2016 Draft Rumours

[SaintsSeptember]

And in other news tonight the GWS has traded away all of its 2014 afl draftees. All of Pickett, Marchbank, Ahern, Steele and McKenna have been traded in the 2016 trade period

Co-incidence that future draft pick trading came along out of the blue, just at the time when GWS stood to benefit from it more than any other club.
They will be offloading these picks for years to come , ensuring that they get fresh new talent coming in, while others on top of the ladder struggle.

 

[sven_inc]

Co-incidence that future draft pick trading came along out of the blue, just at the time when GWS stood to benefit from it more than any other club.
They will be offloading these picks for years to come , ensuring that they get fresh new talent coming in, while others on top of the ladder struggle.

The catch is though that it will for diminishing returns.

Losing all those players who were essentially first round picks for nothing close to that this year.

There will come a point (hopefully soon) where they fall in line with everyone else.

They've worked the system beautifully but its starting to turn around. Clubs are now beginning to be able to get first round talent for much less a few years later.

I wish the Hawks had targeted more than just JOR from GWS. Kids like Pickett, Ahern, Marchbank etc may still turn out to be substandard AFL players but getting them for relative peanuts is insane.

 

[Bic]

I always think of Harry McKay when Marshall is brought up. And when I think of Harry McKay I think 'major bust'.

This. Brings back memories of bad things. I remember how bad McKay was.

Are you calling an 18yo kid a bust? Really?

 

[Moist Biscuit]

Are you calling an 18yo kid a bust? Really?

Don't listen to them, anybody labeling an 18/19 year old key forward a "bust" is an utter moron.

 

[Apex36]

I always think of Harry McKay when Marshall is brought up. And when I think of Harry McKay I think 'major bust'.

You're calling a skinny key forward who was one of the youngest players in his draft year a bust, 1 year in to his career?


Gollo pls...

 

[Heaps of fun]

You're calling a skinny key forward who was one of the youngest players in his draft year a bust, 1 year in to his career?


Gollo pls...

I get your point but neither of the McKay boys started out as skinny. Both 95kg before turning 19.

 

[Bic]

I get your point but neither of the McKay boys started out as skinny. Both 95kg before turning 19.

Both are still 18 for another 2 months.

Harry had a back stress reaction early in the season and only played the last 6 games in VFL.

 

[Heaps of fun]

Both are still 18 for another 2 months.

Harry had a back stress reaction early in the season and only played the last 6 games in VFL.

Yes, I know. I'm just saying neither are skinny. Big boys.

 

[cdcanman]

Are you calling an 18yo kid a bust? Really?

Don't listen to them, anybody labeling an 18/19 year old key forward a "bust" is an utter moron.

And he's suffered from injuries as well.
Still has plenty of time

 

[SaintsSeptember]

The catch is though that it will for diminishing returns.

Losing all those players who were essentially first round picks for nothing close to that this year.

There will come a point (hopefully soon) where they fall in line with everyone else.

They've worked the system beautifully but its starting to turn around. Clubs are now beginning to be able to get first round talent for much less a few years later.

I wish the Hawks had targeted more than just JOR from GWS. Kids like Pickett, Ahern, Marchbank etc may still turn out to be substandard AFL players but getting them for relative peanuts is insane.

It will continue for some time though.
Already from the top of the ladder they've managed to get the 2nd pick in the draft.
Next year they already have 2 second round picks. Bring on next years trade period and watch it improve again, and introduce some 2018 picks as well.

 

[cdcanman]

Co-incidence that future draft pick trading came along out of the blue, just at the time when GWS stood to benefit from it more than any other club.
They will be offloading these picks for years to come , ensuring that they get fresh new talent coming in, while others on top of the ladder struggle.

The AFL didn't introduce trading of future picks out of nowhere, to suit their own ends.
The clubs were the ones asking/pushing for it.

