mo64

With the immaturity level of our list, it's beyond me why we're continuing with the policy of the players voting for the leadership group. I'd imagine that the players are instructed to vote based on certain leadership attributes of possible candidates. If that's the case, surely the football dept. are in the best position to judge these attributes. If the players are voting without any set criteria, it ends up being a popularity contest. Either way, the football dept. should be making the decision.

You could be right Dappa.

This was confirmed in Emma Quayle's book "The Draft". They drafted for needs, not necessarily the best available. And this year we've done the same. Apart from Watts, and maybe pick 19 where we were after Lewis Johnston, we drafted for player type, rather than best available.

Roost It, you are seriously clueless when it comes to knowledge of the game. You were one of the nuffies who said that we should draft key position players, when our coach is professing a run and carry game plan. And then you define a half forward line of Dunn Miller & Bate as being mobile. You've gotta be joking. Do you understand what's required to make a run and carry game plan successful?

Can we nominate a non-delisted player as our PSD pick prior to the actual draft? As you say, it has been done with delisted players.

You'd imagine that BP would have seen enough of the kids to have based an opinion on who's the best available. It makes sense to nominate our pick in the PSD asap, and get them down to training.

Warnock is not in the same hemisphere as Glass and Rutten. Dappa's description was apt, a more serviceable Nathan Carroll.

Dappa, if you look at the key position players in the top 4 teams this season, they each had holes in them: Hawthorn - 1 good key defender Geelong - 1 average key forward St. Kilda - No genuine key defender Bulldogs - No genuine key forward or CHB. On the other hand, over the past 4 seasons, Essendon have had the likes of Fletcher, Michael, Ryder, Lucas and Lloyd filling their key position posts, and haven't made the finals. As Sydney, West Coast, Geelong and Hawthorn have shown, you can win a flag without a star in every key position.

By his own admission, he had a quiet under '18 championship. His best game was in the final against WA, and he only got 10 possessions. Jarka explained that this was due to limited game time. My original post was in response to someone claiming he was a ball-winner. He's obviously not, but can hurt the opposition with the quality of his disposal. And yes, I do like players that know how to find the ball, which is why I was hoping we would take Swift at picks 17 or 19. And you are one of those gullible people who gets their jollies off when their club's recruiting manager comes out with "I can't believe we got him at pick so & so".

Thanks Jarka. I was struggling to understand why there was so much excitement over this kid.

Averaged 10 possessions per game during the under '18 carnival as an outside mid. I'd hardly describe him as a ball winner. Also, it was reported in yesterday's Age that he was suffering from OP towards the end of the season, and did his hammy. Doubt that we'll see much of him next year.

You've ruined my night. I would have thought that he's in the same boat as CJ, fringe player who's playing for his AFL survival next season. A 1 year contract would suffice.

He moves really well, has good evasive skills, but he'll need them, because he doesn't appear to have a left foot. And he didn't look overly quick to me.

We got the strategy right. After Watts, it's clear that creative running players were are no.1 priority, and we've drafted for needs. That's not to say that the players we've drafted also weren't the best available. As I've been saying all along, what's the point of drafting talls if we're playing a run and carry game style. My only downer is that we didn't pick Swift at 17.

After last season, I've got every right to be skeptical. We were constantly told that everyone was flying on the track, and the players in rehab were progressing well. A year down the track, and the coach was bemoaning the fact that only 20 players were able to train full tilt. I'd rather the club be honest with the nature of our injury list.

Thanks for the reports Haydo and WJ, but I find this comment disconcerting. I fail to see how Rivers can be back on track when he's unlikely to play round 1, which is 4 months away. We've taken a softly softly approach with him for the past 2 seasons, and he's broken down each time. I really hope that next season is different, but somehow, I've got my doubts.

Maybe you should read what you post. If you believe that our on-field performance next year is irrelevant, from 2011-2014 you'll be attending home games in West Sydney.

Agree. Our past administrations were rightfully chastised for not disclosing our full financial position. I'd like to think that the success of the Debt Demolition would send a message to the board that if they're honest and upfront with the members, the members will respond in kind. There is nothing to be gained in hiding our operating loss for the year, other than avoiding 24 hours of negative press.

On what do you base this? Our forwards never had a hope because we averaged the fewest inside 50's by a significant margin this season, and were constantly outnumbered when we did kick it to them. And our key defenders in Garland, Warnock and Martin stood up quite well, in the absence of Rivers. How did you rate Hawthorn's key defenders in Gilham, Brown and Croad at the start of this season. And your belief that we can afford 2 more seasons on the bottom is utter stupidity. We're currently begging for a $2m financial handout from the AFL, we don't have a major sponsor during a time of economic uncertainty, and you want 2 more seasons like this year. :angry:

Total agree Diablo, we need some seriously good mids if we're going to continue with "run and carry". But I really struggle with the term "best available" with early draft picks. Does it mean the player who's certain to be a 150-200 gamer, or the player with the greatest upside and potential to be a star? If you're comparing a mid against a tall at picks 17 and 19, in all likelihood the mid will end up being the 150 gamer, whilst you never know with a tall. The risk factor in drafting a mid is less, and given that we're taking Watts at 1, I really want 2 mids at 17 and 19.

Wishful thinking. I heard recently that even with the debt demolition proceeds, we'll still incur a loss.

I like Scott West because he's prepared to speak his mind. But it's only a part-time role. Does that mean that he's not in the coach's box during the game? And yes, I believe that Bailey's game day coaching needs improvement.

I must be the only one who's underwhelmed by the appointment. Nothing against Scotty West, who speaks really well about the game, but he's a part-time assistant coach, not the f#cking messiah. Nobody can quantify the impact of an assistant coach, let alone one with no coaching background. Great players don't necessarily make great teachers.

If you consider that the footy career of a good kp forward is 10 years max., you'd hope to get a better return than 5-7 years of good football from a no. 1 pick. I agree that the elite kp forwards have made an impact by their 2nd year of football. I'd hope that Watts can do the same.

Do you really believe that we should base our draft strategy on rattling opposition clubs? Each club would walk into the ND with every scenario covered for their 1st round pick. To suggest that we are gaining a competitive advantage by not disclosing our 1st round pick, is ridiculous. Then again, there are many on this site that believe that we would gain a competitive advantage by not disclosing the full extent of injury list at the start of this season. We really fooled 'em, didn't we?