@adonski  cannot see us picking Armstrong if Langford is available.  It’s an easy choice to make if it’s a call between these two players. I’m 100% in for Langford under your scenario.  

11 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

@adonski  cannot see us picking Armstrong if Langford is available.  It’s an easy choice to make if it’s a call between these two players. I’m 100% in for Langford under your scenario.  

Langford looks a ripper but I can understand his lack of speed putting some teams off him

12 hours ago, John Demonic said:

Furthermore, Back in the Salem/Tyson/Hunt for #2.JKelly day, 2 for 6/11/25 would be satisfactory. Why is nths F1 involved?

We gave up 20 as well in that deal. We paid a lot for Dom.

2-> 6 . Richmond are calling North’s bluff on Tauru and saying we aren’t giving you a top 20 pick for that move. You’re doing that for effectively a future 2nd kind of value.

F1 -> 11. Trading back in will cost you in this draft. We don’t care if you suck. West Coast suck and want that pick. Essendon aren’t good and want that pick. You have to relinquish the value you got in 2-6 to get that pick or we’ll sell it elsewhere.

From North’s perspective - they are taking Tauru no matter what so may as well do it at 6.

They have big gaps on the wing, half back, half forward that they can fill with 11. Getting that pick in right now is worth the overpay. And if they suck LDU gets them first round compo anyway!

Apologies if already posted - "True Footy" channel on YouTube did a mock draft and his reasoning for our picks are pretty sound;

 

Reasons for our picks, essentially we buck the trend somewhat and appear to "reach" - not that we're reaching but if a mid is expected to go at our pick then we'll go Tauru as the "more speculative". Also points out how we like to recruit from  WA and Bo Allen is a good fit for that pick..

 

Edit - note he has Tiges and North doing a pick swap of North's pick 2 for Tiges 11&12

Edited October 27, 2024Oct 27 by Mouseymoo

You don't take key defenders with top 10 picks

It's easy. Leak that we are definitely taking Tauru if available at 5. The North/Richmond trade is then pointless. Tauru goes at pick 2. We pick a gun mid at 5. Easy.

I hate the idea of going for a specific type of player in the top 11 picks of a great draft.

Best available. I'm sure we can fit them in whatever "type" they are.

Every year I have flashbacks to hearing Gysberts name called at 11 (I think). Was sure we were taking Talia.

Another thing stuck in my head. SANFL form means nothing. Aka Toumpass and Trengove. 

Body type means nothing. Tapscott cough...

Key forwards. Apart from Hogan (who's taken 19 years to have an impact). I don't want another Cook or Weideman.

1 hour ago, adonski said:

You don't take key defenders with top 10 picks

Umm………….Weitering?

7 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

Umm………….Weitering?

Darcy Moore pick 9 

Bigfooty draft watcher PMBangers has released an updated power rankings (note: NOT a phantom draft but I couldn't find the POWER rankings thread)

 

1 minute ago, adonski said:

Bigfooty draft watcher PMBangers has released an updated power rankings (note: NOT a phantom draft but I couldn't find the POWER rankings thread)

 

Wow- Langford at 20. That’s a bit different. 

1 minute ago, Colm said:

Wow- Langford at 20. That’s a bit different. 

Speeds king I guess

Langford's first round performance came up on my YouTube algorithm today. He kicked 3 goals and gathered 21 disposals, but took 5 or 6 marks deep inside 50.

The guy will be a weapon in time.

Edited October 28, 2024Oct 28 by Adam The God

Speed won’t be an issue as long as he can get to contests and use his strength and smarts to win the ball (not to mention his contested marking in the fwd 50)

If he’s available at 5 take him and pick a faster type at 9 to pair with him for the next decade 

Edited October 28, 2024Oct 28 by demoncat

I'd still prefer Jagga Smith, but if he's gone, I'm going Langford.

2 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

I'd still prefer Jagga Smith, but if he's gone, I'm going Langford.

I’ll be a very happy Dees fan if we nab either one of them 

I guess what teams will weigh up with Langford is if he's a liability in centre bounces, you're pretty much paying up for an expensive medium sized forward

Just now, adonski said:

I guess what teams will weigh up with Langford is if he's a liability in centre bounces, you're pretty much paying up for an expensive medium sized forward

I’d be curious how his speed compares to Bont or Cripps

Neither are quick but they’re two of the best centre bounce midfielders in the league and have no issues winning a clearance 

5 minutes ago, demoncat said:

I’d be curious how his speed compares to Bont or Cripps

Neither are quick but they’re two of the best centre bounce midfielders in the league and have no issues winning a clearance 

The question will be about how good he’ll be in attack to compensate for his lack of speed when defending. If you’re Bont or Cripps then that’s ok because you would trade their defence for their offence. If you’re Matt Crouch then you may not. You also can’t have many players like that in a team or you get destroyed trying to defend, so you need to consider the mix of players in your midfield, like the Dogs found with Macrae.

9 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

The question will be about how good he’ll be in attack to compensate for his lack of speed when defending. If you’re Bont or Cripps then that’s ok because you would trade their defence for their offence. If you’re Matt Crouch then you may not. You also can’t have many players like that in a team or you get destroyed trying to defend, so you need to consider the mix of players in your midfield, like the Dogs found with Macrae.

See for yourself.

Played more forward then mid this day and could have easily kicked a bag had it not been for inaccurate kicking.

Took some big contested grabs which shows that he could be as dangerous up forward when needed.

 

Just now, dazzledavey36 said:

See for yourself.

The question is for recruiters.

37 minutes ago, adonski said:

I guess what teams will weigh up with Langford is if he's a liability in centre bounces, you're pretty much paying up for an expensive medium sized forward

He's not a mid sized forward though, he's predominantly a midfielder, and a dominant inside one at that. He'd be a weapon at bounces, not a liability. He's one of the best clearance winners at his level. He was top 10 at the combine for the 2km time trial, so he's fit and has a high cruising speed to make it to lots of contests. He just doesn't have the initial burst that some others do. His fitness, determination and footy IQ make up for it thus far. He projects as an inside midfielder who can rest forward. He's very similar to in style to Bont and Cripps, both are both supposedly slow too.

Lack of burst speed didn't stop midfielders like Mitchell, Pendlebury, Selwood, Bontempelli, Hodge, Bartel, Cripps, Fyfe etc from being game changing midfielders. Assuming he develops well, it won't stop Langford either.

On 27/10/2024 at 08:30, adonski said:

If Norf swapped with Richmond, and we do love Armstrong, wanting to get in before the Saints have the chance to pick him, there's a world where both Smillie & Langford are available for the Saints. Question is would they double up on big bodied mids?

Worst case scenario if we went early on Armstrong is we miss all of the more highly touted midfield options, even Smillie.

1. Rich - Lalor
2. Rich (via North) - FOS
3. Carl (via WCE) - Jagger
4. Adel - Draper
5. Melb - Armstrong
6. North (via Rich) - Tauru
7. StK - Langford, Smillie, Travalgia? Allen? Reid? Lindsay?
8. StK -  Langford, Smillie, Travalgia? Allen? Reid? Lindsay?
9. Melb -  Langford, Smillie, Travalgia? Allen? Reid? Lindsay?

No chance we are taking Armstrong at 5

1 hour ago, Axis of Bob said:

The question is for recruiters.

20 goals from 15 Coates League games this year including one game where he kicked 4 goals and 33 disposals against Gippsland Power..

Nah, recruiters won't even need to ask the question. 

15 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

20 goals from 15 Coates League games this year including one game where he kicked 4 goals and 33 disposals against Gippsland Power..

Nah, recruiters won't even need to ask the question. 

You're arguing different things here I think. Bob is asking about his overall attacking game being good enough to counter defensive speed issues. His ability to go forward is part of that but only one part.

He looks natural jumping for marks and can present at the ball. It's a very nice string to the bow, but I'm not overly enamored with the idea of him spending too much time in the forward line (once he's in his prime). Carlton have tried it with Cripps and often he just gets in the way and the lack of forward pressure doesn't help. Mattaes Phillipou is a little bigger and more athletic and has often struggled to really impact forward too.

I like Langford's height and aerial for what it can be combined with a tank all over the ground and his versatility that should see him be able to rotate to a wing, to half back/3rd tall back and of course half forward or deep forward. There's some Jimmy Bartel or younger Jordan Lewis about him.

But Bob's right, the main determination will be does he look like he'll be a 30 high quality touches and goal a game attacking midfielder. Because if you get one of those guys you can find others to do the defensive work.