Opinion Pick 1... is Cam Rayner

[mish33]

I agree we need a mid first, so I've moved away from thinking Rayner is the best option.
Then out of LDU, Dow and Brayshaw I chose Brayshaw mostly because I like to be different, but also because out of the limited vision I've seen of the three, I feel like the latter two are more inside out than LDU who seems to get more hand ball receive type possessions.

I also went with Brayshaw because he has elite endurance which I think the team will need from its inside ball winners. His disposal under pressure seems as good if not better than Dow's. And reasons why he isn't generally considered in the same level?

For 15, unless Clark were still available, I think O'Brien would complement a strong inside mid well. A pacy, long running left foot winger to spread and deliver inside 50 sounds perfect.

 

[25 years on]

I think AFL teams will go away from 2 tall forwards...we can build our forward line around hipwood with med & smalls imo

If we go with one tall fwd, we must have a quality replacement if he misses a game or two.

 

[25 years on]

As much as I think Rayner is the best of the draft, our need is mids,no compromise, pick the best pure mids we can, regardless of how good the Fwds are if they don't get the ball they are expensive ornaments

 

[carnthemlions]

And just because everyone likes videos and this years kids aren't exciting, except Rayner.

yay, exciting!
Jared Brennan- exciting. Simon Black- boring. Brennan should've been the better player, right?

 

[jjami15]

yay, exciting!
Jared Brennan- exciting. Simon Black- boring. Brennan should've been the better player, right?

A very silly comparison, if you see Jared Brennan in Rankine I reckon you would be the only one. Rankine is flashy, granted but he does things that Cyril can only do and just to add he can rundown tackle players. Didn't see Brennan do that to often with his laconic style. Black was a pure midfielder and you didn't see his numbers or impact as much until after the game and you would look at his stats.

 

[luthor]

A very silly comparison, if you see Jared Brennan in Rankine I reckon you would be the only one. Rankine is flashy, granted but he does things that Cyril can only do and just to add he can rundown tackle players. Didn't see Brennan do that to often with his laconic style. Black was a pure midfielder and you didn't see his numbers or impact as much until after the game and you would look at his stats.

A ridiculous comparison

If you see Brennan in Rayner you are just looking for a reason to pigeohole him.

I know I'm anly looking at highlight vids but I see no comparison at all between Brennan and Rayner

Rayner looks driven ,intense and committed and Brennan.....well...........we know how he played

 

[Skoob]

I don't think anyone was making direct comparisons with any one player. The point being made was that an exciting/flashy junior highlight video does not necessarily equal a good player, and vice versa.

 

[BuntonRules]

Always a Brennan fan. did an lot of inside work he never got credit for. When you look at the 2003 draft there is no supersters we missed out on

 

[jjami15]

A ridiculous comparison

If you see Brennan in Rayner you are just looking for a reason to pigeohole him.

I know I'm anly looking at highlight vids but I see no comparison at all between Brennan and Rayner

Rayner looks driven ,intense and committed and Brennan.....well...........we know how he played

Um.......we were talking bout Rankine not Rayner.

 

[SizeMatters]

Um.......we were talking bout Rankine not Rayner.

Might have Carn on ignore?

 

[Viceregal]

Just watched the Rankine video someone posted ... is he really good at dodging tackles or is the opposition really bad at making them / telegraphing their line to strongly or ...?

 

[Lazza16]

And just because everyone likes videos and this years kids aren't exciting, except Rayner.

Wowwwwww

 

[Lacesout]

Just watched the Rankine video someone posted ... is he really good at dodging tackles or is the opposition really bad at making them / telegraphing their line to strongly or ...?

I have seen him play twice and he is Rioli elusive. Little quick bursts of speed and he is gone. Slaps tacklers away a bit like Judd used to. And he’s doing it in the seniors. Kid could be anything. We should be in his ear already. I said in another thread I think, and although I have never seen Rayner first hand, the two of them as mid/fwds in the same team, combined with the pace of Hippy, Christensen and now Cameron would be a nightmare for oppositions. Who’s going to stop all of them!
I get the need for mids, but no one stands in the fwd line now anyway. Fwds have to be able to get up and get back fast now so quick mid/fwds are a valuable commodity.

 

[Bobby Beecroft]

Personally I will be suprised if it is Rayner at Pick 1.

The new guard have stuck to their guns. Maximise the selections inside the top 20, and have constantly stated we will build via the draft.
The clear message this time around has been midfield.

Rayner in his 7 2017 TAC games achieved over 20 possessions once. Obviously he spend chunks up forward but when in the midfield at this point it is more for impact rather than consistent output. There must still be a doubt on consistent midfield output, let alone the ability to produce this at the next level.

I hope we stick with Dow. He is the most consistent & offers the hybrid of inside with that burst of pace that would be ideal to our current set-up.

 

[M Malice]

I'm not too fussed with who we end up taking at pick 1, it'll be Dow, LDU or Rayner although I wouldn't be shocked if we pulled a surprise and went Brayshaw, so we get a good talent anyway, where it gets interesting is our picks 15 and 18.

