Resource 2023 AFL Draft Discussion...

[George CantStandYa]

Don't act dumb. We could have moved Sholl to that rookie spot, but we have so little interest in making a fourth main list spot available that we've promised it to a dud like Borlase.

If we didn't do that, we could have had a fourth main draft pick.

Hamish explaining to the Nannas on Facebook that we don't have scope to do a late pick because we don't have a list spot doesn't mean he WANTED a list spot, because he could have HAD a list spot.

George - he literally says there's a likelihood we only take two picks!! Why the hell would he say that, if he wanted a fourth pick!? It's completely irrational to say anything else.

We’ve committed to Borlase because of a lack of key defenders with Murray injured. That’s obvious.

We can’t move Sholl there. There’s nothing dumb about my position, it’s bloody obvious.

He says 2-3 because he’s talking about trading up, if we do then we take 2. Again it’s bloody obvious.

Hamish literally says we have no scope to pick up a slider even if we wanted to and you think that’s not because we don’t have list spots available?

Mate talk about digging in, but when youve spent a month trying to shut down criticism, I can see why.

 

[LoBu]

We have a lot more coming off contract next year.

Yep, and just 2 who should be signed up asap, Hinge and Pedlar.

Keays will also be signed up, is best 22 and will be excellent depth if others pass him.

Players who are playing for their future and need a good year to continue, or will be traded:

Taylor Walker
Rory Sloane
Brodie Smith
Elliott Himmelberg
Lachlan Sholl
Ned McHenry
Patrick Parnell
Lachlan Gollant
Brayden Cook
Hugh Bond
Sam Berry
Chris Burgess

No doubt half will survive.

 

[George CantStandYa]

I think that’s the point though , they don’t really rate the draft after the top 20-25

And have positioned accordingly

I think it’s fairly general consensus from alot of clubs

Doesn’t excuse Sloane going on , he should have finished up in any case

Nope, it’s because we kept Sloane. We’ve got not flexibility.

 

[BigBoSS_Riot]

Can anyone put up the interview of Hamish please

link given doesn’t work

thanks

On Twitter:

 

[Mostyn]

We’ve committed to Borlase because of a lack of key defenders with Murray injured. That’s obvious.

We can’t move Sholl there. There’s nothing dumb about my position, it’s bloody obvious.

He says 2-3 because he’s talking about trading up, if we do then we take 2. Again it’s bloody obvious.

Hamish literally says we have no scope to pick up a slider even if we wanted to and you think that’s not because we don’t have list spots available?

Mate talk about digging in, but when youve spent a month trying to shut down criticism, I can see why.

Mate, listen to yourself.

"He says 2-3 because he’s talking about trading up, if we do then we take 2. Again it’s bloody obvious."

If we trade up, we'll still HAVE a third pick. We'd have the third list spot to fill.

But he knows they won't want to, so much so that he's saying they wouldn't even fill the left over list spot at the draft!

And you think he is worried that he doesn't have two extra picks?? When he's flagging he wouldn't even use the one he's already got?

We could have made a list spot, but we've already given it to Borlase so we can have extra depth. That's fine - but it's obvious that they don't rate the later end of the draft, because they could have used the spot if there were better players than Borlase available.

They could have said - we've got Burgess, Keane, Butts is healthy, Worrell can play tall, let's finally try Himmelburg back, let's draft someone - ample things they could do if they wanted a spot.

They don't want it. That's incredibly obvious, when Hamish says they may not even use the ones they have!!

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Nope, it’s because we kept Sloane. We’ve got not flexibility.

It’s all factored in when keeping Sloane

Do we want flexibility later in draft or keep sloane , do we want to be in the draft heavy and throughout or just early

They chose Sloane

I would have chose neither Sloane or being in this draft heavy

 

[dogs105]

It's not full.

We've passed final list lodgement date. We HAVE a rookie list spot. For some reason, we've promised it to a player from the rookie list that we've delisted.

It's effectively full because we've promised it to two players. One we wanted to keep, and one in contract. Choice I'm most unhappy with is Sloane.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I'm just messing with you.

You've always been one who's unafraid to have a strong opinion.

It makes for good reading.

You can't have strong opinions without expecting SOME to not come off ...

That being said, your Windsor opinion won't be far off. He only needs one team to be excited and reach for him, and he could go anywhere from 7 onwards. Not many mids in the draft probably means someone goes early.

 

[Danger in Texas]

New or nah?

