Hawks probably wanted someone who can play key position because they took a midfielder at 7 and a ruckman, they got a bit of everything. Tambling is an extreme talent but a bit inconsistent as well.
Swans select at 31
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Jeffers1984
I don't know whats worse, Hawthorn passing on tambling or us drafting spriggs.....Once was, now elsewhereComment
-
Originally posted by Foreign Legion
Looks like Shaw and Clarke will survive - straight onto the rookie list then.
If you look at it dispassionately (bloody hard) I rekcon the Swans have decided that with such crappy picks - 31 the first - then ANY player is a gamble after that.
At least with Spriggs and James we know what we are getting.
Do we have a pick available in the PSD?Comment
-
Looks like the Swans did well at the draft . . . some smart planning by the looks of it:
Spriggs ready to step into the midfield straight away, and a fat-arsed ball-winner in the bank for the future. That pretty much meets our main needs.
Not sure about Heath James, but the reality is that by pick 61 he was probably the stand-out, regardless of his history.
I wonder who Thewlis has upset??Comment
-
Lets look at the positive aspect of the draft - it sounds like Moore can really play. Tough, Skilled midfielder - just what we lack at the moment.
I would love to see one of our draft picks play a Senior game in their first year - Moore could be the one.Comment
-
Originally posted by dendol
How does the rookie draft work? How are you so sure Shaw and Clarke will be on our rookie list?Once was, now elsewhereComment
-
Robbie, I agree wholeheartedly with you.
Moore's profile looks good. All Australian and has a dip, but Spriggs, fair dinkum what a waste. I can't work out James either. They stopped playing him after a few rounds last season, so you would think he didn't fit into their plans on an assault on the flag.
Just doesn't figure and they haven't added any genuine depth to the list, which was a real problem when it counted in 2004.
All I can say is that Heath must be the best bloke on earth.
We must be really banking on getting a gun group of rookies. Lets hope there are a couple of gems in there.Comment
-
Originally posted by j s
No NSW or ACT boys selected by anyone!Once was, now elsewhereComment
-
Ok - we went for an AFL-ready centreman, a KPP that we're familiar with and a semi-experienced wingman. The philosophy is fairly obvious - they think they're close to a flag and are rolling the dice.We hate Anthony Rocca
We hate Shannon Grant too
We hate scumbag Gaspar
But Leo WE LOVE YOU!Comment
-
Originally posted by j s
The pre-season draft is ONLY for recycled players I think!We hate Anthony Rocca
We hate Shannon Grant too
We hate scumbag Gaspar
But Leo WE LOVE YOU!Comment
-
Originally posted by j s
Sydney gets to nominate two local rookies BEFORE the draft. They count as our LAST two picks but get made first.
Brisbane has a similar opportunity
What's more, in theory they are in addition to our normal rookie quota of 6, although I don't think the Swans have ever taken advantage of this.
So the club could choose all three of the "rated" NSW boys plus add another 5 players to the rookie list (with Potter already retained). There were some decently rated players not picked in the main draft, including Grundy who apparently the Swans have been keeping an eye on for a few years and is a KPP possibility.Last edited by liz; 20 November 2004, 10:15 AM.Comment
Comment