List Mgmt. Draft Watch 2015

[Sanders]

This is true.

Kicking long to a 50/50 contest is an 'effective' disposal, but it might result in an immediate turnover with the opposition gaining possession from the 50/50.

But kicking long to a 50/50 contest IS an effective disposal by definition. Unless you assume there are always uncontested options, which often there are not and even then they may not be good ones

Pushing the ball up to the contest means the kicker has done his job it's now up to the next bloke to do his job and either spoil or win the contest.

The idea that kicking successfully to a 50/50 contest is a failure is beyond me. Just makes no sense

 

[Vader]

Short kicks and handballs is due to the position he plays, inside mid, and Brodie Smiths long kicking is due to position he plays, outside with space to burn.

It's attributable to some extent, given that inside mids will often be making short passes to those just outside the congestion. Crouch's short passing goes well beyond what is expected of an inside mid though.

 

[Sanders]

It's attributable to some extent, given that inside mids will often be making short passes to those just outside the congestion. Crouch's short passing goes well beyond what is expected of an inside mid though.

Crouch's short passing goes well beyond your ability to evidence

 

[Stiffy_18]

Rhys Mathieson at 13 I reckon! With one of the picks we are picking up an inside midfielder.

 

[Draft Bored]

So are we taking M Crouch at 9 or not?

This thread needs a subject change.

 

[crows dude]

So Vader has gone from Lyons to Crouch now. I wonder which one of our picks 9 or 13 will be his next whipping boy after they havent cemented a spot before their 23rd birthday. In Crouches case before his 21st birthday.

 

[FAITH]

Rhys Mathieson at 13 I reckon! With one of the picks we are picking up an inside midfielder.

thinking we may go outside speed and KPF.
why do you think we'll go inside mid?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

thinking we may go outside speed and KPF.
why do you think we'll go inside mid?

Fairly educated guess based on our history

Odds are on an inside mid and a tall defender

 

[Stiffy_18]

thinking we may go outside speed and KPF.
why do you think we'll go inside mid?

We've covered outside speed in our trade period and I doubt that we go hunting for those types in the draft. We might actually be in danger of having too many of outside types if we go down that path. Having said that, if a gun slides to 9, we will probably take him.

Historically AFC draft structural players with early picks. In other words KPP and inside midfielders who form the framework of the side.

Reading Rhys Mathieson's write up, it kind of screams another Rory Sloane type player to me. Not a great kick, not overly quick, gut runner, good mark, loves a contested ball, will give everything he has in every contest, high IQ but not blessed athletically. Not a sexy pick but a dependable one that could probably play straight away, can play inside and outside and be a spiritual leader of the team down the track.

After reading his profile on bound for glory, he sounds like exactly the type of player that we traditionally target. Not a lot of X factor there but like Sloane, you always know what you will get from him and he has the ability to lift his team through his actions on the field.

 

[displacedaussie]

He gets the ball a bit, but most of those disposals. Eugh. Anyone but Mathieson.

 

[rezagun]

He gets the ball a bit, but most of those disposals. Eugh. Anyone but Mathieson.

If we want a midfielder from victoria id rather us go for oliver or balic. They look alot cleaner and they have another element to the games of being able to push forward and hit the scoreboard

 

[Vader]

So Vader has gone from Lyons to Crouch now. I wonder which one of our picks 9 or 13 will be his next whipping boy after they havent cemented a spot before their 23rd birthday. In Crouches case before his 21st birthday.

I like Crouch a lot more than I do Lyons. I think Lyons is barely AFL standard. Crouch is definitely AFL standard and should have a long career, it's just that his ceiling is limited by his poor disposal.

 

[Archie87]

I like Crouch a lot more than I do Lyons. I think Lyons is barely AFL standard. Crouch is definitely AFL standard and should have a long career, it's just that his ceiling is limited by his poor disposal.

Let's not be too harsh on a young, inside midfielder still finding his feet at AFL level given that you would have barely seen him live before. He’s not a great kick granted but it’s getting a bit blown out of proportion here. Don't make out his poor disposal to be up there with Priddis because it’s not.

