Jump to content

Isaac Keeler

Whispering_Jack
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

Posted

Isaac Keeler is a promising key forward/ruckman from South Australia who has been considered by some as a potential Luke Jackson replacement. The Adelaide NGA has no problem moving interstate and this week, the Crows decided not to nominate him under the rules -

Why Crows chose against nominating draft prospect under NGA rules

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     

    Yes, WJ. He impresses me as he has to goods to learn our ways whilst young and merge these with the innovative development of his own game  characteristics. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    I'm a fan. Obviously only speaking based on various profiles and highlights but if you show me a super-mobile tall who can still stick marks and who has a clean long kick I'll always be interested.

    Also a good time to start developing the rucks and ruck-support players of the future, when they can grow under the supervision of basically the two smartest rucks in the game.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Love 1
     

    If he’s still available at our pick 37 then he’d be a perfect target to develop long term as either a tall forward or ruck. Think he might fall between our picks on the night though.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    He will go much earlier than pick 37 , probably late 20's . I think pick 37 will get bumped out.

  • Quote
    • Sad 1

    He looks good in the highlights but Adelaide has not said they would pick him as a NGA player why? 

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    Adelaide having the most access to him and no interest is a big red flag 

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    Adelaide's apparent 'lack of interest' could be because:

    1) they think he will go in the top 40 so not allowed to match

    2) their only draft picks are: 46, 56, and 59 so even if we went after 40 they have limited draft currency to fulfill their draft obligations of 3 draftees/rookie upgrades.

    They have a full hand of 2023 picks plus an extra F2 (NM) and F3 (Coll) but may not be willing to use any of them to match a bid after pick 40...are they targetting someone better than Keeler in 2023?

    3) On a 'needs' basis they think they have enough forward and ruck options and have other positions in mind for a 'needs' basis pick this year.

    They all look like good reasons to me.

    Edited by Lucifers Hero
    Added the word 'not'. Thanks to @Redleg for noticing the omission.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
     
    40 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

    Adelaide's apparent 'lack of interest' could be because:

    1) they think he will go in the top 40 so allowed to match

    2) their only draft picks are: 46, 56, and 59 so even if we went after 40 they have limited draft currency to fulfill their draft obligations of 3 draftees/rookie upgrades.

    They have a full hand of 2023 picks plus an extra F2 (NM) and F3 (Coll) but may not be willing to use any of them to match a bid after pick 40...are they targetting someone better than Keeler in 2023?

    3) On a 'needs' basis they think they have enough forward and ruck options and have other positions in mind for a 'needs' basis pick this year.

    They all look like good reasons to me.

    I think you mean "not" allowed to match in point 1.

  • Quote
    • Thanks 1

    Just looking at a recent 'Knightmare' phantom draft and saw that Adelaide have a F/S, Max Michanney which 'Knightmare' is suggesting a bid at #31.  Adelaide will need points to match that bid and may need to trade out some of its 2023 picks..

    So another legit reason for the Crows to not nominate Keeler.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    14 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

    If he’s still available at our pick 37 then he’d be a perfect target to develop long term as either a tall forward or ruck. Think he might fall between our picks on the night though.

    I like Mankara NGA - Ess at 37, or Brayden George if he were to slip that far

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    7 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

    Just looking at a recent 'Knightmare' phantom draft and saw that Adelaide have a F/S, Max Michanney which 'Knightmare' is suggesting a bid at #31.  Adelaide will need points to match that bid and may need to trade out some of its 2023 picks..

    So another legit reason for the Crows to not nominate Keeler.

    Adelaide cannot match any bid upto 40 which is the new rule regarding NGA players, but they can match 41 onwards.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    9 minutes ago, durango said:

    Adelaide cannot match any bid upto 40 which is the new rule regarding NGA players, but they can match 41 onwards.

    I noted that rule for Keeler, an NGA, in my earlier post.

    MM is a F/S so can be matched at any pick.

    Edited by Lucifers Hero

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    I’ve only seen very little of this year’s draftees, but I don’t think I’d pick him with any selection and I would be shocked (given how Melbourne play footy) if he was on our list of potential draftees.

    As a big guy he has some good little guy skills …. but that isn’t the role we’d need him to play. We need big guys with good big guy skills, players who compete in the marking contest and compete in the ruck contest. He’s a small player stuck in a big player’s body.

    I’m sure someone could take a chance on him …. but it wouldn’t be me. Apparently not Adelaide either.

  • Quote
    • Like 8

    On 11/11/2022 at 12:26 PM, Axis of Bob said:

    I’ve only seen very little of this year’s draftees, but I don’t think I’d pick him with any selection and I would be shocked (given how Melbourne play footy) if he was on our list of potential draftees.

    As a big guy he has some good little guy skills …. but that isn’t the role we’d need him to play. We need big guys with good big guy skills, players who compete in the marking contest and compete in the ruck contest. He’s a small player stuck in a big player’s body.

    I’m sure someone could take a chance on him …. but it wouldn’t be me. Apparently not Adelaide either.

    If you’ve seen so little of him, it’s interesting that you conclude that he’s a “small player stuck in a big player’s body” and you wouldn’t take a chance on him as an 18 year old to develop his game. He plays for North Adelaide in the SANFL Under 18s and is 198cm 88kg and has played ruck and key forward roles and kicked goals. Why could he not become more imposing than BBB (a late developer) with some gym work and a few pre seasons under his belt?

    By comparison, a lot of people around here are salivating over the rangy stick figure key forward Matt Jefferson who is 194cm, 76kg and while he can admittedly take a grab, he doesn’t have much physicality and, at this stage of his career is by no means a strong man?

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
    On 11/11/2022 at 1:26 PM, Axis of Bob said:

    I’ve only seen very little of this year’s draftees, but I don’t think I’d pick him with any selection and I would be shocked (given how Melbourne play footy) if he was on our list of potential draftees.

    As a big guy he has some good little guy skills …. but that isn’t the role we’d need him to play. We need big guys with good big guy skills, players who compete in the marking contest and compete in the ruck contest. He’s a small player stuck in a big player’s body.

    I’m sure someone could take a chance on him …. but it wouldn’t be me. Apparently not Adelaide either.

    One could say you’ve just described Luke Jackson. He’s a big man with small man skills. He’s lauded for agility and ground ball skills for a tall, but ironically his weakness are his big man skills such as marking and using his body in contests.

    I haven’t seem enough of Keeler to pass good judgement, but his skill set and output seems fine for his size.

    Edited by Lord Travis

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    On 11/11/2022 at 11:06 AM, DeeSpencer said:

    Adelaide having the most access to him and no interest is a big red flag 

    Maybe trying to put other clubs off. Lol.!!

    Edited by DeeZone
    Spell checker

  • Quote
    56 minutes ago, Leopold Bloom said:

    If you’ve seen so little of him, it’s interesting that you conclude that he’s a “small player stuck in a big player’s body” and you wouldn’t take a chance on him as an 18 year old to develop his game.

    I have only seen a few games of his (plus the highlights) so I have some knowledge but certainly not enough to be an expert at all - which is a caveat to the opinions I have on this year’s draft class. This is intended to not try to deceive anyone and also give context to any opinions I have …. those opinions might even be wrong! 😁

    Based on those caveats, I gave my opinion from what I’ve seen. 
     

    1 hour ago, Leopold Bloom said:

    He plays for North Adelaide in the SANFL Under 18s and is 198cm 88kg and has played ruck and key forward roles and kicked goals. Why could he not become more imposing than BBB (a late developer) with some gym work and a few pre seasons under his belt?

    By comparison, a lot of people around here are salivating over the rangy stick figure key forward Matt Jefferson who is 194cm, 76kg and while he can admittedly take a grab, he doesn’t have much physicality and, at this stage of his career is by no means a strong man?

    It’s not a matter of his body shape, it’s a matter of his competitiveness in the contest. Jefferson is a constant aerial threat and, in aerial contests, very competitive, brave and composed despite his current size. That’s what you want from a big man in our system. I’m not sure Keeler has that willingness to fight in the contest, which is why I wouldn’t draft him. I’d rather draft a player that I thought had some chance of playing a role in our team.
     

    24 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

    One could say you’ve just described Luke Jackson.

