NATIONAL DRAFT PICKS 3 & 7

[DeeSpencer 23,198]

Whilst I agree they do come early in the draft, most clubs who are looking for key forwards will attempt to trade them in, this is where i think we can do our best work towards a more open premiership window is look to bring in a forward target.

Dawes is still well above competitive and is easily in our best 22 and would not be replaced by any of the younger forwards in this years draft, but I still agree that we are definitely in need of a developing forward. The problem with this years crop is that 2/3 of the available prospects have suffered from injury throughout the year and the third and best option (IMO) is still really raw and who knows how he will develop. People keep excluding Frost from our forward line and it is evident through what we saw of him last year and multiple instances of players and coaches mentioning him as a forward.

Our key forward stocks look like this: Hogan, Dawes, Frost, Pederson, King as developing, Spencer and Gawn if we play two ruckman. We do not need to be hasty with selection of a forward and if we do not think that they will fit into an AFL system or their body will not hold up to the rigors of AFL then we should not risk it.

On Dawes: What do you mean by competitive? Do you mean he's a competitor who is good at bustling for the ball and chasing, tackling etc? Because I agree with that. But in terms of being competitive as able to play at the standard, beat your opponent and be an average AFL standard forward I disagree. The service to him isn't great but for most of the last 2 years he's drawn the 2nd best defender and rarely hit the scoreboard, dropped a lot of marks and also suffered injuries. He's now a below average player.

From the 2013 draft class Hogan, Boyd, McCarthy and McStay would play ahead of him, obviously some super talents there. I'm tipping McCartin and Peter Wright from last years draft class start to be regulars next year and would play ahead of Dawes.

On trading in a forward: I look at the Bulldogs in their prime under Eade, Freo and the Tigers now and think getting in a good forward is very very hard if you are a club without a reputation of success. There's just not that many on the market.

On Frost: His athleticism means he can get out on a lead, chase well and can bring a bit of speed and movement as a back up ruck. But sorry he's not a forward. Just doesn't read the play or mark like a forward.

I 110% agree with your last line though! Can't risk it if they aren't right. But if they are it should be a big green light.

[Mad_Melbourne 872]

On Dawes: What do you mean by competitive? Do you mean he's a competitor who is good at bustling for the ball and chasing, tackling etc? Because I agree with that. But in terms of being competitive as able to play at the standard, beat your opponent and be an average AFL standard forward I disagree. The service to him isn't great but for most of the last 2 years he's drawn the 2nd best defender and rarely hit the scoreboard, dropped a lot of marks and also suffered injuries. He's now a below average player.

From the 2013 draft class Hogan, Boyd, McCarthy and McStay would play ahead of him, obviously some super talents there. I'm tipping McCartin and Peter Wright from last years draft class start to be regulars next year and would play ahead of Dawes.

On trading in a forward: I look at the Bulldogs in their prime under Eade, Freo and the Tigers now and think getting in a good forward is very very hard if you are a club without a reputation of success. There's just not that many on the market.

On Frost: His athleticism means he can get out on a lead, chase well and can bring a bit of speed and movement as a back up ruck. But sorry he's not a forward. Just doesn't read the play or mark like a forward.

I 110% agree with your last line though! Can't risk it if they aren't right. But if they are it should be a big green light.

Competitive consists of all of the above, and whilst il be the first to admit he is prone to drop marks, his onfield leadership, his movement around the ground and his ability to compete in most contests when fit allows for him to still be a starting 22 player. Do I think he is exceptional, definitely not, but a serviceable second stringer for the time being, especially when his body is right, and a key player in our best 22.

Hogan definitely, McCarthy also, Boyd will be a bust at the bulldogs, i think he has such poor movement that he would and will struggle to play AFL level and found it incredibly difficult this year and McStay would have played but over a fit Dawes I doubt it.

I agree, but as we get closer to success drawing in recruits will be easier, i think at least.. .

He had only spent 3-4 games in the forward line before suffering injury, i am almost certain that he will start in our forwardline and play back up ruck in round 1 at the very least and know this was the role he was brought to the club to play by Roosy. I think his athletiscism makes it much easier for him to play as a defender but i also think he is the prototype for future forwards and will be able to take advantage of mismatches whether it be speed or height. I think his forward experiment will work out, but he can always fall back on being a defender.

I agree, in this years draft, if Brisbane for some reason pass up Schache then we will jump on him with pick 3. Mckay is the forward i have next in line in my eyes, but at pick 7 i dont know. Curnow has potential to be something, but i can also see him being a flop, just looks clunky, so I would take a mid ahead of him and Wiedeman reminds me too much of Tom Boyd and i think their lack of genuine athletiscism will affect their careers. Only opinion, but its just how i see football moving forward. I would love for us to invest in a 205 cm athletic American that is available and try to teach them the game, because it could be plenty handy.

