2 hours ago, W I S E said:

With pick 3? Or will he slide right down...

FWIW this draft ranking / coverage site has Kemp presently ranked 9th

https://afl.draftcentral.com.au/category/power-rankings/

Edited October 13, 20196 yr by Rusty Nails

3 hours ago, W I S E said:

With pick 3? Or will he slide right down...

NO! We need a pick 3 that can make an almost immediate impact! IMV

On 10/12/2019 at 5:51 PM, inanunda said:

For far too long we have played the safe card and it has got us nowhere.  It is time for us to take a risk and take a punt on two players that we will get for nothing and have massive up side. Harley Bennell and Sam Murray. Ignore the hype, the negativity, the history and just have a crack.

Put them on the rookie list and if it doesn't work what have you lost? Nothing.

Actually,  in real terms we have previously (2007 - 2015) taken great risks in drafting high school age prospects in the draft.

It's only recently that we've decided to go low risk (trading 1st & 2nd round picks for May,  Lever,  Hibberd,  Melksham,  Frost,  Vince etc)

We even drafted a 21 year old in 2017 (Fritsch) so we've taken plenty of chances in areas of recruitment.

It's just that drafting high school age prospects is seen as 'normal' where as I've only ever seen recruiting that way as high risk.  But we are creatures of habit so what is normal?

On 10/12/2019 at 7:01 PM, america de cali said:

[censored] players that are successful all have one thing in common. That is strong linear progression and consistency despite their faults. They just re bloody good despite themselves and clubs put up with them because their advantages outweighs the negatives. Look at Dustin Martin, Cousins, Toby Greene and others. They have never spent half their careers in the seconds, rehab or jail and generally get along with their peers. Bennell is just a walking disaster and Murrey is a dicquehead that cant break out of the reserves so likely will always be a dicquehead loser. 

West Coast covered for the drug abuse of Cousins/Mainwaring and others for YEARS.

Not a fair statement.

On 10/13/2019 at 6:32 AM, Whispering_Jack said:

There’s taking risks and then there’s taking risks.

For better or worse, the club adopted a no [censored] policy as part of Paul Roos’ plan to improve the culture of the club and that policy has more or less applied since and been successful. 

The question of whether we take players named in despatches as offending against that policy such as Sam Murray or Harley Bennell would depend very much on the assessments of our recruiters and based on a number of factors. I can see us possibly taking Murray based on what I’ve heard and read about him but Bennell seems to be a repeat offender making the risk far too high to warrant a departure from the policy.

There are other risks that may or may not been worth taking. Is it worth taking the short term and immediate route with someone like Josh Jenkins as a third tall on the forward line or do we draft a young key forward who might take a few years to develop if at all?

 The sort of risk taking I like the most is the creative risk like the one Adelaide took when it used a first round pick to draft Patrick Dangerfield, a country schoolboy footballer who was always going to stay in Victoria to complete his schooling in his first year as an AFL player. The comparison this year is Brodie Kemp, a player who could be anything, but will most likely not play in 2020 due to ACL surgery. That’s a risk I would like to see us taking.

Ditto - Kemp is worth the risk.  He has the pace, size and intensity to be an absolute star.  Big call but is the Dangerfield Prototype 

Edited October 14, 20196 yr by spirit of norm smith
P

On 10/13/2019 at 7:32 AM, Whispering_Jack said:

There’s taking risks and then there’s taking risks.

For better or worse, the club adopted a no [censored] policy as part of Paul Roos’ plan to improve the culture of the club and that policy has more or less applied since and been successful. 

The question of whether we take players named in despatches as offending against that policy such as Sam Murray or Harley Bennell would depend very much on the assessments of our recruiters and based on a number of factors. I can see us possibly taking Murray based on what I’ve heard and read about him but Bennell seems to be a repeat offender making the risk far too high to warrant a departure from the policy.

There are other risks that may or may not been worth taking. Is it worth taking the short term and immediate route with someone like Josh Jenkins as a third tall on the forward line or do we draft a young key forward who might take a few years to develop if at all?

 The sort of risk taking I like the most is the creative risk like the one Adelaide took when it used a first round pick to draft Patrick Dangerfield, a country schoolboy footballer who was always going to stay in Victoria to complete his schooling in his first year as an AFL player. The comparison this year is Brodie Kemp, a player who could be anything, but will most likely not play in 2020 due to ACL surgery. That’s a risk I would like to see us taking.

Yes. Go for Kemp if he’s available.

On 10/14/2019 at 3:40 PM, spirit of norm smith said:

Ditto - Kemp is worth the risk.  He has the pace, size and intensity to be an absolute star.  Big call but is the Dangerfield Prototype 

prototype? do you mean refinement?

Personally I'd prefer we stick to what appears to be an unofficial 'no [censored]' policy. My NFL side Green Bay seem to have similar ideas and it has only enhanced their reputation as a brand when competing for new fans and among players who might otherwise look to avoid six months of the year living in the frozen tundra. For what it's worth I also think the way we conduct ourselves during the trade period enhances our chances of recruiting the right players to our club and with the rival teams we have to deal with (Fremantle look away now). It's not just on the field that those one percenters can make the difference.