Knightmare's 2010 Draft rankings

[The Bomb]

Knightmare

your opinion was you gave Collingwood B for Fasolo and Farmer Essendon B for Heppell and Steinberg that is real strange, lets think about this for 1 minute. I know on the pick they had

next you gave Adelaide Trade A Draft C+
Carlton Trade B+ Draft A

Carlton B+ but lost Jacobs

Jacobs Kicks 3.6 H/B 7 Marks 2.9 HO 20.2 Goals 0.2

Mumford Kicks 2.7 H/b 7.7 Marks 2 Ho 19.6 Goals 0.2

Kreuzer Kicks 5.1 H/B 7 Marks 2.9 Ho 14.6 Goals 0.6

You never valued Jacobs did you
so pretty much a Mumford / Kreuzer and Adelaide gained him
so Carlton lost out big time, sometimes u dont know what you have until it smacks you in the face which Carlton will find out against Adelaide.

Adelaide walk away with Smith Jacobs Tambling
Carlton walk away with Watson McCarthy Mitchell but lost Jacobs

Adelaide easily beat Carlton, Smith and Jacobs are huge inclusions
so everyone rates Carltons draft except me, Jacobs will be a very good player wait and see.

 

[Knightmare]

Knightmare

your opinion was you gave Collingwood B for Fasolo and Farmer Essendon B for Heppell and Steinberg that is real strange, lets think about this for 1 minute. I know on the pick they had

next you gave Adelaide Trade A Draft C+
Carlton Trade B+ Draft A

Carlton B+ but lost Jacobs

Jacobs Kicks 3.6 H/B 7 Marks 2.9 HO 20.2 Goals 0.2

Mumford Kicks 2.7 H/b 7.7 Marks 2 Ho 19.6 Goals 0.2

Kreuzer Kicks 5.1 H/B 7 Marks 2.9 Ho 14.6 Goals 0.6

You never valued Jacobs did you
so pretty much a Mumford / Kreuzer and Adelaide gained him
so Carlton lost out big time, sometimes u dont know what you have until it smacks you in the face which Carlton will find out against Adelaide.

Adelaide walk away with Smith Jacobs Tambling
Carlton walk away with Watson McCarthy Mitchell but lost Jacobs

Adelaide easily beat Carlton, Smith and Jacobs are huge inclusions
so everyone rates Carltons draft except me, Jacobs will be a very good player wait and see.

Remember I rate on how well they did with their selections, to naturally the Gold Coast for example I didn't rate all that highly because they had so many high selections, and some I didn't feel were the best available.

I really liked Collingwood's early selections. Fasolo and Farmer were the selections I liked at 44 + 45 also. The other fantastic selection was Tom Young who has come through the NSW/ACT Scolarship program and had an outstanding season at VFL level. But otherwise I wasn't super keen on the remaining selections and thought that we overpayed of Ugle and Seedsman and Stubbs I felt also were more rookie selections. Could have also added a more immediate player, but considering the lateness of entering the draft and the fact that you can't get AFL quality players through every selection I wasn't disappointed either because I think we did add some nice pieces in the end.

Heppell I like allot and I think he will be a fantastic player for Essendon for a long time, really liked as a selection and for mine saved this draft for Essendon, Steinberg I did not like so much because I did think it was a bit early given what he has shown and because he's an undersized leading forward which as another Essendon fan mentioned earlier is most definately not a need. He can certainly develop into an AFL quality player, but I felt there were much better (Hallahan and Parker in particular who were also great fits) selections available. The other selections were ok, but nothing spectacular with Alex Browne the better of the rest.

I think the ratings in both cases were very fair, and possibly a little harsh on Collingwood if anything and possibly slightly generous to Essendon. But not by allot.


Regarding trades.

Jacobs I think will be excellent for Adelaide and will probably be their no.1 ruckman for 2011. I absolutely rate him. Hard to say just how good he will be, but I certainly agree with his new club he will be very successful.

But for Cartlon I have no problem with the trade and don't think it will be bad for them by any means. They got some currency back for their 3rd/4th ruckman (depending on whether you rate Jacobs or Hampson higher). They also to this stage appear to have done very well from that trade by adding Patrick McCarthy at pick 33, who was strongly under their consideration at 18. So I have no problem with that trade for Carlton either which is why I didn't feel the need to mark them down.

So I largely take it as a win - win making both teams better, but Adelaide I like yourself feel it improved most simply because they lack quality ruckman, and Jacobs can be that quality ruckman for them.

