Collingwood's 2012 Draft Prospect Talk - Picks 18, 19, (updated), 20, 38

[HFF]

understandable, however if you look at in the past 10 years how many kids have made it as AFL players from picks 35-45 they are few and far between, taking towers at 39 taking that into consideration could be a good pick up.

At 39 if Hine really wants to take him I'll obviously support their decision but at any of our first 3 picks it's really not an option.

You don't need to worry about him going between 18-21 it's just not Hine's style. He's drafted just one player over the age of 19 in his time with the club (Perham in 2010). He won't buck that trend so spectacularly when we have a cluster of decent selections for the first time since 05!

Point well taken.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

I have a general sort of question about this draft. It had been described by some as the best draft ever, and Matt Rendell said in his sacking speech that he had relished the opportunity to be around to select players in it.

Why has there been such a downgrading of the quality of this draft in recent weeks? It is now being described as shallow, and 4 clubs seem to have indicated that they are going to take early picks then opt out of further selections.

Can anyone explain why the draft was initially seen as one of the best ever yet is now viewed as being short on talent? I'm just curious.

 

[soreplums]

Talk that garlett could still be around at our pick

 

[Snoop Dog]

I have a general sort of question about this draft. It had been described by some as the best draft ever, and Matt Rendell said in his sacking speech that he had relished the opportunity to be around to select players in it.

Why has there been such a downgrading of the quality of this draft in recent weeks? It is now being described as shallow, and 4 clubs seem to have indicated that they are going to take early picks then opt out of further selections.

Can anyone explain why the draft was initially seen as one of the best ever yet is now viewed as being short on talent? I'm just curious.

Surprise me folks have called it best ever. I think most only have ever rated average. Top 10 are exceptional but falls off badly I reckon. Not at all surprised clubs out by 50th selection.

 

[DermiesLuvChild]

I guess a number of 17 year olds did not progress as expected this year (Stewart for example).
This time last year it was certainly described as a 'super draft'.

 

[jerry springer]

I have a general sort of question about this draft. It had been described by some as the best draft ever, and Matt Rendell said in his sacking speech that he had relished the opportunity to be around to select players in it.

Why has there been such a downgrading of the quality of this draft in recent weeks? It is now being described as shallow, and 4 clubs seem to have indicated that they are going to take early picks then opt out of further selections.

Can anyone explain why the draft was initially seen as one of the best ever yet is now viewed as being short on talent? I'm just curious.

heard the exact same thing,was supposed to be the best draft in years .One quote i heard from a scout(obviously exaggerating but excited) was that "the first 40 players could all end up being 200 gamers"

The mini drafts have taken their bite,but why has it all of a sudden this draft losts its flavour?

 

[soreplums]

Already talk that next year's draft is supposed to be stronger. Geelong Falcons are apparently very excited about their draft prospects.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

I heard it described on SEN (Fine's program) as:
Top 5 = pick themselves
Next 10 = should all be pretty good
Next 10 = gets harder, some will not make it, but most should
Rest = some diamonds but most average

Now call me a cynic, but that's how I have heard all drafts described.

 

[Knightmare]

I have a general sort of question about this draft. It had been described by some as the best draft ever, and Matt Rendell said in his sacking speech that he had relished the opportunity to be around to select players in it.

Why has there been such a downgrading of the quality of this draft in recent weeks? It is now being described as shallow, and 4 clubs seem to have indicated that they are going to take early picks then opt out of further selections.

Can anyone explain why the draft was initially seen as one of the best ever yet is now viewed as being short on talent? I'm just curious.

It's nothing close to the best ever.

Only average draft and after the top 20, maybe 25 it's a mostly even group and could fall any number of ways.

Some interesting mid-late draft options but nothing to get too excited about.

The reality with this draft is a number of top end prospects have performed below expections this year then not as many as usual have elevated their games and it has very quickly gone from what was expected to be an above average draft to a probably even slightly below average draft - at least from a depth perspective.

 

[look at him goooo!]

O'Meara, Crouch, Anderson, Neade, Barry, Cameron would all have been top 50 picks so the draft is still slightly compromised.

Also, on a side note, as mentioned previously, its well stated that Hine lists the draftees in order of preference and goes down the list as they are called out. I believe he had Fasolo around 30 back in 2010. No doubt he would have had Beams around 10-15 back in 2008. As no two recruiters share the same ratings of all players, its entirely plausible to assume that with picks 18, 19 and 21 we will get 3 players who Hine rates in the top 15, regardless of the draft order eg. he may rate someone like Garlett or Lonergan 12th or 13th on his list, despite them being there at 18.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

O'Meara, Crouch, Anderson, Neade, Barry, Cameron would all have been top 50 picks so the draft is still slightly compromised.

