The Tom Lynch Thread

[Demon Disciple 12,281]

Did we genuinely rate Gawn ahead of Tapscott?

If so then it's the exception case I described above.

It's a very risky ploy - I wouldn't do it but then I am risk averse.

No. It was well documented at the time that BP didn't think Tapscott would be there at pick 18. But because he was, it pushed Gawn and Fitzpatrick back in the picks. We were willing to take Gawn at 18 and Fitzpatrick at 34 (Have to question Fitzpatrick at 34 call).But as it turned out, we got both at picks 34 and 50 along with Tapscott. Those who were at the Melbourne function on draft night said that Chris Connolly was getting very pumped with the way the draft was working out for us.

[Axis of Bob 11,867]

Lynch to GC?

"If the Suns opt for an extra midfielder, Lynch looks likely to be snapped up by Melbourne at No. 12.

He would complement Jack Watts and Liam Jurrah in an emerging forward line.

Melbourne was the only club to speak to Lynch after the draft camp, when coach Dean Bailey and recruiting chief Barry Prendergast visited in October."

[Nasher 33,617]

Did we genuinely rate Gawn ahead of Tapscott?

If so then it's the exception case I described above.

It's a very risky ploy - I wouldn't do it but then I am risk averse.

Peanuts' version of the events is not as I understood it - I thought it was more like we had targetted Gawn at 18 but expected Tapscott to already be taken, so we took Tapscott, and Gawn falling to 34 was a stroke of luck.

[beelzebub 23,383]

Peanuts' version of the events is not as I understood it - I thought it was more like we had targetted Gawn at 18 but expected Tapscott to already be taken, so we took Tapscott, and Gawn falling to 34 was a stroke of luck.

Correct. That is the 'as stated' commentary by the FD after last draft. It caused a little bit of consternation and well, not panic, but serious revisions on the fly as Tappy wasnt meant to be there. We're just lucky I guess.

[Choko 493]

Peanuts' version of the events is not as I understood it - I thought it was more like we had targetted Gawn at 18 but expected Tapscott to already be taken, so we took Tapscott, and Gawn falling to 34 was a stroke of luck.

Correct. We thought Tapscott would be gone, but we KNEW Gysberts would be gone by 18.

[e25 5]

Correct. We thought Tapscott would be gone, but we KNEW Gysberts would be gone by 18.

Yeah... and?

That means, not only did we rate Gysberts higher than Tapscott, but we thought other teams did too.

In fact, it means our perception of Tapscott had no bearing on us choosing Gysberts at 11.

We simply thought he was the best available.