior standard of competition
e) the player racking up meaningless possessions

And so on. The modern school of thought is that data and scouting need to be used hand in hand, and an approach weighted too heavily towards data or scouting for attributes alone is flawed and will fail.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Timmy from Thomastown said:
Thought he was a FA? Besides theres plenty other picks to trade to land him. I doubt that pick will affect our trading capacity.

Muarray will be an interesting one to watch all the same. Big price for a zero gamer. Hes our smokey of this years draft/trade period.
Click to expand...

yeah I think Im getting mixed up with the NBA and restricted and full free agency. they always trade for the restricted, My bad
 
jerry springer said:
yeah I think Im getting mixed up with the NBA and restricted and full free agency. they always trade for the restricted, My bad
Click to expand...

If restircted they can match and get a better deal than they can get from compo. Thats what happened with Dangerfield at Geelong. But Geelong still got got a bargain.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

jatsad said:
Just saw Nathan Murphy's video on the CFC website, ans my very first impression was how similar he is to Keith Grieg. If he has half that ability, we are in for a treat.
Click to expand...
If he's half as silky .... wow.

Wells is our closest to Keith Grieg silk level.
Pendlebury a different kind of silk if I can put it that way.

I was only a kid, but challenge anyone that watched Keith Grieg play that didn't love watching him ( ok except when carving up Collingwood). He had all the beauty the game can muster. That good.
 
loki04 said:
Here's hoping we can keep our first and get him, trading out of that draft is :'(. I really am a greedy SOB.
Click to expand...
I like your thinking and somehow we get Brisbanes 1st pick which ends up the 1st pick overall and we get Lukosius.

My greed tops your greed :D
 
The Royal Sampler said:
I gather Champion Data have some algorithm which crunches his stats and spits out a rating. There were some players whose ranking according to this algorithm was quite high, and yet they didn’t get picked up. It could easily be due to;
a) recruiters weighting attributes differently to Champion Data
b) recruiters having minimum benchmarks for height/weight/pace/VO2/etc. that these draftees failed to meet
c) shit attitude/not coachable/unprofessional
d) the player racking up stats in an inferior standard of competition
e) the player racking up meaningless possessions

And so on. The modern school of thought is that data and scouting need to be used hand in hand, and an approach weighted too heavily towards data or scouting for attributes alone is flawed and will fail.
Click to expand...
That all makes sense. I wonder what the knocks on Moore are given just how highly he was rated.
 
Baltimore Jack said:
Don't think Adelaide matched, they just agreed to do a trade
Click to expand...
That's what I thought. They threatened to match.
The question re Lynch is whether GC would have the cap space to match whatever offer is put up. They have GA Jnr's salary to play with so you would think they have some capacity. You would think they would be talking up that strategy in that case.
 
Last edited:
2 x Top Tens... That is all

1124_DRAFT_CAROUSEL.jpg
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Game Day 2017 National Draft

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top