 

[The Bomb]

thanks Knightmare for your reply,
what player do you think in this draft outside GC top 3 would you love to be on Collingwoods list,
last year before the draft I always rated Dustin Martin as the man I would love to have at Essendon, def after the Game against WA I thought he was awesome,
this year I thought Caddy, reminded me of a x between Jason Johnson and Riccuito,
but I thought Gaff will just be a better player overall but does not seem to be as dangerous. so how many posessions do you sacrifice for a goal or 2
then you have Polec and Heppel well very tight for mind.

 

[FAITH]

Knightmare

your opinion was you gave Collingwood B for Fasolo and Farmer Essendon B for Heppell and Steinberg that is real strange, lets think about this for 1 minute. I know on the pick they had

next you gave Adelaide Trade A Draft C+
Carlton Trade B+ Draft A

Carlton B+ but lost Jacobs

Jacobs Kicks 3.6 H/B 7 Marks 2.9 HO 20.2 Goals 0.2

Mumford Kicks 2.7 H/b 7.7 Marks 2 Ho 19.6 Goals 0.2

Kreuzer Kicks 5.1 H/B 7 Marks 2.9 Ho 14.6 Goals 0.6

You never valued Jacobs did you
so pretty much a Mumford / Kreuzer and Adelaide gained him
so Carlton lost out big time, sometimes u dont know what you have until it smacks you in the face which Carlton will find out against Adelaide.

Adelaide walk away with Smith Jacobs Tambling
Carlton walk away with Watson McCarthy Mitchell but lost Jacobs

Adelaide easily beat Carlton, Smith and Jacobs are huge inclusions
so everyone rates Carltons draft except me, Jacobs will be a very good player wait and see.

Finally someone with real sense

 

[Prem87]

Loved Adelaide's trade and drafting.

Milera Tambling Smith & Jacobs will fill needs in 2011.

 

[Knightmare]

thanks Knightmare for your reply,
what player do you think in this draft outside GC top 3 would you love to be on Collingwoods list,
last year before the draft I always rated Dustin Martin as the man I would love to have at Essendon, def after the Game against WA I thought he was awesome,
this year I thought Caddy, reminded me of a x between Jason Johnson and Riccuito,
but I thought Gaff will just be a better player overall but does not seem to be as dangerous. so how many posessions do you sacrifice for a goal or 2
then you have Polec and Heppel well very tight for mind.

Caddy would have been a handy inside mid, and I think he will have a fantastic career. Don't think he will play 22 games in season one, but could play possibly around 10 games with Gold Coast likely to share games around to see who they like and see who plays well within their structures.
Probably if any non top 3 guy I would go with Polec for Essendon because he is a pretty natural fit into your team and adds some much needed class into the midfield. I think a number of clubs would love to have him.

But don't lose sleep over Heppell, absolutely fantastic player. Didn't have him far behind Polec in my order.

If I could add any of the non top 3 guys to Collingwood, I'd again go with Jarad Polec (and personally would have selected him over Bennell but not over Swallow or Day). Not sure how many games he will play in 2010, but has a fantastic long kick, real weapon type like a Chris Knights. Also seems to have a bit of Scott Pendlebury where he just feels like he has that much more time than everyone else. In a strong team I think Polec could be an absolute weapon in a couple of years so for Collingwood he would be a fantastic pick to compliment some of our fantastic inside mids.
The other player who would intrigue me for Collingwood might have been Tom Lynch as a KPF/ruckman. Had a massive growth spurt over the past two seasons and I think he will also develop into a fantastic player with time for the Gold Coast franchise. Could possibly be a natural Leigh Brown replacement in a couple of years which would also be very attractive.

 

[Ants]

But what a thread like this is doing is essentially second guessing the output of 17 professional teams of recruiting managers, scouts, coaches and list managers. Each one of them (especially the recruiting managers and scouts) will have spent considerably more time than even the most knowledgeable BF junior footy follower watching their targets, have access to far more information about the youngsters, and know far more about their club's needs (including detailed knowledge of the predicted prospects of players already on that club's list). Through the draft process, it is reasonably fair to assume that they have picked their most fancied prospects that were available when each pick came around.

Of course, there will be booms and busts. In time, highly rated youngsters will not make the grade and some diamonds will be found amongst the rough. But these things will transpire from future events - injuries, hard work, ability to adapt and not a small amount of luck.

