Weaver mock draft

[JeNnO_powerfreak_21]

Good stuff Weav's, Well done mate!

 

[missionpossible]

Weaver, why do you have Hughes ahead of Dowler? Surely if they are similar players the Hawks would err on the side of caution and take the Melbourne boy?

They may be similar size and play similar positions but the are not similar players.

Hughes rellies more on a fast lead where Dowler tends to rely on the contested mark. This is not to say that Dowler doesn't lead or Hughes cant take a contested mark.

Both are good with what I think is huge room for improvement.

 

[footyman]

just that I am sick of people taking other people's lists and reordering them. When my list is completely wrong I can at least take pride in getting it all wrong all by myself

Terrific work weaver. Completely agree with the comment above, I know I prefer to see phantom drafts that aren't simply cut and paste jobs done by people who haven't been to any, or have seen a couple of games. I know you get to games and have your own views on players which is important.

Great work.

 

[missionpossible]

Good work Weaver, I like that you have put pen picks with each of your players.
I think we could sit down for hours and discuss the pros and cons of each player.

 

[coasting]

If you have to resort to racist innuendo to get your point across you're a bigger tool than I thought!

Really? Well, perhaps you can enlighten us all as to why Patrick Ryder isn't the clear cut #1 pick? Or are you just all talk?

 

[The Shag]

just to add on what i said before, carlton could go close to a win-win situation anyway....
as you said weaver, hawthorn will want mids, thats a given. and you'd expect collingwood to go best available... (Ellis, Hurn, Kennedy)...so if we take murphy at #1, collingwood take either of those mids considering their forward line could be one of the best in the comp and their backline is in no way shakey.....hawthorn will take a the remaining mid of hurn or ellis, leaving us with Kennedy at 4. and if either collingwood or hawthorn go tall then we possibly have hurn or ellis to get at 4.....what is wrong with going 2 mids anyway....after all, we could do with a couple of skilled players in the guts....and then that leaves us to take couple of tall natural defenders (by natural i mean people who have been there for their whole life...i.e lucy, mills, bower, spangher...) with picks 20 and 36....

#1. Marc Murphy
#4. Kennedy/Hurn/Ellis (at least one will be around at pick 4)
#20. Spangher/Lucy
#36. Mills/M West
#68. A project player...

 

[jackson_rules]

Really? Well, perhaps you can enlighten us all as to why Patrick Ryder isn't the clear cut #1 pick? Or are you just all talk?

because he isnt the clear cut best player in teh draft

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Really? Well, perhaps you can enlighten us all as to why Patrick Ryder isn't the clear cut #1 pick? Or are you just all talk?

I thought it was because he may be short for a ruckman, hasn't played key position and doesn't get a lot of the ball. Not saying he isn't capable of being the best player but at this age, you have to show a lot to be a standout selection. To suggest he has shown more than everyone else and if he was white would be a clear number 1 is just pure mischief making. The world might not be as racist and unfair as you seem to want to believe, especially the football world where aboriginal talent is revered and chased after. Based on his stats, his drafting will be based partly on the X factor that comes with his aboriginality, yet if he doesn't go very high, you seem to think it is his aboriginality holding him back.

What is he? 195cm? How many white ruckman would go at number 1 at that height?

 

[waspy]

I was a little surprised to see you having Kennedy going to Carlton at #1, but it sounds like a brave and possibly very clever move.

 

[coasting]

What is he? 195cm? How many white ruckman would go at number 1 at that height?

Jeff White was 195cm when he was drafted #1 in 1994.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Jeff White was 195cm when he was drafted #1 in 1994.

11 years ago. Ruckmen have been getting taller ever since. So much so that 195 is considered to be a small ruckman nowadays.

You are calling for reasons why he is not a standout number one selection and you have got them. He may well end up being the best player in the history of the game but has not been the standout player in this years draft as yet.

 

[coasting]

11 years ago. Ruckmen have been getting taller ever since. So much so that 195 is considered to be a small ruckman nowadays.

Adam Goodes won a Brownlow playing in the Ruck and he is 194cm.

 

[waspy]

Not sure Essendon will take another midfielder at 19 if we take one with 7. I think we might take Spangher or Bower with that pick if they are there at pick 19, both sound like they can cover key back positions which is what we need. Bradley might not be able to play CHB.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Adam Goodes won a Brownlow playing in the Ruck and he is 194cm.

Also got injured playing in the ruck. Sydney won a flag with Jason Ball and Darren Jolly in the ruck. Seems team ambitions outweigh individual honours in this sport.

How about you comment on his versatility or his possession rate when evaluating number one or otherwise.

 

[coasting]

How about you comment on his versatility or his possession rate when evaluating number one or otherwise.

