Seems like he likes to dash off the HBF... Do we have room for another of his type of player? With CJ gone you'd suggest we do. Going on that video:

We are definitely lacking in this department, which is why I suggested that Davey should be played in the back pocket. At the time, I was surprised when the Hawks used a 1st round pick on Birchall, who was basically a HBF. It's turned out to be an inspired choice, because I believe that his influence is massively underrated.

I'm warming to Ash Smith.

He reminds of of Simon Buckley, but a good long kick. His body is a decent size, he has good pace, and one of the best long kicks in the draft.

I'd love if he was there at 35. Pick 17 or 19 is probably too high to grab him with because I expect some talented players will drop/be available there. Guys like Mckernan, Blease, Swift, Shoenmakers etc, so hopefully he lasts until 35. He seems to be one of those guys that is just outside the top 20, but is exactly what we'd love to grab at 35, abit like how Petterd fell even though he is a real talent.

As a player, he may start off on a HBF as he gains experience and builds fitness, which is one of his weakness' as he suffered mild OP, but seemed to be over it this season and getting better and better as it wore on. Once that happens I expect him to be a full time midfielder eventually, who can be thrown onto the HBF to give drive and long kicking in a sort of Jason Gram way. He has great run and a hunger to take guys on and break lines.

If people want to check him out, here's a youtube clip (yes I hear the groans )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w4Uvjs4Wh1Q

Hoping he slips to 35 personally!

I'm really not sold on him. He seems like a faster Wheatley.

Gets the ball, runs like lightning then throws it on his boot, kicking long to a contest. Nothing special about that.

Of all his 'highlights' the only time I noticed him pick put an option & put it on his chest was the very last bit.

Having said all that, I'd be gutted to end up with him in the 2nd round, but a 3rd round pick wouldn't be the end of the world.

We are definitely lacking in this department, which is why I suggested that Davey should be played in the back pocket. At the time, I was surprised when the Hawks used a 1st round pick on Birchall, who was basically a HBF. It's turned out to be an inspired choice, because I believe that his influence is massively underrated.

I agree with your observation on Birchall. Not a bad suggestion with regard to Davey, as we are lacking in that department. I would however rather use him in attack at half forward or bursts on the ball at times, and find another alternative down back if there is one. Certainly worth some thought, though, even worth a try next season to see how he goes.

As Dappa alludes to, we definitely have room for a player to fit this department. If Smith fits this criteria, as it appears he does, I won't be disappointed if selected.

I'm really not sold on him. He seems like a faster Wheatley.

Gets the ball, runs like lightning then throws it on his boot, kicking long to a contest. Nothing special about that.

Of all his 'highlights' the only time I noticed him pick put an option & put it on his chest was the very last bit.

Having said all that, I'd be gutted to end up with him in the 2nd round, but a 3rd round pick wouldn't be the end of the world.

watching melbourne the last few seasons, all i've wanted us to do at times is kick it long to a contest. much prefer that then morton trying to pinpoint a 25metre pass and coughing it up. kicking it long = high hurt factor, low risk. trying to pinpoint short passes = low hurt factor, high risk. ash smith looks great

watching melbourne the last few seasons, all i've wanted us to do at times is kick it long to a contest. much prefer that then morton trying to pinpoint a 25metre pass and coughing it up.

You mean like Brent Moloney does or Daniel Ward used to?

yeh, brent moloney is a good player..just injury plagued...and ward was a good player for us over the years. its players like morton that gives me the shits. when in doubt KICK IT LONG!..why players like morton cant grasp this i dont understand..when in doubt they kick it short to a contest. so stupid.

yeh, brent moloney is a good player..just injury plagued...and ward was a good player for us over the years. its players like morton that gives me the shits. when in doubt KICK IT LONG!..why players like morton cant grasp this i dont understand..when in doubt they kick it short to a contest. so stupid.

Well in today's possession oriented game, kicking long to a contest could easily result in a turnover & a goal in transition.

Its possibly a team rule to specifically not do that.

