Melbourne's first 3 picks

[cougar000]

I'd like to hear who you would like to get with our 1st 3 picks and be realistic not (Watts, Rich, NickNat) because that is not possable. For me I'd like Watt's, Blease, McKernan. I really like the look of Blease I hope we get him.

 

[nutcase5]

#1 - Watts
#17 - Hill/Swift
#19 - L. Johnston/Shoenmakers

 

[Future Star]

Pick 1- Watts, a no brainer

Pick 17- Hill/Blease/Swift/Robinson. One of these quick midfielders would definately help us out. My pick would probably be hill because he is the quickest out of them.

Pick 19- Johnston (if around) Mckernan/Shoenmakers/Cornelius
If Mckernan is around which is a possibility would probably take him because of his size. Otherwise i would take Shoenmakers before Cornelius because of his better physical attributes.

 

[Wolfmother2]

Watts
Swift (pretty please I think he will be a gun hopefully like Grimes )
Blease or Robinson if they are there, maybe a tall that has slipped

 

[whelan=legend]

My dream draft would be acquiring:

1. Watts

Then with 17/19 i would be shitting myself of excitement with:

Blease, Schoenmakers, Swift, McKernan

But i guess there is no certainty any of those players will still be around

 

[Beats]

For me it goes

1. Watt's - early on I prefered Rich and I probably still like him better but Watts tested and spoke well and is needed a lot more in the team structure.
17. Midfielder - as whatever talls here are likely to make it to 19, a midfielder here would be nice, In order of preference I would like Swift/Blease/Hill/Robinson
19. Tall - whatever tall has lasted to this pick in order of preference, Johnston/Trengove/Schoenmakers/Cahill/Mckernan/Cornelius

And for pick 35, Paul Cahill if he is around, otherwise a ruckman/BP.

 

[Headless]

1/ Watts
17/ Swift/Blease
19/ Schoenmakers/Cornelius

 

[stEdy]

All named in order of preference

1 - Watts
17 - Swift / Blease / Hill / Robinson
19 - Schoenmakers / Cornelius
&
35 - Roughead / Redden

 

[Colin Grigson]

1- Watts
17- Schoenmakers, Swift, Stephen Hill
19- Blease, O'Keefe, Ash Smith

 

[bringbackschwarter5]

1 - Watts

17 - Swift/Blease

19 - O'Keefe/Ash Smith/Schoenmakers

 

[Wolfmother2]

With most of us wanting Blease and Swift, big chance neither will be there

 

[richskee]

1- Watts

17- Blease

19- Roughead

 

[McLean_4_Captain]

Watts at No.1

As for 17 & 19, i just want best available, it's too early in the draft to say "we must take a forward at 17 or 19", if it's 2 mids we should take them, it's not like we couldn't use them.

Mid at 17 unless there's a slider, WC will be after mids (especially if they take Naita) so any talls we would be targetting should still be there at 19.

I think that there's a reasonable chance that one of Blease, Hill, Swift, Johnston or McKernan will have slipped to pick 17. Someone will pull a surprise pick, there's usually at least 1 and it makes a big change to the draft, meaning someone will take a bit of a slide and hopefully it's a player we're after.

Pick 19, obviously we shouldn't take a 3rd tall if we've got a 2nd at 17, so O'Keefe, Robinson & Smith could be good options. Schoenmakers & Cornelius will also be in the mix if we've gone small at 17.

Don't count out Yarran as a slider. Clearly one of the most talented kids in the draft, but some queries of attitude and desire have seen him fall down people's lists, he could be the top 10 twist which might throw a spanner in the works of the draft order. If he does slide i couldn't see a Geelong or Hawthorn passing him up, but we'd be crazy not to take him if he was available at 17.

