-
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
how did we go in the draft
- Thread starter snappy
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Ed_Gein
Very good. But brick not hit back!
- Dec 17, 2003
- 17,871
- 12,042
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- Glasgow Rangers, Liverpool, Storm.
15 SYDNEY - Daniel O'Keefe - Geelong Falcons - 25/10/1988 - 183.7cm - 74.1kg
Prolific possession winner with very good evasive skills, strong overhead for his size and smart around goals. Uses ball well and good in traffic. Vic Country U18 representative this year. Played 16 games for the Falcons this year, averaging 22 disposals and kicking 32 goals. From Warrnambool Football Club.
49 SYDNEY - Daniel Currie - Northern Knights - 15/02/1989 - 200.4cm - 90.6kg
Mobile defender/ruckman who is strong overhead. Only 17 years of age. Had a very promising year, representing Vic Metro in the NAB AFL U18 Championships. From Eltham Football Club.
65 SYDNEY - Peter Faulks - Calder Cannons - 24/04/1988 - 192.2cm - 74kg
Key defender who is rarely beaten. Recorded the best standing vertical jump overall (NAB AFL Draft Camp/State Screening Session) with a leap of 74cm at the Victorian State Screening Session, as well as a sub 3sec 20m sprint (2.93sec).
79 SYDNEY - Jesse White - Southport Sharks - 9/01/1988 - 196.3 - 101.4
Strong and mobile big man who was a former State basketball representative. Showed he can play forward, back or in the ruck at representative level for Queensland over the past two years.
Prolific possession winner with very good evasive skills, strong overhead for his size and smart around goals. Uses ball well and good in traffic. Vic Country U18 representative this year. Played 16 games for the Falcons this year, averaging 22 disposals and kicking 32 goals. From Warrnambool Football Club.
49 SYDNEY - Daniel Currie - Northern Knights - 15/02/1989 - 200.4cm - 90.6kg
Mobile defender/ruckman who is strong overhead. Only 17 years of age. Had a very promising year, representing Vic Metro in the NAB AFL U18 Championships. From Eltham Football Club.
65 SYDNEY - Peter Faulks - Calder Cannons - 24/04/1988 - 192.2cm - 74kg
Key defender who is rarely beaten. Recorded the best standing vertical jump overall (NAB AFL Draft Camp/State Screening Session) with a leap of 74cm at the Victorian State Screening Session, as well as a sub 3sec 20m sprint (2.93sec).
79 SYDNEY - Jesse White - Southport Sharks - 9/01/1988 - 196.3 - 101.4
Strong and mobile big man who was a former State basketball representative. Showed he can play forward, back or in the ruck at representative level for Queensland over the past two years.
- Thread starter
- #3
good on you ed.. dosnt sound so bad at all.. im happy to hear we got a couple of tall defenders, and another o'keefe cant do us any harm. sounds like a possible kirk replacment in a few years.. also like the fact he can kick a few goals as well. 
It's all exciting.
I like the sound of all of them.
Aw and Daniel Currie is younger then me!
I like the sound of all of them.
Aw and Daniel Currie is younger then me!
Wow! Good, healthy, fit, talented and TALL players. Just what we needed!
Have you been on RWO today? Someone posted a link to Jesse White's myspace. He's cute!
Yuh, but who knows when they will play..
I don't think we'll see any of them within the next 2 years.. hm, maybe in 2008, but not next year.
Hey, do you remember reading about how Auskick had a twin brother? He should have been in the draft!!
Further discussion on Simon Phillips, his twin brother, and his living arrangements has been moved to The "Roomies" Thread
Please keep all discussion on those topics in that thread - and not in all the others
Congratulations. You're now old!
I remember when the first player younger than me was drafted, and it hits home this year when kids born in 1988/89!!!!! are getting picked. Bloody hell, these kids were not much more than kindergarten when I left school.
And there'd be many people on this board who have seen players younger than them played 300 matches and retired. Now that's old.
Oi! watch yourself!
For what it's worth, there are no 300 gamers younger than me
(but plenty of retired players)
For what it's worth, there are no 300 gamers younger than me
(but plenty of retired players)
Mark Ricciuto is already there, and only a couple of months older
Barnaby French is retired, and he's younger than me - much younger I'm sure (there's no way that guy is much older than 26/27 eh Charlie?)
Barnaby French is retired, and he's younger than me - much younger I'm sure (there's no way that guy is much older than 26/27 eh Charlie?)
- Banned
- #17
All of the draftees sound like good players that will be handy for us. We needed key defenders and we got them.
I would put O'Keefe in for round 1, at the expense of Ben Mathews.
I would put O'Keefe in for round 1, at the expense of Ben Mathews.
I would think he's in line behind Jarred Moore, Matthew Laidlaw and probably Tim Schmidt for Benny's spot.
Having seen O'keefe play I wouldn't mark him down for a place in the team just yet.
