Hannabal

I know. Otherwise I wouldn't have brought it up. And I meant every word.

If we don't take Swift and he's available at 17 I'll be physically ill. Sure it's a bit of a risk, but guess what, we need to take a little risk to potentially get a star. And a little luck of course. He's had one reco, but so has Lynch and Vickery. The other injury was to the opposite leg and not as serious. Obviously it's not ideal, but the reward is worth any risk considering our circumstances. If we don't take Watts at 1 I reckon that will probably be it for me.

What another time wasting thread. He won't be a Dee and he's a terrible fit for where our club currently sits. Cousins only has himself to blame for his current predicament. I suspect the usual swagger won't be as noticeable tonight.

He's definitely a mid. The 10 goals have fooled a few - although he does go forward (obviously).

I may have to change my mock draft

I'm not sure anyone drafts 'small backs' anymore. They draft the Ash Smiths of this world as reasonably tall and fast running backs that hurt on the rebound. Cheney was a poor selection imo. The best backs are quite tall, fast and can lock down smalls. But I'm probably being a pedant, Old, as your definition of 'small back' is probably the same as mine for an agile fast tallish back. They're really 'defensive utilities'. I'll probably have egg on my face, but I'm convinced that one of Blease, Sidebottom, Swift, or McKernan will be available at 17. Whoever is the one available out of that quartet I'd take. I reckon McKernan would be too good to pass up even if notionally one would like a mid. Fwiw, my first round: 1. Melbourne – Jack Watts (VIC) 2. West Coast – Nicholas Naitanui (WA) 3. Fremantle – Daniel Rich (WA) 4. Port Adelaide – Hamish Hartlett (SA) 5. Essendon – Chris Yarran (WA) 6. Carlton – Michael Hurley (VIC) 7. Brisbane – Jack Ziebell (VIC) 8. Richmond – Tyrone Vickery (VIC) 9. North Melbourne – Lewis Johnston (SA) 10. Adelaide – Jackson Trengove (VIC) 11. Collingwood – Stephen Hill (WA) 12. Sydney – Shaun McKernan (VIC) 13. St Kilda – Sam Blease (VIC) 14. Western Bulldogs – Ayce Cordy (VIC) 15. Geelong – Tom Swift (WA) 16. Hawthorn – Phil Davis (SA) No doubt it's wishful thinking, but I have Sidebottom at 17. *My assertion of one of the above being available at 17 crumbles if Hawthorn take a mid at 16.

You may be right with your assertions about the AFL, but why do YOU want us to wait til saturday ? Do you work at the NAB ?

It's a great idea. Create as much hype as possible. Watts has a level head and will thrive on the challenges that come with no. 1. This club needs all the positive exposure it can get. Give him the no. 4 jumper as part of the event.

Unfortunately it's only her rating of the players, not a mock draft. (and yes I know she mentions the challenge of being at the wooden spoon club) http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/general/j...6770818997.html

But it keeps highlighting the likelihood that the Dees will have available a McKernan, Swift, Walters, Schoenmakers, Blease, or Sidebottom at 17.

If the first 16 were correct, which they probably won't be, we could end up with Watts, McKernan, and Walters with our first 3. That would be terrific. I like Lynch as a footballer, but he's not what we presently need and nor is he necessarily best available. You'd think by now that the HS would have up to date measurements of the players.

When have I referred to Brereton as saying Watts will take 4-5 years to play ? Bereton only stated that he wouldn't play him in 09. I don't quite agree with that, but I can understand his sentiments.

Despite what some say, Brereton is an astute footy observer. Yes he loves the sound of his own voice, yes he's a Frankston bogan, and yes he'll use 100 words when 10 will do, but he usually shares some pretty good insight. He's wide of the mark with Watts, imo. His article a while back was based on watching one match - Vic Metro V WA on TV, which wasn't Watts best. He stated that Watts had OK agility "but nothing special". Watts is the most agile KPP I've ever seen and his results at DC are testamount to that. A skinny Nick Riewoldt was no. 1 pick in 2000. He played 6 games in his first year and was very good as a 19 year old in his second, playing all 22 games. Many here are too young to remember a very skinny David Neitz as a junior. Neitz made AA at 20. David Schwarz kicked 60 goals from CHF as a 21 year old. Buddy has just kicked 100 at 21. My point ? I don't expect Watts to be a star in his first couple of years, but I do expect him to have a much greater impact than Whispering Jack and others who are cautiously managing their expectations. Most stars of the game, even tall ones that take longer, are very good players by 20 and elite by the time they reach 21. Watts will bulk up considerably over 2 years, he has the pace, agility, and smarts to create separation, and will be a very good player reasonably quickly. I believe those expecting little for 3-5 years are overly conservative in their assessment.

If we're lucky enough to yield 3 of Watts, Swift, Sidebottom, Schoenmakers, McKernan, Blease, Walters then I'll be over the moon. Add a Hannebery or Zaharakis at 35 and it will be a bumper draft. All wishful thinking you might say, and that's probably right, but after pick 1 there's only 14 players that will be taken before our pick 17. When you look at Naitanui, Rich, Hill, Yarran, Hartlett, Ziebell, Trengove, Sidebottom, Swift, Blease, McKernan, Vickery, Hurley, Johnston as 14 names and that there's no way that they will form the exact first 16 picks (with Cordy as a 1st round Father/Sun) then the odds of getting 3 highly touted players is very strong. Add Schoenmakers, Walters, Suban, Lisle, Cornelius ----

So he'd "certainly rather pick 6 than pick 1". What a croc and if it's true, I'm glad he's not at Melbourne. All golfers want to make the putt that determines a victory in a major. They don't want the outcome in their competitors hands. Any recruiter worth his salt would want to be making the ultimate call.

For those unfamiliar Sidebottom here's a bit more information from Quigley at BF on his game and prospects. In fact he has a very detailed Phantom Draft that is well worth the read: He has him at pick 5 Steele Sidebottom (DOB – 2/1/91, Ht – 182, Wt – 79) The bottom aged Vic Country player has the tools to be a very good AFL player. After the Champs I had him around the 10 to 12 mark thinking he lacked a little class and natural tools to break into the top 10. Since then he has continued to develop at speed and his last 6 weeks or so of the season were very good and he absolutely dominated in the TAC GF picking up 10 goals to go along with 32 possessions. To pull out a game like that when it counts most will grab a lot of attention and I would have thought he had shot himself up into the 5 and 8 range on draft day. Reports coming out of Camp though is that he did not perform well and this might have dropped him back down a bit. Me I still like him and I remember Cyril being the worst interviewee ever apparently last year and yet still being able to play. For me Steele can play and I have no problem with him going high. At AFL level I see him as an inside midfielder who he can go forward or back and do a very nice job wherever he is played. He has reasonable size for a bottom aged player who looks like he will fill out nicely and whatever his size he doesn’t mind throwing it around. He is courageous to a fault and led the Champs in contested possessions (48) and was right up there in clearances as well. He commits to contests knowing he is going to get crunched and on the other side of the coin he really makes his tackles felt and hammers the man with the ball. Skills wise he is pretty good although I would not put him in the same category as teammate Zeibell. Some matches (and parts thereof) his skills look fantastic but in others he will make a few silly errors. He is one of the few genuinely dual sided players that play at any level. It is worth noting that 4 of the 10 goals that he kicked in the TAC final were kicked on his left foot. He has good finishing skills and his kicking and nose for goal are good although I would not put him in the same category as Yarran in this regard. Overhead he is a good mark and from what I have seen he seems to have excellent vision and takes pretty good options. What I really like about Sidebottom is his balance in contested situations. He keeps his feet when others are going to ground and recovers quickly, steadies and this improves the quality of his disposals in contests a lot. He is a very passionate player who has a reputation for being very coachable. He does not usually play a full game in the midfield so it is often hard to judge his tank but when in the middle he gets to every contest and makes good space without the ball. Going into camp he was expected to go close to 15 in the beep test and maybe even give the record a nudge. On the day though he only managed a 14.5 which was good enough for second. He also finished second in the 3km in a time of 10.32. The biggest issue with him is probably his pace which seems a little below a few of the other top midfield prospects. Maybe because of the pace issues he tends not to burst tackles or run with the ball as much as I like to see at junior level. That being said though there is a lot to like and he quite simply looks like a natural footballer. He is a very low risk midfield prospect who I expect to be a good player at the next level at least but may lack the class to be a star.

I couldn't disagree more. He's a hard talented midfielder. He's nothing like the two you mention.

Interestingly, neither Inside Footy or the HS have Sidebottom in the first round. The latest rumour is Dayne Beams being a chance to go to Collingwood at 11 as Brisbane will probably pounce at 25 before the Pies second round pick. Who knows, but more and more I'm convinced that we'll get very highly rated players at 17 and 19. I change from week to week, but presently I'd salivate over: 1 Watts 17 Sidebottom/Blease 19 Suban 35 Strauss 51 Wright

Your name isn't Dennis Pagan, is it ? How about we develop our own.

I think I'll back my own eyes and that of Barry Richardson, who said he's the best junior he's seen, over some jealous pimply friends of yours. You may not know - Richardson is a multiple premiership player from Richmond who played in the 60's and 70's. He's also coached elite junior footy teams and is a former chairman of selectors at the MFC. And Watts' kicking is superb.

http://forums.demonland.com/index.php?show...=12980&st=0 Post #40

We 'won' the spoon in 97 and played in a prelim in 1998. We had many players come back from injury and an injection of youth through trading and the draft. There are reasons for everything. And no doubt there are reasons for each example you've used. There's nothing definitive to be gained by a few examples of teams turning their fortunes around.

I find it laughable that some of you people think that Bailey and Co will let the players off the hook after unacceptable performances. Yes, he's a teaching coach and he'll put performances in perspective, but I've no doubt that every player will be left under no illusion as to how they're going and what is expected of them. Because the club is taking a pragmatic approach doesn't mean that the coaching staff and players aren't expecting to win each and every time they take the field.

OK, so you just want a bit of 'spin' ? Some pyschological claptrap from the club will make you feel better. Maybe you and Mo can shout from the stands "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore !!"

He's bottom age and only decided to play football over basketball 6 months ago. I've watched him 3 times live and I don't like soft players and his physicality wasn't a concern to me. There's a reason that so few KPP's go pick #1 and that's because they rarely dominate underage football due to their less than mature bodies. Even Carey and Longmire were traded by Sydney when they were promising juniors because no one expected the careers that followed. Riewoldt is the only KPP junior I can remember going #1. Noel Blundell ran psycho motor testing at DC. They've done it differently since 2007 where they now pit a player against another player. Eventually it comes down to 2 players and a winner. There are numerous things that this test measures, but according to Blundell, one is definately their competitive urges. Whilst this test received less publicity, I was interested to know that Watts won this event. An important box that was partly ticked for me. Best player in the Carnival also was important. David Dickson talks of his concern at having Private School kids play in the Vic Metro team in Emma Quayles draft book. He says it's a real worry because the programmes they come from in the school system are very different. From a team structure and coaching expectation these kids are not at the level of the TAC kids. He finds it difficult to integrate them in a short period of time. So Watts winning the Larke Medal was even more impressive considering his football background. I don't expect Watts to be a player in the J. Brown mould. I don't expect him to throw bodies around. Much like James Hird, he doesn't need to. In fact, I reckon he's too smart for that. But I also have no concerns about his courage or ability to put his body on the line and have seen him do so in the games I've watched. Taking a pack mark 4 deep when players are backing into you at CHF at a critical time in a match being a case in point. But I remember other examples of strong body contests at Casey. Barry Richardson is quoted in the current Inside Football as saying that Watts is the best junior he's seen. He's been watching/playing football for 45 years and coached elite junior teams. I doubt he would have made such a statement if he thought Watts was soft. In fact, it's an unbelievable wrap. I know that you consider your last reference very clever, especially as you've used it twice, but frankly, I find it snide in the extreme. But it's easy for amateur observers to pigeon hole players from limited knowledge. We all do it.