Also, afl rules state that you can't have a pick swap with a huge differential of points or something to stop something like that happening.

2 hours ago, JakovichScissorKick said:

Petty shoedat the end of the season he

Where does Petty fit in?  He showed great promise as a key forward at the end of the season

I have him as our 2nd tall next to T Mac.

I'd play Petty back if we got Jackson to fill a KPF role.

And of course you don't draft a Cox at pick 3 @DeeSpencer. I'm talking about the idea of Jackson saying forward in his first year or so and what that could mean for our forward structure in 2020. We'd want Jackson to eventually replace Max and possibly play as even a mid.

I think Jackson is 100% locked in at 3.

We won't bid on Green just to spite GWS and risk losing him, it's just not the way we operate and for good reason. Focus on your own side not what others are doing. This guy has the potential to be the best ruck/kpf in the comp and could potentially be similar to a Buddy with his elite speed and athleticism.

I'm also still of the belief the deal of 8 for 10 + 22 (potentially we may have to flick a late pick next year back) will 100% go ahead, because it just makes sense or both sides. Freo will know there's a high possibility us or Carlton will bid on Liam Henry at pick 8 or 9, so why not move up to 8 and essentially guarantee yourself 3 players in the top 15 of the draft. Pick 22 doesn't matter to them because even if they don't do the deal and Henry isn't bid on, the outcome is still the same (pick 7, Pick 10 and Henry).

My ideal draft would be:

3. Luke Jackson

10. Lachie Ash (assumes Young is gone)

22. Kysaih Pickett (assumes Weightman is gone)

Drafting a tall ruck without a strong footy background at 3 is too risky imo. Could work but I don’t think we should take undue risk at pick 3. Green looks an excellent prospect and the risk is much lower. 

I remember the write ups for Tyrone Vickery back in the day, - he could go top 3, he is the modern prototype, quick and can play fwd. dominated as a junior  

i know Jackson is more athletic but still the risk is there. Add in that the WA boys head home a lot and it’s even riskier

25 minutes ago, Collar-Jazz-Knee said:

I think Jackson is 100% locked in at 3.

We won't bid on Green just to spite GWS and risk losing him, it's just not the way we operate and for good reason. Focus on your own side not what others are doing. This guy has the potential to be the best ruck/kpf in the comp and could potentially be similar to a Buddy with his elite speed and athleticism.

I'm also still of the belief the deal of 8 for 10 + 22 (potentially we may have to flick a late pick next year back) will 100% go ahead, because it just makes sense or both sides. Freo will know there's a high possibility us or Carlton will bid on Liam Henry at pick 8 or 9, so why not move up to 8 and essentially guarantee yourself 3 players in the top 15 of the draft. Pick 22 doesn't matter to them because even if they don't do the deal and Henry isn't bid on, the outcome is still the same (pick 7, Pick 10 and Henry).

My ideal draft would be:

3. Luke Jackson

10. Lachie Ash (assumes Young is gone)

22. Kysaih Pickett (assumes Weightman is gone)

Agreed, Freo at the very least should do same deal with Carlton. 22 is gone, so they might as well use it to move up in the draft

6 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Drafting a tall ruck without a strong footy background at 3 is too risky imo.

Worse than risky, its completely insane.

The kid doesnt have any of the weapons to be a great forward either.

Athletic midfield ruck automatically equals good forward? - Do Brodie Grundy or Nic Nat dominate in their brief stints as a KPF? Is Rory Lobb worth pick 3?

Edited November 20, 20195 yr by John Demonic

The buddy Franklin draft is a great touchstone for the jackson decision.

He went at 5. Tigers took Delidio at one and famously rambling at 4. Lidw was a good but safe call. Hawks took roughly at 2 and digs took Griffin at 3. 

Buddy's talent was obvious but there were question marks. So much so they took roughly first.

But do that draft now and everyone would take buddy in a heartbeat.

Is jackson our buddy?

 

22 minutes ago, binman said:

The buddy Franklin draft is a great touchstone for the jackson decision.

He went at 5. Tigers took Delidio at one and famously rambling at 4. Lidw was a good but safe call. Hawks took roughly at 2 and digs took Griffin at 3. 

Buddy's talent was obvious but there were question marks. So much so they took roughly first.

But do that draft now and everyone would take buddy in a heartbeat.

Is jackson our buddy?

 

Buddy was (is) a graceful gliding 'forward' gazelle from day dot with a measure of power, run, finish and goal sense/accuracy the likes of which rarely come around.  Especially the long raking goals on the arc fron 50 and beyond, even off a few steps.

