Pick 1,36,46,62,

[Salaryman]

Is Luke Stanton a player we would consider for pick 36 if he's there?

A couple of people said he was a good size when I was eavesdropping at that Knights game at PP.

Aburrrrr ???

Stalking us again?

Yeah, I wouldn't mind Lukey as a speculative pick at #46. I reckon he's a late developer too.

 

[Silvagnis]

Aburrrrr ???

Stalking us again?

Yeah, I wouldn't mind Lukey as a speculative pick at #46. I reckon he's a late developer too.

Aburrrr?

Please explain.

I was eavesdropping on some scouts.

And I'm stalking AWG.

I read Stanton's AIS profile and it said he's a former basketballer like Pendlebury who was a bottom ager.

And his cousin is Dal Santo.

Are Stanton's skills and game anything like these two players?

I'd rather we find another Joe Anderson if he's a Houlihan. :wavesatBlueWorld:

I don't want Wundke at 36, 46, 62 or know much about him, but will he get drafted?

 

[smithos]

I'd be very happy with Stanton at 36 if he was available.

Gilly and HBF are you going to be posting a top 50 or something similar?

 

[TGR]

Aburrrr?

Please explain.

I was eavesdropping on some scouts.

And I'm stalking AWG.

I read Stanton's AIS profile and it said he's a former basketballer like Pendlebury who was a bottom ager.

And his cousin is Dal Santo.

Are Stanton's skills and game anything like these two players?

I'd rather we find another Joe Anderson if he's a Houlihan. :wavesatBlueWorld:

I don't Wundke at 36, 46 or even 62, but will he get drafted?

Stantons a guy that has me confused a bit. He appears to find space well and has time to use it but is seriously lacking in intensity. His skills are pretty solid and has an AFL type body ( size & weight ). Goes missing way too much for mine, however he seemed to step it up a little in the finals.

I doubt Wundke would be on many radars.

 

[Silvagnis]

Stanton sounds promising.

But it sounds like he'll get snapped up before our second pick.

 

[TGR]

Stanton sounds promising.

But it sounds like he'll get snapped up before our second pick.

Don't be surprised if he's available and that we pass on him. His intensity is a real concern for the AFL ranks IMO.

 

[TOA.]

AFAIK Collard, Connors and O'Brien fell due to question marks over their committment and/or character flaws. Maric doesn't seem to have the same question marks, in fact from what I've heard he is of great character. I suspsect where he is taken you will not so much say he slid but given his likely role and position at AFL level that around the 20-25 mark is about where you would expect. If he does slide any further then I think it will just be a matter of a few clubs picking talls for need.

Agreed Gilly.

Alot of 'hobby draft followers' (incl myself) had O'Brien and Collard going highly, and I think that was justified. O'Brien will be a player for Freo, very good debut game in R22. Collard was very good at South Freo in the first half of the year until his off field problems got the better of him.

On ability, they were worthy of top 20 like alot of us had them. We just werent privy to the very big question marks AFL clubs had hanging on their heads through their interviews and background checks.

So long as Maric doesnt mind integrating into an AFL club (ie talk to ppl), isnt prone to punching teamates, is willing to actually train with the main squad, does have a half stable family/education etc, he will be fine and go relatively early, especially in this draft. Bottom age kids with his talent dont fall into the 30s in this kind of draft without 'issues'.

Also cant see Dangerfield lasting til 36 either. Actually, I struggle to see him getting past 20. Maric could slide alittle further for the reasons HBF pointed out (almost exclusively forward this year etc).

 

[Salaryman]

Stantons a guy that has me confused a bit. He appears to find space well and has time to use it but is seriously lacking in intensity. His skills are pretty solid and has an AFL type body ( size & weight ). Goes missing way too much for mine, however he seemed to step it up a little in the finals.

I doubt Wundke would be on many radars.

I 100% agree, and that's why I said 46 and not 36....for mine 36 is for a surer bet but he might be worth a shot at #46....the only thing which makes me think he might be worth a stab (depsite his intensity) is that he is bottom aged and that lanky 190-1 body type. I just wonder if the intensity is a mental concentration issue or a lack of confidence about putting his body on the line. Having said that he is probably a less polished version of Grigga although to my eye he looks like he might be a slightly better athlete. Would be interested to see how he tested, anybody know if he was DC or state screening?

I wouldn't be surprised if Stanton is bit of a Trevor woodhouse special....he seems to like those tall athletic running types (Schofield, Houlihan - although they are probably more endurance athletes) and give them time to develop in the WAFL.

 

[HBF]

I'd be very happy with Stanton at 36 if he was available.

Gilly and HBF are you going to be posting a top 50 or something similar?

I will be, but not for another couple of weeks.
Won't be top 50 as such. More of a mock draft. It's already done, but it may need some tinkering.

 

[HBF]

Stantons a guy that has me confused a bit. He appears to find space well and has time to use it but is seriously lacking in intensity. His skills are pretty solid and has an AFL type body ( size & weight ). Goes missing way too much for mine, however he seemed to step it up a little in the finals.

Didn't pay much attention to Stanton, but isn't he a bit outside as well?

 

[TGR]

Didn't pay much attention to Stanton, but isn't he a bit outside as well?

yep, but once again come finals seemed to improve in this area.

 

[HBF]

yep, but once again come finals seemed to improve in this area.

Thanks for that.
That'll teach me for following Cotchin and Kreuzer too closely.

 

[TGR]

Thanks for that.
That'll teach me for following Cotchin and Kreuzer too closely.

