Our DRAFT Choices.

ZRS · Post by **ZRS** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 9:58 am

i reckon WC did alright out of all of this.

ZRS · Post by **ZRS** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:05 am

Filthy wrote:Must be going to pick up a back up ruck in the PSD.

Banking guys for the backline for the future.

Guys.....gotta remember we drafted a heap of middies last year and the years before...guys like Dempsey who will come on next year.

Happy.

how many spots do we have left to fill?
just the one?

I think we should have taken KB with our last draft pick, just to shit freo for screwing us at trade time

Doctor Fish · Post by **Doctor Fish** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:07 am

Arrowsmith didn't go. Surprising.

CameronClayton · Post by **CameronClayton** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:09 am

We now officially have rebounding defenders coming out of our arses. Anyone would think we had a gun midfield like WCE (who still added more mids to their list), rather than one of the worst.

You can never have enough quality mids around the place.

rama_fan · Post by **rama_fan** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:24 am

We'll be the WA Bombers soon!

Bit disappointing to miss out on Selwood with our second pick, but looks like we've achieved what we aimed to do.

Hooker's agility and sprint times are simply amazing for his size.

ZRS · Post by **ZRS** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:49 am

Filthy wrote:Just heard Matty K.

They...well he...was looking for tall rebounding, fast, flexible players. Apparently, Meyers can play mid, back, front so all good if it works.

CC....for mids we have potentially Pev, Spike, Welsh, Davey, Lovey, Bachor, Hislop, Dempsey, Hocking, Jetta, JJ, Lonergan, Natrat, Smokey (according to MK), Gus, Nash, Rama, Reimers, Hank, Stants, Watto and Licha!

Mal and Fletch will retire in the next 2-3 years with Lloyd and Lucas not far behind them. Most of those mids are young.....they're banking for the future.

Filth, I hope it works out that way, but personnaly I would like to see at least one absolutly gun mid fielder who can take a game by the balls so to speak, even with some good young kids coming up i dont see that player (i hope one of the boys mentioned above prove me very wrong this year)

jimmyc1985 · Post by **jimmyc1985** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 10:55 am

Filthy wrote:Just heard Matty K.

They...well he...was looking for tall rebounding, fast, flexible players. Apparently, Meyers can play mid, back, front so all good if it works.

CC....for mids we have potentially Pev, Spike, Welsh, Davey, Lovey, Bachor, Hislop, Dempsey, Hocking, Jetta, JJ, Lonergan, Natrat, Smokey (according to MK), Gus, Nash, Rama, Reimers, Hank, Stants, Watto and Licha!

Mal and Fletch will retire in the next 2-3 years with Lloyd and Lucas not far behind them. Most of those mids are young.....they're banking for the future.

Precisely. We have enough midfielders - they just need more opportunity and to develop with age.

People need to ask themselves: who were our three tall defenders this year? Answer: Fletcher, Michael and Ryder. Fletcher will retire by 2009 at the latest; Michael will retire at the end of this year; and Ryder was drafted as a ruckman and will hopefully develop accordingly. Even if we leave Ryder as a tall defender for the time being, that leaves 2 tall defender spots to be filled within the next 2 years. So whilst Myers, Pears and Daniher may all be similarly styled players, i don't think we've erred by drafting "too much of a good thing".

On a side note, us drafting 3 tall guys who will hopefully develop into defenders could also help solve our problem of only having 2 rucks. If all of Myers, Pears and Daniher can be groomed for tall spots in defence, Ryder can then be left to develop as a ruckman.

I'm happy with the way we've drafted.

jimmyc1985 · Post by **jimmyc1985** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 11:00 am

doogle wrote:joke? dolt?

You are the fool who can't recognise a joke.

I don't come on the forum to insult anyone or be insulted.

Ahh. I re-read your initial post a few times and now see what you meant. You were playing along with my joke and wanted me to look into my alleged crystal ball for our 4th and 5th picks. I thought in saying "good work - try 50 something", you were implying i was wrong and we were actually going to take Daniher with pick 55.

Apologies are in order then. Sorry about that.

merc_2 · Post by **merc_2** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 11:03 am

Palmer vs Myers....we took Myers...time will tell... I would have gone for Palmer. But it is all guess work at this stage.

