Draft Results a Mixed Bag?

[FrediKanoute]

I am happy we took Grant and Ward with picks 5 and 19, but I am a little mystified by who we took with our remaining picks, especially given that thre were some quality talls left in the draft pool. Gourdis was one that stands out. I haven't seen him play, but guys like Weaver on BF and MJP here rate the kid, so surely we could have taken him with one of our later picks instead of going for more flanker runners. Its all very well to say hey we'll just rookie them, but I would have thought that he was worth a pick in the 60's.

[GVGjr]

Good points Fredi. We certainly didn't bend to the notion that we must select a set number of KPP. Clayton said their would be a mixture of tall and smalls and might have been just one tall player short of that.

[Go_Dogs]

With the acquisition of Welsh a near certainty, and 2 tall forwards being selected I feel it was a good mix. Listening to SEN it was said that Gourdis changed his kicking foot a few years ago, and has quite a few issues with his kicking, perhaps the reason Clayton and every other recruiter stayed away from him.

IMO, we really needed some hard nosed runners, so I'm quite happy with the other selections in theory. Gourdis would most likely not play AFL next year anyway, so why put him on the senior list if we aren't convinced?

[Topdog]

I am happy we took Grant and Ward with picks 5 and 19, but I am a little mystified by who we took with our remaining picks, especially given that thre were some quality talls left in the draft pool. Gourdis was one that stands out. I haven't seen him play, but guys like Weaver on BF and MJP here rate the kid, so surely we could have taken him with one of our later picks instead of going for more flanker runners. Its all very well to say hey we'll just rookie them, but I would have thought that he was worth a pick in the 60's.

I find it odd that no team picked him. There simply has to be more to it.

[LostDoggy]

the cheaper we can get him the better

[Dry Rot]

I find it odd that no team picked him. There simply has to be more to it.

Agreed. If you want to criticise Clayton for not taking him, then 15 other recruiting guys are wrong too.


I'm delighted that we seem to have got the best forward in the draft for once.

[LostDoggy]

With the acquisition of Welsh a near certainty, and 2 tall forwards being selected I feel it was a good mix. Listening to SEN it was said that Gourdis changed his kicking foot a few years ago, and has quite a few issues with his kicking, perhaps the reason Clayton and every other recruiter stayed away from him.

IMO, we really needed some hard nosed runners, so I'm quite happy with the other selections in theory. Gourdis would most likely not play AFL next year anyway, so why put him on the senior list if we aren't convinced?

Am i the only person to read that and go wtf? What would make someone change their kicking foot. Style maybe, but foot. Thats pretty extreme. Maybe he broke his old kicking leg so decided to play it safe???

[The Bulldogs Bite]

I'm delighted that we seem to have got the best forward in the draft for once.

Ditto.

I know the whole, "he's special, he could be anything" line is thrown around a bit, but It's exciting to hear that attached to the best KPF in the draft that we've picked up for once. Just through what I've read, I liked the sound of Grant, so I'll be following his progress closely over the next few years.

I agree that there must be something more re; Gourdis, but I'm sure if he was very talented, clubs would of taken him regardless. Unless of course, it's something serious.

Still, if we could pick up him, Geartner or a young ruck (Bellchambers? Renton?) in the rookie draft, I'll be happy.

1 Ruck (Hudson)
3 KPF's (Grant, Boumann, Welsh)
3 Mids (Ward, Reid, Wood)
1 Small FWD (O'Keefe)
1 Small Back (Callan)

Through the rookie draft if we can add another ruck or perhaps a Gourdis/Geartner, then I think we should all be very pleased with this seasons drafting/trading outcome. In the ideal world, we'd pick up a ruck & Gourdis/Geartner, but I'm probably being a bit too optimistic ;)

[Dry Rot]

Ditto.

I know the whole, "he's special, he could be anything" line is thrown around a bit, but It's exciting to hear that attached to the best KPF in the draft that we've picked up for once. Just through what I've read, I liked the sound of Grant, so I'll be following his progress closely over the next few years.



