Player Watch 2023 AFL Draft Pool Discussion Thread

Who would you prefer we pick with our first pick?

  • Nick Watson

    Votes: 147 36.2%
  • Zane Duursma

    Votes: 136 33.5%
  • Colby McKercher

    Votes: 50 12.3%
  • Daniel Curtin

    Votes: 51 12.6%
  • Nate Caddy

    Votes: 10 2.5%
  • Conor O'Sullivan

    Votes: 6 1.5%
  • Ryley Sanders

    Votes: 4 1.0%
  • Darcy Wilson

    Votes: 2 0.5%

  • Total voters
    406

Remove this Banner Ad

Same rule applies to this thread as other years, keep it on topic about the kids.
Don’t get bogged down on what other teams might do or where they will finish.

Trade speculation belongs here.

That's also where you can discuss your mock drafts or pick trades.

Any McCabe, Dear or Maginness talk belongs here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Log in to remove this ad.

I know I'm repeating myself here, but Foxsport and ESPN 'rating' teams' draft 2 hours after they have happened is beyond cretinous.

It should be renamed "Teams Ranked According To How Much Their Choices Matched Those of Some Anonymous Hack in the Media"

Team Took Player I Like = WIN!!! Player I liked siipped Two rounds...Was I wrong? NO, The Clubs are wrong! What a bargain to get him for 42, when I HAD HIM AT 20!!!

maybe you were just wrong heckface??

Too stupid for words...

Not a cardable offense if people post rankings, but I would be hoping for a disclaimer if you do...
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

NGA players are a waste of time and resources if you can't draft them

Tew Jiath was introduced to the AFL system, culture and training regimes by us. It is beyond ridiculous we couldn't draft him

I mean, yes. But we wouldn't have Cam Mackenzie if matching bids were still a thing.

It's just ridiculous to me that the Northern states aren't affected by it. Gold Coast getting 4 in the first round is absurd. Should be allowed to nominate 2 players maxiumum and the rest are fair game.
 
Not that Foxsports ratings mean s**t. But I don't see the problem with what a B represents. If C/C+ is a passing grade then a B pretty much represents that we did a bit better than expected.

We got Watson as expected. We got McCabe for perhaps a little less than expected (which was out of our hands anyway). We picked up a promising player in Bodie, but let's be honest 99% on here had never heard of him. And we got Dear as expected. Managed to snag a couple of future fourths but that's just a bit of icing.

Our draft went largely as expected.

If we wanted a higher rating then it probably meant we needed to get another top 10-15 selection via our F1. We tried, it didn't happen. Oh well.

As for Essendon getting A-. Them getting a higher rating than us in previous drafts hasn't helped them win a final. Long may it continue.
 
How does Fox even determine their shitty rating system, Essendon get an A- for what though, grabbing Caddy? "Bombers moved up to get Nate Caddy, which only cost them Pick 31" Yea trading Pick 31 to move one spot in the draft is such a galaxy brain move.

Mean while Hawthorn grab two first round picks which address holes in our list. Plus future capital. If their lazy arse writers paused for two second they would realise multiple clubs tried to trade up to land Watson.

As noted, clubs rated A to C-

8 ratings in which B is 4th. So in effect we were rated just above average
 
Its made up bullshit to get clicks. Just ignore it.
I’m just glad we didn’t get Caddy, I remember what a peanut his uncle was when he was captured on the umps mic calling a young Dan Howe a “ *******” that is low rent behaviour then young Nate playing in the champs lipping off with his peroxide blond hair and I’ve spoken recently to a draftee ( early 2nd round ) from last year who is still on a list ,asked him about a couple of guys we were considering including Caddy , he played against him and apparently he wasn’t highly regarded amongst his peers overrated and poor attitude. I’m glad Essendon grabbed him .
 
I mean, yes. But we wouldn't have Cam Mackenzie if matching bids were still a thing.

It's just ridiculous to me that the Northern states aren't affected by it. Gold Coast getting 4 in the first round is absurd. Should be allowed to nominate 2 players maxiumum and the rest are fair game.
This is absurd and will come back to bite us on the bum. The rules must be the same.
 
I have know idea how these are rated !
There is seriously no point to it now !
Rate them in a year or 2??



On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
I remember getting Inside Football after the 2004 draft and Richmond got an A+ (or close to it) for drafting 5 players in the top 20....1 - Brett Deledio, 4 - Richard Tambling, 12 - Danny Meyer, 16 - Adam Pattison, 20 - Dean Polo.

It's all subjective.
 
Last edited:
I mean, yes. But we wouldn't have Cam Mackenzie if matching bids were still a thing.

It's just ridiculous to me that the Northern states aren't affected by it. Gold Coast getting 4 in the first round is absurd. Should be allowed to nominate 2 players maxiumum and the rest are fair game.
The previous draft the Saints were able to draft NGA's Windhager and Michito Owens - but then the demons weren't allowed to draft Mac Andrew. the anomalies and inconsistency of the system are laughable - they change rules on the whim of the AFL
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

One "AFL Academy"...paid for by the AFL, for non-traditional pathways, rugby states, etc etc.

All players then eligible for the draft by any team.

Everyone knows its the obvious answer for equity, and everyone knows it won't happen for that very reason.

The most corrupt pack of cucking funts this side of FIFA...
 
I mean, yes. But we wouldn't have Cam Mackenzie if matching bids were still a thing.

It's just ridiculous to me that the Northern states aren't affected by it. Gold Coast getting 4 in the first round is absurd. Should be allowed to nominate 2 players maxiumum and the rest are fair game.
I understand the desire to promote Australian Rules in NSW and Qld so I accept the reasoning behind the free hit. Nominating two players maximum has merit however it is unlikely to happen. To provide a small degree of fairness and a greater incentive for non NSW and Qld clubs to develop NGA players, I believe they should be able to match bids from round 2. Furthermore given the first round draft advantage already afforded to NSW and Qld teams, there should be no discounting of points. Finally when a club picks a father son player in any round of the draft, the pick can only be matched by the father son club, not the NGA club.
 
Seems like we have:
R1 - Hawks
R2 - Pies'
R3 - N/A
R4 - Carlton and Port's

As much as I was hoping we may use our F1 for the likes of an O'Sullivan, I also am a little relieved we have kept the F1 in the end. Going into next years draft with just a likely late F2 and 2 later F4s would've been a little tough to get excited about.

O'Sullivan or Caddy would've been nice no doubt but least we have some options for next year with the F1.
 
Looks like Sydney and GCS both have first round Academy prospects coming through next season. Farce.

Let clubs match NGA's at any point (full price) or strip the Academies away.
 
I know I'm repeating myself here, but Foxsport and ESPN 'rating' teams' draft 2 hours after they have happened is beyond cretinous.

It should be renamed "Teams Ranked According To How Much Their Choices Matched Those of Some Anonymous Hack in the Media"

Team Took Player I Like = WIN!!! Player I liked siipped Two rounds...Was I wrong? NO, The Clubs are wrong! What a bargain to get him for 42, when I HAD HIM AT 20!!!

maybe you were just wrong *face??

Too stupid for words...

Not a cardable offense if people post rankings, but I would be hoping for a disclaimer if you do...
There is only one way to measure success in AFL

90
 
Back
Top