Benny Gale on KB's show Wed 14/10/09

[Judge Roughneck]

10 picks in national draft?

3, 19, 35, 44, 51,

67, 72, 83, ?, ?

It is a worry 6 of our 10 picks are after 50 

[1965]

10 picks in national draft?

3, 19, 35, 44, 51,

67, 72, 83, ?, ?

It is a worry 6 of our 10 picks are after 50 

try again   

[Stripes]

10 picks in national draft?

3, 19, 35, 44, 51,

67, 72, 83, ?, ?

It is a worry 6 of our 10 picks are after 50 

A couple of those will be filled by rookie elevations while another one or two will be PSD picks. Another is very likely to go to an 'older' established VFL player. So all in all we won't be using many choices beyond pick 51 in the National Draft.

[torch]

why do they want to play Post in the back line?

Post should be played in the forward line!

 

[mightytiges]

Postie can play at either end.

what is the address of the new Craigieburn Training Ground?

 

Corner of Grand Boulevard and Windrock Ave IIRC.

Maybe Tucky is working on the theory that the gym visibility worked for him 5 years ago so he's trying it again!

I thought that was Cogs?

Nah it was Tucky. Plough was tossing up who to cut out of Tuck and Tim Fleming and he saw Tucky working hard in the gym so Tucky got the nod and Fleming was delisted.

[mightytiges]

10 picks in national draft?

3, 19, 35, 44, 51,

67, 72, 83, ?, ?

It is a worry 6 of our 10 picks are after 50 

A couple of those will be filled by rookie elevations while another one or two will be PSD picks. Another is very likely to go to an 'older' established VFL player. So all in all we won't be using many choices beyond pick 51 in the National Draft.

The article says pick 72 will be our last National Draft pick so it's 3 picks after 50 out of the 7. Picks 67 and 72 may come forward as well if others clubs don't go past the 3rd or 4th rounds of the draft. We won't know that until the 2nd list lodgement.

9 senior spots freed: Johnson, Brown, Cogs, Schulz, Raines, JON, Hughes, Petts, Patto. Bowden (vet) was outside the senior list.

ND: 3, 19, 35, 44, 51, 67, 72.
PSD: 2
Nahas promoted.

If Polak and Putt are gone as well then there's two more senior spots to fill. Another rookie elevation (Browne?) as Stripes suggested, a 2nd PSD pick, or even Richo as a vet can be moved back inside the senior list.

[WilliamPowell]

Could be 3 rookie promotions 

Will know by the 30/10/09

[Ramps]

Could be 3 rookie promotions 

Will know by the 30/10/09

What is the status of Gourdis? Where is he? Anyone see any chance at all for him to make it?

[mightytiges]

Could be 3 rookie promotions 

Will know by the 30/10/09

Forgot to reply to this post WP.

I'm not sure why we would promote three  of our rookies when there aren't that many that deserve promotion. Nahas the only one who possibly does. Does the 3rd include Polly if he's made a mature rookie?

In fact there's an argument not to promote any of them before the final list lodgements as we'll be able to promote one just prior to round 1 given we have only one player (Richo) on the veteran list.

[TigerLand]

MT surely you'd reward Nahas with promotion he was in our top 10 players last season, can't justify half the list if you don't promote Robbie.

[WilliamPowell]

Could be 3 rookie promotions 

Will know by the 30/10/09

Forgot to reply to this post WP.

I'm not sure why we would promote three  of our rookies when there aren't that many that deserve promotion. Nahas the only one who possibly does. Does the 3rd include Polly if he's made a mature rookie?

In fact there's an argument not to promote any of them before the final list lodgements as we'll be able to promote one just prior to round 1 given we have only one player (Richo) on the veteran list.

I am thinking there will 2 definites and possibly a 3rd. And no I'm not including Polly - can't promote him off the rookie list when he isn't on it. 
 
I am working to get Chutney on the sauce to get more info 

[Smokey]

I'll have a stab - Nahas, Silvester and possibly Browne.

