List Mgmt. 2025 National Draft Thread - Beaten at your own game, Bidney?

[robbieando]

 

[dosser]

Plenty of good players are picked in the 40s and beyond. From the Academy we had Errol slip until the 30s, so it's not necessarily a big deal if other clubs let them through.

I know what you are saying, but it seems that King wasn't on most teams' radar. No. 49 in a draft of 60.

My point is that it may have done him a favour as maybe we shouldn't have high expectations. Also, why did the Swans rate him so highly but nobody else did? They all see academy players and he played VFL as well.

 

[Kiama Chris]

I know what you are saying, but it seems that King wasn't on most teams' radar. No. 49 in a draft of 60.

I think it's been said that most (if not all clubs) were looking for "sure things" in this draft, which is why I was a bit surprised that Kyle went so early but then I think he was pretty much the only strongly speculative pick. Plus I think a lot of forward/mids went early. Maybe they saw him as a flight risk too? Hard to know. Good for us I think/hope.

 

[joeykanga]

The fact that nobody else seemed to be interested in King raises a couple of red flags for me. Thankfully I can just think of him as a Pick 49 now and not some academy prodigy.

Luckily our draft people and those in the club werent in any way dissuaded by other clubs opinions. Its a worthless exercise to take that on board when you know youre getting something good and then because other people who perhaps havent seem enough pass on him we get the other goodies thrown in a Jevan and a Coottee
It does add a calmness that hes pick 49

 

[giantsully]

Disappointing. But fair. I can't think of any now that Errol and co are outside the age range.

However, it's not only coincidence that we got in all the good young players while we were at the bottom of the ladder and haven't got them since we bounced back to near the top. This year we missed finals and got a better result at the draft. It doesn't feel exactly causal but I don't think it's total coincidence either.

Matt Roberts was clearly well above about half of those on the list.

 

[Bandicoot]

Hallelujah and that is by far and away the fairest system. It’s fair for us too.

I think the northern states will reduce the amount of money they are currently spending on their academies as the benefit of that spend is getting less and less.
Had this year's draft been based on the same system as last year we would have got all 3 of our academy picks and had it been based on what's likely to be next years, we would have got Kyle, Cootee and King. Would have missed out on Phillipou.
I could accept these changes (at least some of them) if they did away with the biggest rort of all time. The NGA was introduced solely to appease Eddy Maguire and it has had zero effect on what it was introduced for.

 

[Kbroome]

From today's Gettable, for next year's draft:

- The AFL has met with clubs on next year's likely bidding system. It'll likely involve clubs only being able to use 2 picks to match, whilst the 10% discount will 100% be abolished.

- They also may close the loophole that allows clubs to hold more picks than they have list spots on draft night.

I think that’s probably fair although I don’t think the closing of the loophole should be done. I think it creates an edge for active list managers to use over those that don’t do many trades. It would also think it would just limit trading in its self during the draft especially at the back end when your trying to shuffle down the order etc

 

[bedford]

Thomey picking his number 1 for next year , not a proper journo

 

[Adnico26Parker]

I think the northern states will reduce the amount of money they are currently spending on their academies as the benefit of that spend is getting less and less.

Andrew Pridham had already flagged the issue of funding a couple of months ago, so it will be interesting to see what happens from here if the rule changes go through as explained today

 

[Kbroome]

It’s a fine line the AFL has to look at.

Cull the rules too hard - Academies shut down

Cull the rules tough - more delisting to accommodate picks, causing more player turnover and less stability

Barely full the rules - bottom team get “stuffed” over trying to get back up the ladder as the best player in the draft goes to top up the competing sides

 

[Callipygian]

Matt Roberts was clearly well above about half of those on the list.

I didn't look at the list. Probably should have. Just thought we don't have any clearly outstanding under 23 year olds like we did in 2022 when we were overflowing. If Roberts gets a mention then surely Gus Sheldrick does too. I'm not sure which I'd have in front of the other currently.