I still wouldn't use a top 50 pick on him. But yes he could easily be lost watching the Kreuzer, Cotchin show.

 

[HBF]

I still wouldn't use a top 50 pick on him. But yes he could easily be lost watching the Kreuzer, Cotchin show.

Neither would I.

 

[Salaryman]

I'd be very happy with Stanton at 36 if he was available.

Gilly and HBF are you going to be posting a top 50 or something similar?

Apologies in advance.....I'm not going to put up anything. I think mock drafts are bit of a "mugs" game, too hard to predict what 16 RM's are thinking and you get one wrong early and the rest of your picks are basically going to be out. I would keep an eye on the "official" BF phantom draft, as you get 16 different hobbyists who have basically seen a fair bit of the kids representing each club...is usually worth a look. I will have a top 50 list but for a few reasons I am not all that keen to post that either. What I am happy to do is offer some comments based on what I've seen this year where appropriate and I'm happy to answer any questions that people have.

 

[Salaryman]

I still wouldn't use a top 50 pick on him. But yes he could easily be lost watching the Kreuzer, Cotchin show.

Like I said, he's bottom aged and if he puts in the work required he might develop some more grunt when he fills out. Wouldn't be surprised if he is a late bloomer and comes and bites a few on the behind and becomes a "top 50" selection. The main problem I would have with us taking him is we already have the better version in Grigga

 

[Silvagnis]

Do we have to use picks 1,36,46 and 62?

Stupid question time.

Do we have to use ALL these picks in the national draft when you take into account our delistings, trades and pick two in the PSD?

How many vacancies do we have on our list at this point in time?

Out:Flint, Whitnall, Raso, Teague, Mclaren, Kennedy
In: Judd - , Hadley

Have I forgotten any delisted players?

I'm guessing we won't use pick 62 in the PSD and we only use the minimum three picks unless we delist a Saddington, Wiggins or Bannister.

That's sure to make everyone happy.

 

[Blues08]

I go to school with stanton, he used to be a basketballer fantastic and both basketball and footy playing state basketball, chose footy over basketball and was at AIS. i dont believe he was at DC, he is a very athletic player with a great build..

 

[blaisee]

gilly ,

waht do you think of dangerfield?

do you reckon he will be available at pick 18?

 

[Salaryman]

gilly ,

waht do you think of dangerfield?

do you reckon he will be available at pick 18?

I am bit of a fan of Dangerfield. Is bottom aged but has a good size for a med def/mid and plays a bit taller than that and with a bit of grunt and confidence.....athletically he is probably iin the in the top 15% in the draft. Charges the ball out of defense at a great rate of knots, but what he does with it will either have you in raptures or wishing you had never drafted him!!

So obviously two aspects of his game that need work are decision making and disposal.....two things that can be worked on to a degree and if he gets those right he will be a beauty.

Just as an aside you will often see him go on a 30-40m run alternating bouncing the ball between his left and right hands, really quite a sight!


I think he will be there at #18 if Richmond are interested.

As a comparison you could look at somebody like a Selwood, who isn't quite as athletic or quick but will provide the same sort of grunt across HB, a more sound footy brain and won't do the spectacular, but won't turn the ball over as often either.

 

[HBF]

I am bit of a fan of Dangerfield. Is bottom aged but has a good size for a med def/mid and plays a bit taller than that and with a bit of grunt and confidence.....athletically he is probably iin the in the top 15% in the draft. Charges the ball out of defense at a great rate of knots, but what he does with it will either have you in raptures or wishing you had never drafted him!!

And this is why I think Patty might slide a bit in this years draft. You are spot on Gilly with this assesment. How many times have we seen him butcher the ball when he is in space.

Another guy I rate who uses the ball much better of half back is Jackson Hall. Just a very clean footballer who just seems to have time on his side every time he has it.

 

[Salt Lake Cities]

Just a little theory on why the blues may draft one T.Cotchin with pick 1. During our judd dealings we were always confident of keeping the above mentioned pick and, while never seeming 2 confirm so ourselves, let the media run with the Kreuzer to Carlton theme. With West Coast maybe keen on Cotchin according to some people and ninthmond getting Cale Mortons bro in trade week, just thinking it may of been our intention 2 let others think we wanted Kreuzer when really its the other guy we want?? This isnt an opinion on who we should take, merely an observation that may prove to be well wrong! (am new round here im guessing a bloke by the name Gilly would have his day/life made if it did actually go this way)

 

[HBF]

Just a little theory on why the blues may draft one T.Cotchin with pick 1. During our judd dealings we were always confident of keeping the above mentioned pick and, while never seeming 2 confirm so ourselves, let the media run with the Kreuzer to Carlton theme. With West Coast maybe keen on Cotchin according to some people and ninthmond getting Cale Mortons bro in trade week, just thinking it may of been our intention 2 let others think we wanted Kreuzer when really its the other guy we want?? This isnt an opinion on who we should take, merely an observation that may prove to be well wrong! (am new round here im guessing a bloke by the name Gilly would have his day/life made if it did actually go this way)

Getting Kruezer would also give us alot more flexibility with our talls than if we didn't get him. For instance, we can use Ackland/Cloke and Hampson in the ruck, with backup from Aisake whilst Kreuzer develops with the Bullants. It also means that we can use Carlos at FB, and hope that Austin and Jamison come on as well, which means that Carlos could end up being a 200cm utility that we could play anywhere up the spine. Ideally, he could replace Thornton at CHB in a couple of years time, finally allowing T-Brid to move out onto a flank where he is more comfortable.