Draft Review 2019 - Revisit the 2019 AFL Draft

[master bate]

Interestingly, Ottens, McEvoy and Hale were all traded for and Geelong and Hawthorn sure didn't use pick three to get them. Grundy has been important but even with his stellar play, the midfield which really determine matches let him down.

The Hawks gave up pick 18, Shane Savage and moved back from pick 19 to pick 24 for McEvoy. All up that's almost a top 10 picks worth of value.

Ottens was traded for 12 and 16, the points system values that as pick 3, although in reality I'd say it's more pick 5-8.

Darren Jolly was picks 14 and 46.

The idea that every club can go and get a Nankervis for pick 40 something isn't true. Yes, teams have waited until their window but they've paid a decent price for premiership rucks.

No AFL player can win games on their own. Grundy finished top 5 in the coaches votes and is a clear top 10 players to me. The aim of pick 3 is to get that kind of player.

He moves well for a ruckman, I just don't think he has the kicking skills or contested skills other midfielders on offer have.

I think he moves well for any sized player and his contested ball winning looks as good as if not better than most of the mids outside of Green, Robertson, Anderson, Rowell. Clearly kicking is a weakness but kicking doesn't have to be a strength for a contested player. The willingness to go forward and use either foot with vision shows great potential.

Blicavs is an average ruckman and only really works at AFL level as a key back. As for Bontempelli, he has natural agility, speed, forward nous etc. that Jackson lacks.

Scott's desire to move Blicavs in to the ruck to get an extra mid is the point, more than his overall skills as a ruck. For a half it was a move (amongst others) that allowed the Cats to dominate the Tigers.

Players who averaged 20+ disposals, 10+ contested possessions and 1+ goal a game in 2019:

Greene
Martin
Gray
Dangerfield

Petracca isn't on this list. And yes, Petracca is a talent, but he's not close to Martin and your midfield is thus not close to Richmond's who are the benchmark.

I missed Greene. Petracca's at 9.5 contested possessions and 18.7, he's as close as anyone to that group of names and that's playing low midfield minutes in a bad side that needed him at CHF for ball movement. No one matches Dusty on his day - particularly as a deep forward - but at least Melbourne has a player in that range.

It's just weird that you've highlighted a need for outside skill types but then defend the recruitment of a ruckman when your own ruckman is in his peak and is one of the best ruckman in the league. A small forward is a need but drafting small forwards early is really dangerous. Like knightmare has talked about how Kemp is a bad fit for Carlton but he'd be a fantastic fit for a side crying out for some big forward craft.

The point was to highlight that whilst Melbourne needs at least 1 more skilled runner the Richmond midfield is hardly exclusively classy users. The run and overlap - which Melbourne will look to counter/reproduce by actually having a preseason - is a far more important part of the game plan.

Melbourne took 2 skilled running types with their next 2 picks and will have plenty of trade and draft options in the future to keep building that part of the list.

When it comes to a premium pick like pick 3 you have to go for the overall best available and for special abilities not list needs. That's why I'm more than fine with them picking Jackson. And whilst some recruiters preferred Young or Green (or even Ash) I'm quite heartened by the comments of other recruiters who absolutely believe in the upside of Jackson.

There's a lot of signs that he can be a 20+ disposal mid with both clearance and outside linking ability and then can go forward and be a match up problem just on size and movement. If he happens to jump around in the ruck contests whilst doing that then that's cool too.

 

[Skull Face]

Yep same skill yet it seems we rated Dow higher and you rated Philip higher... Hence why we visited Dow and not Philip.. But if you think your club is as petty minded as you are that it's all about trumping Richmond instead of bettering your own list and trusting the judgement of your recruiters ...and if that helps you sleep at night well have at it then Gilligan

I couldn't give a s**t who Richmond wanted, maybe ease off on the baseless bullshit next time.

