What TYPE of players should we select in the draft?

[LostDoggy]

With 7 draft picks available, what type of players should we use our draft picks on?

As to who we pick is purely a guess, however, we all have opinions as to the type of players we need.

In my opinion, we might use 6 selections this Saturday, and use the 7th on:
-PSD for Welsh, or
-PSD for a smokey/Williamstown player, or
-Pass and keep available to promote an outstanding rookie later in the season.

The 6 selections for this saturday might consist of:
1. Key forward (most talented specialist FF or CHF available)
2. Rugged inside mid-field player (Scotty West clone)
3. Key Forward (developing FF or CHF)
4. Running outside mid-field player
5. Developing Ruckman
6. The smokey/deveopment player: whether they be the extremely athletic, or the nuggerty short player, or the bottom age player (like O'Shea in last years draft).

On what type of players would you select with our draft selections to meet our needs?

[Dry Rot]

You're a non-believer in the "best available" strategy?

[Mantis]

Agree with most of what you have posted, except:

I don't think we need a West clone as we have Cross and Boyd to fill his void. What we do need is a hard running, ball winning midfielder with above average kicking skills. (Asking a bit aren't I)

Pretty much spot on with the rest and don't really care what order we pick them in. I just hope we can fill our needs and I hope we make this draft count as we really need to. Through clever trading of players and picks and after a poor 2nd half of the 07 season we are in a very strong position in this draft to improve our list, let's hope we do.

[Dogs 24/7]

Agree with most of what you have posted, except:

I don't think we need a West clone as we have Cross and Boyd to fill his void. What we do need is a hard running, ball winning midfielder with above average kicking skills. (Asking a bit aren't I)

Pretty much spot on with the rest and don't really care what order we pick them in. I just hope we can fill our needs and I hope we make this draft count as we really need to. Through clever trading of players and picks and after a poor 2nd half of the 07 season we are in a very strong position in this draft to improve our list, let's hope we do.

I agree with Doggy Doo's and your thoughts here. We need to inject some pace with any midfielders that we add in this draft.
Boyd should be the one to cover Westy in the next season or two.

[bornadog]

Best available as they should be versatile.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Best available is a crock and is what got us in this situation in the first place.

No-one can tell who's better than anyone else when they're all 17-18 yos, hell, if we tried to rank the players from 1997 we wouldn't agree.

Pick 5 - key forward - Grant/Gourdis/Henderson/McEvoy, whichever one Clayton prefers.
Pick 19 - key forward unless either someone slips (say, Ward) or if Clayton thinks they're all duds. Tarrant, Notte, Simpson maybe.
Pick 35 - midfielder unless we use pick 19 on one, in which case key forward (hoping one of the above 3 slips).
Pick 43 - midfielder
Pick 48 - ruckman
pick 66 - whatever, but I wouldn't mind another key forward (that Williams kid training with us, perhaps?)
Pick 82 - pass for Welsh in the PSD.

Rookies - try some 20 yos who missed out when they were 17. Lockwood or Rockefeller or similar.

[Mantis]

Best available is a crock and is what got us in this situation in the first place.
No-one can tell who's better than anyone else when they're all 17-18 yos, hell, if we tried to rank the players from 1997 we wouldn't agree.


Absolutely.

Time to fill the gaps on the list.... Surely that shouldn't be to hard??

[Go_Dogs]

I think a combination of best available and needs-based is required. If we can select a tall at 19 who Clayton believes will be 'OK', I'd much prefer him draft a midfielder who he thinks will be a gun. At the same time, this is a good draft for early tall selections, so best available could even be a tall.

My point is, yes we have gaps in the list. Yes it would be good to fill them solely on needs basis, however I would rather get quality than plug holes with less than quality.

Overall I'm confident we'll make the right choices.

I expect a couple of talls, a ruck, a few midfielders. Perhaps we will draft an older type like Scooter suggested, we need some more depth and ready made inclusions for mine.

[mjp]

Half a dozen future 200-game, multi-premiership winning superstars who will collect double figure B&F's between them, numerous All-Australian selections and solve the global warming crisis...

You know, the usual sort of players I am looking to add to the team!

[Mantis]

Half a dozen future 200-game, multi-premiership winning superstars who will collect double figure B&F's between them, numerous All-Australian selections and solve the global warming crisis...

You know, the usual sort of players I am looking to add to the team!

I only want players who can help solve the issues with the Japanese government over there insistence that they continue there "scientific" slaughtering of whales.

[The Underdog]

I only want players who can help solve the issues with the Japanese government over there insistence that they continue there "scientific" slaughtering of whales.

Apparently "Scientific" is the Japanese word for delicious.

[Go_Dogs]

Weaver has his PD up on BF. He also selected Gourdis as the best key forward in the draft. Not a bad read, although he did take a dig at Clayton's ability to pick players over 6 foot!

[The Underdog]

Weaver has his PD up on BF. He also selected Gourdis as the best key forward in the draft. Not a bad read, although he did take a dig at Clayton's ability to pick players over 6 foot!

The strong mail seems to be Grant.
Emma Quayle's write up of him in the Age made him sound special, the opposite of Weaver, although Gourdis sounds a safer bet (if there is such a thing) as far as consensus from the "experts". It doesn't seem like either would slide to 19 so I guess Clayton will pick the one he really wants. It seems less and less likely that McEvoy would be his man and as for Henderson, much like everyone else in this draft seems to be he's either the next Pavlich (thanks Inside Football) or an injury prone overrated future CHB.

[mjp]

I am hearing Grant and Tarrant...

[The Underdog]

I am hearing Grant and Tarrant...

From what I've read we'd be paying over the odds, but then it worked out with Everitt, and you can only really judge a players worth down the track.
It makes sense from the two KPP's who'll be available perspective.

I wonder if he'd be prepared to amend that for a midfielder who slid, ie everyone's favourite Western Jet

[mjp]

From what I've read we'd be paying over the odds, but then it worked out with Everitt, and you can only really judge a players worth down the track.
It makes sense from the two KPP's who'll be available perspective.

I wonder if he'd be prepared to amend that for a midfielder who slid, ie everyone's favourite Western Jet

I don't mind Grant at 5.
I have only seen the worst of Tarrant, so have negative opinion of him.

If Ward falls as far as 19, I would be very surprised.

[Bulldog Revolution]

I have only seen the worst of Tarrant, so have negative opinion of him.


Can he kick straight?

[The Underdog]

I don't mind Grant at 5.
I have only seen the worst of Tarrant, so have negative opinion of him.

If Ward falls as far as 19, I would be very surprised.

I know, he was more an example, but generally at least one highish rated player falls further than most thought.

Tarrant seems to have tested quite well, but I'm questionable of players who seem to test ok but don't have the history on the park. Again I'm only going by what others have said but he seems to be trading more on his size and brother's rep than actual deeds.

That should make him a 100 goal forward at AFL level :o

[LostDoggy]

Best available talent is the only way to go. I have faith in Mr Clayton

[Go_Dogs]

It's our new thing, moving onto the younger, better brothers?

[Sockeye Salmon]

I am hearing Grant and Tarrant...

Only because I keep telling you that ...










... but then, I don't know shit.

[bornadog]

Best available is a crock and is what got us in this situation in the first place.

No-one can tell who's better than anyone else when they're all 17-18 yos, hell, if we tried to rank the players from 1997 we wouldn't agree.

Exactly why you go for the best available.

[Mantis]

Exactly why you go for the best available.

All good and well, but we still need to fill the gaps that on our list.

[mjp]

Only because I keep telling you that ...


You know I love you dearly SS, but you actually weren't the information source I was referring too!

[hujsh]

I agree with Doggy Doo's and your thoughts here. We need to inject some pace with any midfielders that we add in this draft.
Boyd should be the one to cover Westy in the next season or two.

Cause if there is one thing the bulldogs need it is lighly framed but quick players;)

[GVGjr]

Cause if there is one thing the bulldogs need it is lighly framed but quick players;)

We actually do need some quick runners. Out midfield lacked a bit of spark last season so a couple of quick guys would be a great assistance for us. As someone else pointed out we will miss McMahons run.

[bornadog]

All good and well, but we still need to fill the gaps that on our list.

If you get the best available, you fill in those positions. The best tall will fill in the tall roll we require etc etc.

[Mantis]

If you get the best available, you fill in those positions. The best tall will fill in the tall roll we require etc etc.

Copout...

Now I know little about the players to be drafted, but have spent a bit of time reading profiles and Mock Drafts so have some idea about the players, well I know there names. So we come down to our first pick and there is Rance available who is a tall defander and Grant who is a tall forward. Now Clayton rates Rance the better player, but we need a tall forward. How does your theory stack up here?

[LostDoggy]

You're a non-believer in the "best available" strategy?

Having to work during day, has delayed my response to the Dry Rot.

Not against the best available, as long as that player fits our needs, nor am I concerned as to what sequence we select the type of players - as long we remedy our short comings.

We must provide the mix of players needed, not purely the best available which could provide 5 mid-fielders and one tall, or visa-versa.

This little 'doggy - doos' not know enough about the players in the draft (only influenced by repeated player profiles), so I'll have to leave it to Scotty Clayton - he gets paid the big $$$$.

I can only hope he has gained the right player info, and the selections opportunities fall his way.

Thanks for the feedback.

[LostDoggy]

so many big forwards to choose from when we have such an early draft choice.

[Dogs 24/7]

Copout...

Now I know little about the players to be drafted, but have spent a bit of time reading profiles and Mock Drafts so have some idea about the players, well I know there names. So we come down to our first pick and there is Rance available who is a tall defander and Grant who is a tall forward. Now Clayton rates Rance the better player, but we need a tall forward. How does your theory stack up here?

I couldnt disagree with you more. How can picking the best player be a flawed logic?
I know every team has to be pragmatic with some of their selections in each draft but skipping over more talented players to pick position players is very likely to land us another Tim Walsh. It was wildly acknowledged that Walsh was a highly regarded key forward but most other teams rated him 10 plus in the draft. Clayton snared him with pick four and we got zero return from him acknowledging injuries had a big say in it was well.
First round picks are just to important to pass on the most talented of players just to fill a position and Claytons reputation is very shaky at the moment so he wont want to get this one wrong.
The best available principle is also something that Clayton never sticks to after his first couple of picks anyway. We always balances out our drafts selections with a mixture of key position players and midfielders.

If Clayton thought the best player was going to be a 200 game player and he a key defender or even midfielder then I will be happy with that even though I would prefer a key forward. He would then need to fix this though by being more pragmatic with his next selection.

[LostDoggy]

As someone else pointed out we will miss McMahons run.


and his miskicks.......

[Mantis]

I couldnt disagree with you more. How can picking the best player be a flawed logic?
I know every team has to be pragmatic with some of their selections in each draft but skipping over more talented players to pick position players is very likely to land us another Tim Walsh. It was wildly acknowledged that Walsh was a highly regarded key forward but most other teams rated him 10 plus in the draft. Clayton snared him with pick four and we got zero return from him acknowledging injuries had a big say in it was well.
First round picks are just to important to pass on the most talented of players just to fill a position and Claytons reputation is very shaky at the moment so he wont want to get this one wrong.
The best available principle is also something that Clayton never sticks to after his first couple of picks anyway. We always balances out our drafts selections with a mixture of key position players and midfielders.

If Clayton thought the best player was going to be a 200 game player and he a key defender or even midfielder then I will be happy with that even though I would prefer a key forward. He would then need to fix this though by being more pragmatic with his next selection.

Did you not read the post I replied to. Read it again and come back to me.

[Sockeye Salmon]

I couldnt disagree with you more. How can picking the best player be a flawed logic?


You make it sound like every player has his clear ranking BigFooty style. At best the draft is an educated guess.

It is more likely that you will be successful picking a midfielder because they mature earlier and are not such a risk, but no-one really knows who is going to kick on and who wont.

The fact is you need KPP's and the ones who do show something go early.

You should, as a minimum, use your first rounder on a tall every second year at least.

[Dry Rot]

Having to work during day, has delayed my response to the Dry Rot.

