NATIONAL DRAFT PICKS 3 & 7

[olisik 4,060]

Parish and Oliver for me.

Slap T Mac down forward to partner with Hogan, both big runners.

T Mac has experience at seeing the best forwards in the game play and played as a forward as a junior.

O Mac and Frost to fill the void down back. Draft project talks with picks 46/50

Midfield of Viney, Tyson, Salem, Petracca, Parish, Brayshaw and Oliver kicking it to TMac and Hogan for the next 10 years puts a smile on my face.

Edited November 11, 2015 by olisik

[hells bells 2,023]

Parish and Weideman for me would be a great result. I think we need another pure key position forward.

Then

Parish and McKay

[spirit of norm smith 16,651]

Agree.

Parish at #3 and Weideman/Curnow/ Mckay at #7

[Its Time for Another 4,303]

Well despite my not having spent too much time trawling through all the possibilities Im going to go with my gut...so to speak.

Not too distant in our past we had the opportunity to pick two players who knew each other inside out...were best mates and they as it happened were of the type for two spots on the list.

History now shows we pretty well stuffed up that twosome ...still ., we did get one !!

This draft theres another opportunity to pick up two mates who , again , would fill two spots very nicely. That being two mids...We need good mids...the more the merrier. We can fill in for the time any other role. There are players for those roles even if not the very best choice, for the moment but again we need good mids.. We also need to loom a fabric which will bind these players together as we build a good team. Nothing usurps mateship.

There are two players coming up for picking who are like two peas in a pod. Theyd add to our mid talent and might likely both make some step onto the big arena in 16 though it s not a requirement. 17's fine

I speak of Parish and Mathieson

I like what they would both bring. There's a bonus to getting both as they play ALREADY with a synergy

So...if i had to pick its Darcy and Rhys.

Worth learning from mistakes eh MFC

BB the mates factor occurred to me as well. Petracca/Brayshaw; Stretch/ANB; Parish/Mathieson. You couldn't help but be infected with the genuine excitement those two pairs last year generated by being picked together. I wonder if we take Parish at 3 and Mathieson is one of a few players there isn't much between whether they'd take it into account. Of course if there is a better option they'd take it but if there's no standout I wonder.

Edited November 11, 2015 by It's Time

[beelzebub 23,390]

BB the mates factor occurred to me as well. Petracca/Brayshaw; Stretch/ANB; Parish/Mathieson. You couldn't help but be infected with the genuine excitement those two pairs last year generated by being picked together. I wonder if we take Parish at 3 and Mathieson is one of a few players there isn't much between whether they'd take it into account. Of course if there is a better option they'd take it but if there's no standout I wonder.

Thats it eh...Theres some form of precedent now to follow this idea.

It'll be interesting

[DeeSpencer 26,478]

IMHO, that's ridiculously short-sighted, and I can't believe that that would be the motivation. We clearly have a target at 3, and GC have a target who they believe will fall to 6.

Seems incredibly logical to me if we rate the drafts similarly.

Next year worse case scenario we have pick 3 (or 2 or 1 but let's no go there). This year we have pick 6. So we make a couple of trades and end up with picks 3 and 7 this year.

Now we have pretty much the same 2 kids in but we have them already. You get a year of Paul Roos' culture. A year of Simon Goodwin being able to coach without the burden that comes with the senior job. You get a year of McCartney etc.

Of course we will have a target at 3, but the important thing is we have 2 guys in the top 7 who we think are as good as what we could get next year and this year.

When we traded down from 2 to 9 for Salem we obviously believed that if not Salem then either Kolodjashnij, Billings, Bont, Freeman, Lewis Taylor etc would be good players. It's the same theory in trading up in to this draft.

[DeeSpencer 26,478]

I've tried to read between the lines on Taylor's comments.

He's strong in his praise of Parish, whilst careful not to give too much away there's no doubt he's fan. If we had picks 1-10 I think it's clear Parish would be one of them.

Otherwise he confirms when asked about Curnow and Weideman that they are in the mix 'amongst others'.

I'm glad to hear that we will be considering what Essendon and the GC will do, but we won't be too clever by half. I have wondered if we included in our deal with Gold Coast for them to not take our player at pick 6 but I doubt that given we originally got pick 10 in that deal.

There's - to my creative mind anyway - a bit of a tell later in the conversation about who we will be picking at either pick 3 or very likely at pick 7 if they make it. But I could be reading too much in to it.

