Pick 14

[DaveLister]

I'd be pretty confident that Fremantle could bring Ian Hill home within 4 years so long as Bradley is still at the club and he doesn't end up at west coast.
What's the likelihood the eagles would take him at 20 or 22?

 

[YEOLO]

I'd be pretty confident that Fremantle could bring Ian Hill home within 4 years so long as Bradley is still at the club and he doesn't end up at west coast.
What's the likelihood the eagles would take him at 20 or 22?

Unlikely I would think.
Reckon we will take either two mids or a mid and hbf. We have a need in both of those areas and I think we will draft Cameron with one of our later picks. We don't have a need for Hill.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Sturt and Woodcock imo.

I like Woodcock as well.

I think he should be available later in the draft, but who knows

 

[elsleevador]

I don’t know much about stack but his hardness and inside hands are very impressive in the couple of vids I viewed!

 

[Joao]

I don’t know much about stack but his hardness and inside hands are very impressive in the couple of vids I viewed!

Burst speed from stoppage is my favourite part. Exactly what we don't have at the moment.

 

[M_rash]

20 kids invited to the draft night. Hill isn’t one. Twomey podcast

 

[Joao]

20 kids invited to the draft night. Hill isn’t one. Twomey podcast

Strange that it is only 20 given the first round is 20 picks. There are going to be people not there getting picked and people there not getting picked IMO.

 

[M_rash]

Strange that it is only 20 given the first round is 20 picks. There are going to be people not there getting picked and people there not getting picked IMO.

Yeah no idea how they do it. Presume it’s really only for the top 10 maybe. Otherwise they would need to invite 30-40, plus some mature agers too.

 

[more_of_bito]

Top 20 kids definitely being picked right ? Even if they’re at pick 45...

Best outcome would be one of those 20 being around at 31 for us! Or hill at 31 is a dream

 

[Taylor]

There are players invited who aren't taken until later. They want the top then there

 

[Clems Knee]

Only 7 clubs have top ten draft picks, thanks to Gold Coast and Port Adelaide. So maybe Hill is not any of those club’s lists.
Says nothing about the clubs with picks in the teens.

 

[apuchar]

O'Reilly kicked 5 after half time to win that game for EF v SF in the colts elimination final....his coach played him in defence in the first half and SF led by 3 - 4 goals at half time....in the 1st Semi O'Reilly played at FF from the off and kicked his 1st goal in the final quarter, EF lost by 2 pts....Heard O'Reilly's opponent for that game was Carter....

Wow. Interesting if true. Carter is at least 8cm shorter. Great effort

 

[Ysaye]

And, we picked Sheridan, Crozier and Forster before Bhill, Yeo, and Hamling.

To add in some more interesting info, this is who Freo have taken at the draft (not inc. rookies) since 2010-2016 in that 180-189cm mid/flanker size:
Jayden Pitt
Viv Michie
Josh Mellington
Tommy Sheridan
Hayden Crozier
Alex Forster
Cam Sutcliffe
Josh Simpson
Max Duffy
Brady Grey
Lachie Weller
Ed Langdon
Josh Deluca
Darcy Tucker
Harley Balic
Shane Yarran*(mature ager)
Luke Ryan (mature ager)

Bolded are still playing with us. So you'll have to excuse me when another set of names gets thrown up as a great proposition and to get excited about because they are 180-189cm mids with good draft stats and performances at U18s. Spare me. Most of these players struggled to get on the ground, let alone be influential in a game. Our best mids have been over 190cm or under 180cm to date. People saying iHill is higher risk and we should go for the about 185cm inside mid from outside WA. Since we don't have 2 top 5 picks this year, show me the evidence for your risk-assessment in light of the above?

I believe you missed Michael Barlow 189cm and Connor Blakely (188cm, at least according that font of knowledge Wikipedia) from that list.

Taking who is still on the list versus whonis not as a measure of success is not a useful assessment because some of those players who are no longer there have had high numbers of games; much higher that the average at which their draft position typically holds. Some are still playing for other clubs and one we even never wanted to let go.

Additionally we had really poor picks (the average order of those picks you are complaining about is poor) through that period because of on field success and it's effect on draft order. When you have lower picks the "value" of the draft often materializes in smaller players (or oversized) because those players are ones that the teams (not just Fremantle) with the top picks will overlook in the early rounds. But if you have good picks you pick players without the weakness of being undersized.

 

[Stars align]

I believe you missed Michael Barlow 189cm and Connor Blakely (188cm, at least according that font of knowledge Wikipedia) from that list.

Taking who is still on the list versus whonis not as a measure of success is not a useful assessment because some of those players who are no longer there have had high numbers of games; much higher that the average at which their draft position typically holds. Some are still playing for other clubs and one we even never wanted to let go.

Additionally we had really poor picks (the average order of those picks you are complaining about is poor) through that period because of on field success and it's effect on draft order. When you have lower picks the "value" of the draft often materializes in smaller players (or oversized) because those players are ones that the teams (not just Fremantle) with the top picks will overlook in the early rounds. But if you have good picks you pick players without the weakness of being undersized.

