Draft Review 2020 - Revisit the 2020 AFL Draft

Remove this Banner Ad

Who knows if we did well or not? I was hoping we’d take Cox. As for the players we took, I haven’t heard of 80% of them. If they are mostly more outside types, my read is that we are looking to play more attacking footy.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

TENACIOUS said:
Peoples you don't need to justify Essendon's draft choices to me,
if you're happy with the choices that's all that matters :thumbsupv1:

Personally I would have taken a mid at Perkins pick but that's just me..
Cox and Reid are great choices, along with your NGA's that you were committed to.
Click to expand...
Which mid would you have taken out of those left?
 
unplugged said:
I'm curious to know how Adelaide are rating their haul?

Happy with Thilthorpe?

Pedlar seemed like a huge reach when Bruhn, Chapman etc. were still on the board, although they very well could've done a Perkins in their interviews. Rowe surprised me a little bit too.

I guess my question is are you satisfied you got the best players for your side, or was it too heavily weighted to taking players out of SA?
Click to expand...
Adelaide fans are very happy.

Thilthorpe could be absolutely anything - he has tools that no one in the draft has. Pedlar only seems early because he has less exposed form to outsiders; the Crows have been following him for a long time.
 
unplugged said:
Alright genius, if I asked you pre-draft who you were going to take with your second pick, and gave you an opportunity to name 20 names, do you think you'd honestly name him? I don't think too many on BigFooty would.
Click to expand...
People were talking about Pedlar constantly on the Crows board.

We probably thought we were going to trade 9 and 22 for 13 and 15 (say) - but if we did that, it still would have been because we wanted Pedlar and Cook at those picks.
 
mezaire said:
From where I sit there seemed to be quite a few bolters so I can only guess that due to limited exposure this year that clubs either had more exposure to certain players than other clubs via local scouts etc, or decided to draft on potential due to limited exposure.

I must say I was very surprised on Adelaide and GWS passing on Chapman as he seemed a walk up starter for the Crows and just the sort of player GWS need.
Click to expand...
The absolute dead last thing the Crows need is another tallish defender.
 
A lot of Bulldog fans were hoping for a small quick pressure forward, preferably an indigenous kid to pair with Marra but really Marra is a rolled gold gift. Dominic Bedendo has the second best name in the draft (a lot of us wanted Phoenix Spicer, damn you North).

I know people say Adelaide reached with Peddlar but their last first round 'reach' was Doedee and they've been proven correct with that one, he might captain the club.
Sydney deserve mention for picking up McDonald who many people thought should have been pick 1, then getting their two academy kids. Their fans should be over the moon.
 
Mego Red said:
People were talking about Pedlar constantly on the Crows board.

We probably thought we were going to trade 9 and 22 for 13 and 15 (say) - but if we did that, it still would have been because we wanted Pedlar and Cook at those picks.
Click to expand...
And a reason a trade didnt go down is that the crows got wind that pedlar was going to be gone by the time it got to their pick so they pulled the trigger at 10
 
JayJ20 said:
Winners
Sydney, Gold Coast and Bulldogs obviously big winners, but that's a given with the NGAs at their disposal.
I thought Collingwood and Essendon in particular did the best of the rest. I liked all of their selections. Essendon are set for KPPs and Collingwood's midfield is stocked. Collingwood probably should have used their 2021 pick to trade up to one of Essendon's selections for one of Reid or Cox, but I guess they went the midfield route.
North, Hawthorn and Adelaide also did well with their selections. North set their midfield and Hawthorn their backline.
Carlton probably the best value pick with Carrol sliding. I liked North's Ford selection as well.

Losers
GWS the biggest losers. Should have traded up to one of Essendon's picks to select one of Reid and Cox. They've gained a future first which is great, but the top end is full of midfielders. Do they really need anymore mids?
Not sure about Geelong's strategy of trading out their 2021 first either. Seems unnecessary.
I think St Kilda could have selected better at their pick given there were a lot of quality players on the board at that point, but they already had an excellent trade period.

We'll obviously know more in a couple of years, but I don't think anyone did particularly horrible. Even GWS had a decent draft.

Have a look at the top 20 prospects next year. Full of mids. This year was the draft for talls. Touted to be a very strong draft for mids. We should have most of our glaring holes filled this time next year with our expected focus on midfielders.
Click to expand...
I keep seeing northern club's academies referred to as NGA's, which is not correct. The northern academies are about establishing a pathway to the elite level of Aussie Rules which does not currently exist in these states. This is an all encompassing program which involves clubs paying to improve coaching for hundreds of players across multiple age brackets. The goal is that one day NSW and QLD will have a self-sustaining ability to provide a number of AFL quality players that is in keeping with their relatively large populations.

In contrast, Next Generation Academies have primarily served to funnel elite talent that is already within an established, non-club related development path, towards clubs based on zoning.

These two terms, NGA and Northern Academy, are not interchangeable. Whilst the outcomes might seem similar on a micro level (ability to match bids on players in the draft), each program has a very different goal, and very different outcomes on a macro level. IMO it is a real disservice to the Northern Academies to lump them in together.
 
