Draft discusson thread

[Prem87]

Cheers for clarifying that up!

 

[placebo]

Except Green is an inside mid who likes to break free and kick goals.

True.
However he himself believes he can play outside, according to his profile.

He has the attributes to, anyway.A pure outside mid in Andreoli would probably suit us better though.

 

[Doc #25]

RE Isaac Smith, being a local i've been watching his rise with interest. There is a reason he has gone from playing with the Redan FC to being a potential high AFL draft pick in the space of a few months. He has the sort of burst away speed that really grabs your attention and makes him stand out at VFL level. Really well suited to the modern game in that he breaks the lines with his run and carry. Not consistent enough for me to describe his kicking as elite as he sometimes shanks them when running at full tilt. Is not a high possession winner but has a high hurt factor with the ball that he does get. I would say that an early 2nd round pick might be overpaying slightly but on a needs basis he would be great for WC. Plays as a genuine winger who can get forward of the ball and kick goals and WC don't have many of them...

 

[Prem87]

Smith then impressed a host of AFL scouts when he took part in the Victorian State Combine screening session for potential draftees, held on the morning of the grand final replay between Collingwood and St Kilda.

His running vertical jump of 89cm put him in the top three per cent of those tested in Melbourne, while his time of 2.88 seconds for the 20m sprint put him in the top five per cent.

He also recorded a score of 14.6 in the arduous beep test, meaning his endurance was in the top 15 per cent.

"When you put his combine results, which tell you about his athletic ability, together with his form in the last half a dozen games of the year, he's just had an enormous turnaround," Sheehan said.

"These sorts of numbers give him a fantastic chance of being drafted, or rookie-listed at worst.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/104082/default.aspx

 

[Avalor]

Had a dream last night that we took Heppell at 4, Cripps at 26 and Tom (someone - begins with an L) as a tall with pick 28 (or whatever our 3rd pick will be). Really annoyed when I woke that I couldn't remember the name.

Only a dream, and meaningless ... but still???

 

[dext]

Had a dream last night that we took Heppell at 4, Cripps at 26 and Tom (someone - begins with an L) as a tall with pick 28 (or whatever our 3rd pick will be). Really annoyed when I woke that I couldn't remember the name.

Only a dream, and meaningless ... but still???

Geez Tom lynch at 28 would be nice, might be this years Aaron black.

 

[tesseract]

Heppell off the half back line frees up Sheppard, Smith, Stevenson(hopefully we retain him!) to move up the field as well so for mine he's the better choice then Gaff.

Sheppard, Smith and Stevenson don't need any freeing up as they're not first choice backmen. Hurn, Waters and Butler, IMO, are the 3 small backs that are first choice.

WC have too many HBF's already, so the selection of Heppell for the reason you've stated makes no sense.

Gaff is a Wingman, and a quality one at that. Stevenson isn't even assured of being retained on the list, let alone being best 22. Smith is a flanker with a bulky body made for power in bursts, not endurance. Hence the wing isn't suited for his game. That still leaves Sheppard needing a pairing for a wing position considering our need for something better than average quality Wingmen we have in Rosa and Houlihan.

The selection of Heppell to turn someone WC use as a HBF into a Wingman, I foresee as a Masten as a HFF/FP type fail. Sheppard has the quality to be a Wingman despite being drafted as a HBF. It makes me wonder why some don't think WC should draft an actual Wingman to play on a Wing.

 

[tesseract]

While i agree we shouldn't take Darling i disagree with this. Andreoli is a strong propspect and i wouldn't be suprised if he was the 5th West Australian picked after Swallow, Bennell, Darling and Conca.

I said Andreoli may turn out to be a good player, but he's not an exceptional prospect. He's not pick 4 worthy as exceptional prospects are. Why are some fans so eager to take another IM or HBF with our 1st selection, when we've got numerous numbers and quality in those positions already?
With Andreoli seemingly rated as highly as Rosa was in his draft, why would WC consider more of the same, when they have a handful of average Wingmen already? (I do understand that the draft Rosa came from was not as strong, but the point remains)
Average doesn't cut it. I think WC will only get above average if they use pick 4 to add quality. WC will get what they pay for. That's been displayed by the OM's WC currently have. Why would it turn out any different now.

