14 hours ago, COOLX said:

I actually thought that our project ruckman is Bradkte.  We may have to make the Weed into a forward/ruckman.

Also I wouldn't be surprised if GWS pick up Anderson in lieu of Green. They (GWS) need a ruckman of quality.

Since we don't have pick 8 , I cannot see us getting Kemp , hence we will have to use pick 3 on him. Kemp will be a superstar.

 

I believe it’s been determined that Bradtke is much more likely to be a long term forward than a ruckman.

Weid would be a backup ruckman only in the case of emergencies, imo.

14 hours ago, Males said:

My concern is the rest of that article on AFL.com, not very good reading for ruckman. 
 

”Almost half of the roughly 100 players drafted since 2010 who were classified as ruckmen or spent decent time there – combined with a key-position role – haven't played an AFL match.”

“Six-time All-Australian Cox, Tiger-turned-Cat Brad Ottens and then-Magpie Jolly are the only ruckmen in the top 10 of their club's best and fairest in a premiership year since 2006.”

Stats are interesting aren't they. They're only as good as how they're used. There's only been 2 ruckman picked in the top 10 since 2006. One a success, one a failure.  I'd have a pretty educated guess that most ruckman are taken on as project players quite late in the draft. So that stat may not be that surprising or significant in picking Jackson if he's a freak like Nick Nat. I haven't seen or read anything that puts him in that category but Taylor and team have earnt my trust so if they pick him I will have to bare knuckled trust their judgement. 

15 hours ago, Paulo said:

After watching a few games of the u18s champs, the first bloke i took notice of was jackson, stood out like a becon , has so much upside, the next bloke i liked was weightman, classy and skillful, easily kicked the most goals through the champs.

Others that stood out through my eyes were gould, green, kemp, henry, ash,al and roberton

Seen a clip of Jackson playing basketball on you tube , wow, so much agility, skill and aggression, i get a sence he wants to be the best, and has that i f...ing hate losing mindset 

Big yes for me

You managed to judge his character by watching him basketball on YouTube? Come on. 

I'll back whoever we pick but it seems relatively safe to say we'll be picking out of Green and Jackson. 

The post that said they'd prefer Jackson running it out of the stoppage because Green is a handball king, the ball travels a lot quicker when you kick or handball rather than run and carry. If Green is an Oliver clone and we can get him, that's an A grade midfield for the next 10 years. That's how you build a dynasty. We want sustained success and it's all built from the midfield. I'd also add Kemp if possible to that midfield in a few years time.

3 hours ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

 

Yet for some reason it’s an iron clad lock that Jackson will dominate the game.

I haven't read anyone saying that.  Quotes please.

9 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

I haven't read anyone saying that.  Quotes please.

Just read back through this thread. 

1 minute ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Just read back through this thread. 

I've read the thread and didn't see it. You're making the claim, put up!

Could turn out to be a bigger version of Patrick Cripps

I see a lot of Stefan Martin in the way Jackson plays. I liked Martin when he was a demon so this is not meant as a criticism of the idea of picking him. In saying this, I still think we should nominate Green. 

17 hours ago, PaulRB said:

I think the idea is if Jackson is Bombing it into the forward line, Gawn will be there looking to mark it.

Who is statistically the worst set shot at the club (who has played a reasonable number of seniors games eg; not half a dozen or so) and the 16th worst set shot for goal in the AFL.

It's a nice thought but let's leave it at that shall we.

We also have no idea how accurate or effective Jackson is around goals either.  Unless someone has some stats from the Colts in terms of number of shots / accuracy %?

2 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

We also have no idea how accurate or effective Jackson is around goals either.  Unless someone has some stats from the Colts in terms of number of shots / accuracy %?

He’s kicked 9.4

20 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

I've read the thread and didn't see it. You're making the claim, put up!

Post 340 : Pennant St Dee 

“He’s better than Natanui below his knees, more of a footy brain and better by hand and foot. He doesn’t have Natanuis leap or explosiveness but I see a player with more mobility who covers more ground and can actually take contested marks on regular occasions.”

Add to that his ability to tap the ball to advantage and his blind turns and breaking away from a stoppage before throwing the ball onto his boot blindly. Please remember only he will have the same time at AFL level as he does in under 18’s, none of the other potential draftee’s will.

Post 356 : Mach5

“I don't see him as direct competition for Weideman (who is a 2nd forward) but I think Jackson would actually play as the number 1 key forward if deployed in the forward line. He has the size and presence to be the main target, create-a-contest type like a Tom Lynch, Tex, Walker, Travis Cloke, etc.

I think this is part of the problem with T-Mac too, as he's more of a very good 3rd forward roaming far and wide, using his mobility to advantage. If we're expecting him to be number 1 KPF we're in trouble”.

This was followed by

Post 357 : DeeSpencer 

“Don't agree with that. Jackson has no goal kicking pedigree. His best use up forward would be creating contests at times but otherwise just staying out of the way by occupying a man. That's how West Coast, Brisbane etc other successful teams with 2 rucks play.

