The Rag Article

[Cap]

Did you see this Article ??

Now we on this board often cut sick at a certain "journo" from the tiser and some of the articels he writes that are pretty much always anti-crow or attacking the AFC

is this above article a Rucci style piece except having a crack at Port ? or is Dave Wildy on 5AA being a little touchy ?

for me its not really a crack, however we have had to put up with this style of article after every draft for the last couple of years so its water of a ducks back for me.

thoughts ?

 

[Redlegs14]

Did you see this Article ??

Now we on this board often cut sick at a certain "journo" from the tiser and some of the articels he writes that are pretty much always anti-crow or attacking the AFC

is this above article a Rucci style piece except having a crack at Port ? or is Dave Wildy on 5AA being a little touchy ?

for me its not really a crack, however we have had to put up with this style of article after every draft for the last couple of years so its water of a ducks back for me.

thoughts ?

I can't believe how sensitive David Wildy got over that article.

Andrew Capel was simply asking a hypothetical question, and anyone who was offended by it needs to take a good look at themselves.

 

[Malibu#27]

Its a classic example of the "boots on the other foot".

If Rucci had written it with the roles reversed there would have been upset Crows fans on this board.

Frankly truth be told - every player that we didnt select could "come back to bite us".

I think the title was out of order, as I dont see the decision to select the player the club thought was best available as a backward move.
I dont think our issue with talls is anywhere near as dire as Andrew suggests in the article. In fact strengthening the midfield as we did may have the side effect of moving Chad back into a key position.

Chaplin is a young KPP, and we have Carslile and Willits as largely untried KPP stock. Immediate backup for Tredrea comes from White and Thurstans. You can never replace a Tredrea in the side if injured - thinking a rookie can do this is a clutch, the focus has to be to develop these replacements over the next couple seasons.

I look at it this way - if we rated Boak as a top class midfielder (lets say a Del Santo) for argument sake, yet we rated Sellar in a similar vein to a Fraser - is there an issue with us taking Boak.

 

[Redlegs14]

Its a classic example of the "boots on the other foot".

If Rucci had written it with the roles reversed there would have been upset Crows fans on this board.

Frankly truth be told - every player that we didnt select could "come back to bite us".

I think the title was out of order, as I dont see the decision to select the player the club thought was best available as a backward move.
I dont think our issue with talls is anywhere near as dire as Andrew suggests in the article. In fact strengthening the midfield as we did may have the side effect of moving Chad back into a key position.

Chaplin is a young KPP, and we have Carslile and Willits as largely untried KPP stock. Immediate backup for Tredrea comes from White and Thurstans. You can never replace a Tredrea in the side if injured - thinking a rookie can do this is a clutch, the focus has to be to develop these replacements over the next couple seasons.

I look at it this way - if we rated Boak as a top class midfielder (lets say a Del Santo) for argument sake, yet we rated Sellar in a similar vein to a Fraser - is there an issue with us taking Boak.

You make some fair points, but many of your fellow supporters were asking exactly the same question as the one Andrew Capel posed in that article.

 

[Malibu#27]

You make some fair points, but many of your fellow supporters were asking exactly the same question as the one Andrew Capel posed in that article.

That doesn't mean we had to use pick 5 on a KPP though. By my thinking if Tredrea doesn't come up we're ********ed next season regardless of whether we picked Sellar.

 

[Crow-mo]

I look at it this way - if we rated Boak as a top class midfielder (lets say a Del Santo) for argument sake, yet we rated Sellar in a similar vein to a Fraser - is there an issue with us taking Boak.

is there an issue? not from our point of view - I'd take Fraser every day over Dal Santo. So if you've gone the other way, it pleases me greatly

 

[macca23]

Its a classic example of the "boots on the other foot".

If Rucci had written it with the roles reversed there would have been upset Crows fans on this board.

Frankly truth be told - every player that we didnt select could "come back to bite us".

I think the title was out of order, as I dont see the decision to select the player the club thought was best available as a backward move.
I dont think our issue with talls is anywhere near as dire as Andrew suggests in the article. In fact strengthening the midfield as we did may have the side effect of moving Chad back into a key position.

Chaplin is a young KPP, and we have Carslile and Willits as largely untried KPP stock. Immediate backup for Tredrea comes from White and Thurstans. You can never replace a Tredrea in the side if injured - thinking a rookie can do this is a clutch, the focus has to be to develop these replacements over the next couple seasons.

