Draft consensus

[Bring_Back_Brad]

Pretty funny really. Only mention Thomas or Pendles got was VV commenting on how loaded the Gippy midfield was in relation to Ellis. No one picked them at all

Pretty funny.
Interesting how it goes, Pendles would be pick1 in retrospect, would be interesting to go through every draft and reorder them and see how closely careers represent draft order.

 

[Pedro]

Pretty funny really. Only mention Thomas or Pendles got was VV commenting on how loaded the Gippy midfield was in relation to Ellis. No one picked them at all

Can't be bothered looking for it, but on the morning of the draft I'm pretty sure someone posted the mail he had that we would in fact draft Thomas @ 2 and Pendlebury @ 5. Thank god we gave Ellis a wide berth.

 

[wednesdaywarrior]

To be fair I think a couple of those guys being proposed actually turned into pretty good players. Ellis was also a very handy flanker and played in a flag for Hawthorn. But I think some of the fan certainty about which players are the ones to take is worth taking note of !!

 

[Bay Pie]

Have a look at the size of this thread. BF has exploded. We now have threads on individual picks that have a massive number of pages.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

Pretty funny really. Only mention Thomas or Pendles got was VV commenting on how loaded the Gippy midfield was in relation to Ellis. No one picked them at all

Well obviously it's unreasonable to expect anyone to be as close to the mark as I was ( ), but I think looking at it from the perspective of "look how wrong everybody was is a little unfair".

I think what's changed since then is a stronger sample size of how unexpected the draft can be, and how different rankings can be from draft "experts" to AFL clubs, and even the clubs from each other. We all just assumed that since neither Dale Thomas nor Scott Pendlebury had had a long wind-up of having been talked about as Top 10 picks, that they weren't in the race.

Compared to the discussion of this year's pick #5, we were getting a really, really, really narrow scatter of who we might be interested in - Even guys like Ryder and Mitch Clark who were consensus Top 10 picks all season and did end up being drafted in the Top 10 barely even got a mention from us.

We all just thought it was between Ellis, Hurn, Kennedy and Swallow, like those were the definite next best four guys in the draft, and we'd be picking two of them. As it stood, Hurn went outside the Top 10 and Swallow fell into the 40s, so the information we'd been leaning on (which mainly all came from the now-defunct footydraft.com) was a fair way off.

Dale Thomas roared into Top 5 calculations on the rumour-mill in the week of the draft, but a week prior to the draft footydraft had him at #14 and Pendlebury at #21. By the day before the draft, Thomas had moved into #5 on their phantom, but Pendlebury was STILL at #15.

This year, with just the one Top 5 pick, our discussion has certainly passed over a lot of names, with Laverde, Wright, Pickett, De Goey, Weller, Langford, Lever, Ahern and even Duggan having a fair amount of supporters, so there's going to be somebody tooting their own horn on draft night regardless.

 

[Old Spice]

Pretty exciting to think we have no idea who will be taken and that the club plays it close to their chest. Were Reid and Brown in 2006 calculations?

 

[Gone Critical]

Well obviously it's unreasonable to expect anyone to be as close to the mark as I was ( ), but I think looking at it from the perspective of "look how wrong everybody was is a little unfair".

I think what's changed since then is a stronger sample size of how unexpected the draft can be, and how different rankings can be from draft "experts" to AFL clubs, and even the clubs from each other. We all just assumed that since neither Dale Thomas nor Scott Pendlebury had had a long wind-up of having been talked about as Top 10 picks, that they weren't in the race.

Compared to the discussion of this year's pick #5, we were getting a really, really, really narrow scatter of who we might be interested in - Even guys like Ryder and Mitch Clark who were consensus Top 10 picks all season and did end up being drafted in the Top 10 barely even got a mention from us.

We all just thought it was between Ellis, Hurn, Kennedy and Swallow, like those were the definite next best four guys in the draft, and we'd be picking two of them. As it stood, Hurn went outside the Top 10 and Swallow fell into the 40s, so the information we'd been leaning on (which mainly all came from the now-defunct footydraft.com) was a fair way off.

Dale Thomas roared into Top 5 calculations on the rumour-mill in the week of the draft, but a week prior to the draft footydraft had him at #14 and Pendlebury at #21. By the day before the draft, Thomas had moved into #5 on their phantom, but Pendlebury was STILL at #15.

This year, with just the one Top 5 pick, our discussion has certainly passed over a lot of names, with Laverde, Wright, Pickett, De Goey, Weller, Langford, Lever, Ahern and even Duggan having a fair amount of supporters, so there's going to be somebody tooting their own horn on draft night regardless.

Yeah Vinnie didnt really mean look how wrong everyone was just that it was amusing to see how much more info we have 10 years on. I wasnt following the draft as strongly then but can remember listening to Shifter Sheehan on the morning of talking about this rumour we were pulling this kid Pendlebury out of the hat. I had thought Ellis was the best no 2 so can remember being peeved with the Thomas/Pendles combo initially. That didnt last long. Hines greatest moment for mine.

 

[Avatar]

Can't be bothered looking for it, but on the morning of the draft I'm pretty sure someone posted the mail he had that we would in fact draft Thomas @ 2 and Pendlebury @ 5. Thank god we gave Ellis a wide berth.

Yep and it's been bumped a couple of times since and probably will be again at some point

Pretty funny really. Only mention Thomas or Pendles got was VV commenting on how loaded the Gippy midfield was in relation to Ellis. No one picked them at all

I picked Pendles as my player for the national champs whenever that was - June or July. Sure I was a bit biased following Gippsland closely but I'll take it.

 

[motr]

Excellent bump. Goes to show how wrong the bigfooty consensus can be.

 

[MyManLynch]

Excellent bump. Goes to show how wrong the bigfooty consensus can be.

Not just BigFooty consensus!

 

[DAWESOME!!]

What amused me was seeing a single... umm.. difficult poster totally derail the thread with a single post and resulting pile on/fight. Plus ça change.

 

[FIGJAM]

Best available. Needs are irrelevant until you are well outside the top 5!

I stand by this post from a decade ago.

 

[sr36]

Obviously Hine was way more astute than anyone on this board, which is why I won't be questioning who he calls out next week, but it was interesting how the mug punters rated Swallow more accurately than the professional recruiters. In retrospect, he should have gone in the top 5 rather than at 43.

 

[jackcass]

Obviously Hine was way more astute than anyone on this board, which is why I won't be questioning who he calls out next week, but it was interesting how the mug punters rated Swallow more accurately than the professional recruiters. In retrospect, he should have gone in the top 5 rather than at 43.

Yes, we'd all be very happy if Hine had called Swallow, Vince, Stokes or even Jack instead of Stanley, Cook, and Anthony.

 

[MagpieJoel]

I kinda miss Murray.

Nah. He was the same on all the Collingwood boards. From memory he was banned from Nick's too.

 

[FIGJAM]

Murray was a Grade-A campaigner!