Oliver Wines

[BIG JIM 508]

I think GWS and the Dees have this deal all done when we got Hogan.

100%

[stranga 328]

There is now highlights of O'Rourke on the AFL draft machine and boy is the Pendlebury comparison spot on for him. Inside and outside ball winner and sublime kicking skills. Tougher decision than many think in my opinion. Im absolutely torn between these two. Love Wines' hard edge.

[Deecisive 1,652]

If Wines is there we will probably take him, he is a tough nut that we need, if he is not there we will have plenty of other quality young players to choose from, and hopefully Wines will want to come home from Sydney to play for the dees in a year or two.

[Jordie_tackles 354]

There is now highlights of O'Rourke on the AFL draft machine and boy is the Pendlebury comparison spot on for him. Inside and outside ball winner and sublime kicking skills. Tougher decision than many think in my opinion. Im absolutely torn between these two. Love Wines' hard edge.

I saw Both at the Metro Country game in Geelong, liked O'rourke then before he exploded.....both players are genuine talents and we will be offered one of them, its just who

[Demon Jack 6,325]

Even if GWS happen to take Wines with one of their first 3 picks, whose to say that Ollie won't want to come back to Vic in a few years.

[olisik 4,060]

Even if GWS happen to take Wines with one of their first 3 picks, whose to say that Ollie won't want to come back to Vic in a few years.

In a few years when we are possibly sanctioned and have nothing to trade for him?

[Demon Jack 6,325]

In a few years when we are possibly sanctioned and have nothing to trade for him?

You never know, we've had shocking luck in the draft and may have a dud top 20 pick to trade for him

[dtrinh 71]

There is now highlights of O'Rourke on the AFL draft machine and boy is the Pendlebury comparison spot on for him. Inside and outside ball winner and sublime kicking skills. Tougher decision than many think in my opinion. Im absolutely torn between these two. Love Wines' hard edge.

yeah agree with that... I wasn't sure about o'rourke until that footage came out. Looks like an absolute beauty... good poise, balance, speed and can win his own ball inside. Only problem I think was he had a very average first two under 18 championships and only showed a bit in the last game? Not sure about his consistency then?

[deejammin' 2,065]

I don't mean to sound contrary, but she didn't say that at all. She said Menzel had top 3 talent and would go anywhere from 3-12. You can also see one of her tweets from today where she refers to him going to GWS at 3 as a "chance" when asked the question.

You've read far too much into her comments. ON BF someone said the same as you and perhaps this is your info. That poster has also been corrected.

No worries. I don't read bigfooty, for one, two, this was the conclusion I reached hearing her on SEN myself in the car. Anywhere from 3-12 still means 3 is possible, and she said it was a "chance", and she said a club with as many high picks as GWS might take that chance. Not to sound contrary, but thats pretty much exactly what I said and what you have unnecessarily corrected.

[ChaserJ 3,964]

yeah agree with that... I wasn't sure about o'rourke until that footage came out. Looks like an absolute beauty... good poise, balance, speed and can win his own ball inside. Only problem I think was he had a very average first two under 18 championships and only showed a bit in the last game? Not sure about his consistency then?

He also had a big game against South Australia. Was on fire and a major reason Metro got the win over in Adelaide.

Consistency (even within games, never mind game to game) has been an issue for O'Rourke and has been flagged as something that he needs to work on.

My only question is around his drive and focus. Is he as driven as Trent Cotchin, or is he Travis Johnstone? It's one thing having skills and athleticism, but it's what's above the shoulders that tends to separate the good from the elite. If he ticks that box, then he is easily a top 3 prospect.

[olisik 4,060]

thinking about it more I would be happy with Wines.

Sure we need more outside spread but we can go for that in next years draft, where we hopefully will have pick 6 - 7. Take out the inside mids, KPP and we may be able to snare the best or 2nd best outside mid in the draft. Then we can start our serious push for the 8

Also with Wines and Viney growing up together they will have chemistry in the square. Chemistry is a priceless attribute and we also know that with them their together it would be near impossible for other clubs to try and pry either of them away with $$$ over the years.

Edited November 12, 2012 by olisik

[Hannibal 5,814]

Not to sound contrary, but thats pretty much exactly what I said and what you have unnecessarily corrected.

You said, "EQ on SEN this morning implied that GWS would take Whitfield, Toumpas and Menzel at 1, 2, 3".

She didn't. Saying someone is a "chance" to go from 3-12 is hardly "implying GWS would take Menzel at 3".

[olisik 4,060]

You said, "EQ on SEN this morning implied that GWS would take Whitfield, Toumpas and Menzel at 1, 2, 3".

She didn't. Saying someone is a "chance" to go from 3-12 is hardly "implying GWS would take Menzel at 3".

Settle down, no need to go nit picking word by word

[daisycutter 28,578]

In a few years when we are possibly sanctioned and have nothing to trade for him?

groan.....it's back to the Wailing Room for you

[olisik 4,060]

groan.....it's back to the Wailing Room for you

Someone can't take a joke

[deejammin' 2,065]

You said, "EQ on SEN this morning implied that GWS would take Whitfield, Toumpas and Menzel at 1, 2, 3".

She didn't. Saying someone is a "chance" to go from 3-12 is hardly "implying GWS would take Menzel at 3".

In EQ's interview on morning SEN the day I wrote that comment Emma said that Menzel was top three talent, that Grundy could slip to 7 and in her mind it was unlikely GWS would take Grundy, that with as many picks in the top 10 as GWS has they may take the punt on Menzel's knees and take him with pick three as he is a "game breaker" and "potentially the best player in the draft". I added the qualifier "implied" because obviously nothing is set in stone and there are plenty of reasons GWS may not do this, as she also expounded in the same interview. However, I don't see what is wrong with what I have said, I never said "definately" I never said Menzel wasn't a punt, but that is what I think EQ was saying in that interview, or at least siting as a possibility.

Also for the record, saying someone is a "chance to go 3-12" does imply that they may go 3, and in order for that to happen GWS would have to take him.

Edited November 13, 2012 by deejammin'

[nutbean 8,837]

. Chemistry is a priceless attribute and we also know that with them their together it would be near impossible for other clubs to try and pry either of them away with $$$ over the years.

You mean like best mates Scully and Blease ?

[olisik 4,060]

You mean like best mates Scully and Blease ?

Did they grow up together?

[Hannibal 5,814]

In EQ's interview on morning SEN the day I wrote that comment Emma said that Menzel was top three talent, that Grundy could slip to 7 and in her mind it was unlikely GWS would take Grundy, that with as many picks in the top 10 as GWS has they may take the punt on Menzel's knees and take him with pick three as he is a "game breaker" and "potentially the best player in the draft". I added the qualifier "implied" because obviously nothing is set in stone and there are plenty of reasons GWS may not do this, as she also expounded in the same interview. However, I don't see what is wrong with what I have said, I never said "definately" I never said Menzel wasn't a punt, but that is what I think EQ was saying in that interview, or at least siting as a possibility.

Also for the record, saying someone is a "chance to go 3-12" does imply that they may go 3, and in order for that to happen GWS would have to take him.

Imply "would take at 3" is very different to "a chance to go at 3".

If you can't understand that I can't do much more for you.

[Lord Travis 10,178]

Holy sh*t let it go guys!

How about we talk about Oliver Wines in the Oliver Wines thread?

I think he's a certainty to get picked up by us now, although I don't agree with it. We'll certainly be well stocked for inside mids next year and going forward. We desperately need some outside spread and skill now.

[Don24 103]

agreed, this is like a lovers argument, u guys got something going on? ha

[H_T 2,941]

Holy sh*t let it go guys!

How about we talk about Oliver Wines in the Oliver Wines thread?

I think he's a certainty to get picked up by us now, although I don't agree with it. We'll certainly be well stocked for inside mids next year and going forward. We desperately need some outside spread and skill now.

You don't agree with it? What do you agree with, then?

There's being well stocked for inside mids and there is being stocked for quality inside mids - we don't have the latter.

[deeko 937]

I think he's a certainty to get picked up by us now, although I don't agree with it. We'll certainly be well stocked for inside mids next year and going forward. We desperately need some outside spread and skill now.

I don't think you can ever have enough players who want to win there own pill. I believe we had one (Jones) for the last season who was continually desperate for it. Wines will compliment him well. From one game I watched this year he also did some good things on the outside so please people, don't think of him as simply a ball extracting machine who is average everywhere else.

He and Viney will be great. The problem is that there excellent ability inside the packs takes the gloss off there great work outside. Which as said, was great and will be going forward.

As for outside mids / more receiver like players, Blease, Bail, Davey, Strauss and Watts will be around. Along with the additions this year of Byrnes, Rodan, Tynan and my main man Taggert (get around him!!) will assist.

[deejammin' 2,065]

Imply "would take at 3" is very different to "a chance to go at 3".

If you can't understand that I can't do much more for you.

I think we both think the same, that it is a chance, but unlikely. Thats all, sorry you didn't like my wording. back to the thread. If GWS get Tippett do they still take Grundy? Who do they take as their top 3?

[Lord Travis 10,178]

As for outside mids / more receiver like players, Blease, Bail, Davey, Strauss and Watts will be around. Along with the additions this year of Byrnes, Rodan, Tynan and my main man Taggert (get around him!!) will assist.

Wines' outside work is average-good. His skills are nothing special, his pace is average, but he does hit the goals when he get a chance. I won't be disappointed if we take him, as he'll be a good midfielder for us and definitely has the drive to make sure he gets the best out of himself. I just worry about our outside mids.

Of the ones you've listed there, Blease will make it over time once his tank is big enough, Bail will likely be delisted in the next few years, Davey is cooked, Strauss is more a half back flanker and even there is struggling to get a game, and Watts will play down back or head back forward. So of that list there is only one who I'd say is going to be playing that role long term.

Byrnes will play forward pocket for a year or two. Rodan will be a rounded midfielder for a year or two, Tynan is a defender, and Taggert I hope comes on as he seems like he could be valuable in the midfield.

You can see from our list though we desperately need outside class more than inside grunt.