Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. 2020 Draft

  • Thread starter Thread starter ScrappyDo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Reader mode
Live Draft Tracker
 
BrutThough said:
Clark and Battle both trained with us before being drafted.
Click to expand...


Smart arse, you know I can't be bothered actually checking facts, that's just designed to make me look dumb, using reality to bring me unstuck. That's just mean. ;)
 
StCicatriz said:
only problem is battle is not played as a forward. he's used a utility, mainly played on the wing. before that down back. that's where the majority of his football has come from. i believe battle is a genuine forward, but to date the club hasn't gone that way.

tim is 27 next year. given it takes 4 years for a draftee to usually develop, that would put old mate in the perfect hand over window.

also worth remembering that the game changes and quickly, because richmond have gone with a certain structure doesn't mean that's where the next successful era is coming from now. before the acquisition of Lynch, richmond went in with a very short forward line. they also didn't care about things like clearance and a dominant ruck.

we on the other hand have gone with a dominant ruck and played two.

so our structure is quite different from richmond, remembering we play one of marshall and ryder there, along side king and membrey. with battle floating down there off the wing or per needs basis.

based on the mock drafts. which are always taken with a grain of salt, i'd say its unlikely ford even gets to our pick.
Click to expand...
Based on mock drafts of those supposedly in the know, he will certainly be there at our pick! Hasn't even made the Top 30 of most ITK journalists, who I would trust given their industry contacts than anyone posting on BigFooty (of which some are highly credentialed, but also heavily biased - read Knightmare).
 
George said:
Yep and my point is that we already have medium sized forwards and I believe our strategy isn't to have anymore of them. I think we need genuine midfielders I don't believe Ford is that.


No I don't think he is a genuine mid which is what I think we need.


We didn't play Battle on the wing and in the backline because of preference or choice. He was drafted as a medium sized forward and in an ideal world that is where he will play a majority of his football.

It doesn't matter that Membrey is 27, Battle will fill that role IMO. I think one genuine tall forward and one genuine medium sized forward is all we need. King & Battle. Surround them with damaging small forwards - and going by our draft/trade history over the last 24 months that looks exactly like what we want to do.
Click to expand...
It's a stretch to call Battle a medium sized forward. He might be at the bottom end of KPF height, but he would still count as one and certainly plays like a genuine key forward when in the forward line.

And bringing in McKernan this off season - as ready to go back-up for Marshall/Ryder - would suggest we aren't going for a forward line with just one genuine tall. That suggests we want two big targets in the forward line every game.
 
BrutThough said:
It's a stretch to call Battle a medium sized forward. He might be at the bottom end of KPF height, but he would still count as one and certainly plays like a genuine key forward when in the forward line.

And bringing in McKernan this off season - as ready to go back-up for Marshall/Ryder - would suggest we aren't going for a forward line with just one genuine tall. That suggests we want two big targets in the forward line every game.
Click to expand...
Why is it a stretch to call him a medium sized forward? He is the same height as Nathan Fyfe. He is most definitely a medium sized forward, as is Membrey. I don't think anyone actually reckons Josh Battle is a tall forward. As for McKernan - he is a replacement for Abbott and most likely won't play a game. You say we want two big targets in the forward line - Ford is 186cm. We may in fact want two big talls in the forward line but Ford is not that.

Our first pick should be used on best available but also part of the pick should be because we think he can make an impact on our side within the next two years.

Picking Ford and having him wait for four seasons for Membrey to retire is stupid IMO. Those players should be used on later picks.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

George said:
Why is it a stretch to call him a medium sized forward? He is the same height as Nathan Fyfe. He is most definitely a medium sized forward, as is Membrey. I don't think anyone actually reckons Josh Battle is a tall forward. As for McKernan - he is a replacement for Abbott and most likely won't play a game. You say we want two big targets in the forward line - Ford is 186cm. We may in fact want two big talls in the forward line but Ford is not that.

Our first pick should be used on best available but also part of the pick should be because we think he can make an impact on our side within the next two years.

