Matt Burgan's Phantom Draft

[GVGjr]

I think Burgan's draft is released on AFL.com.au today.
If anyone gets a chance could they add the link etc.

[Go_Dogs]

Should be out about 2pm.

[Desipura]

Matt has some good inside info re which clubs have shown interest in certain players. I will read with interest who we are interested in.

[Go_Dogs]

http://www.afl.com.au/News/NEWSARTICLE/tabid/208/Default.aspx?newsId=70169

It's up!

[Mofra]

Two players not talked about too much according to Burgan - he must have heard something. Interesting Cornelius is overlooked for a teamate, shades of Gaertner/Boumann?


31 – WESTERN BULLDOGS – LIAM JONES
Tassie Mariners, TAS, Tall forward, February 24, 1991, 195.2cm, 85.6kg
(Draft range: 24-50)

Not only are the Dogs entering this year's draft with the last 'live' choice, they will make back-to-back selections at No.31 and No.32 before signing off for the day. Their first call is likely to come down to two marking forwards, Liam Jones and Cornelius. Jones has also been linked with Fremantle, Brisbane Lions, the Swans, Hawthorn and Port Adelaide. Also in the mix are Adam Varcoe, Michael Gugliotta, Steven Gaertner, Neville Jetta and Liam Shiels.

32 – WESTERN BULLDOGS – TOM LEE
Claremont, WA, Tall forward, January 2, 1991, 190.6cm, 85.8kg
(Draft range: 31-not selected)

Having made the call between two tall forwards at No.31 the Dogs are unlikely to plump for Cornelius now, but are tipped to provide the first smoky. Recruiting manager Scott Clayton has the knack of producing left-field selections and this one looms as a specific choice – an athletic forward who can also run in the midfield. While Lee went to the WA state-based screening, there has been little talk about him in the build-up to the draft.

[comrade]

Meh.

[Mofra]

Tommy Lee at the Bulldogs; they did always say we were a Motley Crue :D

[Sockeye Salmon]

If we took Lee then we have given Ray away for nothing as we could have just taken Lee at 48.

It would be just the kind of thing Clayton would do, just because one day it will come off (they never have yet) and he can show everyone how clever he is.

[Go_Dogs]

Pretty interesting effort - he has Walters (like I predicted ;) ) and Blight slipping to the 3rd round... Port snatching up Hartlett and Hill slipping to 11.

Liam Jones and Tom Lee are listed as our selections:

31 – WESTERN BULLDOGS – LIAM JONES
Tassie Mariners, TAS, Tall forward, February 24, 1991, 195.2cm, 85.6kg
(Draft range: 24-50)

Not only are the Dogs entering this year's draft with the last 'live' choice, they will make back-to-back selections at No.31 and No.32 before signing off for the day. Their first call is likely to come down to two marking forwards, Liam Jones and Cornelius. Jones has also been linked with Fremantle, Brisbane Lions, the Swans, Hawthorn and Port Adelaide. Also in the mix are Adam Varcoe, Michael Gugliotta, Steven Gaertner, Neville Jetta and Liam Shiels.

32 – WESTERN BULLDOGS – TOM LEE
Claremont, WA, Tall forward, January 2, 1991, 190.6cm, 85.8kg
(Draft range: 31-not selected)

Having made the call between two tall forwards at No.31 the Dogs are unlikely to plump for Cornelius now, but are tipped to provide the first smoky. Recruiting manager Scott Clayton has the knack of producing left-field selections and this one looms as a specific choice – an athletic forward who can also run in the midfield. While Lee went to the WA state-based screening, there has been little talk about him in the build-up to the draft.

[Go_Dogs]

If we took Lee then we have given Ray away for nothing as we could have just taken Lee at 48.

It would be just the kind of thing Clayton would do, just because one day it will come off (they never have yet) and he can show everyone how clever he is.

Last time I checked we didn't really have much say on whether or not Ray stayed, so it's a bit of a moot point, although I do agree with your logic.

[Mantis]

If we took Lee then we have given Ray away for nothing as we could have just taken Lee at 48.

It would be just the kind of thing Clayton would do, just because one day it will come off (they never have yet) and he can show everyone how clever he is.

As with G#16 I don't think we had much option with the Ray situation.

