Draft Selection #10

[Jars458]

there are also rumors Bulldogs could throw in McMahon as hes an SA boy..

On the bulldogs board they are saying our pick 10 for McMahon.

No way we would do that which may tell you that the Dogs won't give up pick five for McGregor and pick 10.

Will be an interesting trade period.

 

[bus24]

On the bulldogs board they are saying our pick 10 for McMahon.

No way we would do that which may tell you that the Dogs won't give up pick five for McGregor and pick 10.

Will be an interesting trade period.

P10 for McMahon

Oh dear

 

[brown30]

On the bulldogs board they are saying our pick 10 for McMahon.

No way we would do that which may tell you that the Dogs won't give up pick five for McGregor and pick 10.

Will be an interesting trade period.

Talls are far more valuable than smalls and as much as we wish we could we don't actually control what clubs recruiters think/do.

Besides - if we wanted a vanilla midfielder/defender that badly we could just use pick 40 odd on one. Mcmahon is soft as shit and his pace is his only benefit. Pass

 

[Sanguinarius]

P10 for McMahon

Oh dear

Jericho for P5

 

[ShearMagic9]

Haha the Bulldogs fans are dreaming.

McGregor + Pick 10 for Pick 5.

I'd love to see that trade personally.

 

[CarnCrows]

Haha the Bulldogs fans are dreaming.

McGregor + Pick 10 for Pick 5.

I'd love to see that trade personally.

Totally agree. Then round 5 on Ebert.

Could a Mattner - McMahon direct swap be on the cards?

 

[stefoid]

Meesen + Pick 10 to Carlton for their Pick 3?

McGregor + Pick 10 to Bulldogs for their Pick 5?

McGregor + Mattner + Pick 26 to Bulldogs for their Pick 5?

seriously, pick 5 is pretty much a gun player, tall or small, so why would we flip it off for pick 10 and an average tall? two average players does not equal one gun player.

we have average talls already, and if we want to add to our stocks of average talls, it wont involve parting with pick 5.

 

[stefoid]

Talls are far more valuable than smalls and as much as we wish we could we don't actually control what clubs recruiters think/do.

Besides - if we wanted a vanilla midfielder/defender that badly we could just use pick 40 odd on one. Mcmahon is soft as shit and his pace is his only benefit. Pass

you can add brilliant kicking off either foot at full pace to his list of pros, but you have the cons pretty much covered. its hard to know what pick 10 is worth in this draft. does anyone know how deep the genuine gun talent goes before its a raffle? I think we would struggle to get pick 10 as well, but ports first pick might be an option.

macmahon could blossom into a deadly winger, albeit one-way.

 

[Truck Rutten]

seriously, pick 5 is pretty much a gun player, tall or small, so why would we flip it off for pick 10 and an average tall? two average players does not equal one gun player.

we have average talls already, and if we want to add to our stocks of average talls, it wont involve parting with pick 5.

You guys are set with on-ballers. I would have thought moving down 5 places would be well worth it to secure a guy who can walk straight into your team and hold down FF. Of course you could go for an 18 year old KPP who at best will take 3 or 4 years to be playing consistently well at AFL level, or at worst doesn't make it at all. Unless you guys want to piss away West and Johnson's last years at the club, you need a key forward who is ready to go now and McGrug looks like being the best available in this year's trade period.

 

[stefoid]

Because you want McGregor, and you don't have the players (aside from Griffen) that we're after, so we'll want the pick or a trade won't happen.

agreed. trade wont happen.

 

[stefoid]

You guys are set with on-ballers. I would have thought moving down 5 places would be well worth it to secure a guy who can walk straight into your team and hold down FF. Of course you could go for an 18 year old KPP who at best will take 3 or 4 years to be playing consistently well at AFL level, or at worst doesn't make it at all. Unless you guys want to piss away West and Johnson's last years at the club, you need a key forward who is ready to go now and McGrug looks like being the best available in this year's trade period.

we put in two very differnt performances in 06 and 07 with the same forward line which lacked talls. our needs actually arent that clear cut - it was the midfield that let us down the most.

you are wasting your time if you think someone like mcgregor is worth upgrading from pick 10 to pick 5. and clayton aways drafts the best available. if thats ebert or whoever, then thats who he will draft. the doggies supporters are just hoping like hell that he thinks mcevoy, henderson or rance is the best available at pick 5.

 

[macca23]

we put in two very differnt performances in 06 and 07 with the same forward line which lacked talls. our needs actually arent that clear cut - it was the midfield that let us down the most.

you are wasting your time if you think someone like mcgregor is worth upgrading from pick 10 to pick 5. and clayton aways drafts the best available. if thats ebert or whoever, then thats who he will draft. the doggies supporters are just hoping like hell that he thinks mcevoy, henderson or rance is the best available at pick 5.

I can't see the Bulldogs drafting another small.

You have a swag of running players and virtually zero contested marking players.

In a draft that is regarded as on the weakish side, it's definitely a case of look after needs rather than stockpile many of the same.

Your coach has made it clear that he wants to trade to get a marking tall up forward.

IMO McGregor is a huge chance to end up as a Bulldog - if Freo haven't already nabbed him.

 

[brown30]

Because you want McGregor, and you don't have the players (aside from Griffen) that we're after, so we'll want the pick or a trade won't happen.

