Pick 14

[Shadow Man]

I think we are still an outside chance for Jordan Clark to fall to us, outside of that I'd expect us to take Hill if he's available.

 

[Alfonz]

OK I admit I haven't been paying much attention to the draft until today but I have just sat here for a while in the air conditioning with a frothy, given it some thought, some more thought and still only came up with only one question - can anyone give one legitimate reason why we wouldn't take Ian Hill if he is available at 14?

His size is very concerning. Only once in a blue moon does a player that small and slight turn into a genuinely good player. Maybe he will be that rare example.

I'm on the Sturt bandwagon. I want someone with good size who is fast, skillful, can mark and can kick goals. He fits the bill and has more appeal to me than Hill.

 

[Joao]

They may rate someone higher, but it would be marginal imo unless someone slides significantly. Our pick is within Hill's draft zone and it wouldn't be like we would be reaching for him. Speed, skills, scoring.

I don't think being a WA boy will mean we'll take him over a more highly rated prospect, even if the difference is small. Nor should it.

 

[nurries]

I don't think being a WA boy will mean we'll take him over a more highly rated prospect, even if the difference is small. Nor should it.

Agreed, especially with picks earlier on. Later picks yes

 

[Scham]

We seem connected (in rumours) with Hill, Butters, Clarke, Jones and Stocker but I suspect Shadow Man is right, unless Clarke is there we take Hill.

If Hill is gone too, the choice will be made from whoever is left from the other 3. Who all look good btw, so we’re in a good position.

 

[Taylor]

There's a place at AFL for players at that height who have that speed, that leap and that ball use.

 

[apuchar]

Draft selections: 14, 31, 43, 65, 81

Backs: The tall stocks are in good shape, but a gun lockdown small defender to develop would be handy, and so would another quality ball user to support Nathan Wilson and Luke Ryan with Connor Blakely and possibly Stephen Hill set for more midfield time.

Midfield: Still looks solid despite losing Lachie Neale to Brisbane, but more skilled onballers who can play inside and out would be welcome. Another big body or two to develop while Nat Fyfe is at his peak and David Mundy is still around wouldn't hurt either.

Forwards: The Dockers appear to have finally sorted out their key forward stocks by bringing in Jesse Hogan and Rory Lobb, and the next step is to add ground-level firepower around them. Hayden Ballantyne is surely heading into his final season, while Michael Walters splits his time as a mid-forward. Travis Colyer should help, but Freo is crying out for dangerous small forwards.

Rucks: The Dockers have a 10-year ruckman in Sean Darcy, who could spend part of next season as Aaron Sandilands' understudy before assuming the No.1 role. There is enough depth with Lobb pinch-hitting, and Scott Jones, Michael Apeness and Lloyd Meek on the books.

The priority: The Dockers would have seen the impact Willie Rioli [175cm] and Liam Ryan [179cm]– admittedly both mature draftees – had down the road at West Coast and finding some high-pressure small forwards with innate goal sense to ease the load on Walters should be a priority. - Travis King

Dream draft according to Cal Twomey: If small forwards are what the Dockers are looking for, then Zak Butters will be in the frame for their first selection. The Western Jets prospect is a classy finisher and can also play in the midfield. Ian Hill might also be available, while there's a chance they look at pressure forward Ned McHenry if he is still there at their second pick.

 

[Paracleet]

There's a place at AFL for players at that height who have that speed, that leap and that ball use.

Height certainly. That sort of height to weight ratio? Not so much. They exist but it's an exception. Most players under 180 defy the height minus 100 rule for playing weight in the AFL by being above it. Can anyone ever see Hill, with that frame even getting close to 75+ kg? For context Brad Hill was drafted at 180 and 71 and is now listed as 78.
Would need to be elite in some category to make up for it. E.g. If his cousin Brad, again, was just a very good rather than elite gut runner he'd be probably playing ammo's, let alone WAFL, given his good but not great skills and inability to lay or beat a tackle given his lack of size and strength.

Now I'm not saying he doesn't possess those elite qualities that would make up for it; I've never seen him play. If the recruiters think he is the best prospect at our pick they should take him. Anyone saying his body type isn't a handicap is just flat out wrong though.

 

[apuchar]

Full name James Gordon Krakouer Name Jim KrakouerSiblings Phil Krakouer Height/Weight 167 cm / 67 kg. Children Andrew Krakouer, Original team(s) North ...

Phillip Matera (born 27 November 1975) is a former Australian rules footballer. ... Phillip Matera. From Wikipedia, the ... Height, 171 cm (5 ft 7 in). Weight, 76 kg ...

 

[Bicco]

Height certainly. That sort of height to weight ratio? Not so much. They exist but it's an exception. Most players under 180 defy the height minus 100 rule for playing weight in the AFL by being above it. Can anyone ever see Hill, with that frame even getting close to 75+ kg? For context Brad Hill was drafted at 180 and 71 and is now listed as 78.
Would need to be elite in some category to make up for it. E.g. If his cousin Brad, again, was just a very good rather than elite gut runner he'd be probably playing ammo's, let alone WAFL, given his good but not great skills and inability to lay or beat a tackle given his lack of size and strength.