I look at it this way - if we rated Boak as a top class midfielder (lets say a Del Santo) for argument sake, yet we rated Sellar in a similar vein to a Fraser - is there an issue with us taking Boak.

Nothing personal, but re the title of the article, I'm pleased that you felt that way. Welcome to the club - we get those trash titles every week without fail.

Just on the substance of the article though, I genuinely think Choco stuffed up big time at the draft. Hawthorn would have shat themselves with joy to get Thorp, after Port decided to ignore KPP's.

Why would anyone think that both White and Thurstans are adequate back-up for Tredrea?? Port tried to trade White to us in 2005, and get rid of Thurstans by trade in both 2005 and 2006. White under-performs, and Thurstans is the epitome of a dud. He is the measuring stick by which all duds can be measured.

IMO Port HAD to take one of the quality talls that were available in Thorp, Sellar or Reiwoldt. If they had followed that up with Edwards of North Adelaide as their second pick, we'd all be thinking "bloody Port, they've cleaned up again!!"

Boak may be a good player but common sense dictated that it should have been a KPP - you don't get a crack at that sort of KPP every year.

 

[- PC -]

Boak may be a good player but common sense dictated that it should have been a KPP - you don't get a crack at that sort of KPP every year.

But werent we saying all last week our first pick is ''best available'' even though we knew we wanted more talls? We cant have one criteria for us and another for Port.

If Port thought Boak was the best available then they picked correctly.

 

[Crow-mo]

If Port thought Boak was the best available then they picked correctly.

Agreed, if they thought that, they made the right decision.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

is there an issue? not from our point of view - I'd take Fraser every day over Dal Santo. So if you've gone the other way, it pleases me greatly

Hmm big call. I would take Fraser as a permanent CHF or FF over Dal Santo but not the forward/ruckman model.

 

[Malibu#27]

Hmm big call. I would take Fraser as a permanent CHF or FF over Dal Santo but not the forward/ruckman model.

I think its a tough decision, if its the Fraser forward/ruck combo I'd take a DalSanto all the time.

 

[Vader]

Fraser could have been so much better than he has turned out. I'd take the potential of what Fraser could have been (what Sellar will hopefully be) over a midfielder (even as good as Dal Santo) anyday.

Problem with Fraser is that he's been stuck in no mans land - not really a ruckman, not really a forward.

With Hudson, Maric, Meesen, Griffin, Biglands and Tippett all ahead of him on the ruck pecking order (and all taller than him), there's no reason for Sellar to be thought of as a ruckman (other than the occasional boundary throw-in). He'll be able to concentrate purely on becoming the best forward he can be.

 

[Cap]

Its a classic example of the "boots on the other foot".

If Rucci had written it with the roles reversed there would have been upset Crows fans on this board.

Frankly truth be told - every player that we didnt select could "come back to bite us".

I think the title was out of order, as I dont see the decision to select the player the club thought was best available as a backward move.
I dont think our issue with talls is anywhere near as dire as Andrew suggests in the article. In fact strengthening the midfield as we did may have the side effect of moving Chad back into a key position.

Chaplin is a young KPP, and we have Carslile and Willits as largely untried KPP stock. Immediate backup for Tredrea comes from White and Thurstans. You can never replace a Tredrea in the side if injured - thinking a rookie can do this is a clutch, the focus has to be to develop these replacements over the next couple seasons.

I look at it this way - if we rated Boak as a top class midfielder (lets say a Del Santo) for argument sake, yet we rated Sellar in a similar vein to a Fraser - is there an issue with us taking Boak.

thats the point I am trying to make - 1 article questioning Power and Dave Wildy is upset - try putting up with 3-4 years of it !!

the exact same article was written about Pearce only a few minths ago by the ferret and it included you run of the mill AFC bashing, however Port supporters didn't feel the need to sit back and say that AFC picked up what they thought was best for their club !

 

[Jars458]

You may or may not agree with Capel but I guess its an opinion piece.

With Rucci, I guess we get sick of it because it happens a lot but its probably fair to say we do go a bit overbaord when we are criticised

As to the subtsance of the article the proof of the pudding will be in the eating, so we will have to wait three to four years to have this debate and even then its largely academic as drafting is hardly a precise science.

