Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 37 to 47 of 47

Thread: Vogels...could he be the key defender we need

  1. #37
    On the Rookie List Charlie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Hammond's old office, Stargate Command
    Posts
    4,101
    Originally posted by liz
    But if it was a typo, and you meant the 2005 draft, what about Currie, Wall, Barlow, Rowe and Prior. Surely they were all drafted as additional "developing" talls.

    And before you point the obvious out to me that they were all taken in the rookie draft, so were Grundy, Vogels and Shaw a year earlier.
    Of course I meant the 2005 draft.

    Yes, I understand the point you are making. I haven't had the opportunity to see any of the rookies play yet - I'm hoping to see some on Saturday, and hopefully I'll get a practice match or two down here as well. But they all seem very skinny and raw to me.

    I think that we'll have to see results from more than one rookie draft before we can place our faith in it as our main source for young KPPs. The crop from the 2004 rookie draft could well be exceptional, if the three of them all become established senior players. But I don't think any club has ever had three rookies from the same draft all establish themselves in the senior side. I'd much rather we balance our recruiting both in the national and rookie drafts.
    We hate Anthony Rocca
    We hate Shannon Grant too
    We hate scumbag Gaspar
    But Leo WE LOVE YOU!

  2. #38
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,309
    Originally posted by ScottH
    Dunkley went forward a few times, with some success.
    I saw some old footage the other night in Tassie where Dunkley and Cresswell played for North Launceston in a GF.

    Guess what, Dunkley was awkward with his kicks but they went a fair distance. Seems his kicking got worse as he got older.

  3. #39

    Re: Vogels...could he be the key defender we need

    Originally posted by Ajn
    Judging by his display against Matty Llyod....maybe!
    He's too slow
    "We love you Stevie"

    Lady that sat in the row behind me in 1987

  4. #40
    Leadership Group goswannie14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Belmont, Victoria, Australia, Australia
    Posts
    11,166
    Originally posted by Thunder Shaker
    A defender that can play forward when needed. A bit like Hunter in the GF.
    Or Ken Hunter at the Blues, he was awesome at both ends of the ground.
    Does God believe in Atheists?

  5. #41
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    14,247
    Originally posted by Charlie

    I'd much rather we balance our recruiting both in the national and rookie drafts.
    But surely we did. Our first round pick was used on a tall - Ted Richards. Unlikely to be an out-and-out star but at worst adds depth amongst the taller options.

    Our second round pick was used on ruck depth.

    The method of applying these picks is consistent with Roos' expressed views that picking 18yos is a lottery - and I suspect a much greater lottery with talls than with mids since you are gambling a lot on the ability of skinny kids to develop body mass as well as kick on with their skills and application. The club chose to give away something in terms of potential upside to limit the potential downside.

    The next three picks were used on midfielders.

    Of the next 8 picks (by which time we're into the rookie draft) 5 were used on tall or tallish players, adding further depth.

    By the time you get down to pick 50 odd in the draft, there probably isn't much difference between your odds of getting a good player in the national or rookie drafts, especially in 2005 where the concensus of the "experts" was that you could throw a blanket over about 200 or so kids.

  6. #42
    On the Rookie List Charlie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Hammond's old office, Stargate Command
    Posts
    4,101
    Originally posted by liz
    But surely we did. Our first round pick was used on a tall - Ted Richards. Unlikely to be an out-and-out star but at worst adds depth amongst the taller options.

    Our second round pick was used on ruck depth.

    The method of applying these picks is consistent with Roos' expressed views that picking 18yos is a lottery - and I suspect a much greater lottery with talls than with mids since you are gambling a lot on the ability of skinny kids to develop body mass as well as kick on with their skills and application. The club chose to give away something in terms of potential upside to limit the potential downside.

    The next three picks were used on midfielders.

    Of the next 8 picks (by which time we're into the rookie draft) 5 were used on tall or tallish players, adding further depth.

    By the time you get down to pick 50 odd in the draft, there probably isn't much difference between your odds of getting a good player in the national or rookie drafts, especially in 2005 where the concensus of the "experts" was that you could throw a blanket over about 200 or so kids.
    Fair argument re: Richards and Chambers. I still would have liked one more, but hopefully Brabazon proves himself to be well worth pick 59. We simply don't need ten midfielders who are 21 or younger. We could do with more than four talls in the same age group, though.

