Mega Thread 2013 Official Draft Thread

[guruisatiger]

Needs isnt really an issue 'MATE' - Just that when you post something the general idea is for people to be able to read it - Otherwise defeats the purpose of posting it !

Easy to increas the size of the Font - Thats if you can be bothered ofcourse but hope it doesnt put you out too much


Also doesnt help when you get too cocky

i could read it fine even without my glasses dont see what the issue is

 

[_RT_]

Seen a bit of chat about trading down to the Saints picks at 18 & 25 and while it is tempting I have to say for me it's not worth it. Why take the gamble that the kid you rank 6th on your list is going to be available 6 spots after our current pick. Surely if we rank him then the 5 teams that follow us also rank the kid. So why risk missing him just so you get a second round pick back.

Truth is if a second round pick was that important to us we wouldn't have traded ours away for Hampson, we would have done the deal using a player and a later pick to get it done. So playing games now to try and get back into the second round and downgrading our first pick in the process is just asking for trouble. Keep pick 12 take the best kid available at that pick and then back Jackson and the recruiting staff to nail the later picks to find us a gem or 2.

 

[Mr Magic]

Do you even read what i've wrote?? Or do you just gloss over it because i haven't mention trading deledio and riewoldt for pick 1 and 2 so we can set our window back another 5 years waiting for them to develop??

I said if our top 5 choices are all gone by pick 12 (seems a chance that might happen) and our 6th choice is going to slide to pick 18 it makes sense to trade down and pick up a free shot at pick 25. Hell if we get 25 we might even be able to attract Longer for a future Ruckman.

It all depends on who the club feel is there 6th choice. If its Dumont, Dunstan, Acres or Taylor there is a strong chance that guy could slip to pick 18. All four of those guys are pretty safe bets to be 150-200 gamers. If our 6th choice is Bontempelli or McCarthy then he is unlikely to slide to 18 so we don't go for the deal.

last year pick 18 - 20 were Grundy, Kennedy and Broomhead all 3 are very highly rated at Collingwood
2011 - McKenzie, Kavanagh and Croizer all very highly rated internally by their respective clubs
2010 - Watson, Smith and Pitt. Watson is crap and poor Jayden Pitt looked good but was forced to retire due to illness, Smith is a good player (also Lamb at 21, Wallis at 22 f/s and Guthrie at 23)
2009 - Tapscott, Griffiths and Fyfe. Tapscott is a Melbourne choice so who cares, Griff is crap but has plenty of potential and Fyfe is a freak. Pick 21 was Bastanic who is also very good
2008 - Shuey, Strauss and Swift. Shuey is a gun. Strauss another Melbourne mistake and swift retired. the next 5 picks were Ballyntine, Trengove, Zaharakis, Suban and Jack Redden.
2007- Rance, Ward and Notte. Rance and Ward are both very very good players Notte was a joke.

18 has been a very good pick outside of two teams shown to be poor early round drafters in Carlton and Melbourne.

Never ever think i'm trying to pick up pick up quantity for the sake of more players on the list but 2 very good players who improve you're best 22 over one super player. Not to mention it builds the length of time you can stay near the top of the ladder like a geelong instead of trying to be a yoyo team like Bulldogs, Saints and Melbourne.

What do you think when I specifically reply to words you use like trends etc...

The word on the street is this draft doesn't have the same depth. So quoting past drafts is irrelevant when the depth was greater.


Q? how do you know our top 5 will be gone before pick 12?? If that is the case are you not arguing we should push for a higher pick than 12???


Frankly IMO , using apparent black and white logic and saying there is a top 5 and they will not last to top 12 and the rest is six of one half a dozen of the other, with little appreciation of the grey that allows RFC to to fine tune their team getting superior picks, comes across as pretty arrogant IMO.

