2015 Draft Discussion

[Swanny10]

From the academy this year, the one I am most keen on outside the big 2 is William. Will be really interested to see how he tests at the combine - his athleticism looks to be very good. In games I have seen him play his game awareness and foots kills have surprised me, in a positive way. Don't get me wrong, he has a long way to go, but considering where he is coming from development wise there appears to be a lot of potential.

Could develop into a real explosive player coming off half back or half forward.

Not sure about Chol. Again great athlete and there is some talent there but just worry about his hardness. Wagner is a good little player that works hard but I am not sure if he has enough great attributes to make the grade.

 

[AFLQLD]

It is a case of a bird in the hand I guess. Take good talent when it is available, wherever it comes from, with a preference for quality home grown players as a guiding principal. Rookie local kids if we can.

I really do think that there is a lot of promotional upside in taking local draftees. We will seem like a real Queensland team, and all that goes with that, in what is still a very parochial state.

It allows Queensland supporters to develop a sense of the Lions being 'us' and that plays very well here.

The development of bitter enemies really helps the us vs them Queensland mindset too. Come on Eddie, say something disparaging and belittling about Queensland, I dare you!

 

[Leuy LongerCombo]

It is worth taking advantage of. i wouldn't want to go into debt next year though, with Allison being considered a top 5 pick at this stage.

I'm not sure of the specifics, but I know there's some sort of restriction on getting academy player with a debt from a previous draft.

dlanod, can you enlighten us?

Only way we will be excluded from next years bidding, is if we go into debt this year, greater than the picks we have the following year, which equates to something like 1726 points (the premiers theoretically points total)

The only way will we devalue our first rounder, if we go into debt from matching a first round selection. Which for us this year will take multiple first round bids.

Being the first year, it's hard to get a full concept of the possibilities. We need to remember that we have first rights to these players, and there's a few different mechanism to make sure we have the option of matching fair bids. It's a system that a good list manager can take advantage of, in a few different ways.

 

[Eons]

Interesting what the club will do with our future draft picks this year. We could get some great value out of our future picks if we improve next year and finish around 10-14th on the ladder. Clubs will gamble on us staying down the ladder, we will expect to greatly improve with a fit list and more mature players we will be bringing in over the off season.

Gives the clubs so much more flexibility to get deals done, trade week won't drag on so much this year. Expect deals to get done pretty quickly.

 

[braddsey]

Do Brisbane get a 20% points discount if we take an academy pick with one of our own allocated picks? Let's say Brisbane had pick 10, and took a kid from the Lions academy. Pick 10 is worth 1395, so would we get to carry over 279 points to use on another draft selection?

Assuming not, is this likely to lead to Brisbane not directly picking academy kids and instead nominating other players in order to maximize draft pick value? If Brisbane passed over said player at pick 10, and he was nominated at pick 11 by the next draft pick Brisbane could then match the bid and cobble together the points from lower picks, effectively picking up pick 10 & 11 in the draft (while forgoing their round 2 & 3 picks).

 

[neg99]

Do Brisbane get a 20% points discount if we take an academy pick with one of our own allocated picks? Let's say Brisbane had pick 10, and took a kid from the Lions academy. Pick 10 is worth 1395, so would we get to carry over 279 points to use on another draft selection?

Assuming not, is this likely to lead to Brisbane not directly picking academy kids and instead nominating other players in order to maximize draft pick value? If Brisbane passed over said player at pick 10, and he was nominated at pick 11 by the next draft pick Brisbane could then match the bid and cobble together the points from lower picks, effectively picking up pick 10 & 11 in the draft (while forgoing their round 2 & 3 picks).

Basically we won't pick an academy player until they're bid on. The 20% wouldn't count if we picked them with an actual selection.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[braddsey]

Basically we won't pick an academy player until they're bid on. The 20% wouldn't count if we picked them with an actual selection.

Right, that makes total sense... we'd only be overpaying - regardless of additional discount.

 

[neg99]

Right, that makes total sense... we'd only be overpaying - regardless of additional discount.

Yep exactly. Especially when if they get to the 3rd round they just cost later picks. Where something like that might happen is say next year with Allison where he's rated top 5. If we had traded out our 2nd and 3rd rounders and had no additional currency and expected him to go a couple places after our pick it might be worth doing it, otherwise we'd carry a monumental deficit into the following year in the first round.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[braddsey]

Yep exactly. Especially when if they get to the 3rd round they just cost later picks. Where something like that might happen is say next year with Allison where he's rated top 5. If we had traded out our 2nd and 3rd rounders and had no additional currency and expected him to go a couple places after our pick it might be worth doing it, otherwise we'd carry a monumental deficit into the following year in the first round.