[Redleg 37,747]

If Cal Twomey is correct with his suggestion that the Bombers might take Oliver, then we have available two or three of Curnow, Weideman, McKay or Francis with 7. He also suggests that GC are hot on Milera if he is still there.

The Bombers taking Oliver opens it up a bit for us. We will know soon enough.

PS. The draft is live on Fox Footy at 6.30 PM on the 24th.

[olisik 4,060]

If Cal Twomey is correct with his suggestion that the Bombers might take Oliver, then we have available two or three of Curnow, Weideman, McKay or Francis with 7. He also suggests that GC are hot on Milera if he is still there.

The Bombers taking Oliver opens it up a bit for us. We will know soon enough.

PS. The draft is live on Fox Footy at 6.30 PM on the 24th.

I think we should take Ollie with 3. Big bodies mid over skinny short kid any day of the week for me.

Especially when their name is Oliver and they are from Echuca

[DemonLad5 1,640]

If Cal Twomey is correct with his suggestion that the Bombers might take Oliver, then we have available two or three of Curnow, Weideman, McKay or Francis with 7. He also suggests that GC are hot on Milera if he is still there.

The Bombers taking Oliver opens it up a bit for us. We will know soon enough.

PS. The draft is live on Fox Footy at 6.30 PM on the 24th.

Thanks Redleg

I certainly reckon the bombers take a mid with 4 or 5. Assuming the suns also take Milera we could have the choice of Mckay, Francis, Curnow and Weideman to select. Only one of them will be gone

I predict Weideman

[Deestroy All 14,262]

Especially when their name is Oliver and they are from Echuca

[daisycutter 28,603]

[manny100 1,015]

Callum Twomey has Parish ranked at 3 so its likely he will be taken by us - he is a high probability choice. For a KPP we have to hope Curnow or Weideman slip through. He has Milera ranked at the live 7 pick - ours but thinks Dons or GC may take him - if not Adelaide.

[djr 1,067]

Taylor said its best available unless the next is a tall and there is not a lot of difference. A mid can get 30 disposals week in week out in the TAC and not be rated that much higher than the tall who leads well, is relatively quick, crashes and bashes and kicks goals on a regular basis with relatively way fewer disposals. So the way recruiters rate talls and mids is different. There is usually more risk with the talls but if it comes up you are laughing big time.

Watch for Callum Toomey's final draft update closer to draft night. He usually gets the first 10 reasonably ok. I guess he gears a bit of talk as we get closer. He said on trade radio (I heard him) that if it was not for injury he would have had Weidemen at pick 2. So Taylor and team have a lot of thinking to do. Play it safe and go for Parish or be bold and take a risk on Weideman knowing that if it comes off it could set the team up for the future. Also knowing that we may attract a top established mid next year.

I think as draft day approaches the Phantom drafters and media will start going for either Curnow or Weideman at 3.

If Weideman passes his medical and we pick him at 3 would we be that worse off as a combination by picking Matheson at 7? If Weideman is that good then he won't be around at pick 7. So the question is - is a Parish/Curnow/Francis combo better than the Weid/Matho combo given that Matheson will be there at 7? Others might suggest Oliver but is he a pure mid like Parish & Matheson?

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

I think we should take Ollie with 3. Big bodies mid over skinny short kid any day of the week for me.

Especially when their name is Oliver and they are from Echuca

how many times are you going to trot that one out?

i hope you are joking that we should consider a bloke's name and the town he comes from in our recruiting strategy, cos that would be silly

[Cheap Seats 3,303]

I wont pretend I know anything about the raft, but Francis looks like a quality kid

Would love him at the Dees.

Also another mid wouldn't hurt either... Parish, oliver, mathisen

[Good Times Grimes 2,396]

The more I think about it and the more I read, the more I like the sound of Weideman.

Given what Hogan said the other day about watching a lot of footage and studying potential draftees, I wonder how he rates the forwards in the draft.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

I'm the same, Parish and Weideman

[Ouch! 2,040]

Don't think personally we'll take anyone at three.

Mills will get nominated, and then we will take Parish at four where he is obviously a bargain!!

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

I'm the same, Parish and Weideman

Seems unlikely that they will occur though.

Parish and Mathieson/Oliver for me.

[Good Times Grimes 2,396]

Seems unlikely that they will occur though.

Parish and Mathieson/Oliver for me.