Just to try and prove my point you make a point of a RFC top 5. If that was the case, why would GWS trade Tyson away for pick 9 to pick 2. Assuming GWS thoughts are align with RFC they would be better off trading a lessor light and trade pick 9 for pick 4 or 5 or still trade Tyson but get a better later pick wouldn't they? . Obviously GWS think the difference between pick 2 and pick 5 is significant enough for them to do the trade despite you suggesting there is a top 5 we are seeking

You seem pretty confident an absolute in your vision. If that is the case who are our top 5 ?? If you are not prepared to reveal this what is the order going to be in the draft for the top 20 that will put RFC in an advantage in your vision???

IMO at face value, based on general online commentary, it seems there is Boyd then 4-5 other candidates. Then IMO there are maybe a top 13 or 14 of players of a certain value then it falls away again maybe. The pies in their push for Adams are arguing a top 15 apparently before it drops off. If other clubs think like this pick 18 and 25 will not help us!!

BTW no point in ramping!! In my replies to you I have not mentioned trading Lids or JR or whoever so there no point in you fanning abstract flames of irrelevance to promote your argument.


One would only do what you suggest if they were specifically targeting certain players in those ranges. Eg. a player(s) around 18 and another player(s) around 25!

 

[Stylo]

Any love for Mitch Honeychurch at pick 50? Quite plausible he'll be available. Only small (175cm) which Dimma won't like but he's a good fast inside scrapper, not unlike Foley. Kicking is far from perfect but that could be worked on. Great attitude too

 

[Stylo]

Also, anybody know if/when the U18 champs replays will be available online?

 

[Calcium Man]

What do you think when I specifically reply to words you use like trends etc...

You say you read it yet you continually skip over the fact i say if. Its not my vision its not what i even said is my first preference to happen. My first preference would be to take Acres at 12 or Salem.

What i've been saying is IF for arguments sake the clubs top 5 choices are gone by 12 and IF the club believes its 6th choice will make to 18 it makes sense to trade down to pick 18 and get a free pick at 25.

The word on the street is this draft doesn't have the same depth. So quoting past drafts is irrelevant when the depth was greater.

Word on the street was 2005 was a very weak draft and 2006 was one of the strongest drafts ever, yet they both ended up about equal. Every other year you hear its a strong draft or weak draft yet more often then not they all end up about equal. In fact the last 7-8 drafts have had plenty of good players to be found all the way down to 30. Yes we may stuff the pick up but the draft is always risk.

Q? how do you know our top 5 will be gone before pick 12?? If that is the case are you not arguing we should push for a higher pick than 12???

Because we don't have the currency to upgrade our pick. Nobody wants Astbury or Griffiths or even Foley.

Frankly IMO , using apparent black and white logic and saying there is a top 5 and they will not last to top 12 and the rest is six of one half a dozen of the other, with little appreciation of the grey that allows RFC to to fine tune their team getting superior picks, comes across as pretty arrogant IMO.

Apparent black and white logic is okay for you though when you've not watched any of the draftee's play but have read that it is a weak draft and their is a clear gap in talent between pick 12 and 18.

Its about maximising our bang for our buck. Clubs have a reasonable knowledge of where the draftees will go, its not perfect but they still have a fair idea. IF we could pick up the guy FJ/the club rates as their 6th choice and they know their first 5 choices won't slip to 12 it makes sense to drop in the draft. pick 25 could be traded for longer, who i notice your whining about in the Hampson thread, we could nab a Dayle Garlett or who ever. Pick 25 could be another long term player we shouldn't have access to but because of shrewd trading and drafting we now do.

Just to try and prove my point you make a point of a RFC top 5. If that was the case, why would GWS trade Tyson away for pick 9 to pick 2. Assuming GWS thoughts are align with RFC they would be better off trading a lessor light and trade pick 9 for pick 4 or 5 or still trade Tyson but get a better later pick wouldn't they? . Obviously GWS think the difference between pick 2 and pick 5 is significant enough for them to do the trade despite you suggesting there is a top 5 we are seeking

GWS is about the worst example of a club you could use as they have so much talent on their list they can keep trading in high picks. Second i don't really understand what you wrote as it makes no sense.
Pick 2 in any draft is a potential superstar, a Cotchin or martin. Pick 12 is a potential good player. But Melbourne have also done exactly what i said. Trade down pick 2 to get in Dom Tyson a potential very good player and pick 9 another potential good player. Pick 2 has netted them 2 very good players.

You seem pretty confident an absolute in your vision. If that is the case who are our top 5 ?? If you are not prepared to reveal this what is the order going to be in the draft for the top 20 that will put RFC in an advantage in your vision???

I think the option is viable if all the pieces fit. You're stuck on our top 5 so i'll change it to top 7. Lets say our first 7 preferences have gone by pick 12 but we know that our 8th choice in the draft will be there at 18 why wouldn't we gain an extra pick at 25 and still get the guy we wanted at 12 at 18?? Its a risk and I'd want the club to do its homework but clubs have a rough idea of who is going to pick who in the first round. If we had done this in 2010 we would have Conca and Darling running around in Yellow and Black (In a weak draft that had lost its 17 year olds to GC). But I suspect the club was loath to trade its first pick as there would have been a fair supporter backlash after the poor year we had, new coach, new CEO, new plan and no trust from the faithful yet, it was probably not the time to test them on swapping out a high pick, which apparently guarantees you a better player.

If you really want to know our top 5 its not to hard to guess from the rumours. Boyd, Lennon, KK, Salem and Freeman.

I don't know the top 20 as i havent paid much attention to who picks after us but at a guess it would be.
1. Boyd (GWS)
2. Kelly or Bontempelli (GWS)
3. Billings (Saints)
4. KK Or Scahrenberg or Kelly (if GWS choose Bontempelli) (WB)
5. KK or Scharenberg(GC)
6. Lennon (Coll)
7. Aish (Lions)
8. McDonald (North F/S)
9. Freeman (Melb)
10. Sheed (WC)
11. Salem (Coll)
12. Acres or Crouch (Rich)

After us who knows who goes where but there is group of crouch or Acres (whoever we miss) Bontempelli (if GWS dont nab him at 2), Dunstan, McCarthy, Dumont, Taylor, Dunstan, Gardiner and Hartung who will make up those picks. That being said McCarthy could go to Brisbane or Collingwood who both need KPF.

IMO at face value, based on general online commentary, it seems there is Boyd then 4-5 other candidates. Then IMO there are maybe a top 13 or 14 of players of a certain value then it falls away again maybe. The pies in their push for Adams are arguing a top 15 apparently before it drops off. If other clubs think like this pick 18 and 25 will not help us!!

One would only do what you suggest if they were specifically targeting certain players in those ranges. Eg. a player(s) around 18 and another player(s) around 25!

This is only right if the clubs have the exact same order of preference . But they don't and often after the first 4 or 5 they change wildly. The draft is as much a game of poker as it is about picking the right kids. For example lets pretend you are drafting for saint kilda, at pick 18 your top 7 choices are gone, your 8th choice you know is going to make it to pick 24 because everybody has rates him much lower but your 9th choice will go to Adelaide at pick 21 if he is available. Would you pick your 8th choice just because you rank him higher or do pick your 9th choice knowing the guy you rank at 8 will get to 24??

Its not about picking players in certain ranges its about getting as many of your higher ranked guys as possible. FJ ranked Rance at 6 or 7 in his draft, in fact most clubs rated him inside their top 10 but he slid to 18 because everybody else pick higher ranked guys on their list. His range according to all clubs was top 10 but in reality he slipped to 18 because everyone's top 10 was different enough he wasn't their highest ranked player.

FJ and co would drop happily 6 places in the draft if they knew they would get the guy they expected to get at 12 at 18.

 

[theflea]

Im glad you can because we cant see sh!t because your font is so small - wtf why would you do that

geez I thought it was just 5 lines.....

 

[theflea]

Because you are trading for mediocrity IMO. Mediocrity doesn't cut it in GF's and you can only fit 22 players in your GF team. The point is , without knowing too much about the players , based on some of the comments, and the fact the depth has been questioned, there is a good chance pick 12 will be clearly better than 18 and 25. So with pick 12 you have a good chance of getting a 200+gamer that can win you a premiership, picks 18-25 you have a reasonable chance of ending up with a handy player and a dud!!