[Gator 18,009]

Why isn't he a natural footballer?

Looks like one to me.

Me too. In fact, that's his strength.

[beelzebub 23,390]

Its important to keep other clubs still guessing a bit. Important they pick the players we want them to

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

Why isn't he a natural footballer?

Looks like one to me.

Me too. In fact, that's his strength.

I guess the term 'natural' footballer may differ slightly depending on who you speak to.

I'm talking football specific skills like kicking, handballing, ball-handling, tackling, competing as well as possessing footballing smarts which also encompasses a number of other elements that are learnt from playing from a young age.

I don't want to hear the words 'he's still raw' or 'he has the potential to be'. To me they are words that are linked to players who are not 'natural' footballers but players who possess some freakish ability, a couple of elite traits, (in this case running capacity for his height and size and contested marking) but other than that a whole lot of 'potential'.

If you flick to 45:55 of this video, you'll see how awkward he looks hand-balling on his left hand, picking the ball up off the deck and doing the kicking test. It's not that I'm basing my opinion on him from these few seconds, but it does back up the knocks on him that I have read from draft profiles.

His weakness's are field kicking, ball-handling below his knees, speed off the mark and footy smarts.

For someone who is meant to be a versatile tall who could be 'anything', they're not the kind of attributes you want to be struggling in.

Compare that to Francis. Francis is a natural footballer. He executes every fundamental football specific skill to a very high standard and is a very competitive player. Athletically, he's not as gifted. But there are no question marks with his footballing ability. Just like there weren't with Brayshaw.

Now if Curnow was a key forward and had been playing that position and dominating over the last few years it'd be a very different story. But he's not. He's a midfielder turned forward because of a growth spurt and hasn't dominated either position.

The MFC can't slip up with another high draft pick. They can't afford to. We still need players who will help build the fabric of the club and in my opinion Curnow is not that player. We need footballers. Not potential footballers.

[Redleg 42,039]

Looked up fox footy on 24 th and Draft is not listed. Wonder if they are televising it?

[Late Draft Pick 48]

That's a pretty good summation Stevethemanjordan for someone who has been put on the spot. Very thorough even though it

still probalby didn't fully express your instincts. I've always felt I knew someone who was a natural footballer - they always had an understanding

that was totally beyond what I could see. I remember Emma Quayle saying something about Rockliff like that and I wanted him in the draft - though we had left it too late and I was very happy with Jurra.

[KingDingAling 3,758]

I guess the term 'natural' footballer may differ slightly depending on who you speak to.

I'm talking football specific skills like kicking, handballing, ball-handling, tackling, competing as well as possessing footballing smarts which also encompasses a number of other elements that are learnt from playing from a young age.

I don't want to hear the words 'he's still raw' or 'he has the potential to be'. To me they are words that are linked to players who are not 'natural' footballers but players who possess some freakish ability, a couple of elite traits, (in this case running capacity for his height and size and contested marking) but other than that a whole lot of 'potential'.

If you flick to 45:55 of this video, you'll see how awkward he looks hand-balling on his left hand, picking the ball up off the deck and doing the kicking test. It's not that I'm basing my opinion on him from these few seconds, but it does back up the knocks on him that I have read from draft profiles.

His weakness's are field kicking, ball-handling below his knees, speed off the mark and footy smarts.

For someone who is meant to be a versatile tall who could be 'anything', they're not the kind of attributes you want to be struggling in.

Compare that to Francis. Francis is a natural footballer. He executes every fundamental football specific skill to a very high standard and is a very competitive player. Athletically, he's not as gifted. But there are no question marks with his footballing ability. Just like there weren't with Brayshaw.

Now if Curnow was a key forward and had been playing that position and dominating over the last few years it'd be a very different story. But he's not. He's a midfielder turned forward because of a growth spurt and hasn't dominated either position.

The MFC can't slip up with another high draft pick. They can't afford to. We still need players who will help build the fabric of the club and in my opinion Curnow is not that player. We need footballers. Not potential footballers.

I don't think we'll take Curnow. He is too sloppy to make it as a mid, and there is no certainty he'll make it as a forward. To my eye he is versatile in under 18's, but hardly exceptional at anything he does, looks a 3 touch player, not that clean. I wouldn't have him anywhere near the level of Francis. And I definitely wouldn't take Curnow ahead of safer picks like Parish or Oliver.

Edited November 11, 2015 by KingDingAling

[Deecisive 1,709]

I think take the best tall at 3 kp/ruck option and oliver at 7. Oliver looks to be more like wines an in and under player but with a bit more body. love his attitude.

[Ron Burgundy 8,588]

Really hope we take Parish with 3.

Would then be happy with any of Curnow/Mathieson/Oliver at 7.

[DeeSpencer 26,478]

I'm not big on the term 'natural footballer' and using it for someone like Curnow because to me he looks like he is out there playing in an undeveloped and unmanufactured way. He is playing his natural game.

'Well rounded' is probably the term to describe a player who has a high level in most of the skills and I agree that isn't Curnow. Ground balls, left sided skills and his high ball drop are definitely a knock.

I also agree it's important to take away some of the flashier traits and examine the base. So forget about the very good tank and the possible midfield ability, it counts for nothing if he doesn't have the basic qualities.

Where I do disagree is whether we can afford to take a riskier proposition. I think we can. We have to build the fabric of the club based on player development, culture, consistent drafts of talent finding it with late picks including rookie picks. Yes it's early days, but the signs are starting to look towards an ability to develop talent and find it in the later parts of the draft. We've been spoilt a bit by Hogan who does the basics so well and can do special things as well and that's what I'd be looking for in every draft. But if the choice is between the guy who does the basics but has limitations or the super talent who has deficiencies then it should be decided without fear of failure.

[beelzebub 23,390]

Really hope we take Parish with 3.

Would then be happy with any of Curnow/Mathieson/Oliver at 7.

not sold on Curnow. ..or Weideman. Just me i know

[olisik 4,060]

Not sure why people were comparing Oliver to Jordie Mckenzie.

Oliver got a perfect score in the combine kickig test while Jordie shanks goals from the goal square.

If we take a speculative forward like Curnow or Weideman over a sure thing like Oliver we will regret it. TMac can play Hogans forward buddy better then any young draftee, he has played on the best forwards in the game to learn and has a huge tank with good hands.

We can take talls with our later picks, if teams burn through picks on academy players our pick 46 could fall as far as 34. Would be some decent talls to slip to that pick anyway.

Edited November 11, 2015 by olisik

[Fitz Fitzpatrick 886]

That's a pretty good summation Stevethemanjordan for someone who has been put on the spot. Very thorough even though it

still probalby didn't fully express your instincts. I've always felt I knew someone who was a natural footballer - they always had an understanding

that was totally beyond what I could see. I remember Emma Quayle saying something about Rockliff like that and I wanted him in the draft - though we had left it too late and I was very happy with Jurra.

Cracking avatar name mate!

The natural footballer is rare but has that inate ability to read the play better than others and can make instinctive decisions.

Edited November 11, 2015 by Munga

[DeeSpencer 26,478]

Not sure why people were comparing Oliver to Jordie Mckenzie.

Oliver got a perfect score in the combine kickig test while Jordie shanks goals from the goal square.

If we take a speculative forward like Curnow or Weideman over a sure thing like Oliver we will regret it. TMac can play Hogans forward buddy better then any young draftee, he has played on the best forwards in the game to learn and has a huge tank with good hands.

We can take talls with our later picks, if teams burn through picks on academy players our pick 46 could fall as far as 34. Would be some decent talls to slip to that pick anyway.

He's not a forward. Read the article on the club website. Doesn't want to be a forward. For a couple of years he might be better than a draftee but more chance than not he'd plateau as an ordinary forward without the creative spark, speed or skills to make it work long term. Plus it's a big hole at CHB to ask Oscar and Frost to fill or to fill with a draftee.

There's merit in taking the best 2 players available with the early picks for sure and using Dawes, Pedersen or trying McDonald. I get that. But they aren't long term solutions and at some stage we will need a long term solution.

The vast majority of gun forwards were high draft picks or father sons who would've been. Just scroll down the Coleman list: Kennedy, Cameron, Stringer, J Riewoldt, Roughead, Franklin, Hawkins, Hogan, N Riewoldt, T Lynch, Waite, McCarthy, Pavlich, Daniher, Cloke. That's the majority of talls who kicked over 30 goals this year.

There's only 1 converted key defender who did that in Bruce and he's only done it for one year so far. There's a few late round draft picks - Tippett, Jenkins, Ben Brown, but they are rare as hens teeth. You can draft 10 key forwards with 3rd round picks and you'll be lucky to get a good one from the bunch. A 3rd round pick key forward is really a key defender.

