Analysis 2025 Draft watch

[Aphrodite]

 

[Bamboo Harvester]

View attachment 2477299

Okay, over to Pommie's draft simulator.....

 

[marcmurphy3]

View attachment 2477299

Pretty poor for us. Disappointing if thats the best we can do.

Timing of Curnow leaving and bidding rule changes has really stung us.

Another F1 or a later 1st round pick this year was the pass mark for me (in addition to Dean+Ison), so that'd be a fail.

Essendon deal better if they can guarantee no bid on Dean, but pointless if Richmond bids before them.

 

[CrippaTheGoat9]

Disappointing

 

[Jimmae]

View attachment 2477299

Disappointing

**** that noise.

Take North's offer, and walk over to Gold Coast, then tell Essendon to go **** themselves.

If North want to up the ante, great, but 25 and 26 are the starting point, because Gold Coast will happily take 11 for 24 and 28.

Trade with Richmond, and flip Essendon the bird on the way past. Tired of Twomey's nonsense.

 

[marcmurphy3]

Disappointing

Garbage deals

If its just 21 and 27 for 9 we lose points? They'd need to throw in 30, but then they couldn't match their own bids.

 

[DEliades]

It’s all about points for us.

 

[bluebaggerjuls]

no club wants to trade a future first. not much we can do about it

 

[Stamos]

It’s all about points for us.

Plus extra.
If nobody is offering an F1, then North’s F2 is a decent fallback.

 

[Bronze]

I'd rather keep 9 & 11 and let 11 get downgraded by 4 or 5 picks and then just get the best player.

They must be concerned that Dean is getting bid on within the first 5 picks and Ison around 20. Bit of a shame we have lost currency from the Curnow trade.

 

[Stamos]

Garbage deals

If its just 21 and 27 for 9 we lose points? They'd need to throw in 30, but then they couldn't match their own bids.

They might be happy to forgo their academy kids if they’re bid on too early, especially when compared with the opportunity to take #9.
Or we might give them back a later pick?

 

[marcmurphy3]

They might be happy to forgo their academy kids if they’re bid on too early, especially when compared with the opportunity to take #9.
Or we might give them back a later pick?

I reckon we might give 43 back, but thats barely a points surplus for us.

Gets slightly better once GC and Brisbane picks get removed, although wont happen with Brisbane if Annable gets taken after Dean.

 

[Jimmae]

Garbage deals

If its just 21 and 27 for 9 we lose points? They'd need to throw in 30, but then they couldn't match their own bids.

You're reading your calculations backwards: it's +171 points to us where the picks would be sitting after other bids, but it also rules us out of trading up.

But from the perspective of points tally, it's going from 1140 points we'd be using to 1311, except that we can shift pick 11 from being worth 1024 in a bid scenario to 1247 from a trade Gold Coast would surely accept unless Melbourne or Hawthorn are splitting a pick.

The club should be sparking a discussion with North on the back of that which delivers the their 2025 2nd rounders, and either way that weakens Essendon's position dramatically.

 

[Jimmae]

no club wants to trade a future first. not much we can do about it

The solution is to do something in the 2025 draft, where we can happily select a third player, even a fourth if we wind up with all our selections in the top 35 (unlikely).

Worry about our 2026 hand in the 2026 mid-season draft trade period, and then in the 2026 off-season, where wie will have wantaway players due to competition for spots.

 

[carlton_99]

Pretty poor for us. Disappointing if thats the best we can do.

Timing of Curnow leaving and bidding rule changes has really stung us.

Another F1 or a later 1st round pick this year was the pass mark for me (in addition to Dean+Ison), so that'd be a fail.

Essendon deal better if they can guarantee no bid on Dean, but pointless if Richmond bids before them.

Late 1st round this year vs early 2nd next year is probably even if not weighted more to the latter if the draft is as strong as everyone is saying.

 

[hous87]

 

[Bletch]

Surely Gold Coast and Brisbane would be getting in ahead of us for trades with clubs wanting to move up the order? We wouldn't be doing any of the above without seeing where the Dean bid comes in, so it would happen at either the Dean bid, or at pick 9 (12).

If we were to do those two trades (per CT), we'd have to know that the points are enough to match Dean and Ison.

And it would look like we'd be doing anything we can to get more 2026 picks, so no 3rd pick this draft.

Neither trade sounds palatable on the surface, but if we're selling out of 2025, then whatever gets us the best 2026 points (plus Dean and Ison) will get done.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

They'd need to throw in 30, but then they couldn't match their own bids.