You say this player will slide here and there but with low recognised depth the further you go out the more likely you will miss the player(s) you want!!


When you worry about quantity remember, this is not the last draft, there will be draft opportunities in 2014, 2015 etc.. some with better prospects so no need to gamble now. Our window is not closing at all, hopefully it will open in the future!!


BTW is the trend you talk about general?? There is a trend for rucks but Darling had the offield question marks and how much depth was there for those drafts compared to this one?? Not sure Atley was that big a slippage but the other slipsters where mainly KPP and Rucks, so I am not sure it is a general trend for all drafts that the average player will slide.


Honestly , atm I am thinking RFC pick 12 is like pick 3 when we got Martin , we wouldn't want to slip further back because although we may not get exactly who we may be targeting at least we will get a very solid citizen that can most importantly really play footy!!

If anything maybe we should be chasing a higher pick like North's first rounder( i assume can't be traded by them now) to get us a better chance to get a player we really think is proven in a dubious draft like Collingwood with pick 6

Oh the ironing.

 

[Mr Magic]

You say you read it yet you continually skip over the fact i say if. Its not my vision its not what i even said is my first preference to happen. My first preference would be to take Acres at 12 or Salem.

What i've been saying is IF for arguments sake the clubs top 5 choices are gone by 12 and IF the club believes its 6th choice will make to 18 it makes sense to trade down to pick 18 and get a free pick at 25.




Word on the street was 2005 was a very weak draft and 2006 was one of the strongest drafts ever, yet they both ended up about equal. Every other year you hear its a strong draft or weak draft yet more often then not they all end up about equal. In fact the last 7-8 drafts have had plenty of good players to be found all the way down to 30. Yes we may stuff the pick up but the draft is always risk.



Because we don't have the currency to upgrade our pick. Nobody wants Astbury or Griffiths or even Foley.






Apparent black and white logic is okay for you though when you've not watched any of the draftee's play but have read that it is a weak draft and their is a clear gap in talent between pick 12 and 18.

Its about maximising our bang for our buck. Clubs have a reasonable knowledge of where the draftees will go, its not perfect but they still have a fair idea. IF we could pick up the guy FJ/the club rates as their 6th choice and they know their first 5 choices won't slip to 12 it makes sense to drop in the draft. pick 25 could be traded for longer, who i notice your whining about in the Hampson thread, we could nab a Dayle Garlett or who ever. Pick 25 could be another long term player we shouldn't have access to but because of shrewd trading and drafting we now do.




GWS is about the worst example of a club you could use as they have so much talent on their list they can keep trading in high picks. Second i don't really understand what you wrote as it makes no sense.
Pick 2 in any draft is a potential superstar, a Cotchin or martin. Pick 12 is a potential good player. But Melbourne have also done exactly what i said. Trade down pick 2 to get in Dom Tyson a potential very good player and pick 9 another potential good player. Pick 2 has netted them 2 very good players.




I think the option is viable if all the pieces fit. You're stuck on our top 5 so i'll change it to top 7. Lets say our first 7 preferences have gone by pick 12 but we know that our 8th choice in the draft will be there at 18 why wouldn't we gain an extra pick at 25 and still get the guy we wanted at 12 at 18?? Its a risk and I'd want the club to do its homework but clubs have a rough idea of who is going to pick who in the first round. If we had done this in 2010 we would have Conca and Darling running around in Yellow and Black (In a weak draft that had lost its 17 year olds to GC). But I suspect the club was loath to trade its first pick as there would have been a fair supporter backlash after the poor year we had, new coach, new CEO, new plan and no trust from the faithful yet, it was probably not the time to test them on swapping out a high pick, which apparently guarantees you a better player.

If you really want to know our top 5 its not to hard to guess from the rumours. Boyd, Lennon, KK, Salem and Freeman.

