Jarka

hmmm, not sure how to respond to this. I've already stated that CAC's record of drafting mid's is very good, it's KPP's that I'm concerned about. Also, once again that post was a response to Old's comment that there have been no decent KPP's available after our picks, which is complete bollocks. A challenge for you, show me evidence that our recruiting of KPP's has been good over the last 10 years.

deanox, you're taking my post out of context. Old55 challenged me to find more than a handfull of decent KPP's taken after our picks, which I've obviously proven to add to my argument that our drafting of KPP's has been poor over the last 10 years. 13 attempts with 1 success and 2 possibles, do you honestly think that is acceptable? Also my assessment was based on KPP's, not midfielders. I've already stated in that post you replied to that CAC's record with mids is very good, perhaps you missed that comment? Once again you've misunderstood my analysis. The debate with old was regarding KPP's, we took 1 in Ottens and it didn't work out. Fail. For my reasons why I consider TJ to be a failure read Hannabal's views on him, his descriptions are far better than mine. (Remember Old challenged me to find decent KPP's after our picks) I was going to respond to each comment but it's clear you've misunderstood the purpose of my post, reread the post I was responding to. With drafting KPP's we've had 13 attempts resulting with 1 success and 2 possibles. Are you happy with this record?

1997 Draft Our picks 1T.Johnstone 22 T.Longmuir 39 M.Blake 50 L.Ottens 66 N.Brown 77 G.Rigoni Who we missed 2 B.Ottens 3 T.Coad 9 C.Cornes 82 N.Thompson No question that TJ has talent but we missed some serious KP talent considering we had the first pick. Fail 1998 13 C.Lamb 60 L.Speers 72 L.Taylor 14 L.Penny 36 D.Jacobs 38 B.Fevola 39 T.Thurstans 75 K.McGregor Disaster of a draft for us. Fail 1999 19 B.Green 20 P.Wheatley 42 M.Clark 50 M.Whelan 63 S.O’Brien 64 C.Bruce 29 A Hunter 36 R Biglands 40 D Hille 74 M Burton Can’t argue about this one, no real KP talent that we missed. Pass 2000 16 S Thompson 62 D Breese 73 R Funcke 80 Mitchell Craig 23 D Petrie 27 T Richards 29 J Charman 30 S Rocca 33 M Pike CAC wouldn’t have this one on his resume. Fail 2001 9 L Molan 25 S Armstrong 26 A Rogers 55 B Miller 21 M Maguire 22 M Seaby 24 S Johnson 38 A Hansen 46 J Waite 62 D White 71 B Harris What were we thinking? Fail 2002 14 D Bell 15 N Smith 26 J Rivers 39 G Moorcroft 54 C Hunter 66 R Ferguson 10 J Laycock 20 W Minson 30 D Merrett 45 K Simpson 51 T Boyle 72 B Fisher Rivers is a good result but it’s offset by Smith. Pass (just) 2003 3 C Sylvia 5 B McLean 36 C Johnson 12 R Murphy 15 T Chaplin 46 M Pettigrew 55 S Fisher 58 B Hudson No KPP’s looked at however I strongly believe that trading away our 2nd round pick was a bad move. Fail 2004 13 M Bate 15 L Dunn 43 M Newton 18 C Wood 23 S Rusling 40 I Maric 62 M Egan Dunn and Newton were drafted to be KPP’s, one looks to fit the role but the other doesn’t. Pass 2005 12 N Jones 53 S Buckley 60 C Bartram 68 H Neaville 14 G Birchall 20 P Bower 25 W Mills 33 S Gilbert 42 Warnock Once again we made a mistake by giving away valuable picks. Bower or Gilbert would have been very handy, our actual picks were good though. Pass 2006 12 J Frawley 30 R Pettard 46 C Garland 62 I Weetra 14 J Sellar 16 M Brown 63 T Goldsack 64 N Gill 71 J Westhoff I’m not sold on Frawley but it’s far too early to tell, very happy that they’ve abandoned the mindset of trading away valuable picks for players on the decline. I didn’t put too much effort into rookies, I’m sure there were many I missed. 2004 40 Jaymie Graham 2003 15 Nick Maxwell 2002 19 Quinten Lynch 40 Ben Rutten 2001 27 Robert Campbell 2000 26 Dean Brogan To answer Old’s question we could have had a spine of: B.Fevola C.Cornes M.Egan B.Rutten So tell me Old, how many fingers do you actually have? My main concern with our efforts with drafting KPP’s is the fact that over the last 10 years we’ve used 5 first round picks on them and only one of them look like being successful (Frawley, still a long way to go though). No matter how you look at it 1 in 5 is a poor return. 13 picks in total have been used on KPP’s, with 1 success (Rivers), 2 possibles (Newton and Frawley), 1 doubtful (Miller), 1 work in progress (Garland) and 7 delisted (Dunn isn’t a KPP). 3 in 13 isn't very flattering, although it seems that CAC's efforts have improved in time, but it's a pity we had to throw away 5 years to get to that level. CAC has a great record with mids and utilities, so the question is are we drafting the wrong type of KPP's or are we failing in their development?

