This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.
Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
E wrote:
To wit, i understand Pendles was the twinkle in Hine's eye and would have gone number 1 if we only had one pick and it was number 1. however, Hine knew that Hawthorn were very serious about Daisy at number 3 and he was also relatively confident that Pendles would slip to 5 so he took Thomas at 2 and Pendles at 5, even though he rated Pendles the better player.
Great point. Pendles rated higher by Hine but didn't take him at two. Because he expected him to still be there at 5, and didn't expect Daisy to still be there at 5.
Great, great point.
If GWS want Wright and Laverde, knowing the profile of our list, they have a better chance of securing both if they take Laverde at 4.
If they do, and in the process suck us into getting the next Justin Koschitzke when we weren't even after a tall...because he was the 'best available'...
The critical point of difference though is that Pendlebury wasn't talked up as a top 10 selection let alone being seen as taken as high as pick 5.
Hine would have been very comfortable taking Thomas at 2 knowing Pendlebury would still be there at 5.
Laverde is very much considered a top 10 prospect, a possible pick 5 selection while Wright is rated even higher and has been considered a top 5 selection all year and at some stages even a possible No.1 pick.
A better comparison to the Thomas and Pendlebury scenario for this years draft would be if we rated Langford ahead of Brayshaw but took Brayshaw at 2 as Langford was seen more in the 10 to 15 range.
McCartin's been rated higher than Wright all year. I personally think that with their list profile, St Kilda are fricken bonkers if they don't take him at 1, good as Petracca will likely be.
For similar reasons, if St Kilda do take Petracca then Melbourne might take McCartin AND Wright. They have lost Frawley and they have nuttin'.
This would mean that if we miss out on Laverde it would be because Brayshaw is still on the table.
They all look great prospects and the only thing holding back Weller from being considered as good as the others is that he's got a light frame. Put a few kilos on him and he should be a beauty. I'm still hoping for Laverde (as I expect Brayshaw will be taken by the Dees), but would be happy with Weller.
Breadcrawl wrote:Pickett or Weller in that unlikely scenario.
McCartin's been rated higher than Wright all year. I personally think that with their list profile, St Kilda are fricken bonkers if they don't take him at 1, good as Petracca will likely be.
For similar reasons, if St Kilda do take Petracca then Melbourne might take McCartin AND Wright. They have lost Frawley and they have nuttin'.
This would mean that if we miss out on Laverde it would be because Brayshaw is still on the table.
Captain_MyCaptain wrote:OK, so what if this happens...
Pick 1. Saint Shit take Petracca... a no brainer.
Pick 2 and 3. Dees take Brayshaw AND Laverde. God knows they need almost everything from FB to FF.
Pick 4. GWS take Wright.
Pick 5. Who? McCartin? Lever? Weller?
Just putting it out there.
Over to you Swoop.
McCartin in a heartbeat.
Has more point of difference to Moore as a forward prospect than Wright (though I'd still take him), is strong, aggressive and has been touted as the likely No.1 pick for the past 12 months.
You'd be mad not to select him ahead of the other two but alas I can't see the prospect eventuating at all.
Captain_MyCaptain wrote:OK, so what if this happens...
Pick 1. Saint Shit take Petracca... a no brainer.
Pick 2 and 3. Dees take Brayshaw AND Laverde. God knows they need almost everything from FB to FF.
Pick 4. GWS take Wright.
Pick 5. Who? McCartin? Lever? Weller?
Just putting it out there.
Over to you Swoop.
McCartin in a heartbeat.
Has more point of difference to Moore as a forward prospect than Wright (though I'd still take him), is strong, aggressive and has been touted as the likely No.1 pick for the past 12 months.
You'd be mad not to select him ahead of the other two but alas I can't see the prospect eventuating at all.
Captain_MyCaptain wrote:OK, so what if this happens...
Pick 1. Saint Shit take Petracca... a no brainer.
Pick 2 and 3. Dees take Brayshaw AND Laverde. God knows they need almost everything from FB to FF.
Pick 4. GWS take Wright.
Pick 5. Who? McCartin? Lever? Weller?
Just putting it out there.
Over to you Swoop.
Definitely McCartin without question but I expect Melbourne to take him at either pick 2 or 3.
Otherwise Laverde is the player I would take at pick 5 if available.
Hey guys I totally agree with Laverde, McCartin, Brayshaw etc being ahead 'the rest' but after a second look at Jake Lever, I'm super impressed. He's a real general down back, very sure hands and makes good decisions disposing of the footy. Good skills for a 193cm player too.
If Dekka went outside the square I wouldn't be complaining if we grabbed Lever.
Cheers.
Can't see the main three falling to us... wright may do, but have a feeling we still wouldn't take him. Think it will be out of laverde/lever/wright at our pick, with all three a chance to go at 3 or 4.
Also think the saints have to be a chance to take McCartin at 1. Perfect timing for a riewoldt replacement to be drafted, with his height and petracca's security and leadership potential the only anomalies that could prevent it.
Captain_MyCaptain wrote:OK, so what if this happens...
Pick 1. Saint Shit take Petracca... a no brainer.
Pick 2 and 3. Dees take Brayshaw AND Laverde. God knows they need almost everything from FB to FF.
Pick 4. GWS take Wright.
Pick 5. Who? McCartin? Lever? Weller?
Just putting it out there.
Over to you Swoop.
Definitely McCartin without question but I expect Melbourne to take him at either pick 2 or 3.
Otherwise Laverde is the player I would take at pick 5 if available.
Hey guys I totally agree with Laverde, McCartin, Brayshaw etc being ahead 'the rest' but after a second look at Jake Lever, I'm super impressed. He's a real general down back, very sure hands and makes good decisions disposing of the footy. Good skills for a 193cm player too.
If Dekka went outside the square I wouldn't be complaining if we grabbed Lever.
Cheers.
Only concern about Lever is that he ruptured his ACL so I'm sure the club is wary of how he recovers from a serious injury of that nature.
On pure talent alone he's a gem of a player and whichever club drafts him will be stoked. I think he's definitely worth a look but I have a feeling he'll be taken by either us or the Giants at pick 5 or 6. However I'm still set on Laverde but we'll see what Hine and his fellow colleagues are thinking in the near future.
Do people take the blokes we already have into any consideration at all when speculating about who we might want to get?
People (more than half) want Reid played back, so I guess we'll have Reid and Brown as KPDs in the AFL. We get Lever and play him and Frost in the VFL, and Keeffe can go fluck himself right?
Obviously we need to plan for the future, if we don't get another tall defender into development soon we could be in a real pickle in, say, 2022.
Interestingly, and as surprising as it sounds, sources (absolute rock solid, don't question it) tell me Petracca begged GWS to get him up there. Absolute hellbent on heading to the club and living in Sydney, despite being a Melbourne boy. Aint gonna happen now obviously, as GWS needed No.1
Podpicken wrote:Interestingly, and as surprising as it sounds, sources (absolute rock solid, don't question it) tell me Petracca begged GWS to get him up there. Absolute hellbent on heading to the club and living in Sydney, despite being a Melbourne boy. Aint gonna happen now obviously, as GWS needed No.1
You'd be absolutely petrified of ending up at Melbourne wouldn't you?
And St Kilda not much better.
Whereas you go to GWS and you only have to kick 8 goals then you get seven million dollars.
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | 