I don't know the top 20 as i havent paid much attention to who picks after us but at a guess it would be.
1. Boyd (GWS)
2. Kelly or Bontempelli (GWS)
3. Billings (Saints)
4. KK Or Scahrenberg or Kelly (if GWS choose Bontempelli) (WB)
5. KK or Scharenberg(GC)
6. Lennon (Coll)
7. Aish (Lions)
8. McDonald (North F/S)
9. Freeman (Melb)
10. Sheed (WC)
11. Salem (Coll)
12. Acres or Crouch (Rich)

After us who knows who goes where but there is group of crouch or Acres (whoever we miss) Bontempelli (if GWS dont nab him at 2), Dunstan, McCarthy, Dumont, Taylor, Dunstan, Gardiner and Hartung who will make up those picks. That being said McCarthy could go to Brisbane or Collingwood who both need KPF.




This is only right if the clubs have the exact same order of preference . But they don't and often after the first 4 or 5 they change wildly. The draft is as much a game of poker as it is about picking the right kids. For example lets pretend you are drafting for saint kilda, at pick 18 your top 7 choices are gone, your 8th choice you know is going to make it to pick 24 because everybody has rates him much lower but your 9th choice will go to Adelaide at pick 21 if he is available. Would you pick your 8th choice just because you rank him higher or do pick your 9th choice knowing the guy you rank at 8 will get to 24??

Its not about picking players in certain ranges its about getting as many of your higher ranked guys as possible. FJ ranked Rance at 6 or 7 in his draft, in fact most clubs rated him inside their top 10 but he slid to 18 because everybody else pick higher ranked guys on their list. His range according to all clubs was top 10 but in reality he slipped to 18 because everyone's top 10 was different enough he wasn't their highest ranked player.

FJ and co would drop happily 6 places in the draft if they knew they would get the guy they expected to get at 12 at 18.

Wouldn't that depend on how high you rate your fifth versus your 6th. BTW nothing in life is free, if, you go from pick 12 to pick 18 and 25 there is a risk.


You detail and persistence, let alone passion, leads me to conclude you are either 1 a troll, or 2 an insider.

Lets assume you are an insider. This is what I have a problem with in your argument. You list a top 12 and say our top 5 selections will not make 12 and then you say" This is only right if the clubs have the exact same order of preference . But they don't and often after the first 4 or 5 they change wildly." Isn't that a contradiction??

What also intrigues me is you say FJ rated Rance 6 to 7 in his draft, How would you know that? Furthermore how do you know 2005 was supposed to be a weak draft and 2006 strong etc..


As far as you are concerned with if a lot of things are if. How probable is it that the top 5 will be below pick 12 and the 6th well after regarding your ifs??? If you feel this is likely and you are an insider do you have a sound basis why the 6th selection for RFC might be later for good reason versus other clubs ratings and does that reason represent a real risk for RFC given each clubs have different needs at each selection??? That is what I would be asking myself if I was an insider!! The other thing is you refer to the draft as poker, how sure are you the likely ifs are true and not other clubs bluffing where RFC's top 5 actually reach pick 12??

In any event, I have no black and white logic , just a experienced perspective on reasoning given various interpretations. I said I have not seen the videos so I have never been categorical on how the draft selections shape . When I said it seems like a top 13-14 or whatever, and then it drops away, I said it seemed that way based on online commentary not it was an actual fact. I was never categorical and my qualifications noting I haven't seen videos etc... are plain for any reader! Why do you think I keep attaching IMO to various comments?

You seem confident the top 5 of FJ's picks are a big if they will be gone by 12! Why???

Furthermore , you seem certain FJ rated Rance 6-7 in the draft!! How do you deduct that or do you know absolutely from primary sources??

 

[wart101]

Soooooooo boring in the off season, soooooooo many people talking shit.

 

[Calcium Man]

Wouldn't that depend on how high you rate your fifth versus your 6th. BTW nothing in life is free, if, you go from pick 12 to pick 18 and 25 there is a risk.

It does not matter the difference in rating your 5th choice and your 6th choice if you have no chance to get your 5th pick.

You detail and persistence, let alone passion, leads me to conclude you are either 1 a troll, or 2 an insider.

Mate i've been around way longer then you, i think it's pretty obvious i'm not a troll. Nor am I an insider, i have a few people who give good info but i can put 2 and 2 together.

Lets assume you are an insider. This is what I have a problem with in your argument. You list a top 12 and say our top 5 selections will not make 12 and then you say" This is only right if the clubs have the exact same order of preference . But they don't and often after the first 4 or 5 they change wildly." Isn't that a contradiction??

You keep sticking at the point that this is about what i know exactly. What i'm telling you is a logical conclusion. It has nothing to do with top 5 that was an arbitrary number i pulled out my @rse (based loosely on the fact i know we want Salem, Kolodjashi, Lennon and freeman at our pick). It could be our top 10 choices or top 3, it doesn't matter, the key point is if the guy we would pick at 12 will still be there at 18 why wouldn't you trade it??

What also intrigues me is you say FJ rated Rance 6 to 7 in his draft, How would you know that? Furthermore how do you know 2005 was supposed to be a weak draft and 2006 strong etc..

I can't remember where i heard it first but i've heard it from a few different people. I also know FJ rated Cotchin 1, Kruezer 2 and Dangerfield 3.

I know 2005 was a weak draft and 2006 a strong draft and from memory 2007 was another strong draft the same way you know this is a weak draft, it was reported a lot at the time.

As far as you are concerned with if a lot of things are if. How probable is it that the top 5 will be below pick 12 and the 6th well after regarding your ifs??? If you feel this is likely and you are an insider do you have a sound basis why the 6th selection for RFC might be later for good reason versus other clubs ratings and does that reason represent a real risk for RFC given each clubs have different needs at each selection??? That is what I would be asking myself if I was an insider!! The other thing is you refer to the draft as poker, how sure are you the likely ifs are true and not other clubs bluffing where RFC's top 5 actually reach pick 12??

I don't know how probably it is and i agree its up to the guys with the knowledge to weigh up the risks. Its why its a poker game you cannot be exactly sure what is in the other guys hand but if you're clever you can usually work it out and take home the pot. Its up to the club to weigh up the risks. But since most people can reasonably accurately predict the top 10 a few weeks out from the draft it's not unreasonable. The last team to pull off a good bluff was us with Conca who nobody expected in the top 10.

You seem confident the top 5 of FJ's picks are a big if they will be gone by 12! Why???

I'm not super confident but putting 2 and 2 together from the rumours it appears we are keen on Salem, Lennon, Freeman and Kolodjashi. Obviously we would also be interested in Boyd, Kelly and Aish if we had a higher pick.

The club will obviously have a lot more information on this and they will know exactly who they want. All i've done is make a logical assumption on when and why we would trade down pick 12 to 18.

 

[Mr Magic]

It does not matter the difference in rating your 5th choice and your 6th choice if you have no chance to get your 5th pick.




Mate i've been around way longer then you, i think it's pretty obvious i'm not a troll. Nor am I an insider, i have a few people who give good info but i can put 2 and 2 together.



You keep sticking at the point that this is about what i know exactly. What i'm telling you is a logical conclusion. It has nothing to do with top 5 that was an arbitrary number i pulled out my @rse (based loosely on the fact i know we want Salem, Kolodjashi, Lennon and freeman at our pick). It could be our top 10 choices or top 3, it doesn't matter, the key point is if the guy we would pick at 12 will still be there at 18 why wouldn't you trade it??




I can't remember where i heard it first but i've heard it from a few different people. I also know FJ rated Cotchin 1, Kruezer 2 and Dangerfield 3.

I know 2005 was a weak draft and 2006 a strong draft and from memory 2007 was another strong draft the same way you know this is a weak draft, it was reported a lot at the time.



I don't know how probably it is and i agree its up to the guys with the knowledge to weigh up the risks. Its why its a poker game you cannot be exactly sure what is in the other guys hand but if you're clever you can usually work it out and take home the pot. Its up to the club to weigh up the risks. But since most people can reasonably accurately predict the top 10 a few weeks out from the draft it's not unreasonable. The last team to pull off a good bluff was us with Conca who nobody expected in the top 10.




