Welcome to Demonland: Pick 9

[58er 6,387]

On 23/10/2024 at 10:09, adonski said:

Ashcroft wasn't drafted with an ACL nor do I have a time machine

But it bears consiering as it is a player  coming back from injury. The previous poster shot you down and said no ACL so maybe a storm in a teacup.

Also Joel Selwood was under injury when drafted.

Most if not all recent drafted with an asterisk have succeeded. Can you name a real failure. 
lts not a death sentence and many 18 yo’s grow up remarkedly with smart handling by their Club. 

 

[58er 6,387]

3 minutes ago, adonski said:

Give him my regards

Smart …. You haven’t got an answer to that have you? 

You are entitled to your opinion but it is a completely open opinion now with such medical and mental assistance around and available. also Club help as well for more sophisticated. 

[58er 6,387]

3 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

I’m comfortable sitting on 5 & 9 thanks very much. We will get two future “aces” 

Agree Smithy we need 2 Aces with our picks. 

[58er 6,387]

On 25/10/2024 at 10:51, Melonmonster said:

This is what worries me 😂

Surely  we are not taking Armstrong with the talented kids available . 

Why worry ? Jeffo is on target for 2025 or have you missed the emails ?

Armstrong or Tauru are the best if their position and 9 is full of A graders with differing mids with skills/ styles that we can select one for  our specific needs also or best available. 

[Melonmonster 112]

41 minutes ago, 58er said:

Why worry ? Jeffo is on target for 2025 or have you missed the emails ?

Armstrong or Tauru are the best if their position and 9 is full of A graders with differing mids with skills/ styles that we can select one for  our specific needs also or best available. 

So that’s why Carlton traded two picks around that mark to get to pick 3?

 

On track to debut ? I expect jeffo to play a handful of games at most next year .

Happy to let him develop and re evaluate in 2 years.

side question, whose rates better aerially Langford  or Smilie ?

I see both have big kicks but from what I’ve seen smilie seems to hit more targets lace out . I’d be happy with Langford/Smilie  Lindsay/Trafaglia

[58er 6,387]

17 minutes ago, Melonmonster said:

So that’s why Carlton traded two picks around that mark to get to pick 3?

 

On track to debut ? I expect jeffo to play a handful of games at most next year .

Happy to let him develop and re evaluate in 2 years.

side question, whose rates better aerially Langford  or Smilie ?

I see both have big kicks but from what I’ve seen smilie seems to hit more targets lace out . I’d be happy with Langford/Smilie  Lindsay/Trafaglia

Jeffo should if he preseasons and trains well ie has built himself up even further be ready to debut early season or start possibly. As

I have indicated I believe he could also play a mobile running game as a HFFlanker with his footy smarts and mobility. Just thinking outside the box rather than putting him on the opps no 1 or 2 defender. 

No one can say we don’t need a player that can help our forward line if he is on offer and 5 for Armstrong or Tauru with 9 for one of a no if gun mids is still a win. If there were no mids left after5 I would most likely say take 2 mids. Another good/ great  mid is likely next year or a trade for one if we need. 
plus we have Sharp and Pup Brown and I believe Windsor should be moved to the centre. He will straighten us up and impact our connectivity beautifully. 

And with all our KPFs one can slip back to defense if team needs arise. 
So all bases can be covered I believe with this mix in the upcoming draft. 

[58er 6,387]

Just now, 58er said:

Jeffo should if he preseasons and trains well ie has built himself up even further be ready to debut early season or start possibly. As

I have indicated I believe he could also play a mobile running game as a HFFlanker with his footy smarts and mobility. Just thinking outside the box rather than putting him on the opps no 1 or 2 defender. 

No one can say we don’t need a player that can help our forward line if he is on offer and 5 for Armstrong or Tauru with 9 for one of a no if gun mids is still a win. If there were no mids left after5 I would most likely say take 2 mids. Another good/ great  mid is likely next year or a trade for one if we need. 
plus we have Sharp and Pup Brown and I believe Windsor should be moved to the centre. He will straighten us up and impact our connectivity beautifully. 

And with all our KPFs one can slip back to defense if team needs arise. 
So all bases can be covered I believe with this mix in the upcoming draft. 

PS Carlton wanted pick 3 for FOS as he is Walsh’s cousinBTW I believe. 

[Lord Travis 10,696]

16 minutes ago, Melonmonster said:

Side question, whose rates better aerially Langford  or Smilie ?

Langford has better hands, is a better mark, and hits the scoreboard more often. Smilie a bit better on the outside. Langford is better on the inside. For his big size, Smilie tends to feel pressure around stoppages and often sags back and dump kicks long. Langford works it through traffic and finds options better by hand.and is generally more effective. Who knows if Smilie could improve that part of his game in an AFL environment though, which is why he's an interesting prospect.

[58er 6,387]

8 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

Langford has better hands, is a better mark, and hits the scoreboard more often. Smilie a bit better on the outside. Langford is better on the inside. For his big size, Smilie tends to feel pressure around stoppages and often sags back and dump kicks long. Langford works it through traffic and finds options better by hand.and is generally more effective. Who knows if Smilie could improve that part of his game in an AFL environment though, which is why he's an interesting prospect.

That’s why I didn’t answer re Smillie va Langford aerially.

Did not have Travs knowledge on both. 
Having to make a choice I would go for Langford S I believe we need our mids kicking goals and thst fits our needs. 
Thats why I am pumping in my posts for the Duke to be moved to the centre a la Chad Warner yo have maximum effect ion our connectivity forward. Duke could also lift his very creditable debut year of 8 goal to 15/20 for us. It’s a no brainer to me. 
 

[FrothiesLiam 59]

If we are still pursuing derksen from gws next year assuming Tauru is gone I think we draft 2 midfielders

At 9 we would potentially select Allan Hotton Reid Lindsay travaglia 

[Adam The God 30,123]

Split it, Hotton and Hynes with 15 and 16, thanks very much. ;)

Our midfield then becomes:

Clarry, Viney, Rivers, Windsor, pick 5 (Smith or Langford hopefully), Hotton and Sparrow. With bursts from Trac, Kozzy and Hynes.

This sets us up for 10 years and when Viney, Clarry and Trac retire/move on, we still have a strong base of 7 mids to choose from.

[spirit of norm smith 16,271]

@Adam The God that’s bold and not sure it would be enough to entice the Giants.  More likely Hotton might be gone by live pick 15 but agree it’s possible. Hynes yes he would be likely available.  

[Colm 2,087]

Now that the Saints have put pick 8 on the table I think we can be pretty sure we will take pick 5&9 to the draft. 
We would have had to get overs to part with pick 9 and that’s unlikely now with a lower pick being up for grabs. 

[Tolstoys Nudge 1,617]

On 28/10/2024 at 20:20, Lord Travis said:

Langford has better hands, is a better mark, and hits the scoreboard more often. Smilie a bit better on the outside. Langford is better on the inside. For his big size, Smilie tends to feel pressure around stoppages and often sags back and dump kicks long. Langford works it through traffic and finds options better by hand.and is generally more effective. Who knows if Smilie could improve that part of his game in an AFL environment though, which is why he's an interesting prospect.

I disagree slightly but all said its a pretty good  snapshot but for me Smilie is more of a threat aerially and has solid hands Langford maybe surer hands but obv much less of a threat — Smilie Dump Kicks aren’t a skill-based error therefore can easily be coached out of him he just hasn’t played inside enough at the higher levels due to being so gifted in outside.. for me he’s closest thing to Bont I’ve seen due to his size but is a better kick! Obv doesn’t have the inside mastery of Bont and doesn’t read play as well in terms of fwd impact but is better on outside and hits targets while running full speed. Either wld be good but I’d much rather Smith/Smilie than Langford.
 

Armstrong will be a demon I’m almost certain he’s the target at 9 and can’t see us doing that if we thought saints wld steal him but of course there is also Tauru whom can go anywhere from 2-12, but if we do miss Armstrong then I’d happily have Langford and Smilie that’s for sure 🙌🙌🙌  

[spirit of norm smith 16,271]

Hold on Pick 5 & 9. Two young guns. JT to get 2 “aces”… 

[DubDee 25,590]

If we believe the player we want at 9 will be there at 15 or whatever then we should absolutely try to grab another pick in the last 20’s

Crazy not to

[rpfc 28,257]

2 hours ago, DubDee said:

If we believe the player we want at 9 will be there at 15 or whatever then we should absolutely try to grab another pick in the last 20’s

Crazy not to

Crazy…

Crazy not to take a gamble on the player we want that may or may not be there 6 picks later…

It is crazy.

so crazy

[Axis of Bob 11,674]

14 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Crazy…

Crazy not to take a gamble on the player we want that may or may not be there 6 picks later…

It is crazy.

so crazy

It depends if you’re after one specific player above all others or are happy to select from a group of players that you’re interested in.

Two examples to illustrate.

If the following players were available at pick 9: Lachie Hunter, Josh Schache, Kyah Farris-White and Caleb Windsor, then you would obviously reject all offers and select Windsor because you think he’s much, much better than the other players available.

If the following players were available at pick 9: Petracca, Gawn, Oliver, May and Lever, then you’d consider trading down from pick 9 to pick 12 because you rate those players very similarly, taking on pick 25 to do so and selecting Trent Rivers. In this case you’re saying that you’d rather have Oliver and Rivers than just Petracca by himself.

It’s situationally dependent and we’ll have the ability to make that call depending on who is available at pick 9 on the night.

[rpfc 28,257]

14 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

It depends if you’re after one specific player above all others or are happy to select from a group of players that you’re interested in.

Two examples to illustrate.

If the following players were available at pick 9: Lachie Hunter, Josh Schache, Kyah Farris-White and Caleb Windsor, then you would obviously reject all offers and select Windsor because you think he’s much, much better than the other players available.

If the following players were available at pick 9: Petracca, Gawn, Oliver, May and Lever, then you’d consider trading down from pick 9 to pick 12 because you rate those players very similarly, taking on pick 25 to do so and selecting Trent Rivers. In this case you’re saying that you’d rather have Oliver and Rivers than just Petracca by himself.

It’s situationally dependent and we’ll have the ability to make that call depending on who is available at pick 9 on the night.

I understand AoB but as a lover of the English language (or any language) I shudder when an adjective is so utterly misplaced as the ‘crazy’ example above.

It really abominable…

[DubDee 25,590]

10 hours ago, rpfc said:

Crazy…

Crazy not to take a gamble on the player we want that may or may not be there 6 picks later…

It is crazy.

so crazy

Crazy like a fox