List Mgmt. Draftee, NGA and Father/Son Discussion - 2025

[Monocle]

Keep banging on about it, but the combo of
Duursma - elite athlete, can play outside and in. Could be anything, can play anywhere an make stuff happen
Sharp - ok athlete, strong inside player. Guaranteed 250 gamer. can play forward and be a threat

Is too good to pass up. The strengths and weaknesses compliment each other, and mitigate so much of the risk,. Just take them both.

Re Duursma agree just take him, you can only take the best of whats available, no point lamenting that the quality this year is not as good as other years.

Would he make us a better team ? absolutely.
His run and carry and two way running, are two facets of the game that we are crying out for and Mini is going to love that.

Similarly Sharp fills an immediate need and he plays next year.

Is he the quality that you would normally get with pick 2 - NO.
Will he ever be a super start - probably not.
Does he look like a player with a decent career ahead of him in the AFL - Yes.
Does he improve our team next year - Yes.
Would he take some heat and attention away from Harley - Yes.
Considering our list, does he have skills that we are short of - Yes.

Unless we get some outrageous offers at trade and draft time, we keep picks 1 & 2 and improve our team next year and going forward.

Do I think that If we drafted both Duursma and Sharp with picks 1 & 2, that they would both play next year - Yes.
And probably start week one.

 

[Dark Sharks]

Robey is going to end up at a minnow VFL team for sure, that's a very unlikely WCE pick I reckon.

My tip is St Kilda, but Bombers could even jump in first.

 

[Mop]

Re Duursma agree just take him, you can only take the best of whats available, no point lamenting that the quality this year is not as good as other years.

Would he make us a better team ? absolutely.
His run and carry and two way running, are two facets of the game that we are crying out for and Mini is going to love that.

Similarly Sharp fills an immediate need and he plays next year.

Is he the quality that you would normally get with pick 2 - NO.
Will he ever be a super start - probably not.
Does he look like a player with a decent career ahead of him in the AFL - Yes.
Does he improve our team next year - Yes.
Would he take some heat and attention away from Harley - Yes.
Considering our list, does he have skills that we are short of - Yes.

Unless we get some outrageous offers at trade and draft time, we keep picks 1 & 2 and improve our team next year and going forward.

Do I think that If we drafted both Duursma and Sharp with picks 1 & 2, that they would both play next year - Yes.
And probably start week one.

Probably the best assessment of the Sharp situation so far. Good stuff as always.

 

[squashface]

Robey is going to end up at a minnow VFL team for sure, that's a very unlikely WCE pick I reckon.

My tip is St Kilda, but Bombers could even jump in first.

Agreed, feels like a Bombers pick for me

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

Let's say Essendon have 5,6 and Merrett leaves. They will get at least Pick 9 + Hawks F1 & F2.

Essendon can have pick 1&2 for 5,6,9 & their F1 if they really want. Happy to throw in our F2 as well if needed and then use Hawks round 1, our second round and hawks second round to get what becomes pick 7.

5,6,7,9 and 2 first rounders next year plus Charlie Banfield, Koby Evans and Tylah Williams. I'd take that in a heartbeat.

Picks 1 and 2 for picks 5 6 9 and F1 works for me. As you say, I would throw in something else if need be. I would hope it is just the 2 Hawks picks which will actually come in hard once Uwland, Annable, Patterson and Dean bids are matched. But also happy to make it a swap of R2 picks. Exacts are noise at this stage

I would want to know what happens with the draft integrity and changes for 2026

Here is the point with selling picks 1 and 2. Dons get to say that they got the best kid in the land with Duursma and they get to boast that they have the perfect pairing for their golden haired boy Caddy. In other words, they get to sell hope to their members. In this scenario, I can smell the fear at the Tullamarine Hangar.

Draft order likely to be:
1. Duursma - Dons
2. CDT - Dons
3. Lindsay - Tigers
4. Robey - Tigers
5. Sharp - Eagles
6. Cumming - Eagles
7. Schubert - Eagles (Suns pick from Port for end R1 assistance + Hawks R1, R2 and R3)
8. Grlj or Marsh - Saints
9. Farrow - Eagles

It gives us a true inside mid, a balanced mid, a KPP that could start at CHB and then move forward when Waterman leaves and then a quarterback elite HBF. IF we came away with Sharp, Cumming, Schubert and Farrow, that would be some draft then we add in Banfield and the NGA crew

 

[squashface]

Picks 1 and 2 for picks 5 6 9 and F1 works for me. As you say, I would throw in something else if need be. I would hope it is just the 2 Hawks picks which will actually come in hard once Uwland, Annable, Patterson and Dean bids are matched. But also happy to make it a swap of R2 picks. Exacts are noise at this stage

I would want to know what happens with the draft integrity and changes for 2026

Here is the point with selling picks 1 and 2. Dons get to say that they got the best kid in the land with Duursma and they get to boast that they have the perfect pairing for their golden haired boy Caddy. In other words, they get to sell hope to their members. In this scenario, I can smell the fear at the Tullamarine Hangar.

Draft order likely to be:
1. Duursma - Dons
2. CDT - Dons
3. Lindsay - Tigers
4. Robey - Tigers
5. Sharp - Eagles
6. Cumming - Eagles
7. Schubert - Eagles (Suns pick from Port for end R1 assistance + Hawks R1, R2 and R3)
8. Grlj or Marsh - Saints
9. Farrow - Eagles

It gives us a true inside mid, a balanced mid, a KPP that could start at CHB and then move forward when Waterman leaves and then a quarterback elite HBF. IF we came away with Sharp, Cumming, Schubert and Farrow, that would be some draft then we add in Banfield and the NGA crew

This would be a tidy bit of business.

Get Clarke on the phone

 

[mitchzz]

Farrow at 9, or in the top 15 or 20 seems too early surely

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

Farrow at 9, or in the top 15 or 20 seems too early surely

Twomey in his latest had him at 14, and that includes Uwland, Annable, Patterson and Dean all ranked earlier.

Pick 9 on draft night will likely be pick 13

 

[shooshka]

Picks 1 and 2 for picks 5 6 9 and F1 works for me. As you say, I would throw in something else if need be. I would hope it is just the 2 Hawks picks which will actually come in hard once Uwland, Annable, Patterson and Dean bids are matched. But also happy to make it a swap of R2 picks. Exacts are noise at this stage

I would want to know what happens with the draft integrity and changes for 2026

Here is the point with selling picks 1 and 2. Dons get to say that they got the best kid in the land with Duursma and they get to boast that they have the perfect pairing for their golden haired boy Caddy. In other words, they get to sell hope to their members. In this scenario, I can smell the fear at the Tullamarine Hangar.

Draft order likely to be:
1. Duursma - Dons
2. CDT - Dons
3. Lindsay - Tigers
4. Robey - Tigers
5. Sharp - Eagles
6. Cumming - Eagles
7. Schubert - Eagles (Suns pick from Port for end R1 assistance + Hawks R1, R2 and R3)
8. Grlj or Marsh - Saints
9. Farrow - Eagles

It gives us a true inside mid, a balanced mid, a KPP that could start at CHB and then move forward when Waterman leaves and then a quarterback elite HBF. IF we came away with Sharp, Cumming, Schubert and Farrow, that would be some draft then we add in Banfield and the NGA crew

Could easily end up CDT, Lindsay, Schubert for us though. That is the risk.

History says teams (other than us) go for smalls over talls when talent is somewhat equal.

Not getting a mid after holding multiple top 10 picks (whether 1+2 or a split) would be an unmitigated disaster

 

[Happy Mastenator]

Picks 1 and 2 for picks 5 6 9 and F1 works for me. As you say, I would throw in something else if need be. I would hope it is just the 2 Hawks picks which will actually come in hard once Uwland, Annable, Patterson and Dean bids are matched. But also happy to make it a swap of R2 picks. Exacts are noise at this stage

I would want to know what happens with the draft integrity and changes for 2026

Here is the point with selling picks 1 and 2. Dons get to say that they got the best kid in the land with Duursma and they get to boast that they have the perfect pairing for their golden haired boy Caddy. In other words, they get to sell hope to their members. In this scenario, I can smell the fear at the Tullamarine Hangar.

Draft order likely to be:
1. Duursma - Dons
2. CDT - Dons
3. Lindsay - Tigers
4. Robey - Tigers
5. Sharp - Eagles
6. Cumming - Eagles
7. Schubert - Eagles (Suns pick from Port for end R1 assistance + Hawks R1, R2 and R3)
8. Grlj or Marsh - Saints
9. Farrow - Eagles

It gives us a true inside mid, a balanced mid, a KPP that could start at CHB and then move forward when Waterman leaves and then a quarterback elite HBF. IF we came away with Sharp, Cumming, Schubert and Farrow, that would be some draft then we add in Banfield and the NGA crew

