Author Topic: Draft Needs  (Read 3489 times)

Offline Stripes

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
Draft Needs
« on: September 14, 2010, 03:30:44 PM »
Looking at our list to look for holes I would order each player in each postion as such. I would play the 'Italics' players in the team first on current form/potential.

Tall Forwards -  (2 or 3)
Riewoldt,  Griffiths, Post, Rance, Westoff
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 6/10
We have the Coleman medalist who is still only 21. Griff has shown a few signs that he could be a great CHF for us in the future but time will tell. We have 2 young average toilers as backups and a development player lining up in Coburg reserves at present.

Mid/Small Forwards - (3 or 4)
Collins, White, Nason, Taylor,
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 4/10
Collins popped up this year and White used his increased size and speed to cause some headaches but overall crumbing/small scoring options remains an area we need more of. Hopefully Taylor can be that crumber as well as marking option too but has shown little to date.

Defensive Forwards - (1)
King, Hicks, Nahas,
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 4/10
In the later half of the year little King made this spot his own using his natural aggression to contain forwards while peeling off and then using his penerating kicks to hurt them the other way. Hicks has promise but will need time and Nahas has gone backwars and may not survive the cull.

Inside Midfielders - (3 or 4)
Cotchin, Martin, Foley, Tuck
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 9/10
Cotchin and Martin are already very good midfielders could, by all signs, turn elite. Foley was class but injury ended his season before it began and could haunt him in the future. Tucky played back but was moved back into the middle more as the year progressed and remains a 'contested-ball monster'. He still lacks the polish and poise of Cotch and Martin though. Our strongest area of the ground imho.

Outside Midfielders - (2 or 3)
Morton, Edwards, Webberley
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 3/10
Edwards had a breakout year and Morton came back into the team and played well. Webberly was also very goo in his first season. While signs a positive it remains an area we are weak. We need more players with speed and elite desposal by foot to lift our side in the future. I'm not sure if our current outside midfielders will get to that level.

Taggers - (1 or 2)
Jackson
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 5/10
Jackson is incredible important to our midfield structures both containing the oppositions most damaging ball user and laying the blocks/physical work needed to create the space for our players to work in around the stoppages. Jackson has the speed, endurance and athletism to stay with almost any player. While he remains relatively young we do need another player to take his place if he is injuries/suspended. We have no depth here.

Tall Defenders - (2 or 3)
Moore, McGuane, Astbury, Gourdis, Thursfield, Grimes
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 8/10
While our tall defenders are still average at present we have built up a great deal of depth and potential in this area. In fact we have created a healthy competiton for places at present.

Mid/Small Defenders - (3 or 4)
Deledio, Newman, Connors, Farmer, Tambling, Dea
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 7/10
Our running backline is excellent with our best uses playing behind the ball. Conversely though we lack the type of small/mid defenders who can shut down a dangerous small forward such as a Milne. We have depth and potential here though.

Rucks - (1 or 2)
Graham, Vickery, Browne
Current Quality/Depth Rating= 4/10
Graham was exceelent early but ran out steam. Vickery also showed good signs but ran his race early too. Vickery has excellent movement for a big fellow but seemed to be still learning how to play this year. Browne remain raw. Three rucks is not enough on a list.

I have not included from our current list for varius reasons - Simmonds, Cousins, Polak, McMahon, Polo, Thompson, Hislop, Roberts,




So looking at the list our biggest areas to improve are imho -

1. Outside Midfielder
2. Small/defensive forward
3 Ruck
4 Tagger/midfielder
5 Tall forward
6 Small/Mid Defender
7 Tall Defender
8 Inside Midfielder


Stripes

Con65

  • Guest
Re: Draft Needs
« Reply #1 on: September 14, 2010, 04:18:44 PM »
Nice post Stripes.

Offline Stripes

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
Re: Draft Needs
« Reply #2 on: September 14, 2010, 04:21:20 PM »
Nice post Stripes.

Thanks Con65! What's your thoughts - inside mid before tall forward?

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Re: Draft Needs
« Reply #3 on: September 14, 2010, 05:06:46 PM »
#1 need is highly skilled tall mids IMO

We should do well with pick 6 with one of heppell/gaff/polec

our 2nd national draft pick is very important. I'd love the club to trade for a 3rd top 30 draft pick.

Offline Stripes

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
Re: Draft Needs
« Reply #4 on: September 14, 2010, 07:41:07 PM »
#1 need is highly skilled tall mids IMO

We should do well with pick 6 with one of heppell/gaff/polec

our 2nd national draft pick is very important. I'd love the club to trade for a 3rd top 30 draft pick.