On the other hand Tom McDonald put up 1.5 seasons of high quality key forward play. He had 2 excellent finals both with goal kicking and up the ground play and paired well with Weideman“

DeeSpencer’s comments make sense to me but before long Mach5 returns serve.

Post 361 : Mach5

”I don't think goal kicking has anything to do with it.
It's about presenting as the number 1 target who continually makes a contest, competes to prevent opposition intercept marks and brings your crumbers into the game. It's not always about pure marks and goals”.

 

Good to know that your no.1 forward isn’t required to kick goals, this is where people remind everybody that Collingwood were 90 seconds away from winning the GF with Cox.

 

Post 383 : Binman

“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?”.

 

I would of thought there are still some question marks hanging of over Jackson’s head, ability to take a pack mark and his kicking both in general play and set shots on goal. Will he be able to dominate at AFL like he can at under 18’s.

Post 435 : Dr Evil

“In terms of pure talent Jackson is the most talented player in this draft with the highest ceiling. I think it's a very easy choice at pick 3. there are Hayden youngs every year“.

In previous years the most talented player generally comes in and has an impact straight away.

 

So in short, he’s already got Natanui covered in a lot areas of his game, he can come in and play as our no.1 fwd, could potentially be our Buddy because his talent is so obvious that he is clearly the most talented player in this years draft. If he’s not going to dominate then I don’t know who will.

1 hour ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Post 340 : Pennant St Dee 

“He’s better than Natanui below his knees, more of a footy brain and better by hand and foot. He doesn’t have Natanuis leap or explosiveness but I see a player with more mobility who covers more ground and can actually take contested marks on regular occasions.”

Add to that his ability to tap the ball to advantage and his blind turns and breaking away from a stoppage before throwing the ball onto his boot blindly. Please remember only he will have the same time at AFL level as he does in under 18’s, none of the other potential draftee’s will.

Post 356 : Mach5

“I don't see him as direct competition for Weideman (who is a 2nd forward) but I think Jackson would actually play as the number 1 key forward if deployed in the forward line. He has the size and presence to be the main target, create-a-contest type like a Tom Lynch, Tex, Walker, Travis Cloke, etc.

I think this is part of the problem with T-Mac too, as he's more of a very good 3rd forward roaming far and wide, using his mobility to advantage. If we're expecting him to be number 1 KPF we're in trouble”.

This was followed by

Post 357 : DeeSpencer 

“Don't agree with that. Jackson has no goal kicking pedigree. His best use up forward would be creating contests at times but otherwise just staying out of the way by occupying a man. That's how West Coast, Brisbane etc other successful teams with 2 rucks play.

On the other hand Tom McDonald put up 1.5 seasons of high quality key forward play. He had 2 excellent finals both with goal kicking and up the ground play and paired well with Weideman“

DeeSpencer’s comments make sense to me but before long Mach5 returns serve.

Post 361 : Mach5

”I don't think goal kicking has anything to do with it.
It's about presenting as the number 1 target who continually makes a contest, competes to prevent opposition intercept marks and brings your crumbers into the game. It's not always about pure marks and goals”.

 

Good to know that your no.1 forward isn’t required to kick goals, this is where people remind everybody that Collingwood were 90 seconds away from winning the GF with Cox.

 

Post 383 : Binman

“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?”.

 

I would of thought there are still some question marks hanging of over Jackson’s head, ability to take a pack mark and his kicking both in general play and set shots on goal. Will he be able to dominate at AFL like he can at under 18’s.

Post 435 : Dr Evil

“In terms of pure talent Jackson is the most talented player in this draft with the highest ceiling. I think it's a very easy choice at pick 3. there are Hayden youngs every year“.

In previous years the most talented player generally comes in and has an impact straight away.

 

So in short, he’s already got Natanui covered in a lot areas of his game, he can come in and play as our no.1 fwd, could potentially be our Buddy because his talent is so obvious that he is clearly the most talented player in this years draft. If he’s not going to dominate then I don’t know who will.

Good on you for finding some quotes. I hope there would be some very positive assessment of the player we're likely to take at 3.  

But i don't see anyone saying

"Yet for some reason it’s an iron clad lock that Jackson will dominate the game."

I've followed Pennant St, Mach, Binman and Dr.Evil over the years and they're all good posters who would recognise that every draftee has risks and no-one is "iron clad locks to dominate".  They're giving reasons why Jackson might be a risk worth taking.

2 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

Good on you for finding some quotes. I hope there would be some very positive assessment of the player we're likely to take at 3.  

But i don't see anyone saying

"Yet for some reason it’s an iron clad lock that Jackson will dominate the game."

I've followed Pennant St, Mach, Binman and Dr.Evil over the years and they're all good posters who would recognise that every draftee has risks and no-one is "iron clad locks to dominate".  They're giving reasons why Jackson might be a risk worth taking.

its the 'implication'.. 

1 hour ago, Rocky said:

its the 'implication'.. 