Attempting to attribute a grade to these professional, knowledgeable assessors of junior talent from a position of less knowledge and - almost certainly - less technical expertise does seem more than a tad pointless, especially before most of these kids have even completed half a pre-season.

The point is to get someone to comment and analyse. Does Knightmare know as much as insiders at the clubs? No. Does that matter? No.

Because he knows an awful lot more than 98% of us, and unlike the guys in the clubs is willing to share. Sometimes he'll be right, sometimes they'll be wrong. And sometimes that will come down to chance.

Last year both Freo and Essendon rated Hardringham above Barlow - but Hadringham has got a lot to do to justify that view now. Each year some clubs rate players widely differently. So even with the inside knowledge, there would be a range of views. Knightmare gives us one view, and one I feel privileged to get (we don't need anyone else chased off this site because people don't like their views).

 

[Ants]

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on Angus Monfries. He was one of the players who I felt might have some value to an extent. Don't know his contract status or the clubs thoughts on him but he seems not to have developed a great deal since showing some promise early. Looks like more of a midfielder to me than a forward.

Also Alwyn Davey while his debut season was probably amongst his better, I though a WCE might have had a look for possibly their 3rd round + another draft pick as upgrades (since these picks were not active) and possibly a player on the scrap heap like a Tony Notte or other if there was one of interest.

I wouldn't trade out Monfries unless a very good pick was on the table - at least top 20, maybe better. He was our leading goal scorer in a bad team last year, yet is also one of our best link up players of the HFF. Works hard, seldom injured, is only 24, would probably have 70 odd games and often a key barometer for us. Also, I would say he's improved virtually every year. Yes, a draft pick might have more upside, but we should realistically get 6-8 seasons of quality games out of Monfries, with the potential that a good CHF and midfield might take off pressure and let him shine more. That is a reasonably high hurdle for an 18 year old to surpass.

With Davey, I would definitely have traded him for any top 50 pick. Although he provides fantastic defensive pressure and can break away, his goal kicking is poor, he's not actually that great a rover of the talls, and he is yet to complete a season at AFL level. Frankly, what is the point if he's never around for finals if we make them? I think his body is too small. Also, given he started at 22/23, he's actually no spring chicken. So I would do the deed.

 

[Knightmare]

I wouldn't trade out Monfries unless a very good pick was on the table - at least top 20, maybe better. He was our leading goal scorer in a bad team last year, yet is also one of our best link up players of the HFF. Works hard, seldom injured, is only 24, would probably have 70 odd games and often a key barometer for us. Also, I would say he's improved virtually every year. Yes, a draft pick might have more upside, but we should realistically get 6-8 seasons of quality games out of Monfries, with the potential that a good CHF and midfield might take off pressure and let him shine more. That is a reasonably high hurdle for an 18 year old to surpass.

With Davey, I would definitely have traded him for any top 50 pick. Although he provides fantastic defensive pressure and can break away, his goal kicking is poor, he's not actually that great a rover of the talls, and he is yet to complete a season at AFL level. Frankly, what is the point if he's never around for finals if we make them? I think his body is too small. Also, given he started at 22/23, he's actually no spring chicken. So I would do the deed.

Monfries I agree. He does have value which is why I considered him amongst the possible trade guys if the appropriate trade came up, he is in the right age group to join a contendor type side and play with them for 6-8 years. My criticism of his game if anything has been that he probably has developed a little slower than expected and hasn't really ever been able to push up into the midfield on a perminant basis. Certainly 1st round would be the type of value you'd be looking at. If the appropriate trade for him doesn't come up, you don't need to trade him because he is still a very good player. Will be interesting to see how Hird uses Monfries over coming years.

Davey in his 1st season looked really promising, but since really hasn't developed. Over the years I have come to learn with those 175cm and below guys, really what you see from them early in their career is about what you expect from them later on and Davey having come into the AFL system late really just never had the upside to further develop his game.
So the lesson there is if you take a 175cm guy, you take them on how good they are now, rather than upside, probably Brent Harvey is one of the few exceptions, but he has always been fantastic from a young age. Davey is a handy depth guy and a top 50 pick in a good draft is about what you'd be looking at. At 26 years of age won't be around for the next premiership opportunity so you want players who are better than a depth quality guy. Certainly would need to be replaced but a similar styled late pick - rookie if an appropriate trade had have happened.

