BEWARE using R1 draft pick on a ruckman

[lids2004roar]

"You can just pick up ruckman on the rookie list"

...just like Angus Graham? LOL!

You can try for years to find a gem ruckman on the rookie list but you might not have any luck (especially with OUR recruiting budget).

Kreuzer sounds awesome, I love how he tackles heaps kicks heaps of goals gets heaps of hitouts and heaps of possies... personally I don't rate ruckman as highly as most do but he sounds like a midfielder who takes ruck!

 

[Wally07]

Its a hard one few you guys. In most cases I'd agree but he is more than just a tap ruckman. By the way if anyones interested here are his statistical averages per game this year:

1.75 goals per game
19.6 disposal per game (approx 14 kicks, 5 handballs, kicking efficiency = 77%) He is also averaging 25 disposals a match in his last 3 games.
5 tackles per game
29 hitouts per game
5 marks (2.4 contested)

He sounds sensational. I am sure we will still be able to f*&k him up though.

 

[Wally07]

Who is more important to the eagles? Judd or Cox. Interesting and a very close battle which goes to show how important ruckman are.

Also a ruckman is going to take longer to develop so better using an early pick on one this year and then using an early pick on a midfielder next year.

 

[Roar]

He sounds sensational. I am sure we will still be able to f*&k him up though.

LOL - yep, my heart goes out to the kid already if/when we take him.

 

[CJH]

he moves well for his size, a lot like Mitch Clark IMHO.

I hope he is a better kick though!

 

[HBK619]

Jeff White was a No.1 Draft Pick and he has turned out to be pretty damn good.

 

[Heisenberg_]

if i was in charge i wouldn't waste my number one pick on a ruckman.

Thank god you aren't.
Always take the best available

 

[PLSC]

Who is more important to the eagles? Judd or Cox. Interesting and a very close battle which goes to show how important ruckman are.

Also a ruckman is going to take longer to develop so better using an early pick on one this year and then using an early pick on a midfielder next year.

good post

judd no doubt better player then cox but as important is debatable, get cox out of the side and suddenly seaby the dud gets found out in the middle and lynch then has to chop him out and it totally ****s up their structure

you dont need to have the best ruck in the comp but just need to have some depth to cover at all times

 

[Weaver]

The great value of getting your number 1 ruckman sorted is that it frees up picks going into the future. Fraser might not be an elite ruckman - but he has meant that the Pies haven't had to spend a lot of early picks on recruiting ruckmen.

At Richmond when Mark Lee went into decline we spent a decade trading using picks on ruckmen. Ottens might be public enemy number 1 but he bought us 5 years without having to spend early picks on yet another ruck candidate.

When you don't get the position sorted you end up spending a LOT of picks trying to ...

1987 - Lounder, Gale
1988 - Francis, Esler
1989 - Eastaugh, Chalmers
1990 - Turner, M.Clarke
1991 - Cloke, Burton, O'Dwyer
1992 - Honeybun, Schaeffer
1993 - Dear
1994 - Charles
1995 - Smith
1996 - Steinfort
1997 - Ottens

1998 - Hall
1999 - none
2000 - none
2001 - Stafford
2002 - none
2003 - Marsh

Pre-Ottens we 'spent' a lot trying to find a ruckman. After Ottens we 'saved' all those picks and could use them elsewhere (Hall and Marsh were 'freebies' and Stafford was about dumping Daffy's contract). That is the true value of getting the ruck pick correct.

That would be the value of taking Krezuer at 1. For the next 10 years we wouldn't have to spend a top-40 pick on a ruckman. We could do as the Eagles have done and trawl through a lot of late-round and rookie backups in the search for additional ruckmen. The presence of Cox means that the Eagles only had to use rookie picks for back-ups in Spanderman and Jones.

A large part of the reason that the Eagles could gamble on Cox with a rookie pick was because they already had taken Gardner at 1. If they didn't have Gardiner ... perhaps they get to pick 18 in the draft and feel they have to pass on Kerr in order to take Petrie to shore-up their ruck stocks. With Petrie allready taken - perhaps they pass on Cox in the rookie draft.

In our own small way we have been able to gamble on Gus Graham because we had Simmonds, Knobel, Pattison and Hall. Unfortunately only one of them is fit and so we get exposed.