I would think even in that instance the Lions could consider some sort of pick package trading. slide down the draft order a little to pickup the academy player, and still have another good pick to use on another player... like trading pick 5 for pick 10 & 28, or even something like 17, 30 & 40. Similar number of points (a little in our favor), but if we've already committed to getting Allison then it gives us a whole lot of leverage at the trade table because a top 5 pick is so valuable.
Considering that though... we'd probably hang onto pick 5 for another player (assuming Allison doesn't go before 5) and find points for Allison somewhere else!

Whatever happens an interesting draft/trade period - with a lot of guesswork at where academy players will go. Draft day will be incredibly fluid and confusing as hell!

 

[neg99]

I would think even in that instance the Lions could consider some sort of pick package trading. slide down the draft order a little to pickup the academy player, and still have another good pick to use on another player... like trading pick 5 for pick 10 & 28, or even something like 17, 30 & 40. Similar number of points (a little in our favor), but if we've already committed to getting Allison then it gives us a whole lot of leverage at the trade table because a top 5 pick is so valuable.
Considering that though... we'd probably hang onto pick 5 for another player (assuming Allison doesn't go before 5) and find points for Allison somewhere else!

Whatever happens an interesting draft/trade period - with a lot of guesswork at where academy players will go. Draft day will be incredibly fluid and confusing as hell!

Yeah exactly right. The circumstances would have to be pretty extraordinary.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[AFLQLD]

Basically we won't pick an academy player until they're bid on. The 20% wouldn't count if we picked them with an actual selection.

If that is our wisest strategy, and it makes sense not to select our academy players until after someone else nominates them, it raises the interesting point as to what other clubs will do strategically with regard to academy players. Obviously they could bid early for someone like Mills or Hipwood but would have to know that the academy clubs would still take them (unless it was a ridiculously early pick).

It has concerned me with this new system, that other clubs could force us to use up picks (via academy points) by nominating for academy players they know we will take. They get us to chew up our picks faster just because they can. I know they would have to take the player if we didn't use our rights but still, they would have a fair idea we would probably take Keays and Hipwood any time after we got Schache if we had to. They need have no real intention other than doing us, or Swans or GWS or GC the most harm for no cost to them.

Is there nuisance value for them in nominating academy players just to force us to use picks up?

It might not be such an issue in a weaker draft but in a strong draft it would seem to allow them to remove a bit more competition for 2nd or 3rd rounders.

 

[dlanod]

The two relevant questions that I see are:

• Does the nominating club feel that the player is worth that pick?

Given your comment deals with "nuisance" nominations, let's assume the answer to the former is no. What's the downside for that nominating club? We know about this player who's been in our system for years and don't match - they're stuck with a player they might have rated at 15 at pick 5 instead and miss out on players they view as more talented. That's a pretty huge downside. If they do actually rate the player at that pick, then the system is working how it's meant to.

• Would we match if we don't think they're worth that much?

Nuisance nominations only an issue if the answer to this question is 'yes'. That seems an odd mindset to talk into a draft. It'd be like picking a player even though you can pick other players you rate higher. (Yes, before everyone jumps on this - things like being a Queenslander, etc, all bears into the rating. Let's just say all those factors are rolled into one overall ordering of our draft life.) It'd be the equivalent of taking Parish instead of Schache with pick 2, even though we rate Schache higher, i.e. very much a WTF moment. At some point you'd have to have some faith in the club to not make a kneejerk reaction, though I suspect we will rate Keays and Hipwood higher than most other clubs simply because of their familiarity with our system and the lack of homesickness worries.

 

[neg99]

The two relevant questions that I see are:

• Does the nominating club feel that the player is worth that pick?

Given your comment deals with "nuisance" nominations, let's assume the answer to the former is no. What's the downside for that nominating club? We know about this player who's been in our system for years and don't match - they're stuck with a player they might have rated at 15 at pick 5 instead and miss out on players they view as more talented. That's a pretty huge downside. If they do actually rate the player at that pick, then the system is working how it's meant to.

• Would we match if we don't think they're worth that much?

Nuisance nominations only an issue if the answer to this question is 'yes'. That seems an odd mindset to talk into a draft. It'd be like picking a player even though you can pick other players you rate higher. (Yes, before everyone jumps on this - things like being a Queenslander, etc, all bears into the rating. Let's just say all those factors are rolled into one overall ordering of our draft life.) It'd be the equivalent of taking Parish instead of Schache with pick 2, even though we rate Schache higher, i.e. very much a WTF moment. At some point you'd have to have some faith in the club to not make a kneejerk reaction, though I suspect we will rate Keays and Hipwood higher than most other clubs simply because of their familiarity with our system and the lack of homesickness worries.

Yeah it's something fans will likely get worked up about but won't happen in reality I suspect. The other risk in the days of players leaving after 1 or 2 years is we could let them take that player, develop them and continue to be in their ear then just get them back 2 years later for a discount anyway.

