Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. 2013 DRAFT

  • Thread starter Thread starter HARKER
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Maybe he will, maybe he won't. His draft range varies from 30-60 on the AFL meet the draftees profile.



A little like Casboult when he first came down to us.

That's exactly what i was thinking.

Hourigan has the same red rosy cheeks as Casboult too. Twins!

826121-levi-casboult.jpg
 
PLAY NICE PEOPLE: PLAY THE BALL, NOT THE MAN

ANY FURTHER INSULTS WILL RESULT IN INFRACTIONS

Finally infractions. Essendon board.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Those people that get impressed by someone predicting the rough order of the draft, I ask you this question.

What is more impressive.

2009 Draft:

  1. Scully
  2. Trengove
  3. Martin
  4. Morabito
  5. Cunnington
  6. Rohan
  7. Sheppard
  8. Butcher
  9. Moore
  10. Melksham
  11. Gysberts
  12. Lucas
  13. Talia
  14. Jetta
  15. Howard
or

  1. Fyfe
  2. Martin
  3. Carlisle
  4. Cunnington
  5. Talia
  6. Duncan
  7. Gunstan
  8. Jetta
  9. Christensen
  10. Scully
  11. Trengove
  12. Reid
  13. Vardy
  14. Lucas
  15. Pittard

So while one got the order correct, the second person potentially picked the better players.

I like a phantom drafter that goes against the grain a little and attempts to back in their concepts. No doubt they will be wrong more often than the professionals, but that is half the fun.
 
I like a phantom drafter that goes against the grain a little and attempts to back in their concepts. No doubt they will be wrong more often than the professionals, but that is half the fun.
That's not really the point of phantoms, it's just like peaking at your christmas presents early, there really isn't anything else to it.
Besides no one can know how a player wil develop at AFL level, njuries etc, a brilliant juniour can struggle at AFL level.
All I use phantoms for are to see who is around the mark for Carlton to pick then i look up those payers and try to get to know them a bit better so I can be excited or depressed on draft day.
 
Those people that get impressed by someone predicting the rough order of the draft, I ask you this question.

What is more impressive.

2009 Draft:

  1. Scully
  2. Trengove
  3. Martin
  4. Morabito
  5. Cunnington
  6. Rohan
  7. Sheppard
  8. Butcher
  9. Moore
  10. Melksham
  11. Gysberts
  12. Lucas
  13. Talia
  14. Jetta
  15. Howard
or


  1. Fyfe
  2. Martin
  3. Carlisle
  4. Cunnington
  5. Talia
  6. Duncan
  7. Gunstan
  8. Jetta
  9. Christensen
  10. Scully
  11. Trengove
  12. Reid
  13. Vardy
  14. Lucas
  15. Pittard

So while one got the order correct, the second person potentially picked the better players.

I like a phantom drafter that goes against the grain a little and attempts to back in their concepts. No doubt they will be wrong more often than the professionals, but that is half the fun.

we all seem to be very hard on Kane but doing a stats comparison he had a better season than Ducan, Trengove, Scully, and Jetta while playing about half of the career games as these boys. So there's room for natural improvement that comes with getting more experience.
I declare the Kane Lucas is shit myth officially BUSTED
 

Remove this Banner Ad

we all seem to be very hard on Kane but doing a stats comparison he had a better season than Ducan, Trengove, Scully, and Jetta while playing about half of the career games as these boys. So there's room for natural improvement that comes with getting more experience.
I declare the Kane Lucas is shit myth officially BUSTED
If he learns to stick a tackle opinions on him will quickly change
 
That's not really the point of phantoms, it's just like peaking at your christmas presents early, there really isn't anything else to it.
Besides no one can know how a player wil develop at AFL level, njuries etc, a brilliant juniour can struggle at AFL level.
All I use phantoms for are to see who is around the mark for Carlton to pick then i look up those payers and try to get to know them a bit better so I can be excited or depressed on draft day.

Your vision of a phantom draft is to reproduce what will happen in the AFL. My preferred version of a phantom draft is to select based on my own personal rankings.

Both are valid concepts and if you're looking for one that matches the real deal, then it will be easy to find a heap of them before the real draft.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

My knowledge of the draftees this year is very limited, but I can't say I'm hugely in favour of taking Hourigan at 39.

Almost every year there seems to be a forward at that undesirable 'in-between' height who slips down the order come draft day. Just last year we saw Tim Membrey slide into the late 40s because despite playing as somewhat of a 'power forward' who didn't quite have the height to match.

Hourigan seems a similar case. Stylistically in the mould of a traditional power forward without the body to match. Despite being rated reasonably highly by some, it would not surprise me in the slightest should he be available at 39 and it would be equally unsurprising should he still be on the board at our 3rd pick.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom