Draft Review 2006 - Redo the 2006 Draft

[Alcopop]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

Selwood is a stand out. Geelong got lucky given they got Hawekins and would have to give up their pick under todays rules.

 

[xellis]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

I'd have Frawley higher - gun.

 

[folester41]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

krakouer, goldstein, hansen and white before reiwoldt?

 

[Nater]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

Robbie Gray would just about be top 5 out of the players you've selected for ur first round. I'd have him almost in front of Boak if he didn't spend much of his first 2 years struggling with injury.

 

[Monkey King]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

But you're right, he doesn't play for Carlton so is therefore a dud.

How could you possibly have whipped that up out of what I posted

I rate Hampson very highly, so in saying the gap between the players is not as big as North posters are making out - if there is a gap at all - is actually a compliment to Goldstein... not me insinuating he's a dud.

I provided a fair and reasoned argument to support my contention and it's met with this drivle. No need for Bay 13esque foolishness around here princess; just settle down and think for a minute.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

how would clubs draft players in the first round now that they have played for 3 years and thinking about their needs:

1. Carlton - Selwood - best player in the draft. obvious choice

2. Essendon - Kurt Tippett - gun versatile player and perfect forward replacement for lloyd

3. North Melbourne - Bryce Gibbs - gun midfielder which is their weakness

4. Brisbane - Travis Boak - going to be a gun midfielder and don't need Leuy now that clark has stepped up in ruck

5. Port - Matthew Leunberger - need a ruckman badly and he showed a lot before he got injured

6. Hawthorn - Todd Goldstein - also need a ruckman badly and he showed he will be a very good one this year

7. Geelong - Scott Gumbleton - have a good enough list to take a chance even though he is so injury prone then if he comes good he form a good combo with hawkins when mooney is gone

8. Collingwood - Nathan Krakouer - great running back who will suit the pies game plan

9. Saints - Jesse White - ready made ruck forward who provide saints with more dangerous options

10. Collingwood - Lachlen Hansen - get a very good future back to take over from presti

11. Western Bulldogs - Jack Reiwoldt - he is a small key position forward but is the best available and dogs need

12. Melbourne - James Frawley - stick with frawley because they are very happy with how he is going

13. Richmond - Mitch Brown - get the good strong backman the better brown brother

14. Adelaide - Justin Westhoff - desperately need a tall forward with no Tippett and he showed he could be good in his first year

15. Sydney - Andres Everitt - sydney love running players like everitt and like what they saw in his first year

16. West Coast - Nathan Brown - showed some good things last year and west coast need tall backman

is tom hawkins included in this? If he is, then he slots into third spot easily and if your basing this on potential shown so far, you could put a strong argument up for him at 1 or 2.

 

[Demon 16]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

Not looking as strong as the last couple of drafts.

Agree that Selwood is the number 1 pick - anyone suggesting otherwise is being a bit biased I think. He could be the best player drafted in the last 5 years imo.

Gibbs would be next imo and Tippet then Hawkins if he's counted. But other than Selwood being number 1 its subjective to opinion I think.

 

[Smyth94]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

is tom hawkins included in this? If he is, then he slots into third spot easily and if your basing this on potential shown so far, you could put a strong argument up for him at 1 or 2.

Ahhhh no

 

[raymagoo]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

I would still take gibbsy in a heartbeat, only equal 9th in the brownlow this year with marc murphy, playing in his third year! awesome and longevity for the club. dont get me wrong selwood is awesome, number 2 for me! very closely followed by tippett, will be interesting to see what he develops into, if he's tearing up games at his age now for a big unit! think the list gets difficult after the top 3 selections! the thought of jack riewodlt make me feel ill! (IMO)

as for the goldstein hampson arguement, imo both have enormous upside, goldy has the size, skills & footy nous, should be a great career tap ruckman! hammer a late starter to footy, very raw atm, but an awesome athlete, has some serious potential, could do anything, but might not come along as us blues supporters think! in a safe bet you'd take goldy, but having seen hammer play games this year, id take him on athleticism alone, but a risk!

 

[danger_to_walker]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

Adelaide would definitely not take Justin Westhoff knowing what we do now. Would take Mackay, Robbie Gray or Alwyn Davey in that order, Gray probably before Mackay if he wasn't injured every second week.

 

[hilly]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

I provided a fair and reasoned argument to support my contention and it's met with this drivle. No need for Bay 13esque foolishness around here princess; just settle down and think for a minute.

It wasn't fair, you simply used Hampson's non-football background as a point of advantage. You either ignored or didn't consider the fact that Goldstein hasn't exactly been playing football since he was six.

 

[lunacy]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

is tom hawkins included in this? If he is, then he slots into third spot easily and if your basing this on potential shown so far, you could put a strong argument up for him at 1 or 2.

Haha Biased much

 

[Monkey King]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

It wasn't fair, you simply used Hampson's non-football background as a point of advantage. You either ignored or didn't consider the fact that Goldstein hasn't exactly been playing football since he was six.

Conceded, but it was one very small, indeed supplementary, part of my post. Nowhere did I put Goldstein down or even suggest he is a dud. I barely breached the idea of Hampson being better than him; just pointed out that North supporters claiming there is daylight between the players doesn't add up.

