If Butcher or Talia don't make it to pick 11, should MFC take the best player at that pick or a KPP?

Tapscott is hard at the ball and has a great booming kick. Also herd somewhere that he is good mates with Trengove, could be good to have them in the same team.

other than Butcher and Talia, is there another KPP worthy of pick 11?

Best available.

*start drafting for need from round 2 onwards.

This is an interesting question.

If Butcher is gone by pick 11, then there might not be a key position forward worthy of pick 11.

If that is the case, we would be silly not to take the best availale midfielder. Imagine having a trio of gun midfielders if Lucas, Tapscott or Rohan, along with Scully and Trengove.

However, even more troubling if that all the good key forwards may be gone by pick 18. Black, Carlisle, Panos, Tahlia and Butcher might all be gone by pick 18. This would mean we miss out on a ootential gun key forward altogether from this draft. This wouldn't be good since we really need a couple more developing key forwards to go with Watts, Butcher and Bate.

Ideally... if Butcher is available at pick 11, we'd pick him.

If he's gone by pick 11, i'd go...

1- Trengove

2- Scully

11- Lucas

18- Black/ Carlisle/ Panos

34- Temel... or another smoky key forward

  tatu said:

If Butcher or Talia don't make it to pick 11, should MFC take the best player at that pick or a KPP?

Tapscott is hard at the ball and has a great booming kick. Also herd somewhere that he is good mates with Trengove, could be good to have them in the same team.

other than Butcher and Talia, is there another KPP worthy of pick 11?

Best available for me at this stage ... However, think we have to hold our gun powder for a few more weeks yet and wait for more key information.

a/ What Luke Ball is doing

b/ Try to determine the picking order/selections for other clubs ... normally you get a few leaks closer to the ND

  Dr Jekyl & Mr Hyde said:

Best available.

*start drafting for need from round 2 onwards.

No.."best available" is very subjective.

If you know for a dead set fact that all the available midfielders are going to make it - and all of the KPP's will turn out to be duds - you've got o choice but to take a midfielder. But you don't know that..... every player is a risk.

Realistically there's not going to be a lot to choose between the best midfielder available at 11 and the best KPP available at 11. Given the balance of our list , we've got to go for a KPP.

Let's put some faith in our midfield group - and try to find a bit of muscle to help them out.

Ideally both 11 and 18 should be KPPs

  hoopla said:

Realistically there's not going to be a lot to choose between the best midfielder available at 11 and the best KPP available at 11. Given the balance of our list , we've got to go for a KPP.

How do you know?

That's like saying there's not not going to be a lot to choose between the best midfielder available at 1 and the best KPP available at 1.

There could easily be a standout mid or a standout KP there.

Or more particularly - only doubtful KPs there.

I'd like KPFs at 11 and/or 18 too but ...

Best available and if that means 4 mids - so be it.

I would think if both talia and butcher are gone that there will be a decent mid available.

So i would take the mid.

I'm actually hoping like hell that either Tapscott or Lucas fall to us at 11...

But if we have to settle for Butcher I guess I will survive

If Tapscott is available we would be stupid not to take him. regardless of needs. Highly doubt it though.

We would definitely need a KPF at 18 though.

  old55 said:

How do you know?

That's like saying there's not not going to be a lot to choose between the best midfielder available at 1 and the best KPP available at 1.

There could easily be a standout mid or a standout KP there.

Or more particularly - only doubtful KPs there.

I'd like KPFs at 11 and/or 18 too but ...

Best available and if that means 4 mids - so be it.

Absolutely.

Best available should be the policy for our top 4 picks.

  Dr Jekyl & Mr Hyde said:

Best available.

*start drafting for need from round 2 onwards.

Considering that this will be our third choice and that the draft is weakened by the change in age isn't pick 11 really the equivalent of "round 2"?

In saying that best available at 11 and needs based at 18 (key position forward) for mine.

BP has stated repeatedly all year that we will be taking the best players available with all of our early picks.

The end.

The trouble is, what exactly are our needs, and how 'needy' are we?

I've been thinking a bit about ruckmen. We're going to need one, one we can count on, in a few years as Jamar gets older and the collection of 'possible/unlikely' ruckmen that we have thins out.

