Phantom 06

[Johnny_3]

According to weavers phantom draft
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?p=6142028#post6142028
we are likely to take
1:Gibbs
17:Collard
19:Brown
35:Reid

IMO, need a ruckman at 17 or 19
gibbs,, well doesnt need an intro
collard very gary ablette-esque
Brown.. ruttenesque
and reid forward prospect, dont really need one imho

 

[Jeremias]

I would be very anoyed with the club if they recruited the players Weaver is suggesting.

 

[HBF]

I would be very anoyed with the club if they recruited the players Weaver is suggesting.

Same here J, I would go very very different to that.
But, he is the resident "expert" apparently.

 

[DIG]

Picking up both Sheldons surprised me too. If we are using a best available approach we'd be compromising that by picking "name" players instead.

 

[Johnny_3]

resident expert, happy with his first pick though

 

[gandaal]

You are a bunch of very strange people.

Yeah it would be nice to pick up a ruck but have you ever thought about the fact that none of the rucks on offer other than Luenburger and Sellar (who's probably not going to be a ruck anyway) are worth being drafted? They're certainly not worth pick 17 or 19 in this draft.

Reid a bad pickup because we don't need a forward prospect... right this very second? Forward thinking there people. From all reports Reid has all the athletism to make it but is bottom aged and skinny so will take time, but in four years when Ben Reid is starting to make him mark who knows what our needs will be?

 

[Jeremias]

You are a bunch of very strange people.

Yeah it would be nice to pick up a ruck but have you ever thought about the fact that none of the rucks on offer other than Luenburger and Sellar (who's probably not going to be a ruck anyway) are worth being drafted? They're certainly not worth pick 17 or 19 in this draft.

Reid a bad pickup because we don't need a forward prospect... right this very second? Forward thinking there people. From all reports Reid has all the athletism to make it but is bottom aged and skinny so will take time, but in four years when Ben Reid is starting to make him mark who knows what our needs will be?

So you don't think that other tha Leuenberger and Sellar, there are other ruckmen worth drafting?

We will not take Reid, as not only will there be better available, but we do NOT need him.

 

[gandaal]

So you don't think that other tha Leuenberger and Sellar, there are other ruckmen worth drafting?

We will not take Reid, as not only will there be better available, but we do NOT need him.

Nope. Not within the first four rounds anyway. Tippet may be an exception as a late third round/early fourth round pick.

We need anyone with talent. Or haven't you had a look at our list lately?

 

[Jeremias]

Nope. Not within the first four rounds anyway. Tippet may be an exception as a late third round/early fourth round pick.

We need anyone with talent. Or haven't you had a look at our list lately?

If you really think that you are being silly. There are at least 2 others. Add to that the ruckmen worth looking at late.

Yes I have seen our list, and yes we do need talent. But we need a ruckman, and to suggest we would overlook them is just silly. Obviously you haven't looked at our list lately.

 

[gandaal]

If you really think that you are being silly. There are at least 2 others. Add to that the ruckmen worth looking at late.

Yes I have seen our list, and yes we do need talent. But we need a ruckman, and to suggest we would overlook them is just silly. Obviously you haven't looked at our list lately.

We need a ruckman so lets just recruit any young ruckman, even if we're reasonably sure that there are better prospects out there and that those young ruckman will never be top class AFL ruckman because one is a tall forward and the other has skills to make Barnaby French blush.

Is that what your saying?

Only idiots draft for need with early picks and in this draft early picks go up to and include our fourth round pick.

 

[Jeremias]

We need a ruckman so lets just recruit any young ruckman, even if we're reasonably sure that there are better prospects out there and that those young ruckman will never be top class AFL ruckman because one is a tall forward and the other has skills to make Barnaby French blush.

Is that what your saying?

Only idiots draft for need with early picks and in this draft early picks go up to and include our fourth round pick.

Now you are just being silly.

