Opinion Hinesight, Knightsight and Hindsight Nov 2012

Remove this Banner Ad

Sep 22, 2010
19,533
19,542
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
Just a little bit of fun and something to bring down the track to see who got things right.
Will also throw some rookie selections in when the rookie draft and preseason draft comes around.


Hinesight: (Where Derek Hine and Collingwood have selected players in this years draft)
18: Brodie Grundy (Comments under Knightsight)
19: Ben Kennedy (Will be a good selection and while I rated others more highly I see him as someone who almost certainly will play games in season one and could be a really nice rotation fwd/mid who perhaps can take Dayne Beams' old post as that weapon forward flanker long term. Still a good selection)
20: Tim Broomhead (Probably a few I would have selected before him but a player with some ability. Was always going to go top 30 but really interesting that we took him and made it a SA trio first round to add to our very small South Australian group which consisted before tonight of only Didak. Really nice user of the footy and we'll probably look at him as that potential next egneration Didak replacement as that playmaking forward and high half forward)
38: Jackson Ramsay (A surprise selection, I'm probably one of the few on bigfooty who rated him inside their top 40. Like with Broomhead there are others I rated more highly but Ramsay is not a terrible get here and with his pace off a back flank or wing could be someone who with some luck finds a role. Impressive pre-injury form this year in the WA colts)
--
13: Kyle Martin (A good get and really pleasing Essendon overlooked him! The pick of our rookies and one I had very high on my shortlist. Will give our VFL midfield a big boost and is a strong chance to get promoted. For mine the better of the state league midfielders to get selected this year and can step into the senior team if needed)
27: Sam Dwyer (Another really good get and very pleased that we added him. Can play if required and like Martin gives our VFL side a big boost through the midfield. Well in that mix for promotion with his talent. Excellent user of the footy by foot and finds those forwards like few others adding much needed skill to a midfield probably needing some better ball users by foot)
35: Adam Oxley (Back flanker who is a good height and can play a variety of sizes. Despite his age possibly not as advanced as you'd think but he'll certainly add some much needed rebound to the back half at VFL level. I liked his play for QLD in the u18s but there were some other backmen I liked more and feel can have a more immediate impact)
41: Jack Frost (Athletic key defender. Has talent and stiff not to get rookied in years past but not sure he is a need with so many quality key defence options and more than enough key defence depth)
47: Ben Hudson (Strong option as cover for Jolly if required come finals time but a mentor to Witts and Grundy first until required)
49: Peter Yagmoor (A good move delisting him and moving him to the rookie list. Was struggling with the pace of VFL football so probably wasn't going to be much use to us in the immediate on the senior list so better off giving the other rookies that greater opportunity to receive promotion and senior opportunities)


