Skippos's 2015 Draft Resource

[JAMES_B_101]

I was actually going to ask about Burton as well, does he have to be caked a key forward? Surely at 190 he'll be one that can get recruited to a club with good key forwards and get used as a goal kicking lead up medium forward? I hate using 'third tall forward' as I believe there is no such thing as a genuine third tall forward. If he has such good leading patterns then he wouldn't even get in the way of stay at home type key forwards or mobile talls that like to roam up the ground. He'd be a genuinely dangerous player at any team really at his height, given he sounds like he is a productive forward.

 

[Skippos]

hey Skippos, you're probably in the know about Burton seeing as you're from Adelaide.

With that injury, I'd assume we're unlikely to see him this season? Think he'll still get drafted even though he's probably likely to slip down the ranking?

Murmurs that he'll be back in July but I'm far from certain.

Like Lever, he showed enough last year to still be a first round for mine. He plays a position that we can more accurately model the transition than most, with the things that make forwards dominant a AFL level far harder to learn and more likely to be already present at junior level. His forward smarts, leading patterns and hands aren't something that disappear, given the type of forward he is is far more dependent on mental skill and that's something that doesn't deteriorate with injury I can also be more confident that what we saw last year is a good enough background to be confident in him.

 

[Skippos]

I was actually going to ask about Burton as well, does he have to be caked a key forward? Surely at 190 he'll be one that can get recruited to a club with good key forwards and get used as a goal kicking lead up medium forward? I hate using 'third tall forward' as I believe there is no such thing as a genuine third tall forward. If he has such good leading patterns then he wouldn't even get in the way of stay at home type key forwards or mobile talls that like to roam up the ground. He'd be a genuinely dangerous player at any team really at his height, given he sounds like he is a productive forward.

I believe he measured in at 191 last year. Growth is possible.

Assuming he stays at that height, there's still a role for him at this level. Pavlich is 192 - he's not going to be a bust for the sake of one or two centimetres.

He could conceivably play a Gunston or Crameri role, but I think he can be better. I think he can genuinely be a number two forward (like how darling is at 190) or even elevate himself to a Pavlich type # forward. If you're explosive, strong through the hands and lead to the right spots, at 191 a bloke can easily lead an attack.

 

[Old navy]

I believe he measured in at 191 last year. Growth is possible.

Assuming he stays at that height, there's still a role for him at this level. Pavlich is 192 - he's not going to be a bust for the sake of one or two centimetres.

He could conceivably play a Gunston or Crameri role, but I think he can be better. I think he can genuinely be a number two forward (like how darling is at 190) or even elevate himself to a Pavlich type # forward. If you're explosive, strong through the hands and lead to the right spots, at 191 a bloke can easily lead an attack.

I like a young Tex Walker as a comparison.. Tex when drafted was 189cm IIRC.. He now stand 192cm

What do think about Kieran Agius? He is now listed as 189cm and has a later birth date.
Is he more your lead up medium forward ? Or could he become a big bodied mid ?

 

[Skippos]

I like a young Tex Walker as a comparison.. Tex when drafted was 189cm IIRC.. He now stand 192cm

What do think about Kieran Agius? He is now listed as 189cm and has a later birth date.
Is he more your lead up medium forward ? Or could he become a big bodied mid ?

Tex is a far more physical player.

Agius has a lower chance than Brent Harvey of becoming a big bodied inside mid. He's as outside as they come and has no interest in winning contested ball. He's best played as the primary target out of the forward line I feel which, with his style, isn't viable. He's yet to really impose himself at a high level in any position, having struggled off a wing and half back. He's still an elite kick with some real forward smarts but at the moment it's all upside and no real exposed form here and now.

 

[JAMES_B_101]

I believe he measured in at 191 last year. Growth is possible.

Assuming he stays at that height, there's still a role for him at this level. Pavlich is 192 - he's not going to be a bust for the sake of one or two centimetres.

He could conceivably play a Gunston or Crameri role, but I think he can be better. I think he can genuinely be a number two forward (like how darling is at 190) or even elevate himself to a Pavlich type # forward. If you're explosive, strong through the hands and lead to the right spots, at 191 a bloke can easily lead an attack.

Does he have a good ground level game? I think he's a top 5 player in this draft as I'm not one to believe the broken leg will really affect his development too much. A club looking for a goal kicker should pick him up. Will end up a steal if taken after pick 8.

 

[Diehardbomber]

Murmurs that he'll be back in July but I'm far from certain.

Like Lever, he showed enough last year to still be a first round for mine. He plays a position that we can more accurately model the transition than most, with the things that make forwards dominant a AFL level far harder to learn and more likely to be already present at junior level. His forward smarts, leading patterns and hands aren't something that disappear, given the type of forward he is is far more dependent on mental skill and that's something that doesn't deteriorate with injury I can also be more confident that what we saw last year is a good enough background to be confident in him.

Sadley it is highly unlikely he will play this year. I'm advised his leg is still not good and running is still months away. Its sad for Burton and SA as they'd been a better team with him playing. I still believe he will be drafted.....could be a late bargain pick up, I'd take that chance!

 

[Rack Watts]

Good to see there's some Inside players around Essendon's draft pick, we need a Mathieson type.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

Tex is a far more physical player.

Agius has a lower chance than Brent Harvey of becoming a big bodied inside mid. He's as outside as they come and has no interest in winning contested ball. He's best played as the primary target out of the forward line I feel which, with his style, isn't viable. He's yet to really impose himself at a high level in any position, having struggled off a wing and half back. He's still an elite kick with some real forward smarts but at the moment it's all upside and no real exposed form here and now.

Have seen very little but sounds disturbingly similar to Jarrad Grant from your description here. Not sure if the comparison is at all reasonable, was just the first thought when I read this.

 

[Skippos]

Have seen very little but sounds disturbingly similar to Jarrad Grant from your description here. Not sure if the comparison is at all reasonable, was just the first thought when I read this.

Yeah that's who I've got as my comparison for him. But I still rate grant.

Agius perhaps a bit better as a volume forward than grant and a slightly better kick but grant a more natural football brain.

 

[Rack Watts]

Reckon we're a chance for Mathieson, Skipdizzle? heard he's a Don's supporter.
We know how that goes down!

(Heppell + Laverde)

 

[Skippos]

Sadley it is highly unlikely he will play this year. I'm advised his leg is still not good and running is still months away. Its sad for Burton and SA as they'd been a better team with him playing. I still believe he will be drafted.....could be a late bargain pick up, I'd take that chance!

I suspected the same. Compound fractures are ****ed, sometimes it's more than a year - even two.

I strongly suspect burton doesn't fall that late. Before his injury he was a top 5-10 player and a reliable bet, low risk type. With the shallowness of this draft especially, no team is gonna go at 25-30 'oh yeah let's take a speculative type who might be okay for us but is probably only a 40-50% chance of making the grade' when there's a bloke who was an 80% chance, perhaps 60-65% now factoring in his leg still on the board.

He's the kind of player you take the risk on and put the time into rehabbing because he truly is worth it.

 

[eth-dog]

Reckon we're a chance for Mathieson, Skipdizzle? heard he's a Don's supporter.
We know how that goes down!

(Heppell + Laverde)

Kavanagh was as well

 

[Rack Watts]

Kavanagh was as well

Hopefully I can confidently put his name near those two soon.
Should get his opportunity this week with Watson out, you'd say?

 

[Skippos]

Reckon we're a chance for Mathieson, Skipdizzle? heard he's a Don's supporter.
We know how that goes down!

(Heppell + Laverde)

Kavanagh too.

I don't have tremendous faith in essendons recruitment team with their recruitment since 2010 being mediocre and questionable - Zac Merrett the exception.

First thing is to place a bid on Hopper and Dunkley. GWS and Sydney will match but still important. Probably Kennedy too. After that Mathieson would be my man however of late I feel Essendon haven't selected the best players available, nor the safest bets or list fits, favouring upside players and players with questionable size in Zerrett, Jerrett, Kav, Langford, Laverde, Melksham and Gleeson. It's a questionable strategy and one that has onl seen Zerrett and Gleeson provide concrete value for money. Blokes like O'Kearney, Crocker, Gresham, Dawson, Stewart, Nunn and Holmes are blokes I could see Essendon looking at based on past recruitment strategies. If I were them I'd be looking more towards Hopper/Kennedy/Dunkley, Clarke, Partington, Curnow and especially Mathieson who I believe to be an excellent list fit.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

Yeah that's who I've got as my comparison for him. But I still rate grant.

Agius perhaps a bit better as a volume forward than grant and a slightly better kick but grant a more natural football brain.

Interesting on Grant - playing some pretty solid footy at the moment as a real utility type but still yet to take that step that we'd love to see him take.

To keep it on topic, any players in the pool this year that you think would complement Boyd well up forward?

 

[Old navy]

Tex is a far more physical player.

Agius has a lower chance than Brent Harvey of becoming a big bodied inside mid. He's as outside as they come and has no interest in winning contested ball. He's best played as the primary target out of the forward line I feel which, with his style, isn't viable. He's yet to really impose himself at a high level in any position, having struggled off a wing and half back. He's still an elite kick with some real forward smarts but at the moment it's all upside and no real exposed form here and now.

Yes he is much more physical.. But the strong hands on the lead and the way he treads them from all angles.

Are there any big inside mids from SA this year?
I know WA have Greg Clark 193cm and Jordan Snadden 190cm
Clark has the potential to do a Bonty on draft day.

 

[Skippos]

Interesting on Grant - playing some pretty solid footy at the moment as a real utility type but still yet to take that step that we'd love to see him take.

To keep it on topic, any players in the pool this year that you think would complement Boyd well up forward?

He hasn't delivered but I like the role he plays. He's a true point of difference and a smart footballer. If he wasn't pick five and worked the other way a little harder he'd be a core part of the side imo. It's a case of the disappointment of his non development counting against him. He's still a classy ball user with some real athleticism and a good footy brain. Given a full uninterrupted season he's a 30-35 goal a year player imo.

It depends what you reckon is a compliment to him? Is it a lead up type traditional full forward? Or is it another physical beast contested marking threat to take the aerial pressure off of him? Pies fans seem to think the best compliment for Cloke is another brute instead of a JJK style leading forward. I personally like to compliment brutal gorilla forwards with the smaller, smart leading types. Based on that, Burton and Curnow. In the other school of thought, Schache. Dylan Smith is an interesting one and one who's old really fit the bill but warrants further investigation. I'm not sold on Weideman, Allen or McKay yet as first round talents which imo you've gotta be to be worth picking.

 

[Skippos]

Yes he is much more physical.. But the strong hands on the lead and the way he treads them from all angles.

Are there any big inside mids from SA this year?
I know WA have Greg Clark 193cm and Jordan Snadden 190cm
Clark has the potential to do a Bonty on draft day.

Greg Clark is probably the notable big bodied mid in the draft along with Dunkley. Not sold on Clark yet, but my initial thought based on last year is that he was pretty likeable. Charlie Curnow is another who's got a bit of scope to develop into that type.

From SA, like usual, not many. Campbell Wildman is an interesting one who I expect to play the champs game this week. Probably not a pure midfielder but there's scope. The one I'm particularly bullish about and see real scope to become that skilled big inside mid is Cam Hewett he's an absolute rake at the moment but shows some real inside ball winning ability and has some really good size and some x-factor type plays. He's one to watch, I suspect he'll bolt late season and perhaps be our second mid taken after Partington.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

He hasn't delivered but I like the role he plays. He's a true point of difference and a smart footballer. If he wasn't pick five and worked the other way a little harder he'd be a core part of the side imo. It's a case of the disappointment of his non development counting against him. He's still a classy ball user with some real athleticism and a good footy brain. Given a full uninterrupted season he's a 30-35 goal a year player imo.

It depends what you reckon is a compliment to him? Is it a lead up type traditional full forward? Or is it another physical beast contested marking threat to take the aerial pressure off of him? Pies fans seem to think the best compliment for Cloke is another brute instead of a JJK style leading forward. I personally like to compliment brutal gorilla forwards with the smaller, smart leading types. Based on that, Burton and Curnow. In the other school of thought, Schache. Dylan Smith is an interesting one and one who's old really fit the bill but warrants further investigation. I'm not sold on Weideman, Allen or McKay yet as first round talents which imo you've gotta be to be worth picking.

All fair. His work defensively and off the ball in general has improved markedly under Beveridge and he's becoming quite a reliable marking option through the middle of the ground. Showed some pretty damn good forward play on the weekend too when isolated deep (but admittedly, after the game was over). He's certainly growing on me. Would like to see him given an extended opportunity in the side but we seem to prefer others.

Yeah, it's interesting. It's even harder to decide as Boyd's shown the scope to be an exceptional presence close to goal, as well as up the ground. He'll do both but we probably need to decide where we see him excelling. Personally - I love him a little higher up the ground but he obviously needs a tank before that's a permanent solution. If we do go with that though we probably do need another forward on the tall side to compete for the high ball (that so many of our midfielders love...). We look much less potent when Boyd rucks and Stringer plays deep, particularly when the game closes up, as a result of our average entries. This is going to be the issue we face if we go another medium type. A bigger forward either relieves Boyd of the ruck duty or provides a traditional target when he rucks. That said, I do agree with your philosophy that two brutes isn't ideal. It's difficult.

FWIW I expect us to trade for a key defender (Carlisle plan A), draft best available and persist with the forward setup we've got now for at least another year. I do think we need that second key forward in time, particularly if Boyd is expected to be the second ruck, but as you say it likely has to be with a first round pick. Given the information from very reliable posters with good histories on the Dogs board, I find it hard to believe that we head into the draft with a first rounder unless somebody wants out or we put a package together. Our forward setup isn't that bad - it's just filled with a lot of poor set shots and suffering from pretty poor entries at times.

 

[Old navy]

Greg Clark is probably the notable big bodied mid in the draft along with Dunkley. Not sold on Clark yet, but my initial thought based on last year is that he was pretty likeable. Charlie Curnow is another who's got a bit of scope to develop into that type.

From SA, like usual, not many. Campbell Wildman is an interesting one who I expect to play the champs game this week. Probably not a pure midfielder but there's scope. The one I'm particularly bullish about and see real scope to become that skilled big inside mid is Cam Hewett he's an absolute rake at the moment but shows some real inside ball winning ability and has some really good size and some x-factor type plays. He's one to watch, I suspect he'll bolt late season and perhaps be our second mid taken after Partington.

I like Charlie Curnow as a big inside mid who wins his own footy and can go forward and take a mark.
Will check Hewett out when I get a chance. Would love another monster in the midfield to partner Cripps.

How do you rate this years draft Skippos? I'm hearing that the media don't really rate it.
But I'm thinking it's got last year covered. May be hasn't got as much depth but some real elite talent
at the top end.

 

[Leemas]

Definitely look at wylie buzz a if you get a chance. Had two weeks of very strong performances, the odd blunder here an there but only been playing for 2 years. Looks to be growing in confidence. Saw him the other week for Mt Gravatt and when compared to Archie Smith he is already miles ahead imo. Exciting late/rookie chance for Brisbane.

 

[Skippos]

I like Charlie Curnow as a big inside mid who wins his own footy and can go forward and take a mark.
Will check Hewett out when I get a chance. Would love another monster in the midfield to partner Cripps.

