Draft Talk

[catempire]

Bomber also stated that pick 7 was going on the best available.

That's true. I just revisited the article:

"Speedy, athletic, skilful midfielders," Thompson replied without hesitation when quizzed on the club's areas of need on Wednesday from the Australian Institute of Sport.

"(But) we're just trying with our pick seven to get a really top-line player, another star of the Geelong Football Club - whether he's a tall or a small or a back or a forward or a midfielder - just someone who fits the criteria of being a really good player."

Still, I'm not convinced that we won't see a surprise selection at pick 7. If they decide to overlook Seller and Thorpe (if either are available) then it's much harder to pinpoint who they will go with. It's probably out of about 10 players.

 

[Metallica_Man]

ALBERT PROUD - Small Midfielder, Mt Gravatt, Qld. DOB: 06/06/88. Ht: 179cm. Wt: 80kg.
"A young indigenous left-foot speedster who is very talented. Has been dogged by injuries all year - stress fractures, shoulder, rolled ankle, and hasn't been up to peak fitness a lot. Last year he was being labelled a top 5 pick but he's slipped away from that a little. That doesn't mean he's lost his talent," said Qld under-18 coach Craig McRae.
Qld Captain 2006. AIS-AFL graduate 2005.

 

[cat_fanatic]

Thanks for info M_man,

If we take Pris or Hogan with 57 i'd be pretty happy.

 

[DBAH0]

Sellar and Thorp are both top 5 caliber talents compared to others who are probably going to go top 10.

Sellar would be going top 3 if he didn't have such an injury - interrupted season with the flu at the champs etc.

I just don't see, if you are going to pick the best available, you can overlook either, for a midfielder like Boak who'd probably go in the mid teens if he was overlooked.

If they do that, it screams to me that we're picking to fill a need (that I think isn't as bad as people make it out to be, if Tenace and Varcoe can come on from a better midfield coach) instead of taking a potential star.

 

[TheTimberMerchant#14]

would love bacher houli to slip down to 25, is a real game breaker, 60m kick either foot, awesome

 

[cat_fanatic]

would love bacher houli to slip down to 25, is a real game breaker, 60m kick either foot, awesome

He probably will slip to between 20 and 30... would be a great pickup at 25 IMO.

 

[Turbocat]

Sellar and Thorp are both top 5 caliber talents compared to others who are probably going to go top 10.

Sellar would be going top 3 if he didn't have such an injury - interrupted season with the flu at the champs etc.
I just don't see, if you are going to pick the best available, you can overlook either, for a midfielder like Boak who'd probably go in the mid teens if he was overlooked.

If they do that, it screams to me that we're picking to fill a need (that I think isn't as bad as people make it out to be, if Tenace and Varcoe can come on from a better midfield coach) instead of taking a potential star.

Another thing is that he is very bottom aged. Sellar born 24/03/89 only gets inside the draft age by 6 odd weeks. Dare I say , he would be a very early pick next year with a half decent 07 U18 Champs.

 

[jim boy]

I just hope that we dont try to be too clever with our first pick. In this year of a potential the like s that have rarely been seen , Id hate to end up with another Mackie. Not that Mackie is a dud , but Im still unconvinced that he was a P7 , that he was worthy of the earlist pick we have had in 16 years. He was always going to be a long termer that would struggle to find his ideal position being a 192cm twig shaped player.

I think you're being a bit harsh, if you look at the 2002 draft, which was very ordainary, then pick 7 is probably about right.

 

[BigCat1]

I have no problem with taking a midfielder with our 2nd and last pick but pick 7 should be to take the best available player. That will be Thorpe, Selwood or Sellar. Full stop.

Watch as we take Boak or Connors. Both really good players who won't be around past pick 15 but the top 7 is clear cut according to nearlly all the recruiting managers. Geelong will pick on needs which is really dangerous.

 

[Budda 230]

I have no problem with taking a midfielder with our 2nd and last pick but pick 7 should be to take the best available player. That will be Thorpe, Selwood or Sellar. Full stop.

Watch as we take Boak or Connors. Both really good players who won't be around past pick 15 but the top 7 is clear cut according to nearlly all the recruiting managers. Geelong will pick on needs which is really dangerous.

I totally agree with you. I'm starting to get really concerned!

 

[Metallica_Man]

Anyone else want a profile on someone?

 

[TGTOA]

I have no problem with taking a midfielder with our 2nd and last pick but pick 7 should be to take the best available player. That will be Thorpe, Selwood or Sellar. Full stop.

