The Lack of Talls on Our List (Merged)

[the claw]

okay the draft is done and where do we sit in the tall stakes.

griffiths - shoulder op wont play a game next yr more than likely.
astbury - 18 yr old if we are lucky he might get a game or two.
simmonds - 31 yr old in his last yr.
thursfield - borderline player needs to stake his spot this yr. depending on weight development likely 3rd tall only.
mcguane - dud.
riewoldt - needs 7 kg progressing nicely will have to play kp rerady or not.
post - sheesh 2nd yr player under normal circumstances if he played more than 12 14 games you would be more than happy.
graham - dud.
rance - 3rd yr player needs to start showing a bit is in the iffy category because of skills..
vickery - very undersized but talented ruckman should be nursed but will be thrown in.
browne- a genuine ruckman who has size still very raw a huge ask to expect him to play a significant role this yr.
gourdis - on the rookie list and likely to stay there with his skills.

thats it people now go compare to all other lists.

 

[toothless]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

sure does look grim. like i said earlier we are years behind the next club, cant progress without kp

 

[Hayfever]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

okay the draft is done and where do we sit in the tall stakes.

griffiths - shoulder op wont play a game next yr more than likely.
astbury - 18 yr old if we are lucky he might get a game or two.
simmonds - 31 yr old in his last yr.
thursfield - borderline player needs to stake his spot this yr. depending on weight development likely 3rd tall only.
mcguane - dud.
riewoldt - needs 7 kg progressing nicely will have to play kp rerady or not.
post - sheesh 2nd yr player under normal circumstances if he played more than 12 14 games you would be more than happy.
graham - dud.
rance - 3rd yr player needs to start showing a bit is in the iffy category because of skills..
vickery - very undersized but talented ruckman should be nursed but will be thrown in.
browne- a genuine ruckman who has size still very raw a huge ask to expect him to play a significant role this yr.
gourdis - on the rookie list and likely to stay there with his skills.

thats it people now go compare to all other lists.

Fair criticism Claw. Add Bradshaw and Polak to the list and it looks stronger. Our midfield has the ability to win the clearances even though our ruckmen will struggle at the hitouts.

Here's my starting 22, as posted yesterday, with talls(over 190cm) highlighted:-

Moore Thursfield McGuane
Tambling Polak Newman
Cousins Cotchin Deledio
Morton Riewoldt Martin
Nahas Bradshaw Taylor
Graham Tuck Foley

Simmonds Rance Jackson Vickery


If we don't go for Bradshaw in PSD2 we will have to use Simmonds up forward more. Given Pattison has gone that leaves Graham, Browne and Vickery to carry our ruck hopes...... a very big ask. I'm not kidding when I say we should seriously consider convincing Lade to go around for one more year. We'd be guaranteed to get him in PSD2. Rotate him and Simmonds(ruck/forward/bench) with the other 3 depending on who we are playing, fitness etc. Hopefully Vickery comes on as we believe he will and we can choose the better of Graham and Browne to run with from 2011 onwards.

Moore Thursfield McGuane
Tambling Polak Newman
Cousins Cotchin Deledio
Morton Riewoldt Martin
Nahas Simmonds Taylor
Lade Tuck Foley

Graham Rance Jackson Vickery

 

[Total Tiger]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

I think it explains why we kept Simmonds on the list. Our young talls, IF they come on, are years away,

 

[Disco08]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

Players 191 or over

Tigers - 12 (1 rookie)
Dogs - 14 (1)
Cats - 13
Saints - 17 (3)
Crows - 19 (1)


Obviously we need to go tall with our PSD pick. Thorp if Beavis is keen otherwise the best of the leftover kids like Grimes. Add a couple more in the rookie draft and more again next year and the structure starts to take shape. At least Cameron/Jackson have shown they realise the problem and used all but one of our 08 and 09 picks in the first 3 rounds on talls.

 

[French Tiger]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

The scary part is that not one of them is an established player (Thursfield & Riewoldt are close).

 

[IanG]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

Moore can play tall then we will probably rookie Polak. Plus hopefully at least 1 more in the PSD.

 

[rockstar_tiger]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

It's not about next year. Who cares if Griffiths won't play every game?

As long as we get it right in 3-4 years time. By then we'll have another 7-8 talls going through the system. We're not doing that bad, nobody said our list was meant to be complete after 1 draft.

We are in this position because we delisted a lot of under performing talls. That's a good thing - and part of the process.

Claw, I've always respected your opinion, but right now I can see the club actually doing the right things, sticking to the right philosophies (many that you have had for years)... these critisisms after the draft sound like you're digging a lot deeper than before to find negatives. That's a good thing long-term I guess, better than before when all these negative sounding hypothesis' were scarily true....

 

[ToraToraTora]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

Listen dude usually I'm with you on most rants but this one is just flogging a dead horse. WE ALL KNOW THIS. Yoo don't like Griffiths. Stiff *smile*. The NEW regime felt that the quality talls had dried up after 35. Tough titty. Yes yes I think the club need to go tall PSD and tall rookies if possible. We also need upgrades in most other positions, right?! And you don't like Dea, etccccccc yaddaaaaaaaaaa. I mean, just this once, give it a rest, huh?

 

[Rosy]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

okay the draft is done and where do we sit in the tall stakes.

.........
thats it people now go compare to all other lists.

Still a few spots to be filled yet.

 

[Streak]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

I agree that our list is light on for talls, very light on. We have known about this for some time, and the club hasn't acted to fill the holes in a meaningful way.

But seriously, was there any point in a draft acknowledged to be weak, particularly in terms of taller players, in going out and stocking up on young talls in the hope we might get a player out of them.

With the GC coming in, we are along way behind the 8 ball.

 

[Scoop]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

Just on Thorp, I heard he trailed terribly with Melbourne. Very unfit, agility was shocking and he had a very limited tank. He would not be my PSD pick even though we need talls, I would take Dlyan Grimes. I would also take two young talls and not take Polak back.

 

[Leysy Days]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

Just on Thorp, I heard he trailed terribly with Melbourne. Very unfit, agility was shocking and he had a very limited tank. He would not be my PSD pick even though we need talls,

That is Mitch.

 

[davidrodan]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

I've gone cold on Thorp, usually there is either a concern with injuries or attitude, seems he has both

I still think we should delist one more player and have 2 PSD picks

Then go with Daw/Patrick with our first pick and Hartigan/Tighe with the second
Might even be a chance that one of these players will still be there at pick 7 in the rookie draft

BTW here is a link to all the clubs lists after the draft
http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/86555/default.aspx

 

[Tigers of Old]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

Just on Thorp, I heard he trailed terribly with Melbourne. Very unfit, agility was shocking and he had a very limited tank. He would not be my PSD pick even though we need talls

Interesting Scooper.
Sounds likely his short career might be over already.

 

[lamb22]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

I've gone cold on Thorp, usually there is either a concern with injuries or attitude, seems he has both

I still think we should delist one more player and have 2 PSD picks

Then go with Daw/Patrick with our first pick and Hartigan/Tighe with the second

Might even be a chance that one of these players will still be there at pick 7 in the rookie draft

Well said David, I'd even delete a couple say Jordy and Tuck and wear the salary pain. Still a lot of talls to be mined over and above yours mentioned - Archer, Casboult , Thompson, Temel & more- not sure they are any less likelythan many talls taken in the ND.

Few good mids/smalls available too Roberts, Palapuimini, Mcneil, Hooper, Woods etc.

PS I Like Patrick very much as a PSD/rookie

 

[davidrodan]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

Well said David, I'd even delete a couple say Jordy and Tuck and wear the salary pain. Still a lot of talls to be mined over and above yours mentioned - Archer, Casboult , Thompson, Temel & more- not sure they are any less likelythan many talls taken in the ND.

Few good mids/smalls available too Roberts, Palapuimini, Mcneil, Hooper, Woods etc.

PS I Like Patrick very much as a PSD/rookie

He has a huge leap, obviously he wouldn't be played in the ruck at AFL level but could be a very good small forward

I would be looking at delisting King as it is more likely he wouldn't be picked up as a rookie by another club

We have 7 rookie spots, so could then go

PSD
2 Patrick/Daw (they prolly won't last long in rookie draft)
6 Hartigan/Tighe

Rookie draft
7 Hartigan/Tighe/Grimes
23 Ruck (McMahon/Putt)
39 Free
55 Casserley
71 King
87 Polak

Some of the later picks will come earlier as some teams have 2-5 rookies already

 

[WesternTiger]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

He has a huge leap, obviously he wouldn't be played in the ruck at AFL level but could be a very good small forward

I would be looking at delisting King as it is more likely he wouldn't be picked up as a rookie by another club

We have 7 rookie spots, so could then go

PSD
2 Patrick/Daw (they prolly won't last long in rookie draft)
6 Hartigan/Tighe

Rookie draft
7 Hartigan/Tighe/Grimes
23 Ruck (McMahon/Putt)
39 Free
55 Casserley
71 King
87 Polak

Some of the later picks will come earlier as some teams have 2-5 rookies already

Taylor mentioned yesterday we will only be adding 5 new players across the PS and rookie drafts.

 

[peggles]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

Taylor mentioned yesterday we will only be adding 5 new players across the PS and rookie drafts.

well that's rightwe have 7 more spots left on the list: 1 on the pain and 6 rookie spots. But two of the rookie spots will go to Polak and O'Reilly the irish recruit.

Hence we'll have 1 PSD pick and 4 rookie picks.

On that note, it's good to see that as it stands, Melbourne only has 3 spots left: 1 PSD and 2 Rookie. they've already committed to Joel McDonald for PSD and have apparently told Meeson and Newton that they'll rookie them. Hence we essentially have the top 2 live picks from now on (pick 2 in the PSD, all the rest are committed, and pick 7 of the rookie draft, GC has top 5 of rookie draft but word is they'll take mature players so they can compete in the VFL next year)

 

[lamb22]

Re: talls after the draft. still looks grim.

He has a huge leap, obviously he wouldn't be played in the ruck at AFL level but could be a very good small forward

I would be looking at delisting King as it is more likely he wouldn't be picked up as a rookie by another club

We have 7 rookie spots, so could then go

PSD
2 Patrick/Daw (they prolly won't last long in rookie draft)
6 Hartigan/Tighe

Rookie draft
7 Hartigan/Tighe/Grimes
23 Ruck (McMahon/Putt)
39 Free
55 Casserley
71 King
87 Polak

Some of the later picks will come earlier as some teams have 2-5 rookies already

You've lost me David - why are we delisting and relisting players.
Reality is we'll take one PSD and 4 rookies, re rookie Polak and rookie the irish bloke I suppose.
I'd prefer two more picks to say Macmahon and Tuck who dont offer much.

Bradshaw might work but my preference would be to stick to kids!