Knightsight (where I would select each player given who was available at each point):
18: Brodie Grundy (Best ruckman in the draft and solves our immediate and long term ruck problems. A no brainer and one clubs will in future seasons rue passing on. Clear top 5 talent this year and the bargain of the draft at this point)
19: Tom Clurey (For mine the best key defender in the draft. Has a really complete game with elite endurance, elite skillset, as well as a solid 1v1 game. Not a need but rated him a top 10 selection)
20: Nathan Hrovat (I consider him a touch better than Kennedy despite not having the same attractive weapons but Hrovat would have been my selection instead as that small. Best performed player in all of the u18s and dominated in all levels of play from APS, TAC and U18 national level. Immediate player and has an elite inside game and has outperformed all competition consistently and I see big success ahead of him at the next level. I would have happily taken him with any selection after 10 and another I see real value in at this point)
38: Dayle Garlett (Predraft there was strong word that Garlett would be looked at by West Coast at 45 and in understanding that he would likely be available at this selection he would have been my selection here. Additionally I rated Garlett below Clurey and Hrovat anyway after understanding in more detail his off-field issues. Top 5 talent if you take away his issues and is one I'd trust the club with a strong culture to turn around with plenty of players on other AFL teams worse)
-- (note having taken Garlett already I can't take him again in the rookie draft)
13: Jason Pongracic (A surprise to get him here but very pleasing he got through as the highest player remaining on my list not named Garlett. Ultimately overlooked completely having struggled this season with injury and being restricted to mostly playing as a forward. Strong chance to get drafted next year if he comes back and persists and one of those guys where with a full preseason he has the ability to be something. Footskills damaging, has nice marking ability and that strong body and ability to win his own ball. Lacking a yard of pace but as that next generation inside midfielder is what I'd be looking for with those other mids more finesse types. Hard call overlooking Kyle Martin as I rate him very highly, Martin will have the more immediate impact being that proven VFL performer this season but with Ball and Swan still with more years to play and another mature midfielder in mind later and no guarantees Pongracic would be available at that next selection I would have taken him here)
27: Tom Langdon (Langdon I rate highly and feel is another who was exceptionally stiff not to be drafted. Langdon really exploded in the second half of the season coming from obscurity and become one of the best players on his team. Langdon is a tall back flanker who is essentially much the same thing as Oxley though I rate him slightly higher and see more upside in his game. Langdon also has nice footskills and a solid shutdown game but also can step into the midfield and win his own footy and clear the ball from congestion which he demonstrated during the TAC finals series which really impressed me. Another guy where if he keeps working at it and improves his game as he did this year and very much find himself on a list and not just win a list position but also find a role on a team)
35: Sam Heavyside (Small midfielder and very light in stature but has a rare midfield game. In the end went undrafted because he broke his foot and missed a large portion of the season but he showed more than enough to suggest he should be drafted. What makes him stand out is despite his relative lack of height and light body he doesn't get knocked off the ball and has that rare natural inside ability and is a dominant clearance player. In mind my his game very much can translate at the next level because it's not predicated on size but rather rare inside ability. He's another where I really hope he comes back and gives it another shot because he is very much capable of making it onto an AFL list and succeeding in an AFL environment)
41: Ben Duscher (With Kyle Martin most likely not available at this stage, I can only speculate anyway I'm more than happy to take Ben Dushcer here who I rated a fraction more highly anyway and with Pongracic as a strong bodied midfielder earlier and Heavyside as another natural inside type I though I'd go with the best state league midfielder who has the ability to play either inside or outside to a high level but also has excellent footskills. Duscher went undrafted having struggled with injury but I'm very confident he has the ability to make the transition and if he can put together a full year next year I don't see why he can't get onto an AFL list being that class above)
47: Josh Toy (Can't help it but the guy is too talented and such a perfect fit for our back half as that elite kicking defender that I just can't not select him regardless of what other clubs think. Gold Coast offered him a year contract and all along said that he would be fine to continue playing but he moved back to Victoria by choice, so without knowing exactly how bad his heart issues are I'd back him in on a rookie contract and give him that year to show what he can do)
49: Ben Hudson (As described before but very much a necessary player to have not only as a coach but on our list. Witts and Grundy both are yet to debut so having a proven performer who even last year was still a productive player at AFL level I'm also very happy to take him)
*Note: Yagmoor unless the salary cap absolutely meant we had no other options I would not have redrafted although obvious this was the clubs plan. I just have my doubts he can improve enough to ever be best 22 relevant and salary cap permitting would have looked explored my alternatives first.
Liam Jurrah I also would have taken but having expressed that he wants to stay in SA he was never a possible selection.
Had I know Garlett would be available in the rookie draft I would have reserved him for our final rookie selection knowing he would slide through.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hindsight (time will tell and to be edited in some years down the track):
18: Brodie Grundy
19: (Lachie Hunter F/S bid) - assuming bid matched: Tim Membrey but if not Hunter would have been incredible
20: Dane Rampe
38: Zac Williams
--rookie draft--
13: Jake Lloyd
27: Ben Brown (drafted 2013)
35: Charlie Cameron (drafted 2013)
47: Tim Kelly (2017 draft)
49: Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti (2015 draft)
*With apologies to Tom Stewart (2016 draft) who was playing local football and probably not nominating at this age.

