For those who still haven't figured out how bad this draft is
David Clayton
http://www.theage.com.au/news/rfnews/dissecting-the-draft/2009/10/10/1255019653282.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
Dissecting the draft
Emma Quayle | October 11, 2009
With the trade period over, next on the AFL agenda is the national draft.
Emma Quayle looks at the key questions surrounding this year's talent
pool.
So, is this year's draft really as bad as everyone has been saying?
''Yes'', was how one recruiting manager answered that question. ''It's
mediocre,'' said another, and that seems a popular line of thinking. Each
draft has ''layers'' of talent, and the very top layer this year is a
small one. Where last year there were, say, 15 players any recruiter would
have happily picked, this year some are nominating as few as four. Others
say it's more like six, eight or 10. What happens? The consensus is, it
evens out quickly, that you don't really want to be picking after 50 and
that there are fewer certain prospects. ''It flatlines after 10,'' said a
recruiter. ''That doesn't mean there aren't any reasonable players there,
but there aren't any absolute guarantees, and everyone's list will be
different. Someone's No. 11 will be someone else's 30.'' Said another:
''After 10, you could throw a blanket over 30 of them.'' Because the group
is considered so even, this may be a draft where ''needs'' come into play
with picks as early as the teens. Adding to that is that Melbourne and the
Power will share so many early picks [they share seven of the first 18].
They might pick someone ahead of time with the last of their picks. It's a
weird situation: the Port team's day will be done before Geelong starts at
pick 17.
Why is there no depth?
The 17-year-olds have been removed - and they generally comprise about a
third of any draft. One recruiter suspects 20 would have been drafted this
year. Plus, many of those 17-year-olds - the best of whom have been signed
by the Gold Coast - are very, very good players. At least three - Josh
Toy, Maverick Weller and Luke Russell, plus possibly Trent McKenzie and
one or two more - would have been first-round picks if they were in this
year's draft. Toy would have pushed for top three. ''We'd be talking about
what an amazingly good first round we had if those players were in it,''
said one recruiter. This draft could see a really low number of players
chosen, and it's hard to see anyone taking more than their mandatory three
picks [aside from perhaps Melbourne, Essendon, Fremantle and Richmond, the
first two having loaded up with top 30 picks] and possibly Geelong, which
needs to bring in kids. For the first time this season, clubs can use one
of those three picks to upgrade a rookie, and I suspect quite a few will
take this option. We could only have 50-something fresh players drafted.
Who are the really good players?
Tom Scully and Jack Trengove seem, at this point, likely to be wearing
Melbourne jumpers next year. All going well, they will play round one.
Midfielders Dustin Martin and Ben Cunnington are in the top group, as is
Anthony Morabito, a 190-centimetre wingman from Western Australia. They
seem the distinct top five at this early stage. That Sydney offered
Richmond draft picks six and 14 for No. 3, but didn't make Fremantle the
same offer, tells us something.
Who are the best onballers?
The run-all-day Scully and the equally complete Trengove, but unless
you're a Demon fan don't get too excited. People in Adelaide have been
comparing Trengove's SANFL season - he had 30 possessions and took a
match-saving mark in the preliminary final, then had 20 touches in Sturt's
losing grand final team - with those of Bryce Gibbs and Nathan Buckley.
I'm not sure everyone would agree, but there are little bits of his game -
his floating marks - that remind me of James Hird, although Trengove is
probably a more traditional midfielder. Martin has explosive speed
[confirmed at the recent draft camp] and beautiful foot skills. Cunnington
would almost kill someone to get to the ball, and can go forward; he and
Trengove are probably the best marks in the midfield group. The top 10
picks will be dominated by midfielders, with Gary Rohan [maybe a mid,
maybe a half-forward or half-back], Jake Melksham, Kane Lucas, Jordan
Gysberts and Luke Tapscott names you will hear more of.
How about the talls?
There aren't very many of them. There aren't many really tall players, for
a start; in fact, you might see a few ruckmen drafted out of state leagues
or kept on lists when they might otherwise have been delisted. John
Butcher seems clearly the best key-position prospect, but the thinking
with the rest seems to be that while many have exciting qualities or
attributes, none look like complete packages. They will need development,
wherever they go. Jake Carlisle and Daniel Talia look like first-rounders
- both can play forward or back, although some recruiters will tell you
they only like Carlisle as a forward and others will tell you he's better
down back. Gippsland ruckman Nathan Vardy might be in there somewhere, but
again, he has shown mostly glimpses. ''He can jump, he can mark, he's got
good technique,'' said one recruiter. ''But has hasn't shown it
consistently. It's the same story with all of them. Norwood forward
Matthew Panos may come into the mix in the 20s [earlier, should the Demons
or Port pick him] and he's not a flashy or an aggressive player, but he
takes marks, kicks goals and from all reports will lap up an AFL
environment. David Astbury [North Ballarat] will fit in there somewhere,
too. Aaron Black has burst onto the West Australian scene late but seems
more of a tall utility than a true key-position player. James Craig shapes
as the best ruck prospect, but he's only 195 centimetres. He's got a good
leap, which helps, and the way Mitch Clark and Paddy Ryder played this
year suggest his height won't matter so much. There is so much for
recruiters to consider this year, the talls look like a lottery more than
ever before. ''People are going to have completely different ideas about
all of them,'' said one recruiter.
What's the deal with John Butcher?
Touted as a top two or three pick at the start of this year, Butcher
hasn't had a fantastic year and his stocks seem to have fallen. He is this
year's mystery man and no one seems sure where he will fit in at this
stage. The critics will say he has a bad kicking action and that his work
ethic can vary from game to game. But he is 197 centimetres and is the
best contested mark in the draft, surely. He kicks points, but he also
kicks goals. His endurance needs work, but he notched a 2.99-second sprint
time for 20 metres. Having starred as a 17-year-old, he has been under the
microscope for a long time. Butcher impressed in many of his interviews at
draft camp and when the dust settles, it's hard to see him reaching the
Demons at No. 11. ''He presented really well,'' said one recruiter. ''I
watched him really closely in the time trial, I thought he busted a gut
and I watched him really closely. I reckon he's right back in the mix.''