So many unknowns, yet so many are quick to criticize.

... and before anyone complains about the coach's gameplan if this in fact is the case, i'd rather wait until I see it implemented correctly by a team of competent players, before I pass judgement.

Freak, that's a very old fashioned point of view.

Why do you think Hawthorn won this year? Why were Geelong the most dominant team this year?

Geelong were first for disposals, with 34 more possessions per game than any other team, yet were only 6th for long kicks. They were the most dominant team all year and the secret was clearly maintaining possession of the ball and not giving the opposition a chance to get it back.

Hawthorn have had a drafting policy where they only draft kids that can kick. And any unskilled player can boot the ball long. The kicking skills are entirely related to maintaining possession of the ball.

By kicking the ball long you give the opposition a chance to get the ball from you. That's the way the game is heading.

Unfortunately the players often took the wrong option. This leads to less knowledgable supporters in the stands yelling "just kick it long". Our bad footy was when the players became stagnant, stopped moving the ball quickly, didn't want to make mistakes, and lost confidence in each other. It was a new game plan and many light bodied players were still coming to grips with AFL footy.

Of course there are times when it's a better option to kick long to a 50/50 than kick 25 metres to a 50/50 - or worse.

yeh, brent moloney is a good player..just injury plagued...and ward was a good player for us over the years. its players like morton that gives me the shits. when in doubt KICK IT LONG!..why players like morton cant grasp this i dont understand..when in doubt they kick it short to a contest. so stupid.

That's never going to work with our list. Who do we have in the forward line that could mark it? Or even create a contest? Would only end up being a quicker rebound and resultant goal, 9 times out of 10.

Freak, that's a very old fashioned point of view.

Why do you think Hawthorn won this year? Why were Geelong the most dominant team this year?

Geelong were first for disposals, with 34 more possessions per game than any other team, yet were only 6th for long kicks. They were the most dominant team all year and the secret was clearly maintaining possession of the ball and not giving the opposition a chance to get it back.

Hawthorn have had a drafting policy where they only draft kids that can kick. And any unskilled player can boot the ball long. The kicking skills are entirely related to maintaining possession of the ball.

By kicking the ball long you give the opposition a chance to get the ball from you. That's the way the game is heading.

you're missing the point. our players dont have the skills of geelong or hawthorn...we try and pinpoint these 30m no point passes which 50% will result in a turnover. yes it may be old fashioned but we dont have the new-age football skills to adopt the new-age possession football

Hawthorn didn't have the skills or capacity to carry out the game plan either about 4 years ago.

"Kick the bloody thing long" is just a throwback to an era that has long since been cut apart by the fast running, possession based counter attacking teams that we see today.

you're missing the point. our players dont have the skills of geelong or hawthorn...we try and pinpoint these 30m no point passes which 50% will result in a turnover. yes it may be old fashioned but we dont have the new-age football skills to adopt the new-age possession football

We don't have the skills to adopt this style of football... YET.

That is what we are trying to develop. A winning brand of football, & as with all new gameplans, there are growing pains.

We really shouldn't be opening this can of worms again, but surely it is better to suffer short-term pain & develop a gameplan that can win, rather than go for a gameplan that can be properly implemented now, avoiding the thrashings, but that will only allow us to be slightly more competitive.

Have faith for once & try to see beyond the here & now.

1) Daniel Rich

17) Sam Blease

19) McKernan

35) Ruckman of some sort

51) Tom Hislop

67) Pass

you're missing the point. our players dont have the skills of geelong or hawthorn...we try and pinpoint these 30m no point passes which 50% will result in a turnover. yes it may be old fashioned but we dont have the new-age football skills to adopt the new-age possession football

Your partly right in that we lack foot skills across the paddock, but that style of game just doesn't work with the interchanges we have these days. We wouldn't make the finals ever let alone a grand final.

So, we have to recruit the skilled players who are able to play this style.