Also I just think Clayton has to select the player's he thinks are best fit almost regardless of the pick no's. Who really cares how other's rate these player's.

[The Doctor]

As with G#16 I don't think we had much option with the Ray situation.

Also I just think Clayton has to select the player's he thinks are best fit almost regardless of the pick no's. Who really cares how other's rate these player's.


I'm with Sockeye

If we do as Burgo suggests then we have given Ray away for nothing even if he wanted to go. Lets face it we could have simply delisted him and let him go into the PSD and retained pick 48 and picked Lee with that choice.

I don't know anything about Lee but if Clayton did this I would be outraged. The boy may be able to play but all the experts in the industry clearly do not rate him anywhere near this high. They can't all be wrong.

Clayton needs to pick a guy who can play rather than someone who might be able to play.

[bulldogsman]

We should have delisted skipper or O'Shea then we would have at pick 64 to use on lee

[Mofra]

I don't know anything about Lee but if Clayton did this I would be outraged. The boy may be able to play but all the experts in the industry clearly do not rate him anywhere near this high. They can't all be wrong.

Clayton needs to pick a guy who can play rather than someone who might be able to play.
Do we know this for sure? Aparently everyone rated Gaertner last year yet he was overlooked. I hope he isn't another Wells but we can't feel too resigned to a kid's chances of making the grade before we've even drafted him.

[LostDoggy]

Would you prefer a list filled with second stringers like Farren Ray? No one wanted him, we did well to get a higher pick.
Does it matter what that pick is used for?

[Mantis]

Do we know this for sure? Aparently everyone rated Gaertner last year yet he was overlooked. I hope he isn't another Wells but we can't feel too resigned to a kid's chances of making the grade before we've even drafted him.

I thought they all rated Gourdis too?

[The Bulldogs Bite]

I'm with Sockeye

If we do as Burgo suggests then we have given Ray away for nothing even if he wanted to go. Lets face it we could have simply delisted him and let him go into the PSD and retained pick 48 and picked Lee with that choice.

I don't know anything about Lee but if Clayton did this I would be outraged. The boy may be able to play but all the experts in the industry clearly do not rate him anywhere near this high. They can't all be wrong.

Clayton needs to pick a guy who can play rather than someone who might be able to play.

Agreed.

Mofra/Mantis offer up valid explanations, but at the end of the day Clayton hasn't been as successful as we would have liked over the journey. At times, it really does seem like he tries to 'pull one from the sky', and surprise everyone in an attempt to show his ability at picking out gems from nowhere. Quite a few times it hasn't worked, and this being his last draft with us (and only having two picks), I have to side with Sockeye & The Doc. It's a little worrying, we really need to make the most out of the two picks we have, it'd be pretty disappointing if we picked up another 'smokey' that we could've snared with a much later pick. As explained above, it defeats the purpose of actually trading Ray. If this was the case, we could have sent Ray to the PSD and taken a stance, keeping our Pick 48 with still the chance of picking up Lee (or any other smokey).

The whole point of giving Ray away for basically nothing, was to give ourselves a chance of picking up a better young talent than we could have if we kept Pick 48. I hope Clayton opts to pick two quality players who are likely to offer our side something, and not base his picks around the 'potential' to be able to play.

[Sockeye Salmon]

We should have delisted skipper or O'Shea then we would have at pick 64 to use on lee

Skipper is only still there as a back up ruck but if they were keen on Lee they should have delisted O'Shea, drafted Lee with pick 64 and tried to re-rookie O'Shea.

That would have given us another 2nd round pick.

The other possibility is that they know someone else likes Lee.

[Scraggers]

Agreed.

Mofra/Mantis offer up valid explanations, but at the end of the day Clayton hasn't been as successful as we would have liked over the journey. At times, it really does seem like he tries to 'pull one from the sky', and surprise everyone in an attempt to show his ability at picking out gems from nowhere. Quite a few times it hasn't worked, and this being his last draft with us (and only having two picks), I have to side with Sockeye & The Doc. It's a little worrying, we really need to make the most out of the two picks we have, it'd be pretty disappointing if we picked up another 'smokey' that we could've snared with a much later pick. As explained above, it defeats the purpose of actually trading Ray. If this was the case, we could have sent Ray to the PSD and taken a stance, keeping our Pick 48 with still the chance of picking up Lee (or any other smokey).

