Draft discusson thread

[sharks attack]

Are you sure? The clip on youtube says that he is a KPP but played ruck because the sided needed him to?

David, Chalwell made colts team of the year beating all the taller ruckmen constantly (and averaging 20 possessions a game), he pinched hit in the ruck in reserves for 4 games and also won his fair share of knocks- he palms the ball exceptionaly well. He is not tall for a ruckman but has a great leap and timing. (88 cm running leap at WA combine which would have equalled the best at the National combine) but if he goes it wont be as a ruck.He is a great KPP, when he rested at full forward he kicked goals and played well in the back half. The 18s staff wanted to see him play CHB in colts for the carnival but he was dominating the ruck so much that he wasnt played there by EF. Hence he missed out on the state team because a) they thought he was too short to ruck and b) they wanted to see him as a CHB and that didnt happen. I think he has great potental as a KPP who can pinch hit in the ruck as most guys have wrote here.

 

[WCE_phil]

David, Chalwell made colts team of the year beating all the taller ruckmen constantly (and averaging 20 possessions a game), he pinched hit in the ruck in reserves for 4 games and also won his fair share of knocks- he palms the ball exceptionaly well. He is not tall for a ruckman but has a great leap and timing. (88 cm running leap at WA combine which would have equalled the best at the National combine) but if he goes it wont be as a ruck.He is a great KPP, when he rested at full forward he kicked goals and played well in the back half. The 18s staff wanted to see him play CHB in colts for the carnival but he was dominating the ruck so much that he wasnt played there by EF. Hence he missed out on the state team because a) they thought he was too short to ruck and b) they wanted to see him as a CHB and that didnt happen. I think he has great potental as a KPP who can pinch hit in the ruck as most guys have wrote here.

Yet i still prefer karnezis as the tall utility.

 

[Underdog]

It's beyond me how you've struggled to wrap your head around this so far, but we wouldn't be drafting Chalwell so he could be a specialist ruckman.

He'd be a key defender who could pinch-hit in the ruck if desperately required, both as a 4th/5th in line back-up ruckman on the playing list, and possibly to relieve Naitanui for 5min each quarter. For this he is tall enough, just like Lynch, at 192cm, is tall enough.

It's simply handy bonus on top of the package he already offers.

Sorry, but it's irrelevant.

He needs to be judged on his KP potential alone.

It's easy to find a utility who can contest the ruck. Just look at Lynch, Kepler Bradley, Leigh Brown, Michael Johnson etc. You just need a solid, mediocre KPP who is reasonably mobile.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

It's beyond me how you've struggled to wrap your head around this so far, but we wouldn't be drafting Chalwell so he could be a specialist ruckman.

He'd be a key defender who could pinch-hit in the ruck if desperately required, both as a 4th/5th in line back-up ruckman on the playing list, and possibly to relieve Naitanui for 5min each quarter. For this he is tall enough, just like Lynch, at 192cm, is tall enough.

It's simply handy bonus on top of the package he already offers.

So he'd be fourth in line for a KPD position and a pinch hitting ruckmen...

My point stands. If he can play as a KPF then id be intrested.

 

[dajesmac]

Chalwell doesn't have much speed but he could even be thrust into the midfield in a Goddard like role, has great skills.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Chalwell doesn't have much speed but he could even be thrust into the midfield in a Goddard like role, has great skills.

Looks and moves like a CHB. Not totally against the idea if we draft him with the intention of playing him as a KPD. I do however feel confident in our current three young defenders.

Looks like a Pears.

 

[adagio]

I think we have room on the list for a key defender, given Spangher and Wilkes were just delisted and Schofield plays as more of a 3rd tall.

Glass will be gone in a couple of years and although we have Mackenzie and Brown, beyond them there is nothing and Brown might yet end up as a forward.

We have to go tall at some point in the draft and if it's a key defender that has ability up forward, then fine by me.

 

[paran]

But we are even less stocked in kpf's. We have kennedy, hansen, Wilson and lynch. at least jj, bones and Brennan could pinch hit as a kpd, we have nothing else up forward.

 

[Barnzy]

Looking like Gaff/Heppell/Polec will be going at 4, 5 and 6. Just a matter of which order. I honestly wouldn't been unhappy with any of them.