 

[Malibu#27]

thats the point I am trying to make - 1 article questioning Power and Dave Wildy is upset - try putting up with 3-4 years of it !!

the exact same article was written about Pearce only a few minths ago by the ferret and it included you run of the mill AFC bashing, however Port supporters didn't feel the need to sit back and say that AFC picked up what they thought was best for their club !

To be fair, apart from a couple comments (by me) Port supporters aren't really jumping up and down about the article.

 

[maccas_no1]

To be fair, apart from a couple comments (by me) Port supporters aren't really jumping up and down about the article.

Bet they are though over their draft selections

 

[Malibu#27]

Bet they are though over their draft selections

Theres only 1 selection that has me wondering ... and thats because I've never seen the player involved play. Definitely no problem with pick 5 though.

 

[maccas_no1]

Theres only 1 selection that has me wondering ... and thats because I've never seen the player involved play. Definitely no problem with pick 5 though.

So David Rodan is a good pick???

 

[Macca19]

I think most Port supporters expected us to get a KPP with one or both of our first two picks. Didnt end up that way. After the initial shock, if we went best available and we considered Boak to be best available then weve made the right choice.

After the first 4 talls, the next group were rated a bit lower and all had a question mark over their heads. Thorp was thought he may end up more a mdfielder than a superstar CHF. Riewoldt was considered more a flanker. Sellar may or may not take to becoming a CHF. If we considered Boak to be a less risk then weve made the right call.

And the thing is, theres another draft next year. And the year after. There will be decent talls in those drafts, and future drafts. Drafting Thorp/Sellar/Riewoldt isnt going to help us in the next two years anyway, so as Malibu said, if Tredrea is injured again we'll be ********ed no matter what.

We still have enough tall options at the moment to handle drafting some talls next year. We lost 7 smalls and 2 talls this year. We drafted accordingly. We drafted for more pace which we seriously lacked.

In the end, if Boak becomes a gun midfielder and Sellar/Thorp/Riewoldt struggle then everyone will say what a great call it was. Nature of the beast.

 

[Total Power]

Bet they are though over their draft selections

I am confident that the club made the right choices this time as well...i remember back in 2004 when we expected our pick 11 to be Angus Monfries or Cameron Wood, we selected Adam Thomson, and we were like WTF??? but i am happy with that pick now. We will have a gun midfield in 2 years time like Adelaide and WCE now

 

[Macca19]

So David Rodan is a good pick???

I was unhappy to begin with, but it was thelast pick in the draft. Minimal risk involved. If he fails he fails. Not many 17-18 year olds at that stage in the draft make it either.

 

[Malibu#27]

So David Rodan is a good pick???

At pick 83 or whatever it was - I think it could prove to be an exceptional pick.

(I didn't have this opinion on the day of the draft, but after researching his last couple years I changed my opinion pretty quickly).

EDIT: OF course time will tell - in 2 years we may be sitting here saying Rodan was the steal of the draft, and that Sellar was the biggest blunder the Crows have ever made.... its simply to early to tell.

 

[Eggzoi]

At pick 83 or whatever it was - I think it could prove to be an exceptional pick.

(I didn't have this opinion on the day of the draft, but after researching his last couple years I changed my opinion pretty quickly).

EDIT: OF course time will tell - in 2 years we may be sitting here saying Rodan was the steal of the draft, and that Sellar was the biggest blunder the Crows have ever made.... its simply to early to tell.

Sellar would have to murder someone to top Angwin for that award.

 

[macca23]

I was unhappy to begin with, but it was thelast pick in the draft. Minimal risk involved. If he fails he fails. Not many 17-18 year olds at that stage in the draft make it either.

Rodan is actually one of Port's draft picks that I wouldn't be critical of.

Taken in the 80's he could very well play some damn good footy for Port. Prior to his knee re-construction he was an AFL regular, and he's now had 12 moths of footy to have full confidence in the knee.

I'm still critical of Port taking Boak with their first pick, although time will tell as is always the case. Even using taking the best player argument, which I believe in, I don't think too many other teams apart from Port would have rated Boak above the KPP's available - particularly when Port are really crying out for a young talented KPP.

So either the Port recruiting team will prove to be geniuses, or alternatively ...........

 

[Crow-mo]

Hmm big call. I would take Fraser as a permanent CHF or FF over Dal Santo but not the forward/ruckman model.

Sorry Springy, disagree.

the bloom is rapidly fading from Dal Santo. downhill skier.

IMO Fraser is vastly underrated.