Jaxon Barham

[The Royal Sampler]

As I said on another board, it may have a downgrading effect.

I reckon that unless you have a Hawkins "slam dunk" type, then the "value" of the player might blow out a bit.

It's all well and good to say he's worth a second or third rounder, but what if you still have someone you rate as a first rounder at your second or third pick (which would happen almost yearly due to the nature of subjective opinion).

All recruiters have the "can't believe he lasted until the second round" mantra going every year. That's the nature of the beast. So why starve yourself of that opportunity to bid for a kid you might rank 20 something, over a "too good to be true" (in your opinion) scenario?

I agree entirely, clubs will be reluctant to "over-bid" because a top quality player may slide to them and then they can't take advantage. I doubt very much that he'd go anywhere near the top 20. We'll probably have to spend less on him than we would have under the previous F/S system.

And Vinnie, you came to the dark side, now you have no good left in you.

Either way, we're going to Jaxon!

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Also, looking at his stats on the TAC Cup website, he averages about 4 ineffective kicks per game (they don't list clangers), and just over 8 effective kicks per game. He'd be pushing 70% effectiveness, and has to play on suburban grounds in the weather, and he didn't play TAC Cup last year so he's constantly improving.

I don't think that's so bad. What's the AFL average for kicking effectiveness?

 

[Coin_Toss]

I'm not an avid draft watcher, but he definitely possesses his father's speed. I don't know where people get the can't kick crap from as he probably made only 2 clangers a few weeks ago at Trevor Barker Oval. Definitely an outside midfielder, like his father, but he's shown me he can direct traffic at the stoppages.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

There is an article in the HS going back a few weeks on the Hawks and how they're the best team going around for kicking efficiency. It cites the competition (AFL) average for kicking efficiency as 76.5%.

I'd say Jaxon would be just about there already if you gave him a few games at Telstra Dome and the MCG.

 

[Magpie Mick]

...Barham, a 183cm midfielder, has worked to improve his one perceived weakness, his kicking...

Great that's all we need another player with poor kicking skills!!!

 

[ChipDouglas]

Great that's all we need another player with poor kicking skills!!!

I wouldn't classify him as a bad kick, a better judge than me said he has inherited his father's pace but just needs to steady a bit before kicking. Botton line he's a good prospect especially this year and a third round pick more than likely will get the job done.

 

[Lestat]

Apparently Andrew Swallow couldn't kick, and was picked up pretty late by North.

Would be good to see another Barham running around in the black and white. And most importantly, it sounds like he has the one thing that we don't have that much of...that is pace.

 

[MarkT]

My concern is reported kicking inadequacy. If we offered 4th round would anyone give up a third rounder? Particularly clubs finishing low on the ladder? 3rd rounder for another player with flawed footskills is a worry. Like Timmy, I’d love to see a Barham and a Picken make it at Collingwood though.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

My understanding is; we don't offer anything. We decide if we want to match the highest rival club bid with our next available pick. If we don't, he goes to the club that made that bid.

 

[FIGJAM]

My understanding is; we don't offer anything. We decide if we want to match the highest rival club bid with our next available pick. If we don't, he goes to the club that made that bid.

They are obligated to use that pick on that player if the player is still there.

It could be that other clubs just wanted to see what was left on the table, but may pick the player up if they think he is best available.

It's why I think that unless you have "slam dunk" Tom Hawkins style freaks, who would have had a top five pick holder from last year offer their pick for him (probably top 2-3), then someone who is not of that ilk, will likely not have clubs commit too highly.

As an exercise, here in Colin Wisbey's personal rankings from last year:

1. - Shannon Hurn
2 - Luke McEntee
3 - Beau Muston
4 - Mitchell Clark
5 - Jarred Oakley-Nicholls
6 - Nathan Jones
7 - Patrick Ryder
8 - Dennis Armfield
9 - Marc Murphy
10 - Wayde Mills
11 - John Anthony

BigFooty concensus aside, most recruiters lists would look something like this, as as evidenced on draft day, there are plenty of shocks and surprises.

So let's use our picks for that draft. Wiz may have gone (his ranking in brackets):

1st Round
2. Shannon Hurn (1)
5. Beau Muston (3)

Round 2
20. Luke McEntee (2)
23. Dennis Armfield (8)

Round 3
37. John Anthony (11)

That's ignoring the possibility of knowing a kid like Armfield would still be available later (ie. in the rookie draft...and hasn't even made an AFL list to date). Irrespective, the nature of subjective opinion dictates in this instance that hypothetically, Wiz could have had 5 personal top 11 picks in three rounds.

Now say Jaxon was draftable at this year, and Wiz ranked him #30 in his list. It would be almost silly to commit the third round pick, because the likelyhood is that you will have someone you rate higher at that pick (in this instance Jack Anthony).

On the flip side, and again due to subjective opinion, if one club ranks Jaxon at 15, then they may consider a third round bid to be a reasonable punt.

