Remove this Banner Ad

Pick 13 = Benjamin

  • Thread starter Thread starter Colonel
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Colonel

Senior List
Joined
Oct 16, 2002
Posts
216
Reaction score
235
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Richmond
If the infamous deal for Polak goes through the way some people are suggesting it, our first pick will be 13, this to me sounds like benjamin will be the player coming to Richmond.

He sounds exactly like the type of player TW likes, i have never seen the kid play as i have lived overseas for the last 2 years so have no real idea. But he sounds like he has promise but could be a bit of a gamble.

What do people think? would people like Weaver etc (those with some knowledge on the kids) be happy with a player like him as a first pick?

Just interested in peoples thoughts and whether they agree? If we did get pick 13, who do you think would be the player we have an eye on, because we obviously think the player we want at 8 will still be there at 13! That to me means we aren't really after proud or selwood!?
 
itsintheblood said:
Sure, and miller was delighted adam pattison lasted to pick 16 and JON lasted to pick 8 cause the club thought they'd go top 3!!!!

No one thought those to would go that early anyway (16 & 8),thats why i am not concerned if we downgraded pick 8 to 13 cause we never seem to pick what everyone else thinks we should.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

I was interested what difference it would make to drop 5 spots in other drafts. I looked at the last Super Draft in 2001. Players taken after pick 8 included Reilly 12, Dal Santo 13, Kelly 17, Gram 19, Maguire 21, Seaby 22, S Johnson 24, Armstrong 25, Roberts-Thomson 29, C Brown 32, Mitchell 36, Montagna 37, Hansen 38, Welsh 47, Browne 52, Miller 55, Medhurst 56, Swan 58, Schneider 60, White 62, Hyde 68, Harris 71, D Johnson 81. Half the guys taken in the first 8 probably disappoint to this stage of their career- Polak, X Clarke, Sampi, Hale (maybe a bit harsh but with pick 7 you would want a little more?). Just proves that there is no gaurantee that pick 8 gets us some superstar. With kids at the draft stage, it's still a bit of a raffle.
Another point- if you clasify each youngster as a ruck, key position, inside midfielder and outside midfielder- clubs won't take a player that doesn't suit their needs. Dropping 5 spots may make no difference depending on who needs what ahead of us. Say we want a key position player- 9 takes a ruck, 10 takes an inside mid, 11 takes an outside mid, 12 takes a key position. We get one spot away from who we wanted and the guy taken may not be the one we wanted anyway. I'm convinced it's no big deal to drop five places.
 
5 places isnt much in the mcdougall trade but when you are in the top 10 why the hell would you want to drop down

lol at you just over looking the fact that at number 8 was a gun in bartel, that was a very good midfielders draft so it did go deep but 2006 is different

i wouldnt want benjamin at 13 anyway, IT MUST BE AA FULLBACK NATHAN BROWN:thumbsu:
 
UpTheGuts said:
JON seems decidedly ordinary. Clarke would have been much better

'decidedly ordinary', quite an insult. JON is not only raw but very young. Always going to take a while.

Reminds me abit of Michael Johnson of Freo. Perhaps give him more than 1 year before we right him off?

If we do draft Benjamin it will be intersting to watch a team centered around; Benjamin, JON, Deledio, Tambling, Meyer, Thursfield, P Bowden, Polo, Raines etc. types.

At least you can see what kind of side Plough is trying to put together. At the very least should be fun to watch come 2009 onwards.
 
If Caleb Mourish's athletic abilitys as identified on here are true and he can play footy then we should take him. Hes 194cm plays kp can play FF, CHF from all reports he could even play a similar role to Adam Goodes. Hes the one to get not Benjamin.
 
Bentleigh said:
'decidedly ordinary', quite an insult. JON is not only raw but very young. Always going to take a while.

Reminds me abit of Michael Johnson of Freo. Perhaps give him more than 1 year before we right him off?

.

spot on Bents....very raw but looks to have the tools to be a very good player, should see some real improvement this pre season with some miles in those skinny legs
 
UpTheGuts said:
JON seems decidedly ordinary. Clarke would have been much better

yeah he does "seem", but watching the way this kid moves and his height and speed, we have another rebounding HB that fits into TW's plan perfectly.
He passed the ohter test big time this season, when as a lanky skinny kid, took a bullet, in a crunching 50 50, without a flinch. ;)
 
Supertiger said:
If Caleb Mourish's athletic abilitys as identified on here are true and he can play footy then we should take him. Hes 194cm plays kp can play FF, CHF from all reports he could even play a similar role to Adam Goodes. Hes the one to get not Benjamin.

