Jump to content


Life Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

189 Excellent

About manny100

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1,695 profile views
  1. Who knows we may one day see Jackson roving to Bradtke.
  2. Pickett looks like the type of small forward player we really need. Gee, those highlights look good. I have watched them a few times.
  3. Bet Goody will be up all night watching re runs of Pickett and Jackson highlights!!
  4. Risky picking a ruckman!!! You have to be kidding!!!!! Short memories here!! Ahhhh, Wattsy over Nic Nat, another stuff up. By the way Callum Twomey said on SEN that Jackson is way ahead of Grundy at the same age and is hugely talented. Taylor says he could be anything.
  5. Yes and that is exactly what I said. The mistaken belief is that if rucks and small forwards dud out with high picks then that 'roll' will either continue or reverse (vice versa). The point here is that it has the same effect as the gamblers fallacy simply because people believe it will happen regardless of randomness. Its the state of mind trends induce. Its happened so many times before its bound to happen again or vice versa. Of course it will be considered because human nature picks up trends. But in reality the trend or run of heads or tail is irrelevant because its the player research that matters when matching pick and player.
  6. Suggestions in the press that we should not pick up Jackson or Pickett at 3 and 10 because rucks and small forwards get picked up later than those picks is the 'Gamblers fallacy' at work. Ie, 4 spins show 4 consecutive reds. You base your call on the next spin on those past spins ie you think red is on a big run and will continue or its time that black turned up. The reality is that every spin is completely independent of past spins. Each draft pick is independent from other picks, each player is different and each assessment by recruiters will be different. So Taylors call will be based on player assessment alone with a tiny pinch of needs maybe thrown in especially at 10. Whether rucks or small forwards at high picks have dudded in the past will not be a consideration. An example is Grundy slipping. High end talent but clubs were scared/worried about wasting a high pick on a ruck in case it turned up a dud. Whereas each player should be assessed independently. Luckily our recruiting staff are well aware of this. They were keen on Oliver when he was not talked about as an early pick. If Taylor and recruiting staff after expert deliberation consider those 2 players are the best available at those picks then so be it. Pickett has loads of speed, goal sense, reads the fall of the ball well around goals and has great forward defensive pressure. He is likely eventually to play as a mid or be a mid option. He can worry opposition in the air as well. The big thing Pickett has got going for him is that he has those close to goal skills that no one at the club has. We get the ball inside 50 and it comes straight back. Players like Pickett have the ability to intercept those ground balls inside 50 and create headaches for the opposition. Jackson can play forward as well as ruck and maybe high half forward. He may even be able to pinch hit later as a mid. As a ruck he may be almost an extra mid. He offers some insurance against ruck/forward injuries that may occur. Best of all he has bucket loads of talent. I am not qualified to make a call but if Taylor calls their names at 3 and 10 I will understand the reasons behind it. They have done all the groundwork.
  7. Taylor has big wraps for Jackson. Mids are getting taller with The Bont at 192cm, Cripps at 195cm. Taylor says Jackson has played mid. Wonder whether they are thinking he could be a power inside mid or at least a massive body with talent you can throw into the inside mix as well as forward or ruck. Not saying he will be anywhere near as good as Cripps or Bont but he certainly is loaded with talent. May well be why GWS are rock solid in their belief we will not bid for Green and why there is no way we will split pick 3.
  8. HUN article quoting Martins manager stating that there are many ways to structure a contract to scare off rivals. By rivals he means Ds and GC. The article then talks of first season at $800k plus that the Ds would not match given he would request a trade after the first season. The article actually says 'would request a trade after the first season. You cannot get much more blatant draft tampering than those sorts of plans. I would say the Ds would be seeking clarification from the AFL. The AFL would need to step in to stop this. If not this could happen on a regular basis. It will scare clubs into accepting low ball offers for out of contract players or risk losing them for nothing in the PSD via dodgy structured contracts and the threat of walking out after one season if drafted by the non preferred club. If the AFL allows a dodgy contract to stand then I doubt we will draft him.
  9. At 3 and 8 best available is the way to go. We kicked in far to many points to take a risk picking position rather than best at our pick.
  10. Agree, pick him and hope he turns up in better shape than May - no sure thing though. Worst case we trade him later for an ND pick. Once he meets the players and staff he will settle in well - no doubt. With luck he will prove to be a great get. I see it as some compensation for dropping from pick 2 to 3 in the ND. The HUN reported GC were offered a low ball future second and third round pick in next years highly compromised draft. Hardly a worthy offer for a player allegedly offered $600k+ pa. If he nominates for the PSD we will know what he wants - if its made public.
  11. What exactly was the very good deal offered by Carlton?
  12. Carlton shafted Jack Martin. They obviously went into discussions thinking that they would get him for spare change. GC were obviously burnt by Freo on the Weller trade and were not going to let it happen again - to that extent anyway. Desperate clubs often pay overs. Carlton obviously did not want him badly enough. Jack and his manager would be privately fuming - no doubt - he was shafted. If he nominates preseason say $700k first year $250k second year its obvious draft tampering and the AFL will not allow it. If the Ds pass the AFL will likely investigate and fine us or worse for incompetence. The only true test of his worth is the National Draft. Freo, Swans, Crows or North may well be interested with a pick in the 20s. Its wait and see for us. Its suck it and see for the Blues.
  13. It will come down to whether we have the salary CAP. We had room for Elliott. If we take him its good by to JKH and Stretch. Looks like he may heavily forward load his requirements. Pick wise its some compensation for being downgraded to pick 3 by the AFL granting GC a priority. If we take him in the PSD we can always trade him for a pick later. If he is in the draft he goes where he is picked. The Ds will be very quiet about it all. Can you imagine how dumb we would look if we overlook him and he becomes a star at the blues. We would be the laughing stock. If we pick him and he is just a player we just say it was worth the risk.
  14. Once Martin nominates no club needs to convince him or his manager. He is putting himself up on the open market and will go to who drafts him. He is well aware of that and football is his chosen profession.. No different to kids getting drafted to an interstate club. Any player these days who sooks and loses form won't get another contract. Otherwise its New Start.
  15. Once he nominates he is fair game. He knows that. We do not have to tell him or anyone else of our intentions. If he is overseas and we feel obligated announce our intentions we would then let his manager know we are interested without committing because we may change our mind. If he adds much needed depth then why not. If the football department want him and we can afford him its negligent and soft not to draft him. I do not think we would tell him or his manager as it would be all over the news in minutes. If he specifically wants to avoid the MFC at all costs then he would nominate for the National Draft and take his chances. Carlton could split their pick 9 or trade up to a better than their next pick at 40.. A challenge for the foot in mouth blues. Clubs screw each other all the time especially the strong clubs. Carlton tried to screw the GC banking on a back down and it backfired making them look like fools.
  • Create New...