-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
2024 Draft Thread
- Thread starter Mr T.
- Start date
Smillie has bust potential, Draper has below average kicking and could go the same way. Tauru is now 194cm and could feasibly move forward but failing that he will most certainly find a home in defence. I think the best path forward is to ensure we get core players with 1 & 6, no unnecessary risks with oversized mids and ones with kicking question marks.
Bully if Langford is there at 6 I'm taking him then Tauru next best. Not super hyped about Armstrong to reckon he will slide. The talls available at our later picks I see better value ,Shanahan, Faull, Whitlock and there's couple of SA boys not getting much attention I don't mind .
Charlie West
State: South Australia
State League Club: Woodville-West Torrens
Community Club: Henley
Date of Birth: 01/02/2006
Height: 194cm
Charlie Nicholls
State: South Australia
State League Club: Central District
Community Club: Mintaro Manoora
Date of Birth: 08/06/2006
Height: 197cm
Not much separating Armstrong & Faull, I think there's every chance Faull becomes the better of the two. Armstrong the better set shot but Faull way more mobile and looks the more damaging in general play.
Mraz is another tall we could look at, probably undersold due to injury.
Shanahan will be better than Armstrong,Faull and Whitlock.
Shanahan is an interesting case & i'm not anti about his prospects but he's more Jack Gunston than true power forward and I reckon the role he plays is very similar to Bauer. The first tall I would call is Jack Whitlock, I think he's safer than the others because he looks like a handy ruck and is probably the best set shot behind Armstrong.
Hmmm will there be more talk on the guys we select or on the guys we don't select????
Disagree Bully in the position we are in we can’t miss out on talent for the sake of ticking of a spread sheet , In contradiction to my argument I have no doubt we will be adding talls with our picks this draft , we will have our list of quality in order and will take next available best at each pick .
Each team has basically 2/3rds midsize to small so we need more of those types on our list then talls , draft history is littered with clubs taking the highly fancied tall over the safer bet mid and ending up missing out on a quality long term players , yes we need talls but let’s not waste quality picks on a player just because they are tall .
don’t get me wrong I’d love another young Tom or Jack , however unless we rate them higher then another style of player at the same pick it’s silly to take them just because of the position they play .
Every draft puts up arguments for each case , however the amount of flop talls like Hansen and Gumbleton when those clubs could have got Boak or Selwood simply makes me think always go best available.
Again I love a big gun key forward , however how many Premiership teams in recent years have had Superstar key forwards ? No doubt they still have their importance in team structures , however the game is no longer about the key forward , star midfielders are a must
Last edited:
I get Coleman-Jones vibes with Whitlock.Cumbersome and clunky whereas Shanahan reminds me of Jack Riewoldt.Strong mark,lovely kick and knows where the goals are.Lot to like.
But this is the failed approach that has led the club into a myriad of poor choices with speculative talls. It's easy to say let's just grab Berry & Hotton because they have a desirable skill set but there's also two gaping holes up forward and a long list of battered bodies looking to establish themselves. I can guarantee with 100% certainty there will be medium forwards in the next draft, I can't say with any confidence there will be depth with key position players. This is a great draft to sort out the spine, failure to capitalise simply forces our hand with even more speculative types. If we're playing the odds then we take one ruck/forward & one 195cm type, that would be at a bare minimum.
I take your point about our different use of “rookies”.
About Gray and particularly Lefau, believe we have something exceptional there.
When they get back on the field I reckon we will see 100+ game careers from both.
The main problem I have with Shanahan is he doesn't like to wrestle, I think you need that at the highest level, one can get by with craftiness as we've seen with Jack Gunston but I don't consider Shanahan to be a player you can build a forward line around. He's not quite in Jack Riewoldt territory either, he's not an aerialist for starters, he is smart however so I wouldn't be surprised to see him carve out an AFL career. I just don't think he's the best fit for Richmond when stacked up against all the other options.
I have watched quite a bit of Whitlock and I don’t see CCJ at all. He is actually very agile and good below his knees.
?
There will be some great top end talent in 2025, a bottom three finish would lock in another star to our list, a couple of promising talls as well as early # 1 favorite Dyson Sharp, here are the projected standouts for 2025:
www.afl.com.au
Family ties, Academy guns loom large in 2025 AFL Academy squad
The Marsh AFL National Academy Boys squad has been revealed, with some familiar names among the 28 players selected
www.afl.com.au
Sorry Bully but I dont think you get what I’m saying , if Berry , Hotton , whoever are the best available, then pick them , same if we have Armstrong or Faull as the best available at whatever pick then pick them , I’m not after medium forwards I’m after best available and the consensus is that this is a midfielders draft and that to me is a bonus as you don’t win Premierships without gun mids and we have landed a gluttony of high picks to pick the eyes out of the top shelf mids
We have gaping holes everywhere, I think your idea of fixing our spine in one draft where there is only 2 talls spoke of as being top 10 picks and that’s still just speculative , it’s unlikely but possible there will be only one KPP which to me says this bunch of talls have question marks ( as all players do).
I think the idea of selecting 2 or 3 talls , so we are playing the percentage is ridiculous , let’s waste 2 picks when we could have got 2 very good players who play in different positions, again we are shithouse , we have no depth in any area , yep would love to be adding a gun key back and forward but it’s crazy to take a risk on a player , particularly a tall who has questions about their physicality or competitiveness , this is not even taking into consideration basic skills and athletic ability, the draft has been littered with junior talls who were star at junior level where their competiveness was no shown up , they have then become AFL failures .
Appreciate your thoughts Bully I just disagree on this , I’m with Blair best available all the way
Sorry the reason the talls we selected that have failed is simply because they are no good , we’ve had quite a few good talls too
The interesting thing for me in that list Caeser is that it includes 28 player and 8 of them are tied to either NSW or Queensland academies.There will be some great top end talent in 2025, a bottom three finish would lock in another star to our list, a couple of promising talls as well as early # 1 favorite Dyson Sharp, here are the projected standouts for 2025:
Family ties, Academy guns loom large in 2025 AFL Academy squad
The Marsh AFL National Academy Boys squad has been revealed, with some familiar names among the 28 players selected
