Former Hawthorn recruiter Gary Buckenara's Phantom Draft ... (Herald-Sun)

[Andyy]

So much talk about this draft being shallow/20 deep, but the more I read about the kids the more I think it's at least 30 deep.

I hope we don't regret trading our two 2nd round picks, or even on-trading pick 19. You have no idea what order people will go in after the first handful or so, but if we could pick up two players like Collins and Ah Chee, or even Oliver is he's going to slip that far, it could really have paid dividends long-term. Yarran is such an unknown for me but at least we know what he can do when he's on.

[YellowandBlackBlood]

So much talk about this draft being shallow/20 deep, but the more I read about the kids the more I think it's at least 30 deep.

I hope we don't regret trading our two 2nd round picks, or even on-trading pick 19. You have no idea what order people will go in after the first handful or so, but if we could pick up two players like Collins and Ah Chee, or even Oliver is he's going to slip that far, it could really have paid dividends long-term. Yarran is such an unknown for me but at least we know what he can do when he's on.

And they are not unknown????

[Penelope]

 

[Yeahright]

So much talk about this draft being shallow/20 deep, but the more I read about the kids the more I think it's at least 30 deep.

I hope we don't regret trading our two 2nd round picks, or even on-trading pick 19. You have no idea what order people will go in after the first handful or so, but if we could pick up two players like Collins and Ah Chee, or even Oliver is he's going to slip that far, it could really have paid dividends long-term. Yarran is such an unknown for me but at least we know what he can do when he's on.

And they are not unknown????

Come on mate surely you have it figured out. Whatever the club doesn't do was the right choice. Don't pick up a player? They are good players. But if we did? Well what a waste because they're a dud

[Andyy]

So much talk about this draft being shallow/20 deep, but the more I read about the kids the more I think it's at least 30 deep.

I hope we don't regret trading our two 2nd round picks, or even on-trading pick 19. You have no idea what order people will go in after the first handful or so, but if we could pick up two players like Collins and Ah Chee, or even Oliver is he's going to slip that far, it could really have paid dividends long-term. Yarran is such an unknown for me but at least we know what he can do when he's on.

And they are not unknown????

Yes they are. That's why I said this at the end. Yarran to me in an unknown in that we don't know if he will play to his potential or at what consistency. But at least we know his best is good.

But you have to wonder why we didn't try improving our draft picks more is what I'm saying. Bringing in a bloke or two every year won't be enough to help us climb up the ladder.

[YellowandBlackBlood]

So much talk about this draft being shallow/20 deep, but the more I read about the kids the more I think it's at least 30 deep.

I hope we don't regret trading our two 2nd round picks, or even on-trading pick 19. You have no idea what order people will go in after the first handful or so, but if we could pick up two players like Collins and Ah Chee, or even Oliver is he's going to slip that far, it could really have paid dividends long-term. Yarran is such an unknown for me but at least we know what he can do when he's on.

And they are not unknown????

Yes they are. That's why I said this at the end. Yarran to me in an unknown in that we don't know if he will play to his potential or at what consistency. But at least we know his best is good.

But you have to wonder why we didn't try improving our draft picks more is what I'm saying. Bringing in a bloke or two every year won't be enough to help us climb up the ladder.

Rightly or wrongly the recruiters felt this draft was shallow. As such the kept their 1st pick. Without going for Yarran, they would have kept 31 which they obviously felt was not going to get us a very good player. We also do not know who if anyone they tried to trade during trade week apart form Astbury. Maybe they tried a few players but did not get any bites. Who really knows?
Last year they felt the draft was deeper and that is why we used all our picks up to 77. So they brought in 5 youngsters onto the list. The problem is it takes 3 to 4 years for those guys to blossom unless you are really special (maybe C.Ellis).

[Andyy]

So much talk about this draft being shallow/20 deep, but the more I read about the kids the more I think it's at least 30 deep.

