Correct Jack.
Open Question - How much impact would he have if playing for the losing team? Instead of the all conquering Sandringham.
-
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
Correct Jack.
Open Question - How much impact would he have if playing for the losing team? Instead of the all conquering Sandringham.
A PRE dollar bet Jack W goes in the draft before Armstrong?
Reading these. Am sorta confused to how much you have seen him play before coming up with these strong opinions.
He's not currently argy bargy style as alluded. His groundball game is fine. As is his kicking.
The biggest criticism, not just from Leysy but those on here who have also watched full games of Big Willie Smillie live many times -
Is his ability to transition, can he link up from contest to contest. But even more importantly learn to use his strength. He doesn't play "argy bargy". He uses his nice ground ball and foot skills to get involved on the outside.
More embracing of contact and "stiff arms" is needed please.
Doesn't answer any questions and sat on the fence, but from watching him earlier in the year:
Last edited:
He fended off players at state level, twice in one play, he attacks packs full chested and often uses his size to dump players in tackles. He's predominantly inside, his outside game whilst better than someone like Cripps isn't fully evolved. That's my reading of his game style but to be totally honest, I cannot identify his point of difference when stacked up against the competition's elite 190cm players. A lot of assumptions being made by people making Green comparisons for instance. Smillie averaged 18 disposals at state level, he isn't just going to double his production to Cripps or Green levels once drafted. People slating Jackson need to realise this type of output is probably Smillie's range. If you believe otherwise then good for you but from my perspective he needs a weapon, an elite point of difference.
I was a wacko Jacko fan but I have no doubt that Smillie is a much better footballer at 18 than Jackson was. Jacko was mainly a rower at Carey who also played in the school footy team and was seen by our recruiters when they went to watch Tom Roach play.
Jacko improved and became a good player, a B&F winner. Smillie won’t be the same player he is now in 5-6 years either.
Comparing Jacko to Smillie is a false equivalence, one was a mature long term player and the other is an 18 year old kid.
Jacko improved and became a good player, a B&F winner. Smillie won’t be the same player he is now in 5-6 years either.
Comparing Jacko to Smillie is a false equivalence, one was a mature long term player and the other is an 18 year old kid.
Exactly, it's about projecting into the future and establishing his ceiling once he reaches full development, maybe he reaches Daniel Jackson levels or maybe he doesn't. I'm just throwing out ideas and getting torched by people who have offered very little apart from generic Green comparisons.
And again, not one of you have come up with his AFL point of difference, just pause for a bit and consider what a player like Elliott Yeo brings to the table, why Bontempelli is such a force of nature, why Cripps has won two Brownlows, why Mundy is considered an AFL superstar. Smillie is 196 cm and hasn't demonstrated one elite trait, his kicking is good but not Rolls Royce special, those hanging their hats on this facet of his game probably need to reign in the expectations .
Like I previously mentioned, many of these tall midfielders who get drafted wind up playing a season or two and then they fade into oblivion. Some drafted in the same range as Smillie - Will Setterfield, Matthew Kennedy, Will Brodie, Tom Swift, Aiden Bonar just to name a few off the tope of my head.
But if you believe Smillie is different then fine, he's a 20 possession Tom Green at present, maybe he becomes a 35 possession Tom Green, but I can say with a fair degree of confidence that he won't be reaching those numbers anytime soon.
That's dedication, tm.
They nearly all take the first game to pick up the tempo at seniors anyway, tigerman. I don't judge em on debut at level. Gerreyn got the tempo and did well in his second hitout. (FWIW I reckon he's ok in the damp.) He levelled up IMO. Good showing.
I aint got much atm, Mr Chips. I shared what I had.
I'm getting back to work on it, fb. There's not much news until Norfs punt their pick.
I think this year due to no clear standouts Twomey is just guessing like everyone else is.
Player x's manager informs him that we have spoken to player x 5 times
Player y the same
Player w
etc etc etc.
And the same applies to north/carl etc etc.
Paid to much for list spots we don't have.
End of the day its 32 for 20.
He is a clunky mover at times, 123. And not brisk. Gets little to no air. Really struggles to catch. Catches some. The footage is a little unflattering.