 

[Love the Drake]

Glad were in your mind come draft time, trying to figure out who we'd pick and getting it wrong again
Must be doing SOS mind as he's leaving, too much for him

All clubs including Richmond trade up if there is a player they know another club is interested in and want to beat them to the punch.
Its common knowledge Richmond were in to Philp so I would think that was smart trading...wouldn't you?

 

[Stan Judkins]

All clubs including Richmond trade up if there is a player they know another club is interested in and want to beat them to the punch.
Its common knowledge Richmond were in to Philp so I would think that was smart trading...wouldn't you?

Yeah if you say so, as long as Cal Twomy says so as well
Why can't you blues get it that we weren't into Philip, or is it better to say we took Philip before Richmond did to suit your pick swap
Why else would we (blues) do it even though as most of your posts claim that you weren't going to use pick 55 anyway?
Oh that's right 2 years in a row must be right that we jumped ahead of Richmond to take their player from underneath their nose
By the way Philip is a good fit for your team, glad you did take him

 

[Love the Drake]

Yeah if you say so, as long as Cal Twomy says so as well
Why can't you blues get it that we weren't into Philip, or is it better to say we took Philip before Richmond did to suit your pick swap
Why else would we (blues) do it even though as most of your posts claim that you weren't going to use pick 55 anyway?
Oh that's right 2 years in a row must be right that we jumped ahead of Richmond to take their player from underneath their nose
By the way Philip is a good fit for your team, glad you did take him

Ho hum. The fact is that Carlton traded up ahead of Richmond to make sure we got him; I couldn't give a stuff if Richmond were in to him or not.

Highlights look good. He can find his own pill and is quick - two qualities that any team can use.

Hoping he can serve an apprenticeship in the VFL and push for selection later in the year/early 2021.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Yeah if you say so, as long as Cal Twomy says so as well
Why can't you blues get it that we weren't into Philip, or is it better to say we took Philip before Richmond did to suit your pick swap
Why else would we (blues) do it even though as most of your posts claim that you weren't going to use pick 55 anyway?
Oh that's right 2 years in a row must be right that we jumped ahead of Richmond to take their player from underneath their nose
By the way Philip is a good fit for your team, glad you did take him

Moving from 22 to 20 is a no brainer as we weren’t using 55 and the points were valuable to Port. Our next pick was in the 40s, so no chance at Philp by then.

We tried to do the Stocker trade with Adelaide at 16, Freo at 17 and Port at 18. They valued McHenry, Sturt and Duursma more and rightly so. Our next pick was in the 60s, so no chance at Stocker by then.

Don’t think it’s got anything to do with Richmond. Just getting in a player we want at the right value.

 

[GWS Goose]

The synic in me thinks the 22 to 30 trade was purely to spin the we turned pick 4 into 3 first rounders.... Better marketing than 2 1sts and a second

 

[Jobe Watson]

Mitch Hibberd next year will have the biggest impact out of any draftee so Essendon are big winners here. Will do a Tim Kelly, playing 20+ games as an inside mid.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

The synic in me thinks the 22 to 30 trade was purely to spin the we turned pick 4 into 3 first rounders.... Better marketing than 2 1sts and a second

Maybe if we were using the fourth selection, but there’s no reason to not do the trade otherwise.

 

[GordonBlue]

Not sure WTF Carlton were doing. They traded 22 and 25, for pick 20, to draft a bloke that didn't get selected in the U18's and no one else was in a hurry to take.

Crazy Sossy!

I know plenty would have corrected this by then, however it was Pick 22 plus pick in the 50s which we were not going to use for pick 20.

Weirdly, Port didn't use that pick either.

Richmond were about to select Philp with pick 21.

So not only did we move up a couple of spot, we took the player we wanted, that would have gone the next pick.

 

[Marcel Proust]

It has been mentioned in the media and no I'm not looking it up for you do it yourself.

You drafted a player to play the exact same role with the same skill set in Dow, you can pretend you didn't want Philp if it helps you sleep.

