List Mgmt. Player Ages Thread

[WEEVZ]

Disagree totally with that philosophy, if its a midfielders draft then there is potential to grab someone with upside at pick 26, whether that means a zaharakis or Carlisle player that falls through I don't care if its big or small, get someone that may have an impact or us in 2-3 years.

Maybe it's Templeton, Sicily, jkh, apeness, marsh??

I know what you mean, I'm just saying that we should grab the best available tall at least with our first pick, or maybe a first round slider mid. Our tall stocks up forward are a glaring weakness for mine, with Hurley and Carlisle likely only rotation players up forward, same goes for Bellchambers and Ryder. Daniher is the only genuine KPF we have on our list and if we want to make a flag tilt in the next 2-3 years that has to change. A Nankervis, Apeness or Conlon would fill that key forward void while also covering us in the ruck (or vice versa). I've heard talk we'll be looking to add mids and/or small forwards in the rookie draft.

 

[222EB]

Hawthorn won't win the flag next year IMO

Very lucky win this years the way they played both teams shat themselves in one of worst GF's i've watched, looking fwd to fking them up rd2 next season.

 

[WEEVZ]

There's an article in the Herald Sun saying Scharenberg is battling injury issues and could be a big slider in the draft. Played as a tall defender but is apparently equally comfortable as a tall forward. It's unlikely but if he were to slide to us does anyone else think we'd be daft to pass him up?

 

[eth-dog]

Scharenberg has absolutely no chance of slipping to us. Only way Collingwood don't take him if available at 6 is if Aish is there and if he somehow lasts to 10 he'll go to Collingwood there

 

[Keystone agony]

Probably better to take a tall with our first pick to be honest. This is a midfielders draft so there will still be quality mids available at pick 55, whereas the quality of talls drops off dramatically after pick 30-35. We're best off using our pick 26 on a tall then a mid/small forward with pick 55.

I disagree obviously.

I feel the difference between the best KPP available at pick 26 and 55 will be far less then the best medium midfielder at pick 26 and 55.

Its a midfielders draft in the sense that 80-90% of the players taken in the top 20 will be midfielder types. Which is pretty much the modern way for every draft now. Hardly different.

Im also not really for grabbing small types like JKH. Ive only seen Prestia that small for quite some time be able to look the goods at AFL level that can play midfield.

 

[Keystone agony]

Scharenberg has absolutely no chance of slipping to us. Only way Collingwood don't take him if available at 6 is if Aish is there and if he somehow lasts to 10 he'll go to Collingwood there

Sauce?

 

[WEEVZ]

Scharenberg has absolutely no chance of slipping to us. Only way Collingwood don't take him if available at 6 is if Aish is there and if he somehow lasts to 10 he'll go to Collingwood there

Fair enough, even if he doesn't go top 10 I sincerely doubt he'd fall out of the top 20 anyway. Apparently he's battling pretty serious feet injuries, and clubs are worried about taking him now.

 

[eth-dog]

Sauce?

Tomato, the best kind .

 

[WEEVZ]

I disagree obviously.

I feel the difference between the best KPP available at pick 26 and 55 will be far less then the best medium midfielder at pick 26 and 55.

Its a midfielders draft in the sense that 80-90% of the players taken in the top 20 will be midfielder types. Which is pretty much the modern way for every draft now. Hardly different.

Im also not really for grabbing small types like JKH. Ive only seen Prestia that small for quite some time be able to look the goods at AFL level that can play midfield.

True, I guess it depends on what sort of combination we picked up. If we went say JKH at 26 and say Nankervis or Conlon at 55 (If either were available) I'd be pretty happy with that.

 

[yaco55]

I don't understand the logic that we must draft player from day 1. We brought in Chapman/Aylett/Edwards who are ready from day 1. Sometimes I think some only want to draft 22+ aged players.

 

[WEEVZ]

I don't understand the logic that we must draft player from day 1. We brought in Chapman/Aylett/Edwards who are ready from day 1. Sometimes I think some only want to draft 22+ aged players.

It is a bit daft isn't it. Older players tend to be more set in how they play the game, but we can mould a young kid to play Bombers football!

 

[Yoda_]

I don't understand the logic that we must draft player from day 1. We brought in Chapman/Aylett/Edwards who are ready from day 1. Sometimes I think some only want to draft 22+ aged players.

Agree with these sentiments Yaco

Watch people calling for Kavanagh's head (if he weren't contracted till the end of 2015) for the lack of development.

ChilbroSwaggins is saying we shouldn't draft project players because we shouldn't be taking the risks. I would have thought we need to get games into that 2nd - 4th year untried types I have been banging on about rather than trying to bypass them with direct best 22 replacements.

 

[Fin ice Smuggler]

Agree with these sentiments Yaco

Watch people calling for Kavanagh's head (if he weren't contracted till the end of 2015) for the lack of development.