I hope we don't regret trading our two 2nd round picks, or even on-trading pick 19. You have no idea what order people will go in after the first handful or so, but if we could pick up two players like Collins and Ah Chee, or even Oliver is he's going to slip that far, it could really have paid dividends long-term. Yarran is such an unknown for me but at least we know what he can do when he's on.

And they are not unknown????

Yes they are. That's why I said this at the end. Yarran to me in an unknown in that we don't know if he will play to his potential or at what consistency. But at least we know his best is good.

But you have to wonder why we didn't try improving our draft picks more is what I'm saying. Bringing in a bloke or two every year won't be enough to help us climb up the ladder.

Rightly or wrongly the recruiters felt this draft was shallow. As such the kept their 1st pick. Without going for Yarran, they would have kept 31 which they obviously felt was not going to get us a very good player. We also do not know who if anyone they tried to trade during trade week apart form Astbury. Maybe they tried a few players but did not get any bites. Who really knows?
Last year they felt the draft was deeper and that is why we used all our picks up to 77. So they brought in 5 youngsters onto the list. The problem is it takes 3 to 4 years for those guys to blossom unless you are really special (maybe C.Ellis).

Exactly, which is why I wondered aloud if we had tried to improve our picks for this year.

For example, if the draft is 20-odd deep, and people generally nail their 1-20 or so picks these days, could we have traded our 2nd picks from this year and next year for pick 19, and next year's first pick for an early pick this year, and had 3 picks within the top 20?

If players take 3-4 years and we're only drafting 1 decent one per year (consider Ellis, Vlastuin etc) could we not consider trying to get three players in one year so they peak together and help us climb the ladder?

Because I think one player at a time won't be enough to keep us relevant. The Bulldogs have shown us how quickly you can climb the ladder if you get good draft picks, use them wisely, and have the kids all developing and improving together...

[YellowandBlackBlood]

So much talk about this draft being shallow/20 deep, but the more I read about the kids the more I think it's at least 30 deep.

I hope we don't regret trading our two 2nd round picks, or even on-trading pick 19. You have no idea what order people will go in after the first handful or so, but if we could pick up two players like Collins and Ah Chee, or even Oliver is he's going to slip that far, it could really have paid dividends long-term. Yarran is such an unknown for me but at least we know what he can do when he's on.

And they are not unknown????

Yes they are. That's why I said this at the end. Yarran to me in an unknown in that we don't know if he will play to his potential or at what consistency. But at least we know his best is good.

But you have to wonder why we didn't try improving our draft picks more is what I'm saying. Bringing in a bloke or two every year won't be enough to help us climb up the ladder.

Rightly or wrongly the recruiters felt this draft was shallow. As such the kept their 1st pick. Without going for Yarran, they would have kept 31 which they obviously felt was not going to get us a very good player. We also do not know who if anyone they tried to trade during trade week apart form Astbury. Maybe they tried a few players but did not get any bites. Who really knows?
Last year they felt the draft was deeper and that is why we used all our picks up to 77. So they brought in 5 youngsters onto the list. The problem is it takes 3 to 4 years for those guys to blossom unless you are really special (maybe C.Ellis).

Exactly, which is why I wondered aloud if we had tried to improve our picks for this year.

For example, if the draft is 20-odd deep, and people generally nail their 1-20 or so picks these days, could we have traded our 2nd picks from this year and next year for pick 19, and next year's first pick for an early pick this year, and had 3 picks within the top 20?

If players take 3-4 years and we're only drafting 1 decent one per year (consider Ellis, Vlastuin etc) could we not consider trying to get three players in one year so they peak together and help us climb the ladder?

Because I think one player at a time won't be enough to keep us relevant. The Bulldogs have shown us how quickly you can climb the ladder if you get good draft picks, use them wisely, and have the kids all developing and improving together...

I agree with you but have to say the Bulldogs finished quite low to get those good picks. A couple of handy father sons too helped them. Hardwick would never survive such a performance/tank.
The other problem in losing Hardwick is that Choco would probably leave us too. He seems to be our greatest asset currently. Not sure if he stays unless he becomes head coach which TBH I wouldn't mind.

[Penelope]

So much talk about this draft being shallow/20 deep, but the more I read about the kids the more I think it's at least 30 deep.

I hope we don't regret trading our two 2nd round picks, or even on-trading pick 19. You have no idea what order people will go in after the first handful or so, but if we could pick up two players like Collins and Ah Chee, or even Oliver is he's going to slip that far, it could really have paid dividends long-term. Yarran is such an unknown for me but at least we know what he can do when he's on.

And they are not unknown????

Yes they are. That's why I said this at the end. Yarran to me in an unknown in that we don't know if he will play to his potential or at what consistency. But at least we know his best is good.

But you have to wonder why we didn't try improving our draft picks more is what I'm saying. Bringing in a bloke or two every year won't be enough to help us climb up the ladder.

Rightly or wrongly the recruiters felt this draft was shallow. As such the kept their 1st pick. Without going for Yarran, they would have kept 31 which they obviously felt was not going to get us a very good player. We also do not know who if anyone they tried to trade during trade week apart form Astbury. Maybe they tried a few players but did not get any bites. Who really knows?
Last year they felt the draft was deeper and that is why we used all our picks up to 77. So they brought in 5 youngsters onto the list. The problem is it takes 3 to 4 years for those guys to blossom unless you are really special (maybe C.Ellis).

Exactly, which is why I wondered aloud if we had tried to improve our picks for this year.

For example, if the draft is 20-odd deep, and people generally nail their 1-20 or so picks these days, could we have traded our 2nd picks from this year and next year for pick 19, and next year's first pick for an early pick this year, and had 3 picks within the top 20?

If players take 3-4 years and we're only drafting 1 decent one per year (consider Ellis, Vlastuin etc) could we not consider trying to get three players in one year so they peak together and help us climb the ladder?

Because I think one player at a time won't be enough to keep us relevant. The Bulldogs have shown us how quickly you can climb the ladder if you get good draft picks, use them wisely, and have the kids all developing and improving together...

I agree with you but have to say the Bulldogs finished quite low to get those good picks. A couple of handy father sons too helped them. Hardwick would never survive such a performance/tank.
The other problem in losing Hardwick is that Choco would probably leave us too. He seems to be our greatest asset currently. Not sure if he stays unless he becomes head coach which TBH I wouldn't mind.

why would hardwick going mean choco would too?

[YellowandBlackBlood]

I agree with you but have to say the Bulldogs finished quite low to get those good picks. A couple of handy father sons too helped them. Hardwick would never survive such a performance/tank.
The other problem in losing Hardwick is that Choco would probably leave us too. He seems to be our greatest asset currently. Not sure if he stays unless he becomes head coach which TBH I wouldn't mind.

why would hardwick going mean choco would too?

TBH I obviously don't know that for certain. All I can say is that he is a friend of Damien and is part of the Port connection down at Punt road. When clubs get a new coach, they most often bring in their own coaching team to surround them so he may not be part of their plans or he may not want to be part of their plans. So I think at best it is 50:50 he'd stay if Dimma is shown the door. Just an educated hunch, that's all.

[Chuck17]

So much talk about this draft being shallow/20 deep, but the more I read about the kids the more I think it's at least 30 deep.

I hope we don't regret trading our two 2nd round picks, or even on-trading pick 19. You have no idea what order people will go in after the first handful or so, but if we could pick up two players like Collins and Ah Chee, or even Oliver is he's going to slip that far, it could really have paid dividends long-term. Yarran is such an unknown for me but at least we know what he can do when he's on.

And they are not unknown????

Yes they are. That's why I said this at the end. Yarran to me in an unknown in that we don't know if he will play to his potential or at what consistency. But at least we know his best is good.

