Are 2 (live) Picks in the Draft Enough?

[The Doctor]

I think if we go into this year's draft with only 2 live picks (31 & 32) we are missing a good opportunity to replenish our list.

As we all know this is the last truly uncompromised draft. Next year's draft will lose a lot of bottom aged players (quite often the guns of the draft). We also face the situation where we have a fair number of senior players in the last year or two of their careers.

Our list has some defficiencies as we all know and I won't regurgitate that now. It is interesting to note however the types of players posters consider we should choose with our 2 current live picks. These include; a power forward, lead up tall forward, ruckman, half back with pace, key defender, ruckman, anyone tall, anyone with pace etc etc.

Our next pick at this stage after 32 would be 64 (or thereabouts depending on delistings at other clubs). Sure it's not a great pick but we have picked up some quality players in the draft late. There are always late gems. How is it that so many rookie list players go on to become guns?

To justify using extra picks someone else has to be delisted.

* Why would we keep Wight if we are not going to use him at the business end? We all know the answer.

* If we delist O'Shea is anyone else going to pick him up? Seriously? Then rookie him if we want to keep him?

* I suppose Eagle is contracted. If so he is lucky after the prelim. Can we reach a settlement?

We made the hard call with Westy I don't think it should end there.

I would actually like us to go into the draft meeting with at least 2 extra picks and this may enable us to help solve some of our list defficiencies. No better way to do that than in a strong draft.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Re: Are 2 (live) Picks in the Draft Enough?

I'm not so concerned because we have loaded up over the last two drafts. We do have a lot of players who have only played a few games (or less).

I agree Wight should go. I really don't see the point of keeping someone on the list as a back up and then not using him when he's needed. The only possible explanation is they had no faith in him to do the job (that's OK, neither did I) in which case there is no reason whatsoever to keep him.

I don't think much of pick 64-lotto, though. I'd make the call on either Mulligan or Shaw and elevate one of them.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Are 2 (live) Picks in the Draft Enough?

I fully agree we need a couple more selections.

I'd much rather pick 64 than Wight. I'd rather give a recycled player a run in the PSD than keep Wight.

O'Shea is still as raw as they get. I can't see Eagle playing 25 games next year. At least one should go.

[GVGjr]

Re: Are 2 (live) Picks in the Draft Enough?

Simply speaking 2 live picks is insufficient, especially given what we are faced with over the next few seasons, but we are probably forced into it because of a combination of planning and list management oversights.

Moved On
Street was overtaken by Skipper by the end of the season and wasn't offered a spot on the list. West was moved on and Ray demanded a trade and Doogs quit so they are the only players missing for the 2008 line-up.

Maintained but questionable value
Wight started the season very much in Eades plans however, an injury then subsequent poor form effectively stamped his card. He still has a year to run so he now becomes just a depth player.
Whilst it's easy to point the finger at Eagleton the fact is that the coach continued to play him with no real threat of being dropped probably means that the coach still saw some value in him. Not sure if he has now changed his mind but the fact that he does have another season to run on his contract and that probably reflects poorly on planning and list management.
O'Shea being maintain on the senior list puzzles me. His form went backwards in the last half of the season and he just isn't making the progress that you would hope for. We knew he was a project player when we drafted him and we admire his spirited play but he is a long way off the mark at present and I'd question if it would serve the club better to have him on the rookie instead of the senior list.
Despite Lynch's return to favour, he was carried through the season and didn't display the type of commitment we should hope for but more importantly demand from players. I know it's hard to turn your back on talent, but I think we have rewarded him for a sub-par effort. Lets hope he repays the club.

Elevated?
Mulligan couldn't crack it for a game in the seniors at Williamstown and yet we seem to want to promote him. Thats OK because we lack talls but in all the games I have seen he has rarely displayed the sort of form that would justify a promotion.

I'd would prefer to have another pick in the draft, even a late one, but it seems unlikely.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Are 2 (live) Picks in the Draft Enough?

I see no downside in using Pick 64 in preference to relegating OShea to the Rookie List.
If he does come good, we can still promote him back to the main list.

Whilst I do not want to see either Eagleton or Wight in the jumper again, there is clearly a difficulty in delisting players who have time to run on their contract. I would be more upset paying Eagleton his probable $350,000 a year for sitting at home on his couch.

[Go_Dogs]

Re: Are 2 (live) Picks in the Draft Enough?

I'm not so concerned because we have loaded up over the last two drafts.

Pretty much.

With the amount of turn-over the list has had over the past 2 seasons, anymore wouldn't be wise, especially considering how 'close' we are.

With Ayce locked away, we have 2 more live selections that should get us two more players who'll be looked at to play 200 games.

They'll then join the likes of Ward, Stack, Lynch, Reid, O'Keefe and Wood who'll all be looking at bigger impacts this coming year, as well as Higgins who through injury missed the bulk of the year.

That's approx. 10 blokes who have had no real impact at this stage, and will be players for the future.


I'm all for O'Shea going on the rookie list though, if it means we can secure another player in either the draft or psd.

FWIW, I think someone like Kris Massie could be a worthwhile pick up in the PSD for depth.

[Mofra]

Re: Are 2 (live) Picks in the Draft Enough?

Whilst I do not want to see either Eagleton or Wight in the jumper again, there is clearly a difficulty in delisting players who have time to run on their contract. I would be more upset paying Eagleton his probable $350,000 a year for sitting at home on his couch.

Eagle is on no where near that.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Are 2 (live) Picks in the Draft Enough?

Pretty much.

With the amount of turn-over the list has had over the past 2 seasons, anymore wouldn't be wise, especially considering how 'close' we are.

With Ayce locked away, we have 2 more live selections that should get us two more players who'll be looked at to play 200 games.

They'll then join the likes of Ward, Stack, Lynch, Reid, O'Keefe and Wood who'll all be looking at bigger impacts this coming year, as well as Higgins who through injury missed the bulk of the year.

That's approx. 10 blokes who have had no real impact at this stage, and will be players for the future.


I'm all for O'Shea going on the rookie list though, if it means we can secure another player in either the draft or psd.

FWIW, I think someone like Kris Massie could be a worthwhile pick up in the PSD for depth.

no way not ever...Just another list clogger...would be handy at a bottom level club!!

[LostDoggy]

Re: Are 2 (live) Picks in the Draft Enough?

Eagle is on no where near that.

So what is he on?

[Bulldog Revolution]

Re: Are 2 (live) Picks in the Draft Enough?

In my eyes there have not been enough changes made to the list. I think the committment the club has made to developing players is the right one. I'm really pleased we didn't load up on recycled players during the trade period and hope that it focuses us squarely on what we can do better in terms of player development.

However, I would have thought that we might look to recycle a need player now when we can get them cheap, and be looking to add youngsters and rookies to the list

Having Wight on the list serves no purpose

For my money Lynch is super talented and whilst his 2008 was extremely disappointing he seems keen to atone - sometimes a player needs a Rocket (pun intended), and largely it comes down to the fact that he is highly talented

I guess the issue with OShea is - Do we believe he can still make it? If we were to attempt to rookie list him could another club beat us to the punch? Is that likely? Is it a risk we are prepared to take

Players like OKeefe, Stack, Reid, Wood, Lynch must improve their running abilities a lot if they are to put Eagle out of the side in 2009

[Mofra]

Re: Are 2 (live) Picks in the Draft Enough?

So what is he on?

Don't want to breach the privacy act

[Topdog]

Re: Are 2 (live) Picks in the Draft Enough?

Personally I think it is. Even though only 2 are live we still 3 picks all up and will look to rookie probably 3 players. Next year we will be having a big change in our list.

Aker has already confirmed it will be his last year. Eagleton won't be renewed (very early call but Im confident I'll be right.) If Wight doesn't improve he will definitely be gone. Welsh is a good chance to retire next year. I imagine Johnno will play 2 more years but there is a chance that he will hang up the boots. I'm sure I have missed 1 or 2 more potential retirees and this doesn't even look at people like O'Shea and other young guys who have had some time on the list without making any inroads.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Re: Are 2 (live) Picks in the Draft Enough?

Next year we will be having a big change in our list.

Aker has already confirmed it will be his last year. Eagleton won't be renewed (very early call but Im confident I'll be right.) If Wight doesn't improve he will definitely be gone. Welsh is a good chance to retire next year. I imagine Johnno will play 2 more years but there is a chance that he will hang up the boots. I'm sure I have missed 1 or 2 more potential retirees and this doesn't even look at people like O'Shea and other young guys who have had some time on the list without making any inroads.

That's probably the point/question though. Next year as you said, Aker, Eagleton, Welsh & one of or both Skipper/Wight will be gone. That's all fair enough, but that's quite a big 'list change' in a year where the draft is compromised. I think we really need to delist either Wight or O'Shea so that not everything is left to next years draft. It makes much more sense to use Pick 64, delist Wight/O'Shea and get a year into another young player. If EVER there was a period to use three picks, surely it's the compromised draft, where our picks would be much later.

Pick 64 couldn't be worse/more ineffective than Wight/O'Shea to date, and it's probably a 10-20 pick 'upgrade' on what we'll have next year - if that makes sense.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Are 2 (live) Picks in the Draft Enough?

Could Fantasias comments regarding just giving our third rounder to them be a ruse?

I.e. We got bent over but didn't want to tell the world, and also make the supporters feel a little bit better about the deal. Keep a bit of pride??

But come to he crunch, we may just decide to use pick 64 after all?

[GetDimmaBack]

Re: Are 2 (live) Picks in the Draft Enough?

The fact is we have 3 picks. Not sure how we can see ourselves having only 2 "live" picks.

Can't help wondering how we'd feel if the Father/son deal with Ayce hadn't happened.
I think we'd be happy if pick 14 was "live" and we picked up Cordy.

Hypothetically, then - if we had 3 picks, drafted Cordy, another KP type tall and a strong bodied midfielder, would we feel better after the draft than we do now?

On top of that, if this is a very strong draft, maybe Scotty Clayton has his eyes on a smoky, ala Lake (#71). We'd also be happy with that, IMO.