Picking Ford and having him wait for four seasons for Membrey to retire is stupid IMO. Those players should be used on later picks.
Click to expand...
You are scaring me George. I find you posting on threads that you haven't been closely linked to previously has some inner sanctum workings to it whereby you are trying to let us down easy because you know for a fact that Ford isn't on any war room whiteboards, and you have some ulterior motive for the benefit of us all. That may also just be the esteem I hold you to.

I hope we make some brave decisions with these Victorian boys, rather than base our positions of SA and WA talent that we have seen.

To expect any draftee to come in and have an impact on this team in the next two years is unrealistic when we have so many positions sewn up.

I want points of difference. Where is our freak show. Where is our tall midfield type who just bosses the oppo. Where is our Dusty. Cripps. Bont. Fyfe.

Give me the freakshow.

Don't let me down.
 
George said:
Why is it a stretch to call him a medium sized forward? He is the same height as Nathan Fyfe. He is most definitely a medium sized forward, as is Membrey. I don't think anyone actually reckons Josh Battle is a tall forward. As for McKernan - he is a replacement for Abbott and most likely won't play a game. You say we want two big targets in the forward line - Ford is 186cm. We may in fact want two big talls in the forward line but Ford is not that.

Our first pick should be used on best available but also part of the pick should be because we think he can make an impact on our side within the next two years.

Picking Ford and having him wait for four seasons for Membrey to retire is stupid IMO. Those players should be used on later picks.
Click to expand...
Why would he have to wait 4 years for Members to retire to get a game, just because you don't think he can be a mid and have him pegged as a small forward, a lot of us don't and think he will be a mid so him playing has nothing to do with members, he wants to play like Fyfe so I think that tells you he thinks of himself more a mid than a small forward, he could easily take one of the mid spots in the next 2-3 years, yes the same amount of time it's taken hunter to get some mid time
 
Last edited:
George said:
Why is it a stretch to call him a medium sized forward? He is the same height as Nathan Fyfe. He is most definitely a medium sized forward, as is Membrey. I don't think anyone actually reckons Josh Battle is a tall forward. As for McKernan - he is a replacement for Abbott and most likely won't play a game. You say we want two big targets in the forward line - Ford is 186cm. We may in fact want two big talls in the forward line but Ford is not that.

Our first pick should be used on best available but also part of the pick should be because we think he can make an impact on our side within the next two years.

Picking Ford and having him wait for four seasons for Membrey to retire is stupid IMO. Those players should be used on later picks.
Click to expand...
Battle is about the same heigh at Jack Darling, who is absolutely a key forward. Someone his size can he a key forward. It is also the way he plays up forward as a genuine marking target. Just like when he played in defence, he was used as a genuine key position player on the oppositions tall forwards.

McKernan isn't a direct replacement for Abbott since he is a forward who can spend a little bit of time in the ruck whereas Abbott was a ruckman. Different types of players.

You are viewing Ford as only a forward. Whereas, many of us were discussing him as someone who would move into the midfield. The discussion about the forward line set up from my end has nothing to do with Ford, but with you repeating that our clear forward set up is 1 tall with multiple small forwards when the games we played last year and some planning moving into next year doesn't reflect that at all.
 
George said:
Why is it a stretch to call him a medium sized forward? He is the same height as Nathan Fyfe. He is most definitely a medium sized forward, as is Membrey. I don't think anyone actually reckons Josh Battle is a tall forward. As for McKernan - he is a replacement for Abbott and most likely won't play a game. You say we want two big targets in the forward line - Ford is 186cm. We may in fact want two big talls in the forward line but Ford is not that.

Our first pick should be used on best available but also part of the pick should be because we think he can make an impact on our side within the next two years.

Picking Ford and having him wait for four seasons for Membrey to retire is stupid IMO. Those players should be used on later picks.
Click to expand...

wrong eddie ford.
 
Significant said:
You are scaring me George. I find you posting on threads that you haven't been closely linked to previously has some inner sanctum workings to it whereby you are trying to let us down easy because you know for a fact that Ford isn't on any war room whiteboards, and you have some ulterior motive for the benefit of us all. That may also just be the esteem I hold you to.