But you have to wonder why we didn't try improving our draft picks more is what I'm saying. Bringing in a bloke or two every year won't be enough to help us climb up the ladder.

Rightly or wrongly the recruiters felt this draft was shallow. As such the kept their 1st pick. Without going for Yarran, they would have kept 31 which they obviously felt was not going to get us a very good player. We also do not know who if anyone they tried to trade during trade week apart form Astbury. Maybe they tried a few players but did not get any bites. Who really knows?
Last year they felt the draft was deeper and that is why we used all our picks up to 77. So they brought in 5 youngsters onto the list. The problem is it takes 3 to 4 years for those guys to blossom unless you are really special (maybe C.Ellis).

Exactly, which is why I wondered aloud if we had tried to improve our picks for this year.

For example, if the draft is 20-odd deep, and people generally nail their 1-20 or so picks these days, could we have traded our 2nd picks from this year and next year for pick 19, and next year's first pick for an early pick this year, and had 3 picks within the top 20?

If players take 3-4 years and we're only drafting 1 decent one per year (consider Ellis, Vlastuin etc) could we not consider trying to get three players in one year so they peak together and help us climb the ladder?

Because I think one player at a time won't be enough to keep us relevant. The Bulldogs have shown us how quickly you can climb the ladder if you get good draft picks, use them wisely, and have the kids all developing and improving together...

I agree with you but have to say the Bulldogs finished quite low to get those good picks. A couple of handy father sons too helped them. Hardwick would never survive such a performance/tank.
The other problem in losing Hardwick is that Choco would probably leave us too. He seems to be our greatest asset currently. Not sure if he stays unless he becomes head coach which TBH I wouldn't mind.

why would hardwick going mean choco would too?

I assumed it was some gay innuendo

[YellowandBlackBlood]

So much talk about this draft being shallow/20 deep, but the more I read about the kids the more I think it's at least 30 deep.

I hope we don't regret trading our two 2nd round picks, or even on-trading pick 19. You have no idea what order people will go in after the first handful or so, but if we could pick up two players like Collins and Ah Chee, or even Oliver is he's going to slip that far, it could really have paid dividends long-term. Yarran is such an unknown for me but at least we know what he can do when he's on.

And they are not unknown????

Yes they are. That's why I said this at the end. Yarran to me in an unknown in that we don't know if he will play to his potential or at what consistency. But at least we know his best is good.

But you have to wonder why we didn't try improving our draft picks more is what I'm saying. Bringing in a bloke or two every year won't be enough to help us climb up the ladder.

Rightly or wrongly the recruiters felt this draft was shallow. As such the kept their 1st pick. Without going for Yarran, they would have kept 31 which they obviously felt was not going to get us a very good player. We also do not know who if anyone they tried to trade during trade week apart form Astbury. Maybe they tried a few players but did not get any bites. Who really knows?
Last year they felt the draft was deeper and that is why we used all our picks up to 77. So they brought in 5 youngsters onto the list. The problem is it takes 3 to 4 years for those guys to blossom unless you are really special (maybe C.Ellis).

Exactly, which is why I wondered aloud if we had tried to improve our picks for this year.

For example, if the draft is 20-odd deep, and people generally nail their 1-20 or so picks these days, could we have traded our 2nd picks from this year and next year for pick 19, and next year's first pick for an early pick this year, and had 3 picks within the top 20?

If players take 3-4 years and we're only drafting 1 decent one per year (consider Ellis, Vlastuin etc) could we not consider trying to get three players in one year so they peak together and help us climb the ladder?

Because I think one player at a time won't be enough to keep us relevant. The Bulldogs have shown us how quickly you can climb the ladder if you get good draft picks, use them wisely, and have the kids all developing and improving together...

