KPP Drafting is costing us

[ant555]

Daytripper im not going to get into another round about discussion about game plans and what will and wont work as we have been down that road a few times and it is fair to say we dont agree on it.

I do want to make one comment and that is i think we have been putting something in place. Sure drafting KP players may be costing us a little short term but is it going to give us trouble long trem? In the last 4 years yes we have picked up talls but the trend this year apart from Gumbleton was midfielders. We hope we have drafted our ruck combo in Ryder and Laycock. Ryder needs time and even Laycock is probably a year or two away. We have held onto Johns and drafted Bradley. Both have needed and still need time. In this period Stanton , Monfries and Watson have come in. We have a number of players like Nash,Dyson,Slattery and Lonergan in the background plus this years draftees. I just think we have had a plan for 4 years or so and that was to grab 4 or 5 good tall young kids before we go after mids. Gives the young talls the extra time to develop that they need. I would say that despite all the talk about making finals last year and this year the goal has been putting together a good core group that will take us through 2008 to 2012.

 

[RED STRIPE MAGIC]

look you dont need to get rid on any of laycock, bradley or ryder. people we can play all three every week if we wanted to. paddy can play as the 3rd tall down back helping out flecter and mel, Bradley cxan play on the wing and and laycock can be 2nd ruck men so its all good people things will work out no need to worry about the future just take it one season at a time. lets look forward to 07 because its just going start it not finshing.

 

[Tony Delaney]

Daytripper im not going to get into another round about discussion about game plans and what will and wont work as we have been down that road a few times and it is fair to say we dont agree on it.

I do want to make one comment and that is i think we have been putting something in place. Sure drafting KP players may be costing us a little short term but is it going to give us trouble long trem? In the last 4 years yes we have picked up talls but the trend this year apart from Gumbleton was midfielders. We hope we have drafted our ruck combo in Ryder and Laycock. Ryder needs time and even Laycock is probably a year or two away. We have held onto Johns and drafted Bradley. Both have needed and still need time. In this period Stanton , Monfries and Watson have come in. We have a number of players like Nash,Dyson,Slattery and Lonergan in the background plus this years draftees. I just think we have had a plan for 4 years or so and that was to grab 4 or 5 good tall young kids before we go after mids. Gives the young talls the extra time to develop that they need. I would say that despite all the talk about making finals last year and this year the goal has been putting together a good core group that will take us through 2008 to 2012.

Good points ant

 

[gillyrulz]

wat is annoying me is that we have something like 14 kpp...... what sort of as team needs that many??????????????????????

 

[foj1]

I really like this thread and some of the points being raised

but just a few things i was thinking about

- it has been stated that gumby or say a ryder might not get much game time this year given all our talls. i think it wouldnt really have made a difference if we used our first pick this year on a midfielder or as we eventually did on gumby. The 2nd best midfielder in the draft was probably selwood. the question is would selwood actually get a game for the bombers this year. he would be competing with watson, stanton, lovett, monfries who are all proabaly better than him. then there is also MJ and JJ and campo who would all be ahead of him as well. that leaves him competing with dyson, heffernanan, winderlich, peverill and also our other draftess in hislop, houli and jetta.

- going by that the only player i think who will play consistently for the bombers this year is davey and he plays as a forward. If that turns out to be the case, then all these players would be in the saem category as gumby and then it turns out that drafting gumby and having him only playing in the secoonds would not just be isolated to him.

- also like i was saying our midfield component has lots of competetion and most of them are young. watson, monfries, stanton, lovett, dyson, winderlich, lonergon are all below 24. on top of that you add the draftees this year which is jetta, hislop and houli and we have a lot of good young midfielders coming through. On the other hand, our forward line and backline have not got too many youngsters coming through. I mean we have the stalwarts in the forward line of lloyd, lucas and hird and what maybe lloyd will be the last to retire of that bunch say in about 5 years. all we have after that is basically neagle, johns and gumby.

- the same goes for the backline. you take away mal and fletch who both prolly have 2 years left and you've got McPhee who is 25 and bradley who is like 23. Hence ryder is being developed in that position.

look only time will tell if the right decision was made. but i think generally there has been some rationale to getting who we've picked up as explained above. fingers crossed it will turn out good for the club.