 

[Weaver]

Kreuzer sounds awesome, I love how he tackles heaps kicks heaps of goals gets heaps of hitouts and heaps of possies... personally I don't rate ruckman as highly as most do but he sounds like a midfielder who takes ruck!

I'd say that was over-hyping him. He is not a midfielder who rucks. There are a lot of comparisons to Cox, but is isn't quite that athletic. He is more like Lade, Charman or Primus. A big unit, who can still move, good skills and reading of the play, and the ability to pinch a goal or two up forward. Certainly don't think he is like Goodes, or even as athletic as a young Jeff White.

He'd probably be a 16-18 touch, 8 mark, 1.5 goal player in AFL company.

 

[I Rock]

I'd say that was over-hyping him. He is not a midfielder who rucks. There are a lot of comparisons to Cox, but is isn't quite that athletic. He is more like Lade, Charman or Primus. A big unit, who can still move, good skills and reading of the play, and the ability to pinch a goal or two up forward. Certainly don't think he is like Goodes, or even as athletic as a young Jeff White.

He'd probably be a 16-18 touch, 8 mark, 1.5 goal player in AFL company.

Hew sounds quick for TAC level, but in your opinion Weaver will he still be quickish for AFL level?

Besides if the rules continue they way they are, we may have seen the death of the big bodied KPP today.

 

[_RT_]

I'd say that was over-hyping him. He is not a midfielder who rucks. There are a lot of comparisons to Cox, but is isn't quite that athletic. He is more like Lade, Charman or Primus. A big unit, who can still move, good skills and reading of the play, and the ability to pinch a goal or two up forward. Certainly don't think he is like Goodes, or even as athletic as a young Jeff White.

He'd probably be a 16-18 touch, 8 mark, 1.5 goal player in AFL company.

Weaver I asked one of your fellow U/18 watchers a draft query regarding the Tigers and I'll put the same to you.

What would serve us better overlook Kreuzer at 1 and take say Cotchin or another midfielder type while picking up Bellchambers or McEvoy with our PP or pick up Kruezer and say Scott Selwood with the PP? I have heard he is probably the best of the Selwoods.

 

[Weaver]

charman was a zone selection in 2000 pick 29 overall.

Charman would have gone higher. The zone selection required sacrificing a round 2 (or 3?) pick just like the f/s. Lewis Robert-Thompson was the same to Sydney. Best Sydney player in a decade according to the hype. Lions tried to get Reiwoldt the same way but the AFL 'clarified' the rules.

meeson 8. biglands 36.tippett 32. maric 40.griffen rookie. hudson 58. ive mentioned adelaide players first and all their ruckmen because they have 6 genuine ruckmen at various stages of development, and geez they have needed every single one due to injuries.
how many genuine ruckmen do we have the last time i counted it was two.

Simmonds, Pattison, Knobel, Hall, Graham. Maric and Meesen were recruited as much as forwards as they were ruckmen. Tippett played most of his junior footy at FF too. Adelaide probably wouldn't have carried all 6 if they didn't know that Bhiglands was out for the year and that Hudson was coming back from a knee.

surely if you arent going to use earlyish picks on ruckmen you are going to turn over 4 or 5 each yr with late and rookie picks unti tou find some decent ones. we do neither.

4-5 a year??? That is about half your recruiting in a season on one position. Most clubs carry 4-5 guys. So do we. Its just that Knobel and Hall are in the stands, Pattison is just a trier, Simmonds is half-dead and Graham is a rookie.

one other point i d like to make is it seems other clubs also have plenty of big bodied players above 195cm these players often help out in the ruck ie rocca at collingwood.

This is a popular urban myth amongst Richmond draftnicks. There is a campaign in many quarters for huge gorillas to be recruited. It ignores that some clubs use Campbell Brown, Chad Cornes, Joel Bowden or Leo Barry as their key defenders.

'Giants' like Nathan Bock (193cm), Ben Rutten (192cm), Fevola (191cm) etc aren't as big as people think.

You mention Collingwood?

194cm+ = Fraser (202), Richards (201), Cloke (195), Rocca (195) and faced with a shortage (tee hee) they added Bryan (197), Reid (196), Brown (194)

194cm+ = Richardson (195), Simmonds (196), Knobel (204), Graham (200), Pattison (197), Polak (194), Hall (196)

I make it 7 v 7.

 

[lids2004roar]

The great value of getting your number 1 ruckman sorted is that it frees up picks going into the future. Fraser might not be an elite ruckman - but he has meant that the Pies haven't had to spend a lot of early picks on recruiting ruckmen.

At Richmond when Mark Lee went into decline we spent a decade trading using picks on ruckmen. Ottens might be public enemy number 1 but he bought us 5 years without having to spend early picks on yet another ruck candidate.

When you don't get the position sorted you end up spending a LOT of picks trying to ...

1987 - Lounder, Gale
1988 - Francis, Esler
1989 - Eastaugh, Chalmers
1990 - Turner, M.Clarke
1991 - Cloke, Burton, O'Dwyer
1992 - Honeybun, Schaeffer
1993 - Dear
1994 - Charles
1995 - Smith
1996 - Steinfort
1997 - Ottens

1998 - Hall
1999 - none
2000 - none
2001 - Stafford
2002 - none
2003 - Marsh

Pre-Ottens we 'spent' a lot trying to find a ruckman. After Ottens we 'saved' all those picks and could use them elsewhere (Hall and Marsh were 'freebies' and Stafford was about dumping Daffy's contract). That is the true value of getting the ruck pick correct.

That would be the value of taking Krezuer at 1. For the next 10 years we wouldn't have to spend a top-40 pick on a ruckman. We could do as the Eagles have done and trawl through a lot of late-round and rookie backups in the search for additional ruckmen. The presence of Cox means that the Eagles only had to use rookie picks for back-ups in Spanderman and Jones.

A large part of the reason that the Eagles could gamble on Cox with a rookie pick was because they already had taken Gardner at 1. If they didn't have Gardiner ... perhaps they get to pick 18 in the draft and feel they have to pass on Kerr in order to take Petrie to shore-up their ruck stocks. With Petrie allready taken - perhaps they pass on Cox in the rookie draft.

In our own small way we have been able to gamble on Gus Graham because we had Simmonds, Knobel, Pattison and Hall. Unfortunately only one of them is fit and so we get exposed.

You are by far the most informative and insightful poster on any forum, love your work

 

[Weaver]

Weaver I asked one of your fellow U/18 watchers a draft query regarding the Tigers and I'll put the same to you.

What would serve us better overlook Kreuzer at 1 and take say Cotchin or another midfielder type while picking up Bellchambers or McEvoy with our PP or pick up Kruezer and say Scott Selwood with the PP? I have heard he is probably the best of the Selwoods.

Cotchin is probably more Nathan Brown / Alan Didak. Elite talent unquestionably with tricks aplenty - but probably a part time midfielder and full time match-winning forward. Can we afford that luxury? Is upgrading Pettifer our main priority this year?

Scott Selwood is not the best of the brothers. Joel and Troy were better in junior ranks. Adam missed a year with an injury. Scott is a bigish, tankish, battering ram. A bit of a Nathan Jones or Daniel Harris - except angrier. Every time he plays he looks like someone has knocked his sandcastle over. I wouldn't have him atthe Jordan Lewis / Jimmy Bartel level though.

I certainly think someone like Selwood would be a very good get. Top-10 pick? Bit of a reach. The SA watchers are touting a kid called Greenwood who I haven't seen. Would be good to add some grunt alongside Foley and Polo in the engine room.

I question whether there is a player good enough to warrant passing on Kreuzer for. We might be tempted to trade down - we'd get a good trade - there will be a right-old auction to get the pick that gets Kreuzer.

The upside / high-ceiling / could-be-anything Jarred Brennan / Andrew Walker / Tom Williams / JON special this year is Steve Gaertner. I guess he might shape as the rival number 1 for some clubs with a gamblers instinct.

Personally I think trading pick 1 for (say pick 5 and a player) and then taking Selwood early and getting a ruckman at 17 or 18 would be a pretty canny move. But Kreuzer could be very good for a very long time - tough call.

 

[_RT_]

Cotchin is probably more Nathan Brown / Alan Didak. Elite talent unquestionably with tricks aplenty - but probably a part time midfielder and full time match-winning forward. Can we afford that luxury? Is upgrading Pettifer our main priority this year?