I'm not super confident but putting 2 and 2 together from the rumours it appears we are keen on Salem, Lennon, Freeman and Kolodjashi. Obviously we would also be interested in Boyd, Kelly and Aish if we had a higher pick.

The club will obviously have a lot more information on this and they will know exactly who they want. All i've done is make a logical assumption on when and why we would trade down pick 12 to 18.

It should matter.

What if you worry about not getting your fifth pick at pick 12 so you trade it for pick 18 and pick 25.

Then just say you are right and our first 5 picks go before pick 12. But guess what our 6 best is 12, 7th is 13, 8th is 14 etc... so by the time it comes to pick 18 we missed our 6th best and had to pick our 12th best and at pick 25 we pick our 19th best who we don't really rate at all.


Would it be worth the risk??? The thing is, as in all drafts , the later the pick the bigger the chance we are at selection a dud!!

What you suggest can have merit in certain circumstances. For example, just say you felt the top 5 was definitely or virtually guaranteed to not be their by pick 12. You next pick was a trade like Adams. Then you could do the trade of pick 12 to Saints for 18 and 25, use 18 to get Adams and then you would have a free pick at 25!

 

[Calcium Man]

It should matter.

What if you worry about not getting your fifth pick at pick 12 so you trade it for pick 18 and pick 25.

Then just say you are right and our first 5 picks go before pick 12. But guess what our 6 best is 12, 7th is 13, 8th is 14 etc... so by the time it comes to pick 18 we missed our 6th best and had to pick our 12th best and at pick 25 we pick our 19th best who we don't really rate at all.


Would it be worth the risk??? The thing is, as in all drafts , the later the pick the bigger the chance we are at selection a dud!!

Which is what i keep saying to you. Its up to our brains trust to decide if our 6th choice will fall to pick 18. If they they are confident that happens then the trade down to pick 18 makes sense. If they feel our 6th choice wont slide that far then pull the trigger at 12.

Its all about evaluating the risks. I don't know who our choice is but my personal thought is that if our 6th choice is Dunstan or Taylor he will fall to 18. Acres may also fall but with Geelong the biggest danger there i'd swoop Crouch is also unlikely to fall so you grab him at 12.

 

[Mr Magic]

Which is what i keep saying to you. Its up to our brains trust to decide if our 6th choice will fall to pick 18. If they they are confident that happens then the trade down to pick 18 makes sense. If they feel our 6th choice wont slide that far then pull the trigger at 12.

Its all about evaluating the risks. I don't know who our choice is but my personal thought is that if our 6th choice is Dunstan or Taylor he will fall to 18. Acres may also fall but with Geelong the biggest danger there i'd swoop Crouch is also unlikely to fall so you grab him at 12.

Taylor I am not keen on due to height. Likely he will slip IMO but then again haven't seen him so he may be a freak . His ability from my perspective would have to be exceptional to be picked against peers of similar value

 

[Calcium Man]

Taylor I am not keen on due to height. Likely he will slip IMO but then again haven't seen him so he may be a freak . His ability from my perspective would have to be exceptional to be picked against peers of similar value

Mine too but he is exceptional. Would be close to the top pick if he were 10cm taller IMO.

 

[Mr Magic]

Mine too but he is exceptional. Would be close to the top pick if he were 10cm taller IMO.

He would want to be. Still if we are targeting , realistically, Dunstan /Taylor or so forth you may have a point but then you have to ask are they slipping for a reason.
if it is a perceived problem with a player that could be a problem. If it is simply not what clubs are looking for in that part of the draw, eg. a KPP and it doesn't suit those clubs there , you may have a point.

Then again maybe someone may not slip as far as some suggest. You really have to think if your 6th is Dunstan and he doesn't slip how far off is your 7th selection and are you likely to get him at 18th?

Other options could be trading our first round pick to Geelong for their first round pick, they use it to get Adams and we pick up Geelongs second rounder as well, and also other combinations

 

[enTYSd]

He would want to be. Still if we are targeting , realistically, Dunstan /Taylor or so forth you may have a point but then you have to ask are they slipping for a reason.
if it is a perceived problem with a player that could be a problem. If it is simply not what clubs are looking for in that part of the draw, eg. a KPP and it doesn't suit those clubs there , you may have a point.

