The draft.

[LostDoggy]

Re: The draft.

Our record with these indigenous flashy players is woeful, both with keeping them and getting them to reach their full potential. Thorne, Hill, Lynch, Stack etc. I really don't want us going for these flashy types like Manson or Skinner later in the draft. Have we even hit one yet?

No. I looked at this the other day. Since i can recall it's only been Harbrow who showed he was a worthwhile selection, and before that it was glimpses of Mclean before his injuries set in.

Those that i can recall us recruiting, whether at the start or end of their careers:

Josh Hill
Brennan Stack
Steven Koops
Cameron Faulkner
Malcolm Lynch:
Phil Krakour
Nicky Winmar
Michael McLean

[Topdog]

Re: The draft.

10 J. McMahon.
4 Tim Walsh,
4. Farren Ray,
6. Lochlan Veal (read J. Rawlings)
(still hurts to think what a disaster that whole draft was when you add pick 19 for Koops, a pick Freo used to get Mundy)
6. Tom Williams
11. Shaun Higgins
11. Andrejs Everitt
5. Jarrad Grant

IIRC from that list, Walsh, Williams and Everitt were seen as stretches / speculative picks (of course leaving out Veal as he doesn't exist)

[LostDoggy]

Re: The draft.

IIRC from that list, Walsh, Williams and Everitt were seen as stretches / speculative picks (of course leaving out Veal as he doesn't exist)

Speculative picks! WTF would you use a speculative pick so high (4) in Walshs' case, and even in Williams' case to a certain extent. Geez that shits me.

[Bornadog]

Re: The draft.

Stevo tweet: Ess, North and WB all in the hunt for Daniel Markworth. Super quick forward

Highlights here

[Mofra]

Re: The draft.

Speculative picks! WTF would you use a speculative pick so high (4) in Walshs' case, and even in Williams' case to a certain extent. Geez that shits me.

They were always going in the first round (although Everitt was often touted as a second rounder), I wouldn't class them as speculative picks - the term "stretches" as used seems a better fit, although IIRC Williams was always going to be the no 3 tall selecting in the draft.
If we took a mid over a tall with #6 (after taking Griffen at 3) I dare say fans would have gone into meltdown.

[GVGjr]

Re: The draft.

Stevo tweet: Ess, North and WB all in the hunt for Daniel Markworth. Super quick forward

Highlights here

He should be right in the mix. A very good footballer for a late developer.

[BulldogBelle]

Re: The draft.

He should be right in the mix. A very good footballer for a late developer.

A tallish, fast lead up forward with a decent leap- didnt we recruit him in 2007? Jarred Grant?

[Desipura]

Re: The draft.

He should be right in the mix. A very good footballer for a late developer.

We are going to hear this line alot in the leadup to the draft.

[GVGjr]

Re: The draft.

We are going to hear this line alot in the leadup to the draft.

And your point being?

[Missing Dog]

Re: The draft.

A tallish, fast lead up forward with a decent leap- didnt we recruit him in 2007? Jarred Grant?

Markworth could develop into a midfielder, he went quite well when played in there the times I saw him play. He needs to build his engine up though.

[Desipura]

Re: The draft.

And your point being?

No point, its a term often used (not in your case) when a journalist does not know who a team is going to pick up.

[LostDoggy]

Re: The draft.

Maybe Melbourne should have picked Lower instead of Jurrah!!
As far as I know the QAFL is a legitimate competition.

[Missing Dog]

Re: The draft.

Maybe Melbourne should have picked Lower instead of Jurrah!!
As far as I know the QAFL is a legitimate competition.

QAFL is a much, much lower standard compared to the WAFL, VFL or SANFL.

Jurrah actually showed a bit in the VFL before getting drafted. If Skinner couldn't even challenge for a senior berth at WAFL level, it does raise eye brows.

I think we may have missed out on some very handy mature aged recruits doing this. At the time I was very keen on Hibberd and to a lesser extent Pederson. Both would have been handy players. Pederson would have been more then useful for us.

[mjp]

Re: The draft.

Markworth could develop into a midfielder, he went quite well when played in there the times I saw him play. He needs to build his engine up though.

I get that recruiting is about projecting - I do. But do we really need to project midfielders? There are heaps of options there already...I like Markworth fine - but if everyone is saying we need to use our first round pick to get him then can't we let him be a tweener for someone else? Mids who can run - yes, win their own ball as well, but seriously break lines - are what we need to pick. Why go with someone from a limited footy background who played primarily as a forward?

[mjp]

Re: The draft.

Maybe Melbourne should have picked Lower instead of Jurrah!!
As far as I know the QAFL is a legitimate competition.

Why so defensive? If the selection is right, your chance to say 'I told you so' will come soon enough.

As for Melbourne, rather than taking Lower (who I don't think was available in 2009 but would have to check), maybe they would have been better off selecting Tom Rockliff, or Greg Broughton or even Liam Picken rather than Jurrah? After all, they haven't been winning too many games lately and it remains to be seen how Jurrah will fit into Neeld's systems. I think Picken and Broughton in particular would fit in just fine whatever club/system they were part of and both were available when Jurrah was selected. Not as 'cool' or 'clever' or 'exciting' I admit - but both really good players who have had significant inputs in top 4 campaigns for their respective clubs.

We may (will) never agree on this stuff - that is fine. For me, Skinner should have been a rookie selection at best and I don't understand why he needed to be on the main list. I get it is a real 'reach for the stars' selection and am happy to give credence to that as a strategy.