I'd be very surprised if we didn't take a tall forward with one of our early picks. I think the club is very keen to keep Jesse happy, and I'm quite confident that part of this plan is to recruit some high-level young help for him. Whether this is at #3 or #7 remains to be seen, but I can't see us taking two mids.

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

You're probably right GTG.

For what it's worth, I'm all for keeping Jesse happy!

Just think the mids are safer selections.

[Vitamin Dee 845]

How long before someone suggests we'll pick Francis purely as a bargaining chip in our bid to land Ollie Wines???

[Gator 16,893]

You're probably right GTG.

For what it's worth, I'm all for keeping Jesse happy!

Just think the mids are safer selections.

Safe doesn't win flags.

And if you want quality talls then you pick them early.

I wonder if Hawthorn should have played it safe instead of taking Franklin and Roughead in the top 5 ?

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

Seems unlikely that they will occur though.

Parish and Mathieson/Oliver for me.

Why unlikely?

From everything I've been hearing from our own recruiting staff (Taylor) to draft 'experts', it sounds quite likely that we'll go one mid and one tall and I'd like to think that tall is a natural forward. Which is why I like Weideman. I think he'll be there at 7 and I think he possesses the right mix of traits including his personality which will see him succeed at the top level. The question mark is obviously his injury history.

But I've heard he's having an individual combine screening for a few clubs, (including us) to see how he's progressed.

Given Taylor and co's record at finding some gold at later picks and the rookie draft (ANB and Vandenberg), and considering our all three of our new recruits have the capacity to run through the midfield, I'm not sure why we'd be drafting two mids with 3 and 7 unless they were players deemed to be steals.

It's clear we need future support for Hogan and we know the best forwards go inside the top 10 in the draft. Weideman over Curnow for me because he is clearly the more natural forward and if you hear the bloke speak, you'll see that he's the kind of character we'd want at the club.

That's just my feeling.

[DemonLad5 1,640]

My guess is 1 of Weideman, Curnow and Francis will be there at 7

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/more-news/afl-draft-2015-melbourne-and-essendon-keen-on-sam-weideman-but-must-weigh-up-risk-v-reward/news-story/961caef11d039dc9fe7d5dbf8c59803f

Seriously.

Get him.

[Gator 16,893]

Why unlikely?

From everything I've been hearing from our own recruiting staff (Taylor) to draft 'experts', it sounds quite likely that we'll go one mid and one tall and I'd like to think that tall is a natural forward. Which is why I like Weideman. I think he'll be there at 7 and I think he possesses the right mix of traits including his personality which will see him succeed at the top level. The question mark is obviously his injury history.

But I've heard he's having an individual combine screening for a few clubs, (including us) to see how he's progressed.

Given Taylor and co's record at finding some gold at later picks and the rookie draft (ANB and Vandenberg), and considering our all three of our new recruits have the capacity to run through the midfield, I'm not sure why we'd be drafting two mids with 3 and 7 unless they were players deemed to be steals.

It's clear we need future support for Hogan and we know the best forwards go inside the top 10 in the draft. Weideman over Curnow for me because he is clearly the more natural forward and if you hear the bloke speak, you'll see that he's the kind of character we'd want at the club.

That's just my feeling.

And if Weideman is taken before pick 7 who then ?

Btw, I answered a post of yours yesterday in case it's escaped your attention. You may like to reference Curnow's pace as a case in point.

[Good Times Grimes 2,396]

Why unlikely?

From everything I've been hearing from our own recruiting staff (Taylor) to draft 'experts', it sounds quite likely that we'll go one mid and one tall and I'd like to think that tall is a natural forward. Which is why I like Weideman. I think he'll be there at 7 and I think he possesses the right mix of traits including his personality which will see him succeed at the top level. The question mark is obviously his injury history.

But I've heard he's having an individual combine screening for a few clubs, (including us) to see how he's progressed.

Given Taylor and co's record at finding some gold at later picks and the rookie draft (ANB and Vandenberg), and considering our all three of our new recruits have the capacity to run through the midfield, I'm not sure why we'd be drafting two mids with 3 and 7 unless they were players deemed to be steals.

It's clear we need future support for Hogan and we know the best forwards go inside the top 10 in the draft. Weideman over Curnow for me because he is clearly the more natural forward and if you hear the bloke speak, you'll see that he's the kind of character we'd want at the club.

That's just my feeling.

What makes you confident that Weideman will be around at #7? I would love to have him in the red and blue, but most phantom drafts seem to think he'll likely to be gone by our second pick.

I wouldn't be upset if we took him with #3, though I think we'll take Parish and then the best available tall at #7.

[dazzledavey36 48,901]

I am not sold on Weideman be honest. It would be a massive win for us if we picked Parish at 3 and Curnow slid to 7.