Polak

[Paddles]

I agree that Mooney looked ok against Polak in the NAB game, but hell the ball was coming in quick. Our midfield applied little or no pressure and it was a good day to be a forward. Even Donuts kicked a few. I thought Polak was servicable and he seemed to have a natural presence about him. He was calm in traffic and certainly had good hands. Give him a go!

 

[Bentleigh]

i wouldnt call him quick. this may be because he has always been second man in and it gives you the impression of being slow. it may not.as for second efforts i stand by what i said. maybe hes realised you have to do more than just compete for a mark. yet again maybe he hasnt one things for sure we will find out.

my criticism and angst is not so much at polak. we targeted a 22 yr old kpp who may give us many good yrs service and may be around when and if we ever become a power in 3 or 5 yrs time.

my angst is we down traded our 1st pick. in effect giving up any chance of getting a crack at thorpe sellar brown or riedwoldt.and we traded away our 3rd round pick which in any other draft would have been worth a second rounder.the question i ask is polak worth taking these risks on.a player who has done little or nothing in 5 yrs at his previous club.who has been passed by many kpp players at that club and has deficiencies to concern most people.

the fact that riedwoldt and sellar slipped in the pecking order came down to luck rather than good management.the club actually has stated if riedwoldt wasnt there at 13 they were going to take hislop. they were always going to take edwards with pick 26. so we werent going to target a tall until the fourth round.and with connors still being there i have my doubts even then.

Silly comment.

We wanted Reiwoldt @ 8, Sellar didn't go tell 14. We knew what we wanted to do - if was good managment.

Polak is only a pup for a KPP. P#4 in the 'strongest draft ever'. He could be anything at either CHB or best case CHF. He is that 22-25 age group were we had **** all players, more so KPP. We needed to get him (ditto Paddy Bowden) - and risk that we needed to take.

More so, we picked up Connors who several of people had in their pre-draft top 10 in the 4th round.

 

[santa claws]

It's Riewoldt!!! Get it right!

I agree it came down to a degree of luck. Is this the rght thing to do in any decision? I believe on occasion it is necessary to move forward. We addressed our needs by securing the services of 2 KPPs and even if Riewoldt was taken we would have had a very good midfield replacement.

The club was very keen on taking Djerkurra (sp?) with the second round pick but we missed out by one selection. That was bad luck. Maybe in hindsight it will be good luck

What did you mean by having doubts on Connors, was it about him or taking a tall?

apologise always have trouble remembering where to put the d in his name. in answer to your q. taking a tall.

 

[lids2004roar]

Just remember, there is no double d in Riewoldt lol

Okay maybe for Nick.. *cries*

 

[santa claws]

Silly comment.

We wanted Reiwoldt @ 8, Sellar didn't go tell 14. We knew what we wanted to do - if was good managment.

Polak is only a pup for a KPP. P#4 in the 'strongest draft ever'. He could be anything at either CHB or best case CHF. He is that 22-25 age group were we had **** all players, more so KPP. We needed to get him (ditto Paddy Bowden) - and risk that we needed to take.

More so, we picked up Connors who several of people had in their pre-draft top 10 in the 4th round.

you rate bowden a kpp because hes tall and you rate polak a future champion because he went no 4 in a draft 6yrs ago now thats silly.
if you drafted both on their performance you wouldnt have given 2 bob for either. with bowden ive seen nothing that says hes nothing more than a tall flanker or utility at least he didnt cost much. with polak the proof will be in the pudding this yr if he was worth risking loseing riewoldt and pick 42. and to say getting riewoldt at 13 was good management well thats even sillier a tad naieve and ignores the facts..getting riewoldt came down to luck end of story.

 

[PLSC]

i was a bit pissed at the trade at the time because i thought someone like armitage or nathan brown would of been quality but getting polak and riewoldt worked out well

i was more annoyed at the fact we didnt fight to keep or get another 3rd round selection, i mean if everitt got a pick 30 and soliman a pick 40-ish im sure we had something to give up and get that 3rd rounder

miller got his hollywood trade and went home

 

[lids2004roar]

..getting riewoldt came down to luck end of story.

But isn't there an element of luck with any player you select with your pick anyway?

It was also lucky for WC that Chris Judd's shoulders didn't prematurely end his career.

The whole draft is about luck of the draw.

 

[Bentleigh]

you rate bowden a kpp because hes tall and you rate polak a future champion because he went no 4 in a draft 6yrs ago now thats silly.
if you drafted both on their performance you wouldnt have given 2 bob for either. with bowden ive seen nothing that says hes nothing more than a tall flanker or utility at least he didnt cost much. with polak the proof will be in the pudding this yr if he was worth risking loseing riewoldt and pick 42. and to say getting riewoldt at 13 was good management well thats even sillier a tad naieve and ignores the facts..getting riewoldt came down to luck end of story.

Paddy Bowden? I don't rate him because he is tall, but that is one of his attributes. Apart from being a good size he is also one of our best 5 players in terms of kicking, which is vital is a team of crap skills. He's also fast as **** for a 190cm bloke and have a solid grab.

He's a very good options for the backpocket. He is soft as butter but his role in the side mean his attributes get highlighted and his softness nto exposed too much. Against the Lions in the 1st half @ TD he was amazing. Bowden is a tall flanker/pocket and a pretty good one at that.

Polak I rate because he is young and a highly rated KPP. What we don't have much of and really need.

Losing Rewoldt and getting Reid or Sellar would not have really been heart braking.

 

[Bentleigh]

i was a bit pissed at the trade at the time because i thought someone like armitage or nathan brown would of been quality but getting polak and riewoldt worked out well

i was more annoyed at the fact we didnt fight to keep or get another 3rd round selection, i mean if everitt got a pick 30 and soliman a pick 40-ish im sure we had something to give up and get that 3rd rounder

miller got his hollywood trade and went home

Then again I don't mind the sound of Collins/Peterson. Both sound like decent late gets at this stage.

Alot of people 'in the know' had 4th round Connors in their top 10. I was happy to take him @ 13.

1. Bryce Gibbs (Carlton). This is an era of dominant midfielders and Gibbs is by far the brightest midfield prospect available. Genuinely football smart and takes up intelligent, dangerous positions, accumulates high kick numbers, uses the ball superbly and creates and kicks goals. Not a speedster and probably not a hard-ball player; very much in the Ben Cousins or Nick Stevens playmaker mould. Will play next year and will be a preseason favourite for the Rising Star. At 187cm he is very much the modern midfielder who could develop into a Lenny Hayes type centre square presence.

2. Lachlan Hansen (Essendon). The Bombers have the tough task of choosing between an elite ruckman (Leuenberger), a superb CHF (Gumbleton) or the best CHB prospect we’ve seen in a few years. Hansen is the lowest risk and most ready to play quickly. Struggled at CHF and his best junior football has been rucking – which he won’t do in the AFL. With their lack of key defensive options and an ageing Fletcher, they could play safe. Gumbleton has more raw talent and Leuenberger is the other contender. Hansen is a good reader of the play and has genuine football nous.

3. Scott Gumbleton (Kangaroos). With Hale, McIntosh and Moran the Roos are unlikely to take Leuenberger. Aside from that they pretty much need everything. Gumbleton is the kind you can build a forward line around. Tall, athletic, covers a lot of ground, has a good leap. Will muscle out into a very solid player in time. Shapes as a genuine CHF in the Nick Reiwoldt mould. Isn’t shy of the contest as a couple of the recent early-round bigmen have been.

4. Albert Proud (Brisbane). Brisbane love ruckmen but will have an eye on the QLD trio Tippett, Renouf and Hampson with later picks. They have declared midfield as a priority, which leaves them to choose between Selwood, Proud and Connors. Proud is the best QLD midfielder since Akermanis and Voss. Wins more hardball than Selwood and O’Keefe. Is tough as teak and quicker than Selwood. If one of the top-3 surprises, Hansen could see the Lions replace Leppitsch and Michael.

5. Matthew Leuenberger (Port Adelaide). Port pair Lade and Brogan are both 28+. By the time Leuenberger is 22 he will be ready to replace them as a genuine number 1 ruckmen in a team in which the ruckman plays an important role. He is tall, quick and agile with good skills and the ability to dominate games. His ruckwork is well developed for his age – he generally palms to advantage. Can be a bit hesitant to always throw himself at his opponent. Probably second only to Gibbs in terms on long-term potential – but ruckmen are always a gamble and long-term investment. Is the most likely candidate to be a spanner in the works and could go as high as 1.

6. Joel Selwood (Hawthorn). Selwood is a high-possession running player similar to Shane Crawford. He doesn’t have pure leg speed and his kicking can be hit and miss. He gets teams going forward and can be sharp in tight spaces. Very good a metre or two off the pack. A genuine playmaker and a good choice to put in the centre between wingmen Ellis and Muston. A year-long knee injury may see his value drop, but not too far. Has good leadership qualities.

7. Daniel Connors (Geelong). Connors has the appeal of being able to play both inside and outside. In close he has quick reflexes, vision and awareness to thread handballs through gaps only he sees. Outside he can tuck the pill under his arm, carry and kick with penetration and accuracy. Also has a handy high-mark in his locker. Not completely dissimilar to Heath Black and should be a solid third / fourth best midfielder in the AFL for 150 games. Ordering the midfielders is always tough but Connors should be one of the first to go.

8. Mitch Thorp (Collingwood). An intriguing prospect. His best football has been as a ruck-rover, more than a CHF. He could well get caught between the two roles. Best asset is his eagerness to play on after marking – wheeling around like Scott Lucas. Has a play-on style and the running ability of a midfielder. Pies might be gun-shy on Tassie tall forwards after a couple of hiccups. Need a tall forward prospect with Tarrant leaving and Rocca ageing.

9. Daniel O’Keefe (St Kilda). The Saints midfield has class but lacks depth. O’Keefe is the prototypical modern half-back flanker. Covers a large amount of turf, gets large numbers of touches and loses his man effortlessly. He is also a good kick and has a surprising leap. A 40-plus goalkicker from the wing and lead the TAC in uncontested marks by a big margin reflecting his running gamestyle. Finished the season strongly but a knee injury restricted him at the camp.

10. Shane Edwards (Collingwood). Very much an outside winger with electric pace and long-kicking. Loves open-spaces and showed some toughness in the SANFL that belied his light frame. Can be wasteful when he runs too far and doesn’t steady before kicking. Has good form in senior company, finishing the season very strongly and moving up the draft board. Has no left foot which could be a problem.

There seems to be a bloke called Edwards in the top 10 too.

After the rubbish position of comming 9th; Polak, Rewoldt, Connors, Edwards are 4 pretty strong picks. 2 good KPP prospects, 2 good mid.

Ay of the late picks Collins/Peterson, the rookies or your mate Kingsley then it's very good buisness by Miller IMO. We won't know how good/bad hes done but at this stage, but without hindsite I'm pretty happy with the '06 draft.

 

[theGav56]

Polak I rate because he is young and a highly rated KPP. What we don't have much of and really need.

You rate him because he's rated??? He was rated when he was originally drafted. But not so young anymore, coming towards his prime. You guys have given him a second chance, and he may once again be rated. At the moment he is in rating limbo I reckon. At the worst he will give you a tall to fill a gap for a while.

 

[santa claws]

Then again I don't mind the sound of Collins/Peterson. Both sound like decent late gets at this stage.

Alot of people 'in the know' had 4th round Connors in their top 10. I was happy to take him @ 13.



There seems to be a bloke called Edwards in the top 10 too.

After the rubbish position of comming 9th; Polak, Rewoldt, Connors, Edwards are 4 pretty strong picks. 2 good KPP prospects, 2 good mid.

Ay of the late picks Collins/Peterson, the rookies or your mate Kingsley then it's very good buisness by Miller IMO. We won't know how good/bad hes done but at this stage, but without hindsite I'm pretty happy with the '06 draft.

polak aside and the way we went about it so am i.

 

[Clown Prince]

Polak = Pea Heart would be closer to the mark

 

[PLSC]

Then again I don't mind the sound of Collins/Peterson. Both sound like decent late gets at this stage.

Alot of people 'in the know' had 4th round Connors in their top 10. I was happy to take him @ 13.



There seems to be a bloke called Edwards in the top 10 too.

After the rubbish position of comming 9th; Polak, Rewoldt, Connors, Edwards are 4 pretty strong picks. 2 good KPP prospects, 2 good mid.