ScrewInStuds said:
I keep seeing northern club's academies referred to as NGA's, which is not correct. The northern academies are about establishing a pathway to the elite level of Aussie Rules which does not currently exist in these states. This is an all encompassing program which involves clubs paying to improve coaching for hundreds of players across multiple age brackets. The goal is that one day NSW and QLD will have a self-sustaining ability to provide a number of AFL quality players that is in keeping with their relatively large populations.

In contrast, Next Generation Academies have primarily served to funnel elite talent that is already within an established, non-club related development path, towards clubs based on zoning.

These two terms, NGA and Northern Academy, are not interchangeable. Whilst the outcomes might seem similar on a micro level (ability to match bids on players in the draft), each program has a very different goal, and very different outcomes on a macro level. IMO it is a real disservice to the Northern Academies to lump them in together.
Click to expand...
Yeah I realise they are different. I guess I'll just say the academies. Still, it's the same bidding system so it's hard to go wrong when you have talented players tied to your academy.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Giant Pete said:
Who knows if we did well or not? I was hoping we’d take Cox. As for the players we took, I haven’t heard of 80% of them. If they are mostly more outside types, my read is that we are looking to play more attacking footy.
Click to expand...
A style you could call the Orange Tsunami
 
JayJ20 said:
Yeah I realise they are different. I guess I'll just say the academies. Still, it's the same bidding system so it's still a gift to have players that good coming through the northern academies.
Click to expand...
It's about building the game in the northern states and also to ease the pain of draftees like Archie Perkins warning off non Vic clubs and the significant go home to Vic factor where from the day they're drafted you have ten Vic clubs actively unsettling Vic draftees.

I think the academies have done a great job, we only see the tip of the iceberg in the players that get drafted but for every one of those there's hundreds of kids that have been indoctrinated into playing AFL.

NGA's on the other hand are a rort, just a concession to the Eddie Maguire's in Vic who sooked it up big time about the northern academies. These NGA kids were already in the elite system, clubs get priority to them under the flimsiest of parameters. We were wooden spooners, we were entitled to select (and keep) JUH but the NGA rort donated him to the finals finishing Dogs for a grab bag of late picks.
 
If you're going to review winners and losers, don't you have to consider what assets the club started with on the night? It's pretty pointless to say, Collingwood, Sydney, WB did well because they had the biggest advantages and investments going into the draft.

Collingwood for example picked up a large bunch of players but have significantly divested from next year's draft, which is supposed to be stronger.
 
Kreuuuzeurns said:
Collingwood had a brilliant haul but at an obviously ridiculous cost.
Click to expand...
While our trade period was dumb beyond belief I think it's a bit of a misnomer that our draft selections came at ridiculous cost. Our trades were done at such significant unders that they hardly added any draft value. Ignoring picks swaps the result for Stephenson/Atu was basically 1x second round pick which we ontraded and 1x future fourth. In terms of the Treloar trade historically 2x second round picks would be enough to land 14 on it's own, so Treloar was basically given away to upgrade a third round pick to a future second.

Our '21 first round pick would have been eaten by points for Daicos, so trading it out this year made sense. While my preference would have been a pick between 8-14 in return I think we got reasonable value to ultimately end up with picks 30 & 31 and some future thirds. Sliding back the initial GWS very late first half a dozen spots allowed us to land those future thirds, which will help match the Daicos bid.
 
Dr Awkward said:
If you're going to review winners and losers, don't you have to consider what assets the club started with on the night? It's pretty pointless to say, Collingwood, Sydney, WB did well because they had the biggest advantages and investments going into the draft.

Collingwood for example picked up a large bunch of players but have significantly divested from next year's draft, which is supposed to be stronger.
Click to expand...
We traded out of next year's draft, because we have a similar advantage in 2021 to what you're lauding the 'dogs for in 2020. No point keeping a first round pick when it will be eaten by matching a bid, so it's just a matter of whether it's traded for picks in another draft or on a player.
 
JayJ20 said:
Yeah I realise they are different. I guess I'll just say the academies. Still, it's the same bidding system so it's hard to go wrong when you have talented players tied to your academy.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's fair, I think that academies works fine as a catch all term for both systems, and I agree with the overall point that you're making. Sorry to nitpick, it's just been bugging me for a little while (in the media as much as on bigfooty) and your post just happened to be the one that made me say something. I don't want to derail things any further, so back to the draft!
 
Dangerousfield said:
It's about building the game in the northern states and also to ease the pain of draftees like Archie Perkins warning off non Vic clubs and the significant go home to Vic factor where from the day they're drafted you have ten Vic clubs actively unsettling Vic draftees.

I think the academies have done a great job, we only see the tip of the iceberg in the players that get drafted but for every one of those there's hundreds of kids that have been indoctrinated into playing AFL.

NGA's on the other hand are a rort, just a concession to the Eddie Maguire's in Vic who sooked it up big time about the northern academies. These NGA kids were already in the elite system, clubs get priority to them under the flimsiest of parameters. We were wooden spooners, we were entitled to select (and keep) JUH but the NGA rort donated him to the finals finishing Dogs for a grab bag of late picks.
Click to expand...

I agree with people that say Blakey was a lucky break for us and he clearly was not what the Academies were setup for but just at the Swans guys like Heeney, Mills, Campbell and Gulden are all very likely players that would not be in the AFL right now if not for the academies, and that is who the academies is disigned to help.

Also for all the talk of how big an advantage the academies are I should point out that there has only been 1 player across 4 clubs that has been a Northern Academy member and has also won an All Australian, and that is Harris Andrews who was taken at a pick in the 60's. If a club bid on Andrews in the 20's or 30's then odds are Brisbane would not have even matched.
 
RUNVS said:
I agree with people that say Blakey was a lucky break for us and he clearly was not what the Academies were setup for but just at the Swans guys like Heeney, Mills, Campbell and Gulden are all very likely players that would not be in the AFL right now if not for the academies, and that is who the academies is disigned to help.

Also for all the talk of how big an advantage the academies are I should point out that there has only been 1 player across 4 clubs that has been a Northern Academy member and has also won an All Australian, and that is Harris Andrews who was taken at a pick in the 60's. If a club bid on Andrews in the 20's or 30's then odds are Brisbane would not have even matched.
Click to expand...

I agree the northern academies are a good thing for the game, but I would like to see a fairer system that lowers or raises the discount dependent on previous years use. Given Sydney have just invested some 2000 points into the last draft, next year’s discount should be lower than 20%, more like 10%, conversely if there’s been a series of say 3 years without a prospect, it would raise to 30% discount on bids. A flat rate seems absurdly unfair if one club continually milks it and nobody else benefits.
 
RUNVS said:
I agree with people that say Blakey was a lucky break for us and he clearly was not what the Academies were setup for but just at the Swans guys like Heeney, Mills, Campbell and Gulden are all very likely players that would not be in the AFL right now if not for the academies, and that is who the academies is disigned to help.

Also for all the talk of how big an advantage the academies are I should point out that there has only been 1 player across 4 clubs that has been a Northern Academy member and has also won an All Australian, and that is Harris Andrews who was taken at a pick in the 60's. If a club bid on Andrews in the 20's or 30's then odds are Brisbane would not have even matched.
Click to expand...
I wanted North to bid on Campbell, he reminds me of Wayne Schwass, (but Phillips is good, he's got a bit of the Dustin Martin's about him.) Would have been happy if you lot didn't match the bid as well. I think Campbell will be one of the stand out players from this draft come 2025.

Some north supporters are salty about the lizard faced weirdo Young Blakey but we're really better off with his dad. Maybe youse got lucky but Blakey would have grown up around that Sydney academy, even tho there is no way he'd need that sort of thing to get into footy. Its probably less of a big deal than we make out. Either way he and Campbell will be very good players. Might be AAs one day.

I reckon Longmire and Blakey Sr bought alot of what North under Pagan was about to the Swans ("Bloods culture" etc, all that Shinboner stuff under Pagan was very similar) and it will be great to have Blakey Sr back at North cos we really need a bit of that old school commitment and a bit of continuity/tradition to expose all these young kids to. "Losing" his kid to you guys is probably a small price to pay for that in the long run.
 
La Dispute said:
Hawthorn: Probably disappointed McDonald didn't end up slipping through, but DGB looks a very good prospect. All other picks were sound (B)
Click to expand...
The Hawks had DGB rated as number three after JUH and Campbell, so would have chosen him even if McDonald had been there at our choice.
 
THE_GUN said:
So disappointed , We never win the draft

Hope this kid Rioli can play & 206 Samson doesnt get a haircut
Tigers now have 2021

2 x 1st rounders
2 x 2nd rounders
2 x 3rd rounders

Cant wait for next year
Click to expand...
* that is frightening!
Not being a prick but it must be nice after years of mediocrity to then become an absolute powerhouse and dynasty club.
Now have the chance to keep it going for years yet just as you'll probably need a little injection of young class.

As I said...Frightening!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

adammania9
Draft Review 1999 - Revisit the draft
Replies
2
Views
740
GWS Goose
GWS Goose
S
Draft Review 2022 - Revisit the 2022 AFL Draft
2 3 4
Replies
94
Views
7K
Kane McGoodwin
Kane McGoodwin
Ticky009
  • Locked
2023 AFL DRAFT - National Draft completed, PSD & Rookie Draft Wednesday @ 3pm
30 31 32 33 34
Replies
838
Views
45K
Vindicater
Vindicater
S
Rookie draft 2023
Replies
4
Views
1K
Vindicater
Vindicater
BigVic
Grade your team's draft 2023
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
219
Views
16K
ScrappyDo
ScrappyDo
dajesmac
Each Club's Draft Needs 2023
2
Replies
49
Views
4K
Vindicater
Vindicater
Jeremias
  • Sticky
Win Prizes 2023 Official Draft Tipping Competition - Join Now!
Replies
15
Views
2K
Lore
Lore

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top