Yes, not doubt tens of thousands of richmond fan losing sleep over the Philip coup by sos

perhaps more



do you think paddy dow will want to join richmond one day?

 

[Boonahnah]

I think he moves well for any sized player and his contested ball winning looks as good as if not better than most of the mids outside of Green, Robertson, Anderson, Rowell. Clearly kicking is a weakness but kicking doesn't have to be a strength for a contested player. The willingness to go forward and use either foot with vision shows great potential.

It does become an issue when nobody in your midfield can lace up a target, except Oliver when he actually kicks the ball.

 

[Marcel Proust]

Jeez your a bit touchy aren't you, Philip was a great pick for your club

dunno worries me he failed to make vic metro

 

[Stan Judkins]

Moving from 22 to 20 is a no brainer as we weren’t using 55 and the points were valuable to Port. Our next pick was in the 40s, so no chance at Philp by then.

We tried to do the Stocker trade with Adelaide at 16, Freo at 17 and Port at 18. They valued McHenry, Sturt and Duursma more and rightly so. Our next pick was in the 60s, so no chance at Stocker by then.

Don’t think it’s got anything to do with Richmond. Just getting in a player we want at the right value.

And I I said in a few posts now it's a good pick for your club and in particular I agree with all of your post especially the bold highlited
Your recruiting team did what was best for your list which is a great outcome for CFC

 

[Skull Face]

Yes, not doubt tens of thousands of richmond fan losing sleep over the Philip coup by sos

perhaps more



do you think paddy dow will want to join richmond one day?

Yes and No

 

[Skull Face]

Ah. Right... Like to throw s**t. Can't take it when it comes back... Maybe you should go have a lie down and wipe away those tears

You actually believe I threw some s**t your way? Precious, I mentioned something that has been reported in the media and you get offended.

I've got a cup of concrete for you, if you think you can handle it.

 

[Skull Face]

Glad were in your mind come draft time, trying to figure out who we'd pick and getting it wrong again
Must be doing SOS mind as he's leaving, too much for him

I very much doubt anyone cares who richmond draft or want to draft, SOS wants a player and makes sure he gets them if it isn't going to cost him a lot to do.

Richmond having the following pick each year is meaningless, it could have been GC and it would make no difference the clubs are irrelevant as each other.

 

[Rod Stroker]

I know plenty would have corrected this by then, however it was Pick 22 plus pick in the 50s which we were not going to use for pick 20.

Weirdly, Port didn't use that pick either.

Richmond were about to select Philp with pick 21.

So not only did we move up a couple of spot, we took the player we wanted, that would have gone the next pick.

There are plenty of Tigers fans on here who dispute that...

 

[juss]

There are plenty of Tigers fans on here who dispute that...

The reality? Nobody here knows. We might have, we might not have.

It's square one now with none of the draftees proving anything yet. Here's hoping that when you throw enough darts with some mid ranged picks one or two of them might land you some valuable gems.

 

[Richo83]

The Hawks gave up pick 18, Shane Savage and moved back from pick 19 to pick 24 for McEvoy. All up that's almost a top 10 picks worth of value.

Ottens was traded for 12 and 16, the points system values that as pick 3, although in reality I'd say it's more pick 5-8.

Darren Jolly was picks 14 and 46.

This is my point though. Ruckmen are players you can easily trade for when the need arises. They're a plentiful commodity which can and should be replaced when the other ruckman retires. What would make sense for me is for Melbourne to keep building their midfield and then trade/recruit through free agency a ruckman when Gawn is showing signs of declining.

And these trade figures prove my point. Jolly for picks 14 and 46 is nowhere close to pick 3. Savage isn't much, and a pick downgrade in the second round and a loss of pick 18 isn't equivalent to pick 3. Ottens was contracted so Richmond had some bargaining power. Here, you can pick anyone you want.

The idea that every club can go and get a Nankervis for pick 40 something isn't true. Yes, teams have waited until their window but they've paid a decent price for premiership rucks.

