Reflections on the 2008 draft.

[Dyer Disciple]

Thats alot more useful set out.Can get all the information one needs.

What stands out there to me is that we have alot more depth in important areas that we were severely lacking in as little as 2 years ago;namely midfielld and in particular inside midfielders.

Midfielders
Mark Coughlan
Matthew White
Adam Thomson
Daniel Jackson
Dean Polo
Tom Hislop
Andrew Collins

Thats a good young back up list.There should be at least 2 150 gamers there I reckon,hopefully more.

Next year we probably want to get a couple more KPP,depending on how well Schulz Steamer and Reiwoldt go in 2009

Our ruck stocks are also looking alot deeper now as has been mentioned.

Agree strongly. The insider midfielders and rucks were most important for me to fix this year. We have done that. While stating I wanted to key positions with our first two picks this year I thought we would end up getting a key position and midfielder, I'm wrapped how things turned out.

Next year we need to look at forwards and a tall/strong bodied mobile key back. You don't need as many talls for depth as midfielders/flankers/smalls etc but regardless of how riewoldt/*smile*/hughes go this year...we need more depth to allow for one hit (season) wonders and injuries, players wanting out for some reason, gold coast concessions on uncontracted players, anything mischellaneous etc.

 

[Col.E.Kurtz]

Next year we need to look at a tall/strong bodied mobile key back.

You don’t think Moore, Thirsty, Luke, Rance, Post and Gourdis are enough depth as key defenders?

I’m more worried about our short BP stocks.

 

[GD]

I think we've already picked up our mobile backmen and getting them ready to play. Rance is the next in, Post the year after that.. Moore, Thursfield, maybe McGuane can already do that. You're right though as I was doing our best 22, FF was the hardest spot to fill in. I think we persist with Richo up the ground...... Richo and Lids on the wing means you cannot possibly kick over it, the marking power there is too strong (and fast).

So with Browny set to retire in the next 2 years and probably Richo too (may he go on til he's 40.. don't even do the pre-season Richo.. just freshen up.. turn up in Feb and plonk yourself in the goal square!!!) it's a good time to look at Hughes, Vickery, Schulz and figure if anyone of them can make it in the big square getting all the free shots at goal from the stupid rushed behinds rule.

 

[TOT70]

Agree strongly. The insider midfielders and rucks were most important for me to fix this year. We have done that. While stating I wanted to key positions with our first two picks this year I thought we would end up getting a key position and midfielder, I'm wrapped how things turned out.

Next year we need to look at forwards and a tall/strong bodied mobile key back. You don't need as many talls for depth as midfielders/flankers/smalls etc but regardless of how riewoldt/schulz/hughes go this year...we need more depth to allow for one hit (season) wonders and injuries, players wanting out for some reason, gold coast concessions on uncontracted players, anything mischellaneous etc.

From this point on, we need to turn our thoughts to player replacement.

Johnson has no more than one year left (I'm surprised he even had that). Richo, Bowden and Brown probably have no more than two. Who knows what Cousins has left but I would imagine two years would be about right, three at a pinch. Polak may also be gone at the end of 2009.

Johnson and Bowden have already been replaced, regardless of how many games they play next year. I would imagine that they will figure prominently if there is a run to finals and maybe retire before the end of the season if not.

That tells us that we need forwards now, all shapes and sizes. I would be looking for two CHF types in next year's drafts as a matter of priority. As always, another ruckmen on the rookie list should be a priority if Graham doesn't get there.

 

[ZeroGame]

2003 - i think it was Ok in retrospect! brown, jackson, raines, tuck, and foley (rookie)

If you have a look at the 2003 draft, you'll see that we've done pretty well out of it
It was a stinker!

 

[daoula]

I think we've already picked up our mobile backmen and getting them ready to play. Rance is the next in, Post the year after that.. Moore, Thursfield, maybe McGuane can already do that. You're right though as I was doing our best 22, FF was the hardest spot to fill in. I think we persist with Richo up the ground...... Richo and Lids on the wing means you cannot possibly kick over it, the marking power there is too strong (and fast).

So with Browny set to retire in the next 2 years and probably Richo too (may he go on til he's 40.. don't even do the pre-season Richo.. just freshen up.. turn up in Feb and plonk yourself in the goal square!!!) it's a good time to look at Hughes, Vickery, Schulz and figure if anyone of them can make it in the big square getting all the free shots at goal from the stupid rushed behinds rule.

Inside words suggest Vickery will be thrown up front until he fills out for the ruck

 

[Ty Esler]

You don’t think Moore, Thirsty, Luke, Rance, Post and Gourdis are enough depth as key defenders?

I’m more worried about our short BP stocks.

I agree - based on the needs identified by Craig Cameron at draft night we should have gone some way to meeting our main needs. Back pocket we still need, hopefully one of Nahas or Gilligan come through and of course you always need more quality midfielders.

 

[PurpleSneakers]

Agree with others a lock down negating back pocket would have been nice.

 

[skiptomystu]

Agree with others a lock down negating back pocket would have been nice.

Exactly how many of those are getting around at under 18 level?

 

[the claw]

C'mon Claw, I'd be interested in your view on the list changes, the drafts and where the list is at.

You're all welcome.

ha why me.
as you know phantom im rarely pleased.
as far as list structure goes i agree with you. we desperately needed ruckmen.we got 2 one with a decent pick and we rookied one a good sized one at that.
we improved our kpp stocks with post rookieing gourdis was also a bonus.

we rookied some genuine nippy smalls as you say this was a glareing weakness in the list would have liked a big bodied quick rover type for defence as well.

finally we have taken 3 genuine big bodied onballers including cousins. there are no complaints from me as far as structure went this trade/draft period.

all up 17 talls including rookies. the numbers are right at least. im still very concerned about the quality though.

5 ruckmen on the list we are still in a little trouble if simmonds misses thru injury as the other 4 are unproven.simmonds graham putt vickery and browne. i hope at least 3 develop into afl players this is probably overly optimistic.ill take two though.

kpds rance mcguane thursfield schulz. silvestor rookie. thats 5 imo one short. its well known i have grave concerns about silvestor schulz and mcguane. its my opinion we desperately need a big or powerful fb if you like.
theres also moore who can play kp but its just a personal thing on how i would like to see him played. besides he doesnt fit into the genuine tall criteria.
kpfs richo riewoldt, post, hughes, pattison, polak, and rookie gourdis. thats 7 probably 1 to many but as far as quality goes well i dont think its enough. especially when you think richo and more than likely polak wont be around much longer and pattison and hughes are struggling and in all honesty dont look like it to me.add the fact gourdis is very much a project who probably wont make the grade it does not leave a lot in the forseeable future.

okay thats the talls structure looks okay like i said as far as numbers and type goes..

the most important area of a club. and im loosly calling these players ball winning skillful inside/onballers/mids.

tuck thomson hislop coughlan edwards collins foley polo johnson connors cousins deledio cotchin. the last 4 being similar types imo skillful inside/outside players. theres some depth there now. even though i didnt want him in the short term cousins does give us something now, if he stays healthy. i mean that in a footy sense.
theres 3 there ive always thought we should upgrade on. theres johnson who i thought should have retired.
theres coughlan will he or wont he get back and of course there is the 3 newcomers. theres no guarantees there either they have to prove themselves. one thing about nearly all of them is they are ready to play now.there will be no gaping holes if a foley or tuck get hurt.theres extractors ready to take their place.
by no means are all skillful.

medium and small defenders. newman mcmahon tambling white jon bowden king raines.theres not one with toughness and a mean streak theres only 3 worth keeping newman white and tambling.

medium and small forwards. brown, morton. pettifer. nahas rookie. gilligan rookie. still light on here pettifer should have been delisted.browns in his 30s. cousins im sure will play a lot of footy here so will connors atm as well.

once again i will say the list stucture is much better its almost where we need iut to be.the real concern continues to be the quality i know i keep saying this but it is a fact.
i think tot 70 said from this point on we need to focus on player replacement i take it he means for like player. i call this upgrading. sheesh it may be we are even to the point when we offer a player up he is worth something.
as far as upgrading and age of players goes i could quite easily turn over as few as 15 and if things dont go the way we want them more than half the list.
finally just on today i have to say im annoyed we didnt use all of our rookie picks imo theres no excuse for this this entire draft we have effectively taken just 3 18 yr olds which includes two rookies.

anyway there you all go i think an overall positive post i may have to revise where i think we will finish next yr.

 

[RFC not KFC]

Well done Claw - good analysis and a nice positive finish to stick it up those who don't quite seem to understand where you are continually coming from.

 

[TigerLuke]

ha why me.
as you know phantom im rarely pleased.
...
anyway there you all go i think an overall positive post i may have to revise where i think we will finish next yr.

wow. that is almost a positive post from you claw.

i assume that we passed on our last rookie selection due to finances. a full list of rookies is probably not for clubs still in debt.

i think our list is young enough as it is without picking up too many 18yo. wallace has been trying to balance the list age wise of the last few years which is why he has brought in 'recycled'/mature aged players from other clubs. even many of our rookies over the last few of years have been 'old'(22/23yo) rookies.

rucks - i still think that wallace's plan all along was to trade for a ready-made number 1 ruckman when our 'window' comes around. simmonds will be gone by then. pattison or vickery for the 2nd ruck at that stage and hopefully 1 of graham, putt, browne will be ok.

maybe this has been answered, but if essendon didn't pick klemke, were we going to pick him with either of our 2 picks after that? or did we decide we didn't want him?

salary cap - are we near the salary cap limit? allegedly only $120000 to play with to pay cousins(my idea is he be should be signed up on minimum wage + match payments). if this is true or even close to the truth, how can it be that we are paying the same amount as geelong? we have been a mid-table team and we have such a young list, how could we be paying that much? who is taking up all the money? is simmonds contract back-dated? who else is on a big salary?

 

[PurpleSneakers]

Exactly how many of those are getting around at under 18 level?

You tell me. Who said anything about under 18's anyway, was thinking more of a mature player in the rookie draft.

You don't think we need one?

 

[Freezer]

A couple of junior 195-199cm key forwards for 2009 would complete the picture.

As in Jaydon Post types?

Any that you already know of?