List Mgmt. Pick 9

[HBF]

Laverde was an example of a player I did not like but BF hype is hard to ignore. The more you watch juniors, you learn to stick to your guns a little more.

I am still terrible about knowing where to rank tall players.

I think we all got sucked in by Laverde. I remember him playing the Stingrays and I thought he was going to to be a jet at AFL level. Looked a couple of classes above everyone else at times.

 

[windows1]

I think not fumbling under pressure is about as important a draft skill as there is. Especially for players under 192. Fumbling almost certainly rules out a midfield spot. And a forward pocket spot. Like I panic when I see it in juniors. Stephens fumbled twice in the sanfl reserves game. I hated it so much I went back and watched other games to see if it’s a trend. It isn’t. But it’s more in the back of my mind about him rhan his build (which is all anyone talks about).

Flipside is Green. Simple thing like picking up a half volley under pressure in a game against the Bushrangers early this year. He does it over and over again. His hands are superb.

Flanders has amazing hands. Doesn’t fumble. Serong close. Doesn’t fumble. It’s vital at AFL level in my view. Young doesn’t fumble. Ash maybe a little. Not much. Stephens about the same. Kemp about the same. Liam Henry couldn’t fumble if you asked him to try.

 

[Matty411]

Like it, windows1 - I reckon Green could easily be the best player from the draft after 50 games. Question is for Green - unlike the likes of Rowell - how long it'll take for him to get that much opportunity at GWS.

 

[windows1]

Like it, windows1 - I reckon Green could easily be the best player from the draft after 50 games. Question is for Green - unlike the likes of Rowell - how long it'll take for him to get that much opportunity at GWS.

I just don’t think GWS have anyone like him. I think he’s straight in and straight on ball.

He’s that good.

 

[LemmingMaster]

I just don’t think GWS have anyone like him. I think he’s straight in and straight on ball.

He’s that good.

Hooper played a little like him in his junior years.

 

[Matty411]

I just don’t think GWS have anyone like him. I think he’s straight in and straight on ball.

He’s that good.

Pane, that call is

 

[HARKER]

I just don’t think GWS have anyone like him. I think he’s straight in and straight on ball.

He’s that good.

It's never quite that easy and especially given the depth of the GWS midfield.
Who is Green going to replace from the get-go? Coniglio, Hopper, Taranto, Kelly, Ward, Whitfield? Hately and Caldwell also have a year on Green.

It's possible, but it is a big step up from the comp he has played in, to becoming a first-picked mid in a very deep midfield, given it's relative maturity.

 

[TerryWallet]

I personally think Green is over hyped. He's not as big as Cripps, not as quick as Oliver, not as catlike as Bont. Imo he's got question marks just like most of this years lot. I'm not convinced with his scope at AFL. I'm not even convinced GWS don't pass him over in favour of Jackson if it comes down to 1 or the other.

They don't need him, not enough to sell the farm over and not enough to pass over someone they really do need. A Canberra local will be very hard not to take though, but it would really help the narrative that Academy boys are open to the whole pool.

I'm interested to watch what happens.

Wouldn't be surprised with:

3. Mel H.Young
4. Adel S.Flanders
5. Syd T.Green
6. GWS L.Jackson

 

[gandaal]

Academy kids are always overhyped. It's because they have an advantage working in a professional AFL environment. That advantage disappears after draft day.

 

[windows1]

It's never quite that easy and especially given the depth of the GWS midfield.
Who is Green going to replace from the get-go? Coniglio, Hopper, Taranto, Kelly, Ward, Whitfield? Hately and Caldwell also have a year on Green.

It's possible, but it is a big step up from the comp he has played in, to becoming a first-picked mid in a very deep midfield, given it's relative maturity.

You ran out pretty quickly hey. Whitfield doesn’t play on ball. He’s in front of Hately and Caldwell for sure.

Time will tell. I know what I see. I’m supremely confident.

 

[windows1]

I personally think Green is over hyped. He's not as big as Cripps, not as quick as Oliver, not as catlike as Bont. Imo he's got question marks just like most of this years lot. I'm not convinced with his scope at AFL. I'm not even convinced GWS don't pass him over in favour of Jackson if it comes down to 1 or the other.