You don't rate Atley?

I agree regarding the importance of our second pick - this is where I would look for the best tall either ruck or forward/utility. If we could get another pick in the 30s that would be worth a first round pick in other years imo.

Stripes

Offline WA Tiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14257
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Draft Needs
« Reply #5 on: September 14, 2010, 08:28:00 PM »
Wouldn't mind a talented utility that can play the role of Lids, going forward more though, perhaps on an opposite wing/half back position.
DIMMA - You will be held ACCOUNTABLE...

“We are really excited about what we have brought in. We have got great depth of players that can take us where we need to go. We are just putting some cream on the top at the moment,” he said.

"Rucks:
Shaun Hampson is the No.1 man"

Offline Mr Magic

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 6887
Re: Draft Needs
« Reply #6 on: September 15, 2010, 07:20:03 AM »
Great thread.

#1 need is highly skilled tall mids IMO

Agree. Pretty obvious to me quality outside midfielders are the biggest requirement.
I'd be taking a couple of youngsters and if the dollars permit chase a more mature player in Mundy as well.

Offline Stripes

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
Re: Draft Needs
« Reply #7 on: September 15, 2010, 10:43:29 AM »
Are people happy with the order/position I have placed players in? Do people believe my ratings are correct?

I thought I would receive more - 'you're speaking rubbish!' and 'you are over-rating/under-rating our list/players!' - replies.... ??? :shh  ;)

Stripes


Offline FooffooValve

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 960
Re: Draft Needs
« Reply #8 on: September 15, 2010, 12:22:00 PM »
Are people happy with the order/position I have placed players in? Do people believe my ratings are correct?




I wouldn't have had Foley as an inside mid. He's more of an outside run and carry player to me (when 100% fit). And the beauty of Martin and Cotchin is that they could probably slot into either role - outside or inside.

But the point still stands - we need to improve our uncontested possession more than we need to improve our contested possession, so whether we get a giant, a dwarf or defender, mid, whatever — the most important thing is that they must be a great kick and a good decision maker with good character. Andrew Gaff ticks those boxes.

Offline Stripes

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
Re: Draft Needs
« Reply #9 on: September 15, 2010, 12:34:03 PM »
Are people happy with the order/position I have placed players in? Do people believe my ratings are correct?




I wouldn't have had Foley as an inside mid. He's more of an outside run and carry player to me (when 100% fit). And the beauty of Martin and Cotchin is that they could probably slot into either role - outside or inside.

But the point still stands - we need to improve our uncontested possession more than we need to improve our contested possession, so whether we get a giant, a dwarf or defender, mid, whatever — the most important thing is that they must be a great kick and a good decision maker with good character. Andrew Gaff ticks those boxes.

I thought Gaff was more of an inside midfielder than out while Atley was billed as the better user? What's your thoughts?

Offline FooffooValve

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 960
Re: Draft Needs
« Reply #10 on: September 15, 2010, 12:41:57 PM »
Gaff is definitely not an inside mid. He's a gut-running accumulator with a very nice left foot. Not to say he can't win a contested possession, but that isn't his strength.

Offline RedanTiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1035
Re: Draft Needs
« Reply #11 on: September 15, 2010, 01:50:05 PM »
Are people happy with the order/position I have placed players in? Do people believe my ratings are correct?


OK Did draft up a reply along those lines Stripes but thought your work deserved to be allowed to flower in all it's glory without nitpicking,  :) however if you want

1 Outside Midfielder - agree and we really don't have a goal-kicking mid outside of Morton. Would really like some more fast, big-bodied, skillful ones. DRAFT.
2. Small/defensive forward - don't really agree since we have King, Nason and Hicks for the single spot. NOT A PRIORITY.
3 Ruck - agree we need more than 3 but do we draft another junior or pay very heavily for a second rate senior one. NOT FIXABLE SHORT TERM.
4 Tagger/midfielder - don't know if we need more since it's a spot that Tuck, Connors, Morton, Newman, King and Edwards should shoulder. NOT A PRIORITY.
5 Tall forward - we have Jack as one of the best and just have to wait on the others you mention. NOT A PRIORITY.
6 Small/Mid Defender - as you've noted we have enough and may have too many if we want to develop our young mids off HBF. NOT A PRIORITY.
7 Tall Defender - agree we have enough and like the tall forwards, just have to wait and see. NOT A PRIORITY.
8 Inside Midfielder - think this is a bigger problem than you think. We need 3/4 and you name 4. Take out Tuck to a more defensive role and Foley still doubtful with injury and we are short. We really can't lose with going after these types since the excess can be used as flankers. DRAFT.

The category you don't mention in your summary is the mid-sized Forward where you've listed Collins, White, Nason and Taylor.
I think Nason is more of the small defensive forward while White is the same or more of the outside running midfielder.
I would like to see us get a similar type player to Taylor and this is where players like Mundy and Knights fit into peoples plans. CAN WE TRADE.

So IMO We need to draft inside and outside midfielders who can develop off the flanks depending on their skill set. A taller, marking, mid-sized forward wouldn't hurt but is still a tricky one to draft.
Later picks can be used to future proof for key position and rucks but I would hope we can pick up a more mature midfielder with a late draft or even rookie pick.

Offline Stripes

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4261
Re: Draft Needs
« Reply #12 on: September 16, 2010, 10:58:57 AM »
Are people happy with the order/position I have placed players in? Do people believe my ratings are correct?


OK Did draft up a reply along those lines Stripes but thought your work deserved to be allowed to flower in all it's glory without nitpicking,  :) however if you want

1 Outside Midfielder - agree and we really don't have a goal-kicking mid outside of Morton. Would really like some more fast, big-bodied, skillful ones. DRAFT.
2. Small/defensive forward - don't really agree since we have King, Nason and Hicks for the single spot. NOT A PRIORITY.
3 Ruck - agree we need more than 3 but do we draft another junior or pay very heavily for a second rate senior one. NOT FIXABLE SHORT TERM.
4 Tagger/midfielder - don't know if we need more since it's a spot that Tuck, Connors, Morton, Newman, King and Edwards should shoulder. NOT A PRIORITY.
5 Tall forward - we have Jack as one of the best and just have to wait on the others you mention. NOT A PRIORITY.
6 Small/Mid Defender - as you've noted we have enough and may have too many if we want to develop our young mids off HBF. NOT A PRIORITY.
7 Tall Defender - agree we have enough and like the tall forwards, just have to wait and see. NOT A PRIORITY.
8 Inside Midfielder - think this is a bigger problem than you think. We need 3/4 and you name 4. Take out Tuck to a more defensive role and Foley still doubtful with injury and we are short. We really can't lose with going after these types since the excess can be used as flankers. DRAFT.

The category you don't mention in your summary is the mid-sized Forward where you've listed Collins, White, Nason and Taylor.
I think Nason is more of the small defensive forward while White is the same or more of the outside running midfielder.
I would like to see us get a similar type player to Taylor and this is where players like Mundy and Knights fit into peoples plans. CAN WE TRADE.

So IMO We need to draft inside and outside midfielders who can develop off the flanks depending on their skill set. A taller, marking, mid-sized forward wouldn't hurt but is still a tricky one to draft.
Later picks can be used to future proof for key position and rucks but I would hope we can pick up a more mature midfielder with a late draft or even rookie pick.

May get your wish will Houli...

Maybe recruiting Gaff would fix the midfield problem as he plays inside and out?

A midsized forward is a bit of a waste as long as you have a tall forward who is good at ground level too such as what I hope Griff will be. In reality we are still lacking depth almost everywhere but probably defence and inside mids have been looked at first which is why I have them as least in needing of being drafted for at present.

Stripes

Offline RedanTiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 1035
Re: Draft Needs
« Reply #13 on: September 16, 2010, 12:11:37 PM »

May get your wish will Houli...

Maybe recruiting Gaff would fix the midfield problem as he plays inside and out?

A midsized forward is a bit of a waste as long as you have a tall forward who is good at ground level too such as what I hope Griff will be. In reality we are still lacking depth almost everywhere but probably defence and inside mids have been looked at first which is why I have them as least in needing of being drafted for at present.


Houli - NO. Is not my wish, more of a nightmare.
Never been convinced even before his drafting, nothing he has done since has changed my mind, simply confirmed his deficiencies.

A single recruit will not fix the midfield. THREE more might if they all develop.

Don't think a midsized forward is a waste but maybe Collins, Taylor and Hislop are enough given a midfielder or two will rotate there as well.

Defense? Think we've got enough possibles there and we will get trainee midfielders there next year. Like the midfield, IMO defense needs time playing together.

Interesting to look at a Tambling/Lions trade which may get us one of their kids (unlikely), Clarke (very good last year) or Sherman (good last year), any of which fill another hole.


Offline tdy

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 2407
Re: Draft Needs
« Reply #14 on: September 16, 2010, 10:28:47 PM »
recruit the spine i say.  Ruck, Tall backs, inside mid, then tall forwards