Review Winners and Losers of the draft

[Sleezy]

You're about 2 years behind, we've added to our midfield depth the last 2 drafts.

Fyfe, Mundy, Neale, Barlow, Hill, Bennell. That 6 is as good as any.

Our current depth are not world beaters;

D. Pearce, Suban, DeBoer, Mzungu.

But we have plenty coming from underneath to apply pressure and take their spot.

Sheridan, Crozier, Weller, Blakeley, Langdon, Tucker, Balic. Morabito training fully but it remains to be seen if he can endure a full season of preseason.

Cheers mate, always good to get new info. I know very few people outside port would recognise some of our depth. Mybcomment was basically in repsonse to a WC poster who was saying that picking mids was a waste of time for you. I disagreed, and even with my better understanding of your depth (now) i still wouldn't call them wasted. Barlow and Mundy are starting to get on - better to start succession planning now than later or you'll end up like the hawks when hodge and mitchell retire.

 

[Lethality]

Geelong are the big losers. They threw the kitchen sink at Dangerfield, sure, but even with the loss of SJ, Kelly, Stokes, Walker, Simpson, Gore, etc, they forfeited their best picks in this draft and also next year's. Most worrying of all is that even after this exodus of experience they are still equal 3rd oldest in the competition.

 

[blaisee]

Daniel Rioli is ranked elite by champion data

On contested marks i50
Tackles i50
Cp i50
Ground ball gets i50
Assists

If that is a reach I hope we reach next year as well

 

[MightyDons4]

Daniel Rioli is ranked elite by champion data

On contested marks i50
Tackles i50
Cp i50
Ground ball gets i50
Assists

If that is a reach I hope we reach next year as well

I hope you do too

 

[MightyDons4]

Geelong are the big losers. They threw the kitchen sink at Dangerfield, sure, but even with the loss of SJ, Kelly, Stokes, Walker, Simpson, Gore, etc, they forfeited their best picks in this draft and also next year's. Most worrying of all is that even after this exodus of experience they are still equal 3rd oldest in the competition.

Gained a superstar in Dangerfield and solid players in Henderson, Smith and Selwood. Lost older and fringe player, in no way have they 'lost'. I'd back in their recruiting team to find gems later in the draft too.

 

[theGav56]

Gained a superstar in Dangerfield and solid players in Henderson, Smith and Selwood. Lost older and fringe player, in no way have they 'lost'. I'd back in their recruiting team to find gems later in the draft too.

Yes a pretty good off season so far at Catland. The draft is a lottery, and they have acquired some great talent.

 

[Lethality]

Gained a superstar in Dangerfield and solid players in Henderson, Smith and Selwood. Lost older and fringe player, in no way have they 'lost'. I'd back in their recruiting team to find gems later in the draft too.

That's pretty optimistic, and if their recruiting staff is able to find gems later in the draft then they would be even better placed to do so earlier in it.

Also if Kelly, Stokes and Johnson are fringe players then so are Selwood, Smith and Henderson.

This looks like a hail mary drafting strategy, and with Geelong equal 3rd in the oldest teams in the AFL, it needs to start paying dividends immediately.

 

[gutsroy]

Not sure if this is the right place to post about this, but couldn't see any dedicated threads elsewhere.

Rhys Mathieson:

He was tipped to slide to an extent given his aerobic testing at the combine(and I think maybe occasional lapses in disposal efficiency?), but did well in other areas of testing and was a back to back All-Australian, yet ended up slipping to around 39. Was there something else that put teams off him? Seemed odd

 

[aussierulesrules]

Not only did Mathieson make back-to-back AA teams, but the year before he also won the Kevin Sheehan medal, for best in division 1 of the under 16's championships and in his game in the VFL this year he had a game-high 10 clearances (from reportedly just 60% game time) against the powerful Box Hill Hawks (reportedly lining up on Kyle Langford).

Brenton Sanderson coached him and the other "elites" at the AIS AFL Academy and he said at the end of the first round during the coverage on TV the other night how surprised he was that Mathieson (and also Balic) didn't go in the first round, and described him as a "fantastic mid", and they mentioned him earlier in the coverage as a possibility to go as early as Richmond's first pick, so it's fair to say I was shocked to see him last to 39 and I imagine plenty of others were too.

I imagine his endurance testing would have spooked clubs, especially with the rotations being reduced again next year, but with "endurance being the easiest thing to fix" (according to Essendon's fitness team, re. Aaron Francis) I think some clubs may live to regret overlooking him.

