Recruiting Draft Watch 2021

[eDPS]

eDPS's 2021 Draft Rankings

Lore's 2021 Provisional Draft Order
Any issues with it please tag Lore in this thread: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/2021-provisional-draft-order.1251001/

 

[Keystone agony]

If a player we like is still there at 15 such as Chesser, Sinn or Knevitt (17 after bids), I wonder if we offer to trade our F1 for it.

Richmond have done a similar deal in the past with Geelong (to get pick 15 in fact), and there is probably not much chance that we make the GF next year, and so Richmond upgrade the pick for free in a year with more exposure of the junior talent (2022) and still have 3 picks in the 20's this year.

With the Davey's maybe being 15-30 at the moment for us next year, we will still be able to pick up quality in that part of the draft if we lose our F1

I expect one of a Gibcus, Amiss, Hobbs to be available at our pick and think Richmond would have to have a seriously good look

 

[ant555]

If a player we like is still there at 15 such as Chesser, Sinn or Knevitt (17 after bids), I wonder if we offer to trade our F1 for it.

Richmond have done a similar deal in the past with Geelong (to get pick 15 in fact), and there is probably not much chance that we make the GF next year, and so Richmond upgrade the pick for free in a year with more exposure of the junior talent (2022) and still have 3 picks in the 20's this year.

With the Davey's maybe being 15-30 at the moment for us next year, we will still be able to pick up quality in that part of the draft if we lose our F1

I would seriously consider it. Take two in the 10 to 20 range this year and then work the pick trades next year depending on what level our F/S picks pan out at.

 

[Keystone agony]

The addition of Kelly to the list off sets the need to bring in a small defender imho.

Perhaps one who can start at HB but eventually roll up to a wing would be nice


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Kelly will still get found wanting on the really good small quick fwds. Hes not exactly quick

I think we will take a small/medium defender in this draft if there is one?

 

[Ants]

Redman, Hind, Kelly with backup from McGrath and Guelfi. No need to prioritise 2 small defenders - more pressing needs IMHO.

edit: Hird also spent a lot of time as a small defender. They are prioritising defenders who can play on multiple types and are versatile. Think players who can play on a variety of types eg Laverde, Ridley, Redman and Kelly. I don't think recruiting a small defender is on the agenda.

What are the more pressing needs for the five openings? You’ve said McGrath is depth for defence, so clearly not mids. We’ve got 11 talls under 25, 7 drafted in the last two years. Do you want to draft 5 small forwards?

Sure we like flexible players. The problem is other than McGrath (who is too important to the midfield to play back) we’ve got nobody else who is any good as a small defender. Guelfi is best and he’s rubbish.

Also we usually play 4 small defenders, but you left out Cutler and Heppel. Although Heppel ain’t a spring chicken.

 

[Keystone agony]

Interesting that Twomey mentions us with Amiss a bit if available at our pick in the video of road to the draft today. Would be melt downs

I think its time to get an Erazmus, M.Johnson or Goater. Its been since Jobe and their sitting eight in front of us. Happy for us to pretend we like others but this should be an easy decision. Its only not easy if there is more than 1 available. All can play roles outside of the centre square aswell which is helpful in flexibility and early exposure at AFL level.

Can be hard for big inside mids RCD for example to get exposure if theyve got no versatility. These guys do. M.Johnson might battle a bit in other roles early but hes still more capable than an RCD for example

 

[Duckworth]

What are the more pressing needs for the five openings? You’ve said McGrath is depth for defence, so clearly not mids. We’ve got 11 talls under 25, 7 drafted in the last two years. Do you want to draft 5 small forwards?

McGrath can rotate back - hence can be used (I said backup NOT depth). Clearly, we do need more mids. I'd also take another KPF, as aside from 2MP and Wright, they are unproven (although I'm happy if we don't take a KPF). One small forward.

Also we usually play 4 small defenders, but you left out Cutler and Heppel. Although Heppel ain’t a spring chicken.

Who are they??? Hind, Redman....

 

[Keystone agony]

If a player we like is still there at 15 such as Chesser, Sinn or Knevitt (17 after bids), I wonder if we offer to trade our F1 for it.

Richmond have done a similar deal in the past with Geelong (to get pick 15 in fact), and there is probably not much chance that we make the GF next year, and so Richmond upgrade the pick for free in a year with more exposure of the junior talent (2022) and still have 3 picks in the 20's this year.

With the Davey's maybe being 15-30 at the moment for us next year, we will still be able to pick up quality in that part of the draft if we lose our F1

I think quite a few of those guys are still going early 20s

Id prefer to use our F2 and 2 x C3s to the right team to get a player there if we really like them

Willmot springs to mind. He would help with our backline alot, also think he could really become a midfielder

 

[Keystone agony]

McGrath can rotate back - hence can be used. Clearly, we do need more mids. I'd also take another KPF, as aside from 2MP and Wright, they are unproven (although I'm happy if we don't take a KPF). One small forward.

Who are they??? Hind, Redman....

Our back 7 is

Stewart/Reid
Laverde
J.Kelly
Ridley
Redman
Hind
Heppell

Depth:
Stewart/Reid (We have more tall depth)
T.Cutler
Guelfi? (Unsure of where we see him)

Stewart and Reid can play in the same backline aswell

I think we're one defender short there basically with losing Gleeson. I think we will be looking for someone who replaces Heppell in 2-3 years time

 

[Ants]

McGrath can rotate back - hence can be used. Clearly, we do need more mids. I'd also take another KPF, as aside from 2MP and Wright, they are unproven (although I'm happy if we don't take a KPF). One small forward.

You can't have it both ways. You can't say defence isn't a problem because you can play a midfielder down back, and then say we need more mids. If we need more mids, we can't afford to play McGrath back.

We've got 5 picks (6 if we don't re-rookie Clarke). And we know we're getting the Daveys next year. I'd have said, including the Daveys, that if out of those 7 players we get 2 mids, 2 small forwards, a forward/wing (A Davey Jnr) and 2 small backs, that would be a good mix. With at least one of those small defenders recruited this year.

Who are they??? Hind, Redman....

At the back end of the season it was Hind, Redman, Heppell and Cutler.

Early in the season it was the first three plus one of Francis/Ridley, with Cahill & Guelfi filling in a bit for missing players. But Truck didn't seem to like that combo and shifted to the above one for the last third of the season, with Gleeson filling in for any missing player.

I'd also point out that currently, even with adding Kelly, if Cutler doesn't continue his good form then we've actually got no dedicated small defender depth.

 

[Duckworth]

Our back 7 is

Stewart/Reid
Laverde
J.Kelly
Ridley
Redman
Hind
Heppell

Depth:
Stewart/Reid (We have more tall depth)
T.Cutler
Guelfi? (Unsure of where we see him)

Stewart and Reid can play in the same backline aswell

I think we're one defender short there basically with losing Gleeson. I think we will be looking for someone who replaces Heppell in 2-3 years time

Add in BZT, developing (Brand / Eyre) and Francis? although he is probably a forward as he's been squeezed out of defence. Cutler is a medium type that was looking OK towards the end of the year. I'd be OK with taking another, but as I said, not the greatest need.

 

[Ants]

If a player we like is still there at 15 such as Chesser, Sinn or Knevitt (17 after bids), I wonder if we offer to trade our F1 for it.

Richmond have done a similar deal in the past with Geelong (to get pick 15 in fact), and there is probably not much chance that we make the GF next year, and so Richmond upgrade the pick for free in a year with more exposure of the junior talent (2022) and still have 3 picks in the 20's this year.

With the Davey's maybe being 15-30 at the moment for us next year, we will still be able to pick up quality in that part of the draft if we lose our F1

Not really knowing the two draft strengths, it does feel like a valid option. There is obviously the risk that we fall down the ladder next year, but there is also the risk (from a drafting perspective) we move up it.

