If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
So you have changed your mind on him? On the weekend you were not sure about his understanding of the game?
I wouldn't be disapointed if we picked him.
Yes well noted. I talked to some local footy people who say he might struggle for a few seasons but has the capacity to be an out and out gun.
Port most likely you would think now.
You don't develop courage by being happy in your relationships every day. You develop it by surviving difficult times and challenging adversity. ― Epicurus
AFL.com.au phantom draft has us taking Wines and Menzel with 5 and 6. Interesting that the notes on 'in the mix' state opposite to who they actually have selecting the player. The have O'Rourke going at 2
Yes well noted. I talked to some local footy people who say he might struggle for a few seasons but has the capacity to be an out and out gun.
Port most likely you would think now.
What I would like to know is how does he compare to Natinui at the same age. Natinui isn't great but he is improving each season.
Grundy seems to have a great desire to get the most out of himself and being his size and agility cannot be a bad thing.
And you think we don't have enough already? I don't want another inside midfielder.
nor do i. Smith, Wallis, Libba, Stevens. We really need some pace and polish which is why O'Rourke, Macrae or Toumpas would be nice. I really dont want Wines as he is much of the same (inside midfielder).
What are you talking about? Vlastulin is an inside midfielder.
Ignoring the spelling, Vlastuin isn't really an inside mid. He is a utility mid who can win his own ball. If you watched the champs, he played primarily at half-back for VM. Why? Because he could and others such as Hrovat who were in their best 22 probably couldn't.
Just because everyone says a player is 'x' type of footballer, doesn't mean he is. Wines is another example...at the champs a lot of his possessions were handball receives but if you read the press he is the next coming of Greg Williams.
Grundy seems to have a great desire to get the most out of himself and being his size and agility cannot be a bad thing.
He is agile, but not 'freakishly' so. How agile will he be with another 12-15kg of muscle?
The real question with Grundy is can he make it as a key forward - if you believe he can then he is a top 10 pick. If not, he is another young ruckman who may or may not make it - certainly Longer from VM (2011 draft) was a far better and aware ruckman at the same age.
The worry with Grundy's forward play is he has not really shown the ability to mark on the lead consistently (like Daniher has for example). His goals have come from outmarking smaller defenders or - more often - from second effort snap shots. Now, given the numbers game AFL footy is, it is unlikely those 2nd effort snaps will be available...so...
Basically, I can understand all the questions about Grundy.
The talk on Grundy reminds me of the raps on Cordy prior to us drafting. Agile, great beneath his knees etc. Drafting rucks so early is a big gamble, especially when we start talking about turning them into forwards because we have too many rucks on the list
Ignoring the spelling, Vlastuin isn't really an inside mid. He is a utility mid who can win his own ball. If you watched the champs, he played primarily at half-back for VM. Why? Because he could and others such as Hrovat who were in their best 22 probably couldn't.
Just because everyone says a player is 'x' type of footballer, doesn't mean he is. Wines is another example...at the champs a lot of his possessions were handball receives but if you read the press he is the next coming of Greg Williams.
Man o man I wish Thursday was over.
I saw the same thing with Wines.
Don't understand some people's angst with recruiting Wines
If you assume that Whitfield and Toupas are gone, I would be looking to get Vlastuin and Garlett. But 'everyone' says we wont take Garlett - even though 'everyone' also says he is the best player in it. I actually don't know who else I would pick at 5. If you trust Menzel's injury, you could take him. If you think Stringer will return to u16's form then you could take him. If you decide not to gamble, then I guess you are down to Macrae or O'Rourke with Macrae being a bit classier and O'Rourke the one who has done it for longer.
Given my 'look back' at what they have done theology I would lump for O'Rourke as he is more of a sure thing.
So after all that I guess my answer is Vlastuin and O'Rourke.
If you assume that Whitfield and Toupas are gone, I would be looking to get Vlastuin and Garlett. But 'everyone' says we wont take Garlett - even though 'everyone' also says he is the best player in it. I actually don't know who else I would pick at 5. If you trust Menzel's injury, you could take him. If you think Stringer will return to u16's form then you could take him. If you decide not to gamble, then I guess you are down to Macrae or O'Rourke with Macrae being a bit classier and O'Rourke the one who has done it for longer.
Given my 'look back' at what they have done theology I would lump for O'Rourke as he is more of a sure thing.
So after all that I guess my answer is Vlastuin and O'Rourke.
Thanks mjp....it will be interesting to see what way we go....going by the media, a lot of teams have gone cold on garlett....obviously that picture I've seen on big footy doesn't paint the best picture of a guy wanting to be professional and play afl. He alone, will make the draft and interesting watch.
I'm still hopeful for stringer at 5 or 6 as I really think we need someone who can take the game on, and he seems to have a good head on him.
Comment