    I still think we should view the rookie draft with caution. I'd love to see Vogels, Grundy and Shaw all become 200 game players, but if they do they will be the best crop that any club has ever got out of the rookie draft. If they don't, we have very little coverage for the three of our five best KPPs that are approaching thirty years of age. We're gambling on having gotten it right the first time. In the rookie draft.

    We would have had over 50 selections by now in that draft (not sure of the exact number and I can't be bothered searching for a site that will tell me), but how many have played senior footy? I can think of ten - Kirk, Kennelly, Bevan, Vogels, Bennett, Piltz, Brockman, Meiklejohn, James and Rogers. Only four of those are still on the list, and only two of them can be considered stars. Five of the ten had been on AFL lists previously, two of them at the Swans, and one of them was a wildcard from Ireland. The success rate from the rookie list is very low. The national draft, whilst not spectacular, is much better.

    I understand the theory behind last year's drafting - drafting talls is more of a lottery than midfielders, so use your better picks on midfielders. I just think it's a bit too much of a gamble. But I will be happy if I'm proven wrong.
    We hate Anthony Rocca
    We hate Shannon Grant too
    We hate scumbag Gaspar
    But Leo WE LOVE YOU!

  7. #43
    Veteran Site Admin
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    14,247
    Originally posted by Charlie

    I still think we should view the rookie draft with caution.
    Agree. But we should also view the national draft with caution. Only a small portion of players drafted onto a list ever get close to 100 games. And when your first pick is beyond no 50, the chances must decrease.

    Of the 9 rookies on the list this year, the chances are that at least half won't survive to next year, if past patterns are anything to go by. But had we drafted, say, Currie at 59 and then taken Brabazon in the rookie draft, it wouldn't really affect either of their chances of "making it".

  8. #44
    The hype on this forum surrounding Vogels is staggering.
    Given he is probably one average season away from the chop doesn't seem to phase anyone.
    Good luck to the kid , I truly hope he comes on. But until he does something other than kick a few uncontested goals perhaps we could temper the excitement.

  9. #45
    Originally posted by skilts stilts
    The hype on this forum surrounding Vogels is staggering.
    Given he is probably one average season away from the chop doesn't seem to phase anyone.
    Good luck to the kid , I truly hope he comes on. But until he does something other than kick a few uncontested goals perhaps we could temper the excitement.
    you dare to suggest this forum breeds hype....brave, very brave
    "We love you Stevie"

    Lady that sat in the row behind me in 1987

  10. #46
    The Fourth Captain Schneiderman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,615
    Firstly, the 'hype' around Vogels has mostly been demonstrated as 'hope'. Noone has stated he is a star, but most are wishing he turns out to be a 100+ gamer.

    Secondly, on the issue of how we recruit and from which draft, I think the Roos and his team have a specific strategy. And it has as much to do with where they see the game going in ten years time as it does with what players to play next year. The current rule changes already signal a shift towards an even faster brand of football. Forcing players to move it on more quickly after a behind or after a mark (with both faster disposal and 'no holding' allowed), means a lot more running at top speed in both directions. As a result, having a massive 'fleet' of small nimbile and high-aerobic-capacity players seems to be the requirement. If the changes are here to stay, coaches who continue to recruit 'lumbering' talls will be found out. Even last year the Western Bulldogs showed up a lot of teams with there fast shorter backline. And then look at Leo's success. If anything, the kick-in rule will play into these teams hands.

    It seems to me that teams with only a tall spine, and then a 12+ small fast mobile players will benefit most from the new rules. And since the current draft format will continue to assist only the poor performing teams each year, it is better to put in plans where you can identify and snare quality players regardless of ladder position. Hence the focus on getting the Rookie drafting right, and use the picks in the National Draft more to stock up on experienced players.
    Our Greatest Moment:

    Saturday, 24th Sept, 2005 - 5:13pm

  11. #47
    RWO Life Member ROK Lobster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Capital Hill
    Posts
    8,658
    Blog Entries
    3
    Originally posted by skilts stilts
    The hype on this forum surrounding Vogels is staggering.
    Given he is probably one average season away from the chop doesn't seem to phase anyone.
    Good luck to the kid , I truly hope he comes on. But until he does something other than kick a few uncontested goals perhaps we could temper the excitement.
    We don't need that negative crap here. Go back to Richmond you troll.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO