Player Watch #29: Shai Bolton - Traded for picks 10,11&18

[SunshineBoy]

It's not if our results justify this. People brag that we've selected a great crop of smalls yet after Dusty I see Rioli only being a possible A grader. I'm not dismissing this years lot , but 7 years of noise has eventuated to exactly that. Our tall stocks have basically been poorer , so where do you start to build a list?
Spine , mids or short people? I know where I would be going.

As old jack used to say , the big blokes don't get any shorter

 

[blaisee]

No they are not. ATM they project at afl level as sml fwds and nothing more. They have similar traits and attributes and importantly are a similar size. Personally id prefer stengles chances of being the better fwd Bolton has the better chance of being a mid very outside at that.

At pick 29 and especially if it your first and only decent pick in the entire draft, plus you have gaping holes in FAR MORE IMPORTANT AREAS there is no way I would be using that pick on a super sml super skinny player who may or may not become an afl mid slash fwd. I know and have shown there is plenty of opportunity to dabble in this type much later.That is not even bringing into account SERIOUS DEFICIENT LIST NEEDS.

Similar heights and both indigenous but that's where it ends

Bolton is quick dual sided and will become a midfielder

Stengle is not .

I guess according to you all Asians look alike as well .

 

[prodigy]

I don't get why we would draft a tall, just for the sake of drafting a tall this year. I don't understand that school of thought.
Next years draft is littered with quality talls and we are in a better draft position.
Why run the risk?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Joey longshadow]

This is a general post regarding list management (apologies to mods, if you think this is better served else where , please move)....

List management and player selection at drafts is a multifaceted issue that may be impacted on by opposition list analysis as well as considering your own lists needs. Some people saying we made this mistake or that. As we could've taken player x at the rookie selection etc, etc You don't know if a player will slip through to rookie or your second or third picks but if another team has deficiencies for example in the small forward area? Let's say for example we let Daniel go past our first selection?

I don't know for sure but I'd suggest that the Hawks for example knew that they were going to lose Brad Hill, I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest they would have taken him (Daniel) at their first selection last year, given him a season to develop & learn then played him as a possible Hill replacement?

Opposition list management is a full-time position? ( correct me if I'm wrong please RFC_Official ), I'm thinking there are a lot of things this person would be considering not just who may be available as a restricted/unrestricted free agent? But what are their lists needs as well as (opposition Clubs) strengths/weaknesses & how do they match up against our for when we play them? Also liaising with player managers to develop strong relationships etc in readiness for possible player transfer to our club as a desired club of destination may be another part of their role?

But if I'm a person who can think of these elements and I have nothing to do with recruiting, can you imagine how many things an opposition list manager or similar person might actually be doing? Point is no matter how much we might be saying this or that decision is "bad, wrong, could have taken this or that player later" etc I'd suggest it's never a simple decision and the rationale changes each season as the club (all clubs) needs/wants etc fluctuate season to season as well as what's available draft to draft.....Just my 2c worth..(steps off soap box....)

this is a very well thought out post ,and well written.

 

[TigerImposter]

I don't get why we would draft a tall, just for the sake of drafting a tall this year. I don't understand that school of thought.
Next years draft is littered with quality talls and we are in a better draft position.
Why run the risk?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

With Casino everything is a risk. That's why our list has achieved no finals success for years. Where do you start ?

 

[Calcium Man]

As old jack used to say , the big blokes don't get any shorter

They don't suddenly find talent either

We have made probably two glaring/hindsight errors since the dusty draft with regard to talls. We should have taken Lynch over Conca and Level over CEllis.

The first one hurts but its understandable as we'd just gone and drafted 4 talls in the first 2 rounds of the previous 2 drafts. The Lever one was a massive mistake, but the kid was coming off 12 months not playing the game so you can understand the trepidation.

But those mistakes don't mean we should start reaching for talls in a draft. KPF are rarely found after the 1st round, while we got a very good KPD in Garthwaite. The recruiters ranked bolton in the first round, they paid to make that call and you always take best available in the draft.