The whole point of giving Ray away for basically nothing, was to give ourselves a chance of picking up a better young talent than we could have if we kept Pick 48. I hope Clayton opts to pick two quality players who are likely to offer our side something, and not base his picks around the 'potential' to be able to play.

With Fantasia and now Simon Dalrymple on board, how much of a role will Clayton play anyway ?

Surely they as part of the squad management team would have a significant say in who we choose and it wouldn't just be left for Scott Clayton to make the decision ... I mean if he was staying I would understand it, but as part of the handover Dalrymple would want to be playing his part

[Cyberdoggie]

Last time I checked we didn't really have much say on whether or not Ray stayed, so it's a bit of a moot point, although I do agree with your logic.

I think Sockeye has a point as well.

why would you trade for a draft pick if you were going to pick up a complete unknown.

in such a good draft why would you go for a smokie at pick 32.
You would think there would be better talent around at this point, and if he really wanted a smokie they should of delisted someone like Skipper for another pick further down the order.

[LostDoggy]

Umm. excuse me but this draft has been put together by Burgan NOT Clayton or the Western Bulldogs

Burgan's view is speculative in the extreme.

Start getting shitty about it when it is official. Until then, it has as much relevance as my predictions ie nil

[mighty_west]

Whilst Jones hasn't yet been selected, here's some video footage of the kid, CHF type.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=3d2Qx8PEU6c

[Happy Days]

Would prefer Cornelius to Jones.

I prefered the one in the Sun, which had us getting Schoenmakers :)

[GVGjr]

If it came to our selections and the following players were overlooked for the ones nominated by MB I would be disappointed:
Sam Wright, James Strauss, Will Young, Rhys Stanley, Clancee Pearce and especially Rhys O'Keefe.

It's OK to go for the smokey when you have a number of selections but when only two of them are live, pick the boys who can play the game now.

[Go_Dogs]

I'm with Sockeye

If we do as Burgo suggests then we have given Ray away for nothing even if he wanted to go. Lets face it we could have simply delisted him and let him go into the PSD and retained pick 48 and picked Lee with that choice.

I don't know anything about Lee but if Clayton did this I would be outraged. The boy may be able to play but all the experts in the industry clearly do not rate him anywhere near this high. They can't all be wrong.

Clayton needs to pick a guy who can play rather than someone who might be able to play.

From recent history, Josh Hill, Harbrow? Just because someone isn't rated by another recruiter (or any of them!) doesn't mean they won't be a player. I'm sure a lot of recruiting managers would be putting Hill in their top 20 or so picks from the 2006 draft already, and that was a 'super draft'. At the time I'm sure a lot of people would have been disappointed if we had picked up Hill in the 30's, now it would seem like sound recruiting.

[LostDoggy]

I'm with Sockeye

If we do as Burgo suggests then we have given Ray away for nothing even if he wanted to go. Lets face it we could have simply delisted him and let him go into the PSD and retained pick 48 and picked Lee with that choice.

I don't know anything about Lee but if Clayton did this I would be outraged. The boy may be able to play but all the experts in the industry clearly do not rate him anywhere near this high. They can't all be wrong.

Clayton needs to pick a guy who can play rather than someone who might be able to play.

Exactly! Which is why i cant wait for January 1st, when this over payed, overrated fellow is on his way to the GC.

[azabob]

If we took Lee then we have given Ray away for nothing as we could have just taken Lee at 48.

It would be just the kind of thing Clayton would do, just because one day it will come off (they never have yet) and he can show everyone how clever he is.

I think you are being a bit hard on Clayton. Seems in most "draft" related threads you stick the boots into him. Our list has improved dramatically over the time he has been there. He is starting to have success with KP picks - Williams, Everitt, Grant, Tiller,
So was Harris a smokey when he was drafted at pick 70 odd? What about Hargrave? Was Murphy expected be drafted as high as he was? Im fairly sure Addison wasnt spoken about as being drafted when we picked him either. Wood had a fairly good year also.

[Mantis]

I think you are being a bit hard on Clayton. Seems in most "draft" related threads you stick the boots into him. Our list has improved dramatically over the time he has been there. He is starting to have success with KP picks - Williams, Everitt, Grant, Tiller,



How so?

I must have missed all these games J. Grant played last year.