 

[bedford]

Some clubs NGA's will be changed in 28 , st scum have now got the whole of the Mornington Peninsula

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I think the northern states will reduce the amount of money they are currently spending on their academies as the benefit of that spend is getting less and less.
Had this year's draft been based on the same system as last year we would have got all 3 of our academy picks and had it been based on what's likely to be next years, we would have got Kyle, Cootee and King. Would have missed out on Phillipou.
I could accept these changes (at least some of them) if they did away with the biggest rort of all time. The NGA was introduced solely to appease Eddy Maguire and it has had zero effect on what it was introduced for.

End of the day we can’t have the GC situation the last few years. You can’t be paying top 5 picks with scraps. It’s not fair and it’s not what the system was in for. Two picks for a top talent is more than fair

 

[.Shotties.]

Does Florent have to apologise for taking a huge contract and then playing like an average VFL player for 12 months?

Or does the apologies only go one way?

Or Hayward for pushing up his contract price by talking with Carlton during his free agency negotiations.

 

[The Blue Max]

I know what you are saying, but it seems that King wasn't on most teams' radar. No. 49 in a draft of 60.

My point is that it may have done him a favour as maybe we shouldn't have high expectations. Also, why did the Swans rate him so highly but nobody else did? They all see academy players and he played VFL as well.

How did King rate for pace? Sometimes an ‘average’ player as far as speed can turn off a lot of interest.

 

[KTT]

End of the day we can’t have the GC situation the last few years. You can’t be paying top 5 picks with scraps. It’s not fair and it’s not what the system was in for. Two picks for a top talent is more than fair

Please clarify what scraps the Suns gave up to earn the points to match.
here, Ill help get you started
Ainsworth (pick 4 2016), Fiorini (rd 1 pick 2015), Flanders (rd 1 pick 2019), Lukosius (p2 2019) and the list goes on.

 

[anotherletdown]

The year after GCS complete the vast bulk of academy recruiting; and the 10 year premiership window is slung open

Better GCS than Adelaide.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Please clarify what scraps the Suns gave up to earn the points to match.
here, Ill help get you started
Ainsworth (pick 4 2016), Fiorini (rd 1 pick 2015), Flanders (rd 1 pick 2019), Lukosius (p2 2019) and the list goes on.

Look at what they actually paid on draft night especially for players 2&3 they matched. It’s not fair and it’s not remotely near “market price”. Take Patterson matched with 24,29,31,32….no club would remotely give up pick 5 for that…and the next one is worse…Murray matched for junk. That’s the issue, it’s not near what a club would pay on the open market.

If we had pick 5 what we we want for it? At least a top 10 plus another later first. It’s not even close to what they paid.

Now I don’t blame GC I blame the ridiculous system.

 

[rustycrate]

End of the day we can’t have the GC situation the last few years. You can’t be paying top 5 picks with scraps. It’s not fair and it’s not what the system was in for. Two picks for a top talent is more than fair

You can when then were years of pillaging GC players. No one said that was bad. Not according to VIC clubs.
Then when the players are coming in it is bad. According to VIC clubs.

 

[KTT]

Look at what they actually paid on draft night especially for players 2&3 they matched. It’s not fair and it’s not remotely near “market price”. Take Patterson matched with 24,29,31,32….no club would remotely give up pick 5 for that…and the next one is worse…Murray matched for junk. That’s the issue, it’s not near what a club would pay on the open market.

If we had pick 5 what we we want for it? At least a top 10 plus another later first. It’s not even close to what they paid.

Now I don’t blame GC I blame the ridiculous system.

I asked you to please clarify what the Suns gave up. I got you started with the Suns trading out 4 x established players picked in the 1st round (including 2 x top 5 picks) + more.
Ill add they had 2x 1st round picks and gave up their future 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks.

