afl.com Phantom Draft

[Stiffy_18]

Here is the Phantom Draft from afl.com

Watts @ 14
Pettigrew @ 31
Mott @ 58
Ericksen @ 67

Brent Hall gone to Freo at 12

 

[macca23]

As I posted elsewhere Stiffy

"As for Matt Burgan's phantom draft Stiffy, I reckon he does a great job when you consider that apart from the first 3 picks or so the clubs themselves don't have any idea who they will end up getting because it all depends on the selections previously made.

As for his 4 selections for Adelaide, I'd be delighted to land Watts at #14, and pleased enough with Mott and Ericksen for the last 2 selections.

No way though would I want Pettigrew if Tim Schmidt from Westies was still available though (he has him going at #45).

Watts, Schmidt, Mott and Ericksen would be a good result IMO for us."

 

[DaveW]

Watts, Schmidt (surely we wouldn't overlook this classy home-grown midfielder for an average KPP like Pettigrew?) and Mott would do me.

I don't think we'll be using our fourth pick.

 

[Mong]

Watts sounds good from that description. Certainly a young key forward is our biggest priority in my opinion, given that our key forwards are aging.

A nice change to see someone predicted we take someone other than Hall. I am sick of reading the same thing in every phantom draft I read.

Interestingly, Matt Burgan correctly predicted our first round selections of Angwin and Reilly over the last few years. That makes his predcitions of our first round picks 100% since he has been doing these phatom drafts for afl.com.au.


****

 

[Jerome]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18

Watts @ 15
Pettigrew @ 31
Mott @ 58
Ericksen @ 67

Brent Hall gone to Freo at 12

Could have been worse. He could have tipped us to re draft Marsh or Smith.

Burgan has covered himself well by suggesting that we could still go for Hall.

Not convinced of Pettigrew or Ericksen. Ericksen didnt play too much footy this year from what I have read. I'd rather pick up blokes who have had a solid season and displayed good form during 2003.

I have a feeling that we will go for a ruckman with our first pick. I feel that we are in the same position that we were in at the end of 2000.

We'll pick the best player to cover our biggest weakness. This is the same reason we went for Angwin after Rehn left.

We probably should go for the best player available regardless of what position he plays. However, I cant see us taking the risk of passing up the best ruckman available and hoping he will still be around at 31.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by ****
Watts sounds good from that description. Certainly a young key forward is our biggest priority in my opinion, given that our key forwards are aging.

A nice change to see someone predicted we take someone other than Hall. I am sick of reading the same thing in every phantom draft I read.

Interestingly, Matt Burgan correctly predicted our first round selections of Angwin and Reilly over the last few years. That makes his predcitions of our first round picks 100% since he has been doing these phatom drafts for afl.com.au.


****

Furthermore, he has a 100% strike rate with our 1st picks period. In 2000 he said Angwin and we got him. In 2001 it was Reilly and last year he correctly predicted that we would pick Jericho with our 1st pick.

I just hope Hall's poor aerobic capacity puts off other clubs and he slips all the way to 31

I would be stoked with Watts. Don't want Ericksen. Mott looks the best available ready made ruckman in the draft. Assuming that Hall long gone by the time pick 31 comes along, and we decide to pick up Pettigrew while Schmidt is still available, AFC would need their heads checked. Pettigrew would be good at 58 or if we can get him at 67. I would still prefer Mott at 58.

 

[DaveW]

Our interest in taking Jericho with our first pick last year was the world's worst kept secret.

 

[Portia]

Maybe it means Fantasia gets his recruiting ideas from reading the phantom draft