*Summary: In Hindsight I would have loved to have known I could have added Garlett later as Membrey who I rated at 23 on my draft board would have been great at 38 but I wasn't privy to that inside information to know. With as of Jan 2021 Clurey still in the competition and having picked Langdon a year earlier than Collingwood I find myself favouring my own draft.
 
Last edited:
Knightmare, i am a massive fan of the work you put into the draft period. Kudos to you. Time to have a rest champ.

However, i am stoked with.our draft. Grundy and Kennedy were the keys Not completely sold on broomhead but time will tell.

I really like ramsey and this will be our Hine special.of this draft

Just my opinion and thanks again knightmare for your work over the draft period. I, for one, really appreciated it.
 
In Hinesight, the decision to delist Ceglar appears to be a very good move by the club (Wood was always going to go) given Grundy has far more upside.

The only thing that stopped Geelong from drafting Grundy is that they already had 5 ruckman on their list. It could of been the same situation at Collingwood if we kept Ceglar.

The only thing I would of done different is drafted Tim O'Brien ahead of Broomhead and would of father son James Stewart as a 3rd round pick.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Well done Knight great work this year! Your knowledge of the later picks in the draft is invaluable.

One I really liked was Jackson Ramsay. So I am pleased we got him. As he got injured during the year his profile really dropped off as there wasn't the quantity of info around that there was on others. However, what he did do was impressive and obviously did enough for Hine to like. He may well be another Hine special like Jamie Elliot. He was another that had limited exposure, however Hine didn't let that effect his ratings.

The only regret I have at this stage of the draft (and I hope that changes) is letting Hrovat through. I was very set on getting one of Lonergan or Hrovat. I think Hrovat is going to be a very good player & leader. A lot was made about height and taking Kennedy & Hrovat was too many shorts. I actually think its more about pace, Kennedy & Broomhead are quick and damaging by foot and this is perhaps why they were ranked ahead. None the less I see Hrovat being an onfield general type like Sam Mitchell and so would have still had him before Broomhead.

It will be interesting to see how O'Brien & Stewart turn out, two we had links to. Clurey is another interesting one, however I don't think he was really a list requirement.
 
The quest for better foot delivery continues, Bux made it clear from the word go that we need to lift our delivery. Looking good so far, really aggressive trading that has put us in a much better position with quality depth.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #7
Knightmare, i am a massive fan of the work you put into the draft period. Kudos to you. Time to have a rest champ.

However, i am stoked with.our draft. Grundy and Kennedy were the keys Not completely sold on broomhead but time will tell.

I really like ramsey and this will be our Hine special.of this draft

Just my opinion and thanks again knightmare for your work over the draft period. I, for one, really appreciated it.

Thanks for the kind words Tbone. I think Kennedy will be a solid choice. I like him on a forward flank with that pace and penetrating kick. Not a super natural crumber close to goal and tackling game isn't Elliott good. Then not so keen on him as a midfielder either but I can see Kennedy occupying a similar forward flank role Beams played in his first couple of seasons and on that other forward flank to Fasolo could make a really damaging combo.

Ramsay is something similar to Luke Rounds. Probably not what people want to hear but has similar pace off a back flank and can play the same role to a similar standard. Not a guy who is necessarily guaranteed to make the grade but the opportunity is there with a role potentially available to him off a back flank.

In Hinesight, the decision to delist Ceglar appears to be a very good move by the club (Wood was always going to go) given Grundy has far more upside.

The only thing that stopped Geelong from drafting Grundy is that they already had 5 ruckman on their list. It could of been the same situation at Collingwood if we kept Ceglar.

The only thing I would of done different is drafted Tim O'Brien ahead of Broomhead and would of father son James Stewart as a 3rd round pick.

You are spot on with the Ceglar decision. Absolutely not needed now and perhaps the club saw the potential for Grundy before the rest of us. Or at least we can only speculate. In any case really well done by the club to identify the Grundy opportunity and capitalise on it with pick 18. He is the best ruckman drafted since Naitanui so it's an exciting selection.

O'Brien is interesting and he was heavily linked to us by really all media sources - with all suggesting that we would absolutely take a key forward so it was interesting that we passed. I can only guess we felt Spencer White would be available at 38. I'm not a huge O'Brien fan anyway and see him as a more athletic Jack Anthony without the attitude but also without that same agro. He feels more like a depth guy who can play if/when required after some years in the system but I'm not buying him as a franchise forward - and KPPs are all about max quality as opposed to having a bucketload of them just to fill out the list so I don't necessarily mind that we passed.

Well done Knight great work this year! Your knowledge of the later picks in the draft is invaluable.

One I really liked was Jackson Ramsay. So I am pleased we got him. As he got injured during the year his profile really dropped off as there wasn't the quantity of info around that there was on others. However, what he did do was impressive and obviously did enough for Hine to like. He may well be another Hine special like Jamie Elliot. He was another that had limited exposure, however Hine didn't let that effect his ratings.

The only regret I have at this stage of the draft (and I hope that changes) is letting Hrovat through. I was very set on getting one of Lonergan or Hrovat. I think Hrovat is going to be a very good player & leader. A lot was made about height and taking Kennedy & Hrovat was too many shorts. I actually think its more about pace, Kennedy & Broomhead are quick and damaging by foot and this is perhaps why they were ranked ahead. None the less I see Hrovat being an onfield general type like Sam Mitchell and so would have still had him before Broomhead.

It will be interesting to see how O'Brien & Stewart turn out, two we had links to. Clurey is another interesting one, however I don't think he was really a list requirement.

I'm not sure Ramsay will find a role as quickly/immediately as Elliott and I don't necessarily think he was say in our top 20 as Elliott clearly was but I think he could well have been rated by the club as being somewhere in the 20s perhaps as someone who might be able to find a role and more a guy who potentially has the opportunity to give us options with the club identifying him as someone who might add versatility to the team.

Hrovat I'm a big fan of also. The club by passing on him and I get the sense we weren't certain who in the midfield he would break past as he is more that pure, Sam Mitchell variety inside midfielder as opposed to the combo fwd/mid Kennedy is. Hrovat for the WBD could also have similar difficulties finding a role with - Boyd, Cross, Wallis, Liberatore, Stevens, Macrae, Stringer and Dahlhaus all to break past to become a full time midfielder. I really would have liked for a team without so many quality young midfielders draft him and it could even hurt his chances for a regular position as opposed to if a North Melbourne/Geelong/Fremantle might have drafted him.

Surprised we didn't take O'Brien.

Seeing Hawthorn take him makes me think we made a mistake there.

Hawthorn aren't the strongest drafters, really lacking that consistency traditionally and tend to do better through trade if anything. They had no forward depth with only Franklin, Roughead more a no.2 ruckman now, Hale who is no.1 ruckman and Gunston more of a 3rd tall so it might end up a good move. O'Brien could find a role perhaps at CHF due to not having that much forward depth but he won't be an immediate star I wouldn't think. Having those quality key forwards to learn off won't do him any harm so he does have the chance to make it and probably a good fit for Hawthorn's situation.

The quest for better foot delivery continues, Bux made it clear from the word go that we need to lift our delivery. Looking good so far, really aggressive trading that has put us in a much better position with quality depth.

It certainly seems both footskills and pace was the theme this year and probably not a bad move with both being relative areas of weakness last season as demonstrated by the way Hawthorn more specifically moved the ball so much quicker and more easily by foot and then the Sydney's with their outside runners with Jetta doing damage and Gary Rohan isn't even back yet. Probably not a bad theme to take this year really and the list is looking as balanced as it probably ever has with these draft day additions this year.
 
A very important aspect to recruiting in the business world is assessing how a candidate would fit into company culture. Companies will usually recruit a competent candidate who will fit well into the company culture ahead of a hyper-inteligent nong.

I'd imagine it's the same at footy clubs.