He gets a lot of uncontested ball, playing wide and I'm not sure he's a true midfielder. He does remind me a bit of R O'Keefe, but he reminds me more of a guy called Bo Nixon, who spent some time with Coll & Haw.
Some quotes from the AFL website;
Barham was effusive about Vic Country Under-18 representative O'Keefe, a dynamic left-footed midfielder and prolific possession-winner who won the 2006 Geelong Falcons Best and Fairest easily. "He's a very, very talented player, a very smart player. I rated him very highly all the way along," said Barham.
Clearly Barham rated him more highly than other clubs. But my concern is that once again (unlike say Collingwood or West Coast in this draft) we didn't draft for need. We could have taken a highly rated KPP in M. Brown, but chose a tweener.
The fact that we drafted 3 talls at picks 49+ is largely irrelevant. All 3 are development players, Currie & Faulks body wise and White skill wise. If one of the 3 becomes a regular, down the track, we'll be doing well.
I'm afraid to my mind another unspectacular draft. One pick, essentially in the first 50 and we 'reach' for a guy who is in between a midfielder and a flanker. A handy player, but not an absolute certainty to play 100 games (which a first rounder, in a super draft, should do) and a player that doesn't address a need.
He gets a lot of uncontested ball, playing wide and I'm not sure he's a true midfielder. He does remind me a bit of R O'Keefe, but he reminds me more of a guy called Bo Nixon, who spent some time with Coll & Haw.
Some quotes from the AFL website;
Barham was effusive about Vic Country Under-18 representative O'Keefe, a dynamic left-footed midfielder and prolific possession-winner who won the 2006 Geelong Falcons Best and Fairest easily. "He's a very, very talented player, a very smart player. I rated him very highly all the way along," said Barham.
Clearly Barham rated him more highly than other clubs. But my concern is that once again (unlike say Collingwood or West Coast in this draft) we didn't draft for need. We could have taken a highly rated KPP in M. Brown, but chose a tweener.
The fact that we drafted 3 talls at picks 49+ is largely irrelevant. All 3 are development players, Currie & Faulks body wise and White skill wise. If one of the 3 becomes a regular, down the track, we'll be doing well.
I'm afraid to my mind another unspectacular draft. One pick, essentially in the first 50 and we 'reach' for a guy who is in between a midfielder and a flanker. A handy player, but not an absolute certainty to play 100 games (which a first rounder, in a super draft, should do) and a player that doesn't address a need.
- Banned
- #21
Only time will tell, you could be under-estimating all of them.
It WAS a super draft, as you called it. Which means that lower picks will be of a better quality than what they usually are.
But I think we should of gone for Eric McKenzie, he is a key defender who ended up going to West Coast with pick 29. I thought he was our backup plan if we didn't get Nathan Brown so I was surprised we didn't get him.
It WAS a super draft, as you called it. Which means that lower picks will be of a better quality than what they usually are.
But I think we should of gone for Eric McKenzie, he is a key defender who ended up going to West Coast with pick 29. I thought he was our backup plan if we didn't get Nathan Brown so I was surprised we didn't get him.
Having seen O'keefe play I wouldn't mark him down for a place in the team just yet.
He gets a lot of uncontested ball, playing wide and I'm not sure he's a true midfielder. He does remind me a bit of R O'Keefe, but he reminds me more of a guy called Bo Nixon, who spent some time with Coll & Haw.
Some quotes from the AFL website;
Barham was effusive about Vic Country Under-18 representative O'Keefe, a dynamic left-footed midfielder and prolific possession-winner who won the 2006 Geelong Falcons Best and Fairest easily. "He's a very, very talented player, a very smart player. I rated him very highly all the way along," said Barham.
Clearly Barham rated him more highly than other clubs. But my concern is that once again (unlike say Collingwood or West Coast in this draft) we didn't draft for need. We could have taken a highly rated KPP in M. Brown, but chose a tweener.
The fact that we drafted 3 talls at picks 49+ is largely irrelevant. All 3 are development players, Currie & Faulks body wise and White skill wise. If one of the 3 becomes a regular, down the track, we'll be doing well.
I'm afraid to my mind another unspectacular draft. One pick, essentially in the first 50 and we 'reach' for a guy who is in between a midfielder and a flanker. A handy player, but not an absolute certainty to play 100 games (which a first rounder, in a super draft, should do) and a player that doesn't address a need.
An interesting post. Thanks for the info.
I also am bemused about the "need" thing and also very late round ruck potential but so far it hasn't seemed to effect Swans (touching wood!). I simply accept that they know what they're doing.
Sydney have a completely different dilema than almost all other teams.
The ACTFL surely is not a strong enough development league eg when compared to SANFL? But what has worked over the last decade is trading youngsters or picks for mature age "proven ready to go" talent.
Also a "ready to go" high draft pick had they been taken, still has to displace an established dual GF player.... ahead of those already patiently waiting...not an easy task.
I was in a close position to view Leapin Leo last qtr GF (clearly with hammy trouble). It scares me that all Swans KPP backline stocks have played well above themselves and weight division, and Swans don't seem to have any obvious backups in the event of prolonged injury?