Jackson could be a very good ruckman certainly.  Possibly one of the best in the AFL a few years from now with some very good ground ball assets on top, in terms of clearance and contested work.

Is he a genuine forward prospect that could turn our fortunes around there and hold down a No.2 mantle?  Who knows.  Haven't seen any evidence to suggest he can.  I assume Taylor has plenty more to go on and good reason to pick him at 3 if that is what he (we) decide on the night.

2 hours ago, Collar-Jazz-Knee said:

I'm also still of the belief the deal of 8 for 10 + 22 (potentially we may have to flick a late pick next year back) will 100% go ahead,

This deal can't happen. We can't trade pick 22 back as we traded it to Freo. 

Rule 9.7(a) A Club may exchange a Draft selection which it has received from another Club, provided that the selection is not traded directly back to that Club.

Any deal with Freo would require them to trade in another pick for 22 from somewhere else as well as their pick 10. That's possible but they better get on with it. The clocks ticking. At this stage we have no other picks to offer this year or next year other than this year's 8.

7 hours ago, binman said:

The buddy Franklin draft is a great touchstone for the jackson decision.

He went at 5. Tigers took Delidio at one and famously rambling at 4. Lidw was a good but safe call. Hawks took roughly at 2 and digs took Griffin at 3. 

Buddy's talent was obvious but there were question marks. So much so they took roughly first.

But do that draft now and everyone would take buddy in a heartbeat.

Is jackson our buddy?

 

Pretty sure I read somewhere that the Hawks took Roughy first because Richmond were keen on him, but not buddy.

Your point still stands; but I don't think the Hawks ever had question marks on Bud.

1 minute ago, Good Lord George said:

Pretty sure I read somewhere that the Hawks took Roughy first because Richmond were keen on him, but not buddy.

Your point still stands; but I don't think the Hawks ever had question marks on Bud.

Maybe not. But they risked not getting him. They were very fortunate the tigere took tambling and the dogs took Griffin.

7 hours ago, binman said:

The buddy Franklin draft is a great touchstone for the jackson decision.

He went at 5. Tigers took Delidio at one and famously rambling at 4. Lidw was a good but safe call. Hawks took roughly at 2 and digs took Griffin at 3. 

Buddy's talent was obvious but there were question marks. So much so they took roughly first.

But do that draft now and everyone would take buddy in a heartbeat.

Is jackson our buddy?

 

Interesting take binman but I think the difference is buddy and roughy were true footballers and had showed they can play fwd, and kick goals. 

Imo Grundy is the better comparison. Best case we end up with a Grundy but is that our need for the next 4-5 years? Obviously he could surprise and turn into a gun fwd but it’s a low percentage imo. Chances of him being a roughy or buddy are very slim imo

9 hours ago, It's Time said:

This deal can't happen. We can't trade pick 22 back as we traded it to Freo. 

Rule 9.7(a) A Club may exchange a Draft selection which it has received from another Club, provided that the selection is not traded directly back to that Club.

Any deal with Freo would require them to trade in another pick for 22 from somewhere else as well as their pick 10. That's possible but they better get on with it. The clocks ticking. At this stage we have no other picks to offer this year or next year other than this year's 8.

 

I think we can, as it has changed hands to Port.
I know the AFL makes up rules on the run, but the wording as it stands allows us to make the trade.
The intention was also to prevent a Sydney-like points evasion trade, not what we'd be proposing.
Worth arguing the point at the very least.

23 minutes ago, Mach5 said:

 

I think we can, as it has changed hands to Port.
I know the AFL makes up rules on the run, but the wording as it stands allows us to make the trade.
The intention was also to prevent a Sydney-like points evasion trade, not what we'd be proposing.
Worth arguing the point at the very least.

Apologies, I was thinking the pick had somehow made its way to Port, not still with Freo.
Obviously this was a mistake. Carry on.

Finding it hard to get overly excited about Jackson and I am in the prefer Young camp. But there is too much noise about us taking him at 3 for that not to happen now I believe. 

I would like to see another highlights package with some decent kicking and a few big marks. But as a ruckman he does look good with his follow up and athleticism.  

I take positives from the fact that he played basketball for Australia (must have massive talent) and when Nic Nat was drafted to WC Cox was 27-28 year old. Very similar age to Max. Develop under Max and then hand over and lose nothing in that area. 

I also get comfort in that Taylor knows what he is doing. 

 

12 hours ago, JakovichScissorKick said:

Worse than risky, its completely insane.

The kid doesnt have any of the weapons to be a great forward either.