A comparison of Meesen and Cameron Wood by Colin Wisbey: *COMPARISON: WOOD vs MEESEN: Neither has obvious significant flaws. Wood's height/reach is much better and he almost certainly has more upside. Meesen's endurance, work-rate and bodywork are better and he is likely to come to hand earlier. I rate both as definite AFL. I rank them at 5 and 7 and expect both to go perhaps within the first 8 or 9, certainly within the first dozen. Wood ready year 3, maybe year 4, and Meesen perhaps year 2, maybe year 3. If I was buying purely on potential / upside, I would definitely take Wood. If I could afford less patience and/or risk, or wanted a bit more versatility or more of a dependable work-horse, I'd take the harder-working Meesen. If (!) the club looking at the two kids deemed none of these factors more important than the others then, on balance, I'd possibly take Wood if I was a SA club, Meesen if I was a Vic club and virtually toss a coin otherwise. On exposed form, those two are way ahead of the other rucks, not discounting the promise that Deluca, Moran and co are beginning to show. Wood and Meesen are possibly the best ruck prospects in the past 3 years. In comparing them:- 1. There doesn't seem to be much between their ruck abilities. Both have a bit to learn and are not yet all-time standouts for ruck technique but show a lot of promise, including at centre bounces. Both seem to enjoy ruck contests. (I believe that matters). When opposed to each other in the U18 Champs, ruck contests were about even. At this stage, if they contested about 100 ball-ups against each other, perhaps 80-90 would be "dead rubbers" and each ruck would get 5-10 hitouts to targeted advantage. 2. re Ruck Style: Both usually try to target their palm-outs. Both have very good leaps and time their leaps well. Both vary their run-up approach on occasions, perhaps Wood more so. Wood's approach tends to be from further back, leaving him more vulnerable to a bad bounce. At this stage at least, Meesen makes much better use of his body. Wood has a bit to learn about protecting the ball. 3. Although Meesen has grown about 8cm since about early last year, Wood is 9 months younger yet already 5cm taller and with a bonus 4cm reach advantage compared to the average player of his height. 4. Their overall stats for the U18 Champs were virtually identical in most areas, not just ruck. Meesen usually has an even split of kicks-to-feeds that the Champs stats suggest but, other than that, their U18 Champs stats, although a small sample, accurately reflect where each is at and their style of game. 5. Both have good leap, agility (despite DC results), and reflexes, and are very mobile for their size. Both are courageous, coordinated and very skilled for their size, including below the knee. Both are clean for their size, all levels. Meesen is quite good off the ground, Wood better. Ditto re inside traffic. These two are modern era rucks, not dinosaurs. 6. Meesen has proven he will push himself to the limit and Wood hasn't. DC tests are not everything but they bear this out. Messen's beep test beat 83% of all-time "at least 195cm" DC/SS attendees. Wood's was very poor and disappointed me greatly - particularly as that poor result was no improvement on one earlier in the year. 7. Meesen is a schools runner and has proven endurance. His DC 3Km time beat 98% of all-time "at least 195cm" attendees. I don't have any evidence of Wood's endurance (and his 3Km time was very poor) but there is no doubting Meesen's. 8. Not that Wood is a slouch but Meesen is a fair bit ahead for intensity and ethic. Meesen has a "ruckrover" work-horse mentality around the ground, with usually better 2nd efforts and a more intense attack on man, ball and marking spoil. Wood is also inclined to go for marks at times when he should try to spoil. Meesen is a very committed chaser, even over 40m or so. Wood has a bit of mongrel in him though. 9. That said, both have good 2nd efforts at ball-ups (especially centre-bounce). Wood's ability to rove his own spill, before or after the ball has hit the ground, is as good as any genuine ruck I can recall in recent years. Excellent agility and reflexes, clean hands and good vision. Wood's efficiency inside traffic is such that he can have days where he gets as many "rove the spill" CB clearances as some of his "rovers". That is very impressive, especially in a 204cm bottom-age kid who has only recently focussed on footy. 10. Both have similar speed. Both are OK for tall rucks but guys like Moran and the shorter Gibson would leave Meesen and Wood in their wake. Neither Meesen nor Wood is probably as quick over the first 5m as their DC times might suggest. Meesen's action over a few metres is as if trying to run with his pants around his ankles. (He's had that action as long as I've seen him but used to look much more unco). Wood has the better running action over a short distance. 11. Both are/will be good overhead. At this stage, Meesen perhaps has slightly better hands and judgement and is harder to spoil against than Wood. Wood might become the better mark down the track. Both hold their ground quite well (for their builds) at marking contests, Meesen a bit better. 12. Both are very good readers of the play across half-back (and move well) dropping back as loose man. Both routinely show good judgement. Both have good vision and poise, can think quickly and they make the right decisions. Both do some clever things. eg hitouts behind their head, or deft tap-ons at knee level, etc. 13. Disposal-wise, Meesen looks for creative/ impact options more often in situations where Wood is too often inclined to just automatically dish off a "1m" feed behind him instead of checking for clear options upfield. Both are accurate by hand, have quick hands and are capable of power in their feeds. However, as mentioned, many of Wood's feeds are those virtual handovers that rucks often feel obliged to automatically lay off to a linker. Meesen's feeds have a very much greater hurt factor. Wood is arguably the better kick. 14. Meesen seems to understand the game a bit better at this stage and will probably be ready a year earlier than Wood. 15. Meesen has already shown an ability to at least pinch-hit in at CHB and CHF on the right opponent, in addition to his prime role of ruck. I wouldn't be surprised to see Wood be capable of occasionally pinch-hitting at CHF or FF in time too though. 16. Meesen has improved dramatically since late last season. Wood also has plenty of improvement in him, having only recently committed to footy after apparently knocking back a US baseball scholarship. 17. Physically, both are skinny but should fill out fine. At the moment Meesen appears more physically developed as both players are the same weight even though Wood is 5cm taller. Wood's current weight though is virtually skinfold-"free" whereas Meesens' skinfold reading, athough good in its own right, is softer.

Fromt he outside that looks like a fair assessment of the situation. Perhaps the pies are a little bit wary of dealing with us and our classy midfielders?

Sometimes that reason is salary cap pressure or too many players of the same ilk, which occasionally means that good players get delisted. However, in the case I'd agree with you, I wouldn't go anywhere near him.

old, you replied to my post earlier and i get the impression that you assumed a couple of things. Main one is that this topic hasn't been discussed before, which is wrong. i'm more than happy to go through my reasons again but i'm too busy this week to give it the time it deserves. Hopefully by sunday afternoon/evening i'll get the chance to post all the KPP's we've missed over the last ten years.

My understanding is that only international players can be on the rookie list for 3 years, normal players have to be redrafted to get the extra year.

Thanks for the info dworship, greatly appreciated. I like the looks of Bode, has a bit of mongrel in him.

Ouch. I get alot out of that article, hopefully this means a new start for the club and our reputation as soft front runners will finally be dealt with.

Great news

It's not often that you get a good thread on bigfooty but io this case it's fully justified. Couch Coach has put together a thread with alot of the potential draftees descriptions from different posters and footballing personalities. Well worth a read to get to know the kids a bit more. http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=388450

wd, I am of the opinion that the club has failed with picking KPP talent over the last ten years. What's your opinion with that? Also, what areas did you work with?

haha, i remember that, I actually went to uni with him, god what a [censored].

ni hao ma?

The thing thing that goes against the eagles is that they pushed very, very hard to have Cousins back playing, and alot of people were saying it was too soon. Regardless it's definitely a worst case scenario for the AFL and it will be very interesting to see how they respond.

I'm still having nightmares of seeing Paul Hopgood play over 100 games with Melbourne....

I agree, the last thing we need as another mid with questionable disposal. I'd prefer to take a putn on a VFL/SANFL/WFL player or Little from the hawks.

It's hard to contemplate Nicho being better than anyone Although in this case I'd have to agree with you.

I disagree, he's had enough time to prove himself and at his age he's not going to bulk up any further.

Forward of centre

The one advantage we have is that we have more room in our salary cap than Richmond, and after the Blues signed Judd I'd guess the same thing. So a player can nominate his price to get to us, just like Gasper did to end up at Richmond (I have a long memory!!) and avoid us.

Thanks for that

Thought I'd make a list of which players are actually available in the psd and who are rumoured to be. Available: Lance Whitnall FergusWatts Djaran Whyman Daniel McConnell Tim Walsh Darren Pfeiffer Potential: Jarred Brennan Jude Bolton (Re-signed further 2 years) Troy Selwood (Possibly re-signed with Brisvegas) Mark Johnson Xavier Clarke Danny Meyer Ashley Sampi Ben McKinley (Contracted for another year) Kepler Bradley Post any more than you've heard. (Thanks grazman with the updates)

I'd be happy if anyone one of Yze, Ferguson, Holland, Warnock, Jamar or P.Johnson were delisted. Actually, now that I think about it some more if you replace the word 'happy' with 'absolutely ****ing delighted' it would be a fairer reflection of my feelings.