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

He works for hindsight.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa....

 

[Groupie_]

blair reckons we're gonna take some talls with our 2 first rounders next year

 

[RockJobster0312]

Josh Battle

There's a reason he went from project top 15 to mid-30s. From what Ive heard post draft most teams think Battle was too small and not quick or athletic enough to be a kpp. More like a third tall.

 

[Calcium Man]

Josh Battle

Would have been a terrible choice. He is too slow and small to be anything at AFL level, he is another Matthew Panos.

 

[GoTigers2015]

With Casino everything is a risk. That's why our list has achieved no finals success for years. Where do you start ?

Hopefully BH is out the door after a series of **** ups over his reign. Only Carltoon recruiters make us look good.

However, I prefer the risk they took this year on Bolton who was the best available but did come with a query on the go home factor. Much better risk than where we have used our first selection for speculative picks over higher rated players (Conca over Heppell / Lynch ) . Starting to think Corey Ellis will also fit into this category.

 

[GoTigers2015]

Would have been a terrible choice. He is too slow and small to be anything at AFL level, he is another Matthew Panos.

Bit early to make that call.

 

[Calcium Man]

Bit early to make that call.

Recruiters already made that call by picking him up so late despite being the best credentialed KPF in the draft.

He is fit but otherwise has no standout AFL or athletic attributes.

 

[GoTigers2015]

Recruiters already made that call by picking him up so late despite being the best credentialed KPF in the draft.

He is fit but otherwise has no standout AFL or athletic attributes.

Didn't Luke Parker have knocks on him also. Until he has played at least a couple of seasons how can say he will be another Matthew Panos?

 

[Calcium Man]

Didn't Luke Parker have knocks on him also. Until he has played at least a couple of seasons how can say he will be another Matthew Panos?

Parker was overlooked IMO because recruiters saw too much of him and started dissecting his weaknesses too much. He was still dominating TAC cup and won the Stingrays BnF as a bottom ager against Scully. I wanted Parker badly in his draft year.

Battle doesn't/didn't dominate was just good and is a lead and mark type player thats his only trick unlike Parker who could win his own ball and get forward. His agility is terrible like bottom 5% or something, he is useless when the ball is on the ground and is not super fit with a 13.7 beep test.

Sure we can wait a few years but i'm pretty confident on this one as a 3rd tall he just doesn't have the attributes you'd want/need to play AFL. A guy like Dylan Grimes or Easton Woods would half most of the contests in the air and destroy him on the ground. The 3rd tall types like Darling, Lynch, Membrey and Stringer are still very very good at ground level and can push up into the midfield.

 

[mopsy]

What if he becomes one of the best players from the draft? Surely having more quality on the list can only be good?
What is the point of getting another Astbury type just for the sake of getting a tall when we could pick up a Lever type next year?
It's not as simple as picking size. We need quality.
I'm hoping Bolton is quality.

Whos says any tall we may have taken is an astbury type. I could just as easily say Bolton is a tambling or alwyn davey type.
So you are saying the kpds that were there are not quality based on what.Every kid that is drafted has potential and could end up a quality player. I have just as much faith that brennan Rotham Maccreadie along with a few others could be quality.Just as any tall we may take next yr could be.
Just because we have not picked a player it does not mean they lose their potential.We had a chance to address serious long term tall problems in the nd and trade period, problems that will take much more than one nd to address. Anyway do you think Fremantle were worried about next yrs draft, nope they saw an opportunity to address serious list needs now.

As i have repeatedly said it is a nonsense to say there were no talls worth taking in the draft when there were several kpds well worth taking. It really was a good draft for tall defenders. But hey we didnt take any talls until the death and to justify not taking them we get oh they are all likely Astbury types.It is nonsense.

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

lol

 

[tigerfan1961]

Actually i realise most of my comments on this kid paints a poor picture. Like all nd picks he has talent and i wish him well.