Watch as we take Boak or Connors. Both really good players who won't be around past pick 15 but the top 7 is clear cut according to nearlly all the recruiting managers. Geelong will pick on needs which is really dangerous.

Totally agree. Although I don't think it's picking based on needs, more picking based on concern that someone we'd really like to take with our second pick won't be there by the second round, so we'll take him with our first pick instead. That sort of logic only works later in the draft, where there's a chance that the guy you rated higher, but didn't take, is still there with your next pick. If Sellar, Thorpe or Selwood are available (and one of them will be) and we pass on them, watch the Pies and Saints pounce.

There's a chance Boak will still be around by pick 25 anyway. Even if not, there'll be plenty of other quality mids who'll drop.

 

[bulletproof]

Refer to my post of about a month ago, barring exceptional circumstances (i.e there is a big shock in who falls through) Geelong will be taking Travis Boak with pick 7.

 

[Turbocat]

I think you're being a bit harsh, if you look at the 2002 draft, which was very ordainary, then pick 7 is probably about right.

Harsh? I think there is no doubt that we have ended up with a decent player but to my mind a pick as early as that was , in any year should perfrom at an earlier stage than Mackie has , to be considered a good pick.
OK , maybe a tad harsh.2002 was not a deep draft , maybe it gives us an idea what the 2007 draft will be like , but even at the time I felt we should have taken McIntosh.He too would hasve takebn time but at the end could have ended up with a key player. I remember Laycock as being of interest and he too has hardly set the world on fire. So no doubt its no easy task picking the best kid but 2002 had some good kids

Either of the Selwoods , infact Adam who is at Wc , taken at P53 seems to have been overlooked in a big way. Crowley at Freo has also turned out to be a very handy player. What about Schammer or Rivers or Brent Staker.
Maybe these guys didnt really standout at the time but all have probably develloped at a faster rate than the Mackster , which probably means that we stuffed up in the assessment of the talent available considering Mackie will probably be never more than a member of the choir , not the lead singer.

 

[bulletproof]

A lot of the recruiting people actually really rate Boak, just because he has appeared down the list in phantom drafts on bigfooty doesn’t mean he is not highly rated by the recruiters. Boak would be a much better selection than Sellwood from what I have heard

 

[jim boy]

Why are you mentioning players picked later in the draft such as Selwood or Rivers, would they not have been seen as bad picks at the time? Hindsight can be a wonderful thing.

The thing about Mackie was that he had not come up on many people's radars, principally becuase of the competition he was playing in, rather than being an average performer in a main comp like the TAC. That he hadn't been noticed by the scribes here doesn't mean that he wasn't assessed thoroughly before-hand by the people that count - the recruiters. And by all accounts of the time, some other teams had an eye on him and he would have gone shortly after.

 

[krisholio14]

they look to have finally found the right spot in the side for the boy mackie and im looking forward to him justifying the no 7 pick next season.

i think i did quite well in the phantom draft. im confident all of my selections (collard,allen amd vasilevski) will go on to be good players in this comp for whatever they wind up at. however, there are any number of players i would like to see at the club next year out of this draft. with our picks (not including hawkins) we will get at least one player who will go on and be a VG player. but the potential is there to get at least one more.

i think the most important thing here is that we are getting a top 3 player in the third round, but still have a top 10 pick. we have to make that pick count, really ram home the advantage. the proof may not be immediate, but time WILL tell

 

[Conan Troutman]

Anyone else want a profile on someone?

Yeah man, Connors if you could - that'd be great.
Seen a few people mentioning Connors and Geelong, but not heard much about him myself.

 

[Metallica_Man]

Yeah man, Connors if you could - that'd be great.
Seen a few people mentioning Connors and Geelong, but not heard much about him myself.

DANIEL CONNORS - Medium Forward, Bendigo Pioneers, Vic. DOB: 22/09/88. Ht: 182cm. Wt: 77kg.
"Daniel knuckled down over pre-season and really set himself to have a good year. Played well over the carnival and he's an exciting player who has pace, is prepared to take players, and the game on. We played him in the midfield, in defence, but mainly on the wing. From where he came from in 2005 his development has been pretty good," said Bendigo Pioneers coach Mark Ellis.
Vic Country representative, All Australian 2006, TAC Cup Team Of The Year 2006. From Echuca FC.

 

[Conan Troutman]

Thanks MM, much appreciated.
Thanks for the other profiles too, they've been a good read. It's interesting seeing it from the coaches p.o.v.