Everitt & Williams have shown some potential, but need to get their bodies right and are still a fair way off being good consistent KPP's.

Tiller played 2 good games last year. Yeah they there in finals which was great, but I still think he wouldn't be in most supporter's best 22, probably not close to it either.

[The Doctor]

Do we know this for sure?

No we don't.

However, when I refer to experts in the industry I'm not talking about the Bigfooty phantom drafters. I'm talking about Kevin Sheahan, Emma Quayle, Elite junior coaches, state selectors, recruiting managers et al. If these people rated him highly he would have either; been spoken about by them or he would have been selected to represent his state or asked to attend the national draft camp. Kevin Sheahan didn't know anything about him other than what Burgo quoted in his PD.

This draft is considered by many of these experts as one of the best ever, particularly in regards to tall players. In this draft there are many key position players and ruckmen who have proven themselves at the elite level. Elite level means they have played against the best of their peers and shown they have the ability to play well against them. I'm not talking about schoolboys who are good at high jump.

As the draft depth runs deep some of these elite players will be available to us at our picks. Choose smokeys with late picks or rookie picks. We are fortunate to have 2 precious second round picks and I would not like to see us gamble these away on speculative young players when proven young players are there for the taking.

[mighty_west]

If it came to our selections and the following players were overlooked for the ones nominated by MB I would be disappointed:
Sam Wright, James Strauss, Will Young, Rhys Stanley, Clancee Pearce and especially Rhys O'Keefe.

It's OK to go for the smokey when you have a number of selections but when only two of them are live, pick the boys who can play the game now.

I agree, although i don't know alot about most of these players, you would hope we could grab the best player available with these 2 selections, whether its the 2 best talls, best tall & best mid etc rather than a speculative pick in which we can most likely do with rookies.

[The Doctor]

Burgan's view is speculative in the extreme.



No it isn't actually.

He is usually well informed. He has tipped Tiller and Hill to go to us when nobody expected it. He is right when he says Clayton is not afraid of left field picks.

[Sockeye Salmon]

No it isn't actually.

He is usually well informed. He has tipped Tiller and Hill to go to us when nobody expected it. He is right when he says Clayton is not afraid of left field picks.

Last year Burgan had us down for:

5 - Grant
19 Ward
35 Gaertner
43 O'Keefe
48 Armstrong
63 Joseph
67 PASS

3 out of 6

[Sockeye Salmon]

I think you are being a bit hard on Clayton. Seems in most "draft" related threads you stick the boots into him. Our list has improved dramatically over the time he has been there. He is starting to have success with KP picks - Williams, Everitt, Grant, Tiller,
So was Harris a smokey when he was drafted at pick 70 odd? What about Hargrave? Was Murphy expected be drafted as high as he was? Im fairly sure Addison wasnt spoken about as being drafted when we picked him either. Wood had a fairly good year also.

I'd like to see some evidence to back that up.

[The Doctor]

Last year Burgan had us down for:

5 - Grant
19 Ward
35 Gaertner
43 O'Keefe
48 Armstrong
63 Joseph
67 PASS

3 out of 6

O'Keefe is another one, just wrong number

[Go_Dogs]

If it came to our selections and the following players were overlooked for the ones nominated by MB I would be disappointed:
Sam Wright, James Strauss, Will Young, Rhys Stanley, Clancee Pearce and especially Rhys O'Keefe.

It's OK to go for the smokey when you have a number of selections but when only two of them are live, pick the boys who can play the game now.

Whilst I do agree with you in theory (surely O'Keefe won't go THAT late), there must be a reason behind MB putting someone like Pearce back at nearly pick 60?

[Go_Dogs]

you will find that he had Hill in the mix.

Hill was the year before.

We would have taken Armstrong too, but Port(?) I think snapped him up before we had the chance.

[Mofra]

No we don't.
I don't understand the angst at the selction of someone we may be interested in


However, when I refer to experts in the industry I'm not talking about the Bigfooty phantom drafters. I'm talking about Kevin Sheahan, Emma Quayle, Elite junior coaches, state selectors, recruiting managers et al. If these people rated him highly he would have either; been spoken about by them or he would have been selected to represent his state or asked to attend the national draft camp. Kevin Sheahan didn't know anything about him other than what Burgo quoted in his PD.
The same people who had Tambling a clear second best in the 05 draft?
Who didn't rate Hill or Harbrow?
The same people who aren't employed as Recruiting Officers?
Do we know for a fact that these people don't rate either pick at all?
Should we have passed on Grant, Grant, Harris/Lake, Cross, etc because they weren't mentioned in news articles as probable draft picks (or at least for young Jarrod, nobody in teh top 10 seemed interested aside from us?)


