Not sure how I feel about picking up Edwards. On the plus he plays above his height and is a good kick for goal, and certainly helps fill the gaping mid-sized forward role in the team, at least as a stop gap until if/when O'Hanlon steps up. On the down side he can be inconsistent though certainly has heaps more talent than most players that are going to get drafted in the 70s. Edwards and Knights both a bit speculative in some respects, with Edwards probably the more known quantity in the short term and knights having more potential upside in the long term. Both came cheap (effectively from picks at the bum end of the draft), fill needs, and more likely than not improve the list. Not quantum leaps forward but that's what the top end of the draft is for.
here here well said.
just on ohanlon. if hes the only young medium sized forward we have wouldnt you say we have all of our long term medium forward eggs in one basket and need to get another on the list.especially as ohanlon is a very late pick psd and like most 18 yr olds taken this late dont make it.
i have to say we are heading in the right direction despite craig cameron and his ineptness.
we are screaming out for mids at least 3 or 4 genuine ones. we are screaming out for two ruckmen one experienced one a kid we are lacking long term sml/med forwards
and we are at least 3 kpds shyof what is needed yet we may go into the nd useing just 3 nd picks. we need to balance out the list but it never ever seems to happen with this bloke in charge.
I disagree with you Claw, how many players do you think we can put on the field at one time? We are not "screaming out" for all these players. We have most of them , just need to develop them to the next stage. Back up ruckman seems to be the one place we seem to be out but Im sure they have a plan in place for this. This draft ( the four picks inside 50) will see the big turnover nearly complete. Offcourse there will be failures to come on etc but I dont think we are as far off as you think it is.
next yr we will actually put on 44.
look at our senior side look at what we go with and then mirror it.
pretty simple really. you need the numbers to cater to long term development structure and depth.
3 tall defenders
2kpf, 1 fror/ruck
1 ruckman
14 mids/flankers
1/ utility or spare depending on what the 21 is lacking in quality or experience. could be a mid. usually a a ruckman as some side go 3 tall for and 2 rucks.
this is how most sides structure up and it is what we try to do.
i agree we need to develop but to have smooth transition when injury hits or delistings happen or players retire list management is simply about numbers, we dont have enough in the right areas age goups we dont a good spread of age for each position and quality we dont have enough spread thru the team and too many on the list are below standard.