 

[PTizzle]

Would be happy with any of the three top prospects. Can easily make arguments for any of them. I like LDU personally, but am excited to welcome any of them, think they'll all add a lot.

 

[Daniels Riches]

I've been on the Dow train for a while now, but I'm really warming to Raynar.
I don't know him from a bar of soap, but as we know there have been rumours floating around about some questionable off-field behaviour/potential go home factor, which has put me off the whole time. But after watching some more highlights and media interviews, I think he seems like a really likable kid, with the confidence to succeed at the top level. I think he is the type of player that will bring the crowd back to the gabba and add some real excitement going into 2018. Love the fact that he seems to have a bit of mongrel in him too. Remember, the kid is only 18 years old. Plenty of room to grow as a person and a player.
Draft Raynar with #1 and bunk him up with Hodgey for the first year. If he has any issues in regards to professionalism and standards, then I'm sure that they will get ironed out very quickly shadowing one of the best leaders the game has ever seen.

 

[Skoob]

I'm a bit surprised at the strength of feeling for this rationale.

I don't want to sound like a smartarse but since when do we let our players tell us who we should draft? It's not a popularity contest.

I agree in theory, but as Sproj said, we have to draft differently to other sides. We've just lost another first round pick, because he didn't want to be here.We are really behind the 8 ball in terms of list management. Beside being a bottom of the ladder side, most of the best talent comes from interstate. If they can get past living away from home and playing in a bottom, developing side, the lure of BIG money and BIG clubs is very tempting and if they are very good, those offers come thick and fast.
I wouldn't be letting players know that their thoughts are considered in the process, but if drafting a mate or someone the boys would love to have here helps all 3 enjoy our club more, then it is worthwhile leaning that way. Reading through the thread, there doesn't seem to be a real stand out first choice, so it's not like we'd be picking a dud in preference... just because...
Last year is looking pretty successful so far, and I wouldn't discount the impact of us bringing a few lads who were mates and played juniors together or from the same region.

 

[tate13]

I agree in theory, but as Sproj said, we have to draft differently to other sides. We've just lost another first round pick, because he didn't want to be here.We are really behind the 8 ball in terms of list management. Beside being a bottom of the ladder side, most of the best talent comes from interstate. If they can get past living away from home and playing in a bottom, developing side, the lure of BIG money and BIG clubs is very tempting and if they are very good, those offers come thick and fast.
I wouldn't be letting players know that their thoughts are considered in the process, but if drafting a mate or someone the boys would love to have here helps all 3 enjoy our club more, then it is worthwhile leaning that way. Reading through the thread, there doesn't seem to be a real stand out first choice, so it's not like we'd be picking a dud in preference... just because...
Last year is looking pretty successful so far, and I wouldn't discount the impact of us bringing a few lads who were mates and played juniors together or from the same region.

I disagree. I don't think there's any "right" way for us to draft other than taking best available pick in the eyes of the recruiter. Schache was considered a safe pick and all the noise was that he was eager to become a Lion. 2 years later he's gone. On the other side of the coin, Sam Mayes has long been considered a flight risk, yet is one one the few first round picks in recent years to have hung around. I'd be disappointed if we started drafting guys based on who they're mates with, rather than the role they can play in our team.

 

[Skoob]

I disagree. I don't think there's any "right" way for us to draft other than taking best available pick in the eyes of the recruiter. Schache was considered a safe pick and all the noise was that he was eager to become a Lion. 2 years later he's gone. On the other side of the coin, Sam Mayes has long been considered a flight risk, yet is one one the few first round picks in recent years to have hung around. I'd be disappointed if we started drafting guys based on who they're mates with, rather than the role they can play in our team.

Most of the "noise" about Schache "eager' to come was from punters and media, based of the fact that his dad played some games for the Bears, and that he said it would be great. 99% of draft hopefuls would say "it would be great" (before they're drafted). What else would they say? The fact that Schache had and made few connections here and is now gone, makes my point. Far too many made much too much of Schache's tenuous link to Brisbane.
Mayes on the other hand, as you say is constantly speculated as a flight risk. Again, he has no prior connection to the club or other players. Again, this makes my point that the feeling of risk is higher due to that lack of connection.
This doesn't mean that if there is no connection, then a player will leave, otherwise we'd be dead. What it does say though, is that if we build with guys who are connected, then our chances might be better.
Don't assume that recruiting mates wasn't a consideration in last year's strategy. There is a very high chance that some of our youngest boys are happier than they might have been otherwise.
And again, I'm not suggesting it should be the deciding factor or ruling strategy, but when we are picking from a group of 3 or 4 guys who could be equally good, then how they fit in with the others should come into consideration. If we value LDU & Dow equally, but Dow has buddies here, then no harm in letting that tip the scales.

