He was also weighing him at at our first round pick too, but took the gamble that he'd be there come our second rounder. Got one right for a change. Still doesn't excuse his Lucas Cook call, whose manager even told him he would be a 2nd to 3rd round pick at best.

Howe was supposed to be a smokey and people thought he would go late in the draft with a pick in the 50's. It was a midfielders draft and we went with all talls, I still don't understand the logic behind that decision.

I don't know if we got the Howe decision right when Parker was still available (I know who I would rather have), if we got him at pick 50 instead of Davis then we would have won.

Yes, the fact that Petracca, Brayshaw and McCartin may or may not be those players.

Right now they are the best players but I can pretty much guarantee from bitter experience that others will pass at least one of them, maybe all of them.

The judgements made on here about taking 'best available' are increasingly becoming moot, being weighed down by the fact that those that were the 'best available' when they were 18 are anything but when they are 22.

Yes you a right, by the age of 22 I'm sure there is another player of the draft who'll excel ahead of those three. Although the question is which one?.... at this point in time we or no one knows.

Once these youngsters go into the AFL system there are a range of other factors that will vary between clubs that will contribute to their ultimate success or failure, these include club playing culture, club development programs, and their living conditions. For example would Fyfe have excelled the way he did in later year if he was drafted by us, I doubt it.

On the basis we as a club need mids, it is absolutely foolish to go into the draft with such high picks and exclude the likes of McCartin based on our needs. Do you honestly think an 18 year old midfielder next year will be able to constantly match it week in and week out with the likes of Hodge, Mitchell, Jack, JPK, Fyfe, Barlow, Pendles, GAJ, Cotchin, Watson, Rockliff etc.??? I certainly don't think so.

On that basis the draftees should be ranked primarily based on talent and previous output/ track records along with the considerations of personality, character and work ethic to help determine their likelihood of succeeding at the next level.

Definitely not needs.

Do we have to go after the past again? Id prefer made up rumours about who the saints will take thanks

Hassa Mann was one. Flower, just about a mid. Ricky Jackson didn't bother, and I don't remember Greg Healy playing dirty. Woey wasn't a thug. There'd be plenty of examples. I s'pose the footballers you meet are mostly the ones you seek out, rather than the other way round, d-l?

Nice to see Robinson dumped, by the way...

I think you've got the wrong dirty.

Sugar was very dirty often. woey was often dirty. Hassa, was always dirty, from my first memories of him as a nipper.

Edited October 25, 201410 yr by dee-luded

I'd give Prendegast a tick for getting Howe at 35ish.

even the worst dart thrower is bound to hit the board once in a while. blindfold or not.

Best talent, most likely to be a star over the best available midfielder. Pretty simple.

The player who is likely to give you the greatest output over the course of their career, that's the one I want Taylor/ Viney/Roos to select.

Am I missing something here? The concept is not confusing to me.

Surely there is some sort of difference between the potential of a player and the likelihood he will fulfil his potential?

So then, who do you take? A player who is a certainty to become as good as Grimes, or a player who could be as good as Tyson?

I think you look for players who exhibit the qualities needed to "make it", and then from there you look to see who matches them with the most "talent" or "potential."

I've got my YouTube highligts recruiters cap on, and with that I declare Laverde our pick 3.

He has that class, that bit of silk, the evasiveness and deftness when needed. I see some Pendles in him.

Hopefully the club see it the same. If they are looking for a tall midfielder who can play forward he is our man. A safer and more logical bet than a defender who MAY turn into a midfielder (Lever) I'm sure.

I see a future of Laverde and Stretch running teams off their feet through the middle.

So with Brayshaw and Laverde in this draft, the best mid available in next years draft and we snag a big forward in FA (Tex please) we could actually be in a bloody good position around 2016!

I've got my YouTube highligts recruiters cap on, and with that I declare Laverde our pick 3.

