Do we need to draft another KPP?

[My5t3r10u5]

This discussion began in another thread but I thought it was worth a thread of it's own. A couple of posters suggested we needed to draft another one or two KPP defenders in the next draft and I suggested we already had enough. In response to my statement that we already had 11 KPP players on the list and that was enough, thejester had the following to say:

Not entirely true. Last year at absolute full strength the VFL had King, West, Grima, Lonergan, Playfair, Hawkins, Gardiner and Spencer playing. Now with Egan out and Nablett not playing, that roster reads McKenna, Taylor, West, Dawson, Scotty, Mumford, Hawkins and Kangars. Same number of KPPs as far as I can tell.

And while it is a concern, this is the last year we'll have a crack at top line talent for a while and we need it. Last year our optimal set up was three tall defenders (Scarlett, Egan, Harley) and two utilities (Milburn and Mackie). In two-three years Milburn, Harley and Scarlett will all almost certainly be gone. Taylor shapes as a replacement for Harley or Milburn and Egan should eventually make a full recovery. Which still leaves us needing a replacement for Scarlett and Harley/Milburn. Out of those you listed, do any of them look it? Far too early to call on McKenna but unlikely he'll ever be able to hold down a role on a power forward. Likewise Kangars has done little of note, whilst in the worst case scenario (ie Nablett leaves) Scotty will become the future CHF. So assuming the chips fall our way and McKenna becomes a replacement for Harley, we are still left with a gaping hole when Scarlett retires. Ergo, we need to pick someone up to replace him - and someone like Lisle or Trengove fits the bill perfectly.

One of the difficulties in this discussion is how you classify a player - Milburn is listed as 189cm yet you classify him as a tall defender. Interestingly, Mackie is listed as 192cm and I still wouldn't regard him as a KPP. I couldn't be bothered looking at all the other teams, but I had a look at Carlton's list and could only find 10 players in the 192+ height (but not including ruckmen) so we already have one more player in this category. On top of this we also drafted an extra ruckman so we have an abundance of height. Unless we delist one of our KPP at the end of the year (and if Nathan decides to play on I can't see any obvious options for delisting unless one of the first year draftees is glaringly bad and I'm not even sure if you can delist a first year draftee?) I don't think we have room for another KPP. We made our bed last year with our KPP picks, now we just have to see if they have what it takes.

Other thoughts anyone?

 

[Vegas.]

I agree with you that we made an obvious bais towards picking KPP's last year, and we did so with reason. I would have said their progress is going as well as could be expected thus far, with Simpson kicking a few goals here and there - the others just getting into AFL life in the normal manner KPP's do. I think having Hawkins as a 'ready made' key position player has put us in a position where we can afford to let the guys from last year develop without showing senior promise for a little longer than usual, especially when coupled with our recent success.

However, we almost had to go after KPP's last year as we traded away most of our fringe stocks in that area, so perhaps Wells and co. were forced into picking players they didn't neccessarily have as a top preference. There is no reason why we wouldn't go after more this year, as I would say we have better stocks of smalls than we do talls.

 

[thejester]

One of the difficulties in this discussion is how you classify a player - Milburn is listed as 189cm yet you classify him as a tall defender. Interestingly, Mackie is listed as 192cm and I still wouldn't regard him as a KPP. I couldn't be bothered looking at all the other teams, but I had a look at Carlton's list and could only find 10 players in the 192+ height (but not including ruckmen) so we already have one more player in this category. On top of this we also drafted an extra ruckman so we have an abundance of height.

I'm not sure I'd classify Milburn as a tall defender - rather, I'd suggest he is a utility who can play tall. Equally you could argue Mackie is more a vision of the 'modern' winger in the mould of Richardson and Goodes - physically the size of a bigman but with the tank of a midfielder. There's not set guidelines obviously but it's probably important to consider weight as well as height.

Unless we delist one of our KPP at the end of the year (and if Nathan decides to play on I can't see any obvious options for delisting unless one of the first year draftees is glaringly bad and I'm not even sure if you can delist a first year draftee?) I don't think we have room for another KPP. We made our bed last year with our KPP picks, now we just have to see if they have what it takes.

I agree the only KPP who could get the arse is Nathan, but to use the bed analogy 2007 left it with a mattress protector, a pillowcase and a half-tucked in sheet. In an ideal world (ie one without two new teams) we might wait another year - but the reality is if we want a crack at the elite junior defenders we either have to do it now or in three years time when the players we need to replace are retiring.

Worth accepting some short term VFL pain (and there could be ways around that) for the long term gain of an awesome backline.

BTW, the Eagles have 14 players 192cm+ not including rucks, and that excluding Hunter. Equally Melbourne had 13. Dogs only had 9, on the other hand.

 

[Vegas.]

I'm not sure I'd classify Milburn as a tall defender - rather, I'd suggest he is a utility who can play tall. Equally you could argue Mackie is more a vision of the 'modern' winger in the mould of Richardson and Goodes - physically the size of a bigman but with the tank of a midfielder. There's not set guidelines obviously but it's probably important to consider weight as well as height.

He would love to read this.

