NATIONAL DRAFT PICKS 3 & 7

[PaulRB 6,411]

I call bull shlt !!

Nothing is left til last minute...just playing media games

Not wanting to sound condescending, but you do realise this is all just entertainment!

It's the business they're in...

[RalphiusMaximus 6,088]

I honestly believe that there is very little difference in talent and ability between the half-dozen or so players in contention for our picks. We'll be getting a couple of pretty good players regardless of who we go with, as will the Bombers. Personally I want us to get Parish because I consider the ability to hit a target to be one of our greatest issues and he is as good as we'll get on that front. If we were to land Parish and a tall then I'd be thrilled, but as I said, any two of this group will serve us pretty well.

[Rob Mac...... 638]

I'll trust our selectors to get it right but; Jamar's gone plus we dropped Fitzy, leaving Gawn & Spencer our only AFL ready 1st rucks, so they must be considering some ruckman! Especially a KPF/2nd ruck.

I predict Watts will relieve a little by going 3rd man up around the ground more often this year, even though he's no ruckman.

Also the 3 guys we traded in are all lightweight. I checked our senior list and we now have 17 players listed as under 83kg. Seventeen!

So hopefully they add less lightweight/skill (Parish) & more grunt/power (Curnow, Francis etc.) ..unless they really deem the smaller player is best available by a huuuuuge margin!

[olisik 4,060]

Apparently Carlton are putting in a lot of extra time into Curnow. Could suggest they expect him to be an option at 8 to join his brother.

[olisik 4,060]

I'm starting to look at it this way

Pick 3 will be a tall, the best of Curnow, Weideman and McKay. Could be any of the 3

Pick 7 will be a mid. Parish if he slips otherwise Oliver or Milera

[Akum 2,660]

I'll trust our selectors to get it right but; Jamar's gone plus we dropped Fitzy, leaving Gawn & Spencer our only AFL ready 1st rucks, so they must be considering some ruckman! Especially a KPF/2nd ruck.

...

Wasn't Weideman a ruck at U16 before he was a KPF?

If so, he's yer actual KPF who can ruck - much more of a rare bird than a ruck who fills in as KPF.

For several seasons now we've wanted someone who could win his place in the side as a forward, but also ruck competently. And because they're so had to find, we've had to settle for a second ruck who's been useless as a forward. Weideman is our first chance for years, and it may be years before we can get another.

This to me is his one big advantage over Curnow for us.

And why I think that if he's gone before 7, we might even pick Harry McKay before Curnow.

I thought it strange that in the same year we 'retire' Jamar, we also push out Fitzy. Huge risk going into 2016 with only two ruck options plus a few 193cm stop-gaps. We'd only do that if we planned to pick up a ruck prospect or two in draft or trade, and we seemed to not be interested in a few that were available for trade.

Makes me wonder too about picking up Gach Nyuon with a later pick.

[DeeSpencer 26,081]

I'm starting to look at it this way

Pick 3 will be a tall, the best of Curnow, Weideman and McKay. Could be any of the 3

Pick 7 will be a mid. Parish if he slips otherwise Oliver or Milera

That's the way I see it. Because if we rate a tall at 7 we are almost certain to rate them at 3 and somewhat duty bound to take them.

The only way I see it otherwise is if we rate a midfielder as a standout pick and rate the talls either:

- Not at all, so won't pick any of them

- Equally, so we can take whomever gets through

- Rate 1 (or 2) of them enough for 7 but just not worth missing out on the mid at pick 3.

[Rob Mac...... 638]

Wasn't Weideman a ruck at U16 before he was a KPF?

If so, he's yer actual KPF who can ruck - much more of a rare bird than a ruck who fills in as KPF.

For several seasons now we've wanted someone who could win his place in the side as a forward, but also ruck competently. And because they're so had to find, we've had to settle for a second ruck who's been useless as a forward. Weideman is our first chance for years, and it may be years before we can get another.

This to me is his one big advantage over Curnow for us.

And why I think that if he's gone before 7, we might even pick Harry McKay before Curnow.

I thought it strange that in the same year we 'retire' Jamar, we also push out Fitzy. Huge risk going into 2016 with only two ruck options plus a few 193cm stop-gaps. We'd only do that if we planned to pick up a ruck prospect or two in draft or trade, and we seemed to not be interested in a few that were available for trade.

Makes me wonder too about picking up Gach Nyuon with a later pick.

Yes Akum, you're saying what I'm thinking too.

But at 7.31pm on Page 10 of the Weiderman thread, "Wiseblood" posted that unfortunately he'd just tested poorly and wasn't nearly ready to run both ways/run out games yet. ?

Not being a recruiting scout going to kids games, I really have no clue. Haven't seen Nyuon but loved Harry McKay's highlight reel!

[Akum 2,660]

Yes Akum, you're saying what I'm thinking too.

But at 7.31pm on Page 10 of the Weiderman thread, "Wiseblood" posted that unfortunately he'd just tested poorly and wasn't nearly ready to run both ways/run out games yet. ?

Not being a recruiting scout going to kids games, I really have no clue. Haven't seen Nyuon but loved Harry McKay's highlight reel!

I'm wondering whether we've told Weideman that we'll take him at 7 no matter what his beep test, as long as his medical is OK. There seems to be whispers that if his beep test was under 13, other clubs are a lot less interested.

I'm wondering too whether, if Weideman isn't available at pick 7, we might bid on Eric Hipwood, who's a similar type and maybe even better.

Brisbane will be expecting him to go a few picks later, and may not be expecting to have to cough up so much for him. They've got another academy player (is it Ben Keays?) that they also have to find enough points for. I couldn't be bothered doing the maths, but it might put their points total under real strain and even force them to have to choose between Hipwood & Keays, given that they'd have already picked up Schache. So we might have a great chance of actually getting Hipwood if we bid for him at 7.

If Brisbane do take Hipwood, then we take Harry McKay. He's a pretty good 3rd choice - he's younger and more raw than the others, but he may have at least as much upside. There seems to be a big gap between his best (highlight reel) and worst, but maybe that's just because of his rawness.

I just think that the tall who's good enough to hold a place in the team as a KPF but who can help out in the ruck is such a valuable commodity, especially with the reduction in rotations, that we'll go for it. And we've got a crack at three of them in this draft.

[Rob Mac...... 638]

I'm wondering whether we've told Weideman that we'll take him at 7 no matter what his beep test, as long as his medical is OK. There seems to be whispers that if his beep test was under 13, other clubs are a lot less interested.

Akum, could that mean you're almost suggesting Weiderman may have deliberately done the poor beep test to aid getting to Melbourne or elsewhere?

I'm wondering too whether, if Weideman isn't available at pick 7, we might bid on Eric Hipwood, who's a similar type and maybe even better.

Brisbane will be expecting him to go a few picks later, and may not be expecting to have to cough up so much for him. They've got another academy player (is it Ben Keays?) that they also have to find enough points for. I couldn't be bothered doing the maths, but it might put their points total under real strain and even force them to have to choose between Hipwood & Keays, given that they'd have already picked up Schache. So we might have a great chance of actually getting Hipwood if we bid for him at 7.

Sure, with them having Schache, maybe Hipwood could possibly slip through.

If Brisbane do take Hipwood, then we take Harry McKay. He's a pretty good 3rd choice - he's younger and more raw than the others, but he may have at least as much upside. There seems to be a big gap between his best (highlight reel) and worst, but maybe that's just because of his rawness.

I loved Harry McKays reel, though he may need a year before he's much use.

I just think that the tall who's good enough to hold a place in the team as a KPF but who can help out in the ruck is such a valuable commodity, especially with the reduction in rotations, that we'll go for it. And we've got a crack at three of them in this draft.

I wholeheartedly agree.

It may help with something that's bugged me for many years; It seems whenever the pill goes to our traditional CHF area, it's turned over.?!

Cheers, I'm back in Melb ATM & must crash.

[hells bells 2,023]

In reality we will all be happy with whoever is selected at these two picks for at least 2 years. Then the pressure will come if it looks like 1 or both don't live up to expectations. We've seen this with Toumpas, Watts, Sylvia, etc.

As it currently stands id be rapt of we came out of this draft with any two of:

Weideman, Parish, McKay, Milera, Oliver.

I hope for two talls because I see a shortage on our list of top end talent up forward. But I would settle for 1 of each mid and tall. Two mids is not a great result for us IMO.

Something about Curnow doesn't sit with me and I hope we don't pick him up.

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

There's a lot of guess work on this thread.

Simple fact remains though, the club has pretty well stated that it has identified who it will pick at 3 and who it will pick at 7, although pick 7 will depend upon who Essendon and GCS pick beforehand.

Taylor said they have ranked the players and it will be the 'best available' at 7.

Fingers crossed - Parish at 3 and then one of Curnow, Oliver, Mathieson, Francis, Weideman or Milera at 7 (some of whom will be available).

We're in a good position here.

[DemonLad5 1,642]

I quite like Harry McKay at 7. Assuming Curnow and Weideman are gone. He is a good contested mark and is super athletic. Also pinch a hit in the ruck. Similar to Jarryd Roughead

[jackaub 1,402]

I honestly think it could go--

1 Carlton -Weitering- don't even need to say anything

2 Bris - Schache- same goes

3 Syd- Mills - they'll match any bid

4 Melb -Parish - Best available. Must be him

5 GWS - Hopper - Same as Mills

6 GWS - Kennedy - ^^^

7 Ess - Weideman - they need a sidekick for Daniher

8 Ess - Oliver - They are also desperate for mids

9 - GCS - Francis - best available they have been into him for a while

10 Melb - Curnow - Yess

I don't want Curnow, of all the 10 he presents as the most problematical Maybe McKay he looks the goods

Looks like Curnow hasn't the fierceness or desire to make it at this level

I am like Petracattack completely unexcited and underwhelmed by this draft group

Edited November 18, 2015 by jackaub

[Gator 17,449]

It's funny how we all see things differently. I like Curnow (as a forward), but not Oliver and others would say the opposite. But it's all guesswork when you're looking at videos, although I know some on here are far more knowledgeable and have seen these guys live.