Ay of the late picks Collins/Peterson, the rookies or your mate Kingsley then it's very good buisness by Miller IMO. We won't know how good/bad hes done but at this stage, but without hindsite I'm pretty happy with the '06 draft.

so just becuase we got lucky with connors our 3rd rounder didnt mean anything?

imagine having a daniel currie in the side atm pushing patto and angus and making knobel get a kick up the backside

oh yeh we are richmond so lets aim for 75% because we are scared incase we try to go to 100%

its a joke

 

[turtle27]

so just becuase we got lucky with connors our 3rd rounder didnt mean anything?

imagine having a daniel currie in the side atm pushing patto and angus and making knobel get a kick up the backside

oh yeh we are richmond so lets aim for 75% because we are scared incase we try to go to 100%

its a joke

So taking into account who was left, who would you have taken with our picks?

 

[PLSC]

So taking into account who was left, who would you have taken with our picks?

i was pretty happy with how it turned out although wouldve taken jesse white before peterson

if we got a tall like mckenzie before edwards i wouldve been more keener on going for a risk like peterson but because we got 2 good smalls in edwards and connors we shouldve got jesse white and really got some good kp depth

thats my opinion anyway and the season is a week away so stuff it lol

 

[turtle27]

i was pretty happy with how it turned out although wouldve taken jesse white before peterson

if we got a tall like mckenzie before edwards i wouldve been more keener on going for a risk like peterson but because we got 2 good smalls in edwards and connors we shouldve got jesse white and really got some good kp depth

thats my opinion anyway and the season is a week away so stuff it lol

Fair post, White would be nice to have. Having said that, Petereson is 183cm, but he'll certainly play tall with his leap, but I guess one on one he may lack a couple of inches if he's played as a true KPP (Royce was J. Bowden's height by the way). I rate him quite highly though, and am pretty happy to get him.

 

[PLSC]

Fair post, White would be nice to have. Having said that, Petereson is 183cm, but he'll certainly play tall with his leap, but I guess one on one he may lack a couple of inches if he's played as a true KPP (Royce was J. Bowden's height by the way). I rate him quite highly though, and am pretty happy to get him.

yeh the kid looks like a highlight reel and im not against that but i felt the edwards pick should of counted for something like getting a kp late instead of either peterson or collins

playing him in the ruck at afl level is wishful thinking

 

[footy4eva]

yeh the kid looks like a highlight reel and im not against that but i felt the edwards pick should of counted for something like getting a kp late instead of either peterson or collins

playing him in the ruck at afl level is wishful thinking

do u mean edwards, as in ex wce, now roo, who is now being linked to the drug scandal in WA

if thats the edwards ur talking about , he is no kpp at afl, who cares what he did in the vfl

 

[PLSC]

do u mean edwards, as in ex wce, now roo, who is now being linked to the drug scandal in WA

if thats the edwards ur talking about , he is no kpp at afl, who cares what he did in the vfl

im talking about shane edwards, pick 26 for richmond in the 2006 NAB AFL Draft originally from SA blah blah

need to spell it out for ya?

i like aaron edwards anyway, so what if he isnt 6'6 he is a solid footballer and wouldve worked well at north like a 3rd forward, now the pressure is on him so we will wait and see

 

[footy4eva]

im talking about shane edwards, pick 26 for richmond in the 2006 NAB AFL Draft originally from SA blah blah

need to spell it out for ya?

i like aaron edwards anyway, so what if he isnt 6'6 he is a solid footballer and wouldve worked well at north like a 3rd forward, now the pressure is on him so we will wait and see

shane will be a fantastic pick up

btw way

you talk so much crap , you are at times hard to follow
had to skim over this thread cos your posts are 99% fos

u r a disagrace to human society and should be a collingwood supporter not a tiger

let me know when u r on fire, cos rather than pis.s on you i would pour more petol over you, make sure you burn to the crisp

if the tigers are so bad why dont u just f the hell off

 

[Bentleigh]

so just becuase we got lucky with connors our 3rd rounder didnt mean anything?

imagine having a daniel currie in the side atm pushing patto and angus and making knobel get a kick up the backside

oh yeh we are richmond so lets aim for 75% because we are scared incase we try to go to 100%

its a joke

Miller was being bagged for being "lucky" to get Hughes @ 24 last draft.