For example:

Rosa, pick 29. Average player.
Houlihan, pick 43. Average player.
Stevenson, Rookie. Average player.
Neates, PSD. Untested at AFL. Very likely to not perform at a standard of a top 10 selected player.
Strijk, Rookie. Good player, but can he be made into a Wingman? I like him when he's played on a HFF.
Dalziell, Rookie. Unpeeled potato.
Smith, pick 36. Not a Wingman.

This is the point. If WC want quality, they're going to have to pay for it.

The point I was making was that it's typical WC to not emphasize the need for OM's to be selected with 1st round picks. They seem to think they can make do with 2nd, 3rd or later rounders in these roles. I think WC have an imbalance in quality positionally.

 

[beatlesmith]

Sheppard, Smith and Stevenson don't need any freeing up as they're not first choice backmen. Hurn, Waters and Butler, IMO, are the 3 small backs that are first choice.

WC have too many HBF's already, so the selection of Heppell for the reason you've stated makes no sense.

Gaff is a Wingman, and a quality one at that. Stevenson isn't even assured of being retained on the list, let alone being best 22. Smith is a flanker with a bulky body made for power in bursts, not endurance. Hence the wing isn't suited for his game. That still leaves Sheppard needing a pairing for a wing position considering our need for something better than average quality Wingmen we have in Rosa and Houlihan.

The selection of Heppell to turn someone WC use as a HBF into a Wingman, I foresee as a Masten as a HFF/FP type fail. Sheppard has the quality to be a Wingman despite being drafted as a HBF. It makes me wonder why some don't think WC should draft an actual Wingman to play on a Wing.

Why couldn't Heppell play on a wing? He's played in the midfield before and done exceptionally.
Gaff is hardly a wingman in the pure sense. He doesn't run and carry and doesn't have quality cruising speed.
He's a linkman. You would hardly call Chad Fletcher a wingman, who is a similar type of player.
The only genuine wingman we are looking at is Polec.

 

[mitchzz]

Had a dream last night that we took Heppell at 4, Cripps at 26 and Tom (someone - begins with an L) as a tall with pick 28 (or whatever our 3rd pick will be). Really annoyed when I woke that I couldn't remember the name.

Only a dream, and meaningless ... but still???

Tom Ledger?

And as if your dreams are that specific haha

 

[tesseract]

Why couldn't Heppell play on a wing? He's played in the midfield before and done exceptionally.
Gaff is hardly a wingman in the pure sense. He doesn't run and carry and doesn't have quality cruising speed.
He's a linkman. You would hardly call Chad Fletcher a wingman, who is a similar type of player.
The only genuine wingman we are looking at is Polec.

Is Heppell naturally suited to the wing, or if selected would WC have to make-shift Heppell into a Wingman? AFAIK, Heppell played in the midfield as an IM. That's a fair bit different from an OM.

I think Gaff is a pure Wingman. He's an outside receiver. The role doesn't require run and carry and a high cruising speed to make one viable for the position.

I've previously stated that I see Gaff as a Chad Fletcher clone, but with a neater kick. Fletcher was a Wingman, without run and carry and a high cruising speed. But that didn't stop him from being a ball magnet and a very good Wingman for a few years, which earned him an AA. I think Gaff will be better than Fletcher, but play a similar game. That's why I'll stick with my opinion on him being like Fletcher. The comparison goes beyond height and being a left footer.
Also, being a linkman is part of the role of a Wingman. No matter who's playing in this position, it's something I expect from this player.

I've previously said that I want Gaff over Heppell, as I do now. But I've previously stated that I want Polec over both Gaff and Heppell. That hasn't changed.

Polec, Gaff, Heppell, in that order. Reason being is that the first two are Wingman. I want pick 4 to be a Wingman, not anything other, because IMO, it's our most urgent need.

 

[PRANKSTER666]

I think Gaff is a pure Wingman. He's an outside receiver.