 

[Stars align]

To the Freo draft watchers given the clubs off season moves with the addition of hogan and lobb where does that place them in their drafting of O'reilly?

 

[eastfreo75]

To the Freo draft watchers given the clubs off season moves with the addition of hogan and lobb where does that place them in their drafting of O'reilly?

Been thinking the same question.

Talls take longer to develop and think it would be a good idea for a player to develop in the WAFL.

All of our talls are 26 and under excepted for Sandilands.

Our front half is stacked with the players and if were to take O'Reilly then it will be as a back.

The priority should be our midfield and a small forward. Picks 14,31,43 should be on our priority. Depending on bids for Carter, O'Reilly would be a great pick up at 65 (55).

 

[simpsonwillo]

I’ve got a strong felling that drafting Ian (Bobby) Hill with pick 14 is our chance at getting our very own ‘Cyril’. Homegrown WA boy with immense talent and speed to burn. He will light up Optus Stadium; not to be passed up imo.

 

[wayToGo_]

So the thing that confuses me about the Ian Hill debate is that the reasons against us drafting him appear to be that he is too small and we have enough short people on our list already. Yet the same people using this argument are then also very keen on Boyd Woodcock who is just as small (I like him too btw).

The only other argument against seems to be that speed and x-factor in the forward half isn't as important as other positions (eg midfield) yet we look at the two grand finalists last season and West Coast recruited Willie Rioli and Liam Ryan recently whilst Collingwood added Jaiydn Stephenson. West Coast with an elite back line and forward line yet ordinary midfield defeated Collingwood with an elite midfield but ordinary back and forward line.

I'm certainly not going to have a sook if we don't end up with Hill but I don't understand why some are so against him and are also claiming those who do want him are just being emotional because of the Hill name. Is it because people overrate pick #14? It's likely to become #16 or #17 by the time bids get sorted. Is spending a late first on a quality small forward who could eventually rotate through the midfield really that big a gamble?

 

[Scham]

So the thing that confuses me about the Ian Hill debate is that the reasons against us drafting him appear to be that he is too small and we have enough short people on our list already. Yet the same people using this argument are then also very keen on Boyd Woodcock who is just as small (I like him too btw).

The only other argument against seems to be that speed and x-factor in the forward half isn't as important as other positions (eg midfield) yet we look at the two grand finalists last season and West Coast recruited Willie Rioli and Liam Ryan recently whilst Collingwood added Jaiydn Stephenson. West Coast with an elite back line and forward line yet ordinary midfield defeated Collingwood with an elite midfield but ordinary back and forward line.

I'm certainly not going to have a sook if we don't end up with Hill but I don't understand why some are so against him and are also claiming those who do want him are just being emotional because of the Hill name. Is it because people overrate pick #14? It's likely to become #16 or #17 by the time bids get sorted. Is spending a late first on a quality small forward who could eventually rotate through the midfield really that big a gamble?

I think the other query on Hill is his drop off in form this year. Was it just the shoulder?

 

[Scham]

Your beef with knightmare is fairly amusing.

Jealousy is a curse.

 

[Clems Knee]

Jealousy is a curse.

...But you are worse.

Seeing as we’re heading into primary school insults.

 

[jedi mind tricks]

I think the other query on Hill is his drop off in form this year. Was it just the shoulder?

Yes it is

Are you trying to imply something else?

 

[eastfreo75]

So the thing that confuses me about the Ian Hill debate is that the reasons against us drafting him appear to be that he is too small and we have enough short people on our list already. Yet the same people using this argument are then also very keen on Boyd Woodcock who is just as small (I like him too btw).

The only other argument against seems to be that speed and x-factor in the forward half isn't as important as other positions (eg midfield) yet we look at the two grand finalists last season and West Coast recruited Willie Rioli and Liam Ryan recently whilst Collingwood added Jaiydn Stephenson. West Coast with an elite back line and forward line yet ordinary midfield defeated Collingwood with an elite midfield but ordinary back and forward line.

I'm certainly not going to have a sook if we don't end up with Hill but I don't understand why some are so against him and are also claiming those who do want him are just being emotional because of the Hill name. Is it because people overrate pick #14? It's likely to become #16 or #17 by the time bids get sorted. Is spending a late first on a quality small forward who could eventually rotate through the midfield really that big a gamble?

totally agree.

The too many 180cm and under on the list argument seems to be overstated.

Ballantyne will retire at the end of this coming season, and B Hill, Walters and Coyler will be 26,28,29 next year.

Matera, Giro, Switkowski and Crowden haven't cemented their spot in the best 22.

Tigers have Prestia, Short, Higgins, Lambert, Rioli and Houli in their best 22 that are 180cm and under.

People forgot that Neale is 176cm as an inside mid and Bobby Hill is an 175cm outside mid who can play as a high forward.

 

[Scham]

Yes it is

Are you trying to imply something else?

No it’s just some players star at 16, 17 but can’t go on with it, that’s all.

 

[Scham]

...But you are worse.

Seeing as we’re heading into primary school insults.

What primary school did you go to???

Not an insult, just a statement of fact....???