Having seen him numerous times at SANFL level in 2014 and every AO game live this year, his kicking is fine for an inside midfielder i.e. it’s not a strength of his by any stretch but it’s not piss poor either and it will be enough to get by for the position he plays. He’s more than capable of nicely weighted, 30-40m kicks into space for players to run on to. He did this at SANFL level in 2014 and did a couple of times at AFL level this year to Tex in 2015 too. He should do that more consistently as he gets more settled at AFL level.

He’s like Rory Sloane in that as long as he kicks within his limitations and doesn’t try 50 metre grass-cutters to a leading player, his disposal is acceptable. BOB surprised me a bit this year with a couple of nicely weighted kicks in to space

 

[gilbp33]

I like Crouch a lot more than I do Lyons. I think Lyons is barely AFL standard. Crouch is definitely AFL standard and should have a long career, it's just that his ceiling is limited by his poor disposal.

Theres a few blokes that have won Brownlows that are poor disposers of the footy, hopefully that is his ceiling...

 

[gilbp33]

In terms of strategy for our 2 picks, do we simply take best available at 9, or do we look ahead at the type of player that will be available at 13? Ie there are probably more midfielders that we are looking at that could be available later, do we take a fwd first and then the best mid left at 13? Risky strategy not taking the best, but we may end up with a better combo taking a fwd first.

 

[hey shorty]

Trade for needs, draft for talent. Given we have a few holes to fill I say best available. We traded in speedy, skilful flankers/wingmen, a hardnut inside mid/fwd and a skilful HFF.

I reckon midfield polish is required, doesn't have to be lightning but has to be a great kick, plus a 3rd tall defender ala Francis.

Rookie a KPD and mid.

 

[gilbp33]

If we want a midfielder from victoria id rather us go for oliver or balic. They look alot cleaner and they have another element to the games of being able to push forward and hit the scoreboard

Would definitely take Oliver first, but id take Mathieson over Balic, reckon Mathieson will become a pretty decent AFL footballer. That highlights package of him hand balling over his head every time doesnt do him justice i dont think, having said that i didnt see a huge amount of the championships.

 

[gilbp33]

I agree, but I hope we still get someone decent at 13, I see our key fwd depth as very weak, despite our starting 6 being amazing. But I'm not convinced HMckay is the answer, nor am I convinced that a decent fwd will be available at 13.
I'd be happy rookie-ing a couple of raw or mature key fwds if we draft 2 mids.

 

[hey shorty]

Its a big year for both Dear and Ramsey IMO. If they stand up then our KPF depth looks fine, if they don't then both may be delisted and we are back to nothing.

 

[Mismatched]

BTW please, please no Mathieson. I watched him through the championships and I've never seen any midfielder panic and simply hurl the ball over his head more than this lad. Makes Thommo look like a pin point disposer.

Yeah agree, Mathieson to me sounds like a 2nd round prospect, dragged up into first round calculations due to an apparent dearth of decent genuine midfield talent available in this draft (obviously discounting Academy players).

I agree that we need to be looking to replace Dangerfield's elite midfield qualities, however we're not going to do this by focusing on players who project as pure inside midfielders, in particular those with poor-average disposal and pace. Pure inside extractors are easy to find later in the draft, or even as mature aged types in the draft, especially those lacking decent pace and disposal. If we had absolutely no inside, extractor types, then I might consider looking at a Mathieson type with a pick inside the top 20, otherwise I think you're better off looking elsewhere.

To replace Dangerfield, we need to be looking at midfield types who can win contested ball/clearances, but also have significant outside abilities and I wouldn't be reaching for such in a draft this year that seems to be lacking in this type of player. I'd rather use this year to assess who can/cannot actually step up in Dangerfield's absence. Personally I think Ellis-Yolman will relish the opportunities and I think Matt Crouch has Scott Thompson/Matt Priddis/Matt Boyd level inside accumulator written all over him. Jarryd Lyons also is more than capable in a similar role, but probably doesn't have the ability to play at quite the same level.