 

[The Purple Jesus]

Interesting your comment about Yarran ,McLean 4 Captain. I havent seen a lot of him but there are some similarities to Clayton Collard a couple of years ago. All the talent in the world but question marks over work ethic and commitment. This guy in a sense could shape the draft as he could easily go top 5 or slide into the 20's depending on clubs perceptions of him.
When Freo delisted him after 1 year Cameron Schwab admitted that the club knew they were taking a punt with Collard at pick 31 and had failed. Guys like Houli, Reimers etc went after him and Freo paid the price. Who will take the rick woth Yarran? Thats IF he is a risk

 

[oooze]

players that are almost guaranteed to be gone before our pick 17:

watts, nait, rich, hartlett, vickery, ziebell, hill, sidebottom, yarren, hurley, trengove, johnston, cordy. so thats 13 players.

so there are 3 more players to be taken before our pick 17 with blease, mckernan, schoenmakers, swift, strauss, suban, robinson, ash smith and cornelius all still available.

 

[3MELBOURNE6]

Interesting your comment about Yarran ,McLean 4 Captain. I havent seen a lot of him but there are some similarities to Clayton Collard a couple of years ago. All the talent in the world but question marks over work ethic and commitment. This guy in a sense could shape the draft as he could easily go top 5 or slide into the 20's depending on clubs perceptions of him.
When Freo delisted him after 1 year Cameron Schwab admitted that the club knew they were taking a punt with Collard at pick 31 and had failed. Guys like Houli, Reimers etc went after him and Freo paid the price. Who will take the rick woth Yarran? Thats IF he is a risk

Bailey loves Yarren so he wouldn't get past pick #17, But i reckon he will defienitly go top 10 anyway.

 

[Beats]

players that are almost guaranteed to be gone before our pick 17:

watts, nait, rich, hartlett, vickery, ziebell, hill, sidebottom, yarren, hurley, trengove, johnston, cordy. so thats 13 players.

so there are 3 more players to be taken before our pick 17 with blease, mckernan, schoenmakers, swift, strauss, suban, robinson, ash smith and cornelius all still available.

What makes them almost guaranteed to be gone? Because big footy says so? Because you say so?
Watts, Naitanui, Rich, Vickery, Ziebell and Cordy are the only definites (imo), who will be gone.
It's unlikely that one of Hartlett, Sidebottom, Hurley, Trengove, Mckernan and Johnston will be there, but who knows?
All it takes is for one team to take a player no-one rates that much and the whole draft is out of wack, and this happens at least once each year.

 

[Beats]

Bailey loves Yarren so he wouldn't get past pick #17, But i reckon he will defienitly go top 10 anyway.

Says who?
Personally I would be very angry if we were to take Yarran at 17, as he doesn't fill a direct need.

 

[3MELBOURNE6]

Says who?
Personally I would be very angry if we were to take Yarran at 17, as he doesn't fill a direct need.

Go and watch the draft camp videos, And listen to what bailey says.

And Melbourne has said many times that our first 3 picks will be purely based on best avalible, not on positional needs.

 

[Play by Numbers]

Keep your grubby mits away from Swift

 

[Beats]

Go and watch the draft camp videos, And listen to what bailey says.

And Melbourne has said many times that our first 3 picks will be purely based on best avalible, not on positional needs.

Watched the videos, you were right, however it was also said that 3 are in contention for the top pick at around roughly the same time, things change, and they omit much from what they are saying.

Simply put, between picks 10-25ish the field is very even, the best available theory is good, but when there are 4-5 on the same level you take the one who suits your needs the most, Yarran does not do that for us.

And if you're planning on sayintg something like, 'he's rated as the most talented player in this years draft' etc. if he's there at 17 there's a reason for it.

 

[McLean_4_Captain]

Says who?
Personally I would be very angry if we were to take Yarran at 17, as he doesn't fill a direct need.

I think it's preposterous to get angry because the club does something you don't agree with. Yarren isn't exactly on my radar because i think he'll be gone so i haven't considered him much, but i'd be stoked to get him.

How do you figure that he doesn't fit a need? He is seen by many as having potential to go into the midfield, we don't need a quick, clean skilled midfielder with unbelievable footy nous? That could be our plan drafting him, to get a Burgoyne or Wells type midfielder which we could surely use.

