Official Crows Draft Selections

[noddy]

Originally posted by MarksGirl-kbcrowgirl
Well Hello Boys!!!

Unlike some of you grumpy lads, I would like to welcome Josh, Fergie (thats what I am calling him - cause I can't face Fergus ) & Ben to our wonderful club!

Come on, give the boys a go!

k
xx

Gotta agree with you on this kb,

Regardless of how we feel in drafting Kruger & Hudson they are both now Crows & deserve a fair chance to make it at AFL leval.

I will reserve my judgment until i have seen enough of their ability on the playing field & that could take a couple of years by the look of it.

 

[spindoctor]

Nah, stuff that. Don't be easy on em. We should expect the world and increase the pressure.

I'll sue if they don't perform, and if that doesn't work I'll take justice into my own hands!

 

[SAbella]

Originally posted by snakebite01
[
So in the draft period we have picked up Freddie Prince Junior. [/B]

Haha I love it! I'd laugh if by some freaky coincidence (maybe a player reading this post!) they actually did get those nicknames

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by macca23
The more I've thought about this one, the more I've warmed to it.

Hudson has only played footy for a brief time and is obviously on the way up. His immediate role will be the one that Marsh used to do ever so badly - fill in if either of the two main ruckmen were unavailable.

If we retained Marsh we were guaranteed of a sh[thouse performance whenever he played for the Crows - he's proven that over a number of years. Hudson just might do the replacement bit quite adequately and if he does that puts him a looooong way in front of Marsh.

I'm warming to it.

Apparantly Hudson rucked mainly against AFL experienced ruckman & did well (obviously to be runner-up in his B&F). Hasn't been playing footy long, so probably has plenty of improvement in him. Not too fussed that he is older as big blokes tend to take longer to mature & he has the height/weight to play straight away, which we need if either Clarke or Biglands get injured.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by DaveW
I said all along we should have kept Marsh for depth. Instead we've just picked up another mediocre mature age ruckman. No loss, no gain.

Except that Hudson is a physical type. Marsh on the other hand doesn't know the meaning of the word.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by snakebite01
Krueger is an unknown talent but please everyone give him a go. Seriously the recruting staff have watched *****loads more under age footy than us and would have a far better idea than us. They would have spoken to Hall and musn't have been impressed or else he didn't want to come to SA because a club wouldn't publicly state they are interested and then not take him when presented with a golden opportunity.

But thats the thing mate, they actually really liked Hall as a lad and a player. According to Fantasia there are 3 reasons why they chose Krueger over Hall:

* He is a local lad
* He could support Clarke and Biglands straight away where as Hall is 2-3 years away
* He can play KP at both ends of the ground.

As far as the potential is concerned Hall is ahead but one thing I like about Krueger is that he is a hard worker who always gives 110% He likes a contest and I must say to some degree I am happy that AFC have gone for players that have a bit of a mungrel in them.

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Except that Hudson is a physical type. Marsh on the other hand doesn't know the meaning of the word.

Where did you get that from?

On the Bulldogs board, one person felt that Hudson may lack the physicality needed to be a good AFL ruckman.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by DaveW
Where did you get that from?

On the Bulldogs board, one person felt that Hudson may lack the physicality needed to be a good AFL ruckman.

Well Dave he couldn't be any less physical than that bloke who plays for Westies.

 

[spindoctor]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
one thing I like about Krueger is that he is a hard worker who always gives 110%

I think you're lying. It is only possible to give 100%, any higher is unquantifiable as percentage as such will only function from a scale of 1 to 100.

Something smells fishy.

 

[Thunderstruck]

Geez i was really hoping Waters would still be around for our forst pick, but tossing up between him and Watts, hell very hard, id prolly have to have gone with Watts, mainly cos thats what we need, but as far as a guy goes who is READY to play he would have to be as ready as anyone around, he is a man already, he hardly needs weights, will be one of the great midfielders/half backs of the game quicksmart I reckon.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by DaveW
Where did you get that from?

On the Bulldogs board, one person felt that Hudson may lack the physicality needed to be a good AFL ruckman.

I talked to my cousin in Victoria and he described him as a bit of a physical player. Either way he can't be softer than Marsh.

 

[spindoctor]

I think your cousin in Victoria is a bit dodgy, didn't he get busted for drug running and got off on a technicality?

You know he's lying to you. Hudson's probably a pansy who gets knocked over in a slight breeze.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Thunderstruck
Geez i was really hoping Waters would still be around for our forst pick, but tossing up between him and Watts, hell very hard, id prolly have to have gone with Watts, mainly cos thats what we need, but as far as a guy goes who is READY to play he would have to be as ready as anyone around, he is a man already, he hardly needs weights, will be one of the great midfielders/half backs of the game quicksmart I reckon.

I am a huge fan of Waters. He is AFL ready and should make impact immidietly. As tough as they come BUT I would still take Watts over Waters simply because, players who are fanastic contested markers and can kick goals are as rare as diamonds.

Watts for me. Half way through the year I said he would be a fantastic pick up for us but to be honest I never thought we are a chance to get him but when Doggies signed Rawlings I was quietly confident.

 

[spindoctor]

If Kepler Bradley had been available also, who would you have taken?

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by spindoctor
If Kepler Bradley had been available also, who would you have taken?

Watts because I just love physical players. Don't get me wrong Bradley will be a gun but a CHF who is as physical as they come and a fantastic contested mark always someone I would look at. Especially if he is tall enough to pinch hit in the ruck

 

[macca23]

Another thing that should be remembered about Watts, which partly explains why he is on the thin side, is that he grew from 193 cms to 196.6 cms during the footy season. That's 6' 5 and a half inches in the old language. A beautiful size for a guy that can take contested marks.

