Ports Draft Picks

[mic59]

Originally posted by Macca19
After Guerra left, exactly what young defenders do we have on our list? Great big ZERO!! Hardwick, Monty, Kingsley and Wanganeen will be gone in 2 years time, and by then Poulton and Wilbur will be 29 and 30 and near the end. Then what? Who is gonna take over? There is noone there.


What about Thurstans, Chaplin, Pettigrew, Gilham. All potential defenders.

So when you say "RFK will halt another young stars development" then excuse me if I say "What young stars?"

We'll never know if they're not given a chance. John Cahill was never conservative in who he played and look what he did for Port. I just don't want to see young players go onto the shelf because Mark Williams thinks better of a recycled player.


Which is why we got RFK as he will be 24 once everyone retires and reaching his prime as a footballer. Understand why we got him yet?

I understand the thinking. Just that I hope RFK is forced to earn his place like the others.



I see Peel playing more games than Chaplin. I can see Peel having a K Cornes like first year. As for our tall recruits and Gilham...as long as Williams doesnt turn them into Thurstans and Morgan and have to wait 4 years to see them play.

 

[Guardian Hawk]

To put it simply, you guys have done the best recruiting of any team considering your picks. I was looking at KPP's for Hawthorn and Chaplin, Peel and Pettigrew all looked good. Well done!

 

[Zombie]

Don't we have a fairly tall side now though?

Lade
Brogan
Primus
Ackland
Tredrea
Chaplin
Pettigrew
Gilham
C.Cornes
Wakelin
White
Bishop
Champion
Thurstans
Patfull

Makes 15 'talls', i'd say that was a fair few, we would also have a considerably younger side aswell.

 

[Russian]

Originally posted by Zombie
Don't we have a fairly tall side now though?

My ideal setup would be 14 smalls and 8 talls. We have 23 smalls and 15 talls. 9 backup smalls should be enough, most of them if not all are ready for AFL football now. Champion, Patfull and Pettigrew at least aren't ready yet. I reckon we're ok

 

[Macca19]

Originally posted by mic59
What about Thurstans, Chaplin, Pettigrew, Gilham. All potential defenders.

All potential KEY defenders.

Rob Forster-Knight is 186cm. He isnt tall enough to play a key position.

Thurstans is 195, Chaplin 194, Pettigrew 193, Gilham 190. As you can see, they are all key defenders. The only positions RFK will be taking is off Hardwick, Monty and Gavin. So again i ask, what other small defender options do we have considering our youngest key defender turns 27 during the year?

We'll never know if they're not given a chance. John Cahill was never conservative in who he played and look what he did for Port. I just don't want to see young players go onto the shelf because Mark Williams thinks better of a recycled player.

But there are no young players to take a position away from.

RFK can be two things for us:

1) A back flanker/back pocket looking after mid sized forwards. The only positions he will be taking here are guys that are 30 years old and have 2 years max left in them.

2) A midfield tagger in the same way that Cochrane was this year. This allows Cornes, Cassisi, Carr to become attacking footballers. This I would have thought would have been a big plus.

RFK isnt a key defender and he isnt going to be taking any midfield spot of any of our key midfielders.

I cant see one player that RFK can halt the progress of by being given gametime next year, especially in defence.

Most people on here wanted Hardwick gone this year. If he did go, who would take his spot? Noone. Now we have someone that can.

I understand the thinking. Just that I hope RFK is forced to earn his place like the others

Id hope every player on our list has to earn their position. Are you saying Cochrane shouldnt have been in the side at the start of this year and should have had to have played in the SANFL first and performed at that level before being given AFL games? Id say RFK is in the same position Cochrane was in.

I must be the only person in Australia that thinks weve picked up someone that has no expectations and could thrive on that and could become a solid player for us over the next 5 years.

 

[PAfolwr]

I don't quite know what to make of us getting Foster-Knight, but I'm quite prepared to wait and see.

He is fro the same draft year as Koula, and Guerra.
If anything he is more a replacement for the Koula we never got to see, than Guerra as a player.

When I first saw him, I was impressed enough to think that he had a potentially great future at Essendon. Tall reasonably athletic, seemed to stick to game plan, but not exactly a "tough" type player. Not soft by any means, but not with that extra grunt that some players have.
Obviously he hasn't quite developed that far, but not having seen that many Essendon games, I have absolutely no idea why. That means I'll have to wait and see.

As far as replacing our players, I see him as a competitor to Kingsley, Poulton Cochrane Hardwick, Wilson and co (basically what some others have already said) more than the players we have been screaming to get game time.
We have a number of young talls, and also a large number of midfielders that need to be given a chance. MUST be given a chance.
We have Stevens gone now but Francou will be back so the situation hasn't really changed. Let's just hope that Choco's attitude has.

Ps I am also happy we didn't draft any so called "flashy" forwards.

 

[Portia]

Macca, I only have a couple of gripes about Forster-Knight.

1. He was drafted with the pick we got for Guerra. This hurts all by itself.

2. I don't reckon we needed another mid-sized back/midfielder right now, especially if we have decided to retain Kingsley.

3. We could've got Spencer instead of Pettigrew if we'd left Forster-Knight to #46, who is probably rated ahead in development terms. Even if the Roos had gone for F-K before then, mid-sized backs were still prevalent in the draft pool.

I agree that he may turn out OK, but gee.

 

[Darealrath]

He's a good, solid, reliable player is RFK. He was making good progress in 2002 but then all of a sudden he was on the bench until 3 quarter for most games then back to the vfl. I have no idea why as he never seemed to make any noticeable mistakes. Just did his job. I liked the way he always looked composed.

I doubt he'll let you down, but pick 39 seems quite high for what is basically an unproven recycled player.

 

[PJ Power]

Originally posted by Porthos
Macca, I only have a couple of gripes about Forster-Knight.

1. He was drafted with the pick we got for Guerra. This hurts all by itself.

2. I don't reckon we needed another mid-sized back/midfielder right now, especially if we have decided to retain Kingsley.

3. We could've got Spencer instead of Pettigrew if we'd left Forster-Knight to #46, who is probably rated ahead in development terms. Even if the Roos had gone for F-K before then, mid-sized backs were still prevalent in the draft pool.

I agree that he may turn out OK, but gee.

Porthos has articulated this very well.

We are all feeling more than a bit confused about this pick-up.

Personally I see RFK as a "Cassisi-like" scenario. 4 years at a club; lots of time on the bench for an average of 7-8 games a year. Honest efforts without establishing that star quality to his game. Dom so far in three years at our club is treading a similar line, and with the potential of impressive years from Ebert and Salopek who do appear to have star quality about them, could fall further back in our standings at the end of 2004, than at the end of this year.
RFK would be serviceable at a side like Carlton, needing depth of even talent while they bide their time to create a stronger list from talented youngsters. Our time would seem to be now and we really do need to inject that Premiership-quality player to our list to give us that edge.

In defence of our recruiters, we did need a reinjection of depth following our delistings, but I would have been inclined to look for a KPP (tall defender) who could back up Wakes, Bishop and Thurstans next year, while Gilham, Chaplin and Pettigrew take time to develop; serious injury to one of the first three and we could be stuffed! Hopefully, Ackland or Brogan may be groomed as a back-up CHB over the preseason, while a strong showing by the "Great White Hope" might allow Cornesy to help down back should the need arise.

Lastly, let's not forget that Choco has done well with previously average players: Monty, Kingers, Schoey and Bishop all examples of this. Maybe his plan for RFK is more subtle than just as a back-up tagger or HBF.

Ultimately, we should give the kid a chance and if he doesn't perform, then he would not be different to so many other youngsters taken at draft-day, who despite all the potential in the world don't have what it takes.

 

[rubberman]

RFK sounds like a ready replacement for Guerra if he spends 3/4 on the bench and then back to the sanfl.

Not many in the AFL get a second chance after being let go. I hope that RFK realises the chance he has got and makes the most of it. May even surprise.

 

[Portia]

I really wouldn't be at all surprised if Chaplin played games next year - it seems like his natural style fits Choco's `Square peg, square hole' method perfectly as a tall defender.

 

[PJ Power]

Given the strength of the side the last three years, we have been fairly reluctant to throw first year kids into the deep-end first up. Even a talent like Salopek was very much inched into the side in 2003, despite us starting the year with so many darn injuries.
I think of all the teams bar Brisbane, we would be the hardest side to break into for a young kid: partly because of our strong list and also because of other idiosyncrasies of our selection panel (gold-passes, easy-does-it mentality....)
It seems a catch-22. We all want young kids to get a go because it is so exciting seeing raw talent unleashed for the first time and hoping for some surprise brilliance. Paradoxically, it is the weaker teams who get to blood their youngsters first and in turn they get the best shot at proving themselves at AFL.

