in going back some pages i have some sympathy for als position.
yes we had to find a mature ruckman to help maric. i was one who argued pretty loudly, why hampson with his 7 yr record????? hampson with the obvious deficiencies that we were expecting to fix.
al is right when he says we had to target a mature ruckman.
it doesnt matter where we take players nd, psd , f/a, trade, rookie draft, if you take duds you will go nowhere.
it doesnt matter what the pick in the nd is, if you use it poorly it is worthless. so yes i have some sympathy for what al is trying to say.
the thing is for me anyway and i could be wrong and al could be right, but based on performance, based on strengths, based on age and maturity, based on weaknesses, and based on other things what pick you give up for a player is important.
just for arguments sake lets say 100 kids get taken and only 60 become decent players, common sense says with all the information available to us it is better have a pick in the top 60 rather than later. and its this simple point that gets lost in this sort of debate. so when we talk pick 32 for a 26yo unproven player with many deficiencies with a very poor performance record id say it is very important to weigh up your options and rate the value of what your giving up.
imo and that is all it is, but based on the available information shaun hampson was never ever worth giving up a second round pick for. despite the fact we had a need of sorts to take a player of his type.
imo in getting hampson we further blundered by keeping big o and not using his rookie spot on a junior ruckman.if hampson was the answer there was no need for orren to be taking up a spot on our list.
