Completely agree hypen, but in those years we picked first at 7, 3 and 4, and our second and third round picks were commensurately earlier. It's a fair bit easier than when you are picking first at 20, 16, 17, 17, 13 and 22, as we have since 2010.
So, the question is, have we got value from those higher picks? On its face, no. But the response needs to me measured against what was available after out pick, factoring in the 'hindsight' factor. It would have been helpful if we took more tall forwards, but there haven't been many good ones available at those picks in the draft. There's a million people lining up to say we should have done something, but few as to what that something should have been. I mean, if people can't even spell out a compelling alternate draft case with the benefit of hindsight, what chance did Bond have in real time?
