The Lack of Talls on Our List (Merged)

[GoodOne]

totally disagree. of course you can say that 'flanker' with good skills, good agility, reasonable smarts and good courage has a better chance, a lot better chance even, of making a difference to the team than a 'tall' with average skills, average mobility, limited strength and little footy smarts, or even a tall with 1 or 2 good attributes, but other failings. of course you can.

That's the point. At pick 50+ the flankers don't have good skills, reasonable smarts, good courage. Well its not evident otherwise they would have been picked much higher. Each player has their obvious weaknesses at these sort of picks and all you are gambling on is a punt that their weaknesses are going to improve more than the next guy. On this basis concentrate on needs, not some ambiguous attempt to rate best available.

 

[the claw]

And I thought collingwood supporters were thick

lol

 

[GoodOne]

I think another point that should be made is that on top of Astbury and Griffiths, Taylor is also basically an addition to our key forward stocks. He's 189 and possibly still growing - plenty of full forward have had successful careers at this height and all Taylor's junior footy has been as a key forward. FWIW he likens himself to Daryl White.

Disco you make a good point, I'm actually pleased with that pick. Some great upside to this guy although I cant really see him becoming a true key position player. They play funny positions in juniors, even that Liam Patrick (who a few like here for our PSD pick) was playing ruck at 186cm.

 

[Disco08]

Why not goody? Modra, Sumich, Micky O...... *smile*, even Fevola is only 1cm taller.

 

[the claw]

You want Bradshaw claw? Really? How does he help us long term?

im more concerned with now that is how bad the situation is. you want our kds thrown in beaten up kicked in the guts week in week out fine by all means just ignore the state of the tall list.
at least bradshaw is quality or are people going to argue that as well. sheesh we take a quality player in the psd seems to work as far as i can see just look at cuz. we just cleaned out 1500 games the most experienced tall we have is a past ruckman in simmonds the rest are either below standard or in development what a great situation to be in na we dont need any experience. let the kids get killed great for development that will be.

 

[GoodOne]

Why not goody? Modra, Sumich, Micky O...... sh!t, even Fevola is only 1cm taller.

I wouldnt rate Micky O a typical key position. A damn good player nevertheless and probably not a bad comparison for Taylor. The thing is the Aboriginal players don't tend to bulk up as much as they need to for those key positions (well at least in some cases not until they retire ;D).

That Taylor has a lot of skill. Ball on a string. Hope we can get the best out of him.

 

[Disco08]

Not all the time but he played KP well whenever he was asked to.

If we include Taylor as an inclusion to our KP forwards and take the word from people at the Club80 function that we'll pick a young tall in the PSD we'll have added 4 out 8 "talls" to our main list. Is this enough?

im more concerned with now that is how bad the situation is. you want our kds thrown in beaten up kicked in the guts week in week out fine by all means just ignore the state of the tall list.
at least bradshaw is quality or are people going to argue that as well. sheesh we take a quality player in the psd seems to work as far as i can see just look at cuz. we just cleaned out 1500 games the most experienced tall we have is a past ruckman in simmonds the rest are either below standard or in development what a great situation to be in na we dont need any experience. let the kids get killed great for development that will be.

So we just play a Bulldogs type forward line until they're ready. I'd rather that than waste a spot (and heaps of cash) on a player who has no chance of contributing 3 years from now.

 

[the claw]

Don't ND recruits get an automatic 2 years, whereas PSD and RD picks can be punted after 1?

If we (and it looks like everyone else) were of the opinion that the talls in this draft were substandard and those that remained late were speculative at best, wouldn't picking them in the PSD and RD be a smart move? We do have pole position in both given Melbourne are taking McDonald and the Gold Coast are using their RD picks to get some more experienced players onto their list.

In the end will it matter whether we fill our quota of talls in the ND, PSD or RD?

hmm what difference would giving a couple of talls or smalls webberley nason a go in the nd not as if they will stop us cleaning out the numerous duds that are there already.

 

[the claw]

Bradshaw is Sydney bound. Full stop.

Draft kids not retreads. We don't need established FFs for 2010.

pppffffttt. more nonsense.

 

[Disco08]

hmm what difference would giving a couple of talls or smalls webberley nason a go in the nd not as if they will stop us cleaning out the numerous duds that are there already.