Also, on a side note, as mentioned previously, its well stated that Hine lists the draftees in order of preference and goes down the list as they are called out. I believe he had Fasolo around 30 back in 2010. No doubt he would have had Beams around 10-15 back in 2008. As no two recruiters share the same ratings of all players, its entirely plausible to assume that with picks 18, 19 and 21 we will get 3 players who Hine rates in the top 15, regardless of the draft order eg. he may rate someone like Garlett or Lonergan 12th or 13th on his list, despite them being there at 18.

I think Fas was about 20 on Hine's list and yes had Steele been taken at our first pick, Beams would have been taken then.

 

[gifted1]

O'Meara, Crouch, Anderson, Neade, Barry, Cameron would all have been top 50 picks so the draft is still slightly compromised.

Also, on a side note, as mentioned previously, its well stated that Hine lists the draftees in order of preference and goes down the list as they are called out. I believe he had Fasolo around 30 back in 2010. No doubt he would have had Beams around 10-15 back in 2008. As no two recruiters share the same ratings of all players, its entirely plausible to assume that with picks 18, 19 and 21 we will get 3 players who Hine rates in the top 15, regardless of the draft order eg. he may rate someone like Garlett or Lonergan 12th or 13th on his list, despite them being there at 18.

I'd say only omeara and crouch would be certs for top 50
Obviously they'd go very early
Anderson maybe
The others I'd highly doubt they'd be top 50
Neade Barry etc I wouldn't draft them

 

[MrAwesome]

Is it a midfielders draft or key positions?

 

[TradeDraft]

Is it a midfielders draft or key positions?

I think it's more a Midfielders Draft

 

[jjsmitty]

With such a solidified side, we're going to want ready made players or some absolute guns. After reading the best 22 post, all these kids that weve started to blood (Sinclair, Williams, Yagmoor, Elliott etc) are going to get pushed out by returning senior players. Where will this years batch of kids sit? Are we going to have that competition for spots again like 2010?

Can we land a Menzel or Garlett? Will we get a KPP? Kristian Jaksch, will he slip to 18? I'm excited!

 

[dubber]

Question for someone who knows

What happens to Pick 20, currently held by Adelaide, in case they are penalised and lose that pick? Do we then have 18, 19 & 20 in essence?

 

[loki04]

Question for someone who knows

What happens to Pick 20, currently held by Adelaide, in case they are penalised and lose that pick? Do we then have 18, 19 & 20 in essence?

Pretty much, it will move all picks after 19 down one for other sides so 39 will be equiv to 38 too.

 

[Travis bloke]

Guys and girls like i have said before let's not get overly excited for the up coming draft.

I mean its not like we have 3 picks between 1-10.That can nearly guarantee us 3 top players but between 17-21

Anything can transpire.Its hit and miss and hope for the best between 15-21 especially if Hine doesn't rate this draft.

 

[Travis bloke]

Yes go for it but these -players that come out of this draft will take years to develop or will take time to discover they have flopped.Hope we get some decent players

 

[DaVe86]

O'Meara, Crouch, Anderson, Neade, Barry, Cameron would all have been top 50 picks so the draft is still slightly compromised.

Also, on a side note, as mentioned previously, its well stated that Hine lists the draftees in order of preference and goes down the list as they are called out. I believe he had Fasolo around 30 back in 2010. No doubt he would have had Beams around 10-15 back in 2008. As no two recruiters share the same ratings of all players, its entirely plausible to assume that with picks 18, 19 and 21 we will get 3 players who Hine rates in the top 15, regardless of the draft order eg. he may rate someone like Garlett or Lonergan 12th or 13th on his list, despite them being there at 18.

He might, but I think his list is drawn up on a needs basis.

My impression is that he looks at the area of deficiency in the side and stocks up on it.

In 05 we needed mids, and we took Thomas, Pendlebury, Cook and Stanley
In 06 we needed KPP's and took Reid, Brown & Dawes.
In 07 we needed mids again and took Sidebottom & Beams

So I think you are right that he prepares an order and the best available on that order is picked. However, his order is determined heavily by the needs in our side.

And we haven't really seen Hine heavily in action in the top 20 for quite some time so who knows if he has changed his style given the new way the game in played.

Personally, I think a priority for Hine this year will be skills and decent foot speed. I think he'll chose 3 utility type players.

