2015 AFL Draft. Spoiler: We won

IceTemple · December 1, 2015, 8:11pm

what happened to the "shallow draft" theory ?

It is a shallow draft until the club doesn’t pick up the player wanted, then it becomes a lost chance on a superstar.

bloodychoir · December 1, 2015, 8:18pm

Ants I did say I was trying to be positive. We beat Hawthorn fair and square this year and took it up to them till the final quarter later on at a time when everything that could go to s!!t had gone to s!!t, I don’t think the team we have around that senior core is mediocre. I think they can be fantastic too. Will be disappointed if we aren’t vying with the likes of Bulldogs and Tigers next year.

samwoods · December 1, 2015, 9:23pm

Ants I did say I was trying to be positive. We beat Hawthorn fair and square this year and took it up to them till the final quarter later on at a time when everything that could go to s!!t had gone to s!!t, I don't think the team we have around that senior core is mediocre. I think they can be fantastic too. Will be disappointed if we aren't vying with the likes of Bulldogs and Tigers next year.

To be fair though, the good teams don’t consider us a threat yet. So they aren’t really bringing their best against us. There are another couple of levels we need to overcome just yet.

Not saying it can’t be done, and not saying that beating Hawks early last year wasn’t good, but we still aren’t there yet. First we have to get to “competitor” level where other teams consider us as a serious contender and benchmark. Then hopefully we can get to the “hunted” level where we are the team everyone wants to emulate and test themselves against.

Long long way to go. Maybe by round 4 or 5… that should be long enough.

McQuade · December 5, 2015, 12:43am

finally getting to watch the draft, think there may of been a couple of Bombers fans up the back of the crowd…the Boo when Gill took the stage, the Boo when Gil congratulated Hawthorn, the cheer when Woosha and the Essendon panel was mentioned.

LucasLefty · December 5, 2015, 1:04am

McQuade said:

finally getting to watch the draft, think there may of been a couple of Bombers fans up the back of the crowd.....the Boo when Gill took the stage, the Boo when Gil congratulated Hawthorn, the cheer when Woosha and the Essendon panel was mentioned.

Did you record the pick by pick coverage or the main one with all the interviews? I've been wanting to see pick by pick but can't find it anywhere.

McQuade · December 5, 2015, 1:23am

pick by pick for first rd and then the panel discussion plus interviews.

LucasLefty · December 5, 2015, 3:25am

McQuade said:

pick by pick for first rd and then the panel discussion plus interviews.

Yeah that's the coverage I have. I wanted to see when we selected Morgan and Redman.

bobo · December 5, 2015, 9:18pm

what happened to the "shallow draft" theory ?

It was shallow. There were only 11 good players available, but those 11 were sublime talents. Fortunately we outfoxed everyone and got them all.

Bomb_Doe · November 22, 2022, 1:51am

It only took 7 years but you got your wish.

LucasLefty · November 22, 2022, 2:01am

Quality bump Doe

Ants · November 22, 2022, 2:23am

Interesting bump. And interesting to see old posts of mine.

Found the below posts.

Effectively we’d have Walla, Curnow and B McKay left instead of Walla, Parish and Redman. I can’t recall who some of those guys I listed even were!

Ants:

Blummers32:

Ants:

Blummers32:

Ants:

Hodor:

Not sure why ppl think we need an 18 yr old KPP.
I’d go Milera and either Parish or Oliver with 4&5 and best mid and Mitch Brown (25yr old former Geelong pick 15) with 24&25.
Brown, as a KP swingman is clearly worth pick 25 (when a pick around there is about a 50% chance of 100 games) and I don’t believe he will be available at our next pick.

Not sure how you could have missed my posts if you’re reading the thread…

jonovdp:

CJohns:

Only thing I will say with Francis is him being an EFC supporter is something the club takes note off as you want to pick high end talent that won’t leave the club.

That’s really good to hear.
And recent history has showed that we will pick players who support the club, if we are choosing players of similar talent.

Edit:
Crameri, Ryder, Carlisle & Melksham. 4 players wanting out in 3 years. This will be in the back of Doddoro’s mind when selecting players in the future.

'+ Monfries

Apologies if you’ve posted it, but I must have missed it.

What are your thoughts on Weideman?
Do you consider Curnow a KPF like Darling or more like Stringer?
Should Melbourne take Weideman, who do you think is the next KP player we should be considering?

I assume you mean if I’ve posted in respect to your questions before, not if I’ve posted on why we need talls (even 18 year old ones!) which is what I was responding to for Hodor. On your questions, please note that I don’t watch junior football, so I try to keep most of my opinions on “types”, since the Essendon draft team will know far more than I. I do name who I’d like because that’s a bit of harmless fun.

From what I’ve read, Weideman seems like the best ‘true’ KP prospect that may be available at our picks. Most of the risk seems to be about the injuries. Given good young KP forwards can often have a 2nd go at key defence if they don’t work out, then in some ways getting him would allow us to hedge bets.

Curnow from what I’ve read sounds like Crameri with a greater aerial threat and bigger engine - but also injury concerns. That mobile marking guy is really useful (think Darling, Gunston), and Curnow is potentially that. Personally, I would love Crameri back in the side - I think he’d complement a JD/resting ruck forward line. One with greater aerial threat, a bit more mongrel and engine? Yes please. Sounds good as the third tall in the forward line. Don’t necessarily rate his chances (from what I’ve read) on being a midfielder, see that as inconsequential to our needs.

I wouldn’t take both of the above, but I’d like at least one. Francis could also possibly play a similar role up forward, with 3rd tall defender as fall back, so should be considered (or taken in conjunction with one of the above). Francis has played forward as a mobile marking target, and apparently done allright. The other option would be Collins. Sounds very solid, pretty reliable, and an option to take a KP back role. I’ve no fuss taking him at #4/#5 if the club rates him. I’d be fine with taking him and Francis, and then playing them both next year and Hooker forward for example.

If Melbourne take Weideman, and EFC drafters don’t think there is a huge gap in ability in the next group (which seems a consensus view) of Parish/Oliver/Curnow/Francis/Milera/Collins, my preferences would probably be Curnow and Francis. They fit our needs, and also hedges bets if they can play midfield. A Curnow/Francis and Collins combination could also work well.

Cheers.

I read with interest all your posts over the last few months on drafting talls v mids but never read you picking the players.
In particular I recall you challenging how we find game time for midfield rookies.

I still struggle to place Curnow as a KP. I don’t think he’ll be a full time midfielder so as a third tall for us isn’t much of a good fit mainly because I see Langford as the third tall until he’s capable of more time in the midfield.

Weideman is a must for us so if Melbourne overlook him, that’s great.
If Melbourne take Weideman, I’d want us to take Collins. I like what I’ve read about him and think he could slot into our backline and be mentored well by Hurley and Hooker.

Interesting that you’d consider taking two ‘talls’ with our first picks. I’m not sure I’m that bullish.
I’d prefer best tall and best mid at 4 and 5. I was in the best available mids at our picks in the 20s, but I’m almost wanting a tall (if available) and a mid there.

I’m cooling on Mitch Brown and would prefer Hartley instead.

At best that gives us two talls to develop, two mids to develop and a semi developed tall.
That sets us up well to make a big run at O’Meara or go for more mids in the draft.

At worst, it’s one tall to develop, three mids to develop and a semi developed tall.

I do take your point that we have drafted a lot of mids in the last decade, but unfortunately not many can be considered ‘elite’.
Heppell is close and Zerrett is still a few years away. I still think Zaharakis can get back to his best but I’m not sure he’ll reach ‘elite’ status.
Laverde and Langford look promising but are a few years away.
After that there are good average players / role players.
I guess it’s for that reason that I’m clinging on to taking a mid with pick 4 or 5. I’m confident we could get good average midfielders later in the draft but not confident on potential very good mids past pick 20 (Excl Academies). Otherwise, I’d agree with you and go a tall with both picks.

For me it’s still Parish and Weideman as a dream preference.
Oliver and Weideman if Parish is gone.
Parish and best non mid (if that’s Francis, Collins or Curnow then so be it) if Weideman is gone.

In answer/reply to some of your points:

you’re welcome!

some of the reasons for my approach to two talls early is that a) I don’t see Langford as a KP player, I see him as a Caracella/Steve Johnson type flanker/midfielder, and b) I don’t think any good talls will be available at #24/#25 (although I’ve over-estimated where talls will go before!). I see too many clubs with tall needs with picks before us, plus the ‘midfielder’ draft next year causing a run on talls. Like 2006 when of the top 16 picks 11 were on taller players (including rucks). Then there is c) the 2016 draft is meant to be much stronger for talls, or we may use our picks on O’Meara, d) I rate Laverde, Langford, Fantasia, McKenna and Zerrett as a pretty damn promising group of midfielders. Finally, e) I can’t see a scenario where at least 2 of our first 4 picks aren’t used on smalls, so the midfield will get a boost no matter the tall strategy.

On Curnow, after getting back from injury with all the issues that caused – he still managed to kick 4, 2, 3, 4 and 0 goals in the remaining five TAC matches. On the “KP” element - he will get the opposition’s 3rd smallest KPD (as the tallest are on JD and a ruck), he’s the same height as Darling, 2cm taller than Crameri, 1cm shorter than Lloyd and had the longest reach in the draft combine by height. I don’t see the height as an issue why he can’t be a KP player.

I think with our current list and 8 ND and 2 rookie draft picks, if decent talls are available our best position would be to end up with 4-5 of them. However, I don’t really expect there to be 4-5 good talls available at our picks, so want more 2-3 good prospects and 1-2 speculative/mature ones.

A lot of my focus is really on mix. As an example, in 2009 I gave Jbomber a lot of crap pushing for Talia over a mid with pick #10 (ironically, that would have been a good call and fixed a lot of issues now). The reality was I wanted one highly rated tall as that is what I thought we needed, and a few mids. That we got mids at #10 and #26 and the tall at #24 didn’t faze me, I was happy with that. The club was in a better position to say who was in the best position to balance needs versus best available and make the calls on who to draft when (well, except my call on Talia of course!). As long as needs were met somewhere.

Similarly, this year if EFC get two talls in our first four picks plus one or two late in the draft or rookies, I’ll be happy. But in these discussions about plans, I think there is a real threat that there will be a run on talls, which may leave us with no good options at #24/#25 (really #28/#29 odd). In my view if we go into the ND with 8 picks and the only talls taken are with late picks because we only “reached” with late picks – that will be a disaster.

redbull · November 22, 2022, 2:26am

Shane Yarran died in 2018 and Harley Balic passed away earlier this year.

Clone_Hirdy · November 23, 2022, 5:33am

I think he’s a Brisbane supporter, because he wants to team him up with JD.