kurtneverdied

Twomey got as taking Lindsey instead of Allen after saying Allen might be taken at 6 by Tigers. Tigers take Allen after our 2nd pick. Sure. Makes sense.

I have zero worries about Langford and speed. Yes Bont and Cripps were picked on for it in pre-draft profiles. Does Langford near top of 2km time trial counter that fresh speed though? I'm all in on Langford at 5. Bo Allan another beast midfielder who has little flaws. I'd be super happy with these two. I couldn't think of a better result personally. I have this hunch that we will select Travaglia though. His profile screams what JT loves. However... I've been left disappointed in the past and I'm nervous. Those saying all recruiters would of taken Weideman over Curnow/McKay. Then praise JT for getting later picks right. I say this. We took Weideman, JT and team can only take the blame, no excuses. It was obvious Weideman wasn't a competitive beast. Secondly if JT hasn't learnt the lesson that picking a key forward in the top 10 is a gamble after that then doing it again is so damn stupid. If we take Armstrong I'll spew. I'll be ropable. Finally on a positive note it's great to see we have talked to perhaps all the top names and probably linked with most the top 10. Over to you JT.

I always wanted Langford for us. His height is a POD for our midfield and also his marking will be valuable. Potentially able to swap roles with Trac during the game seamlessly.

What's this whole attitude we can't draft 2 of the same type of players? Langford and Smillie for example. What height gives them is flexibilty to play anywhere on the ground if they don't turn out best in the midfield. In juniours the best players play midfield and it's not until there last couple of seasons they may be moved forward or back as they join the best of the best of their age. If there was a Pettracca clone we would draft him etc.

5- Lalor/Langford 9- Smillie/Lindsey/Reid

How many list spots do we have? Is Tomlinson staying or delisted? Like some have said, splitting pick 9 is a bad idea. Go through the last 10 years of drafts. Compare success rate of picks 1-5 to that of 6-10 and so on. 2019 (I think) was the deepest of the lot as I suspect this one is. Most drafts picks 1-5, 7/10 are decent or better. 6-10, 4/10. 2019 was deep so 11 out of the top 13 were decent or better (IMO). I'm no draft expert but the numbers don't lie on just how important 2 top 10 picks in a deep draft is. Of course you have to be a good recruiter to not get it wrong, it has to be easier than plucking one in the 40s though. History is against the talls. Particularly forwards in the top 10. Personally would like a mid with some size. Langford ideally. Has the versatility to be a forward too if he failed to be a mid. Pick 9, next best mid.

I wish we could play mind games with North and Tigers and say we are targeting a 'utility' at 5. Green has already come out and said we are prioritising the midfield. Could still try...

His profile does read very nicely.

Pick 5 I want a tall, well built mid. Both Cripps and Bontempelli pre-draft profiles are particularly similar to Langford and Smillie. However the slightly shorter more versatile Lalor edges both out for me. These 3 can also hit the scoreboard regularly which besides Trac we desperately need as well as to add some youth to an ageing midfield profile. As for 11 I hope say Smillie slips. If not next best mid available. Hotton sounds like a potential gun.

The last few years we've tried trading up. For Watson last year (I think). Humphries year before. Really wouldn't surprise if we go for Norths pick 2.

I really believe we can't pass up on best available mid for at least pick 5 in this draft. I hope s mid for pick 9 too. Stuff putting Mcvee, even Rivers in mids. They can play back and we draft quality mids. Another reason is we still believe we are in the window and I doubt Armstrong helps like Windsor did this year. Looking back at previous drafts, it's rare to have depth going to pick 10ish. Top 5 picks have roughly a 7/10 chance to be decent. Picks 6-10 is far less, around the 4/10 mark. This is a massive opportunity to get 2 star players and a gamble on Armstrong is just wrong. JT picked Weideman over McKay and Curnow, plus the other fails and questions over Jefferson who right now has a serious question mark of being a pick 15. Our success with talls has come late in drafts. Petty, Turner, even JVR pick 19. Before JT, Gawn and McDonald.

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.

In my experience I really hate the whole setup of boards. They generally have no idea what's going on in day to day operations. They get there information glossed over by one source, normally the ceo, who is just looking out for themselves. I knew a great CEO that was replaced and the culture went toxic, very quickly. It took at least 5 years for the board to get an inkling that something was wrong with the culture and that CEO was the fault. In that time I'd say more than half the workforce quit. There wasn't anyone making the CEO accountable and that lost link of accountability caused the downfall of everything. This is where we should never of failed. We need everyone accountable but preferably by more that 1 person. Transparent from top to bottom.

Hi Fan, shh. I don't want Courtney to know I am alive and living the quiet life in country Victoria.

I read somewhere that in a study the top 10% of players from varies global sporting codes where 50-60% likely to have ADHD. They reckon they are just super focused energy bunnies when competitive.