It will be interesting to see how it all unfolds. My prediction is that the system will generally work as it should, with "slam dunks" like Hawkins or G. Ablett Jnr or Jesse Smith or Travis Cloke having strong interest, raising their cost to a reasonable market level, with mid tier options being picked up in the third or fourth rounds, and with projects being available uncontested and able to be picked up with the club's last pick in the draft (or not at all).

 

[MarkT]

Father son players should be outside the draft with every son eligible to play for their father’s club. A fair price is free to dad’s club.

 

[FIGJAM]

Father son players should be outside the draft with every son eligible to play for their father’s club. A fair price is free to dad’s club.

Would be a flawless theory if this was 1986!

 

[The Royal Sampler]

They are obligated to use that pick on that player if the player is still there.

I don't follow. I'm pretty sure that the way it works is this;

1) Collingwood submits something declaring their intention to take Barham as a F/S selection, this must be lodged before October 1st.
2) At some point, which no one can tell me yet (but most likely before the draft), each club goes through the list of F/S selections and puts a draft choice on their heads if they think the player warrants it.
3) The AFL goes through and says to the Pies; "Richmond have put in the highest bid of their third-round pick".
4) The Pies decide whether we want to match that with our (later) third-rounder. If not, he goes to Richmond. I'm still assuming this occurs before the draft, and then the player is read out at the appropriate time on draft day.

 

[FIGJAM]

I'm quite sure I'm right Sampler. Don't really have time to hunt down the link, but it's essentially a commitment by the oppo club to use that pick in the draft. However, the kid can be taken beforehand by anyone else with a pick if they consider him best available.

 

[Ramere]

I don't follow. I'm pretty sure that the way it works is this;

1) Collingwood submits something declaring their intention to take Barham as a F/S selection, this must be lodged before October 1st.
2) At some point, which no one can tell me yet (but most likely before the draft), each club goes through the list of F/S selections and puts a draft choice on their heads if they think the player warrants it.
3) The AFL goes through and says to the Pies; "Richmond have put in the highest bid of their third-round pick".
4) The Pies decide whether we want to match that with our (later) third-rounder. If not, he goes to Richmond. I'm still assuming this occurs before the draft, and then the player is read out at the appropriate time on draft day.

In the case of "if not" then surely it is open slather as the f/s club has elected to not exercize their f/s option. If no other club takes the player then the club which nominated a pick would have to use it to take the player in question.

I've had a quick look for a link to confirm this but as yet haven't been able to find one.

 

[typewriter]

Father son players should be outside the draft with every son eligible to play for their father’s club. A fair price is free to dad’s club.

i agree with this the fact now that all clubs have established themselves in the AFL (no new teams) only Port and freo wil be disadvantaged for the next 10 or so years. Sydney west coast brisbane have all been around long enough for former players kids being able to be drafted.

sometimes a gun will come along and other clubs spit chips that they can be picked for nothing, however when our club is in the situation then we all cant wait to see them in the black and white. for kids coming thru they should be able to play for the same club as their old mans.

 

[typewriter]

i know this also sounds a bit unfare to kids around the country but y havnt clubs made more of an effort to have sons of former players developed from a young age to train them in skills and as atheletes from when their 12 and up and create these super players. its the only way u could have rigged the draft up unitl now

 

[The Royal Sampler]

In the case of "if not" then surely it is open slather as the f/s club has elected to not exercize their f/s option. If no other club takes the player then the club which nominated a pick would have to use it to take the player in question.

I've had a quick look for a link to confirm this but as yet haven't been able to find one.

There is no "open slather" because if he's not taken by the Pies, he goes to whoever made the highest bid that the Pies declined to match.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I'm quite sure I'm right Sampler. Don't really have time to hunt down the link, but it's essentially a commitment by the oppo club to use that pick in the draft. However, the kid can be taken beforehand by anyone else with a pick if they consider him best available.

You may well be. I think it is all decided before the actual draft as the F/S has always been, and the system you've described continues on into the draft. I'd really like to see the link if you can find it.

Unless of course you're saying that this system only applies in the situation where Collingwood decline to use the necessary pick to match the highest bid (before the draft). That would make sense, that the player would go into the draft in that instance.

 

[FadeAway]

Based on Hine's recent drafting efforts if he rates him, we should take him considering that the media is SUPPOSINGLY saying this years draft isnt that good.

 

[toommy]

I don't follow. I'm pretty sure that the way it works is this;

1) Collingwood submits something declaring their intention to take Barham as a F/S selection, this must be lodged before October 1st.
2) At some point, which no one can tell me yet (but most likely before the draft), each club goes through the list of F/S selections and puts a draft choice on their heads if they think the player warrants it.
3) The AFL goes through and says to the Pies; "Richmond have put in the highest bid of their third-round pick".
4) The Pies decide whether we want to match that with our (later) third-rounder. If not, he goes to Richmond. I'm still assuming this occurs before the draft, and then the player is read out at the appropriate time on draft day.

i don't think that is right. if richmond put up say pick 18 for him then we have to use our next best pick on the player which could be pick 60 if we trade off picks

 

[The Royal Sampler]

That may be true. We'd have to match it with our next available pick, don't know how it works in the case of picks having been traded.