As the draft depth runs deep some of these elite players will be available to us at our picks. Choose smokeys with late picks or rookie picks. We are fortunate to have 2 precious second round picks and I would not like to see us gamble these away on speculative young players when proven young players are there for the taking.
Proven young players (safe picks) like Sam Power & Jordan McMahon? The last highly rated talls we picked that seemed to be rated by the recruiting community (Walsh & Williams) haven't turned out that well.

I'm not going to judge kids or label them as likely failures before they are even drafted!

[GVGjr]

Whilst I do agree with you in theory (surely O'Keefe won't go THAT late), there must be a reason behind MB putting someone like Pearce back at nearly pick 60?

There is probably queries over Pearce's pace and kicking skills but I like his toughness in a contest and think he should go earlier but I guess MB is close enough to being on the money with him.

[Scorlibo]

Like what GVGjr said, if guys like Strauss, Wright, O'Keefe, Hannebery, Walters and Blight are available then I would be extremely disappointed to go for Lee over them.

[azabob]

If we took Lee then we have given Ray away for nothing as we could have just taken Lee at 48.

It would be just the kind of thing Clayton would do, just because one day it will come off (they never have yet) and he can show everyone how clever he is.


I'd like to see some evidence to back that up.

This isn't to complementory to Clayton, so I call that sticking the boots in.

[azabob]

How so?

I must have missed all these games J. Grant played last year.

Everitt & Williams have shown some potential, but need to get their bodies right and are still a fair way off being good consistent KPP's.

Tiller played 2 good games last year. Yeah they there in finals which was great, but I still think he wouldn't be in most supporter's best 22, probably not close to it either.

I think all players you listed will be playing consistant senior footy 3-4 years time. Do you expect them all to be off the list do you? In the past all you had to do was look at players like Wells and Wiggins and realise they were no good.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

This isn't to complementory to Clayton, so I call that sticking the boots in.

He meant evidence prior to this thread.

I don't think anybody would deny that Clayton has found some quality players with later draft picks (Hill, Harbrow, Lake, Murphy, etc.) but his reputation is certainly inflated to his overall success. Aside from Lake, we still haven't drafted any proven quality talls. Williams & Everitt look likely types but even they have a long way to go. Walsh, Wiggins, Wells, Faulkner & Power were relatively early selections that he all missed on. Arguably, you could add Ray to that list too.

Clayton is a good recruiter but his criticism is deserved. In this draft particularly, we just cannot afford to blow Picks 31 & 32. It's imperative we find two quality players, idealy one tall and one small, and having know Clayton's appetite for untried smokeys I don't think anyone can blame people for being a little worried.

[azabob]

He meant evidence prior to this thread.

I don't think anybody would deny that Clayton has found some quality players with later draft picks (Hill, Harbrow, Lake, Murphy, etc.) but his reputation is certainly inflated to his overall success. Aside from Lake, we still haven't drafted any proven quality talls. Williams & Everitt look likely types but even they have a long way to go. Walsh, Wiggins, Wells, Faulkner & Power were relatively early selections that he all missed on. Arguably, you could add Ray to that list too.

Clayton is a good recruiter but his criticism is deserved. In this draft particularly, we just cannot afford to blow Picks 31 & 32. It's imperative we find two quality players, idealy one tall and one small, and having know Clayton's appetite for untried smokeys I don't think anyone can blame people for being a little worried.

I agree he hasn't drafted a lot of proven quality talls. But in reality how many quality talls have been drafted after the first 5-10 picks of each draft? Not many I wouldn't think. All clubs bare Hawthorn are probably in need of KP. Could it also be a problem that we as a club are not developing the talent? Or do people think developing talent is a crock?

[The Bulldogs Bite]

I agree he hasn't drafted a lot of proven quality talls. But in reality how many quality talls have been drafted after the first 5-10 picks of each draft? Not many I wouldn't think. All clubs bare Hawthorn are probably in need of KP. Could it also be a problem that we as a club are not developing the talent? Or do people think developing talent is a crock?