Of course we should overlook the ruckmen if there are better available. But you CANNOT deny that we are in dire need of a ruckman, and we will take one. Whether it be Renouf, Tippett, Currie etc is yet to be seen. If Tippett is available at 19, take him. If Renouf is there at 35, take him, unless we take Tippett. Also consider him at 19. If Currie is there at 51, consider it. If we choose not to take him, take him at 67 if available. Goldstein at 67, at least consider it. Obviously we will only take one of them, but we need to consider our options. We would be damn silly if we didn't.

Reid at 35 WILL NOT be the best option. We are in far greater need of other sorts. Of course, consider him, but if we need or rate another kid higher, take him. Reid will not fit into our current structure in the forward line.

We want to build a team. Suggesting that we should have a surplus of something, and a dearth of something else is stupid. Suggesting we should add to the surplus instead of adressing our major deficiencies is just as stupid.

 

[gandaal]

Now you are just being silly.

Of course we should overlook the ruckmen if there are better available. But you CANNOT deny that we are in dire need of a ruckman, and we will take one. Whether it be Renouf, Tippett, Currie etc is yet to be seen. If Tippett is available at 19, take him. If Renouf is there at 35, take him, unless we take Tippett. Also consider him at 19. If Currie is there at 51, consider it. If we choose not to take him, take him at 67 if available. Goldstein at 67, at least consider it. Obviously we will only take one of them, but we need to consider our options. We would be damn silly if we didn't.

Reid at 35 WILL NOT be the best option. We are in far greater need of other sorts. Of course, consider him, but if we need or rate another kid higher, take him. Reid will not fit into our current structure in the forward line.

We want to build a team. Suggesting that we should have a surplus of something, and a dearth of something else is stupid. Suggesting we should add to the surplus instead of adressing our major deficiencies is just as stupid.

Taking Tippett at pick 19 would be criminal incompetence from our recruiting department. We aren't going to win the premiership over the next two years so we can afford to wait till next year where there are actually some quality ruck prospects on offer. The idea drafting a "ruck" like Tippet who's not really a ruck anyway at pick 19 is just a premature panic attack over the state of our ruck division rather than a genuine attempt to realistically fix our ruck issues.

 

[Jeremias]

Taking Tippett at pick 19 would be criminal incompetence from our recruiting department. We aren't going to win the premiership over the next two years so we can afford to wait till next year where there are actually some quality ruck prospects on offer. The idea drafting a "ruck" like Tippet who's not really a ruck anyway at pick 19 is just a premature panic attack over the state of our ruck division rather than a genuine attempt to realistically fix our ruck issues.

A 200cm boy who is a good ruckman and a very good forward is well worth it. I think he will be taken at 14, and if he is available at 19 we should take him.

Think Laurence Angwin, but with a better attitude.

Drafting a ruckman this year will have NO effect on whether or not we draft one next year.

 

[gandaal]

A 200cm boy who is a good ruckman and a very good forward is well worth it. I think he will be taken at 14, and if he is available at 19 we should take him.

Think Laurence Angwin, but with a better attitude.

Drafting a ruckman this year will have NO effect on whether or not we draft one next year.

Indeed a 200cm boy who's a good ruckman and a very good forward would be well worth it. Unfortunately Tippet is neither of those. A decent forward with potential and a pitch hitting ruckman at best with enough height to make the idea of him being a AFL ruck a possibility.

 

[navier-stokes equation]

Jeremias I think you completely misunderstood the above posts by Gandaal

You are suggesting that with pick 19 that we overlook the best available and pick based on position. Sure we need a ruckman, but don't you understand how silly it is to pick based on need?

It is good to have a surplus of something on the list. You have trade potential. You can base your gameplan around this surplus. Look at the bulldogs in last years draft. They had pick 11 and you'd think they would have drafted a tall but they drafted ANOTHER midfielder in Higgins. He looks like a gun doesnt he? Imagine if they drafted Cleve Hughes with pick 11 based on the fact they needed a tall. They'd look like idiots. They have probably realised since drafting Tim Walsh that it is silly to try and 'reach' for certain positions. There is NO HARM in drafting the best available.