This sort of post is dangerous. I would be shocked if you could find anyone who has seen him play or knows much about him.

This is a game of Chinese whispers. He is reported to be an 194cm+ Aboriginal ruck-rover. All the talk of him playing FF, CHF or playing likes Goodes is all guess work. No one knows about his athletic ability.

Declaring him the one to get on the back of how little is known is foolish.

Miller has seen him. It really is one of those decisions where we just have to shrug our shoulders and back the guy who has seen him play.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Bentleigh said:
'decidedly ordinary', quite an insult. JON is not only raw but very young. Always going to take a while.

I watched a preseason game for Coburg where JON played. The Richmond coaches were sitting a few rows from me.

At one point JON ran 15m towards a loose ball, scooped it up without breaking stride, ran 10m and got his kick away (terrible kick incidently). The coaches almost wet themselves at the pace, balance, pick-up and acceleration.

They were ohhing, ahhing and giggling like school boys.

JON is going to be a big part of the plans in the future. He might take some time to make his mark, but will be given every chance.
 
Using the word dangerous Weave is probably over doing it dont you think. All Im saying is if the boy can play and he has the attributes that people are saying then he should be looked at, second I didnt say lets pick a player no one has seen before, no club would pick a player they havent seen, so all im saying is if GM has seen him and the boy can play and we rate him as a pick who is in the 8 to 13 mix then he should be looked at seriously and not be afraid of the public reaction on forums and what not.
 
Bentleigh said:
'decidedly ordinary', quite an insult. JON is not only raw but very young. Always going to take a while.

Reminds me abit of Michael Johnson of Freo. Perhaps give him more than 1 year before we right him off?

If we do draft Benjamin it will be intersting to watch a team centered around; Benjamin, JON, Deledio, Tambling, Meyer, Thursfield, P Bowden, Polo, Raines etc. types.

At least you can see what kind of side Plough is trying to put together. At the very least should be fun to watch come 2009 onwards.

Sure, should be good. Hope so. Re JON, just calling it as I see it early doors - for a start he's a pretty ordinary kick and doesn't get boot to ball quickly. Hope I'm wrong and he wins 6 flags for us, but it was a surprise to see himk go that high and he will be expected to justify that confidence at some stage by showing he really is better than those that followed...
 
Supertiger said:
Using the word dangerous Weave is probably over doing it dont you think. All Im saying is if the boy can play and he has the attributes that people are saying then he should be looked at

This is the bit I am refering to. The attributes people are saying he has are entirely guess work. None of the people who are saying he is quick, skillful, a ruck-rover etc have seen him play.

It is dangerous to have someone guess that he is talented, and then have a dozen other people talk about him because "people say he is talented".

For all we know he can't kick, run or tie his own shoe laces.

It is Chinese whispers.
 
That is, he could be anything - the next dal Santo or the next Ashley Blurton (different types to Benjamin I know but as an example). A gamble and leave it to the folks who should know and will be judged accordingly.
 
At times I would have also prefered the club to draft a Hurn or Clark - more a a sure thing of comming good, yet perhaps less upside and not they style of player Wallace has been building for the clubs future since day 1.

The more I think about it the more I appluade Plough for having the bollocks to get rid of AK and draft JON etc. in attempt to reach this goal.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

PLSC said:
5 places isnt much in the mcdougall trade but when you are in the top 10 why the hell would you want to drop down

lol at you just over looking the fact that at number 8 was a gun in bartel, that was a very good midfielders draft so it did go deep but 2006 is different

i wouldnt want benjamin at 13 anyway, IT MUST BE AA FULLBACK NATHAN BROWN:thumbsu:

Yeah sorry,
I didn't mean to be misleading but I figured Bartel, Hodge, Judd and Ball were all excellent players taken in the top 8. I suppose the point I was making was that just because you pick in the top 8, there is no gaurantee that the player taken will be any better than the guy you could take at 13. Despite the science, there is a lot of guesswork and luck involved. People were screaming about Polak and Sampi before that draft but now I can't believe they went before Del Santo, Mitchell, Maguire, and Bartel and even guys like Reilly, Cam Brown, Miller, Swan, Schneider, Hansen, Montagna, Roberts-Thomson, Gram and Seaby are in a better place career wise than six of the first thirteen players chosen and three or four of the first eight. Dropping five spots makes no real difference- depending on who they've got in mind. We won't know that until draft day.;)
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom