This sounds believable. WC was happy to trade down to 11 and it's quite likely I think that Acres and not Sheed has been their target all along.

Nah i think they will pick Sheed, people have been saying he will be the next captain of the Eagles.

But i would pick Sheed, Lennon, Scharenberg and Freeman ahead of him.

Acres is the big strong body type that Roos mentioned in his interview so it wouldn't surprise.

Acres is the big strong body type that Roos mentioned in his interview so it wouldn't surprise.

We got Dom Tyson, do you think he will go for another?

Or go for a guy like Freeman?

We got Dom Tyson, do you think he will go for another?

Or go for a guy like Freeman?

If you read what Roos said, you will see that they were prepared to trade away the number 2 pick because the top draft picks were all light bodied and he was looking for a bigger bodied player, one that would still be available at pick 9. Acres fits that description perfectly as does Sheed and maybe Freeman.

Roos said that last year we picked up smaller mids, Viney and Toumpass, and this year he wants bigger bodies to complement them and this, in my view, points to the above.

Acres is pick 12-20. Much better to choose from in top 10.

Plus Acres reminds me of ... Cale Morton. yikes!

Acres is pick 12-20. Much better to choose from in top 10.

Plus Acres reminds me of ... Cale Morton. yikes!

Acres is pick 12-20. Much better to choose from in top 10.

Plus Acres reminds me of ... Cale Morton. yikes!

Acres is nothing like Cale, trust me Blake knows how to get his own ball

yes you have your opinion and I have my opinion. Acres will not be in red and blue.

If you read what Roos said, you will see that they were prepared to trade away the number 2 pick because the top draft picks were all light bodied and he was looking for a bigger bodied player, one that would still be available at pick 9. Acres fits that description perfectly as does Sheed and maybe Freeman.

Roos said that last year we picked up smaller mids, Viney and Toumpass, and this year he wants bigger bodies to complement them and this, in my view, points to the above.

That's not what he said.

Roos chose Tyson because the "rated" mids at pick 2 were lighter bodied and Tyson had that bit of extra development we wanted. Listen to the interview again. There's no insinuation that we want a tall mid at pick 9, other than your imagination. The point was that a very good mid would still be available at pick 9. Any other "readings" are purely imaginary.

On Acres:

Just based on video he looks real quality, but more a flanker than pure mid. A bit like Embley at his best, which was vey good. As Mundy and Fyfe have shown though that can change. He might be a better Goddard.

But for where we are now he's too long term and not pure mid enough for me (on limited viewing)

That's not what he said.

Roos chose Tyson because the "rated" mids at pick 2 were lighter bodied and Tyson had that bit of extra development we wanted. Listen to the interview again. There's no insinuation that we want a tall mid at pick 9, other than your imagination. The point was that a very good mid would still be available at pick 9. Any other "readings" are purely imaginary.

Yeah thats what i thought...

The first time I looked at his highlight video he reminded me of Brent Grgic. I don't mean that in a nasty way; soft hands in marking contests and a nice Rolls Royce smooth style. And he seems to possess a more aggressive nature that Brent lacked.

It was only a 3 minute vid but I will be interested to see where Blake gets picked up and what he does in the future. He has something about him

That's not what he said.

Roos chose Tyson because the "rated" mids at pick 2 were lighter bodied and Tyson had that bit of extra development we wanted. Listen to the interview again. There's no insinuation that we want a tall mid at pick 9, other than your imagination. The point was that a very good mid would still be available at pick 9. Any other "readings" are purely imaginary.

Yes I did misinterpret what he said thanks for being so kind as to point that to to me. This is what he said and I guess I read something in to it that wasn't there, thanks once again.

"Rather than us getting another 18-year-old on the back of Jimmy Toumpas, Jack Viney and Jesse Hogan, we probably preferred to get an older player, with some real special talents. We think we've done that with Dom Tyson.

"We think pick two is going to be a good player, but having a guy that's two years older, and a bigger body and a bigger midfielder – most of the top end players in the draft are smaller mids. On the back of Jack and Jimmy last year, we need some size and real strength, so getting Dom was fantastic.''

And Roos remains confident of another win out of the Tyson trade deal with the No.9 pick. "There are quite a few really good players from pick one to 15," he said. "We weren't that worried about sliding down [the draft order] because there is a wide array of talent through that early area.

Well here we go Robbie, I'll make my first player statement.

I've been waiting for this thread because I think he is our man. Can play multiple roles, is big bodied, a good kick and can get the ball. IMO Freeman is high risk and Lennon has been over hyped on this forum.

I've some mates in WA who have mentioned him a number of times and reckon he's in the Nat Fyfe category. He's under everybody's radar.

I'll be fascinated to see if he's our man.

This sounds believable. WC was happy to trade down to 11 and it's quite likely I think that Acres and not Sheed has been their target all along.

It's funny, I haven't looked at this thread til now, but I've been thinking about Acres the last couple of days and he's really hard to place.

I watched him play at Simonds Stadium against VC & saw him as a diet Scharenberg that day.

At the time, I knew nothing of his injury, and knowing he had dislocated his shoulder 3 mins in makes it that much more impressive.

I felt he played a similar sweeper role to Sharenberg, but went forward a bit more and seemed to have maybe a little less class, but more contested ball-winning ability.

Didn't come across soft or hesitant despite the at-the-time-unbeknownst-to-me injury.