What about picks they would get at back-end of the draft as they'd have two list spots more than picks if doing a 3-for-1 with us?

 

[Jimmae]

Surely Gold Coast and Brisbane would be getting in ahead of us for trades with clubs wanting to move up the order? We wouldn't be doing any of the above without seeing where the Dean bid comes in, so it would happen at either the Dean bid, or at pick 9 (12).

Gold Coast yes, Brisbane no.

11 has value for Gold Coast more than any other club on a points basis, while North are exactly as desperate as I said they would be in terms of getting on the end of that run of prospects.

 

[marcmurphy3]

Surely Gold Coast and Brisbane would be getting in ahead of us for trades with clubs wanting to move up the order? We wouldn't be doing any of the above without seeing where the Dean bid comes in, so it would happen at either the Dean bid, or at pick 9 (12).

If we were to do those two trades (per CT), we'd have to know that the points are enough to match Dean and Ison.

And it would look like we'd be doing anything we can to get more 2026 picks, so no 3rd pick this draft.

Neither trade sounds palatable on the surface, but if we're selling out of 2025, then whatever gets us the best 2026 points (plus Dean and Ison) will get done.

Their picks are worse then us, so we absolutely have the advantage in that regard.

In fact we can guarantee they cant move their picks for more points if we deal with North And Don's as those are their only options.

 

[josephone]

I wonder if West Coast actually will bid on Dean at 2. Explains the move.

 

[Blue and Silver]

Ok so let's do the math!

Deal 1

Pick 9 (1355) for 21 (721), 27 (533)

Is on face value a loss of 100 points.

BUT

We know that at least Uwland will be bid before hand, probably at 2.

That would cost them 15, 18, 24 getting back pick 43.

After that pick 9 is 10, 21 is 20 and 27 is 25

So the values become 10 (1276) for 20 (757) and 25 (590) which is a gain of 71 points.

If a bid for Annable happens before Dean, say at pick 5 then Bris match with with 17, 22 and 42, and get back 45.

This would push 9 back to 11 and bring 25 in to 24 which would give us a value boost of about 100 more points.

Deal 2

11 for 25 and a future 2nd.

On base value we are losing 615 points this year, but gaining points next year

But if we assume the same two bids and matches then 11 becomes 13 and 25 becomes 22.

That would mean losing about 400 points this year.

It would also mean that a Dean match in this scenario at 6 would cost us 20, 24 & 25 getting back 30.

Altogether we get about the same matching value for Dean and a future second and insurance that we can match Ison.

Our third pick would likely be a Second rounder.

Deals make sense.

 

[reubsblues]

What's the point of the pick swap if we don't get a future first as well

 

[JJBagger]

What's the point of the pick swap if we don't get a future first as well

Because we have 2 firsts next year already. Plus it seems like no one is willing to trade future firsts

 

[swuzzlebubble]

Deals make sense

And better again with a bid on Patterson?

 

[Jimmae]

I wonder if West Coast actually will bid on Dean at 2. Explains the move.

Then here's what you do: let them have Dean. He's not worth that.

You do not get held to ransom. I take the Richmond talk as bluster as well, because we might actually be in a position to trade with them, so they can turn around and say to their members that they engineered a trade on the back of a bluff.

Ok so let's do the math!

Deal 1

Pick 9 (1355) for 21 (721), 27 (533)

Is on face value a loss of 100 points.

BUT

We know that at least Uwland will be bid before hand, probably at 2.

That would cost them 15, 18, 24 getting back pick 43.

After that pick 9 is 10, 21 is 20 and 27 is 25

So the values become 10 (1276) for 20 (757) and 25 (590) which is a gain of 71 points.

If a bid for Annable happens before Dean, say at pick 5 then Bris match with with 17, 22 and 42, and get back 45.

This would push 9 back to 11 and bring 25 in to 24 which would give us a value boost of about 100 more points.

Deal 2

11 for 25 and a future 2nd.

On base value we are losing 615 points this year, but gaining points next year

But if we assume the same two bids and matches then 11 becomes 13 and 25 becomes 22.

That would mean losing about 400 points this year.

It would also mean that a Dean match in this scenario at 6 would cost us 20, 24 & 25 getting back 30.

Altogether we get about the same matching value for Dean and a future second and insurance that we can match Ison.

Our third pick would likely be a Second rounder.

Deals make sense.

Your deals are excluding the possibility of Patterson being bid on before Dean, which is a wild take from Richmond's recruitment team.