 

[The Bomb]

Knightmare

your opinion was you gave Collingwood B for Fasolo and Farmer Essendon B for Heppell and Steinberg that is real strange, lets think about this for 1 minute. I know on the pick they had

next you gave Adelaide Trade A Draft C+
Carlton Trade B+ Draft A

Carlton B+ but lost Jacobs

Jacobs Kicks 3.6 H/B 7 Marks 2.9 HO 20.2 Goals 0.2

Mumford Kicks 2.7 H/b 7.7 Marks 2 Ho 19.6 Goals 0.2

Kreuzer Kicks 5.1 H/B 7 Marks 2.9 Ho 14.6 Goals 0.6

You never valued Jacobs did you
so pretty much a Mumford / Kreuzer and Adelaide gained him
so Carlton lost out big time, sometimes u dont know what you have until it smacks you in the face which Carlton will find out against Adelaide.

Adelaide walk away with Smith Jacobs Tambling
Carlton walk away with Watson McCarthy Mitchell but lost Jacobs

Adelaide easily beat Carlton, Smith and Jacobs are huge inclusions
so everyone rates Carltons draft except me, Jacobs will be a very good player wait and see.

BUMP

fun looking back a couple of years.

 

[The Bomb]

lol mighty tiger still bitter that i do not rate griffiths..give it a rest mate, you are coming off desperate.
btw richmond,melbourne,adelaide,essendon and to a smaller extent port did poorly in the draft. GC, eagles,north,lions,saints,blues, dogs,swans and hawks did well

Adelaide did poorly but got Brodie Smith who they really wanted , and traded for Jacobs and Tambling that is not bad.

Essendon got Heppell who very well could be the best to come out of this draft. if that is bad well I know nothing.
Heppell could be a star which is worth how much?

really it has been crap having Heppell
Rising Star winner 2011
AFLCA best young player award 2012!

 

[saintsrfreak]

St Kilda: I would have liked for St Kilda to have had a crack at some big name whether it be the out of favour Fevola or possibly a Richard Tambling or Andrew Krakouer might have been the answer.
.

 

[Ant_]

Western Bull Dogs:
Rating: B
Why: Luke Dahlhaus is the guy you will notice even if you don’t want to. One of the more interesting players to feature in the rookie draft. .

Good call on Dahlhaus

 

[Richo83]

Richmond:
Rating: B
Why: Collins for Grigg as mentioned earlier I feel is a fairly even trade and both players at their new clubs should receive opportunities. Tambling is the interesting one. It was pretty clear he wasn’t making progress in Richmond and that it was time for a change, with a bit of luck Richmond do well with the end of 1st round compensation pick they received in the exchange. But I do see Tambling succeeding in Adelaide which is why I couldn’t be more generous.
Richmond:
Rating: D+
Why: I have Richmond in the Melbourne basket. Had a fantastic draft last year when it really counted, but this year have been underwhelming. Conca was expected to go late 1st round by many, I think there certainly were better value selections available, but at the same time I also felt that Conca is a good fit with this team. Jake Batchelor went allot earlier than many expected and again he probably wouldn’t have been my selection, but with that said I think he also can make it and be a good fit with this team. Really improved as the season went on and I think there is allot of development left. Just a little surprising given some of the names remaining. The later selections disappointed me more than anything. Helbig might turn out ok, but MacDonald and in particular Derickx I felt really were much rookie choices. Given Richmond are still rebuilding I would have liked them to have drafted some more high upside guys. Given they skipped on a KPF early I probably would thought a Jimmi Savage might have been a nice choice and Andrew Phillips as a ruckman would have been a much better option, raw and will take him, but has the drive to make it and will be able to develop with this team. While a guy like Derickx is more just a quick fix who is physically mature and can play if necessary, but not a guy who you’d pick to take over as the no.1 ruckman at any point.
Richmond:
Rating: C
Why: Houli should be a good fit into this team and with a bit of luck will play most games from season one. The rookie selections though have been a little puzzling. Miller has come in to help Riewoldt, but as a player he won’t ever be better than inconsistent. Hislop given he hasn’t been all that successful to date I was very surprised to see retained. Both of these selections really demonstrated that Richmond had no confidence in the talent available which is unfortunate when guys like Matthew Rankine, Ben Brown and Myles Sewell all go undrafted.

I'll just say firstly that this task is really hard, to predict how players will turn out is a difficult task and you did a really good job. I'm going to use hindsight because that's how I roll and this isn't a criticism of your comment, I understand you had your reasons.