ChilbroSwaggins is saying we shouldn't draft project players because we shouldn't be taking the risks. I would have thought we need to get games into that 2nd - 4th year untried types I have been banging on about rather than trying to bypass them with direct best 22 replacements.

Exactly we should be looking for a player at pick 26 needs a year or two to develop, I'm going to use a basketball equivalent here but James harden did squiddly dee for first 2 seasons of NBA for OKC thunder, then became the best 6 man, then got traded to Rockets, now one of the best, mind you drafted at pick 4.

Paul George for pacers was taken at pick 10, hugely talented but needed 2 years of development.

Scott pendlebury how we'll did he go in his first year? From memory had one classy tackle, 2nd effort.

 

[Hartnet]

Exactly we should be looking for a player at pick 26 needs a year or two to develop, I'm going to use a basketball equivalent here but James harden did squiddly dee for first 2 seasons of NBA for OKC thunder, then became the best 6 man, then got traded to Rockets, now one of the best, mind you drafted at pick 4.

Paul George for pacers was taken at pick 10, hugely talented but needed 2 years of development.

Scott pendlebury how we'll did he go in his first year? From memory had one classy tackle, 2nd effort.

Bang on. That's what I was trying to say about kav and jkh. It's only kavs third pre season. And of we where to draft jkh by the time chappy is finished at essendon jkh will be ready to take over. If chappy plays 18-20 games next year and jkh plays 5 then in 2015 chappy plays 10-15 and jkh plays 10-15 it will be a slow transition from Chapman to jkh


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[Shane Mead]

Garlett won't be picked with 26 according to Bomber

Smarten up eth. Hawthorn have a pick before us, if Essendon want him it makes perfect sense to say things that will make the Hawks feel they can use a later pick. During this period of time the media is used. Dyson Heppell was talked about as an injury risk, as a result he slid in the draft and we got him.

Gartlett is 1 on my wish list, Apeness is number 2. Gartlett can help us now if things pan out, a big is long term. We can still get a quality big next year in the draft.

I get a chubby thinking about Chapman, Gartlett and Kommer in the same forward line. A combination of class, aggressiveness, intensity and potency. IF everything worked out I can firmly say Hurley will have an improved output as a forward.

 

[Shane Mead]

Exactly we should be looking for a player at pick 26 needs a year or two to develop, I'm going to use a basketball equivalent here but James harden did squiddly dee for first 2 seasons of NBA for OKC thunder, then became the best 6 man, then got traded to Rockets, now one of the best, mind you drafted at pick 4.

Paul George for pacers was taken at pick 10, hugely talented but needed 2 years of development.

Scott pendlebury how we'll did he go in his first year? From memory had one classy tackle, 2nd effort.

Harden averages 10 points, 2 assists, 3 boards and a steal per game playing 22 minutes. He improved his scoring average to 12 points with an increase in minutes, then won the 6th man of the years with 17 points, 4 assists and 3.5 boards with 31 minutes per game. Then by moving he got extra responsibility as the best player, main scorer and leader.

It was a even progression over the 3 years with OKC. He doesn't fit with what you are saying.

If you're looking for a James Harden equivalent it would be a 3 year player who has played well in a limited role who can break out into a star with more responsibility. Harden was never a development project.

 

[Shane Mead]

I don't understand the logic that we must draft player from day 1. We brought in Chapman/Aylett/Edwards who are ready from day 1. Sometimes I think some only want to draft 22+ aged players.

If we want to challenge we need 26 players who are good enough to be in the starting 22. So if we can get a kid at that level with pick 26, we take it. If we are after a project, get a project next year.

 

[BrunoV]

Agree with these sentiments Yaco

Watch people calling for Kavanagh's head (if he weren't contracted till the end of 2015) for the lack of development.

ChilbroSwaggins is saying we shouldn't draft project players because we shouldn't be taking the risks. I would have thought we need to get games into that 2nd - 4th year untried types I have been banging on about rather than trying to bypass them with direct best 22 replacements.

Agreed.

I've not read evidence of a lot of thought into how it is that the sanctions will hurt us. It seems that the situation is being spun in every possible way to avoid continuing on the current path (which seems to be serving us so well).

It is never a good thing to be robbed of high picks but there is not a lot to suggest that the plan needs to be changed. We've already addressed the sanctions as far as we need to. Dodoro told us that we went after Edwards, Aylett and Rayner because we needed to look outside the square in light of the sanctions and, I'd say more importantly, to address a lack of running capacity on the list (be it speed and/or endurance).

Essendon fans need to take a lot more comfort in, what I would say is, the reality that if we get the people we want we will turn them into good players (and remember we tend toward more obscure types - we never seem to go after the popular choices). Trust the club when it says that it has always had an interest in these three players, there really is no reason to lie about it because it does put a certain level of pressure on their recruitment.