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Unfortunately Haggis feels more comfortable picking at 35 than 5, and therein lies the biggest criticism of our drafting the past 10 years.

You do realise that makes no sense .....If a good player can be picked at #35 ....then it's logical, pick #5 is easier to select

It's just that you remember the pick #35 success's .....and focus on the top 10 failures ....it skews your thoughts & reality

 

[WaynesWorld19]

New or nah?

Been done & posted mate

 

[Danger in Texas]

Been done & posted mate

Give me some slack, it got tweeted (X’d?) 3 minutes ago

 

[WaynesWorld19]

It’s all factored in when keeping Sloane

Do we want flexibility later in draft or keep sloane , do we want to be in the draft heavy and throughout or just early

They chose Sloane

I would have chose neither Sloane or being in this draft heavy

Given the Draft is expected to only involve 58 names ....and our 3rd pick will be at the halfway mark, it seems all players after then is a gamble

Club has said, better the devil you know, than take a gamble .....I'm in the camp of quality over quantity

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Give me some slack, it got tweeted (X’d?) 3 minutes ago

LOL ....these articles get posted under 3-4 mastheads

 

[Crow till I die]

On Twitter:

If we can't trade up, I'd be very flat if out of the top group, Windsor is the one left at our pick as his highlights and the stats don't say to me he is worth the pick for what we need - all the other top enders would have genuine real value to our list worthy of that pick. I'd actually be hoping we might field an offer for our pick 10 with a side for a future 1st and maybe a 2nd rounder in this draft - just my opinion.

 

[Danger in Texas]

LOL ....these articles get posted under 3-4 mastheads

Better to ask than to never know

 

[Mostyn]

It's effectively full because we've promised it to two players. One we wanted to keep, and one in contract. Choice I'm most unhappy with is Sloane.

That's fine.

I would have gotten rid of Sloane, but I'm not there everyday and don't know what he offers.

I wouldn't have made any promises to Borlase, because I think he's bog average and we could have gotten other mature bodies to fill that spot, if we desperately needed backup.

I would have rather had a few more options.

The club has looked at what's ACTUALLY there, and done something different.

That's fine too.

 

[Mostyn]

View attachment 1854609

You might be VERY right about Windsor.

Lots of whispers that he's pushing up the order - Melbourne looking at him and Leake, which is fascinating.

They don't mind swimming against convention.

 

[Brett Cummings]

I

If we can't trade up, I'd be very flat if out of the top group, Windsor is the one left at our pick as his highlights and the stats don't say to me he is worth the pick for what we need - all the other top enders would have genuine real value to our list worthy of that pick. I'd actually be hoping we might field an offer for our pick 10 with a side for a future 1st and maybe a 2nd rounder in this draft - just my opinion.

If we don't move one of o'sullivan, leake or wllson will be there.

 

[Chase13]

If we can't trade up, I'd be very flat if out of the top group, Windsor is the one left at our pick as his highlights and the stats don't say to me he is worth the pick for what we need - all the other top enders would have genuine real value to our list worthy of that pick. I'd actually be hoping we might field an offer for our pick 10 with a side for a future 1st and maybe a 2nd rounder in this draft - just my opinion.

Two of our first rounders assuming 14. 20 and maybe a future pick

they must be super keen on someone

im thinking the player is SANDERS

 

[Mostyn]

Suggestions today of Windsor to Melbourne at their first pick, and GWS trading their pick to WCE for a future first, and the Eagles taking Curtin.

 

[Danger in Texas]

Suggestions today of Windsor to Melbourne at their first pick, and GWS trading their pick to WCE for a future first, and the Eagles taking Curtin.

Reckon Melb are tossing up Windsor and Leake, maybe Caddy too

Is Curtin a flight risk or something? No one seems to want him lol

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Reckon Melb are tossing up Windsor and Leake, maybe Caddy too

Is Curtin a flight risk or something? No one seems to want him lol

he wouldn't have surprised me as a pick 2 , now might get to 8, no wonder west coast will offer future 1st

could be great draft for WC with reid/ curtin

 

[Crow till I die]

Suggestions today of Windsor to Melbourne at their first pick, and GWS trading their pick to WCE for a future first, and the Eagles taking Curtin.

Apparently so, but also clarko from reports is super keen on Curtin so North might scupper all that

 

[FR0GGY]

Been awhile since we’ve picked a WA player?
Was O’Connor the last?