Kennedy can play forward or back. Ryder can play forward or ruck. I don't see one as more versatile than the other. As for his possession rate, I don't see what the problem is? Thats more a coaching/gameplan thing, learning to run to the right places and have his team mates look for the free ruckman. Its certainly not because his athleticism is somehow preventing him from doing something. I doubt you will find any u18 ruckmen who are ball magnets. Do you think Dean Cox was a ball magnet when he was younger? He usually got less than 10 possessions a game. Now he often gets 20+

 

[Nightwolf]

Possibly the best Phantom draft ive seen, in terms of the reports on each player (apart from footydraft of course). Quality effort Weaver...

Ill be quite suprised if Kennedy is number 1, and disapointed (i want him at Hawthorn at 3)...Calrton need KPP, but a quality midfeilder is also of need, theyd be nuts to pass on Murphy...

Ryder at 11 is also interesting. I cant see Hawthorn taking him at all, but should be top 10....

Id also like to think pick 6 will be on a future number 1 ruckman at our club, but hey, we'll see what happens...

 

[The Shag]

with the new centre circle, ruck is becoming more and more of a 198cm + man's game...in the past, people with a good leap were able to compete well, but now its more like a basketball "ball-up" and anything under 198cm would be risky...

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Kennedy can play forward or back. Ryder can play forward or ruck. I don't see one as more versatile than the other. As for his possession rate, I don't see what the problem is? Thats more a coaching/gameplan thing, learning to run to the right places and have his team mates look for the free ruckman. Its certainly not because his athleticism is somehow preventing him from doing something. I doubt you will find any u18 ruckmen who are ball magnets. Do you think Dean Cox was a ball magnet when he was younger? Probably got less than 10 possessions a game. Now he gets 20+

You may be right but context is the issue here. You have implied that the only reason for Ryder not going number 1 is because he is aboriginal. Then you are defending him by forecasting what he may be able to do in the future. The number one pick has generally done everything at the junior level that the recruiters are looking for and only have to transfer it to the senior level. Ryder is a mass of potential but a couple of nagging doubts as well.

I think we have shown that he is not a standout number one without playing the racist card just by our little debate here. He might have number one potential but there are some doubts there.

 

[coasting]

What nagging doubts? There are no players in this draft who have "done everything at the junior level", at least not to the extent that I think you mean it. Its a pretty even draft. So the reason he should be the #1 pick is because no one in the draft has his combination of size, athleticism and potential. In fact, its not even close.

 

[Rave Slave]

Fantastic work as always Weaver.

 

[Philhawk]

for starters Ryder is 197.5cm - work from there

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

So the reason he should be the #1 pick is because no one in the draft has his combination of size, athleticism and potential. In fact, its not even close.

Size and athleticism are just elements when it comes to potential, and although potential is one thing, it isn't everything. Part of it is how good you are now.

Lance Franklin would've been #1 last year if it was all about how good you 'could' become.

Part of it is having runs on the board, and at the moment, Ryder has some flaws in his game, probably bigger than other players.

There's really nothing that you look at Marc Murphy and say "he has to improve that". Similar when it comes to Xavier Ellis for mine, in terms of footballing ability. Yes he has to bulk up, but so does every rookie. They do what they do pretty damn well already.

Ryder would have to become a higher possession winner or a better KPP to be able to make his full-potential impact at AFL level.

I am not criticising him, he's still clearly a top 5 pick, but you've got to allow for the fact that you like him a hell of a lot more than others.

I personally like Xavier Ellis as the #1 pick, and I think that on personal opinion, footyman does too. Many people like Marc Murphy as #1. I know Colin Wisbey likes Shannon Hurn at #1. And Weaver here likes Josh Kennedy at #1.

There are arguments to be made for any candidate, and you shouldn't be so flippant of anyone who suggests something contrary to your own opinion.

 

[Silvagnis]

How has Marc Murphy gone from being the only only homerun selection, to now being a part of a strategy to draft a KPP (was pick 8 and athletic, tall, might be better down back) and a midfielder?

I agree with ODN's first post that we've been badly burnt before with going for talls over the best player with our early picks.Murphy and Hurn will do just fine as they are probably as good as any footballer in this draft regardless of position.

Hurn will be a walk up start to replace Kouta as ruck-rover next year who is on his last legs.I hope the club are content to wait to get a genuine number 1 KPP like Thorp/Hansen/Gumbleton next year, rather than recruiting one to fill a need or a strategy.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

for starters Ryder is 197.5cm - work from there

You're a bit dyslexic on that one, Patrick Ryder is 195.7 according to the official measurements.

If it was the other way around, he would be a definite top 3 pick, possibly #1, as there'd be no query about his ability to ruck.

While I agree that that is completely and utterly stupid when you look at how miniscule 2cms is, that's how it works.

However, given how incredibly bottom aged Ryder is, I wouldn't be suprised to see him grow to 197-198cm.

 

[waspy]

Hurn will be a walk up start to replace Kouta as ruck-rover next year who is on his last legs.

Even the most impressive first year players struggle to have an impact in every game, and if you're playing as starting ruck-rover you need to do that. I can't see him being an immediate relacement for Kouta as you suggest he will be.