Your evaluations of Richmond are a bit off. If I had to evaluate these three, it would be A+, C+ and C. Richmond traded in Grigg and Elton for Tambling and Collins. That's a massive win and it's freed up two spots, and got rid of two players which Richmond a) didn't really want at the time and b) probably don't want now (Collins is available, and even if Adelaide delisted Tambling, I doubt Richmond would take him. Tambling hasn't clicked at Adelaide at all, and is not part of Sanderson's plans. I predict that he'll be delisted, and he only played 1 game this year even though he was fit for most of the year. I can't stress how much getting rid of Tambling meant for the club and its fans, it was a huge weight of expectation off our backs and it meant Richmond could move on from the Wallace era. It gets an A at the least.

The main draft is a bit difficult to rate. Batchelor and Conca were not mistakes. Helbig is unproven, and McDonald and Derickx were mistakes. I think that's about slightly above average. For instance if you compare it to Essendon's effort, they drafted Heppell and Browne which seem to be ticks, Steinberg and Davis are unproven and and Ross is delisted.

Houli gets the rookie and psd drafting a C, but the others are as you admit mistakes. Miller and Hislop were mistakes which is why it only gets a C. Rookie drafts are often hit and miss, which means it's somewhat harsh to rate the PSD and rookie effort harshly when most clubs outside the giants didn't really nail the PSD and rookie draft. I think adding a senior player from those two drafts is about par, you'd hope to get maybe one maybe two players from those two drafts which is what we got.

 

[Silvagnis]

next you gave Adelaide Trade A Draft C+
Carlton Trade B+ Draft A

Carlton B+ but lost Jacobs

Jacobs Kicks 3.6 H/B 7 Marks 2.9 HO 20.2 Goals 0.2

Mumford Kicks 2.7 H/b 7.7 Marks 2 Ho 19.6 Goals 0.2

Kreuzer Kicks 5.1 H/B 7 Marks 2.9 Ho 14.6 Goals 0.6

You never valued Jacobs did you
so pretty much a Mumford / Kreuzer and Adelaide gained him
so Carlton lost out big time, sometimes u dont know what you have until it smacks you in the face which Carlton will find out against Adelaide.

Adelaide walk away with Smith Jacobs Tambling
Carlton walk away with Watson McCarthy Mitchell but lost Jacobs

Adelaide easily beat Carlton, Smith and Jacobs are huge inclusions
so everyone rates Carltons draft except me, Jacobs will be a very good player wait and see.

Crows would have been wiser to have kept Maric and the picks they traded for Jacobs. They might need them if they lose Tippett for nothing and have their 2012 draft picks taken away from them.

You shouldn't judge second year KPP who are four seasons younger than Jacobs.

Laidler, Watson, McCarthy, Mitchell, Walker, Duigan and McInnes could be better for us than Jacobs, Smith, Tambling and Lyons will be for Adelaide.

Adelaide wasted a compensation pick on Tambling after missing out on Walker.

Carlton:
Rating: B+
Why: The selection I really liked for Carlton is Ed Curnow. Had a seriously great year before injury at VFL level and deserves another chance. Given Carlton took KPPs with their first few selections in the national draft Curnow is the immediate guy who can help this team get better. Good selection.

Others don't rate Curnow and want Ellard, but I'm a fan. Strong run with mid who gutruns and pushes back hard to help out our backline on the transition. Up there with Judd, Carrazzo and Walker for endurance. Think Curnow will continue to improve and working on his game like Carrazzo who has become more offensive.

 

[Slattery_20]

The main draft is a bit difficult to rate. Batchelor and Conca were not mistakes. Helbig is unproven, and McDonald and Derickx were mistakes. I think that's about slightly above average. For instance if you compare it to Essendon's effort, they drafted Heppell and Browne which seem to be ticks, Steinberg and Davis are unproven and and Ross is delisted.

Conca was a very good pick. That's the thing which keeps getting ignored in the Heppell v Conca v Atley derp-fest... 3 very good picks, whichever the order they were taken in. All easily worth a top 10 pick. Big questions yet on Polec, Tape, Cook & a few others.

FWIW (prolly not much!) Essendon rate Davis pretty highly internally. See him as a big-bodied, hard running midfielder, maybe tagger. Busted his ankle early in the year, would've played a few this year (not saying heaps...)

