Draft consensus

[Murray]

When did they say that?

If they said it and were serious I'd be furious! Pick best available FFS!!

Both at different times on SEN prior to Arizona.

And if the best available were two FF's or two Ruck, you would take them?

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

Pick best available FFS!!

Ridiculous idea. We don't need anymore forwards, and it's looking more and more like guys like Kennedy and Dowler aren't going to make CHB's.

At some point we have to improve our midfield, and there's not enough of a gap between the talls and the midfielders in this draft to justify that taking a tall is a massive step up in talent.

I would be more than happy to end up with two out of Ellis, Hurn and Swallow at #2 and #5.

 

[jefffff34]

Murphy.

 

[Jabso]

Ellis and Hurn. Skinny and fatty please.

 

[Stan.]

Ellis and pfieffer.

Pfieffer sounds like a modern day scott burns.

 

[bucksisbest]

Ridiculous idea.

 

[FIGJAM]

And if the best available were two FF's or two Ruck, you would take them?

So you really are the Devil's advocate!

You'd sure as hell have to consider it. You have to project into the future and if you saw the two full forwards say, as being a Matthew Lloyd and Barry Hall, then you'd take that over going "fast mid at all costs" which might end up netting you a possible Sam Power clone in Ellis, or a slightly quicker Licuria type ball magnet in Swallow.

It's a futures market. If you see the kid being a Lloyd or Hall, in comparrison to a Sam Power or Lica, then you'd be freaken negligent not to adopt the best available policy.

 

[FIGJAM]

Ridiculous idea. We don't need anymore forwards, and it's looking more and more like guys like Kennedy and Dowler aren't going to make CHB's.

At some point we have to improve our midfield, and there's not enough of a gap between the talls and the midfielders in this draft to justify that taking a tall is a massive step up in talent.

I would be more than happy to end up with two out of Ellis, Hurn and Swallow at #2 and #5.

It's not a riddiculous idea, because the fact of the matter is I have a general idea as to who this year will net.

I presume with all your talk vinnie, thhat you've seen enough of the likes of Kennedy to judge his mobility and flexibility on the field. We have another flexible mobile tall by the name of Travis Cloke in the pipeline, who can comfortably play a defensive role in the future IMO.

The fact is, we'll get one of those midfielders in the top five and have a couple of decent options in the early 20s.

Hypothetically, say we don't rank Murphy #1. And say Hine dun give a fugg about our needs and ranks them according to the likelyhood of them becoming a gun AFL player. If Derek's #1 is say Kennedy or Ryder, how on Earth are we supposed to overlook our head recruiter's #1 pick, no matter which possie they play???

I'm sorry, but in the word of Mark Williams, vinnie_vegas, you are wrong!!

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

It's not a riddiculous idea, because the fact of the matter is I have a general idea as to who this year will net.

I presume with all your talk vinnie, thhat you've seen enough of the likes of Kennedy to judge his mobility and flexibility on the field. We have another flexible mobile tall by the name of Travis Cloke in the pipeline, who can comfortably play a defensive role in the future IMO.

The fact is, we'll get one of those midfielders in the top five and have a couple of decent options in the early 20s.

Hypothetically, say we don't rank Murphy #1. And say Hine dun give a fugg about our needs and ranks them according to the likelyhood of them becoming a gun AFL player. If Derek's #1 is say Kennedy or Ryder, how on Earth are we supposed to overlook our head recruiter's #1 pick, no matter which possie they play???

I'm sorry, but in the word of Mark Williams, vinnie_vegas, you are wrong!!

If we don't rank Murphy #1, which would be entirely possible, that doesn't mean that we need to take the player we do rank #1 with the #2.

Drafting strategy must come into it - would you rather get the two players we rate at #2 and #3, or two players that we rate at #1 and #5? Would you draft a player projected to go undrafted just because you personally believed that he was the best player in the draft?

We NEED to address our midfield, whether it means that we make a little sacrifice or not.

You're using an unreasonable comparison to say that Ellis and Swallow could end up as Sam Power and a faster Licuria, while say, Kennedy and Dowler could end up like Barry Hall and Matthew Lloyd. The flaw in that logic is that if we were to draft Ellis and Swallow it would be because we believed that they were going to be like Dal Santo and Kerr. We wouldn't draft them if the recruiting department thought they were going to suck.