Essendon aren’t giving us 5, 6, 9 and their F1 (likely top 3) for 1 and 2

 

[ghostbat12]

The season ended for the Power but the likely pick 1 Williem Duursma wasn't going to go down without a fight. He showed how much his midfield game has matured over the course of the season here, able to influence around stoppage and in contested situations. Some of his marking around the ground was truly elite. The one achilles heel for Willem throughout the year has been his kicking, and it reared its head again here with him struggling to hit up targets inside 50, coughing up turnovers on a number of occasions.

my observations:

1. Cripps will love him. Loves to kick it long into F50 to shortest player in the 50.

2. Has well developed art of hand-throwing the ball. must be a Vic thing.

3. Highlights remind me of Shuey's draft videos with crap kicks everywhere. Bodes well.

4. Body shape of Cale Morton. Does not bode well.

 

[ghostbat12]

Essendon aren’t giving us 5, 6, 9 and their F1 (likely top 3) for 1 and 2

they might given they will need no.1 for political reasons (distract from Merrett leaving and memberships). We may not care about no.1 pick but victorians dream of their own Jack Watts they can parade around and write articles about for a decade.

 

[ghostbat12]

It's funny watching those proposing trades. Effectively willing to sacrifice duursma and draft those with increased risk, just to ensure CDT is not taken.

 

[PremiershipNo4]

Sullivan has his shoulder taped like Chris Judd, they also both have an S in their 1st names…………..

 

[Monocle]

How do draft watchers rate Charlie Banfield as a wing prospect vs Hamish Davis?

Two very different styles of player.

Davis is an elite runner and just runs all day, reasonable mark and has a high footy IQ, he known where to run to on the ground and reads the play very well , also has a touch of cunning to his game, he is an opportunist.
Would like to see him thrust himself more into the contests and be less of a receiver.
Can play wing or HFF.
Also has a kicking action that is less than perfect, that can hurt his kicking on the run
Hamish has the higher ceiling of the two, but also a lower floor.

Banfield is a tough no nonsense player that is a balanced footballer.
He is very adapt at getting in close at the coal face and getting his own ball, similarly he can run and carry and be a link man in the spread.
He is a scrapper and fights like hell to get the ball, he has a touch of the nasties in the way he plays, he doesn't mind the physicality of the contest he often seeks it out.
Plays taller than his height and can take a decent overhead mark.
Decent kick and good hands.
Charlie can play on all three lines and has more versatility.
Lower ceiling than Davis but a higher floor.
He also has the temperament that keeps a steady head in a crisis and will never flinch, he is a big game player.


If there was a minute and half to go and we were four points down, Banfield is the sort of player I would want on the ground.

He is one of those players that is not elite at anything, but does most things well.

To answer your specific question I think Banfield has more chance to make it on the wing at the next level.

If I had to put money on which of the two would have the better AFL career, my money would be on Banfield.

The fact that he is a FS selection and everyone knows that he is going to us, I don't think he gets critiqued as often or as extensively as those who are available to all Clubs and therefore he get under ratted.

Apologies a bit of a long answer, but I hope thats helpful.

 

[BSD]

Two very different styles of player.

Davis is an elite runner and just runs all day, reasonable mark and has a high footy IQ, he known where to run to on the ground and reads the play very well , also has a touch of cunning to his game, he is an opportunist.
Would like to see him thrust himself more into the contests and be less of a receiver.
Can play wing or HFF.
Also has a kicking action that is less than perfect, that can hurt his kicking on the run
Hamish has the higher ceiling of the two, but also a lower floor.

Banfield is a tough no nonsense player that is a balanced footballer.
He is very adapt at getting in close at the coal face and getting his own ball, similarly he can run and carry and be a link man in the spread.
He is a scrapper and fights like hell to get the ball, he has a touch of the nasties in the way he plays, he doesn't mind the physicality of the contest he often seeks it out.
Plays taller than his height and can take a decent overhead mark.
Decent kick and good hands.
Charlie can play on all three lines and has more versatility.
Lower ceiling than Davis but a higher floor.
He also has the temperament that keeps a steady head in a crisis and will never flinch, he is a big game player.


If there was a minute and half to go and we were four points down, Banfield is the sort of player I would want on the ground.

He is one of those players that is not elite at anything, but does most things well.

To answer your specific question I think Banfield has more chance to make it on the wing at the next level.

If I had to put money on which of the two would have the better AFL career, my money would be on Banfield.

The fact that he is a FS selection and everyone knows that he is going to us, I don't think he gets critiqued as often or as extensively as those who are available to all Clubs and therefore he get under ratted.

Apologies a bit of a long answer, but I hope thats helpful.

The reason W.A. players get underated is that our colts competitions standard is a lot lower than that of S.A. & Victoria
judging by the results of the recent championsip.

 

[Hangover Noir]

Has been interviewed by 12 clubs.

I’m all in on Robey. If he goes big in the Grand Final this week and tests well. Take him with a top 2 pick if we need to.

Are you concerned at all he doesn’t seem to use his opposite side? I don’t think I’ve seen a LH handball in any of the highlights, despite that looking like a better option. Can certainly find the ball though.

 

[BSD]

Two very different styles of player.

Davis is an elite runner and just runs all day, reasonable mark and has a high footy IQ, he known where to run to on the ground and reads the play very well , also has a touch of cunning to his game, he is an opportunist.
Would like to see him thrust himself more into the contests and be less of a receiver.
Can play wing or HFF.
Also has a kicking action that is less than perfect, that can hurt his kicking on the run
Hamish has the higher ceiling of the two, but also a lower floor.

Banfield is a tough no nonsense player that is a balanced footballer.
He is very adapt at getting in close at the coal face and getting his own ball, similarly he can run and carry and be a link man in the spread.
He is a scrapper and fights like hell to get the ball, he has a touch of the nasties in the way he plays, he doesn't mind the physicality of the contest he often seeks it out.
Plays taller than his height and can take a decent overhead mark.
Decent kick and good hands.
Charlie can play on all three lines and has more versatility.
Lower ceiling than Davis but a higher floor.
He also has the temperament that keeps a steady head in a crisis and will never flinch, he is a big game player.


If there was a minute and half to go and we were four points down, Banfield is the sort of player I would want on the ground.

He is one of those players that is not elite at anything, but does most things well.

To answer your specific question I think Banfield has more chance to make it on the wing at the next level.

If I had to put money on which of the two would have the better AFL career, my money would be on Banfield.

The fact that he is a FS selection and everyone knows that he is going to us, I don't think he gets critiqued as often or as extensively as those who are available to all Clubs and therefore he get under ratted.

Apologies a bit of a long answer, but I hope thats helpful.

Charlie might not get taken in the main draft but could end up being a rookie pick.

 

[WCE777]

Two very different styles of player.

Davis is an elite runner and just runs all day, reasonable mark and has a high footy IQ, he known where to run to on the ground and reads the play very well , also has a touch of cunning to his game, he is an opportunist.
Would like to see him thrust himself more into the contests and be less of a receiver.
Can play wing or HFF.
Also has a kicking action that is less than perfect, that can hurt his kicking on the run
Hamish has the higher ceiling of the two, but also a lower floor.

Banfield is a tough no nonsense player that is a balanced footballer.
He is very adapt at getting in close at the coal face and getting his own ball, similarly he can run and carry and be a link man in the spread.
He is a scrapper and fights like hell to get the ball, he has a touch of the nasties in the way he plays, he doesn't mind the physicality of the contest he often seeks it out.
Plays taller than his height and can take a decent overhead mark.
Decent kick and good hands.
Charlie can play on all three lines and has more versatility.
Lower ceiling than Davis but a higher floor.
He also has the temperament that keeps a steady head in a crisis and will never flinch, he is a big game player.


If there was a minute and half to go and we were four points down, Banfield is the sort of player I would want on the ground.

He is one of those players that is not elite at anything, but does most things well.

To answer your specific question I think Banfield has more chance to make it on the wing at the next level.

If I had to put money on which of the two would have the better AFL career, my money would be on Banfield.

The fact that he is a FS selection and everyone knows that he is going to us, I don't think he gets critiqued as often or as extensively as those who are available to all Clubs and therefore he get under ratted.

Apologies a bit of a long answer, but I hope thats helpful.

Brilliant analysis as always.
I was only thinking about C Banfields career at the next level recently and your analysis makes him a very nice player for us.
His physicality also might lend him to being a rotation mid in the future at the very least, and agree he is being under rated.
Nice to get a couple of Banfield F/S's into our team this year and next and some better quality NGA's.
Been thin pickings for a long time and hopefully we benefit greatly now we are well into our rebuild and Tassie draft coming quickly.

 

[Jootube]

Pick 1 (the best talent) for 5 (the 8th best player after FS etc) + a pick between 1 and 10 (likely 4-10) next year at best.

I love to see another poster who understands the impact of FS/Academy bids.