Then again maybe someone may not slip as far as some suggest. You really have to think if your 6th is Dunstan and he doesn't slip how far off is your 7th selection and are you likely to get him at 18th?

Other options could be trading our first round pick to Geelong for their first round pick, they use it to get Adams and we pick up Geelongs second rounder as well, and also other combinations

Agreed with pretty much all your doubts concerning the risk of dropping down the draft order, but on the point of us worrying about them slipping for a reason, I disagree.

I think the fact our recruiters clearly don't bring that into consideration has been a massive success and if they did it any other way they wouldn't be fit for our club. I'd love to know where we rated Floss last year overall. People said he went too early and so far they are clearly wrong. That is the beauty of the draft, no one really knows. If our recruiters have an opinion and it differs from others, that's a positive in my view. Better chance of getting our man/men.

Great discussion both of you.

 

[unfoley]

Maybe this has been asked but where do people think Ellis Conca and Floss would rate in this draft?

 

[tigs2010]

Maybe this has been asked but where do people think Ellis Conca and Floss would rate in this draft?

Based on how they were rated as kids or what we know now?

 

[enTYSd]

Based on how they were rated as kids or what we know now?

I'd like to know where we had conca, Ellis and floss ranked in their respective draft years. Any idea?

 

[tigs2010]

I'd like to know where we had conca, Ellis and floss ranked in their respective draft years. Any idea?

Conca was roughly 3.
Floss 4ish
Ellis not really sure but was behind Adams.

 

[enTYSd]

Conca was roughly 3.
Floss 4ish
Ellis not really sure but was behind Adams.

Cheers mate.

Love that. Willing to stick our neck out, not that I'd expect any less.

Certainly seem a bit more proactive than other clubs in that sense.

 

[Mr Magic]

Agreed with pretty much all your doubts concerning the risk of dropping down the draft order, but on the point of us worrying about them slipping for a reason, I disagree.

I think the fact our recruiters clearly don't bring that into consideration has been a massive success and if they did it any other way they wouldn't be fit for our club. I'd love to know where we rated Floss last year overall. People said he went too early and so far they are clearly wrong. That is the beauty of the draft, no one really knows. If our recruiters have an opinion and it differs from others, that's a positive in my view. Better chance of getting our man/men.

Great discussion both of you.

Not so sure about that from a wisdom perspective regarding best practice. I agree you have to back your self in and be confident in what you do. One needs to acknowledge we don't know everything about everything at any point in time and cannot make decisions in a total bubble either. The saying where there is smoke there can be fire carries some weight in practice. For example, when Garlett dropped right out clearly there where alarm bells for a reason and some flags obviously where raised for those not in the know.

In the reverse, on the phantom drafts one poster seems to think a Steven Edwards has been shut down possibly by Freo so they can target him as a smokey. Sometimes it is important to be aware of signals particularly if other clubs are playing smoke and mirrors!

 

[enTYSd]

Not so sure about that from a wisdom perspective regarding best practice. I agree you have to back your self in and be confident in what you do. One needs to acknowledge we don't know everything about everything at any point in time and cannot make decisions in a total bubble either. The saying where there is smoke there can be fire carries some weight in practice. For example, when Garlett dropped right out clearly there where alarm bells for a reason and some flags obviously where raised for those not in the know.

In the reverse, on the phantom drafts one poster seems to think a Steven Edwards has been shut down possibly by Freo so they can target him as a smokey. Sometimes it is important to be aware of signals particularly if other clubs are playing smoke and mirrors!

For the later rounds I can agree with that no problem. Think early on its a different story though, only point I was referring to. If one feels they can make an opinion on something with the info they have and they are educated, got to stick to your guns.

 

[Mr Magic]

For the later rounds I can agree with that no problem. Think early on its a different story though, only point I was referring to. If one feels they can make an opinion on something with the info they have and they are educated, got to stick to your guns.

agree

but the most important thing then becomes to do the due diligence and get in the know about all the prospects so we know who are the best candidates