Why not? Like seriously, why can't Melbourne pick the eyes out of the ruckman market in say 3-5 years time?

No AFL player can win games on their own. Grundy finished top 5 in the coaches votes and is a clear top 10 players to me. The aim of pick 3 is to get that kind of player.

Look, Grundy is a great player, but it's noticeable that even though he dominated hitouts and had a good game against the giants, they lost the contested ball easily, and their forward entries were poor. The giants were able to win because their midfield bats deeper, and they have more skilled players between the arcs.

I think he moves well for any sized player and his contested ball winning looks as good as if not better than most of the mids outside of Green, Robertson, Anderson, Rowell. Clearly kicking is a weakness but kicking doesn't have to be a strength for a contested player. The willingness to go forward and use either foot with vision shows great potential.

Look, Jackson's contested work is good, sure. But that's not your side's problem and Gawn is also a really good contested player anyway. He's raw and his skills aren't great. He's not going to provide you with that polish you need.

Scott's desire to move Blicavs in to the ruck to get an extra mid is the point, more than his overall skills as a ruck. For a half it was a move (amongst others) that allowed the Cats to dominate the Tigers.

You're the only one who actually thinks Blicavs on the wing was a good idea. He had no influence on the game, had 10 touches, no hitouts and no influence. He should have been playing on Lynch whose height worried the short Geelong backline. Dumb move.

I missed Greene. Petracca's at 9.5 contested possessions and 18.7, he's as close as anyone to that group of names and that's playing low midfield minutes in a bad side that needed him at CHF for ball movement. No one matches Dusty on his day - particularly as a deep forward - but at least Melbourne has a player in that range.

Petracca is not in Martin's "range" however you put it. Guys like Fyfe and Dangerfield are in his range. Petracca isn't.

The point was to highlight that whilst Melbourne needs at least 1 more skilled runner the Richmond midfield is hardly exclusively classy users. The run and overlap - which Melbourne will look to counter/reproduce by actually having a preseason - is a far more important part of the game plan.

Ok sure, but you don't have many quick and skillful midfielders. Your midfield is slow and one-dimensional. Jackson, whose skills are limited and isn't quick doesn't change this. Part of the reason why Richmond work is because they have pressure, because they're fast. And yet for a number of years, Melbourne's midfielders couldn't catch their shadow.

Melbourne took 2 skilled running types with their next 2 picks and will have plenty of trade and draft options in the future to keep building that part of the list.

Pickett isn't the outside accumulator you need though. You needed to draft someone like a Gaff or a Whitfield. Instead you drafted Max Gawn and a guy who could be the next Cyril Rioli or the next Sampi.

When it comes to a premium pick like pick 3 you have to go for the overall best available and for special abilities not list needs. That's why I'm more than fine with them picking Jackson. And whilst some recruiters preferred Young or Green (or even Ash) I'm quite heartened by the comments of other recruiters who absolutely believe in the upside of Jackson.

There's a lot of signs that he can be a 20+ disposal mid with both clearance and outside linking ability and then can go forward and be a match up problem just on size and movement. If he happens to jump around in the ruck contests whilst doing that then that's cool too.

But has Jackson ever shown an ability to average 20 touches a game? How many big men his height do that? Secondly, he's shown very limited forwardcraft. This idea that Jackson can blossom as a midfielder and forward is odd given he's never played as one. He reminds me of Josh Fraser/Matt Kreuzer in that he's a somewhat undersized ruck who compensates with effort around the ground. He can take a great mark but his feel for the game isn't quite there.

I think Jackson could have been a good pick for another team. He'd work perfectly for a side without a good ruckman who's looking for some height and bulk. Melbourne aren't that side.

 

[citizen-erased]

Given the hand held, i thought the dons did ok

Added some depth to positions required.

Hibberd and Townsend (assuming he comes in) both offer decent sized bodies to fill that hole in the list.