 

[FIGJAM]

If we don't rank Murphy #1, which would be entirely possible, that doesn't mean that we need to take the player we do rank #1 with the #2.

Drafting strategy must come into it - would you rather get the two players we rate at #2 and #3, or two players that we rate at #1 and #5? Would you draft a player projected to go undrafted just because you personally believed that he was the best player in the draft?

We NEED to address our midfield, whether it means that we make a little sacrifice or not.

You're using an unreasonable comparison to say that Ellis and Swallow could end up as Sam Power and a faster Licuria, while say, Kennedy and Dowler could end up like Barry Hall and Matthew Lloyd. The flaw in that logic is that if we were to draft Ellis and Swallow it would be because we believed that they were going to be like Dal Santo and Kerr. We wouldn't draft them if the recruiting department thought they were going to suck.

You raise some good points, and strategy is of course important.

I ain't saying Kennedy or Ryder will be superstars, just that you have to go with your head and your gut. The recruiters have crunched the numbers! could be coming up mids...who the F knows?!?!?!!

I think you really only start incorporating strategy when you have an inkling (read, strong confidence) that oppo teams ain't gunna touch what you're leaving on the table.

In this draft in particular, there's no guarantees of that. You sight us possibly getting our ranked #1 and #5, which is highly possible. The 2/3 scenario sounds great, but it could just as easily be 3/5 and you'd be cutting off your dream player to spite your list!

 

[Tony Francis]

We wouldn't draft them if the recruiting department thought they were going to suck.

Good point Vinnie. I drafted my girlfriend thinking she was going to suck and I've been very disappointed so far.

 

[morax]

Good point Vinnie. I drafted my girlfriend thinking she was going to suck and I've been very disappointed so far.

What? I had a good look around and tested quite a number at my local draft camp before making my final choice

on topic ... pick #2 imo has to best available

 

[FIGJAM]

What? I had a good look around and tested quite a number at my local draft camp before making my final choice

I'm waiting on the 20m results.

Ya missus can never get the beer quick enough I rekkun!

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

Everybody knows that inside about how much of a ball-gatherer they are - can't go past someone who's willing to go the hard yards, get down on their knees and then hand off to a third party for the finish.

 

[Murray]

So you really are the Devil's advocate!

No, but I am seriously trying to become 'enlightened'

As to the topic: I don't think any club would go into a draft without trying to draft to fill their weaknesses, in the first instance.

If you extended your view to the illogical end - We could have a club with nothing but smalls or another club with nothing but talls, simply because those types of players were the best available at the time.

I think your view has some merit after a club has had its first or second pick, but not from the outset.

 

[FIGJAM]

No, but I am seriously trying to become 'enlightened'

As to the topic: I don't think any club would go into a draft without trying to draft to fill their weaknesses, in the first instance.

If you extended your view to the illogical end - We could have a club with nothing but smalls or another club with nothing but talls, simply because those types of players were the best available at the time.

I think your view has some merit after a club has had its first or second pick, but not from the outset.

No, I think the outset's when you do it. The ability clusters eventuate in the teens and twenties. You can pick for need.

Yes, we need premium midfielders. One might argue that there aren't any in this draft, or at least it's hit and miss.

So (again with the hypotheticals) if we are sitting there with a clear shot at say Kennedy, who we think is a gun and could be a gun in the Koschitzke mould, why would we not pounce on him? This year we might have lacked a Cousins, but who'd kick a Kozi out of the club for being tall??

Again, who knows where our rankings lie. I just hope Hine is preparing his assessments and rankings exclusive of need. Then if we (MM & Co) adopt your "needs first, ability second" approach, he can avoid chronic depression.

 

[magpies42]

Well the results are in and it looks like Xavier Ellis is a certainty with 54 votes followed by Hurn (25) and Kennedy (23). Honourable mentions Swallow(8) and Pfieffer (2) I would say judging from this poll that we will take X-El with 2 and hurn with 5 as i do not believe Kennedy will slip to 5th as Hawthorn seem pretty keen. The collingwood board has spoken!!!!!


p.s i was going to attach the a spreadsheet with the data but dont know how, so if anyone wants it let me know.

 

[Murray]

Wow, what did Eddie, MM, Swann and Hine say when you told them who our first two picks would be?

