Axis of Bob

Agreed. He's dynamic and physically dominant, which gives a point of difference with our other midfielders.

It's interesting when you put all of those names together, BB, because it's interesting to see why they didn't have the success of Roughead/Buddy et al. F Watts: Too slow. Smith: Too slow. Hansen: Not sure he deserves to be in this group, but he's not physically dominant enough to beat his opponent up forward. Thorp: Tool, and injury. Dowler: Competitiveness, body size and injury. Tarrant: Bit left field at the time (talent?) and injury. I think that the general idea is that you are looking for athleticism or an AFL dominant physical trait. None of those players has a physical AFL dominant trait. McCartin is quick, so even if he doesn't become an AFL monster wrestler then he'll at least have the speed to beat his man. He looks like he can get the footy out by himself or on the lead through athleticism, rather than simply by jumping over packs (like Watts/Hansen), reading the play (Smith) or being good an the small man stuff for a big man (Dowler). I suppose you'd be looking for power rather than just strength, which McCartin seems to have. That said, I agree that it's really tough to project.

I have only seen stats, the televised games and highlights of these players. So my opinion should be taken with a mine's worth of salt. Based on what we need, I wouldn't be surprised if there is a surprise (or two) of the Bontempelli/S Hill variety. I think the players that are most interesting to me are Laverde and Ahern. Laverde is a tall midfielder that covers the ground really well and has great skills. Ahern is another with pace that has a flash of raw ability and awareness that is unteachable. We have a developing midfield chock full of young inside midfielders. But good teams have a mix of ball winners and ball carriers. We lack players that can carry the footy. Last year we drafted players that can damage outside the contest (Salem, JKH and Hunt) and I suspect (and hope) that we will do so again.

Not eligible. He goes wherever he's picked.

It depends on what you define as 'X-factor'. X-factor, to me, is the ability to do something different that few other can do. For instance, Gary Rohan has x-factor but that's entirely based on raw speed. Colin Sylvia, in that sense, has x-factor based on his power. He could win contests that other people couldn't win because of this. BRFE is right about his junior footy. He'd take a hanger or two every week as a midfielder. His team mates would just kick the ball to him and he would either win it or kill the person who did. He had natural endurance, but didn't work hard enough. He never developed the work rate or nous to become a high level footballer. He was, and is, a very flawed footballer. But that is independent of his 'x-factor', or whatever people with to call it.

Constantly. He had other limitations that prevented him ever getting to that top level, but his power was never in question. It was exceptional and a real point of difference for him

Disagree. Sylvia had plenty of X-factor, which was his combination of power and endurance. His power was exceptional, but his ability to turn it into consistent performance was lacking.

Why? Not a fan of Nat Fyfe? Stephen Hill? Stephen Motlop? Jack McCrae? Tom Lonergan? Marcus Bontempelli? Dustin Fletcher? etc.etc.

He was a mature age second round pick in 2001.

Who are these low draft picks at Hawthorn that have "elite disposal, contested ball winning ability and competitiveness"?

Turner says that every year. Then he conveniently forgets that and says it again a year later about another player.

These are my thoughts. I heard that he tests well for speed (sub 3 secs) and agility, but haven't heard anything about his endurance. On early impressions, I'm not keen on Brayshaw simply because he's more of a constant motion accumulator rather than a power runner.

Looking at last year's draft, we selected the following players: - Salem - JKH - Hunt Looking at those we drafted, the ability to get on the outside and do damage was very important. Rookies - Harmes - King - Jetta - Georgiou plus we added Tyson, Cross and Riley. Through the rookie draft and trades we picked up players opportunistically, like experienced hard bodies and role players. Interestingly, our first rookie pick was also a midfielder with pace. I think that there was a clear long term plan with our drafting which addresses a key need that will only get more important - speed. I would be surprised if this wasn't a theme in this year's drafting as well.

Last night's stage was compelling viewing. Wet weather, cobbles and riders taking risks to take time off each other when vulnerable. The crashes were caused as much by the aggressive riding than anything else. The conditions were slippery, but they were going flat chat, which wasn't what the conditions called for. High risk, high reward. Nibali rode fantastically, especially to stay at the front and away from the danger of the middle of the peloton in those conditions. It really opened the tour up.

I only saw the televised games, so take this with large quantities of salt ... Is there a chance that Ahern could challenge as the first midfielder picked? He certainly seems to have a huge amount of upside and a bit of x-factor. Fast, uses it well and his hands just seem insanely clean in all situations. One of those players who has the tools but just doesn't produce the high numbers yet. Here's footage.

I'm sorry that you didn't understand what I was saying. My tactic of quoting you and then responding to that specific quote may have been more subtle than I expected. I'm also not entirely sure who you are still arguing with, since we've already established that we both agree that there needs to be a balance in recruiting.

To be fair, KP really is.

You: "For mine its about improving the playing list..bettering the best 22 not collecting kids for a rainy day." This is the direct quote I responded to. I then told you that it's about a balance between improving the best 22 and also picking kids for the future. You then agreed with me that balance is something we should be trying to achieve. I don't see where I said we shouldn't downtrade our early picks.

I've only seen the televised games this year, so I really have very little idea about what's happening. That said, it seems like the first group of players all still have some pretty big flaws that mean that none are a stand out choice. St Kilda seem to like McCartin (probably for the reasons you mentioned, as they are going to be looking for a go-to forward to replace Riewoldt). I like Durdin, despite his lack of output in the games I saw, although probably more as a rebounding key defender. As for the midfielders, there wasn't really a midfielder that stood up and showed why they were better than everyone else. You mentioned Petracca and Brayshaw leave me a little underwhelmed with his lack of explosiveness (which we need). I think we'll do well to trade down as the players we'd be more interested in are likely to be available at 10+, which seems to be where most of the skilled runners appear to be.

My point is that everything is a balance. It isn't about only recruiting for now nor is it about only recruiting for the future. It's about a balance.

Like what St Kilda did?

I was thinking the other way, as in that they would gain an early pick. They'll keep picking up their older players on the cheap, IMO.

It wouldn't surprise me if GWS traded a player for an early pick. They had a bunch of draft picks in one draft, so trading one for an early pick spreads their age profile across a few more years.

The best thing about Dom Tyson's hair is that it is attached to Dom Tyson.

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-05-28/eyecatchers-round-one Round 1 Eye Catchers. Includes a tiny bit of vision of Billy Stretch towards the end.