I hope we make some brave decisions with these Victorian boys, rather than base our positions of SA and WA talent that we have seen.

To expect any draftee to come in and have an impact on this team in the next two years is unrealistic when we have so many positions sewn up.

I want points of difference. Where is our freak show. Where is our tall midfield type who just bosses the oppo. Where is our Dusty. Cripps. Bont. Fyfe.

Give me the freakshow.

Don't let me down.
Click to expand...
Haha just my opinion - but do believe a player picked inside 25 should not take four years to develop. You don't use your first pick on a project player.

CaptainRisky said:
Why would he have to wait 4 years to retire to get a game, just because you don't think he can be a mid and have him pegged as a small forward, a lot of us don't and think he will be a mid so him playing has nothing to do with members, he wants to play like Fyfe so I think that tells you he thinks of himself more a mid than a small forward, he could easily take one of the mid spots in the next 2-3 years, yes the same amount of time it's taken hunter to get some mid time
Click to expand...
StC said we should draft Ford and then let him takeover once Membrey retires. Apparently players take four years to develop. My issue is that we shouldn't be letting a player develop for four years that we drafted inside the first 20 or so picks. They should either be ready to come into the 22 or be borderline 22 with the expectation they play regular senior football inside 2 seasons. Players who need four years to develop should be drafted well beyond the first 20 picks IMO.

I don't think Ford is a small forward. I think is a medium sized forward and I think our needs are elsewhere (genuine mid).

BrutThough said:
Battle is about the same heigh at Jack Darling, who is absolutely a key forward. Someone his size can he a key forward. It is also the way he plays up forward as a genuine marking target. Just like when he played in defence, he was used as a genuine key position player on the oppositions tall forwards.

McKernan isn't a direct replacement for Abbott since he is a forward who can spend a little bit of time in the ruck whereas Abbott was a ruckman. Different types of players.

You are viewing Ford as only a forward. Whereas, many of us were discussing him as someone who would move into the midfield. The discussion about the forward line set up from my end has nothing to do with Ford, but with you repeating that our clear forward set up is 1 tall with multiple small forwards when the games we played last year and some planning moving into next year doesn't reflect that at all.
Click to expand...
Battle doesn't play like a key forward which is my point, my comment on height was only to show you he is as tall as midfielders. Yes he can take a mark but the fact he plays on the wing is enough evidence to suggest he doesn't play anything like Darling. He is leaps and bounds ahead of Darling in terms of speed and agility.

McKernan is a replacement for Abbott but irrespective of what we see him as, he will not play a game barring multiple injuries. He is a depth player, there is a reason he was delisted from Essendon. We did not bring McKernan in because we want him to slot into the 22 immediately because it benefits our strategy (in your opinion) of needing 2 key talls.

Our forward line setup does not require 2 to 3 medium sized forwards (Battle-Membrey-Ford) which is my point. We already have enough of his type. We need genuine midfielders. Good for you if you see him as someone who can move into the midfield. I would prefer a genuine midfielder.
 
George said:
Haha just my opinion - but do believe a player picked inside 25 should not take four years to develop. You don't use your first pick on a project player.


StC said we should draft Ford and then let him takeover once Membrey retires. Apparently players take four years to develop. My issue is that we shouldn't be letting a player develop for four years that we drafted inside the first 20 or so picks. They should either be ready to come into the 22 or be borderline 22 with the expectation they play regular senior football inside 2 seasons. Players who need four years to develop should be drafted well beyond the first 20 picks IMO.

I don't think Ford is a small forward. I think is a medium sized forward and I think our needs are elsewhere (genuine mid).


Battle doesn't play like a key forward which is my point, my comment on height was only to show you he is as tall as midfielders. Yes he can take a mark but the fact he plays on the wing is enough evidence to suggest he doesn't play anything like Darling. He is leaps and bounds ahead of Darling in terms of speed and agility.

McKernan is a replacement for Abbott but irrespective of what we see him as, he will not play a game barring multiple injuries. He is a depth player, there is a reason he was delisted from Essendon. We did not bring McKernan in because we want him to slot into the 22 immediately because it benefits our strategy (in your opinion) of needing 2 key talls.