I wonder if Hawthorn would trade #20 (before bids) and something else (say a F3) for our F1. It would depend on who is still there.

 

[Duckworth]

You can't have it both ways. You can't say defence isn't a problem because you can play a midfielder down back, and then say we need more mids. If we need more mids, we can't afford to play McGrath back.

I'm saying the defence isn't a problem, because we have plenty of defenders. So many that Francis has been forced forward. If we had better mids, I'd be happy if McGrath was forced back, however, we do not.

At the back end of the season it was Hind, Redman, Heppell and Cutler.

Not Smalls. Medium.

 

[Ants]

Yet as already mentioned all the players that have been discussed by most as preferred big bodied midfielders all have an inside game , an outside running game and a decent marking game. You seem to be hung up on "big bodied inside mid " term alone . No one is suggesting we draft a Ben Cunnington clone. All most want is something a little different to what we have. Rather than having a fleet of 180cm midfielders as our prime guys. Even if Perkins makes it in the midfield we will have 5 x 180cm and 1 x 188cm . I am not including Cox as his role on the wing is different. Not including Langford as his best form has been wing / half forward.
Personally I am also on record as saying we do not actually have to get a clearance player. We have to improve two areas. Overall contested possession and marking power around the ground. We do have some players that will help this going forward but we still need to keep upgrading that area.

I do not think we are as far away as most and I have been on record as saying we did pretty well with only two of our best midfielders on the park. However I am not going away from my list management thoughts from the last 10 years where it is my opinion we have not ever looked at the overall balance of the list. This opinion comes from my time working in the area and observing a few other clubs as much as us.

I can see why you are an Adrian fan. Sonsie is a very good prospect and his kicking is very good. He would be a plus for us but he has to replace one of the 180cm guys and he does not change the profile of the list. As I said above IMO we the two biggest issues are overall contested footy and as part of that players able to take contested marks over all positions. I am not hanging my hat on one draft and the few we have. We have 180cm midfielder depth. We do not have 188cm midfielder depth. Kicking is an area we can improve on for sure which is why I do not mind Sinn as a speedy running half back is of use as well given we are a bit thin in that area.

The fact I have challenged a few answers has nothing to do with the KA post. I have challenged the dismissal of needing to improve our contested footy depth and the fact that 3 or so players that may improve is not really depth in that area. At no stage have I said we need to do anything with clearance or stoppage. Where the conversation started is irrelevant. You can discuss with KA as far as that initial post goes. We are mid range to bottom in the contested stats. We are in the 6th to 10th range in total contested possessions. The top sides and the GF sides have generally been in the 1 to 5 range as far as total contested possessions go. We improve that a little by internal and drafting a bit of depth in the bigger bodies and we are pushing top 5.

I do feel like we're talking past each other a bit here. There are a number of taller players who I've no problems with in this draft; hell, I'd love it if Erasmus dropped to our pick. But I was certainly arguing from the theoretical, what type we would target, rather than specific players. I don't really know the individuals well enough to say Player X's attributes make him better overall package than Player Y's ones. Because frankly, outside of the first few picks there will always be a trade-off of some degree. Merrett was clearly the best pick at #26 in 2013, but we were still taking a player who wouldn't ever have strong overhead marking.

I've already stated that for Essendon football club, I want them to take the best available non-tall (as in KP tall, because we've got tonnes), with an emphasis on disposal when deciding between those trade offs. From my personal perspective, I've hitched my ride to Sonsie not because I know he's better or anything (I don't), but simply because out of the players I think most likely available (and I don't think Erasmus will be) that has what I consider a perfect blend of required strengths (disposal, goal kicking mid, stoppage specialist), and hell, at least you can't complain he hasn't played mid throughout under-age levels!

I've already stated that I do think contested football is important, but I don't see it as important as some here. I think its also far more correlated with mature teams than just winning teams. In building a team I'd prefer to try and recreate the Hawthorn structure than the Bulldogs structure. With an overlay of modern defensive structures of course.