No-one's really any the wiser about Steinberg. Could be anything (both good & bad)

 

[aussierulesrules]

Thought KM was definitely on the money about our lack of trading that year. I left the MCG after losing that GF to Collingwood and was completely convinced that that group of ours had given it their all and would not get closer than they did, with the same group, again.

There was pretty much no doubt at all that our group would have had a lot of mental scarring from having been so incredibly close, two years in a row and that it would be imperative to get some fresh faces in there, that wouldn't have that baggage or scarring, so it's fair to say I was very disappointed at our lack of action at the trade table that year. The sort of aggressive trading/attempted trading we did this year was what we needed to do back then, IMO, so that maybe we could have a quick turnaround and contend again, while the likes of Goddard, Dal Santo, Fisher, Montagna, Gilbert, Gwilt and so on were still playing.

Despite Cripps now having left for personal reasons and Crocker being delisted, I think our 2010 draft is going to look a lot better in a few years though, having gotten Siposs at the bargain basement pick of 79.

 

[Slattery_20]

Despite Cripps now having left for personal reasons and Crocker being delisted, I think our 2010 draft is going to look a lot better in a few years though, having gotten Siposs at the bargain basement pick of 79.

4 of your first 6 picks (Gamble, Polo, Cripps & Crocker) are already goneski. I don't know a thing about Eddy, Andreoli & Ferguson, but I suspect they're gone as well.

Siposs looks great, and might save the day somewhat, but it certainly hasn't been fruitful thus far.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

4 of your first 6 picks (Gamble, Polo, Cripps & Crocker) are already goneski. I don't know a thing about Eddy, Andreoli & Ferguson, but I suspect they're gone as well.

Siposs looks great, and might save the day somewhat, but it certainly hasn't been fruitful thus far.

Cripps deciding to move to West Coast is hardly "goneski" he's still an AFL listed player and will still be an excellent player IMO. If he was bad drafting what do you suggest, not to draft players from interstate?
Ledger is still tracking nicely, and Siposs will be very good.
I'm not sure why you are looking at things so selectively, surely not trolling?
Eddy was placed on the Rookie list from the main list so yeah - gone.
Fergason is a NSW Rookie and is doing very nicely, but a project player. Having said that he could be selected if necessary and placed fifth in Sandringham's best and fairest.
Rookie Curren ( who you ignored ) won the Sandringham B&F last season and is still on the list.

Pretty stupid talking about Gamble and Polo when you consider where they were taken in the draft. How did they go compared to the alternatives?
Polo actually did a pretty good job as a depth player when Hayes missed most of 2011, but he's not expected to improve and we now have others that have taken his place ( who hopefully will improve ). I will admit confusion though when clubs are passing on draft picks, or promoting rookies they dont need, and then letting GWS get a player like Giles.

 

[Knightmare]

Maybe later this week or this weekend I'll do a review of this.

Pretty busy early week but I suggest if I did a new review of this draft/trade period today my ratings of all clubs would be very different with my perspectives on different players much stronger as they have progressed or not come on as expected.

 

[The Bomb]

Maybe later this week or this weekend I'll do a review of this.

Pretty busy early week but I suggest if I did a new review of this draft/trade period today my ratings of all clubs would be very different with my perspectives on different players much stronger as they have progressed or not come on as expected.

You do a fantastic job. well done Knightmare, looking forward to it.

 

[Tazwegian]

Giving western bulldogs an A+ for the trade week that included Sherman, Djerkurra, and Veszpremi probably not great on reflection

Delisted, delisted, and ordinary. Sure, Wallis and Liba are decent, but I think they are one of the losers of trade week in hindsight.

 

[Igloo]

Delisted, delisted, and ordinary. Sure, Wallis and Liba are decent, but I think they are one of the losers of trade week in hindsight.

Decent?! . Future superstars more like it

 

[Tazwegian]

Decent?! . Future superstars more like it

Hope so! But the actual trade trades, and not the f/s picks for that year didn't turn out as expected. Which is sad, because I was really hoping Sherman would be great for you guys.

Howe at pick 34 was one of the bargain picks of the draft too, but it took us all by surprise. Hindsight is 20/20 though and there are plenty of things KM got right with is review.

 

[Cleric]

Maybe later this week or this weekend I'll do a review of this.

Pretty busy early week but I suggest if I did a new review of this draft/trade period today my ratings of all clubs would be very different with my perspectives on different players much stronger as they have progressed or not come on as expected.

I would be very interested to see what your opinion of Brodie Smith is as he has really shown his worth this year and had a super finals series, played well beyond his experience.