Why do we need the next Judd when we have the current Judd
Yeah, why would we want that?
You just majorly shot yourself in the foot and ironically provided the best argument I have seen for taking Cotchin yet
.Two Judd's would be horrible.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 4 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Why wouldnt u take Kreuzer????
- Thread starter snowballs
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Yeah, why would we want that?
You just majorly shot yourself in the foot and ironically provided the best argument I have seen for taking Cotchin yet
.Two Judd's would be horrible.
I'm not getting into the Kreuzer v Cotchin argument because I haven't seen much of either. I was a little suprised though whilst watching the Draft camp review on AFL.com when Kevin Sheehan said Kreuzer had grown 5cms this year! Can anyone confirm/deny whether this is true?
HBF
Flying Scotsman
- Sep 24, 2002
- 156,218
- 101,281
- AFL Club
- Carlton
IIRC, he has said that the club will be taking the best kid in the country. It's all of the journo's that are saying we are keeping #1 for Kreuzer.
Given that we are still the best part of 6 weeks away from the draft, i'd be very very surprised if the club have settled on one player or another. Apparently, the club on decided to choose Gibbs two weeks prior to the draft last year.
In this thread and on this board I have recently heard some of the best arguments for taking Cotchin over Kreuzer, and I'm sure anyone we're considering at #1 will be a valuable pick up. Can't say I'd be disappointed with another slick midfielder.
I don't know squat about either player, and have no way of projecting what they will/could turn out to be, so going purely on what others have said, I've been fairly and squarely in the draft Kreuzer camp. This is due to rucks being rarer, Carlton's need for a quality ruckman, etc, etc.
However, even while in that camp, I can definitely see how it's a higher RISK taking Kreuzer. The pay off is further away than with a player like Cotchin, and much harder to predict.
I think last year Gibbs was the "safe" pick. There were other players (Leuenberger included) rated as potential #1s, but Gibbs was the CAN'T MISS prospect. Even if he doesn't turn into the player he was projected to be, he'll still be a very good AFL footballer.
We could do the .same this year, and take Cotchin who WILL be good. I do agree you can never have too many good midfielders. But if we're going the "safe" rout, when DO we get KPPs and rucks? If Kreuzer is supposed to turn into Josh Fraser, I think he's probably worth it. If we manage him better and develop him rather than thrash him as Collingwood have with Fraser, he'll be better. I think that's worth the risk this time around
I don't know squat about either player, and have no way of projecting what they will/could turn out to be, so going purely on what others have said, I've been fairly and squarely in the draft Kreuzer camp. This is due to rucks being rarer, Carlton's need for a quality ruckman, etc, etc.
However, even while in that camp, I can definitely see how it's a higher RISK taking Kreuzer. The pay off is further away than with a player like Cotchin, and much harder to predict.
I think last year Gibbs was the "safe" pick. There were other players (Leuenberger included) rated as potential #1s, but Gibbs was the CAN'T MISS prospect. Even if he doesn't turn into the player he was projected to be, he'll still be a very good AFL footballer.
We could do the .same this year, and take Cotchin who WILL be good. I do agree you can never have too many good midfielders. But if we're going the "safe" rout, when DO we get KPPs and rucks? If Kreuzer is supposed to turn into Josh Fraser, I think he's probably worth it. If we manage him better and develop him rather than thrash him as Collingwood have with Fraser, he'll be better. I think that's worth the risk this time around
HBF
Flying Scotsman
- Sep 24, 2002
- 156,218
- 101,281
- AFL Club
- Carlton
That's very nicely summed up there Faz.
Yeah, why would we want that?
You just majorly shot yourself in the foot and ironically provided the best argument I have seen for taking Cotchin yet
Two Judd's would be horrible.
Law of diminishing returns. Adding an extra Judd to our list would have less impact than adding the initial Judd.
As good as Cotchin will be, the comparisons to Judd are a bit rich. I'm sure I've seen yourself post that their are better midfielders than Cotchin in next year's draft. Similar type, maybe, but I'm guessing it'll be a worse Judd vs a better Fraser?
Kreuzer is supposedly rare for a ruckman - there was Leunberger last year and Natunui next year, but the chances of acquiring a gun ruckmen are significantly less than finding a gun midfielder. If we're in need of a mid, there will be quality ones around at picks 6-10, which is probably where we'll feature next year.
Law of diminishing returns. Adding an extra Judd to our list would have less impact than adding the initial Judd.
As good as Cotchin will be, the comparisons to Judd are a bit rich. I'm sure I've seen yourself post that their are better midfielders than Cotchin in next year's draft. Similar type, maybe, but I'm guessing it'll be a worse Judd vs a better Fraser?
Kreuzer is supposedly rare for a ruckman - there was Leunberger last year and Natunui next year, but the chances of acquiring a gun ruckmen are significantly less than finding a gun midfielder. If we're in need of a mid, there will be quality ones around at picks 6-10, which is probably where we'll feature next year.
I'm not sure I'd ever put Judd and diminishing return in the same sentence
Same with Cotchin.....I think they will bring different things to the side...as I keep saying for the first couple of years I see Cotch playing that Ablett Jnr role across HF.
FWIW If it is deemed absolutely necessary that we take a ruckman this year then it is Kreuzer all the way at #1 for me, there won't be any decent prospects around 36 and 46.....if we aim to take the best player it is less clear cut......for mine Cotchin 51 to Kreuzer 49 two-party preferred
. My personal preference is the best available approach. On team balance you might favour the big fella too and TGR has certianly proposed some persuasive arguments for that, but I'm more willing to back Hammo and Aisake in than most, and more willing to play Carlos as the 199cm utility/pinch hitting mobile ruckman whereas others who see him down back.Next year Daniel Rich is a stand-out midfield prospect.....in some aspects he is even slightly ahead of Cotch, in others Cotchin still has him covered. We won't get our mitts on Rich, or Natainui or Hurley....the other mids available will be good, but still not Cotchin/Rich quality.....Hartlett, Swift and Suban (perhaps more a HBF at this stage) come immediately to mind. There could also be some good KPP prospects around pick 6-10, including Aaron Cornelius, Tom Lynch, Shaun McKernan and Jackson Trengove (can also ruck at TAC level and beat Kreuzer in the TAC prelim).
With first round picks I would personally take each year on its own merit, and from watching a dozen or so of Kreuzer and Cotchin's games this year I still slightly favour the 6 foot midfielder
.
You have to take rucks, KP players at some stage. If you don't you end up like the Bulldogs, alot of fleet-footed runners with no-one to kick to and no-one to tap it down to them. Look how much trouble we've had with KP backman. The risk is higher with "talls" as they take a few years, then you're not quite sure but if they do turn out the upside is alot greater. Given the time taken to develop you have to think about you're list a few years ahead in that particular area. With the loss of Kennedy, Whitnall, not to mention our ruck strength, it's time to take a ruckman, especially one who goes forward and kicks goals. We have Judd, we get Stevens back next year so our midfield is in pretty decent shape. Not to mention the fact Kreuzer's undeniably rated the best in the draft. It's a bit of "horses for courses". If you were an Eagle you'd argue hard for Cotchin.
Either way, whoever we take it's a big win/win and huge icing on a very sweet cake.
If you cut the immature idiots off Bigfooty they'd barely be anyone left
.
But we've already taken some ruckman Jim. We've got three of them developing, four if you include Setanta. The time to take a ruckman was last year and we did so. The risk was taken and all indications are saying that its likely to pay off eventually.
The club that picks for need with early picks is the club who's destined stay in the bottom four, and they'll deserve it. If Kruezer is clearly the best player in the draft who's most likely to make a major impact at AFL level then we should by all means pick him up, but if we're picking him because quality ruckman are rare and we 'need' a ruckman next year then our recruitng staff should be quickly given the sack. Picking for need is the quickest way of finding yourself with the next Luke Livingston instead of the next Daniel Kerr.
I'm pretty sure our recruiting staff don't recruit based on need with early picks so I don't think they'll make that mistake.
thylacine60
Post-Human
- Banned
- #62
If you cut the immature idiots off Bigfooty they'd barely be anyone left
I fiercely resemble that remark!
WorthTheWaite
Cancelled
Yes - after the first round
unless they are comfortably the best prospect. And IMO, Kreuzer isn't. Faz - that was quite a good post, BUT - I wouldn't say Cotchin is even the "safe" rout - IMO, if he fulfils his potential and Kreuzer his, Cotchin will be better. So in a weird way, he's both the "safe" and the "potentially brilliant in hindsight" pick - in that he's a safer bet to become at least good at AFL level, but also become a freak if all goes well.
Another thing on this bit:
Firstly, the reasoning behind Cotchin isn't that he's a "safer, but probably less return" pick - it's that I believe he's the best available. Secondly, we get KPPs/rucks that aren't the best available after Round 1, when there are two guys that are hard to split (taking into account team balance and so on), you can then afford to consider going for need. But when you are dealing with the best of the best, at Pick 1, where you could be overlooking the next Ablett, you should never go for need. Maximise your opportunities as much as you can, IMO. Don't settle with just "filling the gaps", because you're selling yourself short by not going for the absolute best talent.
WorthTheWaite - understood and agreed.
I reiterate that I am NOT in a position to make a judgement call on who is the best talent. From all reports it's either Cotchin or Kreuzer. If they are dead even, I think it makes sense to then pick based on need and rarity.
If those who know think Cotchin is better, I'm all for taking him. Building insane midfield depth is a good good thing. I would have thought, though, that a ruckman worth #1 doesn't come around often, and that a Kreuzer/Hampson combo in the future would give us a core big man department to take on the best.
I reiterate that I am NOT in a position to make a judgement call on who is the best talent. From all reports it's either Cotchin or Kreuzer. If they are dead even, I think it makes sense to then pick based on need and rarity.
If those who know think Cotchin is better, I'm all for taking him. Building insane midfield depth is a good good thing. I would have thought, though, that a ruckman worth #1 doesn't come around often, and that a Kreuzer/Hampson combo in the future would give us a core big man department to take on the best.
We did pick the best already with Judd. Not convinced yet about our ruck stocks and here we have one here that can go forward and kick goals, ala Corey McKernan. Some of the rucks on our list are undersized and may not be there in 2 years (I hope Cloke's there as I have alot of time for him). We have Aisake and Hampson but for the reason I suggested we need a another and this one looks very good. After watching Kennedy and Setanta attempt to ruck and Ackland being terrible I felt it was area we badly needed to focus on. There are alot of able midfielders around so we can get one next year.
We done alot of drafting of the "best player" in recent drafts and it's netted us Walker, Stevens, Murphy, Gibbs and Judd. Hence the midfield is in good shape. Time and a place for everything, this time to go with the "need". Cotchin's definitely the safer bet but if Kreuzer's successful his upside is alot greater. With 2 picks in the first 3, going for a gun midfielder and tall is not a bad idea as we did in 2005. Even more so given we've just lost 2 talls. Last year I went Gibbs over Leunberger (and Leunberger's really starting to look the part, as is Gibbs), this year Kreuzer over Cotchin. I'm sure the club will take Kreuzer anyway. We have our midfielder, and what a midfielder, this pick is for the tall. Kreuzer and Judd with picks 1 & 3, that sounds very nice. On the other hand Cotchin and Judd also sounds very nice too. Either way I don't think there'll be much complaint.
WorthTheWaite
Cancelled
I agree with what you've said, basically. It comes down to who you rate more really, or more importantly, who our recruiters rate more.
I lol'd.
So you'd take Fraser over Judd because we've "done alot of drafting of the "best player" in recent drafts" and "this time to go with the "need""?
See that's where I would disagree. Ruckman are important but if you gave me a choice of the best ruckman (Cox) and the best midfielder (Judd or Ablett) I would take the best midfielder every single time. The upside of the midfielder is just as big as the upside of a ruckman, its just that the midfielder reaches their upside that much quicker while the ruckman takes years and years of development before they even approach their best.
Besides for mine there are some big questions over Kreuzer as a ruckman. He just screams Josh Fraser to me.
Plus he is 3 cm smaller. Ruckman are getting taller and taller nowadays, he will struggle just Fraser has. If only he was 5cm taller, then there would be absolutley no argument that he should be number one, by me anyway.
The midfield is the core of any club but we've built our's up ours nicely now. That's why the majority of players in a team are runners/ball carriers. If you're building a team you set your midfield, the engine room, up first. Then you finish it off with the gun players, power players such as KP and rucks. I believe we're well on the way to doing the former and it's now time for the latter given we've lost a couple.
Always believe though the upside of a tall is greater, given their physical presence, whether it be a KP player or ruck. They're the "power" players who take control of the game. I'm sure right now the Bulldogs would agree. Alot of midfield runners but no-one to get it down to them or kick it too. Cox or Judd would be a close go for mine, probably depend on what's needed most at the time."Horses for courses". Last year Judd, this year a Cox. To take it a step further, Judd or Jonathon Brown, no doubt Brown. He is the best player in the competiton. All 16 club talent scouts think Kreuzer's the best talent available so that's good enough for me.
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,22540737-5011880,00.html
- Banned
- #70
Fraser is like an extra midfielder, gets a lot of the ball and even provides some run so he only needs to be competitive in the tap outs.. Kreuzer could be that extra runner as long as you have a moster ruck to team him with
I have some great real estate on a swamp to sell you Jim, I rang Darryl and he reckons it is a top purchase as well
HBF
Flying Scotsman
- Sep 24, 2002
- 156,218
- 101,281
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Agreed agreed agreed.
Not that you mentioned it gandaal, but there are a heap of ruckman available in this years draft, although Kreuzer is quite a distance in front of his oppostion, which would most likely be McEvoy, even though he has played mainly as a forward. Guys like Renton, Putt and Sullivam would all be available later in the draft should we decide to go with one of these guys instead of Kreuzer at #1.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