I know that he has modelled himself on Dermott Brereton, but at this stage of the game he looks like being a classier tougher version of Drew Petrie of the Kangaroos - and I have big wraps on Petrie.

He's a big get - the footy gods have been kind to us.

 

[redandblack]

I watched Krueger play against West late in the year at Glenelg. I think he went off before half-time with an injury and before that was only average in the ruck. However, he was extremely impressive around the ground, taking several big grabs and looking pretty agile. Might be wise to give him a chance and not judge too soon.

Tim Schmidt didn't play much in the last half of the year because of injury. He is a smart, skillful player. Was equal best player with Adam Cooney in last year's Under 17 grand final.

Beau Waters - will be sensational.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by macca23
Another thing that should be remembered about Watts, which partly explains why he is on the thin side, is that he grew from 193 cms to 196.6 cms during the footy season. That's 6' 5 and a half inches in the old language. A beautiful size for a guy that can take contested marks.

I know that he has modelled himself on Dermott Brereton, but at this stage of the game he looks like being a classier tougher version of Drew Petrie of the Kangaroos - and I have big wraps on Petrie.

He's a big get - the footy gods have been kind to us.

If he can stay injury free and can learn from the likes of Carey and Jarman about being a forward, Watts could really turn into a gun CHF in 3 or so years. Once he puts on a few Kgs and improves his agility a bit, he will be a geniune CHF.

Like you I also have big wraps on Petrie and I think Watts is a very similar type. Both are some 197 cm and both are good overhead marks (I might be a bit biased but I reckon Watts is a better mark), both a not the most agile of players.

Unless something goes horribly wrong like it did with Angwin, we got ourselves a gun in the making.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by DaveW
Our target for next year: Gun midfielders.

and another good ruck prospect.

Midfielders shouldn't be too hard to find unless we fall into the "David Gallagher" trap again

Still if there is a gun tall, we simply must take him

 

[naughty monkey]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
But thats the thing mate, they actually really liked Hall as a lad and a player. According to Fantasia there are 3 reasons why they chose Krueger over Hall:

* He is a local lad
* He could support Clarke and Biglands straight away where as Hall is 2-3 years away
* He can play KP at both ends of the ground.

FURKEN GREAT LOGIC, pass up a future #1 ruckman for a KP, simply because he can pinch hit in the ruck next year! (So what was the point of taking Hudson????)

I'll bet I've seen more of Freddy than just about anybody else on this board, and he aint no bloody ruckman. Nor will he ever be!

I am sorry, but to me James Fantasia has just confirmed he is a dikhed who doesn't know his arse from his elbow. Outside of Watts, this list is no better off than last year, arguably worse.

Along with a new coach we should be looking for a recruiting manager next year.

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by naughty monkey
FURKEN GREAT LOGIC, pass up a future #1 ruckman for a KP, simply because he can pinch hit in the ruck next year! (So what was the point of taking Hudson????)

I agree completely. Short term readiness should not have come into consideration.

We should have taken the best long term prospect. (But that's not to say we haven't.)

I'll bet I've seen more of Freddy than just about anybody else on this board, and he aint no bloody ruckman. Nor will he ever be!

Well that's just plan worrying.

I just hope you're wrong. If he's not a ruckman, then we've misused this pick. I hear Krueger's around the ground work is quite tidy. Do you see him as a future KPP?

I get the feeling that if Clarke retires at the end of next season that we'll be trading for a ruckmen.

And we'll probably pay a fair bit to get one too.

 

[Jars458]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Hall is MILES better than bloody Josh Krueger. WTF are we thinking??????

How many games have you seen Hall and Kruger play?

Its all guess work. At least Kruger is a local lad

He is a Crows man now so don't bag him until you have some evidence.

 

[Jars458]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Some things never change

I can't believe I actually sacrifised a couple of hours of exam prep to follow this sh|t and get worked up about it

Neither can I.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Jars458
How many games have you seen Hall and Kruger play?

Its all guess work. At least Kruger is a local lad

He is a Crows man now so don't bag him until you have some evidence.

I have actually got my hands of both of those fellas playing in 7 games. If one can't pick faults and positives of a player in that many games then they better start following another sport.

I wish Krueger will prove me wrong and become a great player for us but I am 99.9% certain that in time Hall will be a gun ruckman of the competition and instead of taking him for a bargain pick we opted for a pinch hitting ruckman who is 3 years older. He might be a local lad but over the years how many WA players left us for the reason of homesickness?????? Especially country lads from WA.

Not a great rectuiting strategy IMO.

 

[Jars458]

Originally posted by Macca19
And Scott Stevens could barely get a game at Sydney but i bet your happy you traded for him right?

And last year we traded for Cochrane who wasnt overly rated all that highly and most people scoffed at that and didnt expect him to do all that much yet he played every game he was fit for us, was best or 2nd best in our winning final and tagged many good players out of games and performed his role extremely well.

Port stated they wanted an AFL experienced player with 1 pick and he was one of the players that suited what we were after best. Who else would we have got? Simon Fletcher? bleh. Glen Bowyer? bleh. Hes only 21, has no expectations on him at all, and is the type of player we needed - a tallish midfielder that will ultimately be played on a back flank.

Before scoffing and laughing at one of Ports picks, maybe you should concentrate on your own clubs draft picks.

Stiffy - as for the rolleyes on ex-Essendon players....why wouldnt we continue to get them. Theyve all been a success so far. Cummings kicked 70 goals in our first year. Kingsley is a best and fairest winner. Wanganeen was a captain and 2 time AA winner for us. Cockatoo Collins was almost AA in 2001. Hardwick was our 2nd best defender last year and our best finals player this year. If RFK can perform and play as much as Kingsley has during his career then I, and most Port supporters, would be more than happy.

Touchy touchy

Forster-Knight is a dud and you know it