Mega Thread 2014 Drafts complete

[RandB]

The draft with the lowest success rate and we go looking for needs?

Unless we're going mature-age I think it's better to pick the best player.

Mature age would be good, perhaps a ruck but I say that blindly as I don't know the prospects.

It's always difficult with the RD because of the low(er) percentages. Best available sounds good on paper but surely upside and the possibilities of filling a position look better in reality. For example do we need another mid who will in all likelihood stagnate and be on a similar level to Harmes who is a year further in development?

We have 2 rookie spots. Tapscott may happen so with 1 other spot I think we can afford to speculate with a mature tall.

 

[Dez!]

The draft with the lowest success rate and we go looking for needs?

Unless we're going mature-age I think it's better to pick the best player.

The rookie list is made for projects, that's why there's a lot of talls that have been successful that come from the rookie list.

Pick promising tall and try to develop him, if it doesn't work then it doesn't work but if it pays off then the rewards could be very handsome for Melbourne.

 

[youngbear]

The rookie list is made for projects, that's why there's a lot of talls that have been successful that come from the rookie list.

Pick promising tall and try to develop him, if it doesn't work then it doesn't work but if it pays off then the rewards could be very handsome for Melbourne.

Which is why an 18yr old King got another year when he struggled to make the grade at Casey and a 24yr old Georgiou, who played several AFL games, got the chop.

Rookie list is pointless IMO; but if it has to be there, project players and low risk high pay off 2nd chances (e.g. Jetta).

 

[RandB]

Not Really, most rookie picks don't make it so if you want to target a specific need then you should be looking at it earlier in the national draft.

There aren't many key forwards that are of any quality taken outside the top 20 picks so I would say there is a reason Keitel was overlooked at this stage and if we are drafting him for a need I think it's a mistake.

The best chance of getting a rookie player to become a quality player is by taking the best available.

If there is a stand out best available who looks like they can become AFL quality then sure, otherwise it's just another punt. If we're going best available for the sake of it even though the margins are close then its just the best of a poor lot.

Where as a needs player (specifically a tall) might be high risk vs high reward.

With Harmes and King getting second years any rookie is contending with them and possibly Tapscott. Go the "Hail Mary" and see how they pan out in a year or two. How they compare to other rookies now is irrelevant to a degree.

 

[Darksidepoints]

If there is a stand out best available who looks like they can become AFL quality then sure, otherwise it's just another punt. If we're going best available for the sake of it even though the margins are close then its just the best of a poor lot.

Where as a needs player (specifically a tall) might be high risk vs high reward.

With Harmes and King getting second years any rookie is contending with them and possibly Tapscott. Go the "Hail Mary" and see how they pan out in a year or two. How they compare to other rookies now is irrelevant to a degree.

Cant see Tapscott getting a gig. Reinjured himself (how many times is this now?)

Shame, he actually showed something early on.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

The rookie list is made for projects, that's why there's a lot of talls that have been successful that come from the rookie list.

Pick promising tall and try to develop him, if it doesn't work then it doesn't work but if it pays off then the rewards could be very handsome for Melbourne.

I guess it goes both ways, good clubs have taken advantage of the rookie draft heavily - I'd like to think we could do the same.

 

[PerfectFooty]

Someone posted this on a supporters page, had a good laugh. Move over Dustin Fletcher we have Brayshaw

 

[Dory_77]

Not Really, most rookie picks don't make it so if you want to target a specific need then you should be looking at it earlier in the national draft.

There aren't many key forwards that are of any quality taken outside the top 20 picks so I would say there is a reason Keitel was overlooked at this stage and if we are drafting him for a need I think it's a mistake.

The best chance of getting a rookie player to become a quality player is by taking the best available.

But at the same time taller players are riskier picks generally and take longer to develop. Picking a tall in the RD is a good means of mitigating that risk. Keitel was rated well before the draft, and watching his highlights (yes, they're often taken out of context and show only the good bits) shows he has some solid traits. His marking and contested work looked pretty good (disposal was ordinary though I thought). Given we're pretty thin on talls, especially up forward, it'd be a good idea to get another, even if they're rough around the edges.

Realistically I think any pick taken from 50-onwards in the ND to the rookie draft is going to be a fairly speculative pick. Might as well go for a project type ruck/KPP.

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

Is Saad still available or will he be taken in the PSD by someone?

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

The rookie list is made for projects, that's why there's a lot of talls that have been successful that come from the rookie list.

Pick promising tall and try to develop him, if it doesn't work then it doesn't work but if it pays off then the rewards could be very handsome for Melbourne.

Shame our previous recruiting staff applied this to the national draft.

 

[PerfectFooty]

Is Saad still available or will he be taken in the PSD by someone?

I think the saints where having a look at him, but are they picking up membrey in the PSD. Or did they get him through trade period?