[DeeSpencer 26,478]

As for Oliver he's a pale read head of similar build to McKenzie, doesn't have a great kick on him (but is miles from McKenzie) and has a couple of movement related things (shoulder shrug, tongue out) that seem similar. But he's clearly a different football. That said, I'll take McKenzie's work rate, tackling and hardness if it comes mixed in with elite agility, attacking instincts and goal kicking.

[Key Deefender 143]

I have absolutely nothing to base this on, and have also been on the Darcy Parish bandwagon, however I'm now wondering whether Sam Weideman is in the frame for pick 3. I think Jesse Hogan would love to have another big young tall come through the ranks with him, forming in time a lethal tandem attack. To my mind Weideman is unlikely to still be there at pick 7 and he also appears to be another competitive beast in the Hogan mould and thereby may help excite Jesse enough to sign long term. Preliminary discussions with Jesse apparently laid out the club's future strategy which were according to that article received positively by him, and I would bet it included the key signing of a partner-in-crime. Weideman may be an injury risk from his own article, but hey - so was Joel Selwood at his time of drafting. We wouldn't need to rush him till he is physically ready anyway - and just develop him properly as we now have the scope to do.

We just can't wait another 12 months to add a key forward that may not be there anyway unless you trade for one - and who would unlikely be an A grader - we need to develop our own, like Jesse Hogan - and hopefully Sam Weideman.

With Dawes not performing and much older, Pederson handy but not the future, Watts not competitive enough and more a third tall anyway, TMac while a possibility in the forward line - probably needed elsewhere, OMac, Frost and King still very much unproven, we need to bite this bullet the more I think about it.

This pick number 3 needs to be something out of the box, hopefully setting us up for a generation in the key tall forward department with Hogan, and as much as Darcy Parish looks impressive and will be a top player, his kind is more available and his lack of size may also count against him.

Weideman from the recent article has also played alongside Petracca and there seems to be a rapport there too. Taylor may be prepared to risk Parish getting through to pick 7 which he won't - and instead be more than happy to take Clayton Oliver who likely will slip to at least 7 and is probably more the size of the new midfield prototype anyway. He has stormed through the field after a sluggish start to take the Morrish and looks to have a great upside to work with - and is another big competitor!

We just need an outright specialist key forward and an outright specialist midfielder in this draft.

As I said I have no real idea - but after consulting the tea-leaves, this to me anyway now logically makes some sense. But who knows what the recruiters think? And they have done far more homework than I have!

Edited November 11, 2015 by Key Deefender

[bananas 428]

I wouldn't be too shocked if we went for two mids, Parish and Oliver/Mathieson/etc. We all know Roos doesn't much like drafting talls, and the club could easily believe that some combination of Dawes/Pederson/Frost/TMac/King can do a serviceable enough job for another year or two, until our magnificent midfield has hot young tall forwards begging to be traded to us, at which point we can take our pick. ;-)

[jackaub 1,402]

Is there no way we can get Parish and Francis.

I agree Mathieson looks the goods and I really believe that we should have two mid fielders and take some talls later in the forties

[Dr. Gonzo 24,457]

He's not a forward. Read the article on the club website. Doesn't want to be a forward. For a couple of years he might be better than a draftee but more chance than not he'd plateau as an ordinary forward without the creative spark, speed or skills to make it work long term. Plus it's a big hole at CHB to ask Oscar and Frost to fill or to fill with a draftee.

There's merit in taking the best 2 players available with the early picks for sure and using Dawes, Pedersen or trying McDonald. I get that. But they aren't long term solutions and at some stage we will need a long term solution.

The vast majority of gun forwards were high draft picks or father sons who would've been. Just scroll down the Coleman list: Kennedy, Cameron, Stringer, J Riewoldt, Roughead, Franklin, Hawkins, Hogan, N Riewoldt, T Lynch, Waite, McCarthy, Pavlich, Daniher, Cloke. That's the majority of talls who kicked over 30 goals this year.

There's only 1 converted key defender who did that in Bruce and he's only done it for one year so far. There's a few late round draft picks - Tippett, Jenkins, Ben Brown, but they are rare as hens teeth. You can draft 10 key forwards with 3rd round picks and you'll be lucky to get a good one from the bunch. A 3rd round pick key forward is really a key defender.

The problem is just taking a key forward early is not guarantee they will work out - look at Molan, Watts, Cook. The best key forwards are taken early but only because they were the best players available not because they were key forwards