Now I'm not saying he doesn't possess those elite qualities that would make up for it; I've never seen him play. If the recruiters think he is the best prospect at our pick they should take him. Anyone saying his body type isn't a handicap is just flat out wrong though.

It's only a handicap if he wants to play a position not suited to his size such as KPF or ruck for example. If he's playing the position of small forward at the feet of the big guys, his size isn't important, it may even be a benefit. The history of this comp is littered with players thought to have been too small only to go on to have great careers. Similarly big athletic guys who turn out to be useless.
Give me Tony Liberatore over Brendan Fewster any day.
Size it not nearly as important as determination.

 

[wayToGo_]

The conversation about height is bordering on the dumbest I've experienced on BigFooty - and that's a pretty low bar.

Plenty of small players have absolutely dominated at AFL. If you are good enough to be drafted in the first round as a midget you are clearly good enough that height isn't a massive factor. Look at our first round picks for the past decade - being over 180cm had no bearing on them not succeeding. I'd take a chance at a faster Walters or Eddie Betts every day of the week. Even if he ends up Zac Fisher (who was even smaller when drafted) I'd be very happy.

Love it when people who haven't even watched a guy play write them off because of some stat they've read. Even just go watch the highlights and you can see his leap is more than good enough for it not to be a factor. Walters out marked McGovern earlier this season - 177cm vs 196cm. For an elite paced small forward I couldn't care less what height they were.

 

[Mr Fonebone]

I am leaning towards picking Hill.

We need that x factor in the forward line, he supports Freo and you can never have too many Hills. There will be some solid midfield talent in the 2nd and 3rd round as well.

BTW what is the collective of Hills? A range of hills?

 

[Square Peg]

A thrill of hills

 

[wayToGo_]

BTW what is the collective of Hills? A range of hills?

Undulating Landscape?

Rolling Hills?

 

[pavalenkoo]

His size is very concerning. Only once in a blue moon does a player that small and slight turn into a genuinely good player. Maybe he will be that rare example.

I'm on the Sturt bandwagon. I want someone with good size who is fast, skillful, can mark and can kick goals. He fits the bill and has more appeal to me than Hill.

I think if you listen to nick Blakey comments on Bobby Hill, is very interesting, which basically states that when he has played against him he noticed he maybe small in stature, but definitely makes up for it in his leap, and you can’t discount in a contest because of it.

I. Personally think it’s a blessing his dropped in the draft, due to injury, as he will overcome it.
You can’t teach class and skill (to some point)
But he has natural ability.

Bobby Hill is a green light in my book If available. It’s a no brainer


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Pussinbootz]

What sort of player are the following projected to be ? Ie in 5 years time

Clark
Butters
Stocker

Would they be in our best 22 next year?

 

[blue shark]

Well Brad Hill went at 33 for the Hawks, Ian is higher rated, but at his best Brad kicked 18 goals in a season.
That's better than some of our small forwards
We really need a small, medium forward and a mid. Everywhere else we are covered.

 

[Dockernut]

Reckon Butters could be the next Crozier or Tucker.

 

[Walkingwounded]

Height certainly. That sort of height to weight ratio? Not so much. They exist but it's an exception. Most players under 180 defy the height minus 100 rule for playing weight in the AFL by being above it. Can anyone ever see Hill, with that frame even getting close to 75+ kg? For context Brad Hill was drafted at 180 and 71 and is now listed as 78.
Would need to be elite in some category to make up for it. E.g. If his cousin Brad, again, was just a very good rather than elite gut runner he'd be probably playing ammo's, let alone WAFL, given his good but not great skills and inability to lay or beat a tackle given his lack of size and strength.

Now I'm not saying he doesn't possess those elite qualities that would make up for it; I've never seen him play. If the recruiters think he is the best prospect at our pick they should take him. Anyone saying his body type isn't a handicap is just flat out wrong though.

Mmmm that’s a strong response considering you’ve never seen him play “I’ve never seen him play”

Lucky our recruiters get paid to go and see people play

 

[yakamoto]

Butters another Crozier or Tucker! Grab him quick if available at 14.
Ian Hill is 175cm and 75kg is he not? Nothing wrong with that.

 

[_007_]

I'll eat my hat if Hill is 75kg.

 

[yakamoto]

76kg according to Twomey.

 

[_007_]

76kg according to Twomey.

WAFL has him listed as 66kg's. Don't know who is right but here is 76kg Tom Berry (with the ball), 69kg Jarrod Cameron and ??? kg's Ian Hill.

 

[Scham]

And the 72kg Liam Ryan

https://goo.gl/images/yrw1vH

 

[wayToGo_]

If you look at Bobby side by side with Lukosius it is pretty clear his height is being understated...