Reduce the interchange back to 3, with 2 injury (non interchangeable) reserves.

okay i take your point..but skills dont develop. look over a players career, their foot skills dont get any better. bate, jones and bartram's disposals havent deviated one bit since their arrival and you only need to look at someone like godfrey in his career to see how foot skills dont improve. even look at richo. or nick riewoldt. if you want to change to a high possession game plan, you need to recruit the players to do that. no other way.

Hawthorn didn't have the skills or capacity to carry out the game plan either about 4 years ago.

"Kick the bloody thing long" is just a throwback to an era that has long since been cut apart by the fast running, possession based counter attacking teams that we see today.

Conversely, if your gameplan is solely based on a possession game, you become equally predictable, and get torn apart by sides that know how to zone off, and pressure the receiver.

It's all about picking the right option, rather than going short being the only option, which was the case with us this season.

That balance will come with experience and confidence within the playing group.

My local team used to be absolute rat [censored] cos the whole senior team were 18-21 y/olds or 30+, now the over 30s are gone and the 18-21 are now 20-24 y/olds they're capable of playing the way they were trying to (and failing horribly at).

Obviously skills at my club will be far lower than Melbourne's but it's the same sort of principle (though in this case the game plan was picked to suit our smallish side)

We don't have the skills to adopt this style of football... YET.

That is what we are trying to develop. A winning brand of football, & as with all new gameplans, there are growing pains.We really shouldn't be opening this can of worms again, but surely it is better to suffer short-term pain & develop a gameplan that can win, rather than go for a gameplan that can be properly implemented now, avoiding the thrashings, but that will only allow us to be slightly more competitive.

Have faith for once & try to see beyond the here & now.

Good call Shaft.

okay i take your point..but skills dont develop. look over a players career, their foot skills dont get any better. bate, jones and bartram's disposals havent deviated one bit since their arrival and you only need to look at someone like godfrey in his career to see how foot skills dont improve. even look at richo. or nick riewoldt. if you want to change to a high possession game plan, you need to recruit the players to do that. no other way.

Incorrect Freak. Skills do develop. And its not just kicking skills, but a range of skills...and they do improve even in some cases if its just a little improvement. Gary Ablett's skills have improved since he started, so too Steve Johnson, Cameron Ling, James Bartel, Russell Robertson, even Chris Judd and Adam Cooney. There are many, many more.

Your right however in your last sentence, you do need to recruit players that can create a high possession game plan. Which is why the likes of Morton, Grimes, McLean have been recruited. We need more. Fwiw you need those who can cut it in the middle. The likes of Jones, Dunn, Bate - the jury is out

for me, whilst I think their skills can improve a little more, I don't think they are capable of the superior high possession game plan we all desire. I hope they prove me wrong.

Conversely, if your gameplan is solely based on a possession game, you become equally predictable, and get torn apart by sides that know how to zone off, and pressure the receiver.

It's all about picking the right option, rather than going short being the only option, which was the case with us this season.

It is about picking the correct option, quite right.

Whilst the gameplan in your opinion if solely based on a possession game that can become predictable, can get torn apart. But if the coaches implement a few strings-to the-bow in altering the gameplan as an option -midstream- to prevent opposition sides from zoning off, in some cases it can be prevented and work in your favour by confusing the opposition for a short period. Once recognised, the side can revert back to possession. In many ways its like a game of chess for the coaches to gain an advantage.

You have to look at the circumstances of last year, we lost our two main forward targets and lets face it Miller tries hard but hasn't got the kick it long to me pull of Neitz or Robbo. When you don't have good forward targets you play possession footy in you back half of the ground. So don't draft players to fit the game style we currently have draft players for the gamestyle that you want to have. IMO if I was coach this years draft would be 3 key forwards 2 midfielders and 1 ruckman and would draft like this

Pick 1 Watts

Pick 17 Lisle

Pick 19 Roughead

Pick 35 Deboer

Pick 51 Tall Forward

Pick 67 Midfielder

That means our list will have

Tall Backs- Martin, Warnock, Frawley, Garland, Rivers

Mid Backs- Wheatley, Whelan, Petterd, Bartram,Bell, Cheney, Mcnamarra

Mids- Buckley, Mclean, McDonald, Bruce, Green, Davey, Grimes, Jones, Dunn, Morton, Sylvia, Deboer, tba, Moloney, Valenti

Tall Forwards- Miller, Newton, Watts, Lisle, TBA, Zomer

Mid Forwards- Aussie, Maric, Robbo, Bate

Rucks-PJ, Jamar, Meeson, Roughead, Spencer

It's all about picking the right option

Indeed.

