Bulldogs lack of pace!!!!

[F'scary]

I didn't include Griffen, but if you want to I can include Jong who replaces Griffen for height.

I will concede only one player is short and if you take him out then the average is only down by 1cm, hardly anything to worry about.

On the flip we gained Boyd, Hamling, Redpath and lost Jones and Williams. So overall we are ahead.

If you look at the recruiters and what they are thinking for the future, they are banking on Talia, Roberts, Boyd, Roughead, Redpath, Cordy and Campbell to take us forward.

I think next draft we need to look at talls again, but in the meantime I am happy with the way we have drafted.

That is correct, we made our decisions, we had a big turnover of players (biggest ever?). Draft night was mostly spent on acquiring skill, stamina, versatility & flair. We have endeavoured to address KPB and tall BP issues through the trade period and rookie promotion. We have gone for four more primarily defender types with the rookie draft (although I not expecting Goodes to get a call up or promoted again but accept the reasoning for the move to rookie him). Rucks, same thing - technically we have 4 ruckmen on our list. If we get lucky and two of our KPB candidates emerge, then we will have the luxury of utilising Roughead in another role (Ruck, FP or CHF).

[stefoid]

It's a very high risk strategy because many players who were good decision makers at junior level can really struggle to match that at AFL level, in which case you've got a player who's slow, small, and doesn't have any stand out attribute to help them make the grade.

Doesnt matter how quick you are if you cant play. Far riskier to select players for thier physical attributes IMO. We didnt have low enough picks to get a player with good smarts and size/pace combined.

[boydogs]

This thread is worth a read for those interested in the height debate

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thread...rison.1084370/

Speed wise, I agree that speed and accuracy of ball movement is the most important thing. The Geelong crew have already been mentioned, but Lewis, Mitchell & Hodge are Hawthorn's best players yet all are on the slow side. Hawthorn have Hill & Smith, and Geelong had Varcoe, Wojo & Byrnes, but none of those are stars.

A lot of our small players are quick - Dahlhaus, Hrovat, Honeychurch & Daniel. People say we can't play them all in the one side, but I'd be more concerned about playing all our slower players together. Stringer, Wood, Picken & Hamling are quick. Jong is lightning and is a very important piece of the puzzle now as a tall mid with good acceleration.

I'm most concerned about Mitch Wallis, he doesn't have the hurt factor with his disposal to be an attacking mid and doesn't have the pace to be a defensive one. He can compete valiantly and restrict the best players to under 20 disposals, but cost us 2 goals in the last quarter getting burnt off. He has a great footy brain and can win the ball, work it through a contested situation and tackle well, I hope he can improve his pace a yard as it will make him much more effective. But then you could say the same thing about Daniel Cross

[1eyedog]

This thread is worth a read for those interested in the height debate

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thread...rison.1084370/

Speed wise, I agree that speed and accuracy of ball movement is the most important thing. The Geelong crew have already been mentioned, but Lewis, Mitchell & Hodge are Hawthorn's best players yet all are on the slow side. Hawthorn have Hill & Smith, and Geelong had Varcoe, Wojo & Byrnes, but none of those are stars.

A lot of our small players are quick - Dahlhaus, Hrovat, Honeychurch & Daniel. People say we can't play them all in the one side, but I'd be more concerned about playing all our slower players together. Stringer, Wood, Picken & Hamling are quick. Jong is lightning and is a very important piece of the puzzle now as a tall mid with good acceleration.

I'm most concerned about Mitch Wallis, he doesn't have the hurt factor with his disposal to be an attacking mid and doesn't have the pace to be a defensive one. He can compete valiantly and restrict the best players to under 20 disposals, but cost us 2 goals in the last quarter getting burnt off. He has a great footy brain and can win the ball, work it through a contested situation and tackle well, I hope he can improve his pace a yard as it will make him much more effective. But then you could say the same thing about Daniel Cross

Agree with all of this. With regard to Wallis I remember Bomber fans saying a similar thing about Watson when he was 40-50 games in.

[LostDoggy]

This thread is worth a read for those interested in the height debate

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thread...rison.1084370/

Speed wise, I agree that speed and accuracy of ball movement is the most important thing. The Geelong crew have already been mentioned, but Lewis, Mitchell & Hodge are Hawthorn's best players yet all are on the slow side. Hawthorn have Hill & Smith, and Geelong had Varcoe, Wojo & Byrnes, but none of those are stars.

A lot of our small players are quick - Dahlhaus, Hrovat, Honeychurch & Daniel. People say we can't play them all in the one side, but I'd be more concerned about playing all our slower players together. Stringer, Wood, Picken & Hamling are quick. Jong is lightning and is a very important piece of the puzzle now as a tall mid with good acceleration.

I'm most concerned about Mitch Wallis, he doesn't have the hurt factor with his disposal to be an attacking mid and doesn't have the pace to be a defensive one. He can compete valiantly and restrict the best players to under 20 disposals, but cost us 2 goals in the last quarter getting burnt off. He has a great footy brain and can win the ball, work it through a contested situation and tackle well, I hope he can improve his pace a yard as it will make him much more effective. But then you could say the same thing about Daniel Cross

I'd have Cross back tomorrow. Mitch's will make it, give him time.

[Greystache]

Agree with all of this. With regard to Wallis I remember Bomber fans saying a similar thing about Watson when he was 40-50 games in.

The difference is Watson was fat, unfit, and uncommitted to AFL footy. It was only when he put his head down and worked hard that he was able to realise his talent. Wallis has been as committed and professional as anyone in the AFL since day one, he just doesn't have much talent to work with.

I still think Mitch can get to 100 games through pure determination, but as we improve he's going to find it harder and harder to keep up.

[Mofra]

Cooney 187cm
Higgins 186cm
Gryphynn- 190cm
Tutt 177cm
Gia- 183cm

Replaced with

McLean 180cm
Webb 186cm
Hamilton 182cm
Daniel 167cm
Dale 182cm

So we lost 3 big running players and replaced them 5 players of which only one is 6 foot or taller. Yeah, but they're all the same Never mind the fact that 2 of the players we lost were tall and quick, and have been replaced by short and slow.

Have to add the 'talls' in too - Cordy & Hamling (a kid & super-skinny unproven type Geelong let go) for Williams and Austin, who for any flaws in their game were able to hold down a key post when on the park.

Our 2015 KPD stocks are arguably weaker than in 2014, and quite a few posters (myself included) question the strategy of taking 5 players of similar attribute in the same draft.
One big tick I'll give us is the acquisition of Biggs via trade - I really like what I've seen of the kid.

[LostDoggy]

The difference is Watson was fat, unfit, and uncommitted to AFL footy. It was only when he put his head down and worked hard that he was able to realise his talent. Wallis has been as committed and professional as anyone in the AFL since day one, he just doesn't have much talent to work with.

I still think Mitch can get to 100 games through pure determination, but as we improve he's going to find it harder and harder to keep up.

Before Mitch got injured he was having a terrific run, nearly one of our best players (finished top 10 in the B&F) barring injury he is without doubt a 200 gamer.

[stefoid]

Not saying we dont need to add quality quicks and talls, but I think our game plan didnt help us much its emphasis on defence at all costs. Reckon it probably made us look slower/more inept up forward than we really are. Towards the end of 2013 we didnt look so slow and we scored well.

[kruder]

It seems at this draft we made players who are short and slow the priority. As you said, all have good endurance, and are seen to be good decision makers, but all are well below average speed. It's a very high risk strategy because many players who were good decision makers at junior level can really struggle to match that at AFL level, in which case you've got a player who's slow, small, and doesn't have any stand out attribute to help them make the grade.

We really need to hope we can improve the skill level amongst the team, because a team that's small, slow, and can't kick is going to get some beltings. Even more so given we have virtually no proven key defenders.

Greystache,

we are still well and truly into the development faze we just need to target AFL players. Forget a singular attribute, its the least of our worries we need players that are AFL standard as so many on our list are or were not. You would have to back Daly over his past perfromances and IMO I think he has again selected a couple of little beauties who will entertain in the years to come.

Cordy gives me nightmares he is that bad, and after using a first round pick and 6 years developing him I'd much rather buy a guy like Campbell who has a few years of development under his belt and at least shown promise against men.

