Live Event 2015 AFL National Draft Night Thread

[doona]

Considering all he would have ended up costing you is picks 51 and 56 (as they were all you used in the end) I'm a little worried you rated him really low. Hoping it was the go-home factor that was the main decider.

Would have been a bit of both. I reckon you could also add list needs into the mix. I will be very interested to see how his career goes and wish all the best for him. But I was predicting this outcome, so not surprised.

Honestly, he was a player hard to place in the draft after his injuries/games this year.

 

[nottenthagain]

Considering all he would have ended up costing you is picks 51 and 56 (as they were all you used in the end) I'm a little worried you rated him really low. Hoping it was the go-home factor that was the main decider.

Anyway, proof will be in the pudding. Enjoy Mills you bastards, he looks amazing.

I'm still tyring to work out where our third pick would have fallen if we had taken Dunkley, it wouldn't have been much past our actual third.... I'm presuming we passed because it's a combination of flight risk as well as questionable foot skills in a position we're already stacked in - especially with Mills coming in. Personally, I think you took him about 10 spots too early

 

[robbieando]

I'm still tyring to work out where our third pick would have fallen if we had taken Dunkley, it wouldn't have been much past our actual third.... I'm presuming we passed because it's a combination of flight risk as well as questionable foot skills in a position we're already stacked in - especially with Mills coming in. Personally, I think you took him about 10 spots too early

If we took Dunkley our 3rd Pick would of been the final pick of the draft

 

[Shiv]

Did we win?

 

[hairy biker]

If you're not going to match a FS or Academy bid, having a raft of lower picks is useless. We're going to end up with s**t-kickers by not matching for Dunkley.

This, so much this.

It just appears we totally misread the 'market'.

On a side note bewildered by the comment that was made on the Foxtel coverage that Dunkley was keen to stay in Victoria and that his parents were thinking of moving closer to him.

If that last part is true it boggles the mind.
Are his parents going to move to Dandenong, so that they can get up at 3am, Dad going off to Sale to milk the cows and mum heads off to Footscray to make Josh breakfast?

Mr Dunkley Junior must have complained the level of service sis provided.

 

[grimlock]

So the explanation by Beatson for not matching Dunkley's bid is that we were looking for players that can kick the ball well.

 

[Tuco]

So the explanation by Beatson for not matching Dunkley's bid is that we were looking for players that can kick the ball well.

Yes saw that this morning. If we didn't select him for skills issues, then those issues must be glaring.

 

[MF]

It could have been an agreement with Dunkley that he'd nominate us on the proviso that we only outbid other non Vic teams. He seemed pretty keen on staying in Victoria.

It's the kind of deal that would have been in our best interest and his in that situation. He either ends up at a Victorian club or his old man's team. And from our standpoint we increase our small chances of snagging a kid who's hell bent on staying in Victoria.

 

[Tuco]

I don't buy the conspiracy theories about special deals.

Far more realistic explanations exist.

I'd say kcking issues + falling in at 25 which denied us a shot at a couple of other options + due diligence over the year suggesting he was a major flight risk = no deal.

We are obviously very concerned about the loss of field kicking ability in the list over the last couple of seasons and wanted to start rectifying that in this draft.

If he'd fallen to into the 30-40 range we probably would have taken him, though.

 

[bungwahl]

I think the only explanation for not taking Dunkley is that we had agreed not to match a bid from a Vic club.

Dawson could have been taken in the rookie draft and possibly Leonardis may have slid to the end of the draft. Effectively we've chosen Leonardis over Dunkley. Hopefully that turns out to be a master stroke.

 

[Tuco]

I think the only explanation for not taking Dunkley is that we had agreed not to match a bid from a Vic club.

Dawson could have been taken in the rookie draft and possibly Leonardis may have slid to the end of the draft. Effectively we've chosen Leonardis over Dunkley. Hopefully that turns out to be a master stroke.

Sure Dawson and Tyrone specifically could have slid as you say. But retaining the picks meant we could have a look at whoever was available - it just so happens that ended up being Tyrone at 51.

