Draft

[Stiffy_18]

Its time for a poll people.

Are you happy with what we picked up in the National Draft?

 

[Cap]

not having the patience to read through all the posts i'm not sure if i'm happy with picking up the amount of ruckman (3 right although one is possibly a tall forward) and 1 midfieder with another HBF/Winger - but then again i could be wrong (if i can read all the notes)

 

[Skippy_14]

Yes.

 

[DaveW]

Well last year I could only get excited about Fergus Watts.

But there looks to be plenty more to get excited about our batch this year. I especially liked that we were forced to use our last pick because we couldn't let such talent escape!

Still would've preferred another South Australian or two. For sentimental and practical reasons.

 

[Skippy_14]

Yeah heaps better than last year I think. Hey, my 700th post how mega way cool! Woohoo I get to go to training soon and see players training 'cos that's what they'll be doing! This year's picks are gonna be really exciting to watch next year and see what happens! Which of the 5 we drafted do you guys think might get an opportunity next year?

 

[macca23]

My take on the draft is that on paper (as it is with all draft selections at this stage) we've done exceptionally well. Much better than I thought we would.

I think the AFC deserve a pat on the back at this stage, given that there was a stated direction to look for ruckmen before the draft, and they stuck to their philosphy.

The things they should get the thumbs up for are:

- Picking the best players available, irrespective of where they come from.

- Nabbing 2 of the best 3 ruckmen available in the draft.

- totally deluding everyone as to who they were going to select with a masterly display of misinformation. They never selected one of the players they publicly discussed.

- using pick 56 to get a talented young lad after saying that they wouldn't use it.

- choosing a good blend of players to address needs in all areas. 2 ruckmen, 2 midfielders and 1 KPP.

As I said at the start, like every club at this stage, it's only on paper, but I'm delighted with the overall strategy and selection process this year.

Well done AFC.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Yes very happy with the entire group we picked up, taking into consideration our draft picks.
We have secured height, Grunt, some midfield potential, and given ourselves the opportunity to set-up the spine of the side extremely well ehen you add McGregor, Watts, Krueger, Rutten...

Well done to the Adelaide recruiting staff - TWT whether this potential will materialise or vapourise

 

[Stiffy_18]

As you said macca, its all on paper now but like you I am extremely happy with what we got. To get 2 of the top 4 ruckman in the strong draft for ruckman was a huge get. We also got a very atheltic KPP who loves to crash and bang and is already well developed as far as body is concerned (195 cm / 93 kg)

Picked up a couple of midfielders and the thing I am pleased about is that both of those midfields are nice size. Both are around 183-185 cm mark. James Fantasia said we had Knights ranked in out top 20 (@19) and we have done a lot of homework on him.

Meesen and Gibson add a lot of grunt and physicality to the side. Now were are well and truly stocked up on talls and its easier to find good midfielders than good talls. With the injection of talls I would say that careers of Mark Stevens, Nathan Bock, Scott Stevens, Matthew Smith and even Ian Perrie are in question. Certainly puts a lot of pressure on those lads to perform

Good to see that we have gone with the strength of the draft and used 3 of our 5 picks on talls and all @ 195 cm or over. Intersting that all 3 talls don't need to add as much bulk as some others going around

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

My take on the draft is that on paper (as it is with all draft selections at this stage) we've done exceptionally well. Much better than I thought we would.

I think the AFC deserve a pat on the back at this stage, given that there was a stated direction to look for ruckmen before the draft, and they stuck to their philosphy.

The things they should get the thumbs up for are:

- Picking the best players available, irrespective of where they come from.

- Nabbing 2 of the best 3 ruckmen available in the draft.

- totally deluding everyone as to who they were going to select with a masterly display of misinformation. They never selected one of the players they publicly discussed.

- using pick 56 to get a talented young lad after saying that they wouldn't use it.

- choosing a good blend of players to address needs in all areas. 2 ruckmen, 2 midfielders and 1 KPP.

As I said at the start, like every club at this stage, it's only on paper, but I'm delighted with the overall strategy and selection process this year.

Well done AFC.

Yes, for the reasons stated by Macca.

 

[Crow-mosone]

not having the patience to read through all the posts i'm not sure if i'm happy with picking up the amount of ruckman (3 right although one is possibly a tall forward) and 1 midfieder with another HBF/Winger - but then again i could be wrong (if i can read all the notes)

look at essendon in 1996 they drafted the same player 3 times, and it did them very well.

 

[Crow-mosone]

Meesen and Gibson add a lot of grunt and physicality to the side. Now were are well and truly stocked up on talls and its easier to find good midfielders than good talls. With the injection of talls I would say that careers of Mark Stevens, Nathan Bock, Scott Stevens, Matthew Smith and even Ian Perrie are in question. Certainly puts a lot of pressure on those lads to perform

bit premature, though I see where you are coming from.

 

[Lefty]

My take on the draft is that on paper (as it is with all draft selections at this stage) we've done exceptionally well. Much better than I thought we would.

I think the AFC deserve a pat on the back at this stage, given that there was a stated direction to look for ruckmen before the draft, and they stuck to their philosphy.

