5 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Not drafting Jackson because we have Bradtke is about the equivalent of not drafting Hogan because we had Jack Fitzpatrick. Irrelevant.

Plenty of valid reasons not to draft a ruck with a high pick and that they take time is one of the most valid ones but Jackson is one of the best performed players in this draft crop, he's not in the same postcode as Bradtke who by definition couldn't play footy for years to qualify as Cat B.

As I recall Grundy was drafted about pick 18, why would we draft someone with fewer skills at picks 3 to 9. Get a grip.

19 minutes ago, Hobson said:

As I recall Grundy was drafted about pick 18, why would we draft someone with fewer skills at picks 3 to 9. Get a grip.

Because if you had that draft again Grundy would go pick 1 or maybe pick 2 after Whitfield.

He has: O'Rourke, Plowman, Toumpas, Mayes, Menzel, Jaksch, Corr, Garner, Thurlow, Simpson and everyone after pick 18 clearly covered.

You can make an argument for Macrae, Wines, Stringer, Vlastuin I guess but it's Grundy right?

If you think Jackson is even remotely similar to Grundy then he has to be in the conversation for at least pick 8. 

51 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Because if you had that draft again Grundy would go pick 1 or maybe pick 2 after Whitfield.

He has: O'Rourke, Plowman, Toumpas, Mayes, Menzel, Jaksch, Corr, Garner, Thurlow, Simpson and everyone after pick 18 clearly covered.

You can make an argument for Macrae, Wines, Stringer, Vlastuin I guess but it's Grundy right?

If you think Jackson is even remotely similar to Grundy then he has to be in the conversation for at least pick 8. 

I remember at the time he was considered a top 5 talent, but slipped way out. Even at the time they were saying that the Pies got a steal.

I've admittedly only seen bits and pieces of highlights, but he doesn't do anything for me at the pointy end of the draft. I think there are better players who will fill bigger gaps than Jackson will. 

If we had a pick in the mid to late teens then I could see us taking him, but in the top ten? Nah. 

24 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

I've admittedly only seen bits and pieces of highlights, but he doesn't do anything for me at the pointy end of the draft. I think there are better players who will fill bigger gaps than Jackson will. 

If we had a pick in the mid to late teens then I could see us taking him, but in the top ten? Nah. 

Well said. Jackson is raw. An athlete.  Grundy has the footy pedigree and even then slipped to 18.  I think there are plenty of other top quality players at 3 and 8.  Ruck is not a problem area for us. Don’t forget our success with interstate players. On top of all that, the future “Go home” is a negative factor. 

14 hours ago, Dees247 said:

I remember at the time he was considered a top 5 talent, but slipped way out. Even at the time they were saying that the Pies got a steal.

There were a few that ranked Grundy the second best player in the pool.

Key difference b/n Grundy and Jackson in their draft year is exposure and runs on the board. Grundy showed plenty as a 17 year old and then backed it up in his top age year, including good performances for Sturt’s senior team and dominating at the Champs.

Jackson’s recent conversion to the AFL pathway means there’s not a lot of prior performance and he’s only shown a fraction of what Grundy had at the same time. Also, he got better as the season wore on and some his best performances came off broadway at WAFL reserves level post champs. I think those performances really elevated his standing, but most of us haven’t seen those games.

I watch a fair amount of junior footy, but I am confident that I haven’t seen enough of Jackson to make a judgement on whether we should pick him as high as 3.

Edited November 2, 20195 yr by ChaserJ

1 hour ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Well said. Jackson is raw. An athlete.  Grundy has the footy pedigree and even then slipped to 18.  I think there are plenty of other top quality players at 3 and 8.  Ruck is not a problem area for us. Don’t forget our success with interstate players. On top of all that, the future “Go home” is a negative factor. 

I don’t disagree with the assessment, but Grundy is the cautionary tale here.  He was rated top three for most of his U18 year, but slid to 18 because ‘You don’t take a ruckman early in the draft’.  If clubs had the 2012 draft over again, they’d snap up Grundy quick smart.

Not to say that Jackson is or will be as good, but the aversion to taking rucks early cost everyone a multiple all Australian ruckman who everyone knew could play.

2 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Well said. Jackson is raw. An athlete.  Grundy has the footy pedigree and even then slipped to 18.  I think there are plenty of other top quality players at 3 and 8.  Ruck is not a problem area for us. Don’t forget our success with interstate players. On top of all that, the future “Go home” is a negative factor. 