Our forward line setup does not require 2 to 3 medium sized forwards (Battle-Membrey-Ford) which is my point. We already have enough of his type. We need genuine midfielders. Good for you if you see him as someone who can move into the midfield. I would prefer a genuine midfielder.
Click to expand...

to take over full time at CHF.... for all we know he could over take membrey inside 3 years and in the mean time spend time on the HFF

any player we draft will struggle to break into this side now. it won't matter if we draft a tall, ruck or midfielder. that's not going to change! because we have depth in all positions and the younger guys we do play are all high draft picks, unless you are suggesting dropping someone for them?
 
StCicatriz said:
to take over full time at CHF.... for all we know he could over take membrey inside 3 years and in the mean time spend time on the HFF

any player we draft will struggle to break into this side now. it won't matter if we draft a tall forward, ruck or midfielder. that's not going to change!
Click to expand...
I wasn't debating whether or not I think they can break into the side now. I think if we were to draft a genuine mid they could have the ability to play a handful of games for us next year and then become part of the midfield group in 2022.
 
George said:
Disagree I think if we were to draft a genuine mid they could have the ability to play a handful of games for us next year and then become part of the midfield group in 2022.
Click to expand...

you could make the exact same argument for Ford. he could play a handful of games on the half forward flank, then become part of the forward group in 2022.

i don't think this argument changes because its a tall, small or ruck. its the same problem.

i'm not wedded to Ford either, barely followed this draft. but tbh no matter who we pick we are going to struggle to squeeze them in.

B Paton Howard Wilkie
HB Coffield Carlisle Long
C Hill Steele Hanners
R Ryder Crouch Ross
HF Billings Membrey Gresham
F Butler King Marshall
INT Battle Jones Clark Higgins

thats a very very tight side. not one player would you drop automatically. you want players like clark/gresham to get more midfield time. king/higgins more forward time. coffield/long/paton more backline time. marshall more ruck time. battle just time where ever you can play him.

so any dropping of a player for a draftee will require injury/suspension. crouch misses 2 games, but we also want bytel to get some more game time.

ryder might not be ready. then there's off-season injury.

i think we are best placed to go best available and not worry about need at all.

i mean take Richmond, they were in the hunt for flags. they still didnt give RCD games. still selected him despite their depth in the midfield. so why would we be forced to give a new draftee games?
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

StCicatriz said:
you could make the exact same argument for Ford. he could play a handful of games on the half forward flank, then become part of the forward group in 2022.

i don't think this argument changes because its a tall, small or ruck. its the same problem.
Click to expand...
Yes, you could. But then the debate shifts to whether or not that is the best thing for the side and what you see as the thinking of the club and where they see our ideal structure. In my opinion, the goal for the club is to surround King with damaging small forwards while midfielders and ruckmen interchange. Ryder and Marshall aren't put into the forward line because they are needed as a key tall, they are there predominantly so we can play both of them pinch hitting in the ruck as we have demolished sides this year by playing them both. We use Ryders physicality and Marshall's ability to become basically an extra midfielder as an advantage. I don't believe we select them based on pure forward play, whilst their goal kicking admittedly is a bonus.

In any event, players drafted inside 20 should be playing regular football inside two seasons. Any player that is going to take three or four years to develop should be taken in later rounds.
 
George said:
Yes, you could. But then the debate shifts to whether or not that is the best thing for the side and what you see as the thinking of the club and where they see our ideal structure. In my opinion, the goal for the club is to surround King with damaging small forwards while midfielders and ruckmen interchange. Ryder and Marshall aren't put into the forward line because they are needed as a key tall, they are there predominantly so we can play both of them pinch hitting in the ruck as we have demolished sides this year by playing them both. We use Ryders physicality and Marshall's ability to become basically an extra midfielder as an advantage. I don't believe we select them based on pure forward play, whilst their goal kicking admittedly is a bonus.

