Axis of Bob

Kicked 9.4 at in Colts this year, so he must hack them through with a lot of fortune!

GWS offered Adelaide pick 6 and a first rounder next year for pick 4. They would have offered us the same deal, but we must have rejected it. So why would we accept an inferior deal from Sydney?

Whose rankings? Not necessarily Jason Taylor's rankings. Amateur draft pundits are a rough guide, but that's it.

Ha ha ha! You’ve really leant in to the ignorance, haven’t you. Although it’s obvious, and you clearly know this and are trying to bluff your way out of this pit, I will mention that he has played other games of football other than these four games specifically. I know this because Jason Taylor specifically talked about the thing that you claim never to have happened. Anyway, enjoy the draft.

Yes he has .... Taylor specifically spoke about it in the podcast. He watched him play after the championships where he was very impressive as a forward who still got the ball 20+ times a game. You’ve never even seen him even play in the position. In fact you didn’t even know that he had played the position! So how can you say that he “is no forward. No footy smarts”? You cannot.

Half back flankers drafted in the top 5 in the last 15 years. - Andrew McGrath 1 - Lachie Plowman 3 IMO they would have to be pretty special to use a top 5 pick on a back flanker. I think to be a successful HBF in the top 5 you have to be exceptional. Is Young “Luke Hodge” good? I don’t know.

How would you know this? How much have you watched him play as a forward?

He plays as a forward and allows us to play Max as an attacking weapon in the ruck rotating forward. Or he’s just the best player available. If you’ve got two gun ruckmen then you can make it work as a weapon, especially if one is as mobile as Jackson. West Coast were equal top when Naitanui did his knee near the end of 2018, and won the flag with a two ruck combo. Or do you think we shouldn’t draft the best player available because he’s not a half back flanker?

I appreciate the work of KM and the effort he puts in ..... but he’s a one amateur from Victoria and there is no way he has the resources to be anything more than an interesting rough guide for the rest of the amateurs. Why do you think GWS and Melbourne are both trying get Jackson? Why did he say that he was probably going to go to Melbourne (pick 3), GWS (pick 4), Adelaide (pick 6) or Fremantle (pick 7)? Because “99.5% think it’s ridiculous”? No, it’s probably because the AFL recruiters know that he’s one of the very best players in the draft, and they are clamouring to draft him. Or maybe, as many of you seem to think, it’s because the majority of AFL recruiters are complete idiots.

It's good play from GWS if they want Jackson. Basically they get us to choose between Jackson and Green .... if we bid on Green then they get their preferred player in Jackson. If we take Jackson then GWS get Green and an extra pick. It does mean that Green is well and truly in play for us if we want him, because GWS won't match.

I agree. From the limited amounts I’ve seen, Young looks safe and would play a nice role as a behind the ball kicker, but there’s nothing screaming ‘star’, whilst Jackson has several things that do. His footwork is excellent, he covers ground well and easily, he has outstanding instincts around the ball, wins a lot of contests and has the size and athleticism to be anything in a range of positions. At worst he looks like he’ll just be an excellent ruckman .... at best it’s impossible to predict. I hope that Taylor thinks he’s the best player at 3, because he’s going to be the most fun to watch.

James Strauss had elite kicking skills. Just saying someone is a nice kick doesn’t necessarily make them the best pick.

So why did Taylor specifically mention that he saw him play some impressive games up forward after the Championships? Maybe you didn’t see the games from Melbourne.

Taylor has said on the podcast that he doesn’t see Jackson as a pure ruck, but as a key forward and ruck. He was glowing of his continued improvement post-champs, especially up forward. He’s certainly a unique talent. Young is a solid, meat and potatoes choice as a high level role player at half back. This is where it’s hard to select ‘best available’. Who is better, the high floor solid half back whose ceiling is known, or the unique but very raw key forward ruck whose base is low but ceiling is much higher? I think I hope that we pick Jackson .... just to watch this place burn to the ground on draft night! ?

Good stuff, RN. A classy response. I’m happy that you’re excited about the draft and I (and many others) genuinely appreciate the information you bring into these threads. The absence of uncertainty is just a bit of a bugbear of mine (and obviously old55 too). I hope that you continue posting frequently in the lead up to, and after, the draft, as it’s clear that you are obviously doing a lot of research on the kids and that makes Demonland a better forum. ?

That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying that to be so sure of your own opinion comes either from the sort of knowledge that can be gained only from years of dedicated study to the exclusion of almost everything else ..... or almost no knowledge. Or another way is that, whilst having an opinion is ok, I think that you should be more open to the possibility that you you may not be right.

Anybody can have an opinion, but some are worth more than others. Would you listen to Madonna’s opinion on Australian monetary policy? Or my opinion on pet fashion trends? In my opinion, the Dunning-Kruger curve is excellent.

Nobody on here is as sure of their knowledge about draftees as you.

Spargo would kick 6 a game at SANFL reserves level. The Pickett stuff is hilarious.

More class off half back. Nobody is arguing against it. The argument is whether picking a half back flank distributor with a top 3 pick is the best use of our finite draft resources. The players you listed indicated that you don’t need to use such an early pick to get class across half back.

Houli: pick 42 (then preseason draft) Stewart: pick 40 (mature age) Mills: drafted as a midfielder at pick 3 Geary (really?): pick pick 58 Sicily: pick 56 Hurn: pick 13 McGrath: pick 1 Williams: pick 54 in the rookie draft. So I’m not exactly sure what point you’re making in response to concerns about drafting a half back distributor at 3.

He did say that small forwards were not something we were looking to trade for but we would likely look to bring in that type through the draft. He didn’t say when, but we only have 3, 8 and 97 at the moment.

I’m looking forward to the melts from Rusty if we don’t pick Young. He’s already penned him into our backline ahead of our best small defender!

If you think we'll draft bad players then why are you upset that we traded next year's first round pick? ?

That makes no sense. If we wanted the Geelong picks then there’s no reason to d the North trade. We would have just done the deal direct to Geelong. He said that after trading up for pick 8, so he didn’t do it for nothing! He clearly believes that top 10 picks are disproportionately valuable, otherwise he wouldn’t have tried to trade for it! We traded lesser picks or more value to get one pick in the top 10. Also, if we get a player high on our draft board at pick 6, wouldn’t it also hold true that we would get another player high on our draft board at pick 8?