The things they should get the thumbs up for are:

- Picking the best players available, irrespective of where they come from.

- Nabbing 2 of the best 3 ruckmen available in the draft.

- totally deluding everyone as to who they were going to select with a masterly display of misinformation. They never selected one of the players they publicly discussed.

- using pick 56 to get a talented young lad after saying that they wouldn't use it.

- choosing a good blend of players to address needs in all areas. 2 ruckmen, 2 midfielders and 1 KPP.

As I said at the start, like every club at this stage, it's only on paper, but I'm delighted with the overall strategy and selection process this year.

Well done AFC.

Well said mate.

I am extremely happy especially as I would have gone for Meesen at pick #8 as I have said before in numerous posts.

 

[maccas_no1]

Yeah I pretty happy with our picks

Stiffy you would have been like a 5yr old on xmas morning today mate

 

[tinman]

I would say that careers of Mark Stevens, Nathan Bock, Scott Stevens, Matthew Smith and even Ian Perrie are in question. Certainly puts a lot of pressure on those lads to perform

Very happy.

I would think that the careers of Stevens, Stevens & Smith were in question anyway, no matter who we drafted.

Bock perhaps a little less so as he is still relatively young. Perrie you just don't know, he was good when brought back last year, and if overtaken by a Watts or Krueger for example, may still be worth having in the squad.

 

[jo172]

Should of got 1 of Eckermann/Redden/Pearce with Pick 40 or 56. But part from that V. Happy.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Should of got 1 of Eckermann/Redden/Pearce with Pick 40 or 56. But part from that V. Happy.

This is very interesting.

I think there is a lot of hype about Eckermann and its mainly generated by these boards and footydraft.com. I can understand how they would have him so highly because he had outstanding championships but apart from those 3 games he hasn't done a hell of a lot.

I see it this way. Pearce and Eckermann are both similar types. Both have pace to burn, both break the lines and carry the ball and both have good disposals. So many similarities yet Pearce was prediced going late while Eckermann was apparently a 1st rounder. With so many similarities why is it that Pearce made the Sturt side and Eckermann hasn't?????

Also interesting that Burgan had Eckermann @ 40 and he has more insight into clubs thinking than the rest of us. If he was rated THAT highly by the clubs surely Port would have snapped him up with pick 34 or 35 instead of that kid taken @ 34.

I think Eckermann has had much hype about him on these boards and thats based on only 3 games at the Nationals. Well before the draft I have said that to me DeLuca is very over-rated and that he wasn't going to go top 10 as a lot of them predicted. I thought he would be a slider because looking at his stats from TAC Cup, they are far from impressive. Now I think he could very well develop into a top line ruckman but based on his junior career up to date I didn't think he was worth a top 10 pick.

I would take Maric @ 40 over either of those players simply because Maric is a ruckman who has a lot of development in front of him and alredy has been showing some very good signs.

I would have been happy if we picked up one of those @ 56 but James obviously rated Knights higher than Redden and Pearce and considering the record he has with late picks I am sure that he wouldn't have used pick 56 unless he really rated the kid and considered him a steal.

 

[Stiffy_18]

bit premature, though I see where you are coming from.

No doubt its very premature but I think those lads I mentioned would think, hang on we have some good young talls on the list who have shown quite a bit this year yet we are picking up more talls. They would probably think to themselves its time to pull the finger out and secure my place on this list.

When we picked up Maric the first person I thought of was Andrews. If I was Rowan that would ring alarm bells to me and I would want to bust my guts and have a good year to force them to promote me to senior list next year.

I think this injection of talls puts a bit of heat on other iffy/young talls on our list to start performing or maybe just maybe one or more of these lads will overtake them in the pecking order.

 

[- PC -]

This is very interesting.

I think there is a lot of hype about Eckermann and its mainly generated by these boards and footydraft.com. I can understand how they would have him so highly because he had outstanding championships but apart from those 3 games he hasn't done a hell of a lot.

I see it this way. Pearce and Eckermann are both similar types. Both have pace to burn, both break the lines and carry the ball and both have good disposals. So many similarities yet Pearce was prediced going late while Eckermann was apparently a 1st rounder. With so many similarities why is it that Pearce made the Sturt side and Eckermann hasn't?????

Also interesting that Burgan had Eckermann @ 40 and he has more insight into clubs thinking than the rest of us. If he was rated THAT highly by the clubs surely Port would have snapped him up with pick 34 or 35 instead of that kid taken @ 34.

I think Eckermann has had much hype about him on these boards and thats based on only 3 games at the Nationals. Well before the draft I have said that to me DeLuca is very over-rated and that he wasn't going to go top 10 as a lot of them predicted. I thought he would be a slider because looking at his stats from TAC Cup, they are far from impressive. Now I think he could very well develop into a top line ruckman but based on his junior career up to date I didn't think he was worth a top 10 pick.

I would take Maric @ 40 over either of those players simply because Maric is a ruckman who has a lot of development in front of him and alredy has been showing some very good signs.