Fwiw, most of the time I heard someone in the crowd yelling 'just kick it long' we had nothing up the field.

Ok... now that we're getting closer to D-day...

I'm fascinated by the fact that everyone seems to have a clear idea of what's going to be picked as far down as 17 and 19 in the draft. There's SO much homework being done here. Every year there seems to be a slider, as others have put it... The following is a rough guide, going mostly on popular view, not on "smokies." I'm actually just looking for information here, so rather than disagree, I'm looking for a list of players that WILL be available around our second and third picks... or as close to as possible...

So just to clarify:

The following is likely....

Picks 1-3 = Watts, Rich and Naitanui in no particular order.

Pick 14 = Cordy. Already arranged under f/s.

That leaves only 12 more players before we get our PP. Then one more to WC before our first round 2 player.

Going on what I've seen in the press, these guys are looking to be the most likely to be gone after the first round:

Vickery, Hill, Ziebell, McKernan, Blease, Zaharakis, Swift, Johnston, Yarran, Smith and Hurley. And apparently Hartlett, who I don't know much about.

So of that 12, you would say that SOME would perhaps not get picked up inside that all-important first dozen picks between 4 and 16... Which ones are likely to drop to us? Which ones have I left out? Will some be regarded as of higher importance due to their KP credentials?

Over to you...

Ok... now that we're getting closer to D-day...

I'm fascinated by the fact that everyone seems to have a clear idea of what's going to be picked as far down as 17 and 19 in the draft. There's SO much homework being done here. Every year there seems to be a slider, as others have put it... The following is a rough guide, going mostly on popular view, not on "smokies." I'm actually just looking for information here, so rather than disagree, I'm looking for a list of players that WILL be available around our second and third picks... or as close to as possible...

So just to clarify:

The following is likely....

Picks 1-3 = Watts, Rich and Naitanui in no particular order.

Pick 14 = Cordy. Already arranged under f/s.

That leaves only 12 more players before we get our PP. Then one more to WC before our first round 2 player.

Going on what I've seen in the press, these guys are looking to be the most likely to be gone after the first round:

Vickery, Hill, Ziebell, McKernan, Blease, Zaharakis, Swift, Johnston, Yarran, Smith and Hurley. And apparently Hartlett, who I don't know much about.

So of that 12, you would say that SOME would perhaps not get picked up inside that all-important first dozen picks between 4 and 16... Which ones are likely to drop to us? Which ones have I left out? Will some be regarded as of higher importance due to their KP credentials?

Over to you...

zaharakis is definitely not considered to be a first round draft pick...And Ash smith would be about a 5% chance of being picked up in the first 16. phil davis is apparently a big chance of being picked up by hawthorn at 16. Jordan Lisle is another that I think Hawthorn might look at. But Jackson Trengove will be a first rounder, and steele sidebottom will be one as well. Mitch Robinnson also an outside chance.

So in summary: OUT- smith, zaharakis IN: Trengrove, Sidebottom

Aaah yes... Sidebottom. Knew I forgot someone.

Yes I have the same 16 as Freak. In Sidebottom and Trengrove.

And from what I have read on this site the ones I see hovering just outside are:

Lisle, Robinson, Schoenmakers and maybe Davis who Emma Quale says Crows are keen on.

Interesting that Kevin Sheehan said he saw a possible 32 players, before going to Draft camp,

who could be picked in the first 16. Whilst two or three may get into that top

16 I don't know enough to start wondering which ones would drop out.