I agree with you but have to say the Bulldogs finished quite low to get those good picks. A couple of handy father sons too helped them. Hardwick would never survive such a performance/tank.
The other problem in losing Hardwick is that Choco would probably leave us too. He seems to be our greatest asset currently. Not sure if he stays unless he becomes head coach which TBH I wouldn't mind.

why would hardwick going mean choco would too?

I assumed it was some gay innuendo

No innuendos here Chucky.

[Penelope]

So much talk about this draft being shallow/20 deep, but the more I read about the kids the more I think it's at least 30 deep.

I hope we don't regret trading our two 2nd round picks, or even on-trading pick 19. You have no idea what order people will go in after the first handful or so, but if we could pick up two players like Collins and Ah Chee, or even Oliver is he's going to slip that far, it could really have paid dividends long-term. Yarran is such an unknown for me but at least we know what he can do when he's on.

And they are not unknown????

Yes they are. That's why I said this at the end. Yarran to me in an unknown in that we don't know if he will play to his potential or at what consistency. But at least we know his best is good.

But you have to wonder why we didn't try improving our draft picks more is what I'm saying. Bringing in a bloke or two every year won't be enough to help us climb up the ladder.

Rightly or wrongly the recruiters felt this draft was shallow. As such the kept their 1st pick. Without going for Yarran, they would have kept 31 which they obviously felt was not going to get us a very good player. We also do not know who if anyone they tried to trade during trade week apart form Astbury. Maybe they tried a few players but did not get any bites. Who really knows?
Last year they felt the draft was deeper and that is why we used all our picks up to 77. So they brought in 5 youngsters onto the list. The problem is it takes 3 to 4 years for those guys to blossom unless you are really special (maybe C.Ellis).

Exactly, which is why I wondered aloud if we had tried to improve our picks for this year.

For example, if the draft is 20-odd deep, and people generally nail their 1-20 or so picks these days, could we have traded our 2nd picks from this year and next year for pick 19, and next year's first pick for an early pick this year, and had 3 picks within the top 20?

If players take 3-4 years and we're only drafting 1 decent one per year (consider Ellis, Vlastuin etc) could we not consider trying to get three players in one year so they peak together and help us climb the ladder?

Because I think one player at a time won't be enough to keep us relevant. The Bulldogs have shown us how quickly you can climb the ladder if you get good draft picks, use them wisely, and have the kids all developing and improving together...

I agree with you but have to say the Bulldogs finished quite low to get those good picks. A couple of handy father sons too helped them. Hardwick would never survive such a performance/tank.
The other problem in losing Hardwick is that Choco would probably leave us too. He seems to be our greatest asset currently. Not sure if he stays unless he becomes head coach which TBH I wouldn't mind.

why would hardwick going mean choco would too?

I assumed it was some gay innuendo

No innuendos here Chucky.

if it's innuendo its pretty gay isnt it?

[YellowandBlackBlood]

So much talk about this draft being shallow/20 deep, but the more I read about the kids the more I think it's at least 30 deep.

I hope we don't regret trading our two 2nd round picks, or even on-trading pick 19. You have no idea what order people will go in after the first handful or so, but if we could pick up two players like Collins and Ah Chee, or even Oliver is he's going to slip that far, it could really have paid dividends long-term. Yarran is such an unknown for me but at least we know what he can do when he's on.

And they are not unknown????

Yes they are. That's why I said this at the end. Yarran to me in an unknown in that we don't know if he will play to his potential or at what consistency. But at least we know his best is good.

But you have to wonder why we didn't try improving our draft picks more is what I'm saying. Bringing in a bloke or two every year won't be enough to help us climb up the ladder.

Rightly or wrongly the recruiters felt this draft was shallow. As such the kept their 1st pick. Without going for Yarran, they would have kept 31 which they obviously felt was not going to get us a very good player. We also do not know who if anyone they tried to trade during trade week apart form Astbury. Maybe they tried a few players but did not get any bites. Who really knows?
Last year they felt the draft was deeper and that is why we used all our picks up to 77. So they brought in 5 youngsters onto the list. The problem is it takes 3 to 4 years for those guys to blossom unless you are really special (maybe C.Ellis).