 

5 hours ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

...

 

Yeah, nah.

A fair chunk of the conversation was about the concept of a number 1 target as a KPF. Part of the role is marks and goals, but a large part of their role is simply continuing to present, create an option, and at least halve a contest, bringing teammates into the game. Maybe a difficult concept for some?

It’s not set in stone that Jackson will fill this role with aplomb, but I think he will be able to.

At least kudos to you for not being afraid to have an opinion, or a different one.

Edited November 24, 20195 yr by Mach5

On 11/23/2019 at 12:36 PM, A F said:

You managed to judge his character by watching him basketball on YouTube? Come on. 

I'll back whoever we pick but it seems relatively safe to say we'll be picking out of Green and Jackson. 

The post that said they'd prefer Jackson running it out of the stoppage because Green is a handball king, the ball travels a lot quicker when you kick or handball rather than run and carry. If Green is an Oliver clone and we can get him, that's an A grade midfield for the next 10 years. That's how you build a dynasty. We want sustained success and it's all built from the midfield. I'd also add Kemp if possible to that midfield in a few years time.

I guess the mfc see these traits in him to consider him with p3, cmon, have a think about it. I did mention i get a sense he has these traits so cmon and it wasn't just from basketball, i did watch him play football 

Edited November 24, 20195 yr by Paulo

No player is a sure thing to walk in and dominate, or to even make it.  

But Jackson certainly has attributes and talent that would have most clubs excited.

I have see no footage of anyone so can’t comment on who’s better than who. However I believe if they think Jackson’s the one, and ditto Pickett, then they are drafting for need above anything.

Jackson may become more Hogan like in size (already taller) and presence and we need a bigger bodied player (in time) to cover his loss. I’m hoping there also may be a touch of David Schwarz about him in the way he plays, athletic and smart and exciting. The Ox also had a basketball background although he had probably had a stronger grounding in footy than Jackson. The raw talent must be there to work with otherwise he wouldn’t even be considered.

We have a definite need for someone of his type and that type of any quality may not be available either later in this draft or the next one and they do keep an eye on future drafts.

They would also be able to see by his parents and others in his family whether genetically he has the capacity to grow and fill out into a powerhouse. 

Finally if we tried to trade for someone like him having who has had 2-4 years in the system, then they will cost the earth. Cheaper to try and grow our own if the raw talent is there to nurture.

We have stated we are confident of bouncing back in a big way next year. Drafting for need in Jackson and probably Pickett to try fill immediate holes, although they will likely need some time and development, makes sense to me. 

Happy to go with both on everything I’ve read.

 

 

 

Edited November 24, 20195 yr by Key Deefender

6 minutes ago, Key Deefender said:

 

Jackson may be more Hogan like

 

 

 

Nothing like Hogan at all.  

If he was I would be pumped about getting him.

On 11/22/2019 at 8:29 AM, picket fence said:

Some X fACTOR that can't kick??? Yer NOOOO!! WAY

IBID!

So everything I seem to read is that he’s undersized for a ruckman but as a forward isn’t a great mark or kick. Not sure we should use pick 3. 

38 minutes ago, Nelo said:

So everything I seem to read is that he’s undersized for a ruckman but as a forward isn’t a great mark or kick. Not sure we should use pick 3. 

He’s hardly undersized for a ruckman. Seems close to average (assuming he grows another couple of cm which you would expect at his age). He should do well as a ruck. The question mark is over his ability to play as a tall forward for the reasons you stated. But no one (on here) has seen how he did up forward at colts level after the champs

Buckenara rates him at 18 in his phantom draft. 

Seems to have gamble written all over it. Drafting for unexposed potential. Hopefully will develop into a forward, hopefully will learn to kick, hopefully will grow a few centimetres, hopefully won't go home. Hope they've done serious homework on the last point. 

Having watched the finals I would have said the standout trait we need is elite skill. Clearly not addressing that weakness here.

Gotta trust Taylor I guess. 

Buckenara has Pickett at 35. Fair to say our picks would be looking very different if he was our recruiting boss. 

Edited November 24, 20195 yr by It's Time

1 hour ago, Nelo said:

So everything I seem to read is that he’s undersized for a ruckman but as a forward isn’t a great mark or kick. Not sure we should use pick 3. 

Is that really everything you've read about Jackson?  I'd suggest you read a little wider.

Whether he goes pick 3 or not, the kid can seriously play.

5 minutes ago, It's Time said:

Buckenara rates him at 18 in his phantom draft. 

Seems to have gamble written all over it. Drafting for unexposed potential. Hopefully will develop into a forward, hopefully will learn to kick, hopefully will grow a few centimetres, hopefully won't go home. Hope they've done serious homework on the last point. 

Having watched the finals I would have said the standout trait we need is elite skill. Clearly not addressing that weakness here.

Gotta trust Taylor I guess. 

Buckenara has Pickett at 35. Fair to say our picks would be looking very different if he was our recruiting boss. 

Bucky would have delisted Harmes at season's end too.