Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Breadcrawl wrote:I never said we would solve our problems next year with our pick 5.

We have taken Moore at 8. If we take a tall at 5 then we've taken two talls with our two top picks. We also have Witts, Grundy, Brown, Reid, Frost, Gault Marsh all under 25 and Cloke at 27. Our squad going forward is not short on tall players to the extent that we'd be taking two talls with our best picks.

Swan is nearly gone, Thomas, Wellingham, Beams have been lost, there are plenty of great players coming through in the mids but we need more and we need cream in there and that is what we should be taking with pick 5.

There are a few arguments against that, Cloke is prime age now...he will not get better, when our current crop of young mids come through he will be lucky to be around....
We have spent the last 2 drafts bringing in mostly mid/utility types.
Witts, Frost, Gault, Keeffe are all speculative picks, some have impressed in one way or another but there are no obvious game breakers there, White is never going to make CHF or FF his own...so what are we left with in three to five years?

I think you take the best available, but if a big kid was to slip through I think it would be a blessing in disguise.

Besides a over abundance of bigs could buy you a quality mid when you're primed anyway.

one things for sure...if we go mid no matter what at five, we better be heavily in to Cameron.

A team requires 2 large forwards, a 'third tall' type, 2 key defenders, a flexible tall/short defender, a ruckman and some method of relieving that ruckman, either with another ruckman or another tall who can chip in.

Assuming no injuries our KFs are Cloke and Reid. Next in line is White. We have Goldsack as a third tall but I hope we will be looking to Karnezis or Moore or Marsh to play a 'Gunston' role for us. Gault is an understudy for one of these positions too.

We have Brown, Keeffe and Frost battling for two positions KD, Toovey and Langdon as flexi backs, and Witts and Grundy as alternative rucks who will also play in a key offensive post when they are resting off the ball. Mason Cox could be nothing and will take a couple of years in any case, but he is there as a project.

Not one of these tall players named is going to fall out of the rotation due to age-forced retirement for at least three years.

Now Wright could be better than all of them. If we get him, though, how the hell do we develop him without neglecting one or more of the players already listed? Who are we dropping out of Cloke, Reid, Witts, Grundy, Brown or Keeffe to give him a game? Are we leaving Moore, Marsh, Gault, Karnezis to rot in the twos to get AFL minutes into Wright?

If Reid can stay on the park he and Cloke are our boys for three years. As Cloke fades Moore should be ready to take his place. We will need an elite forward tall to replace Reid in about six years. We don't need to draft him this year. In fact if we do then we will be losing he and Moore at the same time in a dozen years, potentially. I don't think that's very good planning.

Who have we lost in the tall department apart from Dawes? On the other hand we have lost Ball, Thomas, Wellingham, Lumumba, Beams, and Swan is the only guy on the list nearing the end. Of course these guys are being replaced by Broomhead, Kennedy, Adams, Josh Thomas, Seedsman etc but then who will replace Young, Pendles who is only a year younger than Cloke, Greenwood? There are many more running players on the field than key position talls and we simply do not, could not have succession plans in place for all running positions, but we pretty much do for our talls.

Final point in this horribly long post: the one thing we do not know we have covered in the mids is the loss of the creamy match-winning capacity of Daisy in full flight, Beams and Swan. You like to think you can see it in Broomy and Seedy, it may come from somewhere else in a Swan-like fashion, but we don't know it is there at all yet and that is the biggest reason why I'd be using a pick 5 on a creative midfielder over the best available tall, even if he was considered better.

Good midfielders can be found year in year out between 10 to 30.

Elite key forward prospects generally go top 5 in the years they're available and not since 2005 have we been in a position where we've had a pick that could see us land one.

Moore of course muddies the waters somewhat this season but it's not unheard of that we'll take two key position talls within the top 10 in the same draft.

I think in the end it'll come down to just how highly Hine rates Wright compared to our immediate list needs.

Breadcrawl wrote:A team requires 2 large forwards, a 'third tall' type, 2 key defenders, a flexible tall/short defender, a ruckman and some method of relieving that ruckman, either with another ruckman or another tall who can chip in.

Assuming no injuries our KFs are Cloke and Reid. Next in line is White. We have Goldsack as a third tall but I hope we will be looking to Karnezis or Moore or Marsh to play a 'Gunston' role for us. Gault is an understudy for one of these positions too.

We have Brown, Keeffe and Frost battling for two positions KD, Toovey and Langdon as flexi backs, and Witts and Grundy as alternative rucks who will also play in a key offensive post when they are resting off the ball. Mason Cox could be nothing and will take a couple of years in any case, but he is there as a project.

Not one of these tall players named is going to fall out of the rotation due to age-forced retirement for at least three years.

Now Wright could be better than all of them. If we get him, though, how the hell do we develop him without neglecting one or more of the players already listed? Who are we dropping out of Cloke, Reid, Witts, Grundy, Brown or Keeffe to give him a game? Are we leaving Moore, Marsh, Gault, Karnezis to rot in the twos to get AFL minutes into Wright?

If Reid can stay on the park he and Cloke are our boys for three years. As Cloke fades Moore should be ready to take his place. We will need an elite forward tall to replace Reid in about six years. We don't need to draft him this year. In fact if we do then we will be losing he and Moore at the same time in a dozen years, potentially. I don't think that's very good planning.

Who have we lost in the tall department apart from Dawes? On the other hand we have lost Ball, Thomas, Wellingham, Lumumba, Beams, and Swan is the only guy on the list nearing the end. Of course these guys are being replaced by Broomhead, Kennedy, Adams, Josh Thomas, Seedsman etc but then who will replace Young, Pendles who is only a year younger than Cloke, Greenwood? There are many more running players on the field than key position talls and we simply do not, could not have succession plans in place for all running positions, but we pretty much do for our talls.

Final point in this horribly long post: the one thing we do not know we have covered in the mids is the loss of the creamy match-winning capacity of Daisy in full flight, Beams and Swan. You like to think you can see it in Broomy and Seedy, it may come from somewhere else in a Swan-like fashion, but we don't know it is there at all yet and that is the biggest reason why I'd be using a pick 5 on a creative midfielder over the best available tall, even if he was considered better.

Typically talls take 2-3 years to develop to a stage where they can play consistent AFL footy. Mids can usually make an impact far quicker.
Taking a second tall to compliment Moore could set our forward line up for the next decade, especially since Moore and Wright would be hitting their straps just as Cloke is winding down his career.
Whilst another silky mid would be lovely, I believe that the addition of Freeman, and the inevitable transition to the midfield of Scharenberg (as foretold by the Hine), will have us covered for the future. We also have next years draft and fingers crossed, Josh Daicos joining our ranks in 2017.

Either way, I'll be happy taking a mid like Laverde, but I would be amazed if Wright or McCartin fell through the top 4 and we didn't pounce.

I want the guy that in 5 years time all the experts will look back at this draft and say "how the hell did he slip through to 5? Clearly now fighting for either 1 or 2 with Darcy Moore"

Fingers crossed!

Az wrote:

Podpicken wrote:

Museman wrote:All of Elliot, Benken, Broomhead, Freeman should be up and running in our midfield before any mid we take this year so I don't think it much matters, if Wright fell you would take him.

People don't seem to correlate very well..... a deficiency in the midfield currently will not likely be fixed by taking a mid this year

Totally agree. The powers that be must get a laugh out of this forum sometimes - if they read it, that is.

Who exactly are they laughing about? I don't see anyone here suggesting a draft pick this year is going to solve our problems straight away. But it's certainly going to help in a few years when we are supposedly supposed to challenge.