Thinking we had pick 2, I noted that I saw him as about pick 10, and therefore not really worth too much more thought.

After watching his video today, I think he really could be a contender for our pick.

I see a lot of Nathan Fyfe pre-draft in him, especially the physicality, attitude and independence.

Still, I think he'd a big roll of the dice.

Potentially a gutsy and high reward move.

As for Sheed, there's a lot to like, but I worry about his pace & just can't get excited about him as a selection.

I don't see the contested ball-winning ability of Priddis like some say, more him being ever-present around a pack & getting touches through workrate & positioning. He'll definitely be an ok player at the next level, but I don't get the feeling he'll ever be better than that.

Edited November 17, 201311 yr by Machsy

As for Sheed, there's a lot to like, but I worry about his pace & just can't get excited about him as a selection.

I don't see the contested ball-winning ability of Priddis like some say, more him being ever-present around a pack & getting touches through workrate & positioning. He'll definitely be an ok player at the next level, but I don't get the feeling he'll ever be better than that.

That's him…you've described his game well based on the Vic country outing.

A lot of phantom drafts have Acres around #15-16 and going to a side like Geelong. They'd win handsomely out of that selection.

As for Sheed, there's a lot to like, but I worry about his pace & just can't get excited about him as a selection.

I'd like some extra pace in the team, but I tend not to mark down an individual for not having great pace if they're a top shelf player.

Bartel, Selwood, Mitchell, Kennedy, Watson and plenty of others don't have great pace, but they're great players for varying reasons. So yes, I'd like some pace into the side, but if Sheed is good enough then being average in the pace department won't make a jot of difference. If he's not good enough it will make the world of difference. Is he good enough ? I don't know, as I haven't seen enough of him. I suspect you haven't either.

Btw, according to Quigley: "The one which seems to have gained the most traction is that Sheed has a lack of pace. Hopefully the Combine results have put paid to that furphy. Sheed does not have the explosiveness off the mark that many of the indigenous players are renowned for but neither is he slow and over 20m he was in the top 25% of those tested."

Acres is very green.

Not broad?

I'd like some extra pace in the team, but I tend not to mark down an individual for not having great pace if they're a top shelf player.

Bartel, Selwood, Mitchell, Kennedy, Watson and plenty of others don't have great pace, but they're great players for varying reasons. So yes, I'd like some pace into the side, but if Sheed is good enough then being average in the pace department won't make a jot of difference. If he's not good enough it will make the world of difference. Is he good enough ? I don't know, as I haven't seen enough of him. I suspect you haven't either.

Btw, according to Quigley: "The one which seems to have gained the most traction is that Sheed has a lack of pace. Hopefully the Combine results have put paid to that furphy. Sheed does not have the explosiveness off the mark that many of the indigenous players are renowned for but neither is he slow and over 20m he was in the top 25% of those tested."

I actually agree with all that, it makes sense in my head... but I just can't get excited about the kid.

I think it's his lack of quickness around packs.

Pace off the mark, agility, acceleration in tight spaces... However you want to put it.

I think that it's not so much of a case of his weaknesses being undersold, but more that his strengths are oversold.

My argument is less on his pace (because a player who plays his role doesn't need that pace necessarily) but more that the assumption is that he's a Sam Mitchell style clearance winner, which he may not be. I didn't see his lightning quick hands or his evasiveness in close that other people have seen. Hence my comparison with Sewell (who is a good player, but a bit more straightforward in style).

He's a mature player (physically and mentally) and it seems very likely that he'll be a good player. But does he have the innate talent to be as good as people are saying he will be?

I think that it's not so much of a case of his weaknesses being undersold, but more that his strengths are oversold.

My argument is less on his pace (because a player who plays his role doesn't need that pace necessarily) but more that the assumption is that he's a Sam Mitchell style clearance winner, which he may not be. I didn't see his lightning quick hands or his evasiveness in close that other people have seen. Hence my comparison with Sewell (who is a good player, but a bit more straightforward in style).

He's a mature player (physically and mentally) and it seems very likely that he'll be a good player. But does he have the innate talent to be as good as people are saying he will be?

If we're talking Sheed here 'Bob' he is definitely no Mitchell style clearance winner. 'Machsy' described him well on an earlier post, positions himself well to get the ball around the packs.

Sounds like a 60's television series.

I think I might have a naughty video starring Blake Acres.

Not broad?

I will ask Arnold Ziffle.

I think that it's not so much of a case of his weaknesses being undersold, but more that his strengths are oversold.

My argument is less on his pace (because a player who plays his role doesn't need that pace necessarily) but more that the assumption is that he's a Sam Mitchell style clearance winner, which he may not be. I didn't see his lightning quick hands or his evasiveness in close that other people have seen. Hence my comparison with Sewell (who is a good player, but a bit more straightforward in style).

He's a mature player (physically and mentally) and it seems very likely that he'll be a good player. But does he have the innate talent to be as good as people are saying he will be?

Who are you talking about? Sheed or Acres? Or someone else?

Sheed.

My fault, I went off on a tangent about Sheed, since they are both WA players rated around the same mark.

I do agree though, Sheed's strengths are overrated to me.

The stats look good, but watching him play, I just don't see it.

Don't discount the weakness of the current draft class meaning he is doing it against a lesser opposition.

The VC team was pretty poor this year.