It's a good question, Bryan. And it harks back to your comment above, 123, about the modern way of playing tall forward.
I think you gentlemen will be aware that until this year Brisbane played Charlie Cameron as their tall forward. He played the role. Oscar Allen plays tall forward. J J Kennedy played tall forward. Post-knees David Schwarz played small forward. And Jeremy Cameron plays mainly as a small forward (high HFF) but often pushes back in for catches and at other times leads up. And then is a tall, who averages 0.5 CM a game.
How does Oscar Allen go in a losing side? He feathers his own nest and kicks a couple. He is a nasty little lurker who kicks goals. Likewise Charlie Cameron, the tall Cameron. They're old-fashioned lurky, leady, sneaky full forwards. (I hate the type FWIW but I have to love in the world in which Armstrong lobs at RFC.)
And when he's a tall inside 50 that's what Armstrong will mainly be. A lurky, sneaky, bludgy, leady, full forward from 1986. Who kicks goals.
Armstrong's inside 50 game is not all about catching, which he's not much good at. He hits the fall and goes again. And again. (That footage above is classic Armstrong.) He runs at goal. He uses towards goal. He will share it. Good values at times and will improve. He lacks aerial game but inside 50 his best play is often post-knees Schwarz like. A bull at the fall. But will share it and can learn more.
Maybe Armstrong's lack of acceleration and altitude will prevent him making the jump to AFL level. But tall forwards are hard to get and an average one is priceless. He has a skill set that is roughly comparable to other tall forwards of the past and present. My thinking is that he is almost certain to be a class above Logan "The Bust" McDonald and McDonald is almost not useless enough to earn a game.
Armstrong has the tank to get up the park and the will. And can improve there too.
He has some weaknesses (OMG those hands) and limitations (can he break into a canter?) but he's there. And he has goal sense. Kicks em. And keeps kicking them.
Caveat: has not been tested at state level. Could he be any worse than Shanahan?
Last edited:
Just wait till the draft is done n we start bitchin n moanin about who we should've got at which pick instead of the ones we did get. 8 picks in the first 24 so we did o.k. but should have done sooooooo much better.
We should get three good mids with 1, 6 and 10 - so unless Blair rates FOS way above, no trade.
It's all about the talls taken in the top 10.
If Tauru is taken top 5 - one of Smith, Langford or Smillie will be there at 6. (But Smith certain top 5 I reckon)
If Armstrong is taken top 9 - one of Smillie, Allan, Lindsay or Reid will be there at 10.
Say the worst case of no talls being taken in the top 10. Smillie will be there at 6 and Reid at 10.
A Lalor, Smillie, Reid combo is not my favourite of mids, but worst case its solid.
It's all about the talls taken in the top 10.
If Tauru is taken top 5 - one of Smith, Langford or Smillie will be there at 6. (But Smith certain top 5 I reckon)
If Armstrong is taken top 9 - one of Smillie, Allan, Lindsay or Reid will be there at 10.
Say the worst case of no talls being taken in the top 10. Smillie will be there at 6 and Reid at 10.
A Lalor, Smillie, Reid combo is not my favourite of mids, but worst case its solid.
Kid gets anywhere near Mundy's level he'll have done bloody well. All the kids are an educated guess at this stage of their careers, so guessing maybe not at pick 1 but at pick 6 or 10 I don't think I'd be to sad about trying for a Mundy type player.
Why not?
As mad as it seems and how even the draft is your still going to get someone who at some point of this year was touted #1 anyway(so he has talent).
Tauru
Fos
Lalor
Draper
Langford
Jagga or Smillie
It won't happen but cats amongst pigeons stuff,lol
Which news was it, Stan? Interesting that Melbs might overlook Langford but not a total surprise.
Let's work it anyway.
Lalor
FOS
Draper
Smith
Lindsay
Smillie
Langford
Reid?
Armstrong?
Allan
Last edited:
I would hope so.
I could see Langford, Smith or Smillie being at 6 if Tauro (he should be The Bull or Lawnmower, not the Viking) is taken top 5.
I'd possibly even take them in that order, although Smiie's body of work this year commands respect.
The Sun article has us also taking Smillie over Langford , very much read like Lalor and Smillie would be our 2
