Re-do the 2008 draft

[Enforcer25]

One more than Watts has ever played lol

Yep, Watts has look good in moments, but definitely not good over the course of a whole quarter.
Good thing too seeing as Naitanui has a year's development on Watts, being a year older & Watts still being in high school last season.

Making comments like the one you just made says more about your intelligence than either player's performance to date.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Yep, Watts has look good in moments, but definitely not good over the course of a whole quarter.
Good thing too seeing as Naitanui has a year's development on Watts, being a year older & Watts still being in high school last season.

Making comments like the one you just made says more about your intelligence than either player's performance to date.

Not really. Naitanui was injured for the first half of last season. Watts while he still had school was injury free.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

Not really. Naitanui was injured for the first half of last season. Watts while he still had school was injury free.

haha , NN is 20... Watts is 19, thats a year more development is it not?? i think that enforcer meant Naitanui's body has had an extra year to develop, that fact that he was injured last year is irrelevant

 

[Enforcer25]

Not really. Naitanui was injured for the first half of last season. Watts while he still had school was injury free.

Yeah, look you're right... except for the fact Watts missed the 2nd half of the season because of a broken thumb.

And most of this preseason with back & hamstring issues.

Injuries aren't really the point anyway, but like I said, all you're doing is showing your lack of knowledge on the subject.

 

[ringo200]

How I think it will turn out excluding Crows players.

1. Hill
2. Naitanui
3. Ziebell
4. Rich
5. Hurley
6. Beams
7. Zaharakis
8. Trengove
9. Hannebery
10. Watts

Still really haven't seen Watts show enough signs at AFL level, Hartlett's injuries worry me a bit.

 

[Pykie]

How I think it will turn out excluding Crows players.

1. Hill
2. Naitanui
3. Ziebell
4. Rich
5. Hurley
6. Beams
7. Zaharakis
8. Trengove
9. Hannebery
10. Watts

Still really haven't seen Watts show enough signs at AFL level, Hartlett's injuries worry me a bit.

Id have a similar list, although I think Hannebery will be better than both Zaharakis and Beams, and Hartlett better than all of those 3.


Was an absolute jet at u/18 level, and should never had slid to the late second round.

 

[Thewlis Dish]

Hannebery is excellent. Hill is freakishly good.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Was an absolute jet at u/18 level, and should never had slid to the late second round.

In TAC Cup, yes, in the U18 Champs he didn't get much of a look-in and averaged around 7 possessions, from memory. Mind you, he was bottom-aged.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Yeah, look you're right... except for the fact Watts missed the 2nd half of the season because of a broken thumb.

And most of this preseason with back & hamstring issues.

Injuries aren't really the point anyway, but like I said, all you're doing is showing your lack of knowledge on the subject.

Knee injury prevented him running for most of the preseason. But sure a broken thumb and a hamstring/ back issues are big problems.

Naitanui did his hamstring last year as well.

So whats your point, Watts has been playing the game longer?

 

[cannons]

Friday night's match confirmed my thoughts on Ziebell's ability.

As I said earlier, he's an extremely tough kid, and in a couple of instances on Friday night his hardness at the ball was very impressive.

Aside from that, though, nothing about his game really stands out. Further, he seemed to be exceedingly nervous and hesitant around goal, and that also extended to his play just outside the forward 50 as well. These issues meant that he either missed goals he should've kicked (e.g. hitting the post from 20m out), or failed to complete passes to targets within North's attacking 50 (e.g. kicked the ball straight to a Carlton defender, who subsequently marked the ball). He also seemed to select the wrong option on occasion as well. With this in mind, I couldn't possibly suggest that he is an elite decision maker or user of the ball.

Having said that, he is an impressive size for a midfielder and has good penetration in his kicking. Those things, in conjunction with his hardness, seem to indicate that North will have a very serviceable player on its books for years to come.

Finally, I would just like to say that Hartlett is an absolute star, and I would be surprised if he didn't end up being considered an elite midfielder in the coming years, assuming he can stay fit of course.

 

[ringo200]

Agree on the Hartlett calls. If he manages to play out the rest of this year without gettung injured I will officially move him up to 5 on my list just above Hurley.

Just curious on neutral fans thoughts on Phil Davis - is he starting to justify being taken at 10?

 

[Enforcer25]

Knee injury prevented him running for most of the preseason. But sure a broken thumb and a hamstring/ back issues are big problems.

Naitanui did his hamstring last year as well.

So whats your point, Watts has been playing the game longer?

???