If you want to go back to the post and prove me wrong, then feel free to do so, but focusing on the supplementary aspect of it and then throwing a hissy fit isn't really my thing, so I'll leave it here if you have nothing more to add.

 

[Pykie]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

Conceded, but it was one very small, indeed supplementary, part of my post. Nowhere did I put Goldstein down or even suggest he is a dud. I barely breached the idea of Hampson being better than him; just pointed out that North supporters claiming there is daylight between the players doesn't add up.

If you want to go back to the post and prove me wrong, then feel free to do so, but focusing on the supplementary aspect of it and then throwing a hissy fit isn't really my thing, so I'll leave it here if you have nothing more to add.

I've no issues with your opinion, as long as it is well reasoned.

It would be interesting to compare their relative TOG%, as Goldstein in the majority of the games he played, would of been lucky to get 50 minutes.

 

[bombermick]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

Hampson has shown a bit but Goldstein has being more impressive, if you want an impartial P.O.V. Selwood and Tippett as 1 and 2 seems fair. To nab a key forward like Tippett with a low draft pick is a great get.

LOL and the Geelong poster having Hawkins as no.1. He's certainly improved but he's not even the best key position player taken, yet alone best overall.

It's impossible to list Gumbleton anywhere on this list, as he obviously has not being able to get on the park.

 

[cannons]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

is tom hawkins included in this? If he is, then he slots into third spot easily and if your basing this on potential shown so far, you could put a strong argument up for him at 1 or 2.

That's fantastic, thanks for the laugh

Yeah, I think that's a pretty reasonable list for the most part, obviously I would have Frawley higher as I think he's got an exceptional future ahead of him, but a solid job overall.

 

[Monkey King]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

I've no issues with your opinion, as long as it is well reasoned.

And is it not?

It would be interesting to compare their relative TOG%, as Goldstein in the majority of the games he played, would of been lucky to get 50 minutes.

Not much difference between them, as Hampson pretty much shared rucking duties with Kreuzer when he played...

Goldstein - 54%

Hampson - 58%

I'm getting the feeling Hampson is very much an underrated young ruckman on BF. Port tried snatching him for pick 9 and Carlton rightly refused.

Matches up very well when comparing his year to Goldstein's, apart from that one terrific game; perhaps even more consistent. Don't get why people are trying to knock him down when Carlton supporters bring his name up.

 

[robba]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

was very happy to get frawley at 12, he's going to be a terrific player for us. would only pick 3 players ahead of him, selwood, tippett and hawkins.

amazes me how underrated hawkins is on here, anyone who doesnt see that he's going to mature into an outstanding kpf is a moron.

 

[danger_to_walker]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

was very happy to get frawley at 12, he's going to be a terrific player for us. would only pick 3 players ahead of him, selwood, tippett and hawkins.

amazes me how underrated hawkins is on here, anyone who doesnt see that he's going to mature into an outstanding kpf is a moron.

Agreed, his Prelim Final against Collingwood was outstanding, and highlighted how clever a player he is, even when not in possession. I am assuming he still would have been under father/son however, meaning he couldn't be drafted by other clubs.

 

[Canyouhearthedrums]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

I'm amazed at how many people are putting Tippett ahead of Gibbs in here.

Tippett has shown a bit and might become one of the premier forwards in the competition. Gibbs, on the other hand, already is one of the premier midfielders in the competition and is only going to get better.

There is daylight between them.

 

[Quinz]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

A lot of injured players in this first round, makes it very tough to rate. If we're rating just the first 16:

1. Joel Selwood
2. Bryce Gibbs
3. Travis Boak
4. Mitch Brown
5. Lachlan Hansen
6. James Frawley
7. Nathan Brown
8. Jack Reiwoldt
9. Matthew Luenberger
10. Scott Gumbleton
11. Andrejs Everitt
12. David Armatidge
13. Ben Reid
14. James Sellar
15. Mitch Thorp
16. Daniel O'Keefe

Others from the draft that might be in the first 16 if selected now:

Kurt Tippett
Alwyn Davey
Todd Goldstein
Jesse White
Tom Hawkins
Kyle Reimers
Robert Gray

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

Mitch Brown for Nathan Brown. Rofl.

 

[morebeer]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

Probably the hardest draft to judge after 3 years as you will get. So many talls taking their time to mature

 

[Vader]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

Others from the draft that might be in the first 16 if selected now:

Tom Hawkins

Hawkins would have gone #1 or #2 at the time if he'd been available, but he went to Geelong for a 3rd rounder under the old F/S rule (his selection was the catalyst for change to the current system).

I'm not so sure he'd even be in the first 16 taken if the draft were re-done this year. Maybe... but he'd be on the fringe. He may well turn out to be a very good player, but right now there are plenty of players with more runs on the board than he's managed.

 

[Death Cab]

Re: re do the 2006 draft now that we have seen them

It goes to show that even in a 'super draft' where you supposedly can't miss in the first round, it is still a lottery.

the 2008 draft almost looks better at this stage, and those kids have only had one year in the system.

Would probably take Nic Nat ahead of any ruck in the 2006 draft and Hurley ahead of any of the KPPs. Take Selwood out of the 2006 draft and its starts to look a bit over hyped. That's the thing with KPP, they are so hit and miss.