Remember that we're on the bottom. So while we have some needs that are greater then others, a gun player in any area will help improve our team. Best available for the 1st 3 picks, and if Yarren is there at 17 he'd have to be very close to best available at that point

 

[Beats]

I think it's preposterous to get angry because the club does something you don't agree with. Yarren isn't exactly on my radar because i think he'll be gone so i haven't considered him much, but i'd be stoked to get him.

How do you figure that he doesn't fit a need? He is seen by many as having potential to go into the midfield, we don't need a quick, clean skilled midfielder with unbelievable footy nous? That could be our plan drafting him, to get a Burgoyne or Wells type midfielder which we could surely use.

Remember that we're on the bottom. So while we have some needs that are greater then others, a gun player in any area will help improve our team. Best available for the 1st 3 picks, and if Yarren is there at 17 he'd have to be very close to best available at that point

I don't expect him to be there either but if it was a choice between say Blease/Swift/Yarran, I'd take either of the first two every time.
He has the potential to go into the midfield, nasty word that. Currently he is a forward pocket, who takes very very limited stints in the middle.
For the next few years as a minimum, he will remain a forward pocket/hff, competing with the likes of Wonaeamiri, Maric, Davey etc.
A gun player will improve the whole team, but he will be competing with 2-3 'gun' players for that spot in our team.

I trust the recruiting team, but it does not mean that I can be unhappy/angry with them for what I consider to be a less than fantastic pick.

 

[McLean_4_Captain]

None of the draftees have yet to prove much at all, it's largely all about potential. We're likely to pick Watts because we believe he has the potential to be our FF or CHF for the next 10 years, but there's no guarantee. We might take Cornelius because he has the potential to be an AFL FF, but he might be nothing more then a 3rd tall, that doesn't mean he can't be a great 3rd tall like Robbo, but he wouldn't have fulfilled his initial 'potential'.

And even so, Yarran average 3 goals a game in 13 WAFL games this year and IMO performed as well or better then Rich or Naita, and he's proved more against tougher opposition then most draftees. So even if he's just a forward, we could use that in our side

Of those 'gun' players, only Davey is proven and he is injury prone. I also don't see why we couldn't play all 4, in a similar style to Collingwood, rotating these types of players, having 1 in a pocket, 1 at half forward, 1 on the ball & 1 on the bench.

 

[Beats]

None of the draftees have yet to prove much at all, it's largely all about potential. We're likely to pick Watts because we believe he has the potential to be our FF or CHF for the next 10 years, but there's no guarantee. We might take Cornelius because he has the potential to be an AFL FF, but he might be nothing more then a 3rd tall, that doesn't mean he can't be a great 3rd tall like Robbo, but he wouldn't have fulfilled his initial 'potential'.

And even so, Yarran average 3 goals a game in 13 WAFL games this year and IMO performed as well or better then Rich or Naita, and he's proved more against tougher opposition then most draftees. So even if he's just a forward, we could use that in our side

Of those 'gun' players, only Davey is proven and he is injury prone. I also don't see why we couldn't play all 4, in a similar style to Collingwood, rotating these types of players, having 1 in a pocket, 1 at half forward, 1 on the ball & 1 on the bench.

The difference between Watts and Yarran is that Watts has played predominantly at FF & CHF and has proved that he is capable at both(albeit at junior level), Yarran has played mainly as a FP with very limited time in the middle, he has in no way shown that he is able to play in the middle consistently or that he has the tank and athleticism required to play in the middle, this can be developed of course but only to a certain level.
I'll change the phrase from 'he has potential to play in the middle' to 'it's speculated that he will be able to play in the middle in a few years', because that's all it is at the moment, speculation that he will make the transition, because at junior level and in the WAFL he has played mainly as a FP.

As for him playing against men and having shown more than most other draftees, you can only play what you're put up against. In the championships his form was not fantastic and for a top pick, he's proved more than most other draftees, but when stacked up against other draftees he was not at the top of the pile.

As for the other 'gun' players, agreed they are not guns, but we assume they will be, just like you are assuming Yarran will be.

I don't think in our team structure, and with our personal, that it is feasible to play 4 small forwards. If you were to make a 2009 team now out of the players currently on our list, who would you take out for Yarran to come in?