KPD with our first pick?

[Dockernut]

Re-watched the Adelaide final on the weekend. Tex Walker's dominance in that game really drove home to me the importance of having quality tall defenders that can handle the 'gorillas'. I know most (including myself) have their hearts set on picking up a KPF at #17 to replace the Pav, but our defensive stocks are quite thin in terms of really quality tall defenders that can contain the big guys. I appreciate, it's not a news that this is going to be an issue when McPharlin goes, but I wonder what everyone's reaction would be if we went for a KPD at #17 over one of the KPFs in the draft who we didn't rate as highly?

 

[theGav56]

Quite simply if they are a significantly better selection than the KPF we should do that. No question in my mind. Actually same if a gun midfielder slips. But if Shaw is there I would be disappointed if we did not take him. It looks like he would represent good value and fill a need nicely.

 

[Dockers Fan]

Richards, Plowman, Siggins, Marsh, Rodda, Thurlow. Wallis, Howson

 

[the doc]

It will be an interesting draft as always. Re-read previous draft day running commentary and you can feel the BF annoyance. We have not taken a KPP in a while. I think we will take best available with our first and then look at needs with the latter 2. There appears some KPP depth around that range (mid-late second) and that will extend into the rookie draft (esp defenders)

 

[ritz]

Yeah I thought I had read somewhere ( d&t thread probably ) that there would be quite a few good ones available later in the draft?

 

[dexter_]

17 just seems like a weird spot to take a KPP. I'm struggling to think of any quality ones that have gone in the 15 - 40 range. Seems like they either go really early or really late.

I fully expect us to go small again with our first pick.

 

[freodog]

Rodda with our second or third pick

 

[Freo Dr]

Common theory is many good size kids can be reasonable KPD so often if they are only a KPD they generally go later (unless exceptionally good like Hurley maybe) or you take one of the best KPF prospects who can play either end. If it is not working for them as a forward at first or for their development you start them as a defender - Pavlich did and would be great as a defender but more value up forward. But yes a KPD is our second biggest need after KPF.

That said I reckon Faulks is coming along nicely as well and think he just needs a chance to show it at AFL level - needs Dawson to miss a game for this though probably.

 

[Righteo]

17 just seems like a weird spot to take a KPP. I'm struggling to think of any quality ones that have gone in the 15 - 40 range. Seems like they either go really early or really late.

I fully expect us to go small again with our first pick.

Precedence shouldn't in any way affect who we take at 17 though.

 

[strobe00]

Re-watched the Adelaide final on the weekend. Tex Walker's dominance in that game really drove home to me the importance of having quality tall defenders that can handle the 'gorillas'. I know most (including myself) have their hearts set on picking up a KPF at #17 to replace the Pav, but our defensive stocks are quite thin in terms of really quality tall defenders that can contain the big guys. I appreciate, it's not a news that this is going to be an issue when McPharlin goes, but I wonder what everyone's reaction would be if we went for a KPD at #17 over one of the KPFs in the draft who we didn't rate as highly?

Splitting hairs maybe, but Walker destroyed Silvagni on the lead... don't remember him wrestling as frequently. Good KPDs need to be able to wrestle (which is what I think of when folks talk about counteracting KPF gorillas) and stop them on the lead as well. Silvagni used to be pretty reasonable with the wrestling bit, but nowhere near enough pace to stop the lead in the Adelaide final.

But completely agree with your point. If there isn't a good KPF available with our first, then a good KPD (or even a mid if they slipped a bit) would be a nice pick-up. Can still go for needs in later rounds if there isn't an obvious candidate for the first.

Would still like to see us pick up Shaw. But if he's gone, I'd hate us to burn the pick on an OK KPF while there were still terrific KPD and mid prospects around.

Just no half back flankers with our first. Please.

Unless Simpson is a HBF... in which case I'll be pretty happy.

 

[23cmonShane!]

Best Available will be picked.

 

[Scham]

Jaksch can play at both ends, develop him where the need lies the most.

If we take Colledge and/or Herbert with our later picks then Jaksch can play back.

There's also the chance of picking a half decent KPD in the rookie draft (Corr, Rodda, Luccon, Brand, Siggins, Bower etc)

 

[Leatherpoizoned]

I just want anyone over 192 and can play KPP. I'm not fussed forward or back.