In the next two drafts, the best ruckman will be gone, bank on it. Each of Gold Coast and the Westies will look to first secure a ready-to-go ruckman from another club and then pick up a top future prospect and a general back up as well. Even if we come about 12th, we wont have a pick in the top ten for those two years, either.

In this draft there is only one really standout ruckman, Nathan Vardy. The AFL website 'Draft Rater' has Vardy at 8-25, Fitzpatrick next is teens to 35.

So, Vardy is therabouts in pure 'best available' terms, and fills a critical need that will be all but impossible to fill otherwise. I think we should be making sure that there is a quality ruckman developing alongside the midfield group that he will spend his career working with, rather than throwing one in years into the process.

So I guess my question is; Is getting the best ruck that will be available for at least the next three years, worth pick 11?

Maybe I'm favouring this because I'm convinced that butcher/lucas.tapscott will be gone at 11 and Griffiths will still be available at 18, and that this combination gives us the best overall value from 11 & 18.

  old55 said:

How do you know?

That's like saying there's not not going to be a lot to choose between the best midfielder available at 1 and the best KPP available at 1.

There could easily be a standout mid or a standout KP there.

Or more particularly - only doubtful KPs there.

I'd like KPFs at 11 and/or 18 too but ...

Best available and if that means 4 mids - so be it.

What I'm saying is that there is rarely a standout "best available".It is entirely subjective. Put 5 recruiters in a room and ask them to rank 20 players. I guarantee you'll get 5 different lists starting from a difference of opinion on pick #1 ( Scully or Trengrove?)

The fact is that 99 times out of 100 there is no such thing as the "best available" except by reference to the balance of your list. We need KPPs - KPPs are hard to find - but "you've got to be in it to win it"

  hoopla said:

What I'm saying is that there is rarely a standout "best available".It is entirely subjective. Put 5 recruiters in a room and ask them to rank 20 players. I guarantee you'll get 5 different lists starting from a difference of opinion on pick #1 ( Scully or Trengrove?)

The fact is that 99 times out of 100 there is no such thing as the "best available" except by reference to the balance of your list. We need KPPs - KPPs are hard to find - but "you've got to be in it to win it"

BP & co rank all the players prior to the draft & pick them accordingly. Of course it is subjective & of course different recruiters rate players differently, all that matters to MFC is who they rate. MFC will be picking the player they deem 'best available' at pick 11, if MFC rate Tapscott higher than Butcher then that is who we will pick.

  hoopla said:

What I'm saying is that there is rarely a standout "best available".It is entirely subjective. Put 5 recruiters in a room and ask them to rank 20 players. I guarantee you'll get 5 different lists starting from a difference of opinion on pick #1 ( Scully or Trengrove?)

The fact is that 99 times out of 100 there is no such thing as the "best available" except by reference to the balance of your list. We need KPPs - KPPs are hard to find - but "you've got to be in it to win it"

There is such a thing and it is purely subjective. But its an assessment that has to be made by BP. And his job lives or dies by it.

Best available refers to whats availabler not the needs of the list.

If the best available is a KPP then fine if it isn't then you take the player you believe is the best talent in the draft. Why compromise the quality of your list by taking a KPP who you have reservations about against a midfielder who you dont, particularly in a skinny draft with few if any KPPs of quality being available.

And as far I am concerned I might "be in it to win it" with pick 34 but I dont want to punt picks 1,2,11,18 on KPP who BP did not consider the best available talent.

I still have nightmares over Molan, Smith, Rogers and Breese.

  hoopla said:

What I'm saying is that there is rarely a standout "best available".It is entirely subjective. Put 5 recruiters in a room and ask them to rank 20 players. I guarantee you'll get 5 different lists starting from a difference of opinion on pick #1 ( Scully or Trengrove?)

The fact is that 99 times out of 100 there is no such thing as the "best available" except by reference to the balance of your list. We need KPPs - KPPs are hard to find - but "you've got to be in it to win it"

It's all about player's ceilings. What they will be like in 5-10 years.

If a midfielder has a higher ceiling, you take him.

