Jump to content

Callum Twomey Phantom Draft

Featured Replies

Posted

Here it is!

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-11-22/callum-twomeys-2015-phantom-draft

For those who dont care about write ups and stuff, it's

1 - Weitering, Carlton

2, Schache , Brisbane

3, Mills, Sydney

4, Oliver , Melb

5, Francis, Essendon

6, Parish, Essendon

7, A Chee, Gold Coast

8, Weideman, Melb

9, Hopper , GWS

10 H. Mckay , Carlton

11, Kennedy, GWS

12, Hipwood, Brisbane

13, Milera, Adelaide

14, Curnow , Carlton

15, Rioli, Richmond

16, Burton, Adelaide

17, Balic, St Kilda

18, Collins , Hawthorn

19, Gresham, Gold Coast

20, B. McKay, North melbourne

21, Keays, Brisbane

22, Hibberd, Hawthorn

23, Tucker, Carlton'

24, Fiorini, Bulldogs

25, Bonner, Bulldogs

26, Cole , Freo

27, Cunningham, Eagles

28, Matheison, Essendon

29, Redman, Essendon

30, Clarke, North Melbourne

 

Maybe we will take Oliver with our first pick and he does look a good prospect, but I simply find it hard to believe that he is player we traded up from pick 6 to get. This part of it doesn't make sense to me.

On paper Id be really happy with that. But, as stated on other posts, we wont really know who the footy gods have smiled on til the middle next year. Really great players usually make some kind of impact early.

Looking forward to Tues night!

 

I think something has been leaked from the club because all the experts have now said in the past 24 hours that we will select Oliver. With only 2 more sleeps this is around the time where we start to hear who could go where.

Maybe we will take Oliver with our first pick and he does look a good prospect, but I simply find it hard to believe that he is player we traded up from pick 6 to get. This part of it doesn't make sense to me.

I still don't think it's set we will take Oliver. I think it's still out of three - Oliver, Parish and Weideman. I agree with you that trading up to take Oliver doesn't seem to make much sense, although trading is done well after the TAC season is over and we may have earmarked him as a player we have to have.

But it's still down to the 3 mentioned above for me.


I wouldn't be surprised to see us take Mckay over Weideman at 7. Either way I'm happy with any combo of Parish/Oliver with Weideman/Curnow/Mckay.

Maybe we will take Oliver with our first pick and he does look a good prospect, but I simply find it hard to believe that he is player we traded up from pick 6 to get. This part of it doesn't make sense to me.

why ?

You think a tall is preferential to a quality mid.

We need mids more

My surprise would be to throw away a pick on a dubious tall.

why ?

You think a tall is preferential to a quality mid.

We need mids more

My surprise would be to throw away a pick on a dubious tall.

Last year I would of agreed with you and I understand your reasoning. For me it's time to take a calculated punt on one of each, especially if we are eager to please the Hulk in some way.

The drungle drums say Weidemen at our second pick, and logic to me says Parish for our first pick.

I would modify Twomey's mock to look something more like this:

Weitering

Schache

Mills

Parish

Francis

Oliver

A'choo

Weidemen

 

I would be staggered if this came to fruition considering both Goodwin and McCartney have spent so much time in the Falcons rooms this year. Roos wasn't mentoring Brayshaw last year for the fun of it, either.

All the work we put into trumping Essendon's draft pick (when they clearly wanted Parish) makes no sense if we are going after a draft bolter instead.

I've heard Goodwin was a fan of Parish's, but reckon Brendan was likely there to watch his own boy play for Geelong.

Still betting we take Parish at 3

Goodwin and Macca have had a bit to do with the falcons

Jason taylor was on a panel that selected him AA

2 weeks ago Oliver wasn't even in the mix for pick 3, he hasn't played a game since then.

we were desperate to get our hands on pick 3 knowing Essendon would take Parish


by taking Oliver at 3, could Parish slip to 7?

There are a lot of people linking us to Oliver at 3. I still think we will take Parish.

My impression of Oliver is that he plays a little like Dangermouse, but we have no way of knowing if he'll ever reach that sort of level or if he'll just be an average bash'n'crash player with ok skills. I regard him as more of a risk than guys like Parish and Francis who have already shown us exactly how they will play when they get into the AFL. I haven't seen enough of him to form any sort of opinion on how good a player he could become.

I still prefer the notion of taking Parish at three. The main point in his favour for me is that he meets our specific needs for good decision-making and disposal out of the midfield. Other players have just as much ability, but perhaps don't suit our requirements quite as well.

I have no problem with the Weed at seven.

I think something has been leaked from the club because all the experts have now said in the past 24 hours that we will select Oliver. With only 2 more sleeps this is around the time where we start to hear who could go where.

Yes but maybe, maybe, someone deliberately let something slip so as to cover up our true ambitions on who we want to draft. Smoke and mirrors.


Still betting we take Parish at 3

Goodwin and Macca have had a bit to do with the falcons

Jason taylor was on a panel that selected him AA

2 weeks ago Oliver wasn't even in the mix for pick 3, he hasn't played a game since then.

we were desperate to get our hands on pick 3 knowing Essendon would take Parish

Some good points here. I agree.

We didn't "trade up" to take Oliver. A month out from the draft nothing was set in concrete. We traded up to improve our position in the draft. We traded up to get the highest position we could and ultimately secure the best talent, as deemed by us, on draft day.

No-one is leaking, but my educated guess from a couple of private things is that we'll take Oliver.

The Ah Chee inclusion for Gold Coast at 7 is interesting. If Twomey has the inside word there it means we get the choice between Weidemen, Milera and Curnow.

We didn't "trade up" to take Oliver. A month out from the draft nothing was set in concrete. We traded up to improve our position in the draft. We traded up to get the highest position we could and ultimately secure the best talent, as deemed by us, on draft day.

No-one is leaking, but my educated guess from a couple of private things is that we'll take Oliver.

The "trading up" to pick 3 also included acquiring pick 10, which we presumably knew (or hoped) we'd be able to eventually move to GWS for pick 7.

It was about getting next year's 1st rounder this year, so we can get an earlier pick and get a year's development into that pick ahead of time.

We didn't "trade up" to take Oliver. A month out from the draft nothing was set in concrete. We traded up to improve our position in the draft. We traded up to get the highest position we could and ultimately secure the best talent, as deemed by us, on draft day.

No-one is leaking, but my educated guess from a couple of things is that we'll take Oliver.

That doesn't make sense. Of course we traded up to take player X (I don't believe it will be Oliver) at 3.

It's ridiculous to suggest that we wanted pick 3, and then we'll decide who's the best talent. IMO, we gave up a lot to get pick 3, so it's madness to suggest that we didn't have a player in mind who we knew was under Essendon's radar, whether that be Oliver, Parish, Curnow or Weideman.


We didn't "trade up" to take Oliver. A month out from the draft nothing was set in concrete. We traded up to improve our position in the draft. We traded up to get the highest position we could and ultimately secure the best talent, as deemed by us, on draft day.

No-one is leaking, but my educated guess from a couple of private things is that we'll take Oliver.

The "trading up" to pick 3 also included acquiring pick 10, which we presumably knew (or hoped) we'd be able to eventually move to GWS for pick 7.

It was about getting next year's 1st rounder this year, so we can get an earlier pick and get a year's development into that pick ahead of time.

We had a deal ready to go with GC for ND3 for weeks before trade week.

The desire to invest Howe into moving up 3 spots?

We had and have someone in mind and the last month of pure speculation - and no footy - isn't changing that.

As much as they may deny it - they will pick the kid they saw a long a way out.

We didn't "trade up" to take Oliver. A month out from the draft nothing was set in concrete. We traded up to improve our position in the draft. We traded up to get the highest position we could and ultimately secure the best talent, as deemed by us, on draft day.

No-one is leaking, but my educated guess from a couple of private things is that we'll take Oliver.

nupp

We had our eyes on"someone"

MFC playing tbe long game.

I reckon Pro Dee they've done exactly what you say they haven't.

Not to argue with you. Just a different pov :)

Maybe something has leaked. We know that the Dees at the moment prefer the big bodied types. We have a few already but none with explosive breakaway pace.

 

When we obtained pick 3 we had full knowledge of all players available. We did not just hear about Oliver's great run in the last half of the season. The Bulldogs picked up McREA and Bont on the back of mid season onwards improvement. This is the time leaks start to appear. We will probably hear a little more tomorrow. The Dons will take whoever we pass on out of Oliver and Parish and likely take Francis as well. They desperately need mids and Francis is likely a play anywhere type. Still we cannot rule out Parish just yet.

I don't buy the notion of trading up to pick 3 for a specific player. It goes against the notion of smart recruiting which is to never go for the messiah pick and to believe in continually good spotting of talent and good development from there on in.

Jason Taylor explained the rationale of the trade to get pick 3 this year instead of next year and to get the development started and a culture built. I'm inclined to take him at his word.

If we don't pick Oliver now then I'm a little confused as to why 3 journos in a row who all had different opinions have jumped on him. Unless Emma went with it and Sam and Cal followed her in?

We hopefully learnt from the Ollie Wines scenario not to leak interest in another kid and then have it bight you on the butt. I'd hate Oliver to go elsewhere now because if we then did pick Parish or otherwise at 3 we'd hear about it for a long time.


Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Featured Content

  • NON-MFC: Round 15

    As the Demons head into their Bye Round, it's time to turn our attention to the other matches being played. Which teams are you tipping this week? And which results would be most favourable for the Demons if we can manage to turn our season around? Follow all the non-Melbourne games here and join the conversation as the ladder continues to take shape.

      • Like
    • 276 replies
  • REPORT: Port Adelaide

    Of course, it’s not the backline, you might argue and you would probably be right. It’s the boot studder (do they still have them?), the midfield, the recruiting staff, the forward line, the kicking coach, the Board, the interchange bench, the supporters, the folk at Casey, the head coach and the club psychologist  It’s all of them and all of us for having expectations that were sufficiently high to have believed three weeks ago that a restoration of the Melbourne team to a position where we might still be in contention for a finals berth when the time for the midseason bye arrived. Now let’s look at what happened over the period of time since Melbourne overwhelmed the Sydney Swans at the MCG in late May when it kicked 8.2 to 5.3 in the final quarter (and that was after scoring 3.8 to two straight goals in the second term). 

      • Clap
      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 3 replies
  • CASEY: Essendon

    Casey’s unbeaten run was extended for at least another fortnight after the Demons overran a persistent Essendon line up by 29 points at ETU Stadium in Port Melbourne last night. After conceding the first goal of the evening, Casey went on a scoring spree from about ten minutes in, with five unanswered majors with its fleet of midsized runners headed by the much improved Paddy Cross who kicked two in quick succession and livewire Ricky Mentha who also kicked an early goal. Leading the charge was recruit of the year, Riley Bonner while Bailey Laurie continued his impressive vein of form. With Tom Campbell missing from the lineup, Will Verrall stepped up to the plate demonstrating his improvement under the veteran ruckman’s tutelage. The Demons were looking comfortable for much of the second quarter and held a 25-point lead until the Bombers struck back with two goals in the shadows of half time. On the other side of the main break their revival continued with first three goals of the half. Harry Sharp, who had been quiet scrambled in the Demons’ first score of the third term to bring the margin back to a single point at the 17 minute mark and the game became an arm-wrestle for the remainder of the quarter and into the final moments of the last.

      • Clap
    • 0 replies
  • PREGAME: Gold Coast

    The Demons have the Bye next week but then are on the road once again when they come up against the Gold Coast Suns on the Gold Coast in what could be a last ditch effort to salvage their season. Who comes in and who comes out?

      • Thanks
    • 138 replies
  • PODCAST: Port Adelaide

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 16th June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect the Dees disappointing loss to the Power.
    Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
    Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • Thanks
    • 33 replies
  • POSTGAME: Port Adelaide

    The Demons simply did not take their opportunities when they presented themselves and ultimately when down by 25 points effectively ending their finals chances. Goal kicking practice during the Bye?

      • Haha
      • Thanks
    • 252 replies