When pick 17 or 19 comes around and Hughes sees Renouf or Tippett as the best available and we pick him then that's a good decision. If when pick 17 or 19 come around and we pick Renouf or Tippett even though there is another player ranked higher, then that would be a pathetic decision - I believe Hughes will not do this and will draft on a BEST AVAILABLE policy. You can't pass up talent just based on need. Look where it got us with Murray Vance. We tried to turn him into a CHB. We were hoping Trent SPorn would grow into a CHB. It is fraught with danger going after a type when TALENT is what we need.

Besides the point that Reid is talented, he can also play down back. We need talent all over the park. If he plays forward, it puts more competition on the rest of the forwards. That can only be a good thing! That is one other benefit of having a surplus - you get the best out of those vying for a place

 

[Jeremias]

Indeed a 200cm boy who's a good ruckman and a very good forward would be well worth it. Unfortunately Tippet is neither of those. A decent forward with potential and a pitch hitting ruckman at best with enough height to make the idea of him being a AFL ruck a possibility.

You are coming across as though you haven't seen Tippett play-you are selling him short.

I think that the Crows will take him at 14. If they don't we should seriously consider him at 19 if he lasts.

Oh, and your comment that because we are not going to contend for a few years, we can afford to pass up on prospects is the silliest I have heard in a while. So, according to your logic, because we won't be in contention for a premiership until about 2009, we shouldn't be drafting at all. Yep, pass on ALL our picks. I hope not. Care to rethnk?

 

[Salaryman]

I'm with Gandaal and Navier, Jeremias you are so dogged on this issue. I can tell you it is not a sign of weakness to admit you might be wrong and change your opinion from time to time. Renouf or Tippett at 19 is paying way over the odds IMO. I think we should look to rookie a ruckman, then draf tone next year......sacrificing a high pick for a ruckman that might end up being our third stringer or a forward pocket is ludicrous. Tell us Jeremias, on your rankings of best available where do you have Renouf and Tippett?

 

[Jeremias]

Jeremias I think you completely misunderstood the above posts by Gandaal

You are suggesting that with pick 19 that we overlook the best available and pick based on position. Sure we need a ruckman, but don't you understand how silly it is to pick based on need?

It is good to have a surplus of something on the list. You have trade potential. You can base your gameplan around this surplus. Look at the bulldogs in last years draft. They had pick 11 and you'd think they would have drafted a tall but they drafted ANOTHER midfielder in Higgins. He looks like a gun doesnt he? Imagine if they drafted Cleve Hughes with pick 11 based on the fact they needed a tall. They'd look like idiots. They have probably realised since drafting Tim Walsh that it is silly to try and 'reach' for certain positions. There is NO HARM in drafting the best available.

When pick 17 or 19 comes around and Hughes sees Renouf or Tippett as the best available and we pick him then that's a good decision. If when pick 17 or 19 come around and we pick Renouf or Tippett even though there is another player ranked higher, then that would be a pathetic decision - I believe Hughes will not do this and will draft on a BEST AVAILABLE policy. You can't pass up talent just based on need. Look where it got us with Murray Vance. We tried to turn him into a CHB. We were hoping Trent SPorn would grow into a CHB. It is fraught with danger going after a type when TALENT is what we need.

Besides the point that Reid is talented, he can also play down back. We need talent all over the park. If he plays forward, it puts more competition on the rest of the forwards. That can only be a good thing! That is one other benefit of having a surplus - you get the best out of those vying for a place

On the contrary, I think you have misread my posts.

I firmly believe in the best available policy, but, on top of that, we need to find a balance between best available and team needs.

Of course I am not advocating passing up immense talent to go for a player based on team needs, but if we need a ruckman, we draft one in a position they are generally rated. That means, either Tippett at 19, Renouf at 19/35, Currie at 51 etc.

As I have said, there is no point drafting to add to a surplus if we are going to ignore a deficiency.

