Pick 48

[aboods]

Fairly surprised that a KPF seems to be the consensus KP priority. Would have thought our KPD needs are far greater.
We’ve got 3 (good-to-high) quality KPF in the best 22. With good options aplenty in the small-medium fwd roles, there’s no requirement to play a 3 tall fwd line should injury strike. However, we’ve got some reasonable cover in Bellchambers and McKernan (as well as Brown) if required.
In defense, we’ve got 1 quality tall and his best role is as a rebounding defender. There’s 1 player to cover injuries, before we have to rob the forward line.
We’re not going to draft a kid to cover huge forwards from year 1, but I’d definitely go a KPD over a KPF. Given defenders are often underrated and (it’s said) playing defence is easier than FWD, I’d say our chance at converting the later pick are better as well.

I think most people that are saying a KPF is a priority want to play Hooker in defence. Personally I want Hooker to stay forward.

[Aceman]

Time to go back to the well and grab a Frankston HBF

[Fairybread]

Maybe you prefer quarterback!

Personally I’m tired of others (television persons) taking my game away from me!

I’m sick of Defs, Mids and four wheel drives (FWDs)!

So John Coleman was never the greatest Full-Forward ever. He was just a tall forward. FFS

Its only going to get worse. I know our club doesn’t even refer to the old traditional positions (CHF, CHB, HFF, RR etc). They are roles. Role 1, Role 2 etc etc.

Each role has some specific and usual things it must do. Depending on the tactics needed for the day a role might also be assigned other duties.

[Alan_Noonan_10]

On the H-S headline email (I don’t get the paper but they send me the emails), the main headline is that someone projected to go in thetop few isn’t in Gary Buckenara’ top 15 or so.

How is that football news? Or news at all?

[Fairybread]

It’s worse than that. They’ve started calling him “Bucky”

[anon49405813]

Reckon they will go tall with 48. Hugh Dixon or Jackson Ross. Mature mid late.

[Speedy_Gonzales]

Mason Fletcher F\S 2018 draft

[DonAtBirth]

I can’t wait!
Reality is it’ll be 2019 if he’s ready to go like his Dad, 2020 if he’s just regular good.
Hurley will be turning 29/30, Hooker would be turning 31/32 (if moved back). We need to be planning for more than just Mason. With a touch of luck we can pick up another someone who can help out in 2019, a stroke of genius and they can help out next year.

[Humble_Minion]

The strength of next year’s tall crop has been talked up for a while. Not sure whether that strength runs deep or is concentrated at the very top end though (cos if we have a top 10 pick next year something’s gone horribly wrong).

We may have half an eye on providing for our kpp succession planning with next year’s draft.

[theDJR]

Yeah Centre Half forward is a bit redundant in today’s game.

Centre half forward? That’s full forward, my friend, and don’t you farkin’ forget it… centre half forward indeed.

[Benny40]

Bumping my own post because it’s relevant. We have very few young talls. I see KPF as our next need, not critical to take this year, but definitely need to draft one in 2018.

Most clubs run a spine of 2-3 tall defenders, 1-2 ruckmen, 2-3 tall forwards. Say 6 talls on average in the best 22, plus some depth.

Talls are known to take a few years, with the first 4 years being development time. I don’t know what the career length of the average tall is, but say on average they retire at 30. So very roughly, talls have a career that is 1/3 development and 2/3 productive.

This means if 100% of your drafted players became best 22, you could have a mature:rookie ratio of 2:1. But it doesn’t work that way, so it’s going to be more heavily weighted towards youth.

If you have a relatively even age demo, you have 3 players 23-26 and 3 players 27-30. Your youth needs to replace the 3 oldest players. That would mean the time to recruit a replacement tall is when your best 22 player is 27-28. In every 4 year block, you need to find 3 best 22 talls to replace retiring players. Over a 4 year block, you could easily draft 4-6 players and delist a few before you find the right 3.

Now I’ll admit I’m kinda making this up as I go, so lets compare this to the Essendon list and see how delusional my ramblings are…

Firstly, we are slightly top heavy on field, running with 7 talls. We have decent depth in all positions, but relatively few developing players.

Current list
Leuenberger 29 *depth
Hooker 29
Bellchambers 28
Hurley 27
Brown 27 *depth
McKernan 27 *depth
Ambrose 26
Hartley 24
Stewart 23
Daniher 23
Francis 20 *developing
Ridley 19 *developing
Draper 19 *developing
*Lavender 21 *developing

Recently delisted / traded talls:
Gwilt
Steinberg
Carlisle
Crameri
Nyuon

So what does this mean…

• Rucks: Leuey and McNernan are depth. Draper looks likely to become the replacement for Belly, with Lavender at the very least a nice backup. We had a crack with Gach, but not every pick is a success. Only draft another ruck in a few years if the young lads aren’t developing.
• Defenders: We have a relatively young group of mature guys with nobody approaching retirement age in the next 4 years. With Ridley and Francis, there is some high end talent awaiting opportunities. Need to draft a tall in 2018 or 2019 to prepare for the retirements of Hurley/Brown/Ambrose.
• Forwards: We need a replacement for Hooker to be ready around 2020. Daniher will take Hooker’s role (in his own way), Stewart will become the second target and a young tall will become the third.

Overall we haven’t turned over much youth of late. The list of talls is really well balanced, despite losing Carlisle and Crameri. We’ve had a damned good success rate with our talls, but even so drafting one this year wouldn’t hurt.

If the decent mids are gone and the most talented player available is a tall forward, we have an upcoming need. If we don’t take one this year we can cover for a year or two, but it will become critical in 2019.

[Clark_Griswold]

I know Hayden blitzed the vertical leap tests…but it’s a measurement that I struggle to get excited about.

What value is it to a mid?

I mean, I already watched Kyle Hardingham jump impressively, but never really rule the AFL.

[PaulBarnard]

Draft kpf as priority then turn them to defenders if need be.

[WindsockBoy]

There can never be enough “Player X - forward or back?” arguments on Blitz.

[Bully]

I find Tim Watsons views regarding the on field activities at Essendon usually pretty far off the mark. The inner workings of the club he has some knowledge, but some of his comments regarding the on field stuff i wonder if he even watches half our games.

[bobshearman]

Really, i’d back Tim Watson’s knowledge of our game against any blitz bozo. Knowledge gained over 300 games as a premier midfielder, covering the game for 7.

This site gets farken sillier and sillier.

[Bully]

I disagree but appreciate your un-bias analysis.

[bobshearman]

I might have been a bit strong, agree to disagree.

[Killer_Mike]

I don’t listen to SEN to have an opinion.

I would have thought he would watch a lot of our games though with the level of involvement he’s got with the club.

[Henry_s_Angry_Pills]

More that he played a very deep, traditional full forward role. Joe was excellent playing CHF.