Agree that our defence is looking scary particulally this year but buying a skinny athletic kid won't improve that in the short term. FA and trading is where the big players are had and it looks like we will use this route once our house is in order and we are pushing into the top 8 again.

[Mantis]

One big tick I'll give us is the acquisition of Biggs via trade - I really like what I've seen of the kid.

From what I hear he is impressing many within the club with how he is travelling.

[Greystache]

Greystache,

we are still well and truly into the development faze we just need to target AFL players. Forget a singular attribute, its the least of our worries we need players that are AFL standard as so many on our list are or were not. You would have to back Daly over his past perfromances and IMO I think he has again selected a couple of little beauties who will entertain in the years to come.

Cordy gives me nightmares he is that bad, and after using a first round pick and 6 years developing him I'd much rather buy a guy like Campbell who has a few years of development under his belt and at least shown promise against men.

Agree that our defence is looking scary particulally this year but buying a skinny athletic kid won't improve that in the short term. FA and trading is where the big players are had and it looks like we will use this route once our house is in order and we are pushing into the top 8 again.

Just because a player is short and slow doesn't somehow mean he's an AFL standard player. The players we selected are just as speculative as those chosen by other clubs who are taller, or quicker, and just as equally unproven. Facts are at best 2-3 of the players chosen during at this draft will be solid to good AFL players, which ones they are we don't know yet. What we do know is, whoever they are, they'll be short and slow because that's all we chose.

So because a key position defender won't an impact next year that is the basis for not recruiting one? Using that logic we'd never draft another key position player. How many quality key position players have we been able to trade for or secure through free agency? The answer is zero, the closest we've come is Boyd, who while having a good pedigree, has played 9 pretty average games of AFL footy, and we paid $1 million a season and gave up our captain and early first round pick for him. I had no problem doing the deal due to the circumstances, but if that's an indication of what a key position player is going to cost from another club then we'll be lucky to get another this decade. The thinking you can build the pillars of a team via trade and free agency is obsurd. An 18 year old won't make a difference next year, but the year after they'll be 19, and the year after 20, all waiting for another 2-3 years to draft one means is they're still another 2-3 years away from making a difference.

Dalrymple has done a good recent job in selecting some quality players, but he's also had some very early selections to do it. He's also recruited about 10 players so far to replace Gilbee (Howard, Fuller, Tutt, Pearce, JJ, Darley ect) and we still don't have anyone locked into that role, so I'd suggest his ability to identify a quality small ball user is actually pretty poor. His best pick thus far would be Hrovat, and again he was a first round selection.

His refusal to draft key position players, and in particular early in the draft, is bordering on an irrational fear. He's been our head recruiter for 6 years and our key defence still centre around Roughead and Morris who were at the club before he took over. We have only Talia and Roberts developing and they are both still highly speculative.

[1eyedog]

Just because a player is short and slow doesn't somehow mean he's an AFL standard player. The players we selected are just as speculative as those chosen by other clubs who are taller, or quicker, and just as equally unproven. Facts are at best 2-3 of the players chosen during at this draft will be solid to good AFL players, which ones they are we don't know yet. What we do know is, whoever they are, they'll be short and slow because that's all we chose.

So because a key position defender won't an impact next year that is the basis for not recruiting one? Using that logic we'd never draft another key position player. How many quality key position players have we been able to trade for or secure through free agency? The answer is zero, the closest we've come is Boyd, who while having a good pedigree, has played 9 pretty average games of AFL footy, and we paid $1 million a season and gave up our captain and early first round pick for him. I had no problem doing the deal due to the circumstances, but if that's an indication of what a key position player is going to cost from another club then we'll be lucky to get another this decade. The thinking you can build the pillars of a team via trade and free agency is obsurd. An 18 year old won't make a difference next year, but the year after they'll be 19, and the year after 20, all waiting for another 2-3 years to draft one means is they're still another 2-3 years away from making a difference.

Dalrymple has done a good recent job in selecting some quality players, but he's also had some very early selections to do it. He's also recruited about 10 players so far to replace Gilbee (Howard, Fuller, Tutt, Pearce, JJ, Darley ect) and we still don't have anyone locked into that role, so I'd suggest his ability to identify a quality small ball user is actually pretty poor. His best pick thus far would be Hrovat, and again he was a first round selection.

His refusal to draft key position players, and in particular early in the draft, is bordering on an irrational fear. He's been our head recruiter for 6 years and our key defence still centre around Roughead and Morris who were at the club before he took over. We have only Talia and Roberts developing and they are both still highly speculative.

As you know really good KPP come at a high cost. I'm also not too sure what the percentages are of getting a really good one at pick 26+ but I do know that it is considerably less likely than at picks 1-12. We have selected MaCrae, Stringer and Bonti and brought in Boyd (pick 4) with our top 12 picks and to be honest the only really good KPP over the past few drafts outside of Patton, Boyd and McCartin (all out of our reach) anywhere near picks 4-6 over the past few drafts is McCarthy who went to GWS obviously at pick 14.

Who are the KPP you would have drafted at the picks we've had that appealed more than Talia, Roberts and Hamling? Hopefully Roughie can hold down full back and it would be nice to have one of Talia, Hamling or Roberts progress this year but there is no reason we cannot secure a KPP as a free agent during our next premiership window (e.g. a Frawley) to shore up our spine. Do we really need to draft in more KPP in the 30s to clog up the list and compete with a spot against Roberts, Talia, Hamling, Smith and potentially Cordy (who some have earmarked as a KPP). Obviously we've had needs across the ground and bringing in Hamling, Kelly and Cordy seems to have sated the desperate need for another speculative tall back, at least for now.

Getting good KPPs is fine but it is hard when your pick starts at 26. I reckon they become far more speculative in this draft range than a close to the ground player with good goal sense which is why I think we selected Hrovat, Honeychurch, Webb, Hamilton and McLean rather than another Talia, Roberts, Smith, Cordy or Hamling.

If you want a really good KPP you get a pick in the top 5 or be prepared to chop off the proverbial for one. We've had two top 5 picks and picked up Boyd and Stringer both of whom will be playing KPP roles this season.

[stefoid]

Just because a player is short and slow doesn't somehow mean he's an AFL standard player. The players we selected are just as speculative as those chosen by other clubs who are taller, or quicker, and just as equally unproven. Facts are at best 2-3 of the players chosen during at this draft will be solid to good AFL players, which ones they are we don't know yet. What we do know is, whoever they are, they'll be short and slow because that's all we chose.

Dalrymple has done a good recent job in selecting some quality players, but he's also had some very early selections to do it. He's also recruited about 10 players so far to replace Gilbee (Howard, Fuller, Tutt, Pearce, JJ, Darley ect) and we still don't have anyone locked into that role, so I'd suggest his ability to identify a quality small ball user is actually pretty poor. His best pick thus far would be Hrovat, and again he was a first round selection.

His refusal to draft key position players, and in particular early in the draft, is bordering on an irrational fear. He's been our head recruiter for 6 years and our key defence still centre around Roughead and Morris who were at the club before he took over. We have only Talia and Roberts developing and they are both still highly speculative.

I see evidence in the type of smalls we picked this year that our recruiters are learning form past mistakes.

[Greystache]

As you know really good KPP come at a high cost. I'm also not too sure what the percentages are of getting a really good one at pick 26+ but I do know that it is considerably less likely than at picks 1-12. We have selected MaCrae, Stringer and Bonti and brought in Boyd (pick 4) with our top 12 picks and to be honest the only really good KPP over the past few drafts outside of Patton, Boyd and McCartin (all out of our reach) anywhere near picks 4-6 over the past few drafts is McCarthy who went to GWS obviously at pick 14.

I hear this all the time, we never have pick 1 so we can't draft tall. How many team's first choice key defenders were early first round draft picks?

Hooker #54
Carlise #24
Merret #30
Jamison Rookie
Rowe #44
Dawson Rookie
Lonergan #22
Taylor #17
Rivers #26
Lake #71
Gibson Rookie
Thompson #37
Carlise #44
Trengove #22
Rance #18
Mckenzie #29
Roughead #31

Virtually none. To suggest pick #26 is too late a pick to go for a tall defender is absurd.

A couple of things you can be certain of is; the key defender you don't pick will never make it. And Jake Carlisle at the "speculative" pick of #24 is a much better chance to make it than the "safe" selection of nicely skilled defender/mid Christian Howard.