Cultural compatibility is something that can't be objectively measured. It's difficult for us fans to get a handle of the exact culture within Collingwood. Swanny may be a "likes horse riding and romantic walks along the beach" kind of a guy for all we know. And it's even more difficult to get a handle on the personality of each of the draftees. And it's impossible for us to get a handle on the compatibility between the club and each draftee.

So that's probably a very important selection criteria that we've got very little idea about.

Perhaps that's something that Hine has focused on here. Rather than simply selecting each of the objectively best draftees available at each position, he's gone for the collection of draftees that will, collectively, best slot into and perform at Collingwood.

I think he hinted at that in comments he's made about how, with Adelaide relinquishing their high picks, we were able to get a block of players.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #9
A very important aspect to recruiting in the business world is assessing how a candidate would fit into company culture. Companies will usually recruit a competent candidate who will fit well into the company culture ahead of a hyper-inteligent nong.

I'd imagine it's the same at footy clubs.

Cultural compatibility is something that can't be objectively measured. It's difficult for us fans to get a handle of the exact culture within Collingwood. Swanny may be a "likes horse riding and romantic walks along the beach" kind of a guy for all we know. And it's even more difficult to get a handle on the personality of each of the draftees. And it's impossible for us to get a handle on the compatibility between the club and each draftee.

So that's probably a very important selection criteria that we've got very little idea about.

Perhaps that's something that Hine has focused on here. Rather than simply selecting each of the objectively best draftees available at each position, he's gone for the draftees that will, collectively, best slot into and perform at Collingwood.

You could be right. They all address needs in their own way but also fit the personality profiling. While Grundy/Kennedy might not have necessarily interviewed with all clubs great they seem to be winners. Grundy talking premiership already is very impressive and what you want to hear.

These are guys who will buy in and perhaps we weren't convinced Garlett would do the same.

With Buckley as coach he is clearly putting a premium on coachability and those real natural leaders and those who will put in the work and be no issue off the field. Just from his playing days as captain, particularly early he never had time for those who didn't put in the work and I expect as a coach while he has clearly watered down his tendencies from his early days he would still in a similar way respect those harder workers who have like him come from a humble beginning and really put in the work and will continue to do so.

And I expect Hine would have that in the back of his mind as a minor consideration in compiling his shortlist.
 
Knightmare, sincere thanks for your tireless and highly informative posts. Will prob. catch you again at rookie draft time. Might actually spend some time with my family for a change.

I was elated with the Grundy/Kennedy double and equally dispirited at missing on Lonergan. I had my heart set on him as that inside mid, tackling presence we lack. (Also, the way he purportedly reads the tap would have made him an excellent trio with Grundy/Kennedy). I'm still convinced we need something in that (hard-ball) department and will probably keep harping on it til we show we can win big games against quality opposition in the contested stakes. Lonergan would have rounded out the perfect draft for us and it hurt losing him at the pick we were almost able to fleece off Melbourne at one stage.

It seems Hrovat would have been a great get as well but obviously the height issue may have been a factor. Seems like our midfield rankings may have gone something like Grundy/Lonergan/Kennedy/Broomhead/Hrovat (?)

On the positive side, I like Broomhead's highlights. He seems very balanced and strong through the legs for such a light player. I like the way he stands up in the tackle and his disposal seems very accurate. Perhaps, in a few years we may be looking at this as a great selection.

When the dust settles I think it will be great to stress less about our ruck depth. A big win overall.

All the best mate.
 
Knightmare, sincere thanks for your tireless and highly informative posts. Will prob. catch you again at rookie draft time. Might actually spend some time with my family for a change.

I was elated with the Grundy/Kennedy double and equally dispirited at missing on Lonergan. I had my heart set on him as that inside mid, tackling presence we lack. (Also, the way he purportedly reads the tap would have made him an excellent trio with Grundy/Kennedy). I'm still convinced we need something in that (hard-ball) department and will probably keep harping on it til we show we can win big games against quality opposition in the contested stakes. Lonergan would have rounded out the perfect draft for us and it hurt losing him at the pick we were almost able to fleece off Melbourne at one stage.