 

[gandaal]

You are coming across as though you haven't seen Tippett play-you are selling him short.

I think that the Crows will take him at 14. If they don't we should seriously consider him at 19 if he lasts.

Oh, and your comment that because we are not going to contend for a few years, we can afford to pass up on prospects is the silliest I have heard in a while. So, according to your logic, because we won't be in contention for a premiership until about 2009, we shouldn't be drafting at all. Yep, pass on ALL our picks. I hope not. Care to rethnk?

That's just about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. How did you interpret "We don't need to draft a ruckman in this draft if the pickings are slim as we've got time to deal with this issue which could potentially be fixed by one quality kid drafted" to "Lets draft nothing"?

 

[Jeremias]

I'm with Gandaal and Navier, Jeremias you are so dogged on this issue. I can tell you it is not a sign of weakness to admit you might be wrong and change your opinion from time to time. Renouf or Tippett at 19 is paying way over the odds IMO. I think we should look to rookie a ruckman, then draf tone next year......sacrificing a high pick for a ruckman that might end up being our third stringer or a forward pocket is ludicrous. Tell us Jeremias, on your rankings of best available where do you have Renouf and Tippett?

I am not arguing this for the sake of an argument, rather I genuinely believe it. Of course I will admit it when I am wrong, but on this issue, I don't believe it to be the case.

I haven't done a best available list as such, rather a mock draft which I have already posted. Therefore, it is hard to say. However, I do think that Tippett will be lucky to last until 17, let alone 19. Roughly, off the top of my head, both Tippett and Currie would be ranked around our 2nd rounder, and almost definitely before our 3rd rounder. We would count ourselves very lucky if either last until pick 35.

Guys, keep in mind that there is absolutely NO malice in my posts. It is good to get some discussion, but please remember I am not angry at all, nor am I targeting indicudual posters. I am merely posting what I believe will be in the best interests of the club, which I have no reason to doubt that it is exactly as you are doing. Just highlights the extent of our differing opinions.

 

[Jeremias]

That's just about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. How did you interpret "We don't need to draft a ruckman in this draft if the pickings are slim as we've got time to deal with this issue which could potentially be fixed by one quality kid drafted" to "Lets draft nothing"?

Because you posted that due to the fact we will not be contending for a premiership over the next few years we can afford not to address our on-field needs...

 

[gandaal]

Because you posted that due to the fact we will not be contending for a premiership over the next few years we can afford not to address our on-field needs...

And the ruck is our sole on-field need then?

 

[Jeremias]

And the ruck is our sole on-field need then?

No, but it most definitely is one of, if not our major weakness. Surely you would agree...

 

[gandaal]

No, but it most definitely is one of, if not our major weakness. Surely you would agree...

Nope. Our midfield is a disgrace and I consider it our major weakness. The lack of top AFL quality rucks is merely an irritation next to the gaping wound of our midfield. It's the reason why our defense is under pressure permantly during every match. Its the reason our forwards don't get the quality of supply they need to do their job. In an era of dominant midfields ours is a joke and that first and foremost is our major weakness.

That being said our ruck division is a weakness no doubt that should be address some point soon. I'm not convinced that it has to be this draft or that any of the options that could be available are the answer by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Jeremias]

Nope. Our midfield is a disgrace and I consider it our major weakness. The lack of top AFL quality rucks is merely an irritation next to the gaping wound of our midfield. It's the reason why our defense is under pressure permantly during every match. Its the reason our forwards don't get the quality of supply they need to do their job. In an era of dominant midfields ours is a joke and that first and foremost our major weakness.

That being said our ruck division is a weakness no doubt that should be address some point soon. I'm not convinced that it has to be this draft or that any of the options that could be available are the answer by any stretch of the imagination.

I agree that our midfield is a major weakness, but I do not understand the logic behind addressing one and ignoring the other. Both need to be taken care of. We cannot draft just midfielders!

And remember, a midfield without a ruckman is not as potent as one with a ruckman. Classic example: St.Kilda