Good Luck to young O'keefe and others
- Banned
- #23
Vogels is a good KPP prospect and Faulks sounds like he will be a good defender for us in a couple of years.
In this draft, a 4th round pick is about as good as a 2nd round pick because the draft had A LOT of depth.
In this draft, a 4th round pick is about as good as a 2nd round pick because the draft had A LOT of depth.
Peter 'Colombo' Faulks is the lynchpin of whether this draft will be regarded as successful for us.
Daniel O'Keefe, as people have said, doesn't fill a short-term or probably even a medium-term need at the club: he was just picked on the basis of 'best available'. As long as Laidlaw, Moore, Schmidt, Thornton, Simpkin etc continue to come on, not much skin off the nose of the club if he takes several years to become a regular first-22 selection.
Daniel Currie: a 200cm+ 17yo who has shown plenty of 'potential'. Like, whatever. Project ruckmen. Gotta love 'em. Get back to me in 2010.
Jesse White: Just part of the 'get a big unit who has some athletic ability but isn't highly rated, give 'em a go and see what happens' KPP development policy. Statistically, Sydney would not be expecting that he is more than about a 10-15% chance of becoming a 100-gamer; probably not more than about a 30% chance of even playing a single game.
Whereas Colombo is a specialist full back, drafted as such. Come 2009 or thereabouts, we will be in desperate need of an automatic selection KPP defender who can play on opposition monsters and provide a bit of dash and creativity as well. That is to say, Leo Barry's replacement. If Colombo is it, then the 2006 draft has been a success. If not, it's been a failure.
From the reviews that are out there, I would have much preferred us to take either McKenzie or Mitch Brown (well-rated KPP defenders) at #15 and leave any smalls or mids to later picks. But the reviews that were out there had Danny Roach at #7 in the 1999 draft and Ryan O'Keefe at #56; so I'm happy to suspend judgment until I actually see the kids playing a bit.
That is to say, on the forums, Sydney had one of the poorer 2006 drafts. But luckily, footy isn't played on the forums.
Daniel O'Keefe, as people have said, doesn't fill a short-term or probably even a medium-term need at the club: he was just picked on the basis of 'best available'. As long as Laidlaw, Moore, Schmidt, Thornton, Simpkin etc continue to come on, not much skin off the nose of the club if he takes several years to become a regular first-22 selection.
Daniel Currie: a 200cm+ 17yo who has shown plenty of 'potential'. Like, whatever. Project ruckmen. Gotta love 'em. Get back to me in 2010.
Jesse White: Just part of the 'get a big unit who has some athletic ability but isn't highly rated, give 'em a go and see what happens' KPP development policy. Statistically, Sydney would not be expecting that he is more than about a 10-15% chance of becoming a 100-gamer; probably not more than about a 30% chance of even playing a single game.
Whereas Colombo is a specialist full back, drafted as such. Come 2009 or thereabouts, we will be in desperate need of an automatic selection KPP defender who can play on opposition monsters and provide a bit of dash and creativity as well. That is to say, Leo Barry's replacement. If Colombo is it, then the 2006 draft has been a success. If not, it's been a failure.
From the reviews that are out there, I would have much preferred us to take either McKenzie or Mitch Brown (well-rated KPP defenders) at #15 and leave any smalls or mids to later picks. But the reviews that were out there had Danny Roach at #7 in the 1999 draft and Ryan O'Keefe at #56; so I'm happy to suspend judgment until I actually see the kids playing a bit.
That is to say, on the forums, Sydney had one of the poorer 2006 drafts. But luckily, footy isn't played on the forums.
Agree that his is the most important selection.
Probably about right. At the same time, he offers a slightly different 'type' to each of those players (except perhaps Thornton and Simpkin, of which I know next to nothing). Laidlaw sounds like a Kennelly 'type', Moore is a lot like Paul Williams, Schmidt is an extractor. Whereas O'Keefe has been described variously as a bit of Nathan Brown and, most attractively, Luke Hodge. If he's a similar player to Hodge then we'll be very pleased to have a linebreaker who doesn't mind the physical stuff.
I see this as a very important selection. Agree that it's hit-and-miss but I think we'd be hoping like hell it's a 'hit'. Without Shaw and Ericksen, with Everitt 33 and Doyle... well, being Doyle - there's a lot riding on Currie by 2009.
Reading between the lines, Barham might have broken his own rule on this one. "He needs plenty of footy and he just needs to immerse himself in footy culture - he's a Queensland boy so he doesn't understand what's needed to make it. If he can turn that around then he's a chance. If we can't then he wont'."
Doesn't sound like he's too confident about the boy's attitude.
He's very slender, though. The comments about him revolve around him being fast and beating his opponent to the contest. If he puts on weight, as he'll need to, he risks losing that extra pace.
Absolutely. But I've grown accustomed to being frustrated on draft day.
What's done is done. Hopefully Barham knows what he is doing.
Similar threads