In any event, players drafted inside 20 should be playing regular football inside two seasons. Any player that is going to take three or four years to develop should be taken in later rounds.
Click to expand...

i see the side best placed to have a number of talls down there, really stretching sides. that's the obvious philosphy they're going with. it's why they have 3 talls down there, with sometimes a 4th roaming through there in battle and Steele spending small patches there.

i can't see that changing. if anything i can see them wanting to upgrade membrey over the next 3 seasons, for a genuine strong match winning CHF.

i think they like having flankers spending time up the ground, so we will see some of the smalls like butler/gresham/higgins running through there. we also will look to sending steele through there in patches (forward line that is, to really really stretch clubs).

we are in a position now, where the expectation that a draftee will play regular football in two seasons just isn't possible anymore. if it does mean that it means players who were previously taken around the same mark will be pushed out, which defeats the purpose of your comment. its worth remembering this pick will possibly push out to pick 25-30, so it's not as high end as you'd think.

it's just how it is now. you take the player and if they're good enough they will play. if not, it means some other younger player is better. no different to richmond with RCD.

i guess what i am arguing for is BEST AVAILABLE. i don't care if its a forward/mid/defender/ruck. tall/small. don't worry about if they can play in two years. just get the best you can.
 
Last edited:
StCicatriz said:
you could make the exact same argument for Ford. he could play a handful of games on the half forward flank, then become part of the forward group in 2022.

i don't think this argument changes because its a tall, small or ruck. its the same problem.

i'm not wedded to Ford either, barely followed this draft. but tbh no matter who we pick we are going to struggle to squeeze them in.

B Paton Howard Wilkie
HB Coffield Carlisle Long
C Hill Steele Hanners
R Ryder Crouch Ross
HF Billings Membrey Gresham
F Butler King Marshall
INT Battle Jones Clark Higgins

thats a very very tight side. not one player would you drop automatically. you want players like clark/gresham to get more midfield time. king/higgins more forward time. coffield/long/paton more backline time. marshall more ruck time. battle just time where ever you can play him.

so any dropping of a player for a draftee will require injury/suspension. crouch misses 2 games, but we also want bytel to get some more game time.

ryder might not be ready. then there's off-season injury.

i think we are best placed to go best available and not worry about need at all.

i mean take Richmond, they were in the hunt for flags. they still didnt give RCD games. still selected him despite their depth in the midfield. so why would we be forced to give a new draftee games?
Click to expand...
Gee that's a strong side I like it
Battle Clark & Jones on the Bench is strong
I would swap Ross & Clark
And hopefully Bytel forces his way in
 
George said:
Battle doesn't play like a key forward which is my point, my comment on height was only to show you he is as tall as midfielders. Yes he can take a mark but the fact he plays on the wing is enough evidence to suggest he doesn't play anything like Darling. He is leaps and bounds ahead of Darling in terms of speed and agility.

McKernan is a replacement for Abbott but irrespective of what we see him as, he will not play a game barring multiple injuries. He is a depth player, there is a reason he was delisted from Essendon. We did not bring McKernan in because we want him to slot into the 22 immediately because it benefits our strategy (in your opinion) of needing 2 key talls.

Our forward line setup does not require 2 to 3 medium sized forwards (Battle-Membrey-Ford) which is my point. We already have enough of his type. We need genuine midfielders. Good for you if you see him as someone who can move into the midfield. I would prefer a genuine midfielder.
Click to expand...
Just because Battle can play on the wing, doesn't mean when he is forward he doesn't play like a key forward. It isn't just that he can mark the ball, it is the way he leads, the way he reads the ball and how he engages his defender.

Of course McKernan isn't best 22. He was brought in as back up so if Ryder or Marshall or King doesn't play, we have a mature option ready to slot into the forward line while keeping our preferred structure. And that preferred structure consisted of more than 1 tall forward, which is my point all along.