It's not a wise strategy but I wouldn't put it past someone like Essendon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[WhiteLionFeva]

I can't envisage any club nominating one of our academy players just to make us use up a pick or picks. To what end? If they have their eye on a specific player or players, there is no guarantee that player or players will not be picked up by someone else anyway. It's just way too speculative. The bigger question for me is whether other clubs rate Keays or Hipwood highly enough to make a serious first round nomination and I reckon that's all the Lions will be focussing on.

 

[Eons]

Bit worried about Hipwood getting bid on very early. Similar player to Andrews and there wouldn't be a club who wouldn't have given up a top 10 pick for Andrews if they had their time again.

 

[SBMVJB]

Bit worried about Hipwood getting bid on very early. Similar player to Andrews and there wouldn't be a club who wouldn't have given up a top 10 pick for Andrews if they had their time again.

I think Kang bid around 30 last year

 

[Eons]

I think Kang bid around 30 last year

Something like that. They would have given their first pick and so would have a lot of clubs based on how well he did this year.

 

[Bucking Beads]

Bit worried about Hipwood getting bid on very early. Similar player to Andrews and there wouldn't be a club who wouldn't have given up a top 10 pick for Andrews if they had their time again.

Don't stress. Worst case scenario is we see our picks from next season knocked back a bit. We will get both Hipwood and Keays if we want them.

 

[SBMVJB]

Don't stress. Worst case scenario is we see our picks from next season knocked back a bit. We will get both Hipwood and Keays if we want them.

It comes down where they rate other kids. There are a lot better kids available around 10 to 15. We will see next month. Can't wait for draft day.

 

[Hollow Knight]

The two relevant questions that I see are:

• Does the nominating club feel that the player is worth that pick?

Given your comment deals with "nuisance" nominations, let's assume the answer to the former is no. What's the downside for that nominating club? We know about this player who's been in our system for years and don't match - they're stuck with a player they might have rated at 15 at pick 5 instead and miss out on players they view as more talented. That's a pretty huge downside. If they do actually rate the player at that pick, then the system is working how it's meant to.

• Would we match if we don't think they're worth that much?

Nuisance nominations only an issue if the answer to this question is 'yes'. That seems an odd mindset to talk into a draft. It'd be like picking a player even though you can pick other players you rate higher. (Yes, before everyone jumps on this - things like being a Queenslander, etc, all bears into the rating. Let's just say all those factors are rolled into one overall ordering of our draft life.) It'd be the equivalent of taking Parish instead of Schache with pick 2, even though we rate Schache higher, i.e. very much a WTF moment. At some point you'd have to have some faith in the club to not make a kneejerk reaction, though I suspect we will rate Keays and Hipwood higher than most other clubs simply because of their familiarity with our system and the lack of homesickness worries.

Yeah, the other thing about nuisance bids is that that club is basically sending a message to the player they actually end up with that they weren't even their preferred pick at that point.

 

[Eons]

Don't stress. Worst case scenario is we see our picks from next season knocked back a bit. We will get both Hipwood and Keays if we want them.

The only issue with our first pick getting pushed back next year is Allison. If we get pushed back to say pick 6 and Allison gets bid on with pick 5, we have to use that pick rather than getting a player early in the draft then using our later picks to get the points for Allison. I may have it wrong but that's my understanding.

 

[Bucking Beads]

It comes down where they rate other kids. There are a lot better kids available around 10 to 15. We will see next month. Can't wait for draft day.

It is irrelevant where we rate the other kids. We won't have picks where Hipwood and Keays are likely to be drafted. If we want them we take them with a collection of later picks. I doubt we will rate these 2 players that much differently to other clubs.

 

[Bucking Beads]

The only issue with our first pick getting pushed back next year is Allison. If we get pushed back to say pick 6 and Allison gets bid on with pick 5, we have to use that pick rather than getting a player early in the draft then using our later picks to get the points for Allison. I may have it wrong but that's my understanding.

It isn't ideal but if Allison is bid on at pick 5 he is worth our pick so I don't see the point in stressing for them. This is the new system so we must deal with it.

 

[Panthera]

Don't stress. Worst case scenario is we see our picks from next season knocked back a bit. We will get both Hipwood and Keays if we want them.

I just hope we have a 2nd round pick to use on a non-academy player

Think there could be some gems in there before pick #30

Should be the case with Leuey and Redden likely to get us picks in the first 25.

 

[whatboutbob]

The only issue with our first pick getting pushed back next year is Allison. If we get pushed back to say pick 6 and Allison gets bid on with pick 5, we have to use that pick rather than getting a player early in the draft then using our later picks to get the points for Allison. I may have it wrong but that's my understanding.

dlanod can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that scenario would require Carlton to use pick one to push back the Lions' first rounder next year. My vague recollection is they made a change so that pick from the relevant round is pushed back the following year.

I'm second guessing myself now though...