Finally, a lot of your post talks about depth. Which implies to me we're in rough agreement the core midfield is in a decent place (I'd say the wings are unproven a bit depending on where Langford plays). My opinion agrees with yours, I think we're close. I think Jones needs another 12 months at least, Draper needs an uninterrupted 12 months, Caldwell and McGrath clean runs at it, the young talls need time, and the defence needs practice together. I do think we've got 18-20 parts of the system that just need 12-24 months of development.

For me, almost the most important thing I'm looking for in #11 is upside. A player who can come in and be a Blumfield/Heffernen/Menegola kind of quality of player would strengthen us. But I do think the top premiership sides have champions. If we had a glaring hole that we hadn't already recruited for (i.e. we've already recruited spare KP talls, and (IMO) mids who are taller in Cox/Perkins/Durham) I'd say take that type. But without that blaring need, a player with the upside to be a champion would be great.

Also, if we are focussing on depth with #11. If we're going to say Perkins/Cox/Durham are longer shots. Then that also means a whole chunk of our potential good disposal is gone. Sure, it only leaves Langford and Stringer who are tall. It really only leaves Merrett and Langford as top class distributors as well.

So I do feel we have some differences in opinion between us at the edges, but they're not huge.

Edit: oh, and I really hope you and others I respond to with utter conviction and long posts, don't think I'm trying to multi-word you into submission. I like these discussions. Its chewing the fat over a process which frankly none of us can (currently) influence, about something we won't know the true answer to for several years to come. I hope nobody takes anything I'm writing as an attack, since I do know I can be solid in my own views.

 

[Ants]

Not Smalls. Medium.

To be clear, I'm using the word interchangeably. A player who is 180-185cm can play on any of those types. I'm really saying non-tall (as in KP tall).

So if you want to define that as medium, I'm saying we need 1-2 small/medium defenders over the next two drafts, with one in this draft.

I'm saying the defence isn't a problem, because we have plenty of defenders. So many that Francis has been forced forward. If we had better mids, I'd be happy if McGrath was forced back, however, we do not.

But we don't. Francis is a tall. Laverde is our main KP tall now. From the players who play medium/small defence (to use your terminology) we have five dedicated ones on the ENTIRE list. Which includes one who 6 months ago everyone wanted delisted, and a second who is 29 years old. And we play four in our preferred structure. How on earth is that enough?

The only way you can say we have plenty of defenders is when you lump in the talls. And yes, when you do that and add BZK, Reid, Francis, Brand and McBride, it seems plenty. But none of those can play on medium/small defenders.

So yes, I think we should prioritise that amongst our five picks this year, at least one is a small defender. And a second wouldn't go astray.

 

[Bjchan13]

If a player we like is still there at 15 such as Chesser, Sinn or Knevitt (17 after bids), I wonder if we offer to trade our F1 for it.

Richmond have done a similar deal in the past with Geelong (to get pick 15 in fact), and there is probably not much chance that we make the GF next year, and so Richmond upgrade the pick for free in a year with more exposure of the junior talent (2022) and still have 3 picks in the 20's this year.

With the Davey's maybe being 15-30 at the moment for us next year, we will still be able to pick up quality in that part of the draft if we lose our F1

I dont think Richmond would do it. They're looking to trade up rather than out this year.

 

[Duckworth]

To be clear, I'm using the word interchangeably. A player who is 180-185cm can play on any of those types. I'm really saying non-tall (as in KP tall).

So if you want to define that as medium, I'm saying we need 1-2 small/medium defenders over the next two drafts, with one in this draft.

Well, that changes things a bit.

Laverde is our main KP tall now.

Apart from Stewart, and the plenty of others we have developing. Laverde is best suited to a medium type defender.

From the players who play medium/small defence (to use your terminology) we have five dedicated ones on the ENTIRE list. Which includes one who 6 months ago everyone wanted delisted, and a second who is 29 years old. And we play four in our preferred structure. How on earth is that enough?