Didn't Luke Parker slide (to pick 40) for no apparent reason after performing really well in the juniors?

 

[M Malice]

Not sure if this is the right place to post about this, but couldn't see any dedicated threads elsewhere.

Rhys Mathieson:

He was tipped to slide to an extent given his aerobic testing at the combine(and I think maybe occasional lapses in disposal efficiency?), but did well in other areas of testing and was a back to back All-Australian, yet ended up slipping to around 39. Was there something else that put teams off him? Seemed odd

Not only did Mathieson make back-to-back AA teams, but the year before he also won the Kevin Sheehan medal, for best in division 1 of the under 16's championships and in his game in the VFL this year he had a game-high 10 clearances (from reportedly just 60% game time) against the powerful Box Hill Hawks (reportedly lining up on Kyle Langford).

Brenton Sanderson coached him and the other "elites" at the AIS AFL Academy and he said at the end of the first round during the coverage on TV the other night how surprised he was that Mathieson (and also Balic) didn't go in the first round, and described him as a "fantastic mid", and they mentioned him earlier in the coverage as a possibility to go as early as Richmond's first pick, so it's fair to say I was shocked to see him last to 39 and I imagine plenty of others were too.

I imagine his endurance testing would have spooked clubs, especially with the rotations being reduced again next year, but with "endurance being the easiest thing to fix" (according to Essendon's fitness team, re. Aaron Francis) I think some clubs may live to regret overlooking him.

Didn't Luke Parker slide (to pick 40) for no apparent reason after performing really well in the juniors?

yes, the lions recruiters would have been nervously biting their finger nails as the last few picks were read out before their pick 39. also noticed on toomeys final draft assessment he was asked who was the big slider/bargain of the draft, he only mentioned 1 name- rhys matheison. as a lions fan

 

[ScrewInStuds]

It's average ages. Sydney are in a world of trouble, they have a bunch of aging stars and not much coming through.

Aging Stars (players over 30): McVeigh, McGlynn, Richards

Nothing coming through (players under 24): Heeney, Jones, Mills, Parker, Mitchell, Talia, Johnson

No idea...

 

[Lethality]

Aging Stars (players over 30): McVeigh, McGlynn, Richards

Aging stars aren't necessarily players over 30, that's just your arbitrary benchmark for it. In any case I'm not trying to show why Sydney are an old list, just the opposite. They're a younger list that relies on their aging veterans. The concern is that they have nothing coming through.

Nothing coming through (players under 24): Heeney, Jones, Mills, Parker, Mitchell, Talia, Johnson

No idea...

The fact that you're using Alex Johnson, a bloke who hasn't played in 3 years, Mills, a player who hasn't debuted yet, as well as a Bulldogs reject, says it all. Sydney's young talent is very thin on the ground, a consequence of the Franklin splash.

 

[ScrewInStuds]

The fact that you're using Alex Johnson, a bloke who hasn't played in 3 years, Mills, a player who hasn't debuted yet, as well as a Bulldogs reject, says it all. Sydney's young talent is very thin on the ground, a consequence of the Franklin splash.

I used players who have shown good exposed form at AFL level, other than Mills who seems to be considered by many as almost a sure thing. Happy to let you make the rules though, so Mills, Johnson, and Talia come out, but I'll add Reid (*edit - I forgot Lloyd too). Now that you've established your criteria, let's do a quick comparison with the Hawk's list:

Players over 30: Burgoyne, Gibson, Hodge, Mitchell
Players over 30: McVeigh, McGlynn, Richards

I think that it would be pretty universally agreed that your aging stars are far more important to Hawthorn than Sydney's are.

Players under 24: Hill, Hartung, O'Rourke, Langford, Litherland
Players under 24 (ommissions as per Lethality): Heeney, Parker, Mitchell, Jones, Reid, *Lloyd

Looks pretty even to my eye.

Aging stars aren't necessarily players over 30, that's just your arbitrary benchmark for it. In any case I'm not trying to show why Sydney are an old list, just the opposite. They're a younger list that relies on their aging veterans. The concern is that they have nothing coming through.

I'm happy to draw the arbitrary benchmark wherever you would prefer. We can lower the age gate to bring JPK / Lewis, Buddy / Roughhead, Birchall / Smith, Frawley / Grundy, Puopolo / Jack, Tippett / Spangher in if you would prefer?

