RWO Draft Thread

[Lucky Knickers]

Originally posted by SimonH
Unless Sydney know something that I don't, there's no doubt that he can play.

Re Grima - maybe he's a d**khead?

As for kids moving. They nominate for the draft knowing there is a 1 in 8 chance of moving interstate. Our club has a great culture and clearly our player welfare structure is working in that we haven't had players citing homesickness as a reason for leaving.

Seriously - these kids have been drafted by the current Premiers with a club culture and ethos the envy of the competition - they will be over the moon and as the vast majority of our list know and understand what it is to relocate - there will be plenty of tea and sympathy from the current players.

[Sanecow]

Originally posted by singaporeswan
these kids have been drafted by last years' Premiers

And next year's as well, don't forget.

[liz]

Originally posted by Charlie
The logic being that a bottom-age player would benefit more from another year of TAC Cup than trying their luck on a rookie list.

Also that senior listed players are guaranteed at least two years on the list, whereas that guarantee doesn't exist for rookie list players.

Would also argue that there is no point in picking a skinny, underdeveloped 17yo unless you're prepared to give them three years.

The rookie list probably wasn't established for these long term prospects - more for slightly older (or at least 18yos) whose physique isn't so much the issue but who have other question marks over them. A year training with the team will then give the club a chance to see how important these question marks are.

[bigswan]

There are still plenty of potential KPP's and defenders left in the pool. Kelleher, Toovey, Colbert, Flint, Haskett, Ainger, Reddan, Taggart, to name a few.

If they are rookie-listed you give them time to settle into the system and give them a chance to build up.

By the way Laidlaw may be called a midfielder but he is 186 cm tall.

[SimonH]

A good thing that I'd missed about Brabazon is that he's older than your average draftee-- turns 19 on Boxing Day.

Even though he's still light-as, this is good news as you can't force kids to put on muscle mass while they're still growing upwards and their hormones are going crazy. No way that the club will wait until 2009 (when he'll be 22) to decide whether to play him-- we'll know if he's got the goods before then.

Looked at in isolation, I can see where these 3 kids fit into Sydney's long-term plans. I just can't see where these 3 kids, Schmidt, Moore, Malceski, McVeigh, and Willoughby fit into Sydney's long-term plans, unless Bolton, Kirk, Monty, Schneider, Crouch, Bevan and Fosdike are all struck down with injury or depart en masse. Not to mention Stefan Garrubba's chances of breaking into the senior list.

Regardless of how Sydney goes next year, at the end of 2006 something's going to have to give. Unless there are multiple injuries (or gross form loss) to those in the senior list, I wonder about the future of Schmidt and Willoughby. Which is a worry as they're both relatively high draft picks by Sydney's standards (29 and 16) and by all reports have done everything that could be expected of 'em, in their time here so far. Certainly on what we've seen to this point, it would be madness to dump Moore or Malceski (and clubs would be lined up down the Hume Hwy to pick up McVeigh if we didn't give him enough love).

Of course anybody can be dropped and re-drafted, but the only likely retiree at the end of '06 is Paul Williams (albeit there'll likely be a 2nd spot created by the axing of Spriggs). Again in '07 the only likely retiree will be MO'L (trusting Kirk, BBBH and Leo Barry should have at least a year or two more than that in 'em). No club can last for long turning over just 1 or 2 players a year.

[Charlie]

Williams and Spriggs will depart next year. It's a good bet that one of Doyle or Erickson will go, too.

But I agree, Simon (I seem to say that a fair bit). There are going to be midfielders departing at the end of next year that, in isolation, we would like to keep.

It won't be any of Kirk, Bolton, Crouch, Buchanan, Ablett or Dempster. You would think also that Malceski and Moore won't go anywhere. But I would expect that at least one, probably two of McVeigh, Mathews, Willoughby, Schneider, Fosdike, Schmidt and Bevan will seek greener pastures for 2007. My wild guess would be McVeigh and one of Mathews or Fosdike.

My rationale for McVeigh is that he shapes as one who will be caught between those that have established themselves in the team - Monty, Ablett, Schneider and Dempster - and those that are pushing hard to get in (Malceski, Moore, Willoughby, Schmidt). Bevan is the other one in this position, but he seems to be ahead of McVeigh.

As for Fosdike or Mathews - well, I expect one of the more mature midfielders will get squeezed out of the best 22 this year (unless injuries are a factor). If it's one of these two (and they strike me as the most likely candidates), they are both at an age where the time to seek another club is now.

Both McVeigh and one of those two would attract a top 30 draft pick... meaning that we'll either be in the market for more disaffected players in their early 20s, or we'll actually be a major player in the draft for the first time since 1998.