Who do you guys think you will pick? Gaff seems to be the concensus at the moment. I think Polec fits your needs well too (mid with hurt factor). Interesting times ahead.

 

[INSANE]

Looking like Gaff/Heppell/Polec will be going at 4, 5 and 6. Just a matter of which order. I honestly wouldn't been unhappy with any of them.

Who do you guys think you will pick? Gaff seems to be the concensus at the moment. I think Polec fits your needs well too (mid with hurt factor). Interesting times ahead.

I reckon Gaff, proven performer, blitzed draft camp and no doubt would have interviewed superbly too. Is different to the other mids we've got, so he makes complete sense.

 

[Pat_Footy]

I think we'll go with Polec. Gaff is overrated by mine. Polec will be the better player. The big decision is letting Heppel slide, he has all the attributes to be anything.

 

[BOND 007]

I reckon Gaff, proven performer, blitzed draft camp and no doubt would have interviewed superbly too. Is different to the other mids we've got, so he makes complete sense.

Yea - to you and me and many others. Problem is that we're talking about a team whose decision processes recently and the words "common sense" seem to be mutually exclusive.

 

[Pat_Footy]

Why it make complete sense to draft Gaff?

How he interviewed doesn't matter.... Top draft picks are for best available. Draft camp, again is not on the footy field so while it might give recruiters an idea of potential it's not as good as indicator as the champs. The Stephen Hill over Daniel Rich debate will always come up.

 

[Bacchus]

Why it make complete sense to draft Gaff?

A complete player with great character.

 

[Pat_Footy]

He's not a complete AFL player yet. Giving players a blanket assessment isn't right. Speed and kicking penetration are very important AFL qualities. Skill assessment by recruiters includes these qualities. Polec leads Gaff in both.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Seems to be 3 camps - Gaff, Polec and Darling.

Looking forward to two thirds of the members of the board letting the WC recruiters know they have no idea.

Edit - sorry 4 camps - add in Heppell

There'll be three quarters of the board up in arms now

 

[adagio]

Heppell to me looks easily the most complete package and still with massive upside.

He's got a Pendlebury-like smoothness and awareness which is tempting in itself. He's pretty much the most efficient player in this draft - awesome by foot and by hand. This is hugely important with the way the current game is heading.

But with his height, versatility, courage, leadership and overhead marking, once he is a fully developed AFL player I'd imagine he'd have more of a Goodard/Goodes presence about him.

I'd be ok with Gaff, I think he's a lovely player, but really I'm not sure why everyone is that keen on him. After a wooden spoon I want more value for money than a neat accumulator that happens to complement our midfield nicely.

 

[WCE_phil]

Heppell to me looks easily the most complete package and still with massive upside.

He's got a Pendlebury-like smoothness and awareness which is tempting in itself. He's pretty much the most efficient player in this draft - awesome by foot and by hand. This is hugely important with the way the current game is heading.

But with his height, versatility, courage, leadership and overhead marking, once he is a fully developed AFL player I'd imagine he'd have more of a Goodard/Goodes presence about him.

I'd be ok with Gaff, I think he's a lovely player, but really I'm not sure why everyone is that keen on him. After a wooden spoon I want more value for money than a neat accumulator that happens to complement our midfield nicely.

I want Heppell *cough* i mean Hird *cough* i mean Heppell. You get my drift. Great decision making, Great awareness, Great hands on both sides of his body, 60 metre left boot and all with a great leap and mark.

He's by no means slow and i'll ask this. How fast was robert harvey? How often was he caught. Pace isn't everything.

 

[Pat_Footy]

I agree that Heppel looks like the most complete package if we're blanket assessing. I think he will be a force in a few years espcially looking at his body shape. Scott Clayton usually targets players of his build.

 

[INSANE]

Heppell to me looks easily the most complete package and still with massive upside.

He's got a Pendlebury-like smoothness and awareness which is tempting in itself. He's pretty much the most efficient player in this draft - awesome by foot and by hand. This is hugely important with the way the current game is heading.

But with his height, versatility, courage, leadership and overhead marking, once he is a fully developed AFL player I'd imagine he'd have more of a Goodard/Goodes presence about him.

I'd be ok with Gaff, I think he's a lovely player, but really I'm not sure why everyone is that keen on him. After a wooden spoon I want more value for money than a neat accumulator that happens to complement our midfield nicely.