I think it is absolutely fair value.
And good on the Suns for doing a fantastic job at expanding the game into SE QLD & NE NSW.
The AFL, TV stakeholders, Players (salaries) would be ecstatic with the games development.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

You can when then were years of pillaging GC players. No one said that was bad. Not according to VIC clubs.
Then when the players are coming in it is bad. According to VIC clubs.

What happened in the past is then was it fair no, but not as if other clubs haven’t either. Time to pay fair value for access it’s about time. Do like how they built an entire side of A graders till they do it though

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I asked you to please clarify what the Suns gave up. I got you started with the Suns trading out 4 x established players picked in the 1st round (including 2 x top 5 picks) + more.
Ill add they had 2x 1st round picks and gave up their future 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks.

I think it is absolutely fair value.
And good on the Suns for doing a fantastic job at expanding the game into SE QLD & NE NSW.
The AFL, TV stakeholders, Players (salaries) would be ecstatic with the games development.

That’s nowhere near enough for FOUR first rounders plus Petracca, 3 of those went in that deal so it looks like they gave up more than they did. It’s not even close to market value a bunch in the 20-30 range does not equal a top 5 pick. Now do I blame them no I don’t they are playing by the rules. However now it’s time once and for all to make a system where all these bidding systems (father son, nga, and academy) are under the same umbrella. If said player is in the top 5, be prepared to lose someone very good or trade up using futures. What won’t happen is multiple early first rounders in bidding unless you acquire 4 first rounders to do so. This is a good thing it’s going to stop the first rounders being 25 plus and bottom 4 clubs may get access it was a bit farcical this year

 

[rustycrate]

That’s nowhere near enough for FOUR first rounders plus Petracca, 3 of those went in that deal so it looks like they gave up more than they did. It’s not even close to market value a bunch in the 20-30 range does not equal a top 5 pick. Now do I blame them no I don’t they are playing by the rules. However now it’s time once and for all to make a system where all these bidding systems (father son, nga, and academy) are under the same umbrella. If said player is in the top 5, be prepared to lose someone very good or trade up using futures. What won’t happen is multiple early first rounders in bidding unless you acquire 4 first rounders to do so. This is a good thing it’s going to stop the first rounders being 25 plus and bottom 4 clubs may get access it was a bit farcical this year

The AFL make the rules. If the rules are dumb. Then the AFL is dumb.

 

[Bonz]

How did King rate for pace? Sometimes an ‘average’ player as far as speed can turn off a lot of interest.

Was top 10 in the 20m sprint.

His quick.

 

[SwansLifer]

Look at what they actually paid on draft night especially for players 2&3 they matched. It’s not fair and it’s not remotely near “market price”. Take Patterson matched with 24,29,31,32….no club would remotely give up pick 5 for that…and the next one is worse…Murray matched for junk. That’s the issue, it’s not near what a club would pay on the open market.

If we had pick 5 what we we want for it? At least a top 10 plus another later first. It’s not even close to what they paid.

Now I don’t blame GC I blame the ridiculous system.

I have not once seen you complain about the Roos being gifted #11 or whatever it was though. No club would remotely give up pick #11 for that. It works both ways. Now, I'm just quoting you here and replacing the numbers.
"If we had pick #11 what we we want for it? At least a 1st and another late 1st or an early 2nd too. It’s not even close to what they paid."

The, it's only about points argument is moot here, you have made that a moot point with your previous claims.

 

[liz]

The year after GCS complete the vast bulk of academy recruiting; and the 10 year premiership window is slung open

People have been predicting a decade of dominance for GCS and GWS ever since they entered the competition. We’re still waiting…

Someone should go back and do a parallel simulation of this year’s draft without the players developed by the Northern Academies, completely removing those players from the talent pool since most of them would be off playing other sports or, if they had found their way to AFL, would mostly be less developed late draft and rookie picks. While they’re at it, they might run simulations of what the competition would look like when you remove Heeney, Mills, Gulden, Briggs, and the like from the AFl player pool.