 

[The Casey Cat]

Our recruiting has been pretty good up til now. I'd say they will take one if there is an obvious talent available. Another 195cm or so player we can develop into a defender for the future would be nice but every other club will be looking for the same. Scott Simpson was a nice pick up, if we get someone else like him with relatively late picks I think we've done well.

 

[The 747]

Yeah nah, best available this draft. So long as they follow the strategy of not picking players who can't kick or play football (eg athlete types), I am happy.

Too early to tell with all the KPP we drafted last year, no need to specifically target more.

 

[Duskfire]

I think we are good with KPP's assuming Egan comes back next year; the young ones just need time to develop. Personally I think we should start looking for a couple of small to medium sized defenders. I still think that is one weakness, and if we can work on it for the next couple of years, might be good.

 

[Vegas.]

We have the luxury that our current back crew should be around for long enough to see if those young guy we have will develop. If not, we can just draft another HT or Matty Egan .

 

[Vegas.]

I think we are good with KPP's assuming Egan comes back next year; the young ones just need time to develop. Personally I think we should start looking for a couple of small to medium sized defenders. I still think that is one weakness, and if we can work on it for the next couple of years, might be good.

I sometimes question the importance of small defenders in the current day game. Most small 'defenders' are actually just rebounding HBF'ers with not much of a defensive side to their game, but they play a vital role in ball movement and scoring. Interestingly, small forwards are more dangerous than ever (Medhurst, Chappy, Campbell & Thomas (of the Roos variety)), which is probably a reflection of the lack of defensive minded smalls in the game. I agree with your sentiment that getting a good one would be very very handy, but I don't think the club will head in that direction.

 

[Duskfire]

I sometimes question the importance of small defenders in the current day game. Most small 'defenders' are actually just rebounding HBF'ers with not much of a defensive side to their game, but they play a vital role in ball movement and scoring. Interestingly, small forwards are more dangerous than ever (Medhurst, Chappy, Campbell & Thomas (of the Roos variety)), which is probably a reflection of the lack of defensive minded smalls in the game. I agree with your sentiment that getting a good one would be very very handy, but I don't think the club will head in that direction.

Just always seems small forwards do a pretty good job against us. medhurst, Johnson 9except for last game of course), etc etc. granted they tend to be like that with everyone, but if we can just get someone who is greta at stopping people like that rather then reasonably decent, it would be nice.

Maybe I just have too many nightmares of the 05' semis

 

[TBoyleSuperstar]

Can I ask how Dan McKenna is tracking?? Saw a few early games from him in the twos and he looked to have poise adn footy nouse, but is built like a twig. Has he built up any?? How is his form been in the twos??

 

[Vegas.]

Just always seems small forwards do a pretty good job against us. medhurst, Johnson 9except for last game of course), etc etc. granted they tend to be like that with everyone, but if we can just get someone who is greta at stopping people like that rather then reasonably decent, it would be nice.

Maybe I just have too many nightmares of the 05' semis

You are not wrong. Harley was playing that role exceptionally well for us before Egan went down which was a total luxury - and obviously not a long-term option - but it just showed how much better it is to have a guy that can take a dangerous small out of the game. Again, I agree with you that I'd like one, but I don't think we will take one with an early pick.

 

[forrrestGump]

need a ruck as a priority
west should be traded as has currency and is too short as a key ruck

need to recruit a quality small forward and a mid (assuming pris goes)

end of story

by the way they cant trade prissa, byrnes, johnson, tenace in the same year

 

[search and destroy]

It seems that a lot of people do not think trent west is tall enough to be a permanent ruck and we have a couple of other ruck prospects. Could west be a good kpp prospect?

 

[The Casey Cat]

It seems that a lot of people do not think trent west is tall enough to be a permanent ruck and we have a couple of other ruck prospects. Could west be a good kpp prospect?

Dunno about the too short stuff. He is listed as 198cm. That is the same as Kruezer, Brogan and Simmonds. Fair enough he may not be able to cut it but I don't know that height is an excuse.

 

[ben_cats_fan]

need a ruck as a priority
west should be traded as has currency and is too short as a key ruck

This makes little sense to me. Has currency but is too short as a key ruck? Surely most, if not all clubs, would come to the same assumption if that is the case - meaning he'd have no currency?

He's raw. I'd keep him in all honesty.

 

[re cat]

"In Wells we trust"

 

[forrrestGump]

This makes little sense to me. Has currency but is too short as a key ruck? Surely most, if not all clubs, would come to the same assumption if that is the case - meaning he'd have no currency?

He's raw. I'd keep him in all honesty.

read chambers
often timing is imperative with respect to currency

 

[dtrainium]

If Hurley is available with our first pick I'd draft him, beside that, I think we'd take a ruckman in the Rookie draft. I wouldn't go out of our way to draft a tall defender outside of Hurley though.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Our recruiting has been pretty good up til now. I'd say they will take one if there is an obvious talent available. Another 195cm or so player we can develop into a defender for the future would be nice but every other club will be looking for the same. Scott Simpson was a nice pick up, if we get someone else like him with relatively late picks I think we've done well.

we have a quality CHB who is 25 years old and a developing FB who is 21 that looks a tallent, both of these players can replace scarlett and Harley in the future, i doubt that either will be as good as Scarlett has been but i beleive will be able to do a good job still

from watching us play in the reserves a couple of weeks back against Tasmania, i believe it is obvious that the area we lacked was tallented small midfielders, outside of djerkurra i struggled to find another class disposal midfielder, despite our senior side having a strong midfield, if you look into the reserves for depth of midfielders you can not venture to far

We already have Hawkins and N ablett coming back as young Tall forwards, with Scott simpson in back up to these two i beleive we have enough talls.