Of all the stuff I've read about our draftees so far, the one I'm most excited about is Luke Peel. Being "underrated" has its benefits and we have lacked a rebounding defender able to kick long distances and play with that medium-tall build (187cm).

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Originally posted by PJ Power

Of all the stuff I've read about our draftees so far, the one I'm most excited about is Luke Peel. Being "underrated" has its benefits and we have lacked a rebounding defender able to kick long distances and play with that medium-tall build (187cm).

If you get a a chance to read Wisbey's profile on him you might get unexcited real fast! There's a link in the Wisbey on Chaplin thread and he's profiled all Port's recruits (bar RFK) in response to a request from Porthos. Apart from Symes, not very encouraging reading (wonder if that's a Collingwood thing ). But at the end of the day it's one guy's opinion and we have to see for ourselves ... after all, last year I got excited about his description of Wade Champion as a first round young David Neitz. So far all I've seen is a tall Wade Chapman ...

 

[Eddie Woloschek]

Originally posted by Ford Fairlane
If you get a a chance to read Wisbey's profile on him you might get unexcited real fast! There's a link in the Wisbey on Chaplin thread and he's profiled all Port's recruits

Can someone pls copy these across? i can't access the hotrod board? cheers.

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by Eddie Woloschek
Can someone pls copy these across? i can't access the hotrod board? cheers.

Done.

 

[Kid Dynamite!]

Ford Fairlane is right. I got unexcited rather quickly after reading Luke's profile.

But keep in mind the kid's still young (hell even I'm older than he is!) and still has time to smooth the bumps over. I've got no doubt that being in a healthy team environment with mentors such as Tredrea, Primus and Wanganeen will help him through.

 

[Portia]

To be fair though, I'd be willing to bet that Brett Montgomery's profile at age 17 would've been worse, and thats who it sounds like he's the replacement for.

(would've preferred an Archer-type replacement though..)

 

[Kid Dynamite!]

Would be interesting if we could dig up Monty's profile and compare the two.

 

[sog35]

I am ambivelent in our draft selections. Brogan will be able to help Chaplin come to terms with the differences between footy and basketball.

Charlie has only played 15 months of solid junior footy. He spoke well on the tellie as well. However the comparison of Bendigo and Adelaide was an interesting one.

Anything past 30 is a bit of luck I suppose. It'll be good to have a further injection of youth in the squad.

The thing to remember about the taller and bigger kids (and I'm one myself) is that all through junior ranks they learn bad habits due to being bigger and more able to contest. They can seem to be doing it easy and this may reflect in their match day intensity.

There is much to learn in the AFL, let's hope they can stay fit and have a good start to their careers. A free trip to NZ in your first week ain't too bad.

 

[sog35]

There was also an article about Pettigrew in the Sunday Mail. He was at one of the other WA Draftees places for a celebratory BBQ, but didn't drink because he ahd a program set through the off-season to be ready for the NZ trip. A good reflection on his attitude, but to be fair you would hope most of the draftees would have an self-motivated off-season program.

 

[Portia]

What NZ trip is this?

 

[Kid Dynamite!]

Originally posted by sog35
There was also an article about Pettigrew in the Sunday Mail. He was at one of the other WA Draftees places for a celebratory BBQ, but didn't drink because he ahd a program set through the off-season to be ready for the NZ trip. A good reflection on his attitude, but to be fair you would hope most of the draftees would have an self-motivated off-season program.

I quite liked that article. It reminded me of something I once read about Tredders. I cant remember what award he won, but instead of going out on le booze he went home, couldnt sleep and went out for a 4km run.

Grover's got a good head on his shoulders it seems.

 

[Kid Dynamite!]

Originally posted by Porthos
What NZ trip is this?

Four day training camp in New Zealand, specifically Christchurch.

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by Kid Dynamite!
Four day training camp in New Zealand, specifically Christchurch.

What an odd location.

 

[sog35]

Sounds like a bit of a boot camp. But they get a day off for sightseeing.

And to reject all rumours, it is not a Chokers Outreach program.