[Lucky Knickers]

I hope you're not right Charlie - IMO Fosdike is an incredible footballer. I would hate to see him go and same with Matthews.

[SimonH]

While (obviously) not all of yr predictions will come true, footy does tend to blindside you a bit, and when the end comes it comes fast, e.g. at the start of the year you could have got pretty long odds on Schauble getting dumped from the team, never to return, by round 10 or so. Schwatta's mid-week pronouncement "I'm jack of this; see ya" also leaps to mind.

Predicting the future with the notoriously hot-and-cold Fossie is a tough business, but I reckon that for at least the first half of 2006 he'll continue that GF afterglow and play good footy. BMathews would struggle to make my best 22 (and certainly wouldn't make my best 18) now, but the club has shown great loyalty to him and (unless a new 'leadership group' is announced in 2006 and he ain't in it) will continue to do so. Fossie should make a top 30 trade (just), but I would be shocked if Mathews had any substantial trade value at all. Still, I would have given you silly odds on Dylan Addison getting picked at #27 while both Ryan Jackson and Tom Rischbieth missed out, so what do I know?

The main area on which you'll get disagreement from me is that I reckon you might be underselling the value of McVeigh. While he has a couple of relatively minor things (mainly a few kilos and concentrating for 120 minutes) to iron out, he is a class act. Sydney started looking like a different side when Paul Williams returned mid-year, particularly in the all-important area of delivery into the forward line; and McVeigh has got a Williams-style role written all over him. Unless he completely lost his way or got a chronic injury in 2006, I reckon he would still have as much to offer the meat-market as he did when he was draft picked at #5. Even granting Sydney's recent bad habit of underselling players who have got 100+ games left in them, there is no way a sane club would part company with him for less than a first-round pick.

[chammond]

Geez, talk about not spoiling a good story for the facts.

How did we go from recruiting three midfielders to bashing Mathews and Fosdike? . . . quite amazing!

I agree that it will be really interesting to see how Willoughby and Schmidt perform this year.

Didn't understand the rest of the arguments.

[Charlie]

Originally posted by chammond


How did we go from recruiting three midfielders to bashing Mathews and Fosdike? . . . quite amazing!

That's a sweeping misrepresentation. If you'd bothered to read my post correctly, you'd know that I said:

There are going to be midfielders departing at the end of next year that, in isolation, we would like to keep.

Note, 'we would like to keep'. Does that amount to 'bashing Mathews and Fosdike'? I think not. I simply think they are amongst the most likely midfielders to be squeezed out, as we get to the point where the youngsters must either be found a spot or let go. Again, you'd know that if you bothered to read my post correctly.

[Nico]

I'm off McVeigh. He was in the 2's for most of the 2nd half of 2005.

Just don't think he fits out style. Doesn't seem to like the close in contests, is a bit slow and just doesn't find it enough. Question on his stamina.

Also don't think Bevan will hold his spot unless he reinvents himself.

[Plugger46]

Originally posted by Nico
I'm off McVeigh. He was in the 2's for most of the 2nd half of 2005.

Just don't think he fits out style. Doesn't seem to like the close in contests, is a bit slow and just doesn't find it enough. Question on his stamina.

I certainly have my doubts about him, however I think he deserves another go.

[liz]

Originally posted by Nico
I'm off McVeigh. He was in the 2's for most of the 2nd half of 2005.

Just don't think he fits out style. Doesn't seem to like the close in contests, is a bit slow and just doesn't find it enough. Question on his stamina.

Also don't think Bevan will hold his spot unless he reinvents himself.

A year ago Ablett was a dud according to many on this site, while others were still questioning Buchanan's value, notwithstanding a couple of smart cameos.

Questioning his stamina, of all things, seems strange, given that until this year's draft camp he held the record for both the beep test and the 3km time trial.

He is still pretty young and the majority of young players take their time to adjust to AFL level. The Chris Judd's of this world are the exception, not the rule.

[DST]

Originally posted by Nico
I'm off McVeigh. He was in the 2's for most of the 2nd half of 2005.

Just don't think he fits out style. Doesn't seem to like the close in contests, is a bit slow and just doesn't find it enough. Question on his stamina.

Also don't think Bevan will hold his spot unless he reinvents himself.

He may not "fit" our style at present but if you look at the 3 rule changes and 7 rule interpretation changes announced by the AFL on the weekend, the future of the game has McVeigh written all over it.

Players like Mcveigh will excel with the quick movement of the ball and space that the rule changes will deliver. Miniminal body contact, gut busting running up and down the field and a premium on blokes who can deliver the ball by hand and foot well.

I am not too sure why you question his staminia, considering his natural running capacity?

DST

[bigswan]

Anyone who plays in a premiership team doesn't get cast off for two untried youngsters.