Probably short on key defenders with Hartley leaving.

 

[Marcel Proust]

There are plenty of Tigers fans on here who dispute that...

Its quite possible richmond wanted Philp over Dow.

however they said they same about Stocker/RCD and were proven wrong

either way Philp wasn't deemed good enough for Vic Metro iirc and was rated by some mid draft ...

 

[M Malice]

This is the quintessential we win you lose thread.

 

[master bate]

Why not? Like seriously, why can't Melbourne pick the eyes out of the ruckman market in say 3-5 years time?

How's that gone for GWS and Geelong? Two teams right in their windows and they can't find the right ruck. Cats have tried Stanley, Smith, Abbott all without luck. GWS have mixed in Dawson Simpson, Lobb, Keeffe and bough Mumford out of retirement before now turning to Jacobs. There's not always a Nankervis available. Sydney had a massive glut and he was out of contract at the right time. It won't always work like that for every team.

Ok sure, but you don't have many quick and skillful midfielders. Your midfield is slow and one-dimensional. Jackson, whose skills are limited and isn't quick doesn't change this. Part of the reason why Richmond work is because they have pressure, because they're fast. And yet for a number of years, Melbourne's midfielders couldn't catch their shadow.

Viney and Oliver are as quick over a few steps as anyone - both in attack and to tackle. Petracca needs to add it both ways but he has excellent explosion with the ball. Langdon will bring the outside pace. Harmes can run with anyone. Once again, there's certainly room for one or two more and I have my doubts on Brayshaw but otherwise it's fitness and coaching to keep space and balance around the ball and execute with skills.

I'd argue the Tigers forwards and backs are the real speed until the second halves when games open up and the midfields fitness starts creating run. I'm not sure the Tigers have an inside mid with the true top end pace like Treloar - who's a heck of a player but who rarely does much damage until later in games.

Pickett isn't the outside accumulator you need though. You needed to draft someone like a Gaff or a Whitfield. Instead you drafted Max Gawn and a guy who could be the next Cyril Rioli or the next Sampi.

More like than either of those is Pickett becomes the next Dan Rioli. Are you going to tell me he's not a good player and a good pick up and Melbourne didn't need a Dan Rioli type?

There was one Whitfield/Gaff type in the first round of this draft - Dylan Stephens. And I would've considered him with pick 3 and absolutely taken him with pick 12 but he's not am amazing contested ball winner, not supreme pace and doesn't absolutely lace the kicks. He's more Gaff than Whitfield I think, which isn't a knock. If he's not best available you can't reach at pick 3 and he didn't last until Melbourne's next pick.

But has Jackson ever shown an ability to average 20 touches a game? How many big men his height do that? Secondly, he's shown very limited forwardcraft. This idea that Jackson can blossom as a midfielder and forward is odd given he's never played as one. He reminds me of Josh Fraser/Matt Kreuzer in that he's a somewhat undersized ruck who compensates with effort around the ground. He can take a great mark but his feel for the game isn't quite there.

I think Jackson could have been a good pick for another team. He'd work perfectly for a side without a good ruckman who's looking for some height and bulk. Melbourne aren't that side.

Averaged 19 disposals in the WAFL colts. 22 disposals in his last 4 games after the champs.

15 disposals (11 contested), 5 clearances - despite winning 37 hit outs often down the throat of his mids who cleared the ball for him. Fraser had amazing skills for a ruck. Kreuzer crashes in at ground level really well - for a ruck. Grundy actually contributes like a midfielder and that's how they talk about Jackson.

Either he's a good pick for any team or he's not a good pick. In a couple of years Gawn will be 30 and to extend his career he'll need a partner taking the share. Dean Cox was a year younger than Gawn when Nic Nat was drafted.

Best available for what they'll do for 15 years not drafting for needs for the next 2 years.

 

[Ekomaira]

This is the quintessential we win you lose thread.

View attachment 787880

Rions*