old55

Thanks - doesn't seem like they publish the whole list. How many of our 4 went to the camp or state screening anyway?

you're lying

Well it's like Sylvinator said pre-draft - we had a leaning towards talls and if we rated 2 players similarly then we'd take the tall at 12 and that's what both Bailey and Prendergast said we did. You're not seriously suggesting we took Cook while we rated some mid higher are you? Please explain how Howe and Davis are needs based when we've got Jurrah and Warnock? And how McDonald is needs based when we just picked 2 marking forwards?

Is there somewhere I can see their test results? Stibbard says Cook is a bit slow but the knock on Lynch was he had the worst 20m time - what's Cooks's?

We rated Cook higher than Smith, Smedts, Atley, Jacobs, Tape etc and I very pleased we did - happily he coincided with a type we need. There can be all sorts of reasons for this - Atley said in in his Age profile he needs to work on his kicking ... It's hard to see Howe is a "needs" pick when we've got Jurrah and similarly with Davis when Warnock can't get a game. We just picked the best player. It's interesting that we have 19 of 39 players 192+ - how many do we need?

No you have missed the point - more highly rated by whom? Some phantom drafts?

I'm puzzled how drafting the 3rd and 4th tall is drafting for needs? If we drafted 4 mids no-one would be saying that. Surely the "need" is filled at some stage. I'd say the fact that we drafted 4 talls indicates quite the opposite.

More highly rated by who? Barry Prendergast and our recruiting team apparently do not agree.

MDT : )

Well you had Jacobs at 21 in your own phantom and Guthrie at 16. Next time you did a phantom you've got Jacobs at 12 and Guthrie at 24 even though neither of them have kicked a ball in between. And you're a self-professed advocate of best-available. Now you've got Jacobs possibly at 33 even though you've had him going north at a rate of knots. Excuse me if your reasoning seems all over the place like a mad-woman's vomit.

maybe one day in Georgia's Paddock?

Someone can tell you for sure.

Jacobs can only be "best available" in your dream draft he's the next best player after Heppell given that you've agreed they're the same type. If it's a dream draft then surely a player that meets a need and warrants selection at 33 is much more dreamy? Yes like Guthrie for example.

Fair enough but so far you're two at bats and 0-2. 1st: simple check of draft order - strike-out 2nd: it's more likely that a player is covering a real condition to get drafted than a recruiter is making up the condition to cause the player to slide - caught on a fly-ball. Keep swinging ...

Alternatively both those stories could be true. I don't imagine Heppell or Darling would be confirming them. The most likely misinformation in those situations would be coming from the player to talk themselves up not the recruiter talking them down. Occam's Razor.

Heppell and Jacobs sound like they play similar roles - hard to see how this would be a dream outcome. All things being equal with us selecting the best player particularly at early picks a dream outcome would be to solve as many holes in the list as possible. I agree that the role they play is a need so one would be great but there's other needs like a fwd/ruck, small defensive back and outside midfield line-breaker.

Or there's speculation by media and fans who don't have a clue ... you have absolutely no evidence of misinformation - just a bunch of phantom drafts that will get blown away in the wind of reality like the sand that they are.

I just don't follow the logic there - Gold Coast sound almost certain to pick Swallow, Bennell and Day, they don't have another pick before the Tigers and the Tigers don't have another pick until well after all these players will be gone.

Fantastic to see mass confusion reigning on draft day - no-one knows who is taking who outside the recruiters and understandably they've been playing it tight. We could pick just about anybody it seems outside of Swallow, Bennell, Day and Gaff. It's a great pity they're doing the stupid 10 to 1 order again. It would be just so much better if they did the whole thing in order. The excitement hinges on who's left in the pool at the next pick. They could stop at 5 or 10 and interview the top couple if they want to. Reverse order is just a dumb, dumb idea.

200cm - easy to miss I guess For posterity:

Did we genuinely rate Gawn ahead of Tapscott? If so then it's the exception case I described above. It's a very risky ploy - I wouldn't do it but then I am risk averse.

In addition when Josh Hunt was out in 2009 they played James Kelly down back. IMO they lost plenty when Hunt, who I do not rate defensively at all, came back and Kelly went back to the midfield. I think Bartram's stats are pretty good because he's a smart and disciplined payer who generally plays within his limitations. But we are limited by those limitations - his ROI is good but it's low I so low R - 70+% of SFA.

I find that very difficult to believe - it defies logic. If we rated Player X at 11, Gysberts later than 11 let's say best case 12 and Player Y later still let's say best case 13 You're saying that 11:Gysberts(12) plus 18:Player Y(13) is better than 11:Player X(11) and 18:Player Y(13) - no way! The only way that could possibly make sense is if Player X was certain to be available at 18 and we'd get 11:Gysberts(12) and 18:Player X(11) Occam's Razor says we picked Gysberts at 11 because we rated him next best.

I know it's a long time ago, but I look back to when we had Alan Johnson in this role - he was an A grade mid who won a best and fairest in the midfield and went to play as small defensive back and won another B&F. He played on Peter Daicos at his most dangerous, probably the toughest assignment ever, and when the ball got in his hands you were always supremely confident he'd use it well. It's an under-rated role that warrants an A grader if your midfield rotation can support the loss.

What's Bartram's disposal efficiency? That's the % of time he plays to his limitations. I reckon it's most of the time and his % is likely to be quite high - short kick to unmarked defender or handball to running defender. When he tries to exceed or is forced out of his limitations he does make errors and his kicking limitation bar is quite low. I think he's a pretty smart footballer overall who generally makes good decisions, has good pace and endurance. The problems are he can't attack with his kicking and he can be pressured into a turnover.