 

[jefffff34]

Oh ffs.

 

[magpies42]

Wow, what did Eddie, MM, Swann and Hine say when you told them who our first two picks would be?

they said that your a ****************

 

[macca69]

Well the results are in and it looks like Xavier Ellis is a certainty with 54 votes followed by Hurn (25) and Kennedy (23). Honourable mentions Swallow(8) and Pfieffer (2) I would say judging from this poll that we will take X-El with 2 and hurn with 5 as i do not believe Kennedy will slip to 5th as Hawthorn seem pretty keen. The collingwood board has spoken!!!!!


p.s i was going to attach the a spreadsheet with the data but dont know how, so if anyone wants it let me know.

Yeh if Ellis goes pick 2, then Kennedy 3, Dowler 4 leaving Hurn, Swallow and Pfeiffer. I'm going to go against the trend and say that Pfeiffer will go pick 5. Rumour has it collingwood are very interested in Pfeiffer and not so much in Hurn and Swallow. Will be interesting come draft day.

 

[FIGJAM]

Wow, what did Eddie, MM, Swann and Hine say when you told them who our first two picks would be?

Don't make me re-sticky the "Decorum Please" thread Murray.

Only cannibals and lesbians eat their own kind!

 

[Murray]

Don't make me re-sticky the "Decorum Please" thread Murray.

Only cannibals and lesbians eat their own kind!

And of course you posted the same advice to Hoggy in the other thread - what, you didn't, why was that?.

Secondly - tell me what I did that was wrong, and if you can do that, I will produce a hundred posts where the identical sentiment was said by someone else and where you have said nothing.

I am all for moderating, but only when the moderation applies to all in exactly the same manner.

As to the point - to suggest that a few people on this site have determined the recruiting strategy of the Collingwood Football club is as ridiculous as the supposed outcome.
And when I do point out how ridiculous it is, you suggest I also should live in that fantasy world to maintain the harmony.

No thanks, my world is quite real

Finally, I neither care nor am I concerned about what people write or say about me on a web site.
I find it funny and to some degree quite satisfying.
Its a hoot.

Do your worst - I dare you

 

[moe sizlak]

And of course you posted the same advice to Hoggy in the other thread - what, you didn't, why was that?.

Secondly - tell me what I did that was wrong, and if you can do that, I will produce a hundred posts where the identical sentiment was said by someone else and where you have said nothing.

I am all for moderating, but only when the moderation applies to all in exactly the same manner.

As to the point - to suggest that a few people on this site have determined the recruiting strategy of the Collingwood Football club is as ridiculous as the supposed outcome.
And when I do point out how ridiculous it is, you suggest I also should live in that fantasy world to maintain the harmony.

No thanks, my world is quite real

Finally, I neither care nor am I concerned about what people write or say about me on a web site.
I find it funny and to some degree quite satisfying.
Its a hoot.

Do your worst - I dare you

Internet beef is way overrated. Get over it fellas.

 

[jefffff34]

And of course you posted the same advice to Hoggy in the other thread - what, you didn't, why was that?.

Probably something to do with you causing that thread to come into existance.

Secondly - tell me what I did that was wrong, and if you can do that, I will produce a hundred posts where the identical sentiment was said by someone else and where you have said nothing.

It gets old after 1000 times.

I am all for moderating, but only when the moderation applies to all in exactly the same manner.

Fair enough, but some members have more runs on the board than others.

As to the point - to suggest that a few people on this site have determined the recruiting strategy of the Collingwood Football club is as ridiculous as the supposed outcome.

FFS it's a bit of fun, magpies42 made a survey, simple as that. The conclusion that eventuated from said survey said that X Ellis would be the most likely person taken at no.2 by the CFC people from Bigfooty. Did he say he was going to send it to Mick Malthouse? No.

And when I do point out how ridiculous it is, you suggest I also should live in that fantasy world to maintain the harmony.

So get a hobby.

No thanks, my world is quite real

How old are you? And you spend your time posting rubbish into an online database?

Finally, I neither care nor am I concerned about what people write or say about me on a web site.

So?

I find it funny and to some degree quite satisfying.
Its a hoot.

Then that's weird.

Do your worst - I dare you

But you said 2 paragraphs ago that you were saying your final thing?