They will laugh at those on here who think they have it all worked out and are way off the mark with the processes they have in choosing players, that's who. Yes, there are a few clever cookies on here with some good theories and suggestions, but 80% would make them laugh.

MJ23 wrote:

watt price tully wrote:

MJ23 wrote: If McCartin or wright fell through to five I'd think we would take them.

At this stage Petrecca, Brayshaw, Wright, McCartin would be the top 4 picks.

So for us it's of Leverde, ahern, Goddard, Durdin or maybe a Picket / Weller.
I don't want Weller, he's another qlder who wants to play with his bro.

Ahern is a lot like Kennedy who needs the game time.
Durdin and Goddard have had injuries and need development.

I like Leverde. - looks a "Bontemtelli " type. Has a lot of things we need in marking ability, height run and carry with a bit of x-factor.

Weller's brother plays for the Saints (currently) just signed a 2 yr contract I think.

Hi. Yes he does.
Yet what I said is still right. He currently is a qlder and has has stated he would love to play with his bro.
Wether he leaves to go to GC or saints he still leaves.

Maverick Weller was recruited from the Burnie Dockers in Tasmania. I presume that the family moved to Queensland when Mav was recruited by the Suns. Certainly young Lachie played for Queensland this year but he presumably spent the first 14 years of his life in Tassie. It is worth remembering that Nick Riewoldt who was recruited from the Gold Coast always considers himself as much of a Taswegian as his cousin Jack. I don't want Lachie Weller because I think that there are better kids available but I don't think there is any real danger of him doing a Dayne Beams whoever selects him.

Personally I think it's down to Laverde, Wright, Lever or Pickett for pick 5.

The only other exception would be a Hine special in Langford.

Pickett's the guy who strolls into the senior side and has an impact in 2015.

Pickett Cloke Witts

Broomhead Reid Elliott

Looks exciting doesn't it?

I'm leaning this way currently

Yeah, if I was picking just for 2015 it'd be Pickett first and daylight second.

I've really got no insight into who'd be a better player down the track between Pickett, Laverde or any other possibles so I'll leave it to Hine and co to work their magic. I'd be most pleased if that magic ended up with us landing an attacking and skilled midfielder like Pickett or Laverde but if there are better players available we shouldn't be passing them up.

Ideally I'd love to recruit Patrick McCartin if he slips down to selection number five but I think the Demons will take him at either pick two or three or maybe the Saints will shock everyone and take him at pick one instead of Petracca. He's a huge talent and one worth looking at even if it's unlikely we'll obtain him or have the chance to obtain him at all.

Both Laverde or Pickett would be great picks for the club, so I'd be happy for the club to take one or the other. I think Pickett might have the more immediate impact between the two but both will be great players of the future without doubt if they're developed properly. However, one thing that worries me about Pickett is that he's a Western Australian boy and apparently he recently said that if he had the chance, he'd most likely go back home even if he enjoyed his time at a particular club that wasn't in Western Australia. I wouldn't be surprised if that put Hine and his fellow recruiters off from recruiting him.

swoop42 wrote:Personally I think it's down to Laverde, Wright, Lever or Pickett for pick 5.

The only other exception would be a Hine special in Langford.

If Laverde's gone he'll pick the next best suited to our needs, which is a tallish utility with time and foot skills, remember he took the Berg last year knowing he'd have no impact the following season, he'll go the same again.

Defender wrote:

swoop42 wrote:Personally I think it's down to Laverde, Wright, Lever or Pickett for pick 5.

The only other exception would be a Hine special in Langford.

If Laverde's gone he'll pick the next best suited to our needs, which is a tallish utility with time and foot skills, remember he took the Berg last year knowing he'd have no impact the following season, he'll go the same again.

I think Hine will be taking best available. Our list isn't in desperate need of a rebalance, so overlooking better talent to target a particular type would be counterproductive. You would only pick based on type if there are a few players that you rate at about the same level. Scharenberg last year was also seen as the best available player, even if he did fit the type we needed.