 

[Bulldocker]

Jaksch can play at both ends, develop him where the need lies the most.

If we take Colledge and/or Herbert with our later picks then Jaksch can play back.

There's also the chance of picking a half decent KPD in the rookie draft (Corr, Rodda, Luccon, Brand, Siggins, Bower etc)

Yep. Will be interesting if, by some chance, both Shaw and Jaksch are available at our pick. Nice dilemma for Bondy and co. and KPFs are hard to come by. I would still favour Shaw above all other options and then get the best available KPD with pick 2 or 3.

 

[Sman-21]

NO
Defenders are alot easier to get that key forwards.
A very good defender can go pretty much unnoticed so they can be picked up in the draft cheaply and even in rookie drafts.

Key forwards stand out, any half decent young key forward gets noticed so its much harder to get very good ones cheaply.

Plus we have guys capable of bulking up that can play as key backs in the squad.

We have noone coming through to play key forward.

As usual though they will play it safe and pick a guy that can either make it as a midfielder or a flanker.

 

[Jezzitizle]

If they think that the kpfs are too risky and there is a very talented kpd then why not? It would be nice to have a potential 200 game full back or centre half back running around in the WAFL for peel next year.

imo to get a flag you are better off having a rock solid defence and a reasonable forward line than the reverse. Although Geelong circa 2008 disagree with me.

 

[Kickett Punches Read]

I don't know why, given both of their history, but I for some reason have more confidence in Luke mcpharlin a body lasting the distance over the next two years than I do pav's, so I'm hoping for shaw. But either kpf or kpf would be good providing they are te best kpp at the time

 

[Proud Bogan]

I don't know why, given both of their history, but I for some reason have more confidence in Luke mcpharlin a body lasting the distance over the next two years than I do pav's, so I'm hoping for shaw. But either kpf or kpf would be good providing they are te best kpp at the time

????

One of the marvels of Pav's career has been his durability. I would hazard a guess that Luke has been far more injury prone.

May be wrong though.

 

[valkorum]

McPharlin
2000 - 4
2001 - 8
2002 - 11
2003 - 12
2004 - 16
2005 - 19
2006 - 22
2007 - 21
2008 - 20
2009 - 18
2010 - 17
2011 - 20
2012 - 21
Total = 209


Pavlich
2000 - 18
2001 - 21
2002 - 22
2003 - 23
2004 - 22
2005 - 22
2006 - 25
2007 - 22
2008 - 19
2009 - 19
2010 - 23
2011 - 20
2012 - 23
Total = 279

 

[freo84]

^ Damn Pav is a beast......

If we take a defender then wouldn't that defender then have to contend with the defenders we have already thus reducing his exposure at the top level.?

Why wouldn't we take a KPF who we can play under the guidence of Pav in as many games as we can.

 

[Kram]

17 just seems like a weird spot to take a KPP. I'm struggling to think of any quality ones that have gone in the 15 - 40 range. Seems like they either go really early or really late.

Harry Taylor or Tippett?

 

[Taylor]

An 18 year old KPD probably wouldn't get a go in any AFL level team. Daniel Talia is 21.
By the time "N. Recruit" is 21, and assuming they have gained the size required to compete, McPharlin would be gone, Dawson would be thirty and Faulks might be looking for help.

Sometimes I can't tell if a key defender ever really has a reputation for quality, key forwards can kick a bag of goals and look like a superstar and if they do that regularly then come up against a key defender who restricts him it makes the KPD look good, by only by proxy.

I expect KPD to slip further than the more "obviously" talented key forwards.

 

[Freo_4eva]

Jaksch can play both ends.. if he is at 17 take him. As earlier mentioned, i reckon defenders can be found much lower in the draft / converted from other areas of the field.

 

[Righteo]

Jaksch can play both ends.. if he is at 17 take him. As earlier mentioned, i reckon defenders can be found much lower in the draft / converted from other areas of the field.

Been doing a bit of reading up on Jaksch after seeing a few mocks having us taking him, seems a real prospect and I would be reasonably happy with either him or Shaw at 17.

 

[Taylor]

I didn't expect Jaksch to get past pick 10?