I would have been happy if we picked up one of those @ 56 but James obviously rated Knights higher than Redden and Pearce and considering the record he has with late picks I am sure that he wouldn't have used pick 56 unless he really rated the kid and considered him a steal.

IMO Stiffy a lot of recruiters base a lot on the old adage ''how does he perform in big games?'' And thats why I am guessing a lot of people rated him higher. Just my opinion.

As to the draft I am happy as to how they went about it not who they picked..if that makes sense.. as posted ages ago by a few of us..with such an even draft you can at 56 have a gem so you take him..AFC did

I like how they concentrated on 2 ruckmen as well ..I have said you can shake a tree and a midfielder falls out but good quality ruckmen dont come along early.

Until they play 50 games then the jury has to be out on the players chosen IMO

 

[Stiffy_18]

IMO Stiffy a lot of recruiters base a lot on the old adage ''how does he perform in big games?'' And thats why I am guessing a lot of people rated him higher. Just my opinion.

As to the draft I am happy as to how they went about it not who they picked..if that makes sense.. as posted ages ago by a few of us..with such an even draft you can at 56 have a gem so you take him..AFC did

I like how they concentrated on 2 ruckmen as well ..I have said you can shake a tree and a midfielder falls out but good quality ruckmen dont come along early.

Until they play 50 games then the jury has to be out on the players chosen IMO

I take your point when you say that big games count but up until then and after that he hasn't been as impressive as he was in the Nationals.

Even a few Sturt people said they were surprised that he did that well. There is still a good chance he will turn into a very good player but I am always a bit sceptical when people start pumping up someone's tyres after watching 3 games in which this lad played well.

I couldn't agree more with your ruck comment. This is beyond my wildest dreams. We picked up 2 quality ruck prospects and even more pleasing is the fact that they are different types of ruckman. Meesen is more your tough, crash and bang style ruckman while Maric is more of a leaping ruckman. A nice mix and if they both develop it would give us a fair bit of flexibility.

 

[Thunderstruck]

Well first and foremost, todays draft just blew me away really. Some picks were staggering and the ones that missed out even more staggering.

But for us...well godamn happy, bloody happy.


Meesen - Cant believe he was there. Better than Wood in the sense he works around the ground a lot more. Never thought we would get him. Big bloke, mature, gets the taps, gets marks, goals, the lot. Just has that 'look' about him that he will be a top line AFL ruckman.

Gibson - STRONG kid, well built and only going to get bigger, has a very big leap and strong hands. Bit of a plodder and very raw, with questionable foot skills but the rigours and depth of AFL pre-season will bring him up to scratch nice and quick. Think of Watts and Gibson in the forward line for the next 10 years. two agressive, crash and bash forwards, something we have been missing since Mods...and they are a lot bigger than him. Exciting.

Van Berlo - I had a feeling we might pick him, very clever player. Knows what to do and is super cool. Agile, sharp, fit, havent seen a lot of him but I reckon he will develop quickly.

Maric - God another TALL!! Talk about lucky, he would have beena good one to pick with our 2nd or 3rd pick, but for him to still be there with our 2nd last one, geez!! No need to worry about talls any more! Strong player, havent seen much of him but have heard good things.

Knights - I know he wins the ball well but thats it. Good size already 184cm 81kg which is great. Hopefully he can dominate the SANFL and push some of our more lazy players in Ladhams for selection.

All up Id give our recruiters a 9/10 maybe even a 10/10 for what they have done....as Stiffy said we went with the strength of the draft. Next years may be a good midfield draft, we dont know.

Bit piffed at missing Monfries, really wanted him but cannot complain.

 

[jo172]

.

. I can understand how they would have him so highly because he had outstanding championships but apart from those 3 games he hasn't done a hell of a lot.

why is it that Pearce made the Sturt side and Eckermann hasn't?????

This could just be one of those rumours you pick up on the playground but didn't Eckermann win the U17's best and fairest? I understand that that is at a lower level than reserves/league but that's still pretty good for a kid who played 8 or so games in the reserves.

Sturt selected Pearce and not Eckermann because they have enough quality midfielders but thought the role of a small forward was suited to Pearce.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Sturt selected Pearce and not Eckermann because they have enough quality midfielders but thought the role of a small forward was suited to Pearce.

But why play him on the wing then??????

 

[jo172]

Alright we're steering off point. Would you draft Pearce in rookie or PSD should Stevens god forbid not be ready. Why couldn't Ladhams or Shirley have dodgy knees instead

 

[Stiffy_18]

Alright we're steering off point. Would you draft Pearce in rookie or PSD should Stevens god forbid not be ready. Why couldn't Ladhams or Shirley have dodgy knees instead

Yes I would draft Pearce and Grundy and Fisher

Would probably go with Fisher or Grundy in the PSD.

 

[Nige_Bix]

Being the conservative type, I am going to wait and see, so I'm a not sure.

I was surprised we went for three talls that are ruck/forward types - seeing we took 3 talls last draft too. and perhaps didnt look at a defender, in fact I don't remember much talk about defenders. Should we have looked at one. I notice some have said we maybe are one midfielder type short.

However, as was mentioned we have some talls already whose careers are in question.