I really think those that have not seen him are really underrating him if anything. I hear he lacks hurt-factor, well he has scored goals very regularly through his junior career, and, is a gun at setting up shots on goal....So what if he can't kick 60, Lynch can and is not damaging at all really.

He has a lot of development and upside, because he is still so slight.

 

[INSANE]

Why it make complete sense to draft Gaff?

How he interviewed doesn't matter.... Top draft picks are for best available. Draft camp, again is not on the footy field so while it might give recruiters an idea of potential it's not as good as indicator as the champs. The Stephen Hill over Daniel Rich debate will always come up.

Disagree, you will learn a lot about a player- drive, motivation, intelligence, leadership etc in those interviews.

 

[INSANE]

He's not a complete AFL player yet. Giving players a blanket assessment isn't right. Speed and kicking penetration are very important AFL qualities. Skill assessment by recruiters includes these qualities. Polec leads Gaff in both.

Quentin Lynch has more penetration than anyone. A couple of extra metres in distance is nothing. The way some people talk about Gaff you'd think he can't kick 10 metres....Or, they've never watched him.

Gaff is a smart damaging mid, that will love using his endurance at Subi and will be on the end of a lot of plays, shooting on goal/assisting.

 

[paran]

Impression I get is that Gaff is more in the mold of a Dal Santo - second touch receiver type, who's good up to 35-40m. Not really a game changer or game breaker. I see Polec as a game breaker, capable of breaking away from play and making something happen. Postman Pav seems to intimate that he's slow, but the tape says otherwise and I know Jerry Rice (greatest WR in the NFL ever) was tested as very slow for his position, but never seemed to ever get caught when playing. When I see tape of Polec I see a guy who takes the game on, can create space for himself, get his own ball, tackle and chase hard, good overhead, runs well with the ball, always attacks and sets the ball to advantage of teammates more often than not. Yes, I've seen shanks, but they're the exception than the rule. He would tear up Subi and really complement Shuey, Swift, Scooter, Masten. He's a flair player, and something our squad lacks.

All I've seen of Heppell is a good HBF.

 

[dext]

Impression I get is that Gaff is more in the mold of a Dal Santo - second touch receiver type, who's good up to 35-40m. Not really a game changer or game breaker. I see Polec as a game breaker, capable of breaking away from play and making something happen. Postman Pav seems to intimate that he's slow, but the tape says otherwise and I know Jerry Rice (greatest WR in the NFL ever) was tested as very slow for his position, but never seemed to ever get caught when playing. When I see tape of Polec I see a guy who takes the game on, can create space for himself, get his own ball, tackle and chase hard, good overhead, runs well with the ball, always attacks and sets the ball to advantage of teammates more often than not. Yes, I've seen shanks, but they're the exception than the rule. He would tear up Subi and really complement Shuey, Swift, Scooter, Masten. He's a flair player, and something our squad lacks.

All I've seen of Heppell is a good HBF.

You obviously didnt see Heppell's prelim final against oakleigh. Got bout 35 possys and won the game off his own boot playing midfeild. Was everywhere and has real hurt factor,(which gaff lacks) but also consistency (which Polec lacks).

Everyone wanting the next Stephen hill are going to be quite disappointed if we select Polec, as he lacks the speed, agility and skills and will only end up with a poor mans hill. Gaff is a safe bet who is going to be a good player, but the way heppell can control a game and with a huge scope for improvement I think we would be mad to pass on him.

 

[beatlesmith]

You obviously didnt see Heppell's prelim final against oakleigh. Got bout 35 possys and won the game off his own boot playing midfeild. Was everywhere and has real hurt factor,(which gaff lacks) but also consistency (which Polec lacks).

Everyone wanting the next Stephen hill are going to be quite disappointed if we select Polec, as he lacks the speed, agility and skills and will only end up with a poor mans hill. Gaff is a safe bet who is going to be a good player, but the way heppell can control a game and with a huge scope for improvement I think we would be mad to pass on him.

Where are you pulling this crap from?
He might not have these attributes to the extent that Hill does, few players do, but he still has them in spades. You watch him a lot do you?
Should we wait around until a player has the same attributes of the same level as Hill before we draft them?
How about ignoring opposition players that have no bearing on us and drafting players based on merits and needs?
You're just manipulating and ignoring facts to suit your own argument.