My problem is not the player but the process along list management lines and where we took Bolton.
I was 100% certain that a playe rof his type would be available very late or even in the rookie draft. I think this because this is actually the norm.
Lo and behold what happens two very similar types go at 5 and 6 lebois and stengle in the rookie draft. What i am pissed about is having taken Rioli the yr before with a top 20 pick we took this runt with what amounted to our first pick this yr we sure are keen to invest in kids that project as sml fwds who MAY IF LUCKY become good mids.Rioli i can live with but in a list management sense taking bolton or a similar type to him with our first two picks is madness.

Now as i said good luck to the kid i have faith he will do well but fmd dont mention list management or the overall direction we have taken. Im sorry i just can not buy into it.
IMO scraping into the 8 justifying the coach and the board has taken precedence over the right approach which would have meant embracing the ND and almost certainly missing the 8 again not that we will make it or theres any real certainty we will anyway.

You have no idea Mate. Could turn out to be an absolute star, no one knows at this stage.
And wait until late or rookie draft, where did Ballantyne get taken, and until this year, he was the best small forward in the game.
Unlike our recruiters who have watched all these players for years, you likely haven't and I think I'll trust their judgement over yours.

 

[Ancient Tiger]

Whos says any tall we may have taken is an astbury type. I could just as easily say Bolton is a tambling or alwyn davey type.
So you are saying the kpds that were there are not quality based on what.Every kid that is drafted has potential and could end up a quality player. I have just as much faith that brennan Rotham Maccreadie along with a few others could be quality.Just as any tall we may take next yr could be.
Just because we have not picked a player it does not mean they lose their potential.We had a chance to address serious long term tall problems in the nd and trade period, problems that will take much more than one nd to address. Anyway do you think Fremantle were worried about next yrs draft, nope they saw an opportunity to address serious list needs now.

As i have repeatedly said it is a nonsense to say there were no talls worth taking in the draft when there were several kpds well worth taking. It really was a good draft for tall defenders. But hey we didnt take any talls until the death and to justify not taking them we get oh they are all likely Astbury types.It is nonsense.

So you are saying that tall players that are not highly rated as juniors are the same chance as those who are highly rated to become A graders?

Wow!!!!!

Lucky you are not our list manager!!! I thought BH was bad.....

 

[pebblestone]

Kid's got an unbelievable leap in the video on the rfc site. Literally stands on heads.

 

[THE_GUN]

Shai Bolton was the correct choice !

The depth of quality talls was extremely low and we could realistically only take 1 this year which we did,Battle is a limited player and there are very good reasons why he went so late similar to Kerr.

I really cant see what all the fuss is about not taking more talls, we can always select 1 or 2 next year or trade for 1

Midfield is what wins the games in todays game

 

[tunksy]

They say that every yr. They have only fallen 3 or 4 yrs behind in this. No actually they have never got remotely close when it comes to talls.

You start with structure and strength and build from there. And that takes so much time to build. So why are we adding cream on top types who will rely heavily on that structure to survive first.
I say again i have nothing against Bolton he may end up a champ but fmd we ignore continuously the real needs of rebuild.

Tell me how many tall nd picks have we used after 09 then tell me we will target talls. FMD they have said inside mids are a priority almost from day dot and have proceeded to ignore the problem and now have been forced to trade out of a really deep draft for mids to at least attempt to address that problem.

It has been a complete basket case and forgive me me if i have little faith in any thing they say or think they have any idea at all about serious list needs. Ive been waiting too long .

Apply for the list management position if you think you know more than they do.

 

[blaisee]

We need a good tall

If there was one there we would have take him

There wasn't

 

[prodigy]

We need a good tall

If there was one there we would have take him

There wasn't

That pretty much sums up the argument.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[THE_GUN]

Apply for the list management position if you think you know more than they do.

I can guarantee you i would have done a better job than these guys