You are completely wrong, he is not a pure wingman, and he is not an outside receiver, but don't let the truth get in the way of your analysis.

 

[tesseract]

You are completely wrong, he is not a pure wingman, and he is not an outside receiver, but don't let the truth get in the way of your analysis.

Care to add reason to your post. Or just moronically state that you're wrong, with nothing to back it up. Put up or shut up!

 

[maxrm]

You are completely wrong, he is not a pure wingman, and he is not an outside receiver, but don't let the truth get in the way of your analysis.

He is an outside receiver. He lacks a bit of on field speed to be a pure wingman and he struggles with kicking over long distances (But he's short distance kicking is superb).

 

[PRANKSTER666]

Care to add reason to your post. Or just moronically state that you're wrong, with nothing to back it up. Put up or shut up!

He can play inside and out, never been a wingman, never will be, is a Dal Santo/Power type.

He is an outside receiver. He lacks a bit of on field speed to be a pure wingman and he struggles with kicking over long distances (But he's short distance kicking is superb).

He is not an outside receiver in the sense of the footballer type, he can outside receive and distribute because he makes good decisions and has precise kicking.

He will constantly run behind a team player on the mark and receive a cheap handball because you want the ball in his hands, unlike Chad Fletcher who did it so he could simply build his stats up.

The BF myth that he doesn't have an inside game, is just that, a myth.

You play him out of the centre square.

 

[dext]

Ah for crying out loud! Gaff is no more a wingman than masten or shuey. If gaff is going to be drafted it's to be a midfielder. If it's a winger people want, heppell has more of a chance at playing that role much the same as hurn played well late in the season on the wing.

 

[adagio]

Is Heppell naturally suited to the wing, or if selected would WC have to make-shift Heppell into a Wingman? AFAIK, Heppell played in the midfield as an IM. That's a fair bit different from an OM.

I think Gaff is a pure Wingman. He's an outside receiver. The role doesn't require run and carry and a high cruising speed to make one viable for the position.

I've previously stated that I see Gaff as a Chad Fletcher clone, but with a neater kick. Fletcher was a Wingman, without run and carry and a high cruising speed. But that didn't stop him from being a ball magnet and a very good Wingman for a few years, which earned him an AA. I think Gaff will be better than Fletcher, but play a similar game. That's why I'll stick with my opinion on him being like Fletcher. The comparison goes beyond height and being a left footer.
Also, being a linkman is part of the role of a Wingman. No matter who's playing in this position, it's something I expect from this player.

I've previously said that I want Gaff over Heppell, as I do now. But I've previously stated that I want Polec over both Gaff and Heppell. That hasn't changed.

Polec, Gaff, Heppell, in that order. Reason being is that the first two are Wingman. I want pick 4 to be a Wingman, not anything other, because IMO, it's our most urgent need.

Would I be correct in guessing you made most of your conclusions based on a few minutes of footage?

Gaff isn't a wingman. And Heppell is certainly more than a HBF.

 

[bodazoka]

What do people think of our actual draft pick, and the talent thats left after the GC picks and sign ups?

Looking at Gaff/Heppell/Polec I think either Toy or Matera could well of been ahead of all 3 of those guys for 4th and 5th place. Hard to see which other kids would of been ahead also.

So is our pick 4 actually pick 6 when you factor that in? or even pick 7??

 

[maxrm]

Just gone over youtube footage of Gaff. The 2010 game vs western australia and the 2009 game vs south australia. Very impressive stuff, his short-medium range kicking is first class, he just lacks a bit of penetration. He is such a smart player, knows where to go to get the ball, and unlike some players on our list, you actually want him getting the ball. He can push forward and kick goals and when he wants to use it has a lot of pace. His convinced me for now, Gaff with pick 4!

Also, I had a small chat with Andreoli, he said WC have shown interest and have spoken to him more then once. Had quite a big chat with Alex Fasolo, who said west coast have spoken to him, and being a wc supporter it'd be his dream to be picked up at 26/28. He rates Cripps the highest out of himself, Andreoli, Newton and Cripps, but he doesnt think cripps will last to 26. Obviously really rates him. He also thinks Atley to west coast at 4, although i doubt that'll happen.

Really need this draft to hurry up! Still a month away and I'm spending half my time after school on it!

 

[tesseract]

He can play inside and out, never been a wingman, never will be, is a Dal Santo/Power type.



He is not an outside receiver in the sense of the footballer type, he can outside receive and distribute because he makes good decisions and has precise kicking.

He will constantly run behind a team player on the mark and receive a cheap handball because you want the ball in his hands, unlike Chad Fletcher who did it so he could simply build his stats up.

The BF myth that he doesn't have an inside game, is just that, a myth.

You play him out of the centre square.

I've never mentioned that Gaff doesn't have an inside game. Gaff has a predominantly outside game.

You say he'll never be a Wingman, I disagree strongly that he won't be used in this regard. WC can only play so many IM's. Those IM's like Kerr, Priddis, Masten, Ebert, Shuey, Swift and Stevens, can't all be playing the role at the same time, let alone adding Gaff into the mix. Of those just mentioned, Gaff, is the most likely to be a Wingman, due to his predominantly outside game. His outside game is something which those forementioned don't have, besides Kerr.

Like Dal Santo and Luke Power, the team would be better served if Gaff was a finisher, not a grunt.

Gaff's kicking is excellent. Why take away the utilization of this by having him scrapping for the ball on the deck and hand passing to a less skilled kicker, when he could utilize his strength by being a receiver and kicking the ball more often.
Unlike some of our other IM's like Kerr and Masten, as well as others, Gaff's hand balling is apparently not a strength. It makes no sense to not play players in positions where their strengths won't be fully utilized.

How did you come to the conclusion of the difference between Gaff and Fletcher when they both want to receive a quick handball by skirting around the back? According to you, Fletcher is doing it only for the stat, while Gaff isn't. That's nothing but an unfair assumption.

 

[tesseract]

Would I be correct in guessing you made most of your conclusions based on a few minutes of footage?

Gaff isn't a wingman. And Heppell is certainly more than a HBF.

The clips that are supposed to be highlights, aren't usually so. So I don't base my conclusions on just these. I search for and read what I can find, watch telecast games and YouTube clips. Any info I can get hold of will help me formulate my opinions.

He may not be at U18's, but I believe he will be if he's drafted to WC. I've documented my plausible reasons for this.

I've already stated a few times, not just in this thread, that Heppell is not just a HBF.

 

[maxrm]

Speaking to Tim Milera right now, he say wc have spoken to him twice now. Maybe a smokey for pick 28? Would love it if we got him as a rookie! Seems keen to come to Perth too

 

[tesseract]

Ah for crying out loud! Gaff is no more a wingman than masten or shuey. If gaff is going to be drafted it's to be a midfielder. If it's a winger people want, heppell has more of a chance at playing that role much the same as hurn played well late in the season on the wing.

That's bollocks. Masten and Shuey haven't showed nous for an outside role because they're out-an-out ball winning grunts. The same can't be said of Gaff. He may be able to do both, but his style shows a favoring toward an outside game.
I disagree that Heppell is more likely to be a Wingman than Gaff.

As has been seen on many occasions throughout every team in the AFL, not every player is going to play in their desired position, or even the one they were drafted for.
If WC recruit Gaff, it'll be interesting to read what they have to say about him and what role they have in mind for him, especially given WC's needs.

 

[stuftag]

Task for WCE recruiters
What do we need most at our club?
Someone who can get the footy.
Someone who can get the footy to a teammate in a better position by hand or foot.
Someone who doesn't drink or use drugs.
Go and find that boy/man

 

[maxrm]

Task for WCE recruiters
What do we need most at our club?
Someone who can get the footy.
Someone who can get the footy to a teammate in a better position by hand or foot.
Someone who doesn't drink or use drugs.
Go and find that boy/man

Andrew Gaff.

Ball-winning machine.
Superb skills.
Absolute saint off-field.