How do you rate this years draft Skippos? I'm hearing that the media don't really rate it.
But I'm thinking it's got last year covered. May be hasn't got as much depth but some real elite talent
at the top end.

Hewett is very, very raw. Certainly not an inside midfielder...yet.

I rate it as an ordinary one. Not weak nor strong. I like the top 15-20 and believe you'll get a player to work with, and I think towards draft day 20-40 will also be full of role players. Not a draft I feel we're going to see many 18 year olds picked after 40-45 and in the rookie turn out as diamonds though - the worthwhile players to me at least seem clear, compared to last year where there were a lot of speculative and risk/reward types.

 

[Skippos]

Definitely look at wylie buzz a if you get a chance. Had two weeks of very strong performances, the odd blunder here an there but only been playing for 2 years. Looks to be growing in confidence. Saw him the other week for Mt Gravatt and when compared to Archie Smith he is already miles ahead imo. Exciting late/rookie chance for Brisbane.

I've seen Wylie play before but perhaps not at as advanced a stage of development as he is now.

I'm happy to tentatively write him off, though. He's an overaged player so already he'll enter the system at the equivalent of a second year player. And he's playing like a solid first year player.

As I've written a page or two back in this thread, I'm very hesitant to buy into the hype of any non top 20 standard key forward. The hit rate with key forwards in the second/third round is between 5-15%. The hit rate of 18-19 year old key forwards drafted in the fourth-rookie would be less than that. They traditionally do not provide a good return on investment unless selected based on dominant junior performances. There are very, very few exceptions to this rule.

Wylie is fighting uphill to make the grade purely as very few key forwards of his type do - the pre-requisite is to dominate junior levels. As an older and bigger player, he might just do that by virtue of his size and extra development, a bit like Jayden Foster did last year. But Jayden Foster was a waste of time - and any 19 year old key forward who does I do look at with a cynical view. The way for Wylie to prove himself would be to play some state league footy in a proper competition and earn his way in that way, not by playing regional Queensland footy at his age.

While there is a bit to like about Wylie and I do think he's got more chance than most 19 year old project forwards, I don't think he's even in the best two forwards eligible for Brisbane this year. Hipwood is a good player and Chol exhibits some incredible potential for mine and could just be the pick of the bunch. At this stage I'd assess both as traditionally 'second round' type talents - who'd go there in past drafts, but given the hit rate of those 'second round' types, I'd probably not touch them until the third or fourth. But if there was one forward who could tempt me to spend a second round pick on them despite my strong aversion to it, it's Mabior Chol. I really, really, really like that kid.

The Smith comparison is a little redundant. With key forwards - you usually know what you're going to get from what they do as juniors. The dominant ones make it, the speculative/promising ones rarely do. The ones who have smart footy brains make it, the athletic ones don't. With rucks, there's far more room for pure athlete's to thrive and modelling their development based on junior careers is far less concrete - it's often about speculation and promise as opposed to production. I personally think that irrespective of their junior careers Archie's probably got a greater chance of making the grade than Wylie purely by virtue of roles. Young, raw, athletic rucks can often make it. Young, raw and speculative forwards don't.

 

[Dav1d]

Because I don't read into the numbers when I can trust my own eye.

He's a seagull. He wins and receives cheap ball, disposes of the ball conservatively and doesn't really so much. Yeah, he's got some pretty cool evasive moves and good spacial awareness, but he just doesn't actually hurt for mine. He's like a poor man's Jackson MacRae but not as tall, not as broad shouldered (scope for inside game), not as elite a handball and not as ridiculous an accumulator. Perhaps he's not as rabidly comservative as Jackson by foot but he still is.

I have to disagree with your assessment (at this time), because I definitely saw a different player to what you described when he played against Country
The game that I watched he was as damaging or even possibly the most damaging midfielder on the ground
I am not sure that I see the comparison to Macrae either, other then them both been more outside types
Anyhow.. I hope that I see more the same performance that I saw against Country, on this weekends game