GWS have exploited the rules/system wonderfully well. But that is not going to last forever. There is nothing to fear from the new player movement landscape. Within a few years it will even out and present a level playing field for all (other than the academies which are a completely unnecessary joke. Father-sons should be removed also). It's introduction was always going to favour the teams towards the top during it's introductory years (particularly with the league further skewed by the expansion teams) but that will even out soon enough.

I disagree with your assertion that only teams in certain parts of the ladder benefit. Teams from any position on the table can exploit the rules to their benefit. Teams at the top can trade out future picks for ready made players. Teams at the bottom can trade out veterans for future picks to hasten their rebuild. Works both ways. As does free agency incidentally

 

[Gollo]

You're calling a skinny key forward who was one of the youngest players in his draft year a bust, 1 year in to his career?


Gollo pls...

I said I think 'major bust'. I never concretely said anything.

 

[BluesRule]

The AFL didn't introduce trading of future picks out of nowhere, to suit their own ends.
The clubs were the ones asking/pushing for it.

GWS have exploited the rules/system wonderfully well. But that is not going to last forever. There is nothing to fear from the new player movement landscape. Within a few years it will even out and present a level playing field for all (other than the academies which are a completely unnecessary joke. Father-sons should be removed also). It's introduction was always going to favour the teams towards the top during it's introductory years (particularly with the league further skewed by the expansion teams) but that will even out soon enough.

I disagree with your assertion that only teams in certain parts of the ladder benefit. Teams from any position on the table can exploit the rules to their benefit. Teams at the top can trade out future picks for ready made players. Teams at the bottom can trade out veterans for future picks to hasten their rebuild. Works both ways. As does free agency incidentally

I like the idea of father/sons and think it should include grandfather/sons.
If academies are expanding the game then they should stay.
But every team should have one and limit to only 3 allowed to be nominated by a club in any draft.
Also the 20% discount looks too much.
Drop it to to 10% discount and it will make it fairer.

 

[Apex36]

I said I think 'major bust'. I never concretely said anythingl=.

Nice backpedal!

 

[Apex36]

I like the idea of father/sons and think it should include grandfather/sons.
If academies are expanding the game then they should stay.
But every team should have one and limit to only 3 allowed to be nominated by a club in any draft.
Also the 20% discount looks too much.
Drop it to to 10% discount and it will make it fairer.

Watch the AFL introduce this after we missed out on Sam Weideman

 

[Gollo]

Are you calling an 18yo kid a bust? Really?

Jesus Christ. I SAID I THINK 'BUST'. Where did I directly call him, or Marshall a bust??

 

[Moist Biscuit]

Jesus Christ. I SAID I THINK 'BUST'. Where did I directly call him, or Marshall a bust??

Interesting, and I'm sure you have always been harsh on Tom Boyd?

 

[Gollo]

Nice backpedal!

What, it's a crime to have opinions on a draftee, especially one who couldn't get a game in one of the weakest forward lines in the comp, who was also a top 10 pick?? For all I know he could become a jet, but I don't think that's likely to happen.

(Sorry, didn't realise he was injured for so long, but the point is still there.)

 

[cdcanman]

I like the idea of father/sons and think it should include grandfather/sons.
If academies are expanding the game then they should stay.
But every team should have one and limit to only 3 allowed to be nominated by a club in any draft.
Also the 20% discount looks too much.
Drop it to to 10% discount and it will make it fairer.

Define 'expanding the game'? If you mean that they are attracting/retaining talented young athletes who may choose other sports if not for the academy assistance, I get that. But there is no reason for the academy to be attached to a specific club. Why don't the AFL themselves run academies in each state, and then the players produced/nurtured enter the draft just like any other prospect rather than being linked to a club unnecessarily. The real purpose of the academies is not just to retain these players in the AFL system, it's to artificially advantage teams in non-AFL markets, ensuring them on-field success for the expressed purpose of maximizing TV audiences and therefore TV revenues. If they were just interested in retaining the young athletes, then as I have said, they would run the academies themselves.

I just disagree with you on academies and father/sons. I long for a day when