Exactly, which is why I wondered aloud if we had tried to improve our picks for this year.

For example, if the draft is 20-odd deep, and people generally nail their 1-20 or so picks these days, could we have traded our 2nd picks from this year and next year for pick 19, and next year's first pick for an early pick this year, and had 3 picks within the top 20?

If players take 3-4 years and we're only drafting 1 decent one per year (consider Ellis, Vlastuin etc) could we not consider trying to get three players in one year so they peak together and help us climb the ladder?

Because I think one player at a time won't be enough to keep us relevant. The Bulldogs have shown us how quickly you can climb the ladder if you get good draft picks, use them wisely, and have the kids all developing and improving together...

I agree with you but have to say the Bulldogs finished quite low to get those good picks. A couple of handy father sons too helped them. Hardwick would never survive such a performance/tank.
The other problem in losing Hardwick is that Choco would probably leave us too. He seems to be our greatest asset currently. Not sure if he stays unless he becomes head coach which TBH I wouldn't mind.

why would hardwick going mean choco would too?

I assumed it was some gay innuendo

No innuendos here Chucky.

if it's innuendo its pretty gay isnt it?

I guess you're right. Just like catching a cold. I opened the window and influenza.

[Penelope]

So much talk about this draft being shallow/20 deep, but the more I read about the kids the more I think it's at least 30 deep.

I hope we don't regret trading our two 2nd round picks, or even on-trading pick 19. You have no idea what order people will go in after the first handful or so, but if we could pick up two players like Collins and Ah Chee, or even Oliver is he's going to slip that far, it could really have paid dividends long-term. Yarran is such an unknown for me but at least we know what he can do when he's on.

And they are not unknown????

Yes they are. That's why I said this at the end. Yarran to me in an unknown in that we don't know if he will play to his potential or at what consistency. But at least we know his best is good.

But you have to wonder why we didn't try improving our draft picks more is what I'm saying. Bringing in a bloke or two every year won't be enough to help us climb up the ladder.

Rightly or wrongly the recruiters felt this draft was shallow. As such the kept their 1st pick. Without going for Yarran, they would have kept 31 which they obviously felt was not going to get us a very good player. We also do not know who if anyone they tried to trade during trade week apart form Astbury. Maybe they tried a few players but did not get any bites. Who really knows?
Last year they felt the draft was deeper and that is why we used all our picks up to 77. So they brought in 5 youngsters onto the list. The problem is it takes 3 to 4 years for those guys to blossom unless you are really special (maybe C.Ellis).

Exactly, which is why I wondered aloud if we had tried to improve our picks for this year.

For example, if the draft is 20-odd deep, and people generally nail their 1-20 or so picks these days, could we have traded our 2nd picks from this year and next year for pick 19, and next year's first pick for an early pick this year, and had 3 picks within the top 20?

If players take 3-4 years and we're only drafting 1 decent one per year (consider Ellis, Vlastuin etc) could we not consider trying to get three players in one year so they peak together and help us climb the ladder?

Because I think one player at a time won't be enough to keep us relevant. The Bulldogs have shown us how quickly you can climb the ladder if you get good draft picks, use them wisely, and have the kids all developing and improving together...

I agree with you but have to say the Bulldogs finished quite low to get those good picks. A couple of handy father sons too helped them. Hardwick would never survive such a performance/tank.
The other problem in losing Hardwick is that Choco would probably leave us too. He seems to be our greatest asset currently. Not sure if he stays unless he becomes head coach which TBH I wouldn't mind.

why would hardwick going mean choco would too?

I assumed it was some gay innuendo

No innuendos here Chucky.

if it's innuendo its pretty gay isnt it?

I guess you're right. Just like catching a cold. I opened the window and influenza.

which is nothing to sneeze at