how do we rate the draft over-all?

[baconb]

How do we feel... #1 was always a certainty to me...

I don't know enough about the other guys besides reading some stats and looking on you tube...
hope it pays off

 

[lopezz]

always gonna be a decent draft when you get the no.1 pick

 

[Bluebear]

The question isn't how, but when.

Post this again in 2 years and we'll have some sort of answer.

 

[smithos]

Viewed as an offseason, I think it's pretty hard to be anything but extatic to gain the services of Judd, Hadley, Kruezer, Browne and Armfield. From just the national draft, it was hard to get excited given we already knew our first pick and our others were towards the arse end, but I had Browne earmarked as a personal fave for pick 20 prior to trade week, so to pull him out was a happy moment. Army will be also great because he's ready to go, there wont be any speculation.

Really, the only way we could take the gloss off this would be to pick up Guy Richards.

 

[The Real Deal]

I thought we may have been looking for more talls, especially defenders. Seem to have a lot of mid sized onballers now. Any thoughts?

 

[MBIB]

I thought we may have been looking for more talls, especially defenders. Seem to have a lot of mid sized onballers now. Any thoughts?

I agree Real Deal, I didn't know much about them (other than big Matt of course) but I was a bit surprised as well.

But they must have chosen for a reason - remember they said they were going for the best available, not necessarily the most needed.

Overall it seems we did well judging by the stats and write-ups

 

[blue gunslinger]

I am happy with it.I was thinking gee Cotchin looked good and man I wish we still had number 3.But then again we have Judd and Kreuzer looks like he will come up good.His interview on Fox sports was very impressive!I certainly think the expectations of the supporters are high.I hope we do not get ahead of ourselves but I am certainly looking for improvement remembering the kids still need time to develop

 

[The Real Deal]

I agree Real Deal, I didn't know much about them (other than big Matt of course) but I was a bit surprised as well.

But they must have chosen for a reason - remember they said they were going for the best available, not necessarily the most needed.

Overall it seems we did well judging by the stats and write-ups

I did happen to have a look at the footage of Browne and Armfield and they look like very good players, so we'll wait and see.

 

[hong_kong_bond]

Really, the only way we could take the gloss off this would be to pick up Guy Richards.

That name should never even be hinted at on these boards

 

[smithos]

I thought we may have been looking for more talls, especially defenders. Seem to have a lot of mid sized onballers now. Any thoughts?

At pick 36 and 46, the talent pool was so thin that the club has gone for players who have an excellent chance at playing senior football as opposed to a tall who has a very slim chance of playing senior football. A tall play that sits on your list and migrates between the bullant reserves and 1st's doesn't address a team's lack of KPP.

West Coast are a great example of taking players who have the best chance of playing senior football; someone like Hurn did not fit their requirements in 05' when what they really needed was a tall fwd, but Hurn now plays senior footy and the next best tall fwd from that year Cleve Hughes looks a touch shakey.

Less than perfect talls - Hugh Sandilands for example - are still available to be rookied.

 

[HBF]

Kreuzer was obvious as soon as we landed Judd, and he was the equal best player available along with Cotchin.

With 36 & 46, the club have gone for players with good work ethic, pace, good users of the ball by hand and foot, and that have come from good families.

On the day, I was happy with Browne, as I had seen him at the Champs, and was impressed. Knew nothing of Armfield, and only after watching him on CFCTV, and reading what people have said about him, that I am quite impressed with him as well.

Hard to give a rating out of 10 at this early stage. Ask me again in 12 months time.

 

[blues4flag]

Don't the point of such threads. Most haven't seen the players in action yet, apart from a two minutes highlight package. Will likely be at least a couple of years before we can form some sort of idea and longer still before we can say with any certainty.

 

[Amers]

Nearly a perfect draft/trade period for us IMO. Some great gets, 2 premiership players, Judd & Hadley, a freak 200cm midfielder - Kreuzer, and from all I can tell we could not have done better with our 2 later picks in Browne & Armfield.

My only gripe would be letting go of Kennedy and maybe giving WC more than we needed too overall.

9/10 for me, and we may still have a surprise waiting in the PSD for us!

Bring on 2008 !!!!

 

[Funkalicous]

I wanted Gourdis with our 2nd pick, but looks like the club went for best available. I like the look of Browne though. With the next pick after that? All the talent was gone. Most clubs at this point drafted from left-field....

 

[tubes]

i think we did ok.

ill agree with everyone and say that in 12 months time it will be easier to judge. but thats a given.

time will be the JUDDge.

 

[Blue Through and Through]

We traded early picks, and Kennedy to get the best midfielder and possibly best player in the competition. We selected the best player available, Kreuzer who will help address our ruck needs long term. So overall I think we did very well.

 

[Salaryman]

9 out of 10.....we got three junk yard dogs.....desperately needed.

Would have got a 10 if Greenwood had of fallen to 36, but not the fault of the RT.

XXXKings has been on a 5 day bender ruing those 4 picks between Greenwood and 36.

 

[btdg]

Pretty difficult to rate the draft itself at this point. Rating the overall trade period:

- Big marks for getting Judd in, obviously. Any time you get arguably the best player in the competition without giving up one of your top 5 players in return, you've done well
- Hadlee for nothing was a smart gamble with a weak draft coming up.
- Kreuzer at pick 1 is excusable even if Cotchin turns out to be a better player (and no others were on the radar). His draft camp video was extremely seductive - I may have a bit of a man-crush coming on there.
- I would have liked us to trade back into the 15-20 area. There were some great prospects available at that point, and not much afterwards. Could have got Rance, Maric, Selwood or Pears in that range, at of whom would have been good pickups. Perhaps should have thrown Hartlett, Russell, or even Scotland or Houlihan around for a pick in that range.
- The picks we took lower down have all the signs of 2 years and delisted type players. In a shallow draft, though, I think we did pretty well. Both are 'good ordinary' players who project to play specific positions in the AFL. We can test them in those positions, if they make it thats great, if not, turn them over in a future strong draft. Nice picks considering the alternatives

Overall, I'd give it an 8.5
Had we managed to retain pick 20, or thrown Hartlett or Russell out and managed to get Pears or Maric, I'd bump it up to a 10. But as is, not a bad crop. Judd, Kreuzer - and anything else is a bonus. Considering you probably need to get 3 good players in each draft, and we're guaranteed 2; we've got a 1 in 3 chance of this turning out to be a good draft for us. Thats not bad, really.

 

[Salaryman]

Pretty difficult to rate the draft itself at this point. Rating the overall trade period:

- Big marks for getting Judd in, obviously. Any time you get arguably the best player in the competition without giving up one of your top 5 players in return, you've done well
- Hadlee for nothing was a smart gamble with a weak draft coming up.
- Kreuzer at pick 1 is excusable even if Cotchin turns out to be a better player (and no others were on the radar). His draft camp video was extremely seductive - I may have a bit of a man-crush coming on there.
- I would have liked us to trade back into the 15-20 area. There were some great prospects available at that point, and not much afterwards. Could have got Rance, Maric, Selwood or Pears in that range, at of whom would have been good pickups. Perhaps should have thrown Hartlett, Russell, or even Scotland or Houlihan around for a pick in that range.
- The picks we took lower down have all the signs of 2 years and delisted type players. In a shallow draft, though, I think we did pretty well. Both are 'good ordinary' players who project to play specific positions in the AFL. We can test them in those positions, if they make it thats great, if not, turn them over in a future strong draft. Nice picks considering the alternatives

Overall, I'd give it an 8.5
Had we managed to retain pick 20, or thrown Hartlett or Russell out and managed to get Pears or Maric, I'd bump it up to a 10. But as is, not a bad crop. Judd, Kreuzer - and anything else is a bonus. Considering you probably need to get 3 good players in each draft, and we're guaranteed 2; we've got a 1 in 3 chance of this turning out to be a good draft for us. Thats not bad, really.

Not sure I agree here....they way it turned out (and was always going to) is that some clubs chose for needs (went tall) and some just went plain simple (e.g. Lobbe at #16, Hinkley #24 ), so we ended up with a player ranked in our top 20 at #36 anyway without having to give anything away. We also got a guy ranked in our top 30 at #46.....good times


Just saw your last point and vehemently disagree......of any picks taken beyond 30 I think Browne and Armfield have far more of a chance of a 10yr AFL career than any others..