The draft I suppose is a market, with 16 players making calls about the "goods".

I find it interesting that Henderson, Rance and McEvoy all fell much later than I thought they would - a substantial number of market "players" didn't rate them as their #1 choice.

[Dry Rot]

BTW, any thoughts on other clubs' picks, strategies etc?

[Bulldog Revolution]

The draft I suppose is a market, with 16 players making calls about the "goods".

I find it interesting that Henderson, Rance and McEvoy all fell much later than I thought they would - a substantial number of market "players" didn't rate them as their #1 choice.

Those three really highlight the difficulty AFL clubs have projecting how well big guys will adjust to senior footy - its just so much harder to know how they will go.

Regarding Gouridis and Gaertner - it seems that both have major kicking issues, and there were a number of references to Gaertners lack of maturity

[Go_Dogs]

BTW, any thoughts on other clubs' picks, strategies etc?

WC did exceptionally well. Port's picks will be ones I watch with interest, they really turned out some quality picks last year, and Westhoff#2, Motlop and some of these other guys could also add a lot to their lists.

I was shocked Adelaide didn't go for Ebert, as I though goal kicking midfielders would be very high on their list. They obviously rated Dangerfield ahead of Ebert, but was an interesting choice.

Interesting to see Geelong pick up 21 y.o key forward whose 'ready to go' when they had one, and a very good one, playing in their VFL side last year.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Good points Fredi. We certainly didn't bend to the notion that we must select a set number of KPP. Clayton said their would be a mixture of tall and smalls and might have been just one tall player short of that.

I'm very happy with this draft on the surface of it.. GVGjr What talls that were out there by the time of our 3rd round pick that you think we should've nabbed?
I think Ward was too good to pass up at pick 19, and I think there maybe still some options for us in the rookie draft re Bellchambers, Gourdis or Gaertner.

[GVGjr]

I'm very happy with this draft on the surface of it.. GVGjr What talls that were out there by the time of our 3rd round pick that you think we should've nabbed?
I think Ward was too good to pass up at pick 19, and I think there maybe still some options for us in the rookie draft re Bellchambers, Gourdis or Gaertner.

One of those guys would have been a nice addition I think. I thought getting a ruckman like Renton or Bellchambers would have been a good investment

[Topdog]

One of those guys would have been a nice addition I think. I thought getting a ruckman like Renton or Bellchambers would have been a good investment


I thought so too at the time but it's very strange that all 16 clubs passed on them.

This is not to say that all 16 can't make a mistake but there has to be some reason for it.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

One of those guys would have been a nice addition I think. I thought getting a ruckman like Renton or Bellchambers would have been a good investment


and both of them are still available to be rookied? Obviously 16 clubs perceive some risk in them... and the rookie draft is the perfect forum to take a punt. Add Gaertner to the list and unless Carlton, Tiges or dees take all 3 of them with their first pick in the rookie draft, we can still pick one of them.

[Mantis]

One of those guys would have been a nice addition I think. I thought getting a ruckman like Renton or Bellchambers would have been a good investment

With 4th pick in the rookie draft that is a real possibility.

[LostDoggy]

How many rookie selection are we going to have?

[Topdog]

probably 4 borgy

[Mantis]

How many rookie selection are we going to have?

Probably 3. The AFL requires each team to have a minimum of 4 rookies, we already have one (Gavin Hughes) so need to add atleast 3 more.

[Topdog]

Probably 3. The AFL requires each team to have a minimum of 4 rookies, we already have one (Gavin Hughes) so need to add atleast 3 more.

forgot about him. I'd say 3 is a certainty then.

[LostDoggy]

How many shall we use?

[LostDoggy]

does anybody think todd grima will be looked at in the rookie draft....?

[hujsh]

does anybody think todd grima will be looked at in the rookie draft....?

I think the Kangas drafted him again

[hujsh]

I wish we had picked up Joel Shouha so he's to the rookie draft

[GVGjr]

I think the Kangas drafted him again


The Roos redrafted Blake Grima. Todd played for the Geelongs VFL side

[The Underdog]

I think we need to draft a ruck and a tall KPP type (assuming there's one with potential available)in the PSD, if only to add development depth to each position on the list.

I was a bit bemused by our lower picks but I'll bow to Scotty for the time being. i thought we'd pick up another tall but time will tell I guess.

[Scorlibo]

If Easton Wood is such a smoky, why did Clayton pick him at 43!? I hope that he chose him that early because he thought other teams rated him very highly as well, because if they didn't then it's a bit of a waste of a reasonably high draft pick. I doubt other clubs would have pounced on him before pick 48, or even 63. You just get the feeling that Clayton only picked Wood that early because he wanted to make a statement as to how highly he rated him. I might be wrong, and many clubs may have rated Wood highly, it's just interesting to see such a low profile player taken that early.

[The Coon Dog]

If Easton Wood is such a smoky, why did Clayton pick him at 43!? I hope that he chose him that early because he thought other teams rated him very highly as well, because if they didn't then it's a bit of a waste of a reasonably high draft pick. I doubt other clubs would have pounced on him before pick 48, or even 63. You just get the feeling that Clayton only picked Wood that early because he wanted to make a statement as to how highly he rated him. I might be wrong, and many clubs may have rated Wood highly, it's just interesting to see such a low profile player taken that early.

You are so very wrong!!

Below is a paragraph I posted about attending the draft:

From here on in there was an element of luck as the 2 or 3 players we had penciled in could go in those picks immediately prior to ours. Names mentioned earlier we would look at if available were Patrick Veszpremi, Cyril Rioli, Dawson Simpson, Sam Reid, Chris Mayne, Guy O'Keefe, Jarrod Boumann, Tony Armstrong & Easton Wood (who had come in for some late attention, particularly from Collingwood, who it was thought may have used their first selection, pick #31 on him).

We drafted Easton Wood with pick #43. Our next pick was pick #48. Who do you think had pick #47? Collingwood!!!

[Scorlibo]

You are so very wrong!!

Below is a paragraph I posted about attending the draft:

From here on in there was an element of luck as the 2 or 3 players we had penciled in could go in those picks immediately prior to ours. Names mentioned earlier we would look at if available were Patrick Veszpremi, Cyril Rioli, Dawson Simpson, Sam Reid, Chris Mayne, Guy O'Keefe, Jarrod Boumann, Tony Armstrong & Easton Wood (who had come in for some late attention, particularly from Collingwood, who it was thought may have used their first selection, pick #31 on him).

We drafted Easton Wood with pick #43. Our next pick was pick #48. Who do you think had pick #47? Collingwood!!!

ok, sorry mate, I didn't read your post, glad that there was some reason behind drafting him that early and lets hope that Easton can really succeed at AFL level.

[Bulldogs_6]

Just a quick one. With Clayton saying that his 2 first picks were sure to be there, and ended up with both Grant and Ward, is there a chance he may not have believed his luck with Ward lasting to 19 and that he let the other kid go? Or do we think Ward was his number 19 in mind anyway, because if it was it's pretty tough to say that they would DEFINITELY be available, namely Ward.

[The Coon Dog]

Just a quick one. With Clayton saying that his 2 first picks were sure to be there, and ended up with both Grant and Ward, is there a chance he may not have believed his luck with Ward lasting to 19 and that he let the other kid go? Or do we think Ward was his number 19 in mind anyway, because if it was it's pretty tough to say that they would DEFINITELY be available, namely Ward.

If you read the post on Dog's Draft Strategy, it's pretty clear there was a preference for Robbie Tarrant, who wasn't considered that high a pick when Clayton made those comments. It's only in the past week or so that Tarrant's name really got bandied about. I believe they expected to draft Grant & Tarrant.

[Go_Dogs]

If you read the post on Dog's Draft Strategy, it's pretty clear there was a preference for Robbie Tarrant, who wasn't considered that high a pick when Clayton made those comments. It's only in the past week or so that Tarrant's name really got bandied about. I believe they expected to draft Grant & Tarrant.

That is basically what I inferred from it also. Not many had Tarrant going near the top 20, but I'm quite pleased he was gone. :)

[always right]

The article by Mark Stevens in the Herald Sun today also mentioned that they were very surprised when Rance was still there at pick 18. Would of made for interesting discussion if they had to choose from Rance and Ward. Something tells me they would have taken Rance as they had even considered him for pick 5.

[Dry Rot]

The article by Mark Stevens in the Herald Sun today also mentioned that they were very surprised when Rance was still there at pick 18. Would of made for interesting discussion if they had to choose from Rance and Ward. Something tells me they would have taken Rance as they had even considered him for pick 5.

Anyone else surprised that Rance lasted so long? I thought he'd go in the top 10.

[LostDoggy]

Anyone else surprised that Rance lasted so long? I thought he'd go in the top 10.

Earlier on he was rated top 10 but in the past couple of weeks he seemed to side to the late first round picks.

[The Coon Dog]

Funny, we all take as gospel the write up by the 'so called' experts who determine roughly where players will end up.

Guess it's like the people who predict the weather.

As good as your hunches & statistical data, it can all go so very wrong so very quickly.

In answer to your original question DR, yes, I thought Rance would have gone well before pick 18.

[Topdog]

Richmond thought he would have been gone too. They are rapt and from the sounds of things, they should be too.

[LostDoggy]

Anyone else surprised that Rance lasted so long? I thought he'd go in the top 10.

Yes but on refelection being viewed more as a defender might have worked against him.
There is obviously exceptions but most years the defenders aren't rated as highly as their results would indicate.

[dog town]

As happy with the draft as someone who has seen very little of the players can be.

Grant- I have read a few people being a bit cautious over the fact that he is 192cm and not up around the 194-196cm mark that most people associate with a KPP. I am not overly fussed by this as he appears to play taller than his actual height. When you combine his contested marking as demonstrated by his stats and highlights package with his raw speed it seems a very exciting package. He also seemed more than capable at ground level from the highlights package. Attitude and work rate might be easier to put into him than raw talent. At least he has the basic tools and now it is up to us to develop him. I am also enthused by Clayton's confidence in him.

Ward- To be honest I have never cared much about whether a kid is a local or not as long as they can play. From all reports this kid can not only play but he also has something driving him. His versatility is a plus and means he will probably get a run fairly early. Love that he appears to be quite strong in the air.

Reid- Out of all the highlight packages his one really excited me for some reason. I know they are just a minor sample of the players work and you just cant make a judgement on the players whole game from a tiny snippet of footage but I remain impressed by the minute or so I saw. Seems very clean at ground level and certainly didn't lift his eyes when bending down. Most impressed with his acceleration away from traffic after a couple of his pick ups. He actually put the ball straight to ground after gathering it which is common in those pack busting types. Seemed to have that Foley, Judd, Cooney sort of ability to get clear .I am sure I dont have to say that I am not suggesting he will get to that level. What the footage doesn't reveal is what his work ethic, skills, footy smarts, discipline and these sort of things are like. Did anyone get a good look at him during the year? I also like the fact that he has come through the AIS.

Wood- Happy enough to take a punt. He is a good enough player that they were trying to get him to the Geelong u/18s and that mixed with his obvious athletic ability means to me it is worth the punt. Cricketing ability also suggests good hand eye. Clayton described him as a Sylvia type in that he is hard at the contest and good in the air.

Bowman- Not sure about this one but I haven't seen him play either. Just seems like one of those speculative athletic tall picks. He obviously tested fantastically but can he play? Only time will tell.

O'Keefe- Really like the footage of this guy as well. Very clever and excellent vision particularly inside 50. He will need a few more strings to his bow in the modern game than just being a handy forward pocket but the basic skills are evident again. Very balanced and plenty of time.