A fit Selwood would certainly get a game for us in our best 22. There was/is a big? on his fitness. As a 16 year old he was superb but injuries have curtailed his prospects- without them I believe he would have been rated a definite top 2. Remember that we would have taken McLean with pick 6 several years ago but was thwarted by Melbourne. We chose Bradley instead of Tenace- good decision or Waters- questionable decision or R Clarke- good decision.

 

[monty1104]

We would have to mark 50% of the time for that strategy to work. Otherwise it would just be turnover - goal.

Do you really think our forwards can get in a position to mark the ball every 2nd time and with the ball being delivered haphazardly ?

We're better off dumping it into the forward line for a turnover than having it turned over in the midfield while the guys stuff around with the ball trying to get a clean possesion. We just need to learn to move the ball forward, however we can.

Also, with the trend of the game changing to athletes who can kick a footy rather than footy players that can run a bit, who's to say kicking long won't work. Most teams have tried to recruit athletes, so they are lighter in KPP, especially defenders. You only have to look at Joel Bowden and Jarred Rivers to see which way footy is going.

 

[Bombersfc]

A fit Selwood would certainly get a game for us in our best 22. There was/is a big? on his fitness. As a 16 year old he was superb but injuries have curtailed his prospects- without them I believe he would have been rated a definite top 2. Remember that we would have taken McLean with pick 6 several years ago but was thwarted by Melbourne. We chose Bradley instead of Tenace- good decision or Waters- questionable decision or R Clarke- good decision.

Hindsight is better than 20-20. if we had that time again, I would have liked us to go with waters.

but c'mon how many of us after havig a first look at bradley went this bloke could be the next big thing in our backline?

the fact is not getting selwood was probably not because of his fitness (or lack of it) but because we feel that ginven we have: watson, stanton, dyson, monfries, lovett, winderlich, lonergon and slattery as young midfielders, it probabaly was a better bet to go with a young KPP given than the only real good talent coming through there was johns, bradley and laycock.

and i think finally given the way the draft fell for us we ended up getting four pretty good midfielders after that, so i think our decision was probably vindicated.

 

[Longy413]

Clayton at the Bulldogs targeted midfielders early on and its now paying dividends.

Having priority picks allowed them to do that. They also drafted Penny, Walsh, Williams, Everitt with early picks.

 

['51 Bewick]

We would have to mark 50% of the time for that strategy to work. Otherwise it would just be turnover - goal.

Do you really think our forwards can get in a position to mark the ball every 2nd time and with the ball being delivered haphazardly ?

I don't see this as a problem if our midfielders and forwardline smalls just use their eyes and brains. If the opposition plays a smaller running player on our 3rd tall, the midfielders kick to him and 2 forwardline smalls sprint to where he is leading to. This gives us a real advantage in the marking contest, and the option to win a spilled marking attempt or lock the ball in the forward line.
I am sure Kevin and the coaching staff would be well aware of these sorts of scenarios.

 

[Smokin]

Still worried about what part Johns is going to play for us though.

His performances dictate his position, like anyone else.

He is not Guaranteed a spot this season - he just turned 22, and is in the same age bracket as Dyson and Watson, and younger than Laycock and Winda, and like all those, he has to earn a spot.

Adding to that, he hasnt done a pre-season before this year, and has only played a handful of games after a horrendous run with injury. He is still a work in process, especially being a KPP.

Now that he has finally completed a pre-season, this season should see huge development for the kid. If that means 11 games in the 1's, and the rest in the magoos, so be it.

Sometimes we get over excited and expect too much out of the young players.

This year is a development year, which hopefully sees great improvement as the season goes on and the team settles and gels, which it couldnt do last season.

Im not expecting over the odds results this season, I feel this season will set the launching pad for 08 and beyond.

 

[Jaymin]

wat is annoying me is that we have something like 14 kpp...... what sort of as team needs that many??????????????????????

14?

Lloyd, Lucas, Johns, Michael, Fletcher, Lee, Gumbleton...

McPhees a flanker...Bradleys not key position...Ryder perhaps although he's more of a ruckman...

Hille, Laycock...ruckmen..