And with Ford, he is the type of player who was going to move into the midfield this year but obviously couldn't. But thats not unusual for many players who go onto being genuine AFL mids to not play much midfield minutes in their u17 year.
 
bluesteel2008 said:
Great season. Such a better way to go into the offseason even with tonight’s result. We win tonight with Ryder, Carslile and Long in I think, they don’t score 10 goals from stoppage with Paddy in ruck.
Click to expand...
Diehard Saint said:
A bit of an exaggeration surely - One or two melts, the majority of us just have a bit of empathy for a player who was a real good news story pick up and who we were barracking for to succeed.
Click to expand...
CaptainRisky said:
Sorry mate , but we got Butler last year now Higgins and we still have Byrnes , Gresh , Billings, to name just a few smalls who can go forward , we have plenty of the same type , Ford is a different type of player who I'm will to put my left nut on the line and say he will make a very good mid who can go forward and be very dangerous
Click to expand...
The 6 min highlight tape looked amazing - I would go with CR’s left nut based on the highlight reel
 
BrutThough said:
Just because Battle can play on the wing, doesn't mean when he is forward he doesn't play like a key forward. It isn't just that he can mark the ball, it is the way he leads, the way he reads the ball and how he engages his defender.

Of course McKernan isn't best 22. He was brought in as back up so if Ryder or Marshall or King doesn't play, we have a mature option ready to slot into the forward line while keeping our preferred structure. And that preferred structure consisted of more than 1 tall forward, which is my point all along.

And with Ford, he is the type of player who was going to move into the midfield this year but obviously couldn't. But thats not unusual for many players who go onto being genuine AFL mids.
Click to expand...
Battles best position is a forward imo
Think if he was was given a full season there 50 to 60 goals a year
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Mowman said:
Gee that's a strong side I like it
Battle Clark & Jones on the Bench is strong
I would swap Ross & Clark
And hopefully Bytel forces his way in
Click to expand...

we are in a much healthier position here, where we don't have to stress about this kid we pick at pick 20 which will be more like pick 27, having to come in and make it inside 3 years or show signs he will. this guys not going to have the pressure that McCartin/Goddard/McKenzie/Dunstan/Acres/Billings/Gresham all had.

we have the luxory here of really just got best available and just see what happens. doesn't matter what position the guy plays.

i do find it funny we want our pick to play inside 2 years because its a top 20 pick, but then forget that the pick isn't really a top 20 pick, once you see how damn compromised the draft is with the NGA. plus see how damn tight the side is. which could get even tighter this time next year when we grab more trade targets and FA.

its absolutely brilliant position to be in!!!

we could select a Ruck with a 5 year view and i wouldn't blink an eye lid.
 
Mowman said:
Battles best position is a forward imo
Think if he was was given a full season there 50 to 60 goals a year
Click to expand...
Agreed. I'm not a fan of him on the wing and he doesn't seem to play as well there.

But he has always been impactful up forward, even in his first few games.
 
BrutThough said:
Agreed. I'm not a fan of him on the wing and he doesn't seem to play as well there.

But he has always been impactful up forward, even in his first few games.
Click to expand...

i believe battle is genuine forward. fell head over heals for him when i saw him play at subi oval in his U18 year. absolute star.

but i'm also happy for Ratts to keep using him in the way he has, if he thinks thats best for him.

what's important for me is Battle plays! where he ends up sure will be interesting! because he's the one player we have that can play literally anywhere. its like a massive upgrade on how acres was used.
 
StCicatriz said:
i see the side best placed to have a number of talls down there, really stretching sides. that's the obvious philosphy they're going with. it's why they have 3 talls down there, with sometimes a 4th roaming through there in battle and Steele spending small patches there.

i can't see that changing. if anything i can see them wanting to upgrade membrey over the next 3 seasons, for a genuine strong match winning CHF.

i think they like having flankers spending time up the ground, so we will see some of the smalls like butler/gresham/higgins running through there. we also will look to sending steele through there in patches (forward line that is, to really really stretch clubs).

we are in a position now, where the expectation that a draftee will play regular football in two seasons just isn't possible anymore. if it does mean that it means players who were previously taken around the same mark will be pushed out, which defeats the purpose of your comment. its worth remembering this pick will possibly push out to pick 25-30, so it's not as high end as you'd think.

it's just how it is now. you take the player and if they're good enough they will play. if not, it means some other younger player is better. no different to richmond with RCD.

