List Mgmt. 2015 DRAFT discussion - Clayton Oliver #4, Sam Weideman #10, Mitch King #42, Liam Hulett #46

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Say GWS end up with 10? Id offer that for Carlisle the defender no problem at all ( ignoring the suspension possibilty )

I guess. You'd prefer Hurley but he wouldn't be available. For a high pick you'd want someone who's going to turn up every week, but if you get some of these guys away from Essendon, they'll probably play twice as well.

Looking through lists of defenders, maybe GWS should've tried a bit harder with Frawley. Rance is about the only other mid 20s KPD who had a contract running down... not a whole lot else around.
 
I guess. You'd prefer Hurley but he wouldn't be available. For a high pick you'd want someone who's going to turn up every week, but if you get some of these guys away from Essendon, they'll probably play twice as well.

Looking through lists of defenders, maybe GWS should've tried a bit harder with Frawley. Rance is about the only other mid 20s KPD who had a contract running down... not a whole lot else around.

Carlisle is a better player in defence and hes consistent, near impossible to get Key defenders to move clubs
Harder than getting Key Forwards

Theres always Schoenmakers.......
 
Would not touch a single player with drug question marks over their heads - would be a stupid decision to give up a first or second round pick for someone under risk of suspension.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Would not touch a single player with drug question marks over their heads - would be a stupid decision to give up a first or second round pick for someone under risk of suspension.

Even if I knew for certain that Dyson Heppel was going to be suspended for 12 months, I would part with pick 4 or 5 straight away.
 
Even if I knew for certain that Dyson Heppel was going to be suspended for 12 months, I would part with pick 4 or 5 straight away.

Not worth it, what about 24 months?

Health repercussions are still unknown too.
 
They should be. Experienced key back and versatile defender are what I reckon they should be chasing. Have the mids, forwards and ruckman, they need a more stable backline. Other than that, hang on to and get games into their kids. Rest will sort itself out.
They've got Phil Davis and Patfull. As well as Haynes out injured. With developing first round picks Corr and Marchbank in the side as well as 3rd tall types in Plowman and Buntine. I don't think they'd be worried.

GWS will use any trades to get more draft currency to keep their academy kids. They'll keep adding high level kids for years to come if they can find them.
 
They've got Phil Davis and Patfull. As well as Haynes out injured. With developing first round picks Corr and Marchbank in the side as well as 3rd tall types in Plowman and Buntine. I don't think they'd be worried.

GWS will use any trades to get more draft currency to keep their academy kids. They'll keep adding high level kids for years to come if they can find them.

Not sure of the value of giving away players you've drafted and put time into so you can use lots of those picks to get more players to put time into. They've picked up players with limited shelf life recently, they need a few more experienced players to help them climb the ladder.
 
I'd probably still do it with 24 months - this isn't a particularly strong draft.

I'm not concerned about the health effects. I'd be seriously shocked if they had to finish footy early for some reason.

There have been peptides found to cause cancer and serious health problems.

Would be very reluctant to recruit anyone when most substances they've used are unknown and the ones we know havent been cleared for human use.

Using a good pick in a weak draft is less risky than that IMO.
 
There have been peptides found to cause cancer and serious health problems.

Would be very reluctant to recruit anyone when most substances they've used are unknown and the ones we know havent been cleared for human use.

Using a good pick in a weak draft is less risky than that IMO.

He could also turn into a tentacled 12 foot tall mutant freak - would be a monster at clearances. Worth the risk.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I saw that phantom draft (with the sound off) and Brisbane had picks 1, 13 and 18, are they assuming they'll get priority picks or something?
 
I saw that phantom draft (with the sound off) and Brisbane had picks 1, 13 and 18, are they assuming they'll get priority picks or something?
I think it is where the kids are rated and assumes Brisbane ect trade for the picks they need
 
I saw that phantom draft (with the sound off) and Brisbane had picks 1, 13 and 18, are they assuming they'll get priority picks or something?

They are saying that they think other clubs will bid on those kids, which under the new rules, will mean they are given those picks to take those players if they want to.

In return they lose later picks and potentially picks in the next draft as well.
 
We all know it, but yesterday just showed how much we need some class in the middle. Our contested work has improved a hell of a lot, but our delivery inside 50 is still really poor, and we still make dumb decisions sometimes.

Wouldn't mind drafting someone who can use the ball well and is composed, I don't care if they are softer than Cale Morton, we have enough guys who can win the ball to feed it to them (I'd kill for a 21 year old Aaron Davey).
 
We all know it, but yesterday just showed how much we need some class in the middle. Our contested work has improved a hell of a lot, but our delivery inside 50 is still really poor, and we still make dumb decisions sometimes.

Wouldn't mind drafting someone who can use the ball well and is composed, I don't care if they are softer than Cale Morton, we have enough guys who can win the ball to feed it to them (I'd kill for a 21 year old Aaron Davey).

Darcy Parish is looking increasingly like our man.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top