Obviously they saw something in those two that made them more attractive long term options compared to the talls still available. I would have liked to have seen another tall picked there too but I'm prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt for now.

 

[the claw]

I think another point that should be made is that on top of Astbury and Griffiths, Taylor is also basically an addition to our key forward stocks. He's 189 and possibly still growing - plenty of full forward have had successful careers at this height and all Taylor's junior footy has been as a key forward. FWIW he likens himself to Daryl White.

sheesh the bow is really being stretched now.

 

[Scoop]

Just on Taylor, he moves very well in traffic. Really just glides through, a couple of times today in the handball drill players struggled to get a finger on him.

For me the real question is can you play Morton, Taylor, Riewoldt, Post, Griffiths in the one forward line? I know that won't happen in 2010 but doesn't that fell kind of top heavy? And lacking pace even if you have Nahas/Gilligan and a resting onballer in the forward line. Worth thinking about.

 

[GoodOne]

Just on Taylor, he moves very well in traffic. Really just glides through, a couple of times today in the handball drill players struggled to get a finger on him.

For me the real question is can you play Morton, Taylor, Riewoldt, Post, Griffiths in the one forward line? I know that won't happen in 2010 but doesn't that fell kind of top heavy? And lacking pace even if you have Nahas/Gilligan and a resting onballer in the forward line. Worth thinking about.

Scoop, isn't the idea to have more than less. We cant expect every one of them to make the grade. Create competition, create depth, and you get better results.

 

[TigerForce]

pppffffttt. more nonsense.

Answer the question:

Why is Bradshaw important for us in 2010?

 

[Hayfever]

Just on Taylor, he moves very well in traffic. Really just glides through, a couple of times today in the handball drill players struggled to get a finger on him.

For me the real question is can you play Morton, Taylor, Riewoldt, Post, Griffiths in the one forward line? I know that won't happen in 2010 but doesn't that fell kind of top heavy? And lacking pace even if you have Nahas/Gilligan and a resting onballer in the forward line. Worth thinking about

Taylor is a far more versatile prospect than the others mentioned.

 

[Disco08]

sheesh the bow is really being stretched now.

Why? He's played a forward so far and plenty of very successful forwards have been no taller than him and probably had nowhere near his leap. I thought you of all people wouldn't base everything on pure statistics.

 

[Scoop]

Scoop, isn't the idea to have more than less. We cant expect every one of them to make the grade. Create competition, create depth, and you get better results.

That is my point, not all are going to make it. Not all can play in the forward line at one time, to me the spread forward isn't too bad. I think the mediums we have up forward are pretty good. I am much more worried about the talls down back.

 

[TigerForce]

How tall is tall?

I'm quite sure that Hardwick will have some flexibility in his game plans to cover any lack of 'tall' players in attack &/or defence during games.

If our on-field team lacks experience through injury or whatever, then we have to accept it and continue on rebuilding. We have to start accepting losses.

 

[Tango]

oh boy we are getting some beauties now?

like this:

Posted by: Disco08
Insert Quote

Why? He's played a forward so far and plenty of very successful forwards have been no taller than him and probably had nowhere near his leap. I thought you of all people wouldn't base everything on pure statistics.

or this:

Posted by: Disco08

If we include Taylor as an inclusion to our KP forwards and take the word from people at the Club80 function that we'll pick a young tall in the PSD we'll have added 4 out 8 "talls" to our main list. Is this enough?

or this:

Quote from: Disco08 on Today at 08:47:28 pm
I think another point that should be made is that on top of Astbury and Griffiths, Taylor is also basically an addition to our key forward stocks. He's 189 and possibly still growing - plenty of full forward have had successful careers at this height and all Taylor's junior footy has been as a key forward. FWIW he likens himself to Daryl White.

how can taylor be classed as a tall or a KPP - get real, apart from the fact that he is a skinny kid and we are talking genuine players with body size and strength to protect our skinny kids

lets not hide the facts,
we dont have enough talls - fact,
the club have chosen to draft smaller players who are believed to be a better chance at making it - regardless of our desperate need for talls - fact

thats a decision that i believe puts our junior players at risk and smacks of poor list management and after the last 5 years i thought they would have learned something

 

[the claw]

Answer the question:

Why is Bradshaw important for us in 2010?

you have been told time and time again but refuse to listen or acknowledge a thing so why should i bother answering.