Toumpas v Stringer v Wines

[ChaserJ 5,157]

Toumpas needs surgery on his hip:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/140230/default.aspx

I'd be surprised if it's not the sort of thing that's affected his burst speed, because he is known for having good pace. Without injury worries I rate him top 3, but I'd want to be convinced that the hip wont cause problems in the future before spending pick 3. Unfortunate for him (and recruiters) that he wont be able to play out the season.

With Wines, I'd like to see what his 20m sprint times are like, because I don't know how quick he is on the burst/spread. It's the difference between him going top 5 or in the 8-15 range for mine.

I hadn't seen Stringer before yesterday, and I still need to see more to decide where he sits. Still looks to be building into it after the broken leg. I hope he can finish the TAC Cup season strongly.

[Axis of Bob 11,839]

He sounds like he's got a torn labrum due to a hip impingement. That shouldn't affect his speed, but he could be protecting it.

His game wasn't dynamic and he didn't use any athleticism, but he may just be cruising about of his own design and floating at half back due to the hip. But I'd like to see more of his game uninjured.

BH, Stringer 'apparently' had excellent speed prior to his injury. But it was a pretty serious injury.

[Deers 202]

I shouldn't dwell on just one game, but Stringer kicking 10.7 returning last April on one good leg gets to me.

I don't care so much about the number of goals; moreover, the seventeen scoring shots (and I believe a couple more OOB) to me is a strong indicator of this guy's fierce desire to play.

He didn't need to do much that day to dominate - against a pitiful TAC Cup opponent and undoubtedly bigger and stronger. He could easily have slotted a cool 6.1 and put the cue in the rack by three-quarter-time. With a bung leg, nobody would criticise him for it.

Hell, how long has it taken Blease to get up and going to some degree?

Attitude is everything and this kid's got it. I don't give a stuff if he appears slow or podgy ATM, unless the injury has permanently affected his performance.

If he is ignored past pick 10 it's an absolute steal.

[old55 23,687]

He sounds like he's got a torn labrum due to a hip impingement. That shouldn't affect his speed, but he could be protecting it.

I think that would affect his acceleration and power, even if as you say only psychologically.

It can't be affected if you don't have any ;-)

[Viney12 196]

Are you 100% sure that's how it works?

I agree that's a likely process, but it's equally possible that each team only gets one swing at a F/S nomination and if they're trumped then it moves on to the next club.

Recently changed

Read here

[olisik 4,060]

We may get none of these kids, if we are forced to take Viney at 3 and god forbid, trade #4 for Boak

[old55 23,687]

Recently changed

Read here

OK great thanks for that - agreed it's what rpfc said:

Should Gold Coast bid, hypothetically, for Daniher, Essendon would then be asked if it wanted to match the bid with its next available pick. If the Bombers did that, the Suns would then be given the opportunity to bid for one of the other players. Those remaining would be offered to GWS, Melbourne and the rest of the clubs, in reverse ladder order.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-overhauls-fatherson-bidding-20120627-212vm.html#ixzz1zhpt9ItS

[Bonkers 994]

OK great thanks for that - agreed it's what rpfc said:

Read more: http://www.theage.co...l#ixzz1zhpt9ItS

I think its pretty rubbish that a team such as GC/GWS gets to have more than one crack at the father son picks. The system should be whoever has pick 1 gets to select one player who is eligible for F/S & then the bidding moves to the 2nd pick to nominate a player & so on. This rule change has the potential to stitch us up, or am I just being paranoid?

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

The rule change is largely inconsequential.. they are either going to bid for Viney, or they aren't. The "risk" is still the same to them.

[Bonkers 994]

The rule change is largely inconsequential.. they are either going to bid for Viney, or they aren't. The "risk" is still the same to them.

Say one team rates Viney the other doesn't. First pick could go on Daniher & then they have the option to pick Viney also. If they only had one pick not numerous & the next team didn't rate Viney we would get him as a second rounder. Under the former rules did teams have more than one bid or was it one bid & then the bidding moved onto the next club down the order of the draft?

[olisik 4,060]

It does give them a 2nd chance to bid for Viney now. Theoretically GWS and GC and use there 1 pick, to screw over all the F/S if they wanted. Where as before they could only screw up one other team with that specific pick. So it raises the chance of them bidding for Viney now whereas before, they may have bidded for Daniher, thinking the bid on him would be more worthwhile.

[Jesse Christ 2,884]

The former rules were one bid and then move onto the next club- which does give them an extra bite at the cherry- but the risk assessment will still be the same from GC or GWS- they will still risk losing a more promising kid if they try to play funny buggers. Personally I'm not too worried about the rule change- there is a good chance one of these two would bid for Viney and the other for Daniher anyway to force our hands.

Actually they probably wouldn't have bid for Daniher because there are more opportunities for someone else to force Essendon's hand as they will have many clubs before them in the pecking order. Either way a secret deal would have had to be made by us IMO

[olisik 4,060]

The former rules were one bid and then move onto the next club- which does give them an extra bite at the cherry- but the risk assessment will still be the same from GC or GWS- they will still risk losing a more promising kid if they try to play funny buggers. Personally I'm not too worried about the rule change- there is a good chance one of these two would bid for Viney and the other for Daniher anyway to force our hands.