He has that class, that bit of silk, the evasiveness and deftness when needed. I see some Pendles in him.

Hopefully the club see it the same. If they are looking for a tall midfielder who can play forward he is our man. A safer and more logical bet than a defender who MAY turn into a midfielder (Lever) I'm sure.

I see a future of Laverde and Stretch running teams off their feet through the middle.

So with Brayshaw and Laverde in this draft, the best mid available in next years draft and we snag a big forward in FA (Tex please) we could actually be in a bloody good position around 2016!

I thought he was the most outstanding player in the SA V VIC METRO game. He singlehandedly kept them in the game, he seems to have it all, he can take a mark, he's quick, good at run and carry and has a real x factor about him that I didn't see in Petracca or Brayshaw. Didn't see much inside work from him which must be his only downside. Sounds like he could go to Collingwood at pick 5.

Surely there is some sort of difference between the potential of a player and the likelihood he will fulfil his potential?

So then, who do you take? A player who is a certainty to become as good as Grimes, or a player who could be as good as Tyson?

I think you look for players who exhibit the qualities needed to "make it", and then from there you look to see who matches them with the most "talent" or "potential."

I think there needs to be some distinction about who is arguing what.

1. Best available player vs best available midfielder

and

2. Best immediate output vs Best career output.

I want our club to recruit the best available player (any position) they expect to give the greatest career output.

And it may be that that player is a midfielder who is currently considered the best player right now....or it may not.

Edited October 26, 201410 yr by jabberwocky

2. Is not that cut and dried though.

Like I said, what if you've got a kid who is 95% certain to give an output like Daniel Jackson (long-ish career, a B&F, solid but unspectacular role player) or a kid who has 65% chance of becoming Daniel Wells, but could also be a Richard Tambling...

It's not even as scientific as the hypothetical I've just thrown up there.

So what's the philosophy?

2. Is not that cut and dried though.

Like I said, what if you've got a kid who is 95% certain to give an output like Daniel Jackson (long-ish career, a B&F, solid but unspectacular role player) or a kid who has 65% chance of becoming Daniel Wells, but could also be a Richard Tambling...

It's not even as scientific as the hypothetical I've just thrown up there.

So what's the philosophy?

Yes exactly, and I am not saying that I am the one who has the information to make these calls.

Re 2. that is where I expect our recruiting experts to make their money.

Not to pick the Larke medalist or All Australian CHF, or the small bodied hard working outside mid with questionable disposal.

Nailing the top picks is not as easy as we probably believed 5 years ago.

That's a good point. I can see in the past with Cook, it seemed like BP handballed the responsibility by justifying the pick with his selection as AA U/18 CHF. I think most people would have been a bit surprised at the time when they found out Cook had been awarded that honour.

Enough is enough! Time for the football public to find another easy target regarding draft day stuff-ups. We need to get it right this year so this "Groundhog Day" reporting stops.

My full opionion can be read via this link: http://www.thepeptalk.com.au/stop-reminding-demon-supporters-of-thier-drafting-failures/

That would be a great if true.

If the Saints take McCartin, then taking Petracca & Wright would be the way to go for me - Wright is going to become such as valuable and dangerous player in the years to come and way too good to pass up.

Petracca and Brayshaw then, oooo yeah baby!

Petrecca then lever or Bradshaw at 3 would make my day

Well go ahead but do you feel lucky punk?

Well according to some Collingwood supporter, we are 100% getting Mccartin, under the assumption Saints take Petracca.

I have an excellent source at the MFC and have been told they have locked in McCartin at 2, and Brayshaw at 3, believing the Aints have locked on Petracca at 1.

If the Aints take Petracca that's how it will fall. Not really sure who GWS take as it's just guessing, but I'm hoping Wright slips through to us at 5.

He was also weighing him at at our first round pick too, but took the gamble that he'd be there come our second rounder. Got one right for a change. Still doesn't excuse his Lucas Cook call, whose manager even told him he would be a 2nd to 3rd round pick at best.

That is absolute rubbish about Cook, had guaranteed wasn't going past 20 or 21

Well according to some Collingwood supporter, we are 100% getting Mccartin, under the assumption Saints take Petracca.

I have an excellent source at the MFC and have been told they have locked in McCartin at 2, and Brayshaw at 3, believing the Aints have locked on Petracca at 1.

If the Aints take Petracca that's how it will fall. Not really sure who GWS take as it's just guessing, but I'm hoping Wright slips through to us at 5.

I think Brayshaw and McCartin as pick 2 and 3 makes sense. Brayshaw looks a really good midfielder and we really do need a second key forward coming through to partner Hogan. History tells you most of the best key forwards are picked very high in the draft. I like that McCartin is a true big forward, we haven't had one since Neita.

Our midfield will still be terrible next year, but we'll probably throw huge money at a free agent midfielder at the end of next year.

I think Brayshaw and McCartin as pick 2 and 3 makes sense. Brayshaw looks a really good midfielder and we really do need a second key forward coming through to partner Hogan. History tells you most of the best key forwards are picked very high in the draft. I like that McCartin is a true big forward, we haven't had one since Neita.

Our midfield will still be terrible next year, but we'll probably throw huge money at a free agent midfielder at the end of next year.

Also, I'd prefer a key forward and a midfielder, fills 2 needs, than getting a KP defender (Lever) or an athletic utility (Laverde). Wright to me looks like a bigger risk and haven't seen any phantom draft or draft expert rate him higher than McCartin as a forward. Apparently Wright is not a good ruckman, so if he's being drafted as a forward, I'd prefer McCartin.

To the people saying McCartin is no good have you seen him play live on more than 1 occasion?

Also, I'd prefer a key forward and a midfielder, fills 2 needs, than getting a KP defender (Lever) or an athletic utility (Laverde). Wright to me looks like a bigger risk and haven't seen any phantom draft or draft expert rate him higher than McCartin as a forward. Apparently Wright is not a good ruckman, so if he's being drafted as a forward, I'd prefer McCartin.

Wright is a CHF who can switch to perfect tap ruck if needed .(going by the reel).

He will be a top player for whoever gets him.

I think Brayshaw and McCartin as pick 2 and 3 makes sense. Brayshaw looks a really good midfielder and we really do need a second key forward coming through to partner Hogan. History tells you most of the best key forwards are picked very high in the draft. I like that McCartin is a true big forward, we haven't had one since Neita.

Our midfield will still be terrible next year, but we'll probably throw huge money at a free agent midfielder at the end of next year.

It sounds like you think picking him early will guarantee that he is good...

That is absolute rubbish about Cook, had guaranteed wasn't going past 20 or 21

Not Rubbish at all. I even remember the radio interview they did with him on draft night after being picked up by us. He said he was surprised to hear his name called so early, given that his manager told him it was looking like he would get picked from 2nd round onwards.

To the people saying McCartin is no good have you seen him play live on more than 1 occasion?

He is physical, has a presence and he leads to the right spots at the right time.

His only issue is his goal kicking, which does need work (but which KPF has had their own goal kicking issues?)

Not Rubbish at all. I even remember the radio interview they did with him on draft night after being picked up by us. He said he was surprised to hear his name called so early, given that his manager told him it was looking like he would get picked from 2nd round onwards.

Fremantle at 20 and Sydney 21 were very keen and they weren't expecting him to slide beyond that point for what it is worth.

I thought he was the most outstanding player in the SA V VIC METRO game. He singlehandedly kept them in the game, he seems to have it all, he can take a mark, he's quick, good at run and carry and has a real x factor about him that I didn't see in Petracca or Brayshaw. Didn't see much inside work from him which must be his only downside. Sounds like he could go to Collingwood at pick 5.

You talking about Sam Blease?