It seems Hrovat would have been a great get as well but obviously the height issue may have been a factor. Seems like our midfield rankings may have gone something like Grundy/Lonergan/Kennedy/Broomhead/Hrovat (?)

On the positive side, I like Broomhead's highlights. He seems very balanced and strong through the legs for such a light player. I like the way he stands up in the tackle and his disposal seems very accurate. Perhaps, in a few years we may be looking at this as a great selection.

When the dust settles I think it will be great to stress less about our ruck depth. A big win overall.

All the best mate.

Knowing the top 11 with the rest open to interpretation I expect we were looking at from those non top 11s:
Grundy (top 3, maybe top 2)
Kennedy (top 10)
Lonergan (top 10)
Simpson (top 10)
Garner (top 15)
Broomhead (top 15)
Hrovat (top 20)
*Ramsay was probably rated around 20.

Stringer probably would have been top 10 with Vlastuin top 15 on our list. All guess work but probably somewhere around the mark at an educated guess.


The Grundy selection is the single biggest win of this draft. We've got a guy who we probably would have taken at 2 or 3 if we had a selection that high. When you get that a guy who's that good and fills your most major list need. It's a pretty special draft.
 
Was interested to read that Broomhead stated on our website article that 15 clubs had spoken to him prior to the draft. Whether those talks just represented a cursory chat or more serious interest is unknown but might be the reason he was taken earlier than expected
 
Grundy went at about the right spot: I don't consider him a slider at all. He was a monster in the junior comp, and could physically dominate his opponents. He'll need to be a lot bigger and stronger to do that in the big time, and, in the meantime, his skill level will have to increase. All this is possible, but he's not near as ready to play as some of the preferred midfielders, and that's why he lasted till No. 18. If Collingwood had good ruck depth, he would have lasted even longer.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I mentioned earlier in this thread that i wasn't sold on broomhead
I am coming round. I think i just rated obrien and hrvoat higher. However it seems we didn't want 2 talls or 2 smalls. Hence grundy and Kennedy are better than obrien and hrvoat. Interesting that i read this. morning that adelaide would have taken obrien at 20. i think they now regret voluntarily giving up their picks.
 
Just managed to watch the draft and you could see Hine marking off players on his list, Grundy appeared to be right up the top of his list around 3, Kennedy looked to be about 9 and Broomhead was at around 12.
 
A very important aspect to recruiting in the business world is assessing how a candidate would fit into company culture. Companies will usually recruit a competent candidate who will fit well into the company culture ahead of a hyper-inteligent nong.

I'd imagine it's the same at footy clubs.

Cultural compatibility is something that can't be objectively measured. It's difficult for us fans to get a handle of the exact culture within Collingwood. Swanny may be a "likes horse riding and romantic walks along the beach" kind of a guy for all we know. And it's even more difficult to get a handle on the personality of each of the draftees. And it's impossible for us to get a handle on the compatibility between the club and each draftee.

So that's probably a very important selection criteria that we've got very little idea about.


I dont disagree with you, but it is interesting to note that that the club, or Hine specifically (not sure) most recently spoke with Grundy in January. They therefore dont appear to have spent a lot of (recent) time trying to get to know him. Maybe a chat in January was enough. Recruiting is a mystery to me anyway, so I really have no idea.
 
Just managed to watch the draft and you could see Hine marking off players on his list, Grundy appeared to be right up the top of his list around 3, Kennedy looked to be about 9 and Broomhead was at around 12.
I'm trying to figure out how you could tell? I realise you are watching him tick them off but since we had three picks in a row I don't see how players being ticked off gave you different results for all three? Or were you trying to look to see which part of the page he was reading from and the ticking players off didn't have much to do with it?
 
I'm trying to figure out how you could tell? I realise you are watching him tick them off but since we had three picks in a row I don't see how players being ticked off gave you different results for all three? Or were you trying to look to see which part of the page he was reading from and the ticking players off didn't have much to do with it?