i guess what i am arguing for is BEST AVAILABLE. i don't care if its a forward/mid/defender/ruck. tall/small. don't worry about if they can play in two years. just get the best you can.
Click to expand...
See I see the side the complete opposite. Nothing suggests to me that we want to play a tall forward line. Again, the reason Marshall & Ryder are both in the side is predominantly because of their effectiveness in the ruck and we can't exactly rest one of them in any other position other than forward. Over the last two seasons we have brought in Higgins and Butler. We have played Steele forward. Gresham has rotated through mid and forward as have others. A huge majority of our goals have come out the back. Two of the last three seasons our leading goal kicker has been a small forward. There's an obvious trend in how we want to play and how the best sides play so it's clear to me what the strategy is.

Surround King with good marking players and damaging small forwards that have the ability to move into the midfield. Bring in midfielders that have goal kicking ability. We are talking about our first pick here and I think a genuine midfielder at that pick should be the priority over someone who is a medium sized forward that has the potential to play midfield.

I agree best available should be picked but that isn't to suggest Ford is the best available at our pick. I haven't followed the draft much either, but I have an opinion on which kind of players we need and medium sized forwards are not one of them. I think we need 2 more midfielders and preferably more outside than inside. Bytel has the tools to do both, so he needs to come on. Then we need to find another.
 
StCicatriz said:
i believe battle is genuine forward. fell head over heals for him when i saw him play at subi oval in his U18 year. absolute star.

but i'm also happy for Ratts to keep using him in the way he has, if he thinks thats best for him.

what's important for me is Battle plays! where he ends up sure will be interesting! because he's the one player we have that can play literally anywhere. its like a massive upgrade on how acres was used.
Click to expand...
Great point. After him being out of the side at the start of the season, it doesnt really matter where he plays just as long as he is in the side.

We will need to settle him in a position eventually. Right now, it seems to be great for his development to be able to play different positions and make himself a well rounded player. But as soon as that starts becoming a hinderance more than something he is learning from, then we will need to settle him somewhere. I think that will end up being as a forward long term.
 
BrutThough said:
Just because Battle can play on the wing, doesn't mean when he is forward he doesn't play like a key forward. It isn't just that he can mark the ball, it is the way he leads, the way he reads the ball and how he engages his defender.
Click to expand...
He marks the ball well and has the agility and speed to play on the wing. Key forwards don't play on the wing.

BrutThough said:
Of course McKernan isn't best 22. He was brought in as back up so if Ryder or Marshall or King doesn't play, we have a mature option ready to slot into the forward line while keeping our preferred structure. And that preferred structure consisted of more than 1 tall forward, which is my point all along.
Click to expand...
I don't think Ryder & Marshall play in the forward line for structure. I think they rotate through the forward line so we can play two rucks. It's more to do with the ability to play two ruckmen than it is to play 2 key talls. If we wanted to play 2 key talls we would have King and another genuine key tall down there and then we just wouldn't play Ryder.
 
Reader mode

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Sarcoidevo
    • Like
2025 Draft Thread
85 86 87 88 89
Replies
2K
Views
133K
saintmike65
saintmike65
Hubnester
    • Like
    • Love
Rumour Rumours & Confirmed - Trades, Free Agency & Draft [NO DISCUSSION]
2
Replies
37
Views
9K
StFly
StFly
kernelT
    • Like
Analysis Midfield - 25 year draft recap
2
Replies
49
Views
2K
gringo2011
gringo2011
P
    • Like
St Kilda's challenge to draft wisdom
Replies
5
Views
843
Yawkey way
Yawkey way
Enclosed_Animal
  • Poll Poll
Who do you want on draft night?
Replies
8
Views
977
Barrels
Barrels
pebblesofsand
    • Like
St Kilda 2024 Draft Selection "Nearest the Pin"
2
Replies
46
Views
4K
Saintscomemarchingin
S
SaintsSeptember
    • Like
2024 Draft Thread.
709 710 711 712 713
Replies
18K
Views
832K
MOLTEN GANGLANDS
MOLTEN GANGLANDS

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom