They do still get picked though.
Then they play an exponential amount of mediocre games based on what they can become.
Read the Vickery story.
Assuming that you actually need talls. Is it better to take them early and risk an early pick bust like Dowler or Thorp (I was going to name more recent names, but thought better of it), or take the risk later?
Really it depends on how you rate them. Early or late makes no difference if you really rate them. Just don’t take them if you’re only lukewarm on them.
I don’t think the picks being late reduces our chance of finding a tall that we rate that much. We seem to look at talls a bit differently, or at least have in the past.
I personally don’t believe we need forwards so taking one at all should not even a consideration but who knows what the club is thinking.
I think in general clubs are starting to figure out that tall players are a huge risk so unless they are absolutely killing it I doubt they will be taken as high as in the past.
I also believe that clubs are recognising more and more that its a small ball game and are tending to play less tall players at both ends of the ground. We have recently seen the demise of the second ruckman and we are also seeing a significant change in the height of tall defenders. Most of the best ones are now around Hurleys size with mobility and rebound a priority.
GWS, Adelaide and even Essendon were exposed for carrying to many tall players in their forwardlines and I don’t see why we would continue to take chances on a player that may take years to develop when we can most likely pick one up through trading or free agency.
I think we lack depth for midfielders and small defenders and that’s what I would prefer they focus on.
Very understandable. I think an extra developing tall would make some sense. I also think the “small ball” fashion is only a fashion, and good big men are as important as ever. But fashion may mean you can get value!
1 Like
Assuming the club plays Hooker forward I think we need to look at a tall defender. We’ve got a glut of 3rd tall types but no one to play on genuine talls - Hartley upgrade.
I guess it depends on how the club rates young Fletcher
1 Like
I agree big men are still important but they have evolved just like every other part of the game.
the best big men are tall but they are also fast and agile and highly skilled. They are effectively tall midfielders.
Those types of players are very hard to find.
That’s the type we’ve been looking for for 30 years (Mark Bolton says Hi!)
It gets more extreme but it’s not something new.
Go and look at the Ben Miller highlights. Get through the hitouts and to his involvement in general play highlights. Fair to say he moves very very well. Same with McCartin.
The junior development programs have been targetting mobile talks for years. There are plenty of them in the system, but the key difference is ones with"big man skills" as well.
At various times over the last 15 years recruiters have been blinded by the movement of talls and forgotten that taking a mark and crashing a pack are valuable skills. You need both. The evolution had happened, but the key things that elevate the best are still the same. Take a mark, have a presence. Then you need to be able to get up and down the ground, defend, work in the zone, etc etc. But you have to prioritise the big man skills.
1 Like
I’m not sure how you have come to that reasoning
There is not one developing kpf on our list as depth outside the best 22.
Brown can pinch hit but is preferred in defence. Francis can pinch hit but prefers defence himself.
Lavender is a project who will be years away
Smack has been kept as a rookie as a result of us not having any real kpf cover. And he an average fwd.
We absolutely need a kpf not just for the now but for 5yrs down the track. But perhaps better off targeting in next years draft which is strong for talls and when we have higher picks again.
I think we have a decent amount of midfield (it’s just that they young) and small defender coverage (mcneice, McGrath)
If you had of read my post I suggested we will be in a position to either trade or get one in free agency.
We are a destination club and are entering an extended period of success and can afford to allow other teams to take on the risk of drafting and developing forwards.
1 Like
Why would any tall of quality want to be traded to us or come via F/A when our fwd line is stacked already with Hooker, JD & Stewart?
Players move for opportunity in the senior team
Only way you could see a situation occurring is via Hooker moving back & leaving open spot. That’s unlikely to happen given how well he performing up there so we will need to go to the draft on talls at some point.
We tried to get Schache so it’s clearly in list managements mind to get a developing kpf as it should be IMO
1 Like
I guess the idea is that say a Lynch / Patton move to us in the future 3-4 years once Hooker has retired as a free agent, so they can come back to Melbourne and play Finals 
.
1 Like
The same could be said about a young tall not getting enough opportunity because of Joe, Stewart and Hooker. We lost Jenkins because of opportunity and plenty of other talls move for opportunity.
Hawthorn have shown how it is to be done when they picked up Gunstan, Frawley, Hale and many other players that are looking for opportunity in a successful team.
Hooker has 3 or 4 good years left and that’s when we look at replacing him. By then Stewart and Joe will be in their peak.
Players potentially leaving due to lack of opportunity would not be in the list management teams thought process at all.
Improving the senior team & providing adequate depth to to cover for injuries / suspension etc, and planning for future is all that matters.
If we find & draft a class kpf and after 3yrs development is banging the door down in twos and can’t get in senior side that’s a good thing.
Having no genuine kpf depth at all is not.
The idea of replacing Hooker with a free agent or other in 3-4yrs time is a different thing altogether to what I’m saying and what our list management team has indicated. Kerr said in an interview we need a tall, we tried to get Schache. Need is clear.
Whether anyone worthy is left at pick48 though is the big unknown. If not, next years draft it will be.
3 Likes
Seriously rejecting the premise.
We can pick up Fantasia late. We can pick up Hooker late.
If we’re smart enough.
I see no reason to doubt the club, whether we choose a tall or a small, at the moment.
Having said that, if we pick up an in-between sized ‘athlete’…
1 Like
Relying on trading in or picking up a free agent KPF is too risky a proposition. They may not be available when you need one, or they might choose to go elsewhere. Much rather us draft a promising type and develop him in the seconds. I’m certain we can pick up a decent proposition even late in the draft - don’t forget Hooker was a late pick. In a few years time when we might need him he should be right to go - and if isn’t we’ve lost little.
1 Like
Whole lot of hypotheticals there.
My thoughts are that I wouldn’t bother picking up a tall forward at pick 48 because the likely hood is they will have significant deficiencies.
If the margin for error is reduced next year so be it.
Well, this whole thread is nothing but hypothesis.
It can’t be anything else, & wouldn’t exist w/out it.
Exactly.
So it makes me wonder why people are hell bent on changing my mind.
I believe its a small ball game and the future of talls is slim.
Whats even stranger is the fact that people have been complaining about mids at our club for ten years.
Again, … that would be the point of the thread, … discussion/argument over different points of view, despite it all being ultimately pointless and having no influence over what will eventuate, somewhere within it will be a scenario that closely mimics which way the club would be thinking.
And thus far, the reserve KPF has made the most sense to me, … the only surprise is no one has made the “Best available” point, … which is always a very good chance, and still the most likely MO.
1 Like
It’s pretty simple.
If we see Hooker at #48 (or a couple of places later) then we take him.
If we see…you’re talking mids, we’ve taken our potential mids (which when talking about Fantasia et al is a very long bow) very, very early in the draft, but if we see the one there…then sure, we take him.
I absolutely do not accept that getting a club top four mid is more likely at #48 than getting a club top four KPP at #48 is.
The reverse is true.