Having loaded up on more outside types, we should use this year to assess what our midfield actually looks like before we go gung-ho after an inside midfielder type. We also have the entire year to look at poaching an A-Grade to Elite level midfielder from another club. From what I've been able to gather, next years draft also seems like a genuine midfielders draft, so I think we're certainly much better off running with going best available, than panicking over the loss of Dangerfield and soon Thompson.

 

[lunacy]

We've covered outside speed in our trade period and I doubt that we go hunting for those types in the draft. We might actually be in danger of having too many of outside types if we go down that path. Having said that, if a gun slides to 9, we will probably take him.

Historically AFC draft structural players with early picks. In other words KPP and inside midfielders who form the framework of the side.

Reading Rhys Mathieson's write up, it kind of screams another Rory Sloane type player to me. Not a great kick, not overly quick, gut runner, good mark, loves a contested ball, will give everything he has in every contest, high IQ but not blessed athletically. Not a sexy pick but a dependable one that could probably play straight away, can play inside and outside and be a spiritual leader of the team down the track.

After reading his profile on bound for glory, he sounds like exactly the type of player that we traditionally target. Not a lot of X factor there but like Sloane, you always know what you will get from him and he has the ability to lift his team through his actions on the field.

I'm warming to him but I'd be worried about his very close ties to Parish. They have played footy together at every level and are joined by the hip.
Geelong Falcons too .

 

[Scorpus]

But kicking long to a 50/50 contest IS an effective disposal by definition. Unless you assume there are always uncontested options, which often there are not and even then they may not be good ones

Pushing the ball up to the contest means the kicker has done his job it's now up to the next bloke to do his job and either spoil or win the contest.

The idea that kicking successfully to a 50/50 contest is a failure is beyond me. Just makes no sense

Yes, by definition a long kick to a 50/50 is an effective disposal. But if you're wondering how a player can have good disposal efficiency while still being a "poor" disposer, he could do the following things:

- Long kick to a 50/50 that gets turned over. This could be a kick to the player's feet that gets crumbed by the opposition, or a kick to a tall opposition player on a small, or a kick that's in the vicinity of two players. It doesn't have to be a direct, good kick to a 50/50 contested marking situation (which would be a "good" disposal)

In this situation, long kicking to a player's feet (in a contest) is classed as an "effective" disposal, but in my eyes that's a "poor" kick. A kick that falls short of two players in a close contest is also considered effective, yet that kick hasn't hit a target at all.

- Handballing or short kicking backwards or sideways.
- Handballing to a player who receives it, but is put under immediate pressure, or tackled. Think of a Van Berlo disposal.
- A floating long kick that turns an uncontested situation into a 50/50

For example, if Matt Crouch (who I don't think has poor disposal, but let's use him as an example), kicks long to a contest involving Eddie Betts on Jeremy McGovern that's spoiled by McGovern, this is considered an "effective" disposal to a "50/50 contest" despite the fact that McGovern v Betts is not a great contest.

(Note that if this kick was marked uncontested it would not be effective, but if it's spoiled by the opposition this is a 50/50)

He could also kick it high up in the air to Jenkins, who is originally unmarked, but the style of the kick allows a defender to turn it into a 50/50.

Not all "effective" disposals are the same.

 

[Draft Bored]

Are we at all interested in Collins at 13? 2nd best KPD in the draft. Topped the clean hands test at the combine. Cal Twomey and Paige reckon he's pick 15 onwards (not sure if that includes the academy players). Anderson has him gone before our first pick though.

 

[gilbp33]

Its a big year for both Dear and Ramsey IMO. If they stand up then our KPF depth looks fine, if they don't then both may be delisted and we are back to nothing.

No doubt. Dear looks a long way off, but doesn't mean he won't make it. Hopefully they can both have good sanfl years, not sure they'll push for selection just yet though.

 

[lunacy]

He gets the ball a bit, but most of those disposals. Eugh. Anyone but Mathieson.

Those highlights look pretty bad but his highlights on the afl draft machine have turned me a bit.

http://www.afl.com.au/draft/draft-machine.workstation