Midfield depth in the next few years is not going to come from some 18 year old recruited in 2013. Midfield depth is going to come from the usual suspects that people are getting a little impatient to see results from like Kav, Browne and maybe Colyer. There are more mature guys like Howlett and Myers who in 2013 were still limited by their bodies (Howlett because he was injured and Myers because it was the first full year of footy he has played).

Midfield depth also takes the form of Myers, Zaharaiks, Melksham and Heppell being genuinely regarded in the top 6 midfielders at the club (which I think as of 2014 is realistic). Again, for reasons largely beyond our control, we've had to wait a little longer than we want to for at least Myers, Zaharakis and Melksham (for different reasons). I'd say that Heppell's impact on games is largely overstated even if his output for a third year player is exceptional, which it is.


What we need to address is the few gaps in the list.

In light of the loss of Crameri, to a less extent Gumbleton, and the apparent desire to play Hurley forward we need to find a KPF (or at least a KPP) from somewhere. Because we have lost mature KPFs, and with Daniher still immature, there is arguably a need to go for someone who is immediately capable of playing. But we need to weigh up what we think will be available next year and what we already have on the list (I still think that this off-season is suggesting that Gregory is closer than he seems). We are also one or two guys genuinely capable of playing in the ruck short.

To me the best fit the for the list would be a young ruck/forward but it also depends on the quality of the available prospects (young because he is going to have bide his time). I would have though the next best fit would be Thorpe simply because it isn't often that mature CHF/HF with 150 games in him is available in a draft and we will need to replace Crameri in the best 22. The next would be a toss up between half forward and inside midfielder.

It all comes down to the best available prospect that fits in with the needs of the list.

If Conlon or Apeness, being the only two I can name off the top of my head, is available at 26 and are held in a similar regard to Carlisle then we'd be crazy not to recruit either even that selection doesn't play much footbally for 3 or 4 years. If they're only the best of an average lot of talls, and his form will hold up, Thorpe is easily the next best fit for the list.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

I tend to agree on Thorp, Bruno. We're only really one tall forward (and a depth ruckman which Sikora can cover with a late rookie pick) short, and that's ignoring Steinberg and Gregory who might have something for 2014. Between Thorp and those two, we'd be pretty comfortable that we could get one player who's capable of filling a role when Daniher needs rotating out for a week here and there, or when there's an injury down back.

I think Carlisle will play forward next year, but there has to be a succession plan up forward for when Fletch retires. Pears could possible be trialled up front, but I think the end-game will be a Hurley/Carlisle/Hooker tall defence, which is just ludicrously good. If the leading intercept marker in the competition is your weakest link, things are going well.

Gumby hurts more than Crameri I think. He would have been the focal point of our forwardline.

 

[84859300]

In light of the loss of Crameri, to a less extent Gumbleton, and the apparent desire to play Hurley forward we need to find a KPF (or at least a KPP) from somewhere.

I agree with this, as in reality (and no matter how much I liked the guy), we've only lost a 30 goal a year forward and another who played a handfull of games......no matter their reputation. In theory, these players should be easily replaced from our own list.

Say JD has a year that he kicks 30 goals up forward, then we haven't really lost anything..........the issue is that we won't have gained anything either.

 

[VelvetSledge]

I agree with this, as in reality (and no matter how much I liked the guy), we've only lost a 30 goal a year forward and another who played a handfull of games......no matter their reputation. In theory, these players should be easily replaced from our own list.

Say JD has a year that he kicks 30 goals up forward, then we haven't really lost anything..........the issue is that we won't have gained anything either.

But if he kicks 150...

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

Kav, O'Brien, Merrett, colyer need more time no doubt. But they were not high picks (in an uncompromised draft) and have not as yet shown whether they have what it takes. If they don't have it, it will leave a huge gap in our midfield depth.

Losing 2 1st rd picks is farking huge. These mids give you payback almost immediately, look at Wines and wingaard or Heppell. Yeah it can be a raffle but strike rate is high last decade and, to use lottery terms, you can't win it if you don't have a ticket.

Our quality in the mid is not quite there yet so I think a mid is a must at pick 26.

 

[eth-dog]

Against the teams we want to beat, Crameri isn't a big loss. What he did was make us win by 2 goals more against the weaker sides.

 

[Keystone agony]

I think Crameri's ability to win 1 vs 1 contenst or at least half them will be missed a little next year. Dont expect the same from JoeD, TBC in this regard. No doubt the pressure they will apply will be about the same, maybe slightly better.

Ive decided i will play Carlisle, JoeD and Ryder as my 3 talls. Probably sub off JoeD/TBC through the 3rd quarter and play a small forward line in the back end of games - pretty common i guess.

 

[Ashton Agar]

Carlisle must play back I reckon. He is the next Fletch. I think he will be the best full back this time next year. He is just such a good defender that he needs to play back. Even if it means Hurley plays forward, so be it.