You've already proven you know shit all about off season matters. Please step aside.

 

[brown30]

I can't see the Bulldogs drafting another small.

Gotta remember though, the bulldogs take the approach that they draft best available regardless of position and if they believe that's a small then so be it.

 

[Boundryump]

I don't believe any draft is weak...says who? look at past years and players who have been picked between 40-50 selection that have turned out to be gun players.
Anyway the crows will stuff this up again they will pick a player and not give him a run and after two years he will want to go home.
If anything draft an SA boy.

 

[stefoid]

I can't see the Bulldogs drafting another small.

You have a swag of running players and virtually zero contested marking players.

In a draft that is regarded as on the weakish side, it's definitely a case of look after needs rather than stockpile many of the same.

Your coach has made it clear that he wants to trade to get a marking tall up forward.

IMO McGregor is a huge chance to end up as a Bulldog - if Freo haven't already nabbed him.

most dogs supporters would agree with you, but we know better. clayton drafts the best and thats that. every year the phantom drafts have us taking the next best tall and most years we dont - ray, higgins, etc... thank god everitt was deemed the best at 13 last year. but clayton then went on to draft 3 skinny aboriginal flankers. its not as if we were screaming out for skinny flankers.

so.. yes we will try to get mcgregor in a deal that doesnt involve pick 5, thats about all you can count on.

 

[Truck Rutten]

we put in two very differnt performances in 06 and 07 with the same forward line which lacked talls. our needs actually arent that clear cut - it was the midfield that let us down the most.

you are wasting your time if you think someone like mcgregor is worth upgrading from pick 10 to pick 5. and clayton aways drafts the best available. if thats ebert or whoever, then thats who he will draft. the doggies supporters are just hoping like hell that he thinks mcevoy, henderson or rance is the best available at pick 5.

McGregor is not worth dropping down 5 spots? Turn it up. Look we'd all love to believe that any top 10 draft pick is going to be a sure thing but the reality is that some of them will be busts. If you guys are intent on drafting best available, then you are going to have to trade for your needs. I would have thought it's beyond debate that you need a big key forward who can either take a catch or bring the ball to ground.

 

[Crow-mo]

seriously, pick 5 is pretty much a gun player, tall or small, so why would we flip it off for pick 10 and an average tall?

really? a gun player? like Farren Ray, tim walsh, tom williams etc. absolute guns?

pick 5 in a shitty draft... who knows.

 

[Crow-mo]

I don't believe any draft is weak...says who? look at past years and players who have been picked between 40-50 selection that have turned out to be gun players.

umm... that's the point. in a weak draft, the gun players turn up late because there are no standouts. would you want a high pick in 2002?

 

[CrowHop]

really? a gun player? like Farren Ray, tim walsh, tom williams etc. absolute guns?

pick 5 in a shitty draft... who knows.

X Clarke, Polak (both in 'super' drafts), Vance, Tom Gilligan

 

[-VC-]

I don't believe any draft is weak...says who? look at past years and players who have been picked between 40-50 selection that have turned out to be gun players.
Anyway the crows will stuff this up again they will pick a player and not give him a run and after two years he will want to go home.
If anything draft an SA boy.

Did you see the South Australian U/18 team play? There is a long gap after Ebert. Then there's an even longer gap after Greenwood.

 

[stefoid]

really? a gun player? like Farren Ray, tim walsh, tom williams etc. absolute guns?

pick 5 in a shitty draft... who knows.

yep, a gun player. FWIW ray (pcik 4) and williams (pick 6) are clayton specials - players with outstaining athletic abilities that came late to footy and will take longer to develop. this is essentially williams first year given he lost his first two to a stress fracture of the foot. I consider myself a fair judge of footy talent and you can take it from me that they will both be very good players when they come into their own. walsh - well an average player who wasnt even given the chance to be average due to a string of neverending injures.

However. list all the top 5 players from the last 10 years and whats the gun to dud ratio? very much in favour of guns. picks 6-10 however, is a different story. pick 5 >>>> pick 10.

 

[Crow-mo]

yep, a gun player. FWIW ray (pcik 4) and williams (pick 6) are clayton specials - players with outstaining athletic abilities that came late to footy and will take longer to develop. this is essentially williams first year given he lost his first two to a stress fracture of the foot. I consider myself a fair judge of footy talent and you can take it from me that they will both be very good players when they come into their own. walsh - well an average player who wasnt even given the chance to be average due to a string of neverending injures.

very funny.

However. list all the top 5 players from the last 10 years and whats the gun to dud ratio? very much in favour of guns. picks 6-10 however, is a different story. pick 5 >>>> pick 10.

really? why don't you do just that, demonstrate this certainty of getting a gun?

 

[stefoid]

very funny.




really? why don't you do just that, demonstrate this certainty of getting a gun?

thanks, but the comedy in this situation is the delusion that a club will trade down pick 5 to pick 10 for mcgregor.

but since we're having a delusional laugh, ow about pick 10 for macmahon. no? gee, but I want it to be true...

 

[Cap]

thanks, but the comedy in this situation is the delusion that a club will trade down pick 5 to pick 10 for mcgregor.

but since we're having a delusional laugh, ow about pick 10 for macmahon. no? gee, but I want it to be true...

well i suppose you club will be happy with all those tall forwards you have......