 

[Defacto]

We debuted Langdon and Weller who were 1st year underage recruits. Alex Pearce got plenty of games as a 2nd year key position player. Youngsters got games, but come finals experience wins over. Aside from Sheed, I can't think of an inexperienced player in the GF. Or semi's for that matter.

Im sorry but this post is a joke. Not even 2 qtrs of football across 2 games is hardly a debut you should be hanginf your hat on

the development of your 1-3 years is appalling

 

[rgauci]

Im sorry but this post is a joke. Not even 2 qtrs of football across 2 games is hardly a debut you should be hanginf your hat on

the development of your 1-3 years is appalling

Development is different to being gifted games. Our development is exceptional. Peel who are WAFL cellar dwellers made the finals for the first time in their history on the back of our 1-3 yr players.

Sean Hurley an Irish player went from BOG average in WAFL reserves to serviceable key forward in the WAFL over a 12 month time frame.

They weren't ready to replace seasoned fringe players in 2015. DeBoer, Suban, Mzungu, D.Pearce were better in the WAFL when they were dropped than our youngsters but the gap narrowed. I expect after another preseason Weller, Blakeley and Langdon will be knocking on the door and get 10-12 games while the aforementioned are transitioned out.

Sheridan was able to displace Duffield in the 22, Crozier got a run of games but couldn't cement his spot ahead of D. Pearce or Ballantyne.

Just because they don't get gifted games, doesn't mean our development is poor.

Lachie Neale has gone from pick 58 in a 'shallow' draft to knocking on the door of AA all under Ross Lyon. Cam Sutcliffe from pick 71 to best 22 all under Lyon.

We drafted poorly in 2012. But either side of that draft we have done well. 2014, though most haven't seen them, are developing exceptionally.

Speaking of poor development? What happened to the next Buddy at your club?

 

[theGav56]

Im sorry but this post is a joke. Not even 2 qtrs of football across 2 games is hardly a debut you should be hanginf your hat on

the development of your 1-3 years is appalling

And yet those players, such as Weller, happily extend their contracts despite the lack of development and opportunity? I don't think so. They know that the opportunities will come if they are good enough because hey have seen Neale, Sheridan, Pearce and co take their chances.

 

[master bate]

Not only did Mathieson make back-to-back AA teams, but the year before he also won the Kevin Sheehan medal, for best in division 1 of the under 16's championships and in his game in the VFL this year he had a game-high 10 clearances (from reportedly just 60% game time) against the powerful Box Hill Hawks (reportedly lining up on Kyle Langford).

Brenton Sanderson coached him and the other "elites" at the AIS AFL Academy and he said at the end of the first round during the coverage on TV the other night how surprised he was that Mathieson (and also Balic) didn't go in the first round, and described him as a "fantastic mid", and they mentioned him earlier in the coverage as a possibility to go as early as Richmond's first pick, so it's fair to say I was shocked to see him last to 39 and I imagine plenty of others were too.

I imagine his endurance testing would have spooked clubs, especially with the rotations being reduced again next year, but with "endurance being the easiest thing to fix" (according to Essendon's fitness team, re. Aaron Francis) I think some clubs may live to regret overlooking him.

Didn't Luke Parker slide (to pick 40) for no apparent reason after performing really well in the juniors?

I've got 3 red flags with Matheison
- Running. I'm not convinced at all the endurance is easy to fix and what's his excuse for it?
- Disposal. His kicking isn't too bad, but not great. My real concern is he rushes to get the ball out from clearances
- Character. Weird is ok. But he poor Matho doesn't seem all there. He's a little too country.

I expect he'll be more Mitch Robinson than Luke Parker.

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

That's pretty optimistic, and if their recruiting staff is able to find gems later in the draft then they would be even better placed to do so earlier in it.

Also if Kelly, Stokes and Johnson are fringe players then so are Selwood, Smith and Henderson.

This looks like a hail mary drafting strategy, and with Geelong equal 3rd in the oldest teams in the AFL, it needs to start paying dividends immediately.

Yep put all their eggs in the one basket for one last shot at glory.

 

[yyou]

Yep put all their eggs in the one basket for one last shot at glory.

If someone of the caliber of Dangerfield is "on offer" any team would pay a large price.
I don't think they overpaid for any of their pickups at all

 

[hotchips81]

Im sorry but this post is a joke. Not even 2 qtrs of football across 2 games is hardly a debut you should be hanginf your hat on

the development of your 1-3 years is appalling

I'm sorry, but aren't you the same twat spruiking Weller's departure all season?