They don't need him, not enough to sell the farm over and not enough to pass over someone they really do need. A Canberra local will be very hard not to take though, but it would really help the narrative that Academy boys are open to the whole pool.

I'm interested to watch what happens.

Wouldn't be surprised with:

3. Mel H.Young
4. Adel S.Flanders
5. Syd T.Green
6. GWS L.Jackson

If GWS don’t match on Green I will never post on Bigfooty again. Bookmark it.

 

[LemmingMaster]

Academy kids are always overhyped. It's because they have an advantage working in a professional AFL environment. That advantage disappears after draft day.

Just trying to remember some academy kids that were overhyped and then drafted too high on draft night? Most of them end up where they belong.

 

[TerryWallet]

If GWS don’t match on Green I will never post on Bigfooty again. Bookmark it.

It's likely they will. I'll be interested to see how it plays out nevertheless though. They are cramped for points. I'm starting to think they won't trade up to get 2 high picks and will sit tight and be content with either Green or Jackson.

Green: He's considered a gun. Canberra is important to them. But do they need him?

Jackson: He's considered a gun. Could be a rare opportunity.

I think there's reasons for both.

 

[windows1]

TW why not get both? GWS could give Melb 6 and next year’s first and get Jackson at 3 and match on Green. Would be a huge draft for them.

 

[gandaal]

Just trying to remember some academy kids that were overhyped and then drafted too high on draft night? Most of them end up where they belong.

Yes, the clubs dont tend to rate them as highly as media types and phantom drafters.

 

[bmaurizio]

I personally think Green is over hyped. He's not as big as Cripps, not as quick as Oliver, not as catlike as Bont. Imo he's got question marks just like most of this years lot. I'm not convinced with his scope at AFL. I'm not even convinced GWS don't pass him over in favour of Jackson if it comes down to 1 or the other.

They don't need him, not enough to sell the farm over and not enough to pass over someone they really do need. A Canberra local will be very hard not to take though, but it would really help the narrative that Academy boys are open to the whole pool.

I'm interested to watch what happens.

Wouldn't be surprised with:

3. Mel H.Young
4. Adel S.Flanders
5. Syd T.Green
6. GWS L.Jackson

Agree with you and I reckon that Luke Jackson could be selected anywhere between 3 to 6 this kid is a jet and has really good potential.

 

[HARKER]

You ran out pretty quickly hey. Whitfield doesn’t play on ball. He’s in front of Hately and Caldwell for sure.

Time will tell. I know what I see. I’m supremely confident.

Didn't run out quick at all.

Green won't usurp any of the players I mentioned, from the get-go.
We always get excited early on for players and in particular for mids, but given the depth of the GWS midfield, where else will Green play?

Most teams would like to have a principle rotating party of 4 players that set-up at centre bounces and stoppages and then have the odd one or two that step in, on a relief basis. How does Green fit in here?

I personally think Green is over hyped. He's not as big as Cripps, not as quick as Oliver, not as catlike as Bont. Imo he's got question marks just like most of this years lot. I'm not convinced with his scope at AFL. I'm not even convinced GWS don't pass him over in favour of Jackson if it comes down to 1 or the other.

They don't need him, not enough to sell the farm over and not enough to pass over someone they really do need. A Canberra local will be very hard not to take though, but it would really help the narrative that Academy boys are open to the whole pool.

I'm interested to watch what happens.

Wouldn't be surprised with:

3. Mel H.Young
4. Adel S.Flanders
5. Syd T.Green
6. GWS L.Jackson

You see, I think that would be a wiser long-term way to go about things for GWS, although it's unlikely to come about.
GWS can and will take Green and then likely lose another mid or two cheaply next year. This is not a smart cycle to get into and which is why I keep saying that sometimes you have to address needs. All these high end picks for mids when you can't play them all together nor maximise their values on the way out.
Bonar went for less than a future third after GWS paid a #11 for him, when there were better fits around. It's just not smart.

 

[TerryWallet]

TW why not get both? GWS could give Melb 6 and next year’s first and get Jackson at 3 and match on Green. Would be a huge draft for them.