 

[luthor]

I agree in theory, but as Sproj said, we have to draft differently to other sides. We've just lost another first round pick, because he didn't want to be here.We are really behind the 8 ball in terms of list management. Beside being a bottom of the ladder side, most of the best talent comes from interstate. If they can get past living away from home and playing in a bottom, developing side, the lure of BIG money and BIG clubs is very tempting and if they are very good, those offers come thick and fast.
I wouldn't be letting players know that their thoughts are considered in the process, but if drafting a mate or someone the boys would love to have here helps all 3 enjoy our club more, then it is worthwhile leaning that way. Reading through the thread, there doesn't seem to be a real stand out first choice, so it's not like we'd be picking a dud in preference... just because...
Last year is looking pretty successful so far, and I wouldn't discount the impact of us bringing a few lads who were mates and played juniors together or from the same region.

I agree wholeheartedly provided the candidates really can't be split.

If that's the case, by all means give serious consideration to the factors outlined in your post.

By the same reasoning, I'm sure that you would agree that if there is a standout #1, then that should be what drives our decision. From what I've seen, Rayner appears to be that standout. Now, what I have seen is nowhere near exhaustive and I freely admit it's based almost entirely on the usual collection of clips and highlights that I think most of us rely on pretty heavily. The club and it's drafters will have no doubt have far deeper insights so whatever they decide on draft night I for one will readily accept.

Let's hope for all our sakes that we don't end up with another Schache.

 

[carnthemlions]

A very silly comparison, if you see Jared Brennan in Rankine I reckon you would be the only one. Rankine is flashy, granted but he does things that Cyril can only do and just to add he can rundown tackle players. Didn't see Brennan do that to often with his laconic style. Black was a pure midfielder and you didn't see his numbers or impact as much until after the game and you would look at his stats.

I wasn't comparing Rankine with anyone, just making the point that it really doesn't matter whether a player is exciting or not. We need solidity more than anything right now, let's not put the cart before the horse. Even more than that, we need a plan for the kind of list we're trying to build- and I think we do.

 

[carnthemlions]

I agree wholeheartedly provided the candidates really can't be split.

If that's the case, by all means give serious consideration to the factors outlined in your post.

By the same reasoning, I'm sure that you would agree that if there is a standout #1, then that should be what drives our decision. From what I've seen, Rayner appears to be that standout. Now, what I have seen is nowhere near exhaustive and I freely admit it's based almost entirely on the usual collection of clips and highlights that I think most of us rely on pretty heavily. The club and it's drafters will have no doubt have far deeper insights so whatever they decide on draft night I for one will readily accept.

Let's hope for all our sakes that we don't end up with another Schache.

There seems to be a bit of a consensus forming re: Rayner being the best player in the draft, but a lot of those people also have LDU as the best midfielder in the draft. I'd lean toward LDU purely on that basis, shoring up our midfield is an absolute must and I'm not sure whether any of the particularly highly rated inside mids will be available at our later picks.

 

[Flossie32]

Plus we have new staff on board then when Schache was drafted. Andrew Crowell, David Noble a sports Psych. And Chris Fagan. I’m over the go home factor so much now that I say don’t be scared or timid, look the go home factor in The eye say a big FU and back our team in. If they go, tough we won’t die wondering what would happen if we didn’t take them. Plus I don’t want Carlton getting Raynor and having him tear us a new one in his first few years. Something about that kid that screams I’m determined to be no1 and I reckon he will head back to Vic later on, but not before he has some success with us.

 

[tate13]

Most of the "noise" about Schache "eager' to come was from punters and media, based of the fact that his dad played some games for the Bears, and that he said it would be great. 99% of draft hopefuls would say "it would be great" (before they're drafted). What else would they say? The fact that Schache had and made few connections here and is now gone, makes my point. Far too many made much too much of Schache's tenuous link to Brisbane.
Mayes on the other hand, as you say is constantly speculated as a flight risk. Again, he has no prior connection to the club or other players. Again, this makes my point that the feeling of risk is higher due to that lack of connection.
This doesn't mean that if there is no connection, then a player will leave, otherwise we'd be dead. What it does say though, is that if we build with guys who are connected, then our chances might be better.
Don't assume that recruiting mates wasn't a consideration in last year's strategy. There is a very high chance that some of our youngest boys are happier than they might have been otherwise.
And again, I'm not suggesting it should be the deciding factor or ruling strategy, but when we are picking from a group of 3 or 4 guys who could be equally good, then how they fit in with the others should come into consideration. If we value LDU & Dow equally, but Dow has buddies here, then no harm in letting that tip the scales.

Firstly, where else does noise come from? Unless you have a personal connection with a prospective draftee, then most of the info will come from media and punters. Most media do their diligence and the story coming out of the Lions this year was one of anger because they thought Schache was no flight risk. The story also came after a raft of high picks exiting. Not just a link t his father. Your point is flawed. It's based around playing it safe and jumping and ghosts.
I'd build the best possible list I could, not one based on connections. I see your point, the one you said has been made on multiple occasions, I just disagree with it on every level. The day we start drafting like that is the day we stop contending.