 

[Lethality]

I used players who have shown good exposed form at AFL level, other than Mills

Good exposed form is a pretty low bar to clear, even Jack Watts has good exposed form. This does nothing to disprove that Sydney are thin on the ground with their youth stocks.

I think that it would be pretty universally agreed that your aging stars are far more important to Hawthorn than Sydney's are.

This has nothing to even do with Hawthorn. And once again your aging stars are more than just the players in your cherry-picked range. Next year Franklin Tippet and Jack will be 29, Grundy will be 30, McVeigh Richards and McGlynn will go further into their 30s. Sydney need to make their move now because there is not much coming through with their youth stocks.

I'm happy to draw the arbitrary benchmark wherever you would prefer. We can lower the age gate to bring JPK / Lewis, Buddy / Roughhead, Birchall / Smith, Frawley / Grundy, Puopolo / Jack, Tippett / Spangher in if you would prefer?

It doesn't require any arbitrary benchmark, just a look at players in Sydney's list who are pushing 30 or past 30 suggests that their veterans are nearing the end. This has nothing to do with Hawthorn, so I'm not sure why you even brought them up.

 

[ScrewInStuds]

Good exposed form is a pretty low bar to clear, even Jack Watts has good exposed form. This does nothing to disprove that Sydney are thin on the ground with their youth stocks.



This has nothing to even do with Hawthorn. And once again your aging stars are more than just the players in your cherry-picked range. Next year Franklin Tippet and Jack will be 29, Grundy will be 30, McVeigh Richards and McGlynn will go further into their 30s. Sydney need to make their move now because there is not much coming through with their youth stocks.



It doesn't require any arbitrary benchmark, just a look at players in Sydney's list who are pushing 30 or past 30 suggests that their veterans are nearing the end. This has nothing to do with Hawthorn, so I'm not sure why you even brought them up.

You labelled Geelong as being this year's big trade period losers, and then state that Sydney's list is about to fall off a cliff, while ignoring all evidence provided to the contrary. Quite clearly, this has everything to do with Hawthorn, so I say good day to you sir.

 

[Lethality]

You labelled Geelong as being this year's big trade period losers, and then state that Sydney's list is about to fall off a cliff, while ignoring all evidence provided to the contrary. Quite clearly, this has everything to do with Hawthorn, so I say good day to you sir.

No I said Geelong were the draft period losers, this is a draft discussion thread,and their poor draft has nothing to do with Hawthorn. Sydney's list profile likewise.

 

[aussierulesrules]

I've got 3 red flags with Matheison
- Running. I'm not convinced at all the endurance is easy to fix and what's his excuse for it?
- Disposal. His kicking isn't too bad, but not great. My real concern is he rushes to get the ball out from clearances
- Character. Weird is ok. But he poor Matho doesn't seem all there. He's a little too country.

I expect he'll be more Mitch Robinson than Luke Parker.

-In the article on him in the HS the other day Mick Turner said that Rhys was playing CHF in the U16's, so perhaps if he's only been playing midfield for the last couple of years it explains why his endurance isn't that great. Turner also said that his combine beep test was "significantly better" than previous results, so if that's true then that's a good sign that it will continue to improve. According to Kristian Pisano's mock on here in 2012, Jackson Macrae scored just a 12.1 in the beep test in his draft year and yet he then went on to be the youngest ever to have a 40 possession game at AFL level, less than 2 years later, so it shows how quickly endurance can be built, if someone is willing to put in the hard work. His current endurance level is far from ideal though, there's no doubt about that.
- I agree that he seems to just throw the ball onto the boot in the packs (albeit usually under a lot of pressure, from what I've seen of him last year and this), but I wouldn't have thought that would be all that hard to coach out of him. Just tell him to only handball out of packs for a month or two over preseason and that will quickly fix that issue, I'd imagine.
- Hadn't heard anything at all about any character issues until the morning after the draft, so I have no idea if that is just BS or not.

He's going to have his work cut out for him breaking into the Brisbane midfield any time soon though, so it will be interesting to see how he develops.

 

[year of the cat]

No I said Geelong were the draft period losers, this is a draft discussion thread,and their poor draft has nothing to do with Hawthorn. Sydney's list profile likewise.

We started the draft at pick 59. Pretty hard at this early stage to be "draft winners" when you're waiting 2 hours before calling the first name. But I assume you are trolling again