Can we stop with the whole "because of father/sons and NGA's pick 5 is actually pick 10 and pick 8 is actually pick 43 in 2029 routine?" We go round and round in circles with it every year and if it keeps going on for much longer I won't have any brain cells left.

The reason we keep having the same conversation is because people think that pick 5 (with 4 Father Sons and Academy bids before hand) is IDENTICAL to pick 5 with zero dilution.

They think that because you draft the same player in both scenarios they are identical.

However, they are forgetting that the Academy and Father Son players improved opposition lists and make it harder to win games of football for the next 15 years.

I'm honestly not going to post about it any more, but people just fundamentally misunderstand how Academy and FS dilute the draft.

"They were never available to us anyway!!!"

 

[SumaGodCoach]

I love to see another poster who understands the impact of FS/Academy bids.


The reason we keep having the same conversation is because people think that pick 5 (with 4 Father Sons and Academy bids before hand) is IDENTICAL to pick 5 with zero dilution.

They think that because you draft the same player in both scenarios they are identical.

However, they are forgetting that the Academy and Father Son players improved opposition lists and make it harder to win games of football for the next 15 years.

I'm honestly not going to post about it any more, but people just fundamentally misunderstand how Academy and FS dilute the draft.

"They were never available to us anyway!!!"

I'll take that as a no campaigner.

 

[Monocle]

The reason W.A. players get underated is that our colts competitions standard is a lot lower than that of S.A. & Victoria
judging by the results of the recent championsip.

There is some truth in that but it's also a reflection of how the States are administered and managed.

Having Coached in the Colts WA and the TAC Cup VIC ( cant comment on SA ), the top tier talent in the teams is not that dissimilar however the depth in very noticeable in VIC as their bottom 8 players in the VIC teams, are much higher quality than in the WA Colts.

That all comes down to the size of the Club Zones in the respective States.

The Coats Talent League has 13 teams, one of which is from Tasmania, so excluding that it's 12 teams Victorian teams.

Five of which are from the Country: Bendigo Pioneers, Geelong Falcons. Gippsland Power, GWV Rebels, Murray Bushrangers.

Seven Metro Teams: Calder Cannons, Dandenong Stingrays, Eastern Rangers, Norther Knights, Oakleigh Chargers, Western Jets, Sandringham Dragons.

* Side Note to even things up at the Championships - these Melbourne teams player play with Vic Country: Western Jets and the Dandenong Stingrays.



The WAFL has nine Clubs: Claremont, East Fremantle, East Perth, Perth, Peel, South Fremantle, Subiaco, Swan Districts, West Perth.

WA's population 3.0 million v Victorias population 7.0 million.

So Perth has a population of 2.17 million and feeds 9 metro teams
Melbourne has a population of 5.39 million and feeds 7 metro teams.

So the Victorian Metro teams are pulling from a much greater talent pool and thats why their competition is a of a higher standard, its the depth that they have access.

 

[eaglevision]

I love to see another poster who understands the impact of FS/Academy bids.


The reason we keep having the same conversation is because people think that pick 5 (with 4 Father Sons and Academy bids before hand) is IDENTICAL to pick 5 with zero dilution.

They think that because you draft the same player in both scenarios they are identical.

However, they are forgetting that the Academy and Father Son players improved opposition lists and make it harder to win games of football for the next 15 years.

I'm honestly not going to post about it any more, but people just fundamentally misunderstand how Academy and FS dilute the draft.

"They were never available to us anyway!!!"

The main issue is when comparing the historical value of a pick with its value now.

Pick 5 had a lot more trade value ten years ago than it does now, for the exact reasons you have mentioned. I’m sure at 17 clubs list managers would be across this to devalue those picks accordingly, particularly as you get further down the draft.

 

[Jootube]

The main issue is when comparing the historical value of a pick with its value now.

Pick 5 had a lot more trade value ten years ago than it does now, for the exact reasons you have mentioned. I’m sure at 17 clubs list managers would be across this to devalue those picks accordingly, particularly as you get further down the draft.

Totally agree with you.
Unfortunately, the average BF poster has not caught up and still thinks that pick 5 = 5th best player in the draft.

Hence why I think that trading pick 1 for 5 & 6 this year would be a blunder.

 

[Elite Pete]

Are you concerned at all he doesn’t seem to use his opposite side? I don’t think I’ve seen a LH handball in any of the highlights, despite that looking like a better option. Can certainly find the ball though.

Handballing either side can surely be developed. They can teach the Irish players to do it. Kicking both feet would be a struggle now.