News Cats better prepared to defend crown says Bomber

[OldStyle2007]

Its an interesting issue. We lost King and Nathan, Egan was already a doubt, as was Lonergan at that stage. Picking 4 talls in a row is an "unbalanced " way to conduct a draft with late picks for sure but I am sure Wells, Balme and co would have been spooked by the loss of talls.

In the end Taylor is a gem, Dawson just got a 2 year deal and Mc Kenna might still be rookied. The other Simpson might still be on the list also if he wasnt injured. Laidler is a handy utility.

I think Wells' picking was ok in a weak draft but not picking at least one genuine midfielder is probably what Bomber is on about RE balance.

The question is: were there other talls available that we could have picked instead of McKenna and Simpson that have turned out to be good players?

 

[Belisarius]

I all know we would like to get a couple of players from each draft - but even if you get one gun player - like Harry Taylor, the draft has been a success for me. I do not see the '07 draft as a failure - Harry I reckon might be a 200 game player and in a very significant position on the field - CHB.

 

[FoxC]

Here's the complete list of the 2007 National Draft.

Tall-wise, looks a pretty ordinary list from Dawson's pick (#34) onwards. The only tall of note doing well is Cale Hooker (Ess) at #54.

 

[TheHonestyPolicy]

Here's the complete list of the 2007 National Draft.

Tall-wise, looks a pretty ordinary list from Dawson's pick (#34) onwards. The only tall of note doing well is Cale Hooker (Ess) at #54.

I recall Bomber being disappointed to miss out on Scott Thompson.

Guy O'Keefe also at pick 63; isnt he training with us?

Maybe thats more what Bomber is referring to in this instance.

 

[FoxC]

I recall Bomber being disappointed to miss out on Scott Thompson.

Guy O'Keefe also at pick 63; isnt he training with us?

Maybe thats more what Bomber is referring to in this instance.

You're right. I was actually replying to Old Style's question as to whether there were other talls we could've drafted.

Obviously Thompson isn't a tall but shouldn't have got away from our clutches anyway.

 

[Selective Retention]

There's a few between Harry and Dawson that look ok, obviously we didn't get a shot at them, but boy take out the scholarship players and that draft falls away completely after the second round.

 

[Pivo]

It makes for an interesting exercise of hindsight.

After the McKenna selection at 50 a guy call Bradd Dalziell was still available and (while traded this year) I still think he can play a bit.

As already mentioned, Guy O'Keefe was still available as well.

Josh Smith @ North and Tom McNamara were also there and could have been handy selections late. Smith a 195cm forward with pretty good hands and McNamara a 190cm defender for additional depth.

Adelaide's Pick 75 was a beauty - should give them a big tick on the talent spotting there.

The glaring one though, again as mentioned, is Scott Thompson who was taken three spots after Dawson Simpson.

I think I can guess who most people would prefer at Geelong right now out of Simpson and Thompson...even allowing for big Dawson being the classic "project player".

Chris Mayne @ Fremantle and James Polkinghorne @ Brisbane are also good selections (although not talls).

While there are some handy type's, I think FoxC is right, nothing really to write home about on the tall front.

The issue may be Geelong just went for too many talls in 2007.

 

[Vegas.]

As already mentioned, Guy O'Keefe was still available as well.

Adelaide's Pick 75 was a beauty - should give them a big tick on the talent spotting there.

GOK ain't much chop anyway.

And Walker was a scholarship selection, so he was locked in at that pick - but yeah good scouting by them to get him onto the scholarship.

 

[Pivo]

GOK ain't much chop anyway.

And Walker was a scholarship selection, so he was locked in at that pick - but yeah good scouting by them to get him onto the scholarship.

*LOL* Vegas - I think you and I should start pushing the Myles Sewell/Farren Priest rookie selection ahead of O'Keefe (either of 'em actually).

 

[Vegas.]

*LOL* Vegas - I think you and I should start pushing the Myles Sewell/Farren Priest rookie selection ahead of O'Keefe (either of 'em actually).

Absolutely. Haven't heard much talk about us taking Priest in the rookie draft, but he certainly impressed me during his stint with the twos. Has there been any indication he's on the radar?

 

[TheHonestyPolicy]

You're right. I was actually replying to Old Style's question as to whether there were other talls we could've drafted.

Obviously Thompson isn't a tall but shouldn't have got away from our clutches anyway.

I'm glad you answered that question as I didnt have a clue. It's always interesting to read over the drafts 2-3 years later similar to what Emma Quayle is intending to do with this years draft I believe down the track.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

It makes for an interesting exercise of hindsight.

After the McKenna selection at 50 a guy call Bradd Dalziell was still available and (while traded this year) I still think he can play a bit.

As already mentioned, Guy O'Keefe was still available as well.

Josh Smith @ North and Tom McNamara were also there and could have been handy selections late. Smith a 195cm forward with pretty good hands and McNamara a 190cm defender for additional depth.

Adelaide's Pick 75 was a beauty - should give them a big tick on the talent spotting there.

The glaring one though, again as mentioned, is Scott Thompson who was taken three spots after Dawson Simpson.

I think I can guess who most people would prefer at Geelong right now out of Simpson and Thompson...even allowing for big Dawson being the classic "project player".

Chris Mayne @ Fremantle and James Polkinghorne @ Brisbane are also good selections (although not talls).

While there are some handy type's, I think FoxC is right, nothing really to write home about on the tall front.

The issue may be Geelong just went for too many talls in 2007.

Thompson's the big one out of that list.

The reality is the other players overlooked (i.e. Dalziell), while good, are not ones we'd have needed anyway (at least in the medium term). However fortunately with the emergence of Gillies this won't hurt us as much as it would have otherwise.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I found Bombers comments about the 2007 draft a bit strange. Trying to fob off a poorer than expected return on being distracted by winning the flag that year. Considering it is Wells department to recruit, the 2007 flag has nothing to do with it. Finishing the top of the ladder does limit your chances of getting the top recruits for the year but that is a given. I really don't know what Bomber had to gain by saying those things other than pissing off Wells. Afterall Drafting new players is a bit of a crap shoot. They don't always make it to AFL level.

It was a strange comment.

Agreed...particularly given the recruiting guys start looking at potential guys at the start of the season (if not before) rather than the end of the season, I can't see 'premiership distraction' being a reason. That said, I do agree with his assessment of our draft that year to some degree.