I can't see us going into the draft and specifically setting our sights on Dawson and Tyrone, though. They would have just been in a bag of potential grabs.

 

[Johnboi]

Just playing devils advocate here, but with the disappointment of some posters here that we didn't take Brown and/or Hartley, maybe we actually spoke to them in the lead up and they indicated they weren't interested in a move interstate? Don't shoot me for suggesting it, but that was an issue with selecting Dunkley in the lead-up to the draft so possibly it was a similar situation for those guys.

 

[grimlock]

Hartley is a Penrith boy

 

[Johnboi]

Damn, now I'm really disappointed. Would've loved to have a guy from my home town in the team

 

[Lakeside Swan]

So the explanation by Beatson for not matching Dunkley's bid is that we were looking for players that can kick the ball well.

Good to see that the club has acknowledged this issue and is doing something about it.

 

[swansfan51]

Good to see that the club has acknowledged this issue and is doing something about it.

They're each a 10-20% chance of becoming good AFL players (based on analysis of over 200 players drafted over a period of decades), so we have less than a 50% chance that this focus on kicking skills has actually delivered an improvement to the senior side.

 

[MarkP]

You know when management are talking about kicking skills they are taking the piss.

Total face saving program to get him to nominate for the F/S with the perfect understanding we were never in the hunt anyway because he had told us he was Victoria bound.

Apart from the obvious issues we face, along with other northern clubs, of getting "talent" up here I just wish the club and Dunkley had been forthright. I have no real issue if the kid did not want to play for us. Plenty of kids want to do it different to Dad. That is a perfectly natural thing, I see it all the time in my game.

It is the lies and spin that get me. Does it really honestly matter that much?

 

[Superstar swan]

We have probably kissed our chances of jordan dunkley good bye now

 

[Dangas]

Did we not rate Dunkley?

 

[Cadsky]

Did we not rate Dunkley?

Apparently cant kick. I'd bet we would have taken him had he fallen another 5-10 places

 

[CheapCharlie]

Dunkley wasn't committed to Sydney, so would have been a flight risk after a couple of years. No point in using all our picks just because it is a father/son selection. Doesn't mean he will fit in with what we need.

Overall, I'm damn happy with who we got.

2 years in a row we have taken a top 3 draft pick. Mills & Heeney. You could argue they are both #1 picks

We got a couple of handy other looking possibles.

As always, if the player works out. kudos to the brilliance of the recruiting team.

If it doesn't work out, we can blame the player for not giving his all.

 

[Wayne Swan]

There was. We picked up Talia cheap!

Wrong, we picked up Talia for free. We gave next years 4th rounder which will be late 60s for Bullies pick 69 and Talia was free.

 

[Neverwas]

They're each a 10-20% chance of becoming good AFL players (based on analysis of over 200 players drafted over a period of decades), so we have less than a 50% chance that this focus on kicking skills has actually delivered an improvement to the senior side.

To analyse this properly we would need to know the proportion of these players who were good kicks.I suspect the odds would be better for the better kicks.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

We have probably kissed our chances of jordan dunkley good bye now

You don't take someone just because his brother is highly rated. Josh has serious issues with his kicking, and as much as he is over these injuries, they are not minor injuries. Plus the two boys we picked are better options going forward. Genuine speed and a half forward.

 

[Superstar swan]

You don't take someone just because his brother is highly rated. Josh has serious issues with his kicking, and as much as he is over these injuries, they are not minor injuries. Plus the two boys we picked are better options going forward. Genuine speed and a half forward.

He may have issues with his kicking but the kid can play football. I can understand some of the reasons we skipped, but he has to be better option than leonidis and dawson. He was rated as a top 25 pick and we have turned him down for 2 x 50 plusers.

I also dont get all the flight risk talk. If we are scared of players leaving we may aswell stop recruiting players outside of nsw all together. Every single player's preference in the draft is to stay close to home. Unfortunately they all cannot stay in their home states. Thats where we need to back our culture in to show these kids we are a great club to play for.

Im sure zac jones honest preference would be to play with his brother in his home state but he arrived at the club and has signed a 2 year extension