The point was that Naitanui should be more developed than Watts, as Watts is a year younger and was still in high school last season (meaning physically he is not as developed and wasn't able to devote the time to training that a normal player like NicNat would; Jack only trained once a week)

the reply argument was that NicNat was injured but Watts was injury free, which is not correct.
Watts has missed a lot of games through injury, most notably for a broken thumb last year.

I'm not sure what you think you're bringing to this discussion, but you seem a bit lost.

 

[Enforcer25]

Agree on the Hartlett calls. If he manages to play out the rest of this year without gettung injured I will officially move him up to 5 on my list just above Hurley.

Just curious on neutral fans thoughts on Phil Davis - is he starting to justify being taken at 10?

Undoubtedly on both counts.

But I'd be wary of writing off Watts this early.
Jarrad Grant has only just come good and he has a year or 2 on Jack.

 

[doggiesin08]

Undoubtedly on both counts.

But I'd be wary of writing off Watts this early.
Jarrad Grant has only just come good and he has a year or 2 on Jack.

Grant like Watts did come out of the private school system over TAC Cup only.

Grant is 1-2 years ahead (1 draft before but about 21 months in age) but really has been torn down with both OP and a stingray harpooning incident already and so probably fair to say the difference is back to just 1 year.

Will Watts be performing like Grant is in a years time? Probably not but I think Grant's type of game is a tad more suited to fitting in earlier with a less developed body. Watts will probably end up better.

 

[ringo200]

Undoubtedly on both counts.

But I'd be wary of writing off Watts this early.
Jarrad Grant has only just come good and he has a year or 2 on Jack.

Certainly not writing off Watts yet but if I'm being honest the only reason I put him at 10 is hype. If he was taken as a second or third rounder and played exactly the same the last 2 years he probably wouldn't be there.

But he has a lot of time on his side and I'm sure he will continue to improve.

 

[Enforcer25]

Certainly not writing off Watts yet but if I'm being honest the only reason I put him at 10 is hype. If he was taken as a second or third rounder and played exactly the same the last 2 years he probably wouldn't be there.

But he has a lot of time on his side and I'm sure he will continue to improve.

Fair enough. I've seen enough of his natural ability and athleticism to know he will be a star, but that is only because I've watched a lot of his games at Casey as well as at training.

In AFL games he hasn't shown much yet.

 

[larson]

Realistically, if the draft was done again today, every club would have Hurley or NicNat no.1.

 

[Enforcer25]

Realistically, if the draft was done again today, every club would have Hurley or NicNat no.1.

Bias much?

As good as Hurley has been at times, he came into the game with a man's body.
He is good and can get better, but he doesn't have quite the potential that Watts does. That is my opinion.

NicNat is proving that many have been sucked in by the hype but he just doesnt know the game and will never have as good a grasp as most players.

 

[Spluff]

Realistically, if the draft was done again today, every club would have Hurley or NicNat no.1.

I'd take Hill at 1#.

 

[Smyth94]

Bias much?

As good as Hurley has been at times, he came into the game with a man's body.
He is good and can get better, but he doesn't have quite the potential that Watts does. That is my opinion.

NicNat is proving that many have been sucked in by the hype but he just doesnt know the game and will never have as good a grasp as most players.

Hurley is 193cm and 89kg...how exactly is that a "man's" body?

 

[larson]

Bias much?

As good as Hurley has been at times, he came into the game with a man's body.
He is good and can get better, but he doesn't have quite the potential that Watts does. That is my opinion.

NicNat is proving that many have been sucked in by the hype but he just doesnt know the game and will never have as good a grasp as most players.

I'm not being biased at all.

They are the 2 players more than any others that have shown they can be match winners/ dominate a game. I really like Hill also, one of the best young mids I've ever seen.

Who would you take before Hurley or Nicnat?

 

[Gazza_11]

Any of the Watts doubters just need to watch this:

[youtube]<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/wjuXc1SM-l8&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/wjuXc1SM-l8&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>[/youtube]

Against players his own size, if not bigger he was obviously very proficient. He was the best player at the U-18 National Carnival, which is pretty good for a KPF.

 

[folester41]

stephen hill is heads above the rest, one of the classiest players in the league.

 

[tcwaters]

Any of the Watts doubters just need to watch this:

He was at his peak then.

 

[Enforcer25]

I'm not being biased at all.

They are the 2 players more than any others that have shown they can be match winners/ dominate a game. I really like Hill also, one of the best young mids I've ever seen.

Who would you take before Hurley or Nicnat?

Pretty simple.
Watts, Hill or Hartlett.

The draft order was just about right but NicNat went too high.