 

[GeeCat]

Wouldn't all coaches just give their respective troops are nice wrap?

 

[Turbocat]

Why are you mentioning players picked later in the draft such as Selwood or Rivers, would they not have been seen as bad picks at the time? Hindsight can be a wonderful thing.

The thing about Mackie was that he had not come up on many people's radars, principally becuase of the competition he was playing in, rather than being an average performer in a main comp like the TAC. That he hadn't been noticed by the scribes here doesn't mean that he wasn't assessed thoroughly before-hand by the people that count - the recruiters. And by all accounts of the time, some other teams had an eye on him and he would have gone shortly after.

Why am I mentioning players picked later in the draft such as Selwood or Rivers? You stated , Jim , that the 2002 draft was very ordinary so I thought Id show a few players who I thought have develloped at a better rate than Mackie.
I state again , I dont deny him a spot on our list , he is a handy type who will only get better but here we are 4 years down the track and he is not a player who is a key member of our side which to my mind any first round pick is expected to become before that type of time, like Corey and Bartel for eg.

Put it this way.Who ever we pick this Sat with P7, would you be happy with him really only starting show some worth in 2010?

 

[GeeCat]

Put it this way.Who ever we pick this Sat with P7, would you be happy with him really only starting show some worth in 2010?

Well, it's all about the expectations isn't it?

I mean, I can understand the general expectation of a 1st Round player, but I suppose the other side to the argument is that, whilst we're in the middle of looking back, the rest of the pack hasn't looked too sharp either (at least, not yet). Perhaps that's one way of drawing things in context when comparing.

 

[My5t3r10u5]

Put it this way.Who ever we pick this Sat with P7, would you be happy with him really only starting show some worth in 2010?

Absolutely, if they became a gun. It's taken Travis Johnstone years to show something but most Melbourne supporters will tell you it has been worth the wait. Same with Luke Hodge. Big deal if an 18 year old takes 4 years to develop if they develop into a Chris Judd or Jonathon Brown. That's why we have lists of 40 odd players plus rookie lists - to give players time to develop. If we are drafting players based on what they offer in the first 4 years rather than what they will offer us long term we need to get some new recruiters!

 

[Turbocat]

Absolutely, if they became a gun. It's taken Travis Johnstone years to show something but most Melbourne supporters will tell you it has been worth the wait. Same with Luke Hodge. Big deal if an 18 year old takes 4 years to develop if they develop into a Chris Judd or Jonathon Brown. That's why we have lists of 40 odd players plus rookie lists - to give players time to develop. If we are drafting players based on what they offer in the first 4 years rather than what they will offer us long term we need to get some new recruiters!

The thing is Judd and Brown didn't take 4 years to show their worth. Johnston has taken time , its true , but at least he has develloped into a player who is a key play maker on the ball.

To my mind , if a player drafted early and who takes 4 years to devellop , it indicates that the judgement at draft time was slightly off.

Four worthless years is neally never followed by 6 champion years!

A true champ shows something a lot quicker than that. GA29 showed more in his first year than Mackie did in first 3 and 1/2 and I dont see him suddenly becoming a player that goes past Little Gary in a hurry. Infact the players I mentioned didnt take 4 years to show something ,they just kept develloping and become players that have passed, not just Mackie , but several other players picked before them.Id be very happy to have either of the Selwood at the club rather than Mackie , infact one on each Back Flank wouldnt be bad.

Look I dont wont this to become a 'Get Mackie " thing , Im taliking more about draft judgement and although its tough its what they are paid to do.They get hours and hours of prep to get it right and you live with their choices for years.Players get missed , no problem , I understand that. It happens every year Bartrum last year played neally every game and probably has passed Mackies output already and he was drafted in an ordinary draft as a very late pick.

If we draft Boak on Sat with our P7 , I expect him to press for a game immediately. I cant see any reason he cant show at least as much as Bartel or Gary Junior and press for selection in the pre-season games unless he really is not a genuine top10 player in this super draft. After all with most of the top10 as tall , and we pick a mid , we basically are picking the 2nd or 3rd best mid going round. This week Turner is talking him up in the paper, if his discription is accurate then Id say he is the type that will suit us but.. others on this board seem to have differing opinions on his disposal. This sound like Tenace , all over again. Tenace was going to be this kid with good skills yet Im yet to see the type of kicking on either foot that Id call Johnston like. The kid in the GF , Batsanis impressed me in this area, if he has his skill with more pace id be very happy.