View Poll Results: Who will the Swans take at #3?

Voters
22. You may not vote on this poll
  • Ugle-Hagan

    1 4.55%
  • MacDonald

    4 18.18%
  • Hollands

    7 31.82%
  • Thilthorpe

    8 36.36%
  • Phillips

    0 0%
  • Other: Please specify

    2 9.09%
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 13 to 24 of 63

Thread: 2020 Draft - Pick #3

  1. #13
    Does it matter if the “big 3” talls are gone by our pick 4, as seems plausible?

    Do people think we should take the best available player whatever or are they sold on us getting a KP size one even if that means going further down the pecking order?

  2. #14
    Veterans List dejavoodoo44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    7,329
    Quote Originally Posted by Markwebbos View Post
    Does it matter if the “big 3” talls are gone by our pick 4, as seems plausible?

    Do people think we should take the best available player whatever or are they sold on us getting a KP size one even if that means going further down the pecking order?
    IIRC, the next the next KPF is a fair way down the list, so if the first three are gone, then it should be best available player.

    Which is one reason why I'm not totally adverse to making a play for Sideshow Ben. Yes, he does have a silly long run up, and yes, he does get some frees for going down too easily. However, he usually kicks straight at the end of that long run and we could probably harden him up a bit. I also think that he's been harshly treated by North, so he should be keen to prove them wrong. And North have been behaving in quite a desperate manner, so whoever gets him, might end up paying unders. It might even end up a Ted Richards, Craig Bolton type signing.

  3. #15
    Given the number of talls in this draft and the need for at least one tall player, I wondered again if we might try and pick swap our way into this draft at the expense of 2021.

  4. #16
    Captain of the Side Captain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Northern Beaches
    Posts
    3,556
    I'm worried that with no U18 this year, it is going to be incredibly tough to get picks right. Pick 3 might be as useful as pick 33.

    Accordingly, I would be more than happy to trade it away and back our recruiting staff in to find some decent players with later picks.

  5. #17
    Senior Player
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2,440
    Quote Originally Posted by dejavoodoo44 View Post
    IIRC, the next the next KPF is a fair way down the list, so if the first three are gone, then it should be best available player.

    Which is one reason why I'm not totally adverse to making a play for Sideshow Ben. Yes, he does have a silly long run up, and yes, he does get some frees for going down too easily. However, he usually kicks straight at the end of that long run and we could probably harden him up a bit. I also think that he's been harshly treated by North, so he should be keen to prove them wrong. And North have been behaving in quite a desperate manner, so whoever gets him, might end up paying unders. It might even end up a Ted Richards, Craig Bolton type signing.
    Aside from his lack of defensive pressure, Brown needs space to lead into, he's not going to get that at the SCG. Pass

  6. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain View Post
    I'm worried that with no U18 this year, it is going to be incredibly tough to get picks right. Pick 3 might be as useful as pick 33.

    Accordingly, I would be more than happy to trade it away and back our recruiting staff in to find some decent players with later picks.
    I agree. This is a riskier draft than usual for that reason, although the SA and WA players have exposed form.

    Picking talls that high in the draft carries additional risk.

    That’s why I can see us splitting pick 3 or taking a mid and/or trying to get another pick for a bargain tall slider.

  7. #19
    Veterans List dejavoodoo44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    7,329
    Quote Originally Posted by Markwebbos View Post
    I agree. This is a riskier draft than usual for that reason, although the SA and WA players have exposed form.

    Picking talls that high in the draft carries additional risk.

    That’s why I can see us splitting pick 3 or taking a mid and/or trying to get another pick for a bargain tall slider.
    Yes, it will be interesting to see how things change after the draft combine. There might be a few sliders on the boards of the draft gurus.

  8. #20
    Veterans List dejavoodoo44's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    7,329
    Quote Originally Posted by caj23 View Post
    Aside from his lack of defensive pressure, Brown needs space to lead into, he's not going to get that at the SCG. Pass
    The dimensions of North's two home grounds and the SCG:
    Marvel Stadium - 160m - 129m
    Blundstone Arena - 160m - 124m
    SCG - 155m - 136m.

    So there's two ways at looking at that. Firstly, the SCG is wider than both Marvel and Blundstone, so there's actually more space inside 50 at the SCG. Or there's a 2.5 metre difference from the centre to the goals, which might mean a very small compression of space, when attacking from the centre, but is largely irrelevant when rebounding.

  9. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain View Post
    I'm worried that with no U18 this year, it is going to be incredibly tough to get picks right. Pick 3 might be as useful as pick 33.

    Accordingly, I would be more than happy to trade it away and back our recruiting staff in to find some decent players with later picks.
    I disagree and think it’s the other way around. Due to a lack of games, we actually know a heap more about pick 3 than 33. At the top end of the draft we know a lot about because they played significant roles as underaged players in their teams including the championships last year. They also played for the academy and in the grand final day game. Out of the Victorian boys, we know that Hollands and Phillips are good because they have the runs in the board. Sure, pick 33 might be a star too but it is roulette at that point.

    That is why I believe we are in a terrific position this year - we will take three players that we know a lot about. One of McDonald, Thilthorpe, Hollands, or Phillips + Campbell + Gulden is a great haul. Don’t get cute with it.

  10. #22
    Veterans List Ludwig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chiang Mai
    Posts
    9,310
    My preference is to trade pick 3 if opportunities present themselves to recruit a good ruckman and key forward. It's hard to say at this point if we can recruit a player like Ladhams, for example.

    If the trade period unfolds such that we get Daniher as a FA and someone like Preuss or Wright with a 3rd round pick, then we take pick 3 to the draft and take the best available player.

    In general, I feel we can do better using pick 3 for a more experienced player to fill key position roles than starting with an 18 yo, who will take years to get up to speed.

  11. #23
    Senior Player Bloody Hell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    3,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Ludwig View Post

    In general, I feel we can do better using pick 3 for a more experienced player to fill key position roles than starting with an 18 yo, who will take years to get up to speed.
    If we were in a premiership window, fair enough. But we're not. Let the team grow together. If you pick a KP at #3, and are able to trade in a ruck, it's alot of boxes ticked. As noted, good KP's are hard to find.

    If we get Daniher, you still need 2 KP's... by the time Reid retires, #3 should be ready for to take the mantle.
    The eternal connundrum "what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object" was finally solved when David Hasselhoff punched himself in the face.

  12. #24
    Maybe we could do a deal with 2 different clubs and downgrade ourselves in the draft to pick 7.
    Give away pick 3 to Geelong for 2 picks in return 11 and 15 and maybe give a lower draft pick back. Obviously Geelong must think that they are going to get an amazing player with pick 3. But may be they have a decent list so they dont need so many picks.
    Give the 2 draft picks to Carlton in return for pick 7, 2nd and 3rd rounder. They are going to need 2 picks in first round to get Zac williams and Adam Saad.
    Get a good player with pick 7 and not to get into deficit next year with academy bids.

    The only problem is that there are teams between pick 4 and 6 - Hawthorn, Essendon, gold coast who may select Braeden Campbell.

    So it will only depend on where do our recruiters mark Campbell and what do they think they are going to get before him and is it a big loss if we lose pick 3.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

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