Scott Selwood is not the best of the brothers. Joel and Troy were better in junior ranks. Adam missed a year with an injury. Scott is a bigish, tankish, battering ram. A bit of a Nathan Jones or Daniel Harris - except angrier. Every time he plays he looks like someone has knocked his sandcastle over. I wouldn't have him atthe Jordan Lewis / Jimmy Bartel level though.

I certainly think someone like Selwood would be a very good get. Top-10 pick? Bit of a reach. The SA watchers are touting a kid called Greenwood who I haven't seen. Would be good to add some grunt alongside Foley and Polo in the engine room.

I question whether there is a player good enough to warrant passing on Kreuzer for. We might be tempted to trade down - we'd get a good trade - there will be a right-old auction to get the pick that gets Kreuzer.

The upside / high-ceiling / could-be-anything Jarred Brennan / Andrew Walker / Tom Williams / JON special this year is Steve Gaertner. I guess he might shape as the rival number 1 for some clubs with a gamblers instinct.

Personally I think trading pick 1 for (say pick 5 and a player) and then taking Selwood early and getting a ruckman at 17 or 18 would be a pretty canny move. But Kreuzer could be very good for a very long time - tough call.

I may not have made it clear regards Selwood, my thought was we pick him at 17, as a early Phantom draft I saw had him about that range
( http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=333706 ) Most people seemed to agree with DanA's assessment at this early stage. I like the sounds of him though and if he does fall that late I would like to see him get snapped up by us as Foley definitely needs the help.

 

[beaver fever]

Personally I think trading pick 1 for (say pick 5 and a player)

Any thoughts on what players would make this unlikely trade possible? I can't think of many.

 

[Calcium Man]

Personally I think trading pick 1 for (say pick 5 and a player) and then taking Selwood early and getting a ruckman at 17 or 18 would be a pretty canny move. But Kreuzer could be very good for a very long time - tough call.

I think the ferals would tear punt rd down if we traded the no.1 draft pick.

If we did trade down how deep is the top end talent?? Does it reach as far as pick 5??

 

[PLSC]

we pick up kreuzer at no 1 and then maric/meeson in the psd and our ruck stocks are nicely coming along

you get too cute with trading and all of weaver's dream scenarios and you get left with more holes in your list then we began with which would be pathetic

 

[santa claws]

Charman would have gone higher. The zone selection required sacrificing a round 2 (or 3?) pick just like the f/s. Lewis Robert-Thompson was the same to Sydney. Best Sydney player in a decade according to the hype. Lions tried to get Reiwoldt the same way but the AFL 'clarified' the rules.



Simmonds, Pattison, Knobel, Hall, Graham. Maric and Meesen were recruited as much as forwards as they were ruckmen. Tippett played most of his junior footy at FF too. Adelaide probably wouldn't have carried all 6 if they didn't know that Bhiglands was out for the year and that Hudson was coming back from a knee.



4-5 a year??? That is about half your recruiting in a season on one position. Most clubs carry 4-5 guys. So do we. Its just that Knobel and Hall are in the stands, Pattison is just a trier, Simmonds is half-dead and Graham is a rookie.



This is a popular urban myth amongst Richmond draftnicks. There is a campaign in many quarters for huge gorillas to be recruited. It ignores that some clubs use Campbell Brown, Chad Cornes, Joel Bowden or Leo Barry as their key defenders.

'Giants' like Nathan Bock (193cm), Ben Rutten (192cm), Fevola (191cm) etc aren't as big as people think.

You mention Collingwood?

194cm+ = Fraser (202), Richards (201), Cloke (195), Rocca (195) and faced with a shortage (tee hee) they added Bryan (197), Reid (196), Brown (194)

194cm+ = Richardson (195), Simmonds (196), Knobel (204), Graham (200), Pattison (197), Polak (194), Hall (196)

I make it 7 v 7.

point 1 we agree abut charman as i said priority pick.

point 2 we disagree.simmo. knobel. graham. maric basketball back ground by the way.and meeson. were primarily ruckmen. tippett was another who came from basketball. i will concede he played a lot at ff but at 201cm he was drafted as a genuine long term ruck prospect.one thing for sure they are all genuine ruckmen. of that group hall and pattison are not ruckmen.i stand by what ive said we have just 2 genuine ruckmen on our list who we can play graham makes 3 a rookie who more likely than not will be delisted.

point 3 okay i was being a bit facetious when i said 4 or 5 a yr. but go thru adelaides recent history they have carried 4 to 6 ruckmen on their list including rookies since 2003 as well as a myriad of big bodied kpp.they have carried 18 or 19 genuine tall players on their list the last 2 yrs and had 22 genuine talls in 2005. as i said if we are not prepared to utilise early picks on genuine kpp and ruckmen we have to turn lots over we do niether atm.

point 4. the urban myth comment. bock 193cm 94 kg. rutten 192cm 101kg.fevola 191cm 98kg they are big and powerful. and no ones ignoring the jobs your bowdens barrys or browns do sheeshs you could throw archer in their as well.i think you are wrong to put cornes in that bracket at 192 and 96kg he is the complete package. the point im making cornes aside is these blokes rely on help from their teammates they play down bak to generate run. look what happened to bowden on sunday against pavlkich he was just to small. thursfield is starting to struggle atm because he just doesnt have the frame atm to compete against the big blokes.

point 5 your comparison coll have 16 genuine talls on their list we have 14. imo collingwood are short a young ruckman they are grooming reid brown cox and anthony to take over from presti clement and wakelin. they have reid and cloke as tall forwards rocca at 29 will probably become ff for the next 2 or 3 yrs they could do with another tall forward in their system.16 is probably a good number once you have your 10 or 12 established talls up and going.the thing is they could cop 2 or 3 injuries to talls and still cope.

compare our 14 talls hall dud. p bowden maybe tall but doesnt play as a tall soft as butter.hughes high hopes for him.kingsley short term dud.knobel required but skills leave a lot to be desired.mcguane touch and go kicking needs lots of work.pattison who knows to many weaknesses imo.polak i hope he proves me wrong.richo how many yrs left.riewoldt high hopes.schulz not up to afl.simmo a big yes.thursfield looksokay. and graham sheesh.

 

[lids2004roar]

The PP could play a role in the decision if Cotchin/Kreuzer are 50/50 choices. With picks 17 and 18 we would surely get a ruckman of great quality (better prospect than Cam Wood at same age?)

We could go for the next Josh Fraser (1) + Dean Polo (20)

Or we could get the next Cam Wood (18) + Brett Deledio (1)


Either way there is still a lot of work to be done building depth.

 

[tigerT]

pick the BEST available player, who cares what position he plays? its not like we are blessed with class in any area of our list to start taking picks for specific list shortcomings.

 

[_RT_]

The PP could play a role in the decision if Cotchin/Kreuzer are 50/50 choices. With picks 17 and 18 we would surely get a ruckman of great quality (better prospect than Cam Wood at same age?)

We could go for the next Josh Fraser (1) + Dean Polo (20)

Or we could get the next Cam Wood (18) + Brett Deledio (1)


Either way there is still a lot of work to be done building depth.

I have asked that question of 2 draft watchers Benny and both have given similar answers take Kruezer and look for mids later. Kruezer while developing the engine to be a full time ruckman has the size to play KP next year (199cm & 91 kg) in fact this time next year could well be rotating through the ruck for periods as well freeing up Simmo to play CHF for 5-10 minutes a quarter. Bellchambers and McEvoy are the only other 2 that sort of size we run the risk neither would be around when the PP comes up. After speaking to Weaver earlier and another guy on the draft board the safer option is Kruezer. From what Weaver said about Selwood and where the other guy rates him as being taken I would be very happy with Selwood at pick 17.

Weaver:
Scott is a bigish, tankish, battering ram. A bit of a Nathan Jones or Daniel Harris - except angrier. Every time he plays he looks like someone has knocked his sandcastle over. I wouldn't have him atthe Jordan Lewis / Jimmy Bartel level though

 

[lids2004roar]

pick the BEST available player, who cares what position he plays? its not like we are blessed with class in any area of our list to start taking picks for specific list shortcomings.

Players are not often numbered in order from best to worst you know. There could be 5 players who are pretty much equal in ability but all play different styles and positions. That is when you need to think about their position.

 

[tigerT]

Players are not often numbered in order from best to worst you know. There could be 5 players who are pretty much equal in ability but all play different styles and positions. That is when you need to think about their position.

try again fool

each year there is always an almost universal standout. Simply pick that one up.

Gibbs last year
Murphy the year before
Deledio the year before that

get it?