As for Weideman, I doubt clubs will be put off by one beep test. You're going to be down on endurance if you've missed the whole year with injury, aren't you ? They've been following him for years, so why would they make their decision on one beep test ? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I'm sure they would already be well aware of his physical capabilities and what programs to improve areas of deficiency.

Edited November 18, 2015 by ProDee

[jnrmac 20,185]

I think this is our last shot at building a forward line 'jnrmac', the midfield is on the improve and will take a big leap next season with Brayshaw, Petracca, Viney and Tyson all likely to step up a notch or 2

...we can then look at trading in or picking up another gun mid when we are looking a good prospect which we will.

KPF's are not so easy to get.

We were ranked 18th last year. I disagree with you. Yes we might improve but when was the last elite mid we had? And I mean elite. You need at least two to be a contender.

And there is no guarantee we will get the right fwd line. I maintain we are better off finding elite mids and pumping th eball into our fwd line 70 times a game. The opposite doesn't work imo.

[rjay 25,088]

We were ranked 18th last year. I disagree with you. Yes we might improve but when was the last elite mid we had? And I mean elite. You need at least two to be a contender.

And there is no guarantee we will get the right fwd line. I maintain we are better off finding elite mids and pumping th eball into our fwd line 70 times a game. The opposite doesn't work imo.

This season coming we have another year into a great group of kids, Petracca and Trengove back and Salem ready to move into the middle...

If we don't have a forward line to kick to then we won't be pumping the ball in, we will be playing keepings off around the middle of the ground.

I'm not as worried about the midfield as others are.

[DemonLad5 1,642]

I am not worried about the midfield. I just think Parish is going to turn out to be a great player

[rpfc 28,777]

This season coming we have another year into a great group of kids, Petracca and Trengove back and Salem ready to move into the middle...

If we don't have a forward line to kick to then we won't be pumping the ball in, we will be playing keepings off around the middle of the ground.

I'm not as worried about the midfield as others are.

Hogan is a Forwardline. Suitable role players floating around him should deliver a great forwardline.

And there is a great deal of 'if' coming off your proposed midfield.

I would like to add another few 'ifs' myself, just to be sure...

It's hard to win Finals without a great forwardline, it's impossible without a great midfield.

I am happy for us to get a tall at 7 but not if he envisioned to be just a role player in Hogan's Forwardline, only if he is a talent that is seen as worthy of that selection. You don't spend top ten picks on role players...

[pineapple dee 2,892]

Yes Akum, you're saying what I'm thinking too.

But at 7.31pm on Page 10 of the Weiderman thread, "Wiseblood" posted that unfortunately he'd just tested poorly and wasn't nearly ready to run both ways/run out games yet. ?

Not being a recruiting scout going to kids games, I really have no clue. Haven't seen Nyuon but loved Harry McKay's highlight reel!

Didnt a kid called Rioli who now plays for Whorethorn test poorly prior to the draft but somehow they felt they should take a risk on him. They could be playing ducks and drakes with this one too.

[DemonLad5 1,642]

i think we should get Parish at 3 because I see Curnow being available at 7 and he would be able to compliment Hogan well

[rjay 25,088]

Hogan is a Forwardline. Suitable role players floating around him should deliver a great forwardline.

And there is a great deal of 'if' coming off your proposed midfield.

I would like to add another few 'ifs' myself, just to be sure...

It's hard to win Finals without a great forwardline, it's impossible without a great midfield.

I am happy for us to get a tall at 7 but not if he envisioned to be just a role player in Hogan's Forwardline, only if he is a talent that is seen as worthy of that selection. You don't spend top ten picks on role players...

It's not Hogan's forward line...I don't see us doing a Pagan's paddock.

We need to build the forward line, a forward/ruck would be a great pickup for us. If we have to rely on so called role players like Dawes we are going nowhere.

...and of course we don't spend top 10 picks on role players. I wouldn't see Weideman or McKay as role players.

[DemonLad5 1,642]

Thinking about it more, I think 100% Parish at 3

Whoever is available out of Weideman, Curnow, McKay

#1 Preference - Weideman

#2 - Curnow

#3 - McKay

[Ted Lasso 19,549]

Parish and weiderman would be a dream result. i reckon if he played all year weiderman would push top 2

[ChaserJ 5,157]

I honestly have no idea who we are going with at 3. Once trade period ended, I thought our dream scenario was Parish and Weideman (although Curnow was and is still my preference). Every chance we get those two, but not in the order initially thought.

Oliver may now be our mid preference, though still feel 3's too high, but based on what info might be coming from elsewhere, the Bombers sound like they've gone cold on Parish and hot on Oliver, the Blues think they have a real shot at Curnow after initially showing interest in Oliver.

I've only seen Oliver in the flesh a couple of times, and nowhere near enough to make my own judgement, so will back the club in, but his style will certainly translate well. has a high floor given his competitive, contested nature, and as pointed out by others, potentially high ceiling given his relative lack of exposure.

Perhaps we think we may have a choice of a range of mids (& Curnow) we like at 7, but the tall preference (Weideman?) may not get past Essendon and maybe this informs our decision.