I agree quality talls are difficult to find, and we've been unlucky when we've had early selections in that there hasn't been any obvious standout choice, but most clubs have been able to find a couple of half decent options. Realistically we've really struggled to identify KP talent until recently.

I think we've struggled to develop talent in the past, but I hope we are getting a lot better, and we seem to be over the last couple of years with proper systems put in place to actually help young players gradually develop into players we hope they can be. In the past though, we've been behind in player development. Collingwood seems to do this really well, and obviously Hawthorn have too over the last 3 or 4 years. Hopefully we can continue our trend over the last two seasons, as I think we're finally getting on the right track.

[Sockeye Salmon]

This isn't to complementory to Clayton, so I call that sticking the boots in.

The quote was "Seems in most "draft" related threads you stick the boots into him. "

By most, I assume you mean once?

I have long been a defender of Clayton and wrote a piece defending his record against Geelong's Stephen Wells, but I also think he likes to show everyone how clever he is by picking one player in every draft that no-one's ever heard of.

Seeing as we only have two live picks, I'd rather he didn't do any grandstanding this year.

[GVGjr]

This isn't to complementory to Clayton, so I call that sticking the boots in.

BM, from what I have seen here on this forum most people would rate the work that Clayton has done highly but also some would acknowledge that he could have and should have done a bit better with the picks that he has had.

I agree with an earlier comment of yours about player development and I believe that is one area that let Clayton down when evaluating his performance.

In a deep draft and with only two live picks I don't think looking at a smokey would be the right step for us.

I'm a fan of Clayton's speculative selection of Easton Wood and think it will pay dividends for us but he had a number of picks that year but this year in my opinion we need to be more practical.

[Mantis]

I think all players you listed will be playing consistant senior footy 3-4 years time. Do you expect them all to be off the list do you? In the past all you had to do was look at players like Wells and Wiggins and realise they were no good.

I don't expect these guys to be off the list I was simply answering your statement that Clayton was having success with his KP picks. As you have pointed out we may know this in 3 or 4 years, but we can't judge that now.

[Scorlibo]

I just had a look at Tom Lee's highlights package and I actually found it quite impressive, smooth mover, strong mark and smart decisions.

[Bulldog Revolution]

From all the second hand reports I'm excited about the talent available in this years draft and disappointed we dont have another pick. From the brief bits of last years smokey Easton Wood I've seen he looks a fine prospect.

However, like so many others I feel it is time to go with two more conventional pick, given Cordy is such a long range project.

The downside of Claytons long range development approach is we draft a lot of guys that physically need 3 years to get ready to really even be in a position to start evaluating their footy ability.

I'd like to see a couple of young talls added with physiques similar to sam reid - basically guys that are physically not that far off it in their first year and should be physically ready to go in year 2. Now given they are key positions it might be more like 3 years until they are physically ready to compete but regardless I'd like to see him try for some slightly more ready made key position prospects.

[lemmon]

I just had a look at Tom Lee's highlights package and I actually found it quite impressive, smooth mover, strong mark and smart decisions.

He does seem athletic and quite quick but I'm not sure if he does make great decisions, the handball in the goal square and taking on two at the end wasn't great.

[FrediKanoute]

BM, from what I have seen here on this forum most people would rate the work that Clayton has done highly but also some would acknowledge that he could have and should have done a bit better with the picks that he has had.

I agree with an earlier comment of yours about player development and I believe that is one area that let Clayton down when evaluating his performance.

In a deep draft and with only two live picks I don't think looking at a smokey would be the right step for us.

I'm a fan of Clayton's speculative selection of Easton Wood and think it will pay dividends for us but he had a number of picks that year but this year in my opinion we need to be more practical.

I agree. I think if you have 5 or 6 selections then choosing a "smokey" is worth the gamble, but with 2 live selections I think we need to play it safe this year. Get in guys who are footballers rather than guys who are poential footballers

[LostDoggy]

Sorry to ask a dumb question but what does the term "live pick" mean?

[Mantis]

Sorry to ask a dumb question but what does the term "live pick" mean?

For this draft we have 3 picks, picks 14, 31 & 32. We have already committed to picking up Ayce Cordy with pick 14.

In effect we now only have 2 'live' picks as the first one has already been used.

[LostDoggy]

Thanks Mantis

[azabob]

The quote was "Seems in most "draft" related threads you stick the boots into him. "

By most, I assume you mean once?

I have long been a defender of Clayton and wrote a piece defending his record against Geelong's Stephen Wells, but I also think he likes to show everyone how clever he is by picking one player in every draft that no-one's ever heard of.

Seeing as we only have two live picks, I'd rather he didn't do any grandstanding this year.


SS I owe you an apology as I have only been a member for a couple of months and I have not seen the examples you have stated. And to be fair to you your main gripe is he hasnt drafted tall players only midfielders which is true. And I am 100% in agreement in saying this draft is not the time to be drafting smokey's. It is ironic the one draft where there are a dozen or so quality talls is the year our father and son is eligable.

[bulldogsman]

Tom Lee in action

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=ls1_T8ecjaY

Looks good

[The Doctor]

I don't understand the angst at the selction of someone we may be interested in




The angst is more concern for the reasons I have already stated. It is certainly not at the player.




The same people who had Tambling a clear second best in the 05 draft?
Who didn't rate Hill or Harbrow?
The same people who aren't employed as Recruiting Officers?
Do we know for a fact that these people don't rate either pick at all?
Should we have passed on Grant, Grant, Harris/Lake, Cross, etc because they weren't mentioned in news articles as probable draft picks (or at least for young Jarrod, nobody in teh top 10 seemed interested aside from us?)



I don't think you understand my point. I'm not one who is usually against the drafting of a relative unknown. As I suggested earlier you can do this with late picks or rookie picks as there is little to lose.

Please don't confuse experts with BF drafters or some sections of the media. Sure the experts don't always get it right as recruiting is not an exact science. Don't get me started on Tambling or Ray for that matter. Players like Hill and Harbrow were late or rookie picks and I applauded those selections. Harbrow wasn't a smokey for what it's worth, neither were many of our late picks like Cross, Gilbee, Harris. They were well known, played rep footy and were there for the taking. Fortune or good selection choice favoured us with those.

Minson however was a smokey and he has paid off, His was a very difficult draft with few standouts and that is often a time to back your instinct rather than popular perception. This time we have a draft with a lot of standouts and when we have 2 very good opportunities to snare a couple of them we shouldn't gamble with them on unproven players.

[bulldogtragic]

Burgan had us taking Jones.

He had Roughy at 19. And us taking Lee with him being taken 12 picks higher.

[LostDoggy]

Tom Lee picked up by the Crows

[bulldogtragic]

Tom Lee picked up by the Crows
At 60. Cornelius and Jetta dropped a heap too.

[LostDoggy]

They were talking Cornelius up a lot too.

[Bulldog Revolution]

Tom Lee in action

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=ls1_T8ecjaY

Looks good

I dont know what the standard of the game he is playing in is like but he is a good mover and has a bit of a swagger

[Scraggers]

http://afl.com.au/News/AFLBlogs/BlogArticle/tabid/8123/Default.aspx?newsId=70232

On Thursday the AFL website gave the general public the opportunity to ask Matt Burgan questions (check out the link above if interested); I posed this question to him ...

Stuart - 27/11/2008 1:02:20 PM

Hi Matt,

Is there a chance that Roughead will fall to the Western Bulldogs first pick at 31 ... and if he does will the Dogs take him?

Matt says:
I can't see Roughead slipping through to No.31. He has shot up into top 30 calculations and could even be a first-round selection.

Needless to say, the AFL have asked me to do the Phantom Draft in 2009 :D

[bulldogsman]

http://afl.com.au/News/AFLBlogs/BlogArticle/tabid/8123/Default.aspx?newsId=70232

On Thursday the AFL website gave the general public the opportunity to ask Matt Burgan questions (check out the link above if interested); I posed this question to him ...

Stuart - 27/11/2008 1:02:20 PM

Hi Matt,

Is there a chance that Roughead will fall to the Western Bulldogs first pick at 31 ... and if he does will the Dogs take him?

Matt says:
I can't see Roughead slipping through to No.31. He has shot up into top 30 calculations and could even be a first-round selection.

Needless to say, the AFL have asked me to do the Phantom Draft in 2009 :D

Seems like a bit of a steal then