 

[Blackas87]

But at the same time taller players are riskier picks generally and take longer to develop. Picking a tall in the RD is a good means of mitigating that risk. Keitel was rated well before the draft, and watching his highlights (yes, they're often taken out of context and show only the good bits) shows he has some solid traits. His marking and contested work looked pretty good (disposal was ordinary though I thought). Given we're pretty thin on talls, especially up forward, it'd be a good idea to get another, even if they're rough around the edges.

Realistically I think any pick taken from 50-onwards in the ND to the rookie draft is going to be a fairly speculative pick. Might as well go for a project type ruck/KPP.

I can't think of one key forward that is a regular player that was taken in the rookie draft. There are quite a few mids and flankers though that were taken as rookies though. Yeah it's a risk taking a key forward in the first round but it seems you must take this risk if you want a quality key forward.

you can develop a ruckman over time from the rookie draft but there aren't any quality ones left in this draft and we already have one on the rookie list. I just think its best to go with more of a mid or flanker types

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

I think the saints where having a look at him, but are they picking up membrey in the PSD. Or did they get him through trade period?

I dont know. Similar to you, heard the saints were talking about taking him as well but wasn't selected Thursday.

If he slipped through to the RD and was interested id take him. Garlett and Saad would be dangerous together. Much prefer him than Tapscott. Fills a need, i still have no idea what Tappys best spot would be for us. I dont think he does either.

 

[Topkent]

I can't think of one key forward that is a regular player that was taken in the rookie draft. There are quite a few mids and flankers though that were taken as rookies though. Yeah it's a risk taking a key forward in the first round but it seems you must take this risk if you want a quality key forward.

you can develop a ruckman over time from the rookie draft but there aren't any quality ones left in this draft and we already have one on the rookie list. I just think its best to go with more of a mid or flanker types

Stuart Crameri is probably the most talented Forward from the rookie draft but the dogs still had to go out and pay 7 Mill/7 for Boyd because Crameri isnt a KF

 

[youngbear]

Someone posted this on a supporters page, had a good laugh. Move over Dustin Fletcher we have Brayshaw

I noticed this as well... It's not just him. Most people seem to be listed as 44.

Although it seems they've fixed it

 

[Topkent]

I dont know. Similar to you, heard the saints were talking about taking him as well but wasn't selected Thursday.

If he slipped through to the RD and was interested id take him. Garlett and Saad would be dangerous together. Much prefer him than Tapscott. Fills a need, i still have no idea what Tappys best spot would be for us. I dont think he does either.

Tappys best spot would be as a HFF playing the Chapman role

Unfortunately Dean Kent has already gone well past him even though I like Tappy as a player

 

[Crimson Azure]

There's no such thing! Haha

I married one does that qualify?

 

[pjfairbairn]

I can't think of one key forward that is a regular player that was taken in the rookie draft. There are quite a few mids and flankers though that were taken as rookies though. Yeah it's a risk taking a key forward in the first round but it seems you must take this risk if you want a quality key forward.

you can develop a ruckman over time from the rookie draft but there aren't any quality ones left in this draft and we already have one on the rookie list. I just think its best to go with more of a mid or flanker types

Russell Robertson? James Podsiadly?

 

[Crimson Azure]

Davey is the best rookie we've ever had. I wouldn't mind going for athletes we can try to make into footballers or the opposite of that a footballer like Daniels who went in the draft but could easily have slipped.

 

[Headless]

Davey is the best rookie we've ever had. I wouldn't mind going for athletes we can try to make into footballers or the opposite of that a footballer like Daniels who went in the draft but could easily have slipped.

Junior?

 

[Blackas87]

Russell Robertson? James Podsiadly?

Robertson wasn't a KPF, he was more of a flanker or 3rd tall in the end, JPOD was a mature recruit, it's a bit different drafting an 18 year old to fill a need

 

[JP2]

I've always been skeptical of the "drafting according to needs" philosophy. The fact is that with any draft (but especially the rookie draft) you're really looking at 3-4 years down the line before the players can be reliable contributors. In that time the entire profile of the list can change - especially in this age of free agency - and the gaps you thought you were drafting to fill may either no longer exist or you find that they have been superseded by new, more pressing gaps.

If you draft a kpf, say, who only has a small chance of making it, just because you think this is the place on the list that needs filling the most then you've really just succeeded in shooting yourself in the foot twice: first you've failed to cover the original gap in the list and secondly, by failing to draft a competent footballer, you've also reduced your capacity to cover future gaps in other parts of the ground. That competent hbf you overlooked could have either slotted in directly to fill the new gap, or could have been traded for someone else who could - in either case you're stuck with a pie in the sky kpf who was probably overlooked 90 odd times for good reason. Best available it must be, always and forever.

 

[Flyswatter]

any of the VFL players who have been training with the dees a chance?

 

[youngbear]

any of the VFL players who have been training with the dees a chance?

They're all Casey, so maybe. But I think it's because Casey were horrible last year and to help our players development they need to close the gap between AFL listed and VFL players.

 

[Demon 16]

any of the VFL players who have been training with the dees a chance?

Ed Morris is apparently a chance with our second or third rookie pick.