    There are a few differences though. Jackson is super competitive around the ball and fights to win the ball or defend. He isn’t currently able to affect aerial contests much but it’s a skill thing rather than a mentality. Also the small man skills are very different ….. Jackson has small man skills the equivalent of a small man, not just ones that are ‘good for a big man’ like Keeler. Jackson also competes in the ruck.

     

    But, of course, maybe I’m wrong.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    • Love 1
    14 hours ago, Axis of Bob said:

    I have only seen a few games of his (plus the highlights) so I have some knowledge but certainly not enough to be an expert at all - which is a caveat to the opinions I have on this year’s draft class. This is intended to not try to deceive anyone and also give context to any opinions I have …. those opinions might even be wrong! 😁

    Based on those caveats, I gave my opinion from what I’ve seen. 
     

    It’s not a matter of his body shape, it’s a matter of his competitiveness in the contest. Jefferson is a constant aerial threat and, in aerial contests, very competitive, brave and composed despite his current size. That’s what you want from a big man in our system. I’m not sure Keeler has that willingness to fight in the contest, which is why I wouldn’t draft him. I’d rather draft a player that I thought had some chance of playing a role in our team.
     

    There are a few differences though. Jackson is super competitive around the ball and fights to win the ball or defend. He isn’t currently able to affect aerial contests much but it’s a skill thing rather than a mentality. Also the small man skills are very different ….. Jackson has small man skills the equivalent of a small man, not just ones that are ‘good for a big man’ like Keeler. Jackson also competes in the ruck.

     

    But, of course, maybe I’m wrong.

    But will you "be happy to be wrong"? 😀

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Haha 3

    32 minutes ago, old55 said:

    But will you "be happy to be wrong"? 😀

    I'll be happy for Isaac Keeler! 😁

  • Quote
    • Like 6
    On 11/13/2022 at 10:40 AM, Axis of Bob said:

    I'll be happy for Isaac Keeler! 😁

    St Kilda will take him (Isaac) with their second pick if he is still available. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    On 11/12/2022 at 6:02 PM, DeeZone said:

    Maybe trying to put other clubs off. Lol.!!

    On 11/12/2022 at 4:54 PM, Leopold Bloom said:

    If you’ve seen so little of him, it’s interesting that you conclude that he’s a “small player stuck in a big player’s body” and you wouldn’t take a chance on him as an 18 year old to develop his game. He plays for North Adelaide in the SANFL Under 18s and is 198cm 88kg and has played ruck and key forward roles and kicked goals. Why could he not become more imposing than BBB (a late developer) with some gym work and a few pre seasons under his belt?

    By comparison, a lot of people around here are salivating over the rangy stick figure key forward Matt Jefferson who is 194cm, 76kg and while he can admittedly take a grab, he doesn’t have much physicality and, at this stage of his career is by no means a strong man?

    Others have described Jefferson differently so if he's the 2nd best FF in the draft and we can't get Cadman  let's give him a go as we still need support for JVR and our older forwards in the near future. 
    Read today's HS and at pick no 14 they say not best player but most needed by the Club at this pick.

    Also he had great marking skills and plenty of scope for development. How old is your 76 km Weight  for Matthew.? Quoted now as 84kg! In HS. 

    Too many draft experts concentrate on an 18 yo players small shortcomings or perceived faults.

    A robust skill base plus competitiveness is a great start to give our coaches to perform their role at the Club. 
    I say get Jeffo in work on his ability and potential.  JVR was not and is not yet a finished product but nicely on the way as a remember. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1
     

    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
    Reply to this topic...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • CASEY: Sydney

      The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • REPORT: St. Kilda

      Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
      This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • 4 replies
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Collingwood

      After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

        • Like
      • 170 replies
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: St. Kilda

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
      Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
      Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

        • Like
      • 46 replies
      Demonland

    • POSTGAME: St. Kilda

      After kicking the first goal of the match the Demons were always playing catch up against the Saints in Alice Spring and could never make the most of their inside 50 entries to wrestle back the lead.

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 328 replies
      Demonland

    • VOTES: St. Kilda

      Max Gawn still has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year award as Christian Petracca, Jake Bowey, Clayton Oliver & Kozzy Pickett round out the Top 5. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1

        • Like
      • 31 replies
      Demonland
    View All