They could do that, but if they do that they are going into massive debt next year to match the Green bid. They just haven't got many picks this year and next after they trade next years first in that scenario.

Going into massive debt for a young player they don't need. I'm just not sure, although i'm fully aware they'd love a Canberra boy.

And if they don't trade up, i don't think they have intentions of matching because they gave away points trading 12 and 18 for 6. As i said, it makes sense to me that they may let Green go if they can get Jackson.

It will be a highly interesting draft night i think. Whatever happens.

 

[windows1]

GWS have one player in the top 30 in clearances per game. They are a clean side. No real dominant clearance players. Terrific bunch of first receivers most of them, maybe bar Hopper. I mean that as a compliment. Green releasing Kelly et al by hand will be a sight to behold.

 

[TerryWallet]

Ward, Hopper and Taranto all are/will be terrific first possession players. Coniglio and Williams are also good. Caldwell and Hately to come.

 

[windows1]

All does make for interesting maths though. Regardless of our opinions I am yet to work out how GWS can get the points to move up.

Melb aren’t trading for anything less than a first next year thrown in with 6. In that world there’s just aren’t enough points this year and next to match a bid at 5 by Swans. I don’t think? But if it’s not at least that why would Melbourne bother? They are not trading 3 for 6 and a second rounder with gws. They just traded out of next year because their ‘futures’ Work (their wording on radio I heard) said next year was weak.

Melb is every chance to decide tactically they are better off bidding on Green to prevent GWS doing the two for one. Will help them at pick 8.

But if that all plays out I don’t get why GWS did the 12 and 18 for 6 trade. They lost (400?) points in it. Baffling.

 

[TerryWallet]

All does make for interesting maths though. Regardless of our opinions I am yet to work out how GWS can get the points to move up.

Melb aren’t trading for anything less than a first next year thrown in with 6. In that world there’s just aren’t enough points this year and next to match a bid at 5 by Swans. I don’t think? But if it’s not at least that why would Melbourne bother? They are not trading 3 for 6 and a second rounder with gws. They just traded out of next year because their ‘futures’ Work (their wording on radio I heard) said next year was weak.

Melb is every chance to decide tactically they are better off bidding on Green to prevent GWS doing the two for one. Will help them at pick 8.

But if that all plays out I don’t get why GWS did the 12 and 18 for 6 trade. They lost (400?) points in it. Baffling.

In my opinion they did the 12 and 18 for 6 trade to make as near a surety as they can to get either *Jackson or Green. In that order. If they end up matching on Green they end up losing points on that 12 and 18 trade but it's not disastrous and the trade gives them near surety of getting one of their 2 wanted players.

* I'm assuming and pretty confident it's Jackson, but it could be someone else. Young for instance.

 

[windows1]

In my opinion they did the 12 and 18 for 6 trade to make as near a surety as they can to get either *Jackson or Green. In that order. If they end up matching on Green they end up losing points on that 12 and 18 trade but it's not disastrous and the trade gives them near surety of getting one of their 2 wanted players.

* I'm assuming and pretty confident it's Jackson, but it could be someone else. Young for instance.

Seems to be huge interest in Jackson from many parties. He’d be a neat fit for GWS long term.

 

[TerryWallet]

Seems to be huge interest in Jackson from many parties. He’d be a neat fit for GWS long term.

Yeah i'm a fan. i've done 3 ranking boards. On July 4 had him at 8, on Sep 17 had him at 7 and Oct 17 had him at 7. He's just about the youngest in the mooted Top 25 or so and he only really came to footy a year or 2 ago yet his performance is already very high. His scope is huge in my book.

Might even nudge him up a spot or 2 from 7.

 

[windows1]

Yeah i'm a fan. i've done 3 ranking boards. On July 4 had him at 8, on Sep 17 had him at 7 and Oct 17 had him at 7. He's just about the youngest in the mooted Top 25 or so and he only really came to footy a year or 2 ago yet his performance is already very high. His scope is huge in my book.

Might even nudge him up a spot or 2 from 7.

He’s going to win a lot of contested ball after the ruck contest at the next level. That really sets him apart. I can see why clubs like him so much.