Actually they probably wouldn't have bid for Daniher because there are more opportunities for someone else to force Essendon's hand as they will have many clubs before them in the pecking order. Either way a secret deal would have had to be made by us IMO

The difference is they may have thought it was less risk to bid on Daniher before so would have just settled to use there pick on him as they would be happy to get him for 1st or 2nd pick regardless.

Now once they bid for him with the comfort of low risk, there going to consider bidding for Viney also.

Can argue about this all day though, end of the day we'll see what happens. I am confident in the team on hand after how they performed last year during the trade/draft period. (Not exactly wrapped with Taggert and his potential full first-year long sidelining injury but what can ya do).

I am expecting a good 3 - 4 new best 22 players though

[MadAsHell 4,214]

did you prefer garlett to kennedy?

Would be happy with either to tell the truth.

Garlett excites me a bit more.

[old55 23,687]

It does give them a 2nd chance to bid for Viney now. Theoretically GWS and GC and use there 1 pick, to screw over all the F/S if they wanted. Where as before they could only screw up one other team with that specific pick. So it raises the chance of them bidding for Viney now whereas before, they may have bidded for Daniher, thinking the bid on him would be more worthwhile.

It doesn't really mean that - they could still have bid for multiple F/S under the old system, they would have just had to do it in turn as each F/S came up for consideration. Under the old system if Daniher is up first, they bid for him, Essendon says they'll take him. Next player up is Viney and they can bid for him.

The change is to stop Essendon or Melbourne successfully bidding for another club's F/S before their's comes up and therefore using the pick they would otherwise need to use on their own F/S when he does come up. Stewart comes up before Daniher - Essendon bids their 1st rounder 15 - Collingwood doesn't want to use their 1st rounder 20 so Essendon gets Stewart at 15. Daniher comes up next, GWS bid pick 1, Essendon says we'll take him - their next available pick is Round 2 at 33. That's what it's stopping.

Yet another thread becomes a Viney thread - sorry ....

[olisik 4,060]

It doesn't really mean that - they could still have bid for multiple F/S under the old system, they would have just had to do it in turn as each F/S came up for consideration. Under the old system if Daniher is up first, they bid for him, Essendon says they'll take him. Next player up is Viney and they can bid for him.

The change is to stop Essendon or Melbourne successfully bidding for another club's F/S before their's comes up and therefore using the pick they would otherwise need to use on their own F/S when he does come up. Stewart comes up before Daniher - Essendon bids their 1st rounder 15 - Collingwood doesn't want to use their 1st rounder 20 so Essendon gets Stewart at 15. Daniher comes up next, GWS bid pick 1, Essendon says we'll take him - their next available pick is Round 2 at 33. That's what it's stopping.

Yet another thread becomes a Viney thread - sorry ....

Thanks for that, I guess it doesn't change a thing then.

[olisik 4,060]

I read somewhere that Sheedy is expecting GWS to have up to 5 first rounder picks in this years draft.

Thought it was interesting. Sounds like they plan to trade for picks. They also need ruckman.

We have both and they have 17yr olds. I can see some potential deals being made.

[Philthy 284]

I have no doubt in my mind we will nab Viney with a 2nd rounder. GWS/GC would rather go After, Whitfield (Best player) or a Grundy/Daniher because those players are what both clubs require more than anything.

[Guest José Mourinho]

A lot of posters either dismissing or forgetting about Plowman.

He's injured and missed the champs, but I reckon he's right in the mix for one of our picks.

A cross between Fisher and Hurley that moves like a midfielder?

I'd take him.

[Hannibal 5,814]

Pick 3 or 4 is usually far too early for a defender despite the raps.

Hang on ...

[Guest trenners]

Is toumpas a better outside midfielder or half back flanker?

[Guest José Mourinho]

Is toumpas a better outside midfielder or half back flanker?

Think Jimmy Bartel.

[Return to Glory 8,447]

I have watched a considerable amount of TAC and if Stringer is available grab him. He will be the one that clubs say, 'should have grabbed'. Mate in Perth says that Jack Martin is being played down as well. We already have a Toumpas in Trengove. These two guys offer a point of difference imho

[rolly 149]

We've got a bevy of up and coming inside mids, what we need are some genuine speedster outside mids because bail as our main outside runner won't work long term. Will be very serviceable as a Brock McLean replacement but we still need a Murphy/ Simpson.

Whichever of the 3 best meets this requirement I'd say

[jurrahcane 70]

Outside runner with pace ... Jimmy Toumpas (question mark is his hip injury) - if he has no probs, then obvious #3 pick

Inside mid ball accumulator ... Oliver Wines (speed over 5 metres is key)

Strong forward with midfield function (like a Pavlich model) ... Jake Stringer - how he ends TAC cup season. on 2010, under 16's, he is #1 material. Right now, not top 20 but watch in next 8-10 weeks.

This draft is CRITICAL to our FUTURE. No pressure