 

[Number 10]

I think - after reading the phantom draft prospects - I would like to see the following:

18: Hrovat - ready made and can win alot of his own ball from seeing him in the APS. Will do the #35 jumper proud.
19: Vlastuin - Taller inside mid who I would like very much. Could be moulded as the replacement for Luke Ball.
20/21: Garlett - even though we have Elliot coming through ontop of Fasolo and Mooney, I would like another future gun small forward because I see Fasolo and Elliot playing more midfield and Mooney - well who knows what he could be. But if Edwards turns out well and Garlett too, we could have an extremely potent small forward division in 2-3 years time.
38/39: Matthew Dick - Develop him into a replacement for Harry or Shaw

I would love Stringer because I really think the taller midfielders are the way to go and the way of the future. With guys like Kennedy and Pendles dominating at 191 cm, I wouldn't mind if we were that way inclined.

Keep an ear out for a guy named Pat Ambrose in the rookie draft - Coburg key forward who tested this pre-season with Collingwood. He is around about the 100kg mark and is a freak athlete running 16-2 in the beep test.

 

[DaVe86]

I think - after reading the phantom draft prospects - I would like to see the following:

18: Hrovat - ready made and can win alot of his own ball from seeing him in the APS. Will do the #35 jumper proud.
19: Vlastuin - Taller inside mid who I would like very much. Could be moulded as the replacement for Luke Ball.
20/21: Garlett - even though we have Elliot coming through ontop of Fasolo and Mooney, I would like another future gun small forward because I see Fasolo and Elliot playing more midfield and Mooney - well who knows what he could be. But if Edwards turns out well and Garlett too, we could have an extremely potent small forward division in 2-3 years time.
38/39: Matthew Dick - Develop him into a replacement for Harry or Shaw

I would love Stringer because I really think the taller midfielders are the way to go and the way of the future. With guys like Kennedy and Pendles dominating at 191 cm, I wouldn't mind if we were that way inclined.

Keep an ear out for a guy named Pat Ambrose in the rookie draft - Coburg key forward who tested this pre-season with Collingwood. He is around about the 100kg mark and is a freak athlete running 16-2 in the beep test.

agree, these are the 3 appealing to me at the moment assuming a guy like Stringer or Menzel don't slip.

 

[4#Didak#4]

The more I look at Vlastutin the more I want him. However, the guy is just such a safe pick I can't see him getting to 18.

A lot of recruiters are under pressure to deliver and hate taking a risk with a top 20 pick. Its the nature of the game, you just can't afford to have to many flops with your high picks otherwise your neck is on the line.

Vlastutin, although he may not be as exciting or outstanding in some areas as others will get oicked up early as he is just a solid rounded player that is almost a no brainer to be a good AFL player. When you compare him to say a Garlett or any of the talls for that matter, I know who I would put my neck on the line for.

 

[Couch Coach]

I think - after reading the phantom draft prospects - I would like to see the following:

18: Hrovat - ready made and can win alot of his own ball from seeing him in the APS. Will do the #35 jumper proud.
19: Vlastuin - Taller inside mid who I would like very much. Could be moulded as the replacement for Luke Ball.
20/21: Garlett - even though we have Elliot coming through ontop of Fasolo and Mooney, I would like another future gun small forward because I see Fasolo and Elliot playing more midfield and Mooney - well who knows what he could be. But if Edwards turns out well and Garlett too, we could have an extremely potent small forward division in 2-3 years time.
38/39: Matthew Dick - Develop him into a replacement for Harry or Shaw

I would love Stringer because I really think the taller midfielders are the way to go and the way of the future. With guys like Kennedy and Pendles dominating at 191 cm, I wouldn't mind if we were that way inclined.

Keep an ear out for a guy named Pat Ambrose in the rookie draft - Coburg key forward who tested this pre-season with Collingwood. He is around about the 100kg mark and is a freak athlete running 16-2 in the beep test.

Have you been reading my mind?
I think Vlastuin may go before 18 and therefore have Haynes and Simpson as two who could climb a bit.
You even have Matthew Dick who I thought wasn't rated by many.

 

[blaze036]

The more I look at Vlastutin the more I want him. However, the guy is just such a safe pick I can't see him getting to 18.

A lot of recruiters are under pressure to deliver and hate taking a risk with a top 20 pick. Its the nature of the game, you just can't afford to have to many flops with your high picks otherwise your neck is on the line.

Vlastutin, although he may not be as exciting or outstanding in some areas as others will get oicked up early as he is just a solid rounded player that is almost a no brainer to be a good AFL player. When you compare him to say a Garlett or any of the talls for that matter, I know who I would put my neck on the line for.

Not every recruiters neck is on the line, only ones from the bulldogs/dees/port ect and they have picks nowhere near ours