Agree IMO If we draft this kid at 3 It might go down as the greatest draft blunder of the Century. For a start this bloke can't kick!! Yeah thats what we need another poorly skilled player!

DONT DO IT MFC!

Looking past his excellent athleticism... I can't help but have concerns surrounding his height when translated to the AFL and playing in the ruck. At least when it comes using pick 3 in the draft.

According to current profiles he stands at 199cm, which is actually only 3cm shorter than Nic Nats listed height. However... Luke hasnt appeared to test anywhere near as well in his verticle leaps at the combine. It's all well and good to gain an "extra" midfielder after a bounce, but will Luke have the ability to hold his own in ruck contests 1 on 1 with the 202cm+ giants that are current day ruckman?

Furthermore, we constantly have people raise caution around big body players dominating the under 18 comps due to the fact they are so much stronger than the other players. For those in the know is there any element of this in this instance with Jackson?

Would love to be convinced otherwise, but cant help questioning his worth at pick 3.

Edited November 21, 20195 yr by Micah
Spelling

2 hours ago, Mach5 said:

 

I think we can, as it has changed hands to Port.
I know the AFL makes up rules on the run, but the wording as it stands allows us to make the trade.
The intention was also to prevent a Sydney-like points evasion trade, not what we'd be proposing.
Worth arguing the point at the very least.

With a nod and a wink, the afl will let us do what we want as, they took pick 2 away from us.

Edited November 21, 20195 yr by Engorged Onion

13 hours ago, John Demonic said:

Athletic midfield ruck automatically equals good forward? - Do Brodie Grundy or Nic Nat dominate in their brief stints as a KPF? Is Rory Lobb worth pick 3?

None of those players are Luke Jackson.

But you could counter that both Cox and Gawn have had success forward, Mitch Clark looked sensational forward when he first came to us (pre-injury), Boyd took the Dogs to a flag, even blokes like Ryder, Big O, Cox etc etc.

But again, this is a different player to all of those, so my logic impacts it as much as yours does.

 

8 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

None of those players are Luke Jackson.

But you could counter that both Cox and Gawn have had success forward, Mitch Clark looked sensational forward when he first came to us (pre-injury), Boyd took the Dogs to a flag, even blokes like Ryder, Big O, Cox etc etc.

But again, this is a different player to all of those, so my logic impacts it as much as yours does.

 

He's a bloody hard player to find a comparison for. maybe a more mobile Mitch Clark with a basketball background. 

I'm trying to grow some enthusiasm for Jackson given all the hype about us taking him at 3 at the moment. But I'm bloody struggling with it and I can't escape from the view that 3 is way too high. 8 maybe but not 3.

I'm no expert (don't attend games, etc) but I've read an awful lot over the last few weeks and it seems to me that Rowell/Anderson/Green are clear top 3 standouts. GC will take Rowell/Anderson so we should be bidding on Green and if GWS don't match, happy days in getting a 200 game midfielder while letting them take the chance on a raw ruck prospect in Jackson. If they do match, happy days again and we take Young who I think is best available and also fits our needs.

As I said, I'm trying to be convinced of Jackson but I just can't there. Particularly when looking at the high quality of the other candidates we can take at 3.

Seems like Jackson at pick 3 is going to happen. I'm still not sold on the idea as IMO he's too short to be a dominant ruckman at AFL level and has no proven form as a tall forward. Taylor has also been poor with identifying tall talent as our recruiting manager so far. Hopefully Jackson doesn't wind up like the other talls he's picked. I'll just have to accept this reach and hope it works out for us.

I admire those saying to trust the club. I cant. We've been a failure for 50+ years and we just finished 17th. I will only trust the club when we stop being a failure. Until then I support them as a paid up member, but will question a number of their decisions that have continued to be wrong.

I'm more excited by what we can potentially do with pick 8 now.

Edited November 21, 20195 yr by Lord Travis

 

Jackson makes sense.. With evenness of the draft we will still get a player of choice at pick 8 or 14 and 17 if we wheel and deal with Geelong.

Yes Jackson comes with risk but all players do. Look at Mc Cartin (no 1 pick) and done. If he develops we have a ruck/ forward player for yeas to come. If wants to go home WCE and Anchors pay up. 

 

I wonder how many of the posters saying we should "play safe" on Green or Young have been criticising the decision to take Scully and Trengove over Martin for years? 

Yes they are 6 different players but the gist is the same.

IMO FWIW, no Martin = no Richmond flags.

Edited November 21, 20195 yr by Fifty-5