There's a lack of refinement to his skills but I don't think Jackson is as raw as people think, the stats and the way he plays looks like a footballer. Nic Nat, Stef Martin and Grundy are still unrefined at times, doesn't hurt their value.

And it's hard to disagree about the ruck not being a need with Gawn right now but I'm looking at the current Melbourne side and I see a lot of needs and not a lot of strengths. Maybe we'd be well served to lean in to the ruck as a real strength and have 120 minutes of quality in there. We need to add more run and skill but we're unlikely to ever beat Richmond playing open fast footy. Stoppages, contested ball, own the aerial contests might be our best game plan.

Gawn also works his backside off to break even at ground level against the more mobile rucks, I'm not sure how much longer he'll be able to do it at a high level for 100 minutes a game. He tore his hammy tendon chasing a midfielder a couple of years ago, as he gets towards 30 he's going to struggle in the centre square. Gawn with heavier slower inside mids isn't a great centre bounce combination. How often do you see Gawn chasing a mid from the centre or a handball go to him flat footed which forces him to lob an ineffective kick forward. Adding a mobile ruck to do a share of the centre bounce work would help Max do what he does best - control games as an around the ground force.

Interstate players? We burnt a decade of young talent no matter where they came from, I don't think we can be concerned about that. Same with the go home factor. 

11 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

There's a lack of refinement to his skills but I don't think Jackson is as raw as people think, the stats and the way he plays looks like a footballer. Nic Nat, Stef Martin and Grundy are still unrefined at times, doesn't hurt their value.

And it's hard to disagree about the ruck not being a need with Gawn right now but I'm looking at the current Melbourne side and I see a lot of needs and not a lot of strengths. Maybe we'd be well served to lean in to the ruck as a real strength and have 120 minutes of quality in there. We need to add more run and skill but we're unlikely to ever beat Richmond playing open fast footy. Stoppages, contested ball, own the aerial contests might be our best game plan.

Gawn also works his backside off to break even at ground level against the more mobile rucks, I'm not sure how much longer he'll be able to do it at a high level for 100 minutes a game. He tore his hammy tendon chasing a midfielder a couple of years ago, as he gets towards 30 he's going to struggle in the centre square. Gawn with heavier slower inside mids isn't a great centre bounce combination. How often do you see Gawn chasing a mid from the centre or a handball go to him flat footed which forces him to lob an ineffective kick forward. Adding a mobile ruck to do a share of the centre bounce work would help Max do what he does best - control games as an around the ground force.

Interstate players? We burnt a decade of young talent no matter where they came from, I don't think we can be concerned about that. Same with the go home factor. 

I think your point is valid DS up to a point. Most young ruckmen take 3 or more years to develop to a point where they could be worthy of consistent AFL game time, and Max could well be retired by then. Even Grundy took a few years before his stats improved.  Under your scenario, if we want someone to assist Max over the next 3 years, then we need a ready made ruckman now. That’s not to say Jackson won’t be a good player. I have no idea on that. But it won’t be for about 3 years hence if he is.

I don't see what changes if we put Jackson in the forward line. I can see what could happen to forward line delivery  if we drafted Young.

14 minutes ago, Deebacle said:

I don't see what changes if we put Jackson in the forward line. I can see what could happen to forward line delivery  if we drafted Young.

Shrewd Deebacle. I like your thinking.

Young pick 3 then maybe Jackson 8 if still available which is most likely.

Not worth #3, probably not #8. Not tall enough as a ruckman and not showing enough as a forward.

36 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

I think your point is valid DS up to a point. Most young ruckmen take 3 or more years to develop to a point where they could be worthy of consistent AFL game time, and Max could well be retired by then. Even Grundy took a few years before his stats improved.  Under your scenario, if we want someone to assist Max over the next 3 years, then we need a ready made ruckman now. That’s not to say Jackson won’t be a good player. I have no idea on that. But it won’t be for about 3 years hence if he is.

Nic Nat 10 games in year 1, 22 in year 2. 

Grundy 7 games in year 1 including a final as the number 1 ruck. 15 games in year 2.

With Burgess and a maturing midfield group including Tomlinson and Langdon on the wings the idea would be to play Jackson something like 65% game time, 35% forward, 30% ruck from very early in his career. That’s enough to ease the load over the next 2 years before really extending Max when he’s 30+

 

20 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Because if you had that draft again Grundy would go pick 1 or maybe pick 2 after Whitfield.

He has: O'Rourke, Plowman, Toumpas, Mayes, Menzel, Jaksch, Corr, Garner, Thurlow, Simpson and everyone after pick 18 clearly covered.

You can make an argument for Macrae, Wines, Stringer, Vlastuin I guess but it's Grundy right?

If you think Jackson is even remotely similar to Grundy then he has to be in the conversation for at least pick 8. 

May be more like Hogan equivalent

i remember in grundy's year i wanted us to draft him at 4, but alas he slid and slid and he's now a $1m+ player and the, ahem, second best ruckman in the competition

if jackson is as good as some pundits believe then he'll go higher than grundy's pick 18 or english's pick 19

i'd still prefer young and kemp / serong / ash, but could understand why they might go a mid-sized player and a tall at 3 and 8...that's even if we finish with 3 and 8 by the time our selections come around

Looks like the jungle drums are beating loudly.

https://thewest.com.au/sport/afl/gun-wa-ruckman-luke-jackson-has-been-invited-to-draft-night-at-marvel-stadium-and-is-ready-to-move-with-melbourne-demons-and-adelaide-crows-threatening-to-scoop-the-fremantle-dockers-ng-b881371132z

5 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Looks like the jungle drums are beating loudly.

https://thewest.com.au/sport/afl/gun-wa-ruckman-luke-jackson-has-been-invited-to-draft-night-at-marvel-stadium-and-is-ready-to-move-with-melbourne-demons-and-adelaide-crows-threatening-to-scoop-the-fremantle-dockers-ng-b881371132z

We have Gawn and they have uncovered their next ruckman in O’Brien, surely not 

14 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Looks like the jungle drums are beating loudly.

https://thewest.com.au/sport/afl/gun-wa-ruckman-luke-jackson-has-been-invited-to-draft-night-at-marvel-stadium-and-is-ready-to-move-with-melbourne-demons-and-adelaide-crows-threatening-to-scoop-the-fremantle-dockers-ng-b881371132z

Can anyone who is a subscriber let us know what it says?

Just watching his highlights, Jackson twice spins around and through opponents, something most players aren’t exactly capable of, let alone other ruckmen. That is exceptional athleticism and talent.

I’m more than happy to take Jackson at 3.

He will request a trade back to Perth in a couple of years.

Avoid like the plague.

25 minutes ago, adonski said:

We have Gawn and they have uncovered their next ruckman in O’Brien, surely not 

If that is referring to Reilly O'Brien it is legit - he filled in when Jacobs was injured early this season.  He became their no 1 ruckman playing 18 games and Jacobs 5.  It is the reason the traded Jacobs out.

4 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

If that is referring to Reilly O'Brien it is legit - he filled in when Jacobs was injured early this season.  He became their no 1 ruckman playing 18 games and Jacobs 5.  It is the reason the traded Jacobs out.

Yeah that's what I meant, surely neither club would pickup a ruckman with pick 3/4? We're both sorted 

10 minutes ago, adonski said:

Yeah that's what I meant, surely neither club would pickup a ruckman with pick 3/4? We're both sorted 

Ruckman take at least 3-4 years to perform. Max will be retired or close to by then, he's about to to turn 28. Are you happy for Preuss to be our no 1 in 3 years? Or Bradke?

Not saying we should take him at 3, but it's crazy to think we are sorted long term in the ruck. Certainly he's in at mix at 8, but likely taken by then

Edited November 3, 20195 yr by Moonshadow

54 minutes ago, adonski said:

Yeah that's what I meant, surely neither club would pickup a ruckman with pick 3/4? We're both sorted 

They may want him to back up O'Brien and replace Jenkins and Tex who is way past is best.  As might we for Gawn/TomMc/Weideman.

 

As an aside, Adelaide have pick 4 and if Freo want Jackson it is more incentive for them to trade 7 and 10 for our 3 and maybe something back.  We can get that 'something' by splitting pick 8.  GCS are wanting to trade (pick 15 and 20) for a top 10 pick so we could give one of those back to Freo.  We get 7,10 and 15 or 20.  Freo get Jackson and 15 or 20 which they can use on Henry. 

Pick 20 is actually very valuable as it is the 1st pick after round 1 and clubs will be going for it if their preferred player isn't picked in the first round.  It is what Carlton did last year to get Stocker. 

Edit:  I haven't tried to match the draft points of the pick trade Freo/MFC/GCS as I think the picks (esp 3 and 20) have intrinsic value over and above the theoretical points.

Edited November 3, 20195 yr by Lucifer's Hero