However; almost everyone would have been more than happy to get Hughes @ 8, and JON @ 24.

At some stage you have to judge Miller by what he's done. To get Hughes & Connors with later picks that what people thought they'd still be around is a good effort.

Having another promising ruckman would be great, without doubt.

i was pretty happy with how it turned out although wouldve taken jesse white before peterson

if we got a tall like mckenzie before edwards i wouldve been more keener on going for a risk like peterson but because we got 2 good smalls in edwards and connors we shouldve got jesse white and really got some good kp depth

thats my opinion anyway and the season is a week away so stuff it lol

It'll be intersting how good Jesse White turns out, you seem to rate him at least.

With pick 60 you are getting towards the bottom on the barrel. Peterson is a good late pick IMO, alot of x-factor and upside.

Shane Edwards will go alright I reckon.

 

[PLSC]

shane will be a fantastic pick up

btw way

you talk so much crap , you are at times hard to follow
had to skim over this thread cos your posts are 99% fos

u r a disagrace to human society and should be a collingwood supporter not a tiger

let me know when u r on fire, cos rather than pis.s on you i would pour more petol over you, make sure you burn to the crisp

if the tigers are so bad why dont u just f the hell off

back at ya muppet

why did you have to have to skim over this thread again? needed to call your helper because you couldnt read?

 

[PLSC]

Miller was being bagged for being "lucky" to get Hughes @ 24 last draft.

However; almost everyone would have been more than happy to get Hughes @ 8, and JON @ 24.

At some stage you have to judge Miller by what he's done. To get Hughes & Connors with later picks that what people thought they'd still be around is a good effort.

Having another promising ruckman would be great, without doubt.



It'll be intersting how good Jesse White turns out, you seem to rate him at least.

With pick 60 you are getting towards the bottom on the barrel. Peterson is a good late pick IMO, alot of x-factor and upside.

Shane Edwards will go alright I reckon.

so peterson who is nearly 20 and has op has this great upside but because jesse white is a kp you think its mostly junk at the end of the draft?

the kid is massive and will be a good player, this is when you look back in 3 years and say how did sydney find this bloke well i guess thats why they are a successful club because they know what there doing

 

[santa claws]

Miller was being bagged for being "lucky" to get Hughes @ 24 last draft.

However; almost everyone would have been more than happy to get Hughes @ 8, and JON @ 24.

At some stage you have to judge Miller by what he's done. To get Hughes & Connors with later picks that what people thought they'd still be around is a good effort.

Having another promising ruckman would be great, without doubt.



It'll be intersting how good Jesse White turns out, you seem to rate him at least.

With pick 60 you are getting towards the bottom on the barrel. Peterson is a good late pick IMO, alot of x-factor and upside.

Shane Edwards will go alright I reckon.

yep miller has the habit of getting exactly the players he wanted with every pick or so he says.
from millers mouth we were taking casserly at pick 24 but seeing as how hughes slipped we had to take him. all i can say is thank christ he slipped. and then we got lucky again with casserly slipping. the fact is miller and wallace were prepared to forego talls for mids the last 2 drafts. the cards fell our way and i suppose theres an element of luck in all drafts. i suppose what im saying is it seems we are over looking certain areas of the list or that kpp big bodied inside type natural footballers are very much secondary considerations.
the last draft i was happy to get every player we got but i believe we could have done something more about list structure ie we didnt take one or two more talls.or a ruckman on the rookie list. and the same can be said the draft before.

 

[lids2004roar]

the last draft i was happy to get every player we got but i believe we could have done something more about list structure ie we didnt take one or two more talls.or a ruckman on the rookie list. and the same can be said the draft before.

Out of 6 new draftees (inc Polly) we got 2 KPPs. That's 33% - the same percentage of talls you need on the ground.

We also got Kingsley..

2005 we got 5 inc preseason draft with 2 of those KPPs IIRC. 40% KPP rate.

We can't only draft talls until we have the best KPPs in the league because then our midfield will eventually suffer. We need a gradual build up in every area and as far as %'s of talls to midfielder we are pretty much spot on.