Look at our list of young tallented midfielders, After Selwood we really don't have much.

In 3 or 4 years when Corey Ling and enright start to get towards the end of their careers it would be ideal to have a midfielder in their 2nd or third year, ready and groomed to come in to the senior side to replace these guys, ready to come up.

 

[LifeSpan-Void]

let Kangars get some more meat on his bones, S.Simpson to continue developing, Maybe reinvent West as a KPP if D.Simpson can refine the skills to compliment his obvious height advantage, if we lose Prismall, perhaps Moles or Djerrkura can step up. All kinds of combinations. The reason Milburn can play tall is because he has relative strength to go with the bigger forwards. Mackie not so much.

 

[alberto_cat]

"In Wells we trust"

what an absolute top job he has done

 

[ripitup27]

Rucks are fine, Ottens still has a few years left in him, Blake's looking the goods, and then there's West, Mumford and Dawson Simpson.

Forward line KPP's seem fine, Lonergan's playing well, Hawkins looks good for the future and hopefully Nablett will return and dominate. Plus Mooney is the only one likely to retire in the next few years.

Backline is the problem. Scarlett, Harley and Milburn will all retire in the next four to five years at most, leaving our backline depleted a little.

Egan should get back, Taylor is an awesome prospect and going by Friday night, the coaching staff have no problem with turning Mackie into a key defender. I still think we're one short.
We'll see how McKenna goes, we'll see how Kangars goes and while I know the club is against bringing players in from other sides, we might have to.

What do people think of the chances of Corey wanting to go back to WA eventually? Give it a couple of years and he'll be past his best, so how about a trade with Fremantle for Mundy? Mundy's a handy player and a Victorian. He'll probablybe somewhere else by the time Corey wants to go, but it's an idea.

 

[BlueNWhite]

Corey will stay - he bleeds blue and white

 

[Pivo]

I must admit I am in the "draft a KPP" camp. A KP defender to be specific. I do think there is a hole there that needs to be plugged in a few years and with some of the KPP available in this year's draft I think now is a good time to strike.

I'm not calling for two, I think one is all that is required and I reckon a couple of 'goodies' will be available around Geelong's 1st pick.

I have read with interest some people calling for small midfielders but I don't think they are required since Geelong will add Ediriwickrama with a bargin basement pick this year and he fits the bill on that front.

Forwards - Chapman (who can also play midfield), Stokes (see Chapman but also played in defence in the SANFL), Varcoe, Byrnes and Djerrkura (can play back) all sit on the list currently so I don't think any are required there. Add Gamble and S. Johnson to the forward half and it looks good.

Rucks - there are 5 on the list - Ottens, Blake, West, D. Simpson and the rookie Mumford. I really don't see the need to add more ruckmen unless one was traded or told to learn a new position.

Key Forwards - Mooney, Lonergan, Hawkins, Scott Simpson and possibly N. Ablett with maybe McKenna spending time there as well. I'm comfortable with those guys (as long as N. Ablett decides to stay)

Backs - Hunt, Enright (can play midfield), Wojcinski, Hogan (can also play forward), Donahue, Rooke (who can play midfield), D. Johnson...I think that's about it. Seems sound but another probably wouldn't go astray.

Midfielders - G. Ablett, Bartel, Selwood, Corey, Ling, Kelly, Prismall, Tenace (can play back), Davenport. Add Ediriwickrama to that list and it looks strong in there.

Which brings me to the Key Backmen - Scarlett, Harley, Egan, Taylor, with some pinch-hitting from Milburn and Mackie.

Looks thin to me - yes McKenna might come through and go back there as could Lonergan (but he is looking more comfortable as a forward now). Kangars is a project player and a rookie and still a way off for mine.

Sadly, I think Egan is an 'uncertain' now that he has missed 12 months + of AFL (I hope he comes back better than ever though). So there needs to be some thought around him.

Scarlett, Harley and Milburn all probably have 2-3 years left, Egan has missed 12 months of footy, Taylor looks more like a Milburn or Mackie type to me so the back up is Rooke (short, better as a medium defender or midfielder), McKenna and Kangars.

Doesn't make me breathe that easy looking forward. I'd like to see either one more genuine key defender added or Trent West pushed to CHB in the VFL to learn how to play the position.

I think Geelong should look to grab a Key Defender and a small-medium running half backman (who can rotate through the midfield) to go with Ediriwickrama. Of course, who gets cut from the list may also determine the type of players drafted at year's end. However, as the list currently stands, I think GFC does need to draft another KPP (KP Defender).

Of course...

"In Wells we trust"

He does know best