[mightytiges]

MT surely you'd reward Nahas with promotion he was in our top 10 players last season, can't justify half the list if you don't promote Robbie.[/b]

As promising as Robbie was this year, that bit in bold is more a reflection on the state of our list and the pathetic effort from most of our players this year than Robbie sadly.

I believe Robbie will be promoted shortly but what I was saying is the Club could also keep him on as a rookie (pay him more as a reward for 2009 - new rule?) and keep a senior list spot open at the draft to pick up another kid say. As a rookie Robbie could still play seniors in 2010 as our one allowed promoted rookie prior to round 1 and if he backs up and improves on 2009 (opposition clubs will do their homework on him over summer) then promote him to the senior list for 2011. Robbie was a bright spot on a disaster of the year but there's still some question marks on him for mine. Am I being harsh on him .... yep probably ..... but we need to lift our demands from our players at Punt Rd. If we learn anything from recent years it is we need our players to perform over multiple years before we treat them as having made it at AFL level.

[mightytiges]

I'll have a stab - Nahas, Silvester and possibly Browne.

I must admit I'll be absolutely stunned if Silvester survives the cut. A top VFL defender but that's it. Too slow for AFL footy.

I'd rather take the chance on a new rookie. Sure this newbie could equally fail but there's the odd chance we may find some kid who is a late developer. Despite the ever increasingly sophisticated recruiting methods there are still a few diamonds in the rough picked up late in the National draft or even in the rookie draft if a Club has done it's homework on all these kids. Going with a kid with a 1% chance is still better than hanging onto an existing player who you know has no chance.

As for Browne - his size and ruck potential despite being very raw is something to work with but that should be as a rookie. His kicking is the major question mark on him.

From a football ability and performance point of view, Nahas is our only rookie who has earnt the chance for promotion. The only reason I can fathom for promoting any other rookie is the Club is again trying to "save" money which is at odds to March's claim that we are boosting footy dept. expenditure by $500k. If we were to again to re-sign players for only financial reasons (to a 1 year deal over choosing a new draftee on a 2-year deal) then we'll be just repeating the same list management mistakes of the past.

[WilliamPowell]

I'll have a stab - Nahas, Silvester and possibly Browne.

Close but no cigar - right names wrong order

I must admit I'll be absolutely stunned if Silvester survives the cut. A top VFL defender but that's it. Too slow for AFL footy.

I am not saying he should stay I am not saying he should go. Just think with this new rookie rule he has more chance of staying. On promotion to the senior list ..... again just my opinion but I wouldn't be surprised if he gets promoted. I actually think he is up to AFL standard and a lot quicker than people think. If you have a look at some really early games of Will Thursfield you'd question whether he was ever going to make it too, look at him now 

And besides if Silvestor does get promoted it will be great for ...............the likes of Jordie McMahon because it mean there's another whipping boy for the masses, might take the fog lights of Jordie for 3 minutes 

From a football ability and performance point of view, Nahas is our only rookie who has earnt the chance for promotion. The only reason I can fathom for promoting any other rookie is the Club is again trying to "save" money which is at odds to March's claim that we are boosting footy dept. expenditure by $500k. If we were to again to re-sign players for only financial reasons (to a 1 year deal over choosing a new draftee on a 2-year deal) then we'll be just repeating the same list management mistakes of the past.

MT you are assuming though that the promoted rookie is only getting one year deals - what if they are to get 2 years? The financial argument becomes redundant

I look at it this way, if the draft talent pool is so shallow this year, which is the better option? Promoting a rookie eg Nahas who has shown he can play at AFL but needs more development or using pick 80 odd on a kid that is more likely not to succeed than to succeed. Remembering that come the end of 2010 you maybe in the position to be able to trade the promoted rookie to another club for a earlier draft pick than number 80. If someone like Nahas improves on his 2009 he will worth more alot more to us in 2010 come trade time