Not against the best available, as long as that player fits our needs, nor am I concerned as to what sequence we select the type of players - as long we remedy our short comings.

We must provide the mix of players needed, not purely the best available which could provide 5 mid-fielders and one tall, or visa-versa.



No probs, but you seem to have a foot in both camps?

[mjp]

No probs, but you seem to have a foot in both camps?

I have a foot in both camps. You take the best player there unless you have a screaming need for someone. You pick for your needs unless there is another player who you rate significantly more who is still available...

It isn't as simple as we are all saying.

[GVGjr]

I have a foot in both camps. You take the best player there unless you have a screaming need for someone. You pick for your needs unless there is another player who you rate significantly more who is still available...

It isn't as simple as we are all saying.

Fully agree. We have to stick to the principle of best available but still have an approach that covers the needs of the team.
Really the trade period should be used to address the gaps not the draft.

[Mantis]

Really the trade period should be used to address the gaps not the draft.

But how is that so?

We seriously need a power forward. From what we hear we shopped around for one in the trade period, but nothing was available at the price we were willing to pay. So do we overpay for one in the trade period or do we try and develop our own through the draft?

[Sockeye Salmon]

It isn't as simple as we are all saying.

Of course it is.

Just draft another Jonathon Brown.

[LostDoggy]

Fully agree. We have to stick to the principle of best available but still have an approach that covers the needs of the team.
Really the trade period should be used to address the gaps not the draft.

You cant have it both ways. Its 'best available' or 'fill the gaps'. Best avialable is the only way to go. Im sure Clayton would of loved a 6'4 CHF in the 05 draft but decided Higgins was the best avialable.

[mjp]

You cant have it both ways. Its 'best available' or 'fill the gaps'. Best avialable is the only way to go. Im sure Clayton would of loved a 6'4 CHF in the 05 draft but decided Higgins was the best avialable.

I have said this before - you have to be lucky when you draft. Some years, the stand-out players are mids, other years they are talls. You dont use pick 11 (Higgins) for an average tall when there is another player you believe to be of real quality available. By the same token, if there are two guys you rate on a similar level...Sticking with the Higgins example, the next kpp taken in that draft (2005) was Paul Bower (a defender) at pick 20. Then Cleve Hughes went at 24...Of course, before our pick were Paddy Ryder, Beau Dowler, Josh Kennedy, Mitch Clark, Marcus Drum...

We have experienced some interesting times in the draft, and the Griffen over Franklin argument is the only one that still bears follow-up. Cooney was clearly the best player in his draft class...and so it goes.

Picking for needs is simplistic. Picking best available is simplistic.

All that said, quality key position forwards are found early in the first round of the draft.

[The Underdog]

Burgan has us getting Grant, Ward and Gaertner with our first 3 in his phantom. Gourdis then gets picked up at 36, so would be available.
Again it's just another phantom, but this'd be the sort of ideal outcome I'd reckon. Then able to pick up mids in mid 40's and maybe a late pick on a ruck or KPP.
Plus I'd like to see how many of these, :D, mjp could fit in one post if we got Ward.
(I know, I know, he's not going to last to 19 :o)

Also, it's the first place I've seen either Gaertner or Gourdis lasting pass mid 20's.

[mjp]

If Gourdis and Ward slip to the levels he proposes, it will reinforce one thing to me - the recruiters are flat out guessing.

Dawson Simpson in the top 25? For goodness sakes, I would be more use as a ruckman that him right now, all 5 foot 10 of me, reconstructed knees and all - he is 3-4 years away.

If Simpson gets picked early, then why would Gaertner - an legitimate freak in terms of size/athletic ability who could turn into an absolute monster - drop to 35?

Needless to say UD, I will be very pleased if we get Ward at 19.

[The Underdog]

If Gourdis and Ward slip to the levels he proposes, it will reinforce one thing to me - the recruiters are flat out guessing.

Dawson Simpson in the top 25? For goodness sakes, I would be more use as a ruckman that him right now, all 5 foot 10 of me, reconstructed knees and all - he is 3-4 years away.

If Simpson gets picked early, then why would Gaertner - an legitimate freak in terms of size/athletic ability who could turn into an absolute monster - drop to 35?

Needless to say UD, I will be very pleased if we get Ward at 19.

I think his only reason for Simpson going that high was that West Coast need a ruck and their last pick is at 22. So they'd be overpaying, but picking for needs.

I can't see us getting this lucky but hey it's nice to dream.
This and seeing John Howard out the door on Saturday night would make my month.

[LostDoggy]

Whats so good about Ward? Has anyone seen him play? details?

[hujsh]

We actually do need some quick runners. Out midfield lacked a bit of spark last season so a couple of quick guys would be a great assistance for us. As someone else pointed out we will miss McMahons run.

I think Everit Gilbee Griffen COONey Ray Eagles Gia Murph Hahn Johnno Acker Harbrow Higgins and Lynch will provide enough speed.

[mjp]

Whats so good about Ward? Has anyone seen him play? details?


Search function?

[GVGjr]

Search function?

mjp, how about a quick bio on the boy? :)

From my perspective, he is a pure footballer with all the skills and attributes that good footballers need.
He isn't the quickest but he is quickish, nor the biggest and he hasn't got that one signature strength that a lot of players rely on but he can get the ball, he can hold his marks and he uses the ball well. On top of that, at 184cm he can play a variety of positions and he reads the play better than most.

It's hard to say what current senior player he is similar to.

[bornadog]

Copout...

Now I know little about the players to be drafted, but have spent a bit of time reading profiles and Mock Drafts so have some idea about the players, well I know there names. So we come down to our first pick and there is Rance available who is a tall defander and Grant who is a tall forward. Now Clayton rates Rance the better player, but we need a tall forward. How does your theory stack up here?

My theory would be get the best player of the two. Gaps can be filled as they develop, but you are not going to get a ready made 18 year old forward. If Rance is truely the best, he may play forward, or he stays back and some one else goes forward. I would still go for the best available.

[The Coon Dog]

Dawson Simpson in the top 25? For goodness sakes, I would be more use as a ruckman that him right now, all 5 foot 10 of me, reconstructed knees and all - he is 3-4 years away.

Article in today's Age.

Dawson Simpson (http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/boy-rejects-khaki-for-another-draft/2007/11/23/1195753308396.html)

[southerncross]

Well I think the type of players we will select has now been answered.
Two tall picks and everyone of them quick.
While a lot of people go on about getting tall players the general consensus amongst most of the clubs appears to be around adding pace.

All the most noticeable players missed were the tall ones.

[The Underdog]

If Gourdis and Ward slip to the levels he proposes, it will reinforce one thing to me - the recruiters are flat out guessing.

Dawson Simpson in the top 25? For goodness sakes, I would be more use as a ruckman that him right now, all 5 foot 10 of me, reconstructed knees and all - he is 3-4 years away.

If Simpson gets picked early, then why would Gaertner - an legitimate freak in terms of size/athletic ability who could turn into an absolute monster - drop to 35?

Needless to say UD, I will be very pleased if we get Ward at 19.

Can we say then that the recruiters are guessing?

Ward slipped to 19 (luckily for us). Simpson picked by Geelong.
Gourdis and Gaertner not picked at all. Hope one makes it to our first rookie selection.
Wierd draft, all up.

Happy with the early picks but Clayton really seems to back his speculative late picks, so they'd better pay off.

[Topdog]

Happy with the early picks but Clayton really seems to back his speculative late picks, so they'd better pay off.

Fortunately they often do.

[Topdog]

I think Everit Gilbee Griffen COONey Ray Eagles Gia Murph Hahn Johnno Acker Harbrow Higgins and Lynch will provide enough speed.

Everitt wont be playing in the middle.
Gilbee - backline
Cooney and Griffen = good, not exactly speed demons but not slow.
Ray = very quick.
Eagle = getting on in age
Gia = not quick.
Murphy = see Gia
Hahn = again not quick
Johnno = forward
Acker = forward and getting on in age.
Harbrow = quick and young.
Higgins = young not blistering speed but very smart and great footwork
Lynch = quick and young.

We need more pace and pace does not = skinny people.