Post by **boncer34** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 11:09 am

rama_fan wrote:Tom Collier and Alex Rance went very late. We were one pick away from Scott Selwood, which I'm sure Boncer won't be happy about!!

Mother ****** of god. STINKING f****** EAGLE.

sash · Post by **sash** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 11:12 am

Happy with Myers even though Palmer was my first choice.

Think perhaps they went with Myers as they thought Pears or any other talented Tall Defender wouldn't be available come pick 23 (which sure they wanted at least one more KPD other than Darcy). And didnt want Palmer & a mid with first 2 picks.

So then choose Myers at 6, when pick 23 come around the likes of Ward, Maric and Selwood were taken at 19, 21 and 22 respectively. Leaving Pears as the next best talent available especially looking at the next few selections. I would have been happy with either Ward, Maric or Selwood too if they had fallen.

What was a little surprising was Hooker (KPP) instead of going with a Ruckmen like Bellchambers.

Makaveli · Post by **Makaveli** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 11:32 am

Wasn't it always thought you dont draft defenders with high picks, the reason being most of the great backmen have been forwards turned to backs.
I can't beleive we didnt get Palmer, we have the worse midfield in the comp and the names listed (currently on our list) most of them are flankers and pockets people on here like to think could be midfielders. Palmer averaged 32 touches in the under 18s chamionship i think. FFS Dodoro's time is pretty much up.

ealesy · Post by **ealesy** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 12:01 pm

2QIK4U wrote:Hawthorn picked up Dew - WTF

Clarkson got his way then...Clarkson wanted him, had a good relationship when he was an assistant at Port, rest of the club didn't really want him.

Seems like Clarko stamped his feet and had a hissy fit until the let him take who he wanted.

ealesy · Post by **ealesy** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 12:10 pm

sash wrote:Happy with Myers even though Palmer was my first choice.

Think perhaps they went with Myers as they thought Pears or any other talented Tall Defender wouldn't be available come pick 23 (which sure they wanted at least one more KPD other than Darcy).

That could be true if Myers was a key defender.

He's not, he's a tall (190cm) running HBF/midfielder. I think we drafted him with the idea we will start him off as a running HBF and can develop into an AFL midfielder.

We then drafted for the future to cover the impending departures of Fletcher and Michael and to allow Ryder to be freed up to play ruck/forward. Hell imagine a future forward line of Ryder and Gumbleton!!!

Weren't people talking about Patrick McGinnity being a possibility for pick 23....well he didn't get picked up at all.

For the PSD and rookie draft I would be looking for us to take Bellchambers or another ruckman, McGinnity and Collard.

lozza89 · Post by **lozza89** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 12:14 pm

Doctor Fish wrote:Arrowsmith didn't go. Surprising.

Yeah i'm thinking the same.
I thought he would go for sure!

Doctor Fish · Post by **Doctor Fish** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 12:23 pm

lozza89 wrote:
Doctor Fish wrote:Arrowsmith didn't go. Surprising.
Yeah i'm thinking the same.
I thought he would go for sure!

Could be a good pickup in the rookie draft...

rama_fan · Post by **rama_fan** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 12:29 pm

Arrowsmith has no speed at all. Plus if it wasn't for his 5 goals in the GF I doubt anyone would even know his name.

I'd rather snare a ruckman although Arrowsmith no doubt will be looked at by all clubs.

Doctor Fish · Post by **Doctor Fish** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 2:09 pm

rama_fan wrote:Arrowsmith has no speed at all. Plus if it wasn't for his 5 goals in the GF I doubt anyone would even know his name.

I'd rather snare a ruckman although Arrowsmith no doubt will be looked at by all clubs.

He knows how to get the pill though and will run all day, which afterall, is the aim of the game. Deserves a spot somewhere... Do agree RF on the ruck thing however. Can't see any quality talls on the market though (Guy Richards?). Fingers crossed we don't get too many injuries in that department...

Post by **Megan** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 2:36 pm

is it just me or are peoples names in Aussie Rules getting worse and friggen worse?

Brumaz · Post by **Brumaz** » Sat Nov 24, 2007 2:48 pm

a 191cm mid fielder??