He had a list of what looked like about 20-30 players, and he was running a highlighter through names as called out, and most of the top half of the page had been highlighted which would tie in to the fact a number of the top prospects had gone by our pick.

Of course I'm guessing that the list was in descending order, it could be something else.
 
The thing i noticed was the pause before broomhead. It looked ti me Hine was going to go with someone else and the guy next to him (rendall?) and Hine seemed to change opinions. If people watch it again, let me know if you agree.
 
He had a list of what looked like about 20-30 players, and he was running a highlighter through names as called out, and most of the top half of the page had been highlighted which would tie in to the fact a number of the top prospects had gone by our pick.

Of course I'm guessing that the list was in descending order, it could be something else.
Oh yeah, cheers. Any idea where he had Ramsay?
 
The thing i noticed was the pause before broomhead. It looked ti me Hine was going to go with someone else and the guy next to him (rendall?) and Hine seemed to change opinions. If people watch it again, let me know if you agree.
Maybe he had Mr McBean next in line but he would have been a pointless pick by that stage. Could have been a number of reasons, mostly revolving around who we'd already taken I guess.
 
I mentioned earlier in this thread that i wasn't sold on broomhead
I am coming round. I think i just rated obrien and hrvoat higher. However it seems we didn't want 2 talls or 2 smalls. Hence grundy and Kennedy are better than obrien and hrvoat. Interesting that i read this. morning that adelaide would have taken obrien at 20. i think they now regret voluntarily giving up their picks.

I expect with Grundy and Richmond added and likely to play mostly forward next year, then you add Paine and Gault who can also play some key forward and we're in a good position with enough depth.

Adelaide always were going to take O'Brien at 20 and really those two weeks before the draft they werre always linked heavily to him.

I think Adelaide are happy with the result. If found guilty over the Tippett saga (likely) it might mean they only miss one more draft instead of two drafts (think Carlton some years back) because they gave up those selections. They also added some reasonable players late and with Brad Crouch coming into the team next year it's like they haven't give up a thing. I think they've really done the smart thing considering.

Adelaide still have the ability to take a Justin Hardy in the rookie draft as some immdiate KPP help so they'll be fine.
 
Surprised we didn't take O'Brien.

Seeing Hawthorn take him makes me think we made a mistake there.

Grundy and Kennedy just had to be taken- especially as clubs before us had them on their radar.

O'Brien may have been taken at 20 but rumour is that Wells from Geelong strongly considered Broomhead, Matt Rendell rated him very highly too and James Hird said the Bombers pretty much got every player they targetted except one- Tim Broomhead so he was very much in demand and on other teams' radar, hence why Hine didn't risk rolling the dice on him and claimed him at 20. SEN were also of the opinion before the draft that he was a top 20 selection.

Time will tell but we simply nailed our selections at this point.
 
Grundy and Kennedy just had to be taken- especially as clubs before us had them on their radar.

O'Brien may have been taken at 20 but rumour is that Wells from Geelong strongly considered Broomhead, Matt Rendell rated him very highly too and James Hird said the Bombers pretty much got every player they targetted except one- Tim Broomhead so he was very much in demand and on other teams' radar, hence why Hine didn't risk rolling the dice on him and claimed him at 20. SEN were also of the opinion before the draft that he was a top 20 selection.

Time will tell but we simply nailed our selections at this point.

Interesting to hear re Broomhead. One I had in my top 50 really until the week of the draft but dropping him down just outside of my top 50 to make way for some stronger ballwinning types I liked slightly more. Particularly interesting that Wells liked Broomhead.

GWS and Port Adelaide also liked Broomhead inside the top 30 so he was never going to get though to that next choice.
 
Just managed to watch the draft and you could see Hine marking off players on his list, Grundy appeared to be right up the top of his list around 3, Kennedy looked to be about 9 and Broomhead was at around 12.
That's how I used to win Cluedo all the time.
Watching what the oppo is ticking off.;)
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top