If you have reservations about a KPP and those reservations come out to be true, you really aren't filling a need.

  jacey said:

It's all about player's ceilings. What they will be like in 5-10 years.

If a midfielder has a higher ceiling, you take him.

If you have reservations about a KPP and those reservations come out to be true, you really aren't filling a need.

Isnt it more what they will give you over that period of time?

It a good chance that when a player hits his 5-10 year ceiling, it may not be at MFC. And that ceiling may in fact be a few floors below the standard you want.

Pick 11 is a pretty early pick really.

You would reasonably expect to get a pretty decent KPP at pick 11.

  FairBump PlayOn said:

Pick 11 is a pretty early pick really.

You would reasonably expect to get a pretty decent KPP at pick 11.

It depends on the draft. This draft is said to be light on for KPPs.

In this draft the one or two KPPs you would have considered at 11 might not be available then.

  Rhino Richards said:

There is such a thing and it is purely subjective. But its an assessment that has to be made by BP. And his job lives or dies by it.

Best available refers to whats availabler not the needs of the list.

If the best available is a KPP then fine if it isn't then you take the player you believe is the best talent in the draft. Why compromise the quality of your list by taking a KPP who you have reservations about against a midfielder who you dont, particularly in a skinny draft with few if any KPPs of quality being available.abb

And as far I am concerned I might "be in it to win it" with pick 34 but I dont want to punt picks 1,2,11,18 on KPP who BP did not consider the best available talent.

I still have nightmares over Molan, Smith, Rogers and Breese.

You've probably bumped in to me in those nightmares!

You could say that the mistake with Molan wasn't so much putting needs ahead of talent - but completely misreading Molan's market worth. We needed tall defenders and he may have been the best potential tall defender in the draft - it's just that he wasn't worth any more than pick 50.

It looks like we are only going to have 4 picks in this draft. Where are we going to get our KPPs from if we don't use our 3rd and 4 th picks on them this year? It would be a different story if we had 7-8 vacancies on our list - but we don't.I'd agree with you if it is demonstrably clear that none of the available KPPs are up to it - but I don't believe that anyone can say that with certainty especially as talls take longer to develop than smalls.

If all the quality KPF's are gone, I really like Gysberts at pick 11. Came second in Buckley's kicking test, and his champs highlights look pretty good.

  hoopla said:

You've probably bumped in to me in those nightmares!

You could say that the mistake with Molan wasn't so much putting needs ahead of talent - but completely misreading Molan's market worth. We needed tall defenders and he may have been the best potential tall defender in the draft - it's just that he wasn't worth any more than pick 50.

It looks like we are only going to have 4 picks in this draft. Where are we going to get our KPPs from if we don't use our 3rd and 4 th picks on them this year? It would be a different story if we had 7-8 vacancies on our list - but we don't.I'd agree with you if it is demonstrably clear that none of the available KPPs are up to it - but I don't believe that anyone can say that with certainty especially as talls take longer to develop than smalls.

Sorry about that. B)

Molan was clearly a case of placing needs about best available. If he was pick 50 and failed then OK. But at pick 9 and nothing but a delisting then that's ouch. Some years ago Craig Cameron advised that this was the case with Molan and a lesson had been learned from it.

All recruitment is judgement and that comes with risk.

I would be surprised if pick 11 was not used for best available. I have to admit that I am open to BP showing a little bit of licence in prioritising pick 18 as a KPF but not to the extent that there is a clearly better player available from another position. I just get the feeling though that if we keep accumulating mids then the effort to develop them all effectively with limited places available will be less than ideal. We flooded our list last year with ball carriers and if we add Scully, Trengove and perhaps a mid at 11 then I think another mid at 18 is over the top. We have a clearly obvious requirement to stick a decent tall kid up forward where they can importantly freely develop. I won't say what we should do because I don't have a sound enough grasp of the talent pool and predicting where players will go is for others to do. I just hope there is at least 1 decent KPF worthy of being picked with 18 if not 11 and if BP decides to show a slight bit of leeway at 18 then I won't mind. Then there is still the LB factor which may effect things atm as well.

  Rhino Richards said:

Sorry about that. B)

Shivers ... Would three make a crowd.