Did read somewhere that Luke is now over 200cm tall.

1 hour ago, Clintosaurus said:

Did read somewhere that Luke is now over 200cm tall.

He was officially measured at draft camp at 199cm.

Regarding his height, Nankervis, Martin and Ryder are all -199cm, they go alright.

I still prefer Young at 3.

 

26 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

He was officially measured at draft camp at 199cm.

Do you know what his unofficial measurement was?

With now Jacobs and Mummy plus 2 developing rucks and forwards Cameron to resign plus Finlayson and Himmelberg, I wonder if GWS really want Jackson. 

IMO if they can’t trade up a pick they match Green and take him.

51 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

Do you know what his unofficial measurement was?

Collingwood 7-footer?

Firming to be picked at 3, allegedly

26 minutes ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

Firming to be picked at 3, allegedly

I’d be happy about that. Although I sense it’s not a popular view here. 

41 minutes ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

Firming to be picked at 3, allegedly

? 

49 minutes ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

Firming to be picked at 3, allegedly

If true I think it's quite telling about the quality of the other candidates for pick 3. I would guess whoever goes pick 3 this year would have been around pick 10 last year.

 

Unless he fixes his poor kicking and turns it on over summer as a tall forward, which he has no proven history of, then he’s not getting near our round 1 team. It’ll be years before Gawn hands the ruck baton over, and even then he’d be the shortest ruckman in the league.

If we pick him at 3 I’ll put my house on it being a poor drafting choice.

4 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

Unless he fixes his poor kicking and turns it on over summer as a tall forward, which he has no proven history of, then he’s not getting near our round 1 team. It’ll be years before Gawn hands the ruck baton over, and even then he’d be the shortest ruckman in the league.

If we pick him at 3 I’ll put my house on it being a poor drafting choice.

Where are you basing his poor kicking at?

5 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

Unless he fixes his poor kicking and turns it on over summer as a tall forward, which he has no proven history of, then he’s not getting near our round 1 team. It’ll be years before Gawn hands the ruck baton over, and even then he’d be the shortest ruckman in the league.

If we pick him at 3 I’ll put my house on it being a poor drafting choice.

He is the same height as Nankervis already and will probably grow a cm or two by 21 you would think.

Not saying you're wrong about him being a poor choice, just disagree with this part of the post.

Not sure how anyone could possibly be saying he's going to be a fail if we go for him at pick 3 when he hasn't even entered the AFL system! Just as likely the opposite occurs and the guy we get at 3 instead is a nice solid footballer and Jackson goes on to become a game breaking superstar

2 minutes ago, sisso said:

Not sure how anyone could possibly be saying he's going to be a fail if we go for him at pick 3 when he hasn't even entered the AFL system! Just as likely the opposite occurs and the guy we get at 3 instead is a nice solid footballer and Jackson goes on to become a game breaking superstar

Agreed, except I think we’ll take him. And everyone talking up his faults needs to be reminded he’s also linked at picks 4,5 and 6. So it’s not any longer like he’s some wild, left field, punt.  

I have a horrible feeling of damned if we do, damned if we don’t.

38 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

Unless he fixes his poor kicking and turns it on over summer as a tall forward, which he has no proven history of, then he’s not getting near our round 1 team. It’ll be years before Gawn hands the ruck baton over, and even then he’d be the shortest ruckman in the league.

If we pick him at 3 I’ll put my house on it being a poor drafting choice.

Have you seen much of him playing at all?

If you haven't, then perhaps if you do, you may change your opinion.

 

53 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

If we pick him at 3 I’ll put my house on it being a poor drafting choice.

How many bedrooms and what suburb? 
 

Can this guy take a contested mark?   Any footage of it?

19 minutes ago, Beetle said:

How many bedrooms and what suburb? 
 

3 bedroom in Armadale Victoria. I reckon it’s a pretty safe call. 

19 minutes ago, JakovichScissorKick said:

Can this guy take a contested mark?   Any footage of it?

He’s a below average mark for his size. Decent enough at ruck taps, though often just double fisted to no one and then tries to chase his own tap. He’s got a decent leap on him, not NicNat good, but a level down. He’s not a strong mark for 199, rarely clunks them, which is why we’ve rarely seen him play tall forward with success I’d wager.

39 minutes ago, Dante said:

Have you seen much of him playing at all?

If you haven't, then perhaps if you do, you may change your opinion.

 

Yes, and I’m probably one of the few on here that has seen some of these kids play live.

I’d take Anderson, Rowell, Green, Young, Kemp, Henry, Flanders, Stephens, Robertson, Serong all ahead of him. Probably in that order too. I know we are crying out for a tall forward, but Jackson seems like a reach IMO. 

Edited November 15, 20196 yr by Lord Travis

Is there any vision of Jackson online? I’m scratching my head a bit at us taking him, but I also trust Taylor/have barely seen any vision of him. 

12 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

....... which is why we’ve rarely seen him play tall forward with success I’d wager.

So why did Taylor specifically mention that he saw him play some impressive games up forward after the Championships?

Maybe you didn’t see the games from Melbourne.

On top of Jackson being a bolter, Taylor has a poor record with drafting talls. He’s good at identifying mid sized players, but has been poor with talls and smalls. Here’s his track record for talls since he started with the 2014 draft.

O McDonald

Weiderman

Hulett (Delisted)

King (Delisted)

Filopovic (Delisted)

T Smith (Delisted)

Keilty (Delisted)

Petty