With all the KP defenders we have, Reid will be given games, and Stewart too - probably both get games next year. Laverde will move more to a medium type defender to which he is best suited. We have the following Kelly, Ridley, Redman, Hind, Heppell, Cutler (& McGrath resting back). Guelfi? I might be alone here in liking his game and the pressure he brings.

One more medium/small hybrid type is OK (we agree?). I just don't see it as a pressing need. I'm also of the opinion that a failed midfielder can make it as a defender, but the reverse can't happen. One later in the draft, or as a rookie to replace Hurley.

 

[Zach Package]

Now that Dib is in the open draft he shapes as a pretty good option in the 3rd round to be honest

 

[Ants]

Well, that changes things a bit.

Its pretty common to split the lists talls and smalls. But at least we're not now talking past each other!

Apart from Stewart, and the plenty of others we have developing. Laverde is best suited to a medium type defender.

Hell no. By the end of the season Stewart wasn't being given either of the primary opposition talls. Laverde was our first choice player to go on the oppositions dangerous key tall. And he was doing a great job. I don't think you'll see him changing roles anytime in the foreseeable future.

With all the KP defenders we have, Reid will be given games, and Stewart too - probably both get games next year. Laverde will move more to a medium type defender to which he is best suited. We have the following Kelly, Ridley, Redman, Hind, Heppell, Cutler (& McGrath resting back)

One more medium/small hybrid type is OK (we agree?). I just don't see it as a pressing need. I'm also of the opinion that a failed midfielder can make it as a defender, but the reverse can't happen. One later in the draft, or as a rookie to replace Hurley.

I don't consider Ridley a medium, although he can play that role. He's been getting more key roles as he gets older and stronger, less third man intercepting. He is 195cm.

I also consider the idea of sending someone who I think will soon be contending to be AA as a midfielder to the backline. I just don't think its happening, when you can try and find that defender with your picks 60+. So we come back to having 5 dedicated non-tall defenders for 4 spots.

But if we both agree on one more this draft, I'll leave it at that. We can argue next year whether we need a second one!

 

[TheGrizz]

I dont think Richmond would do it. They're looking to trade up rather than out this year.

I suppose my idea relies on the premise that they aren't able to. In that scenario I imagine our first pick next year (8-13ish) is more valuable than what will be pick 17 after bids.

But you are right in that is probably the first priority.

 

[Big Fresh]

Reading Chris25 ‘s opinion of Josh Goater and it’s one that has swayed me from wanting him.

Don’t particularly want Wanganeen - Milera either.

My preferences would be Matt Johnson or Mitch Knevitt


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've only looked at highlights, but I have zero idea how Knevitt's kicking could be rated better than Goater's. While Goater probably has shanks that were omitted from the videos, his action looks fine and he can pull off good kicks, whereas Knevitt's kicks invariably look floaty and inaccurate.

 

[Duckworth]

But if we both agree on one more this draft, I'll leave it at that. We can argue next year whether we need a second one!

I only agree if it's a medium/hybrid type.

 

[Bjchan13]

I suppose my idea relies on the premise that they aren't able to. In that scenario I imagine our first pick next year (8-13ish) is more valuable than what will be pick 17 after bids.

But you are right in that is probably the first priority.

I feel like they have a plan that involves starting their list refresh sooner rather than later. Taking 4 or 5 in the top 30 this year, knowing that Riewoldt, Cotchin, Edwards, Prestia, Grimes etc are at the end of their careers. Probably hoping they can get a quick bounce back that Dusty and Lynch could possibly still be a part of.

 

[sregit]

11 for 15 and 28 if the Tigers love a player at our pick?

Could happen

 

[andleanback]

Can’t believe the Roos nominated archer to take national draft.

 

[Maxabillions]

I should say, I'm not against a half back. Hind faded pretty badly. While I don't see his position as being under any immediate threat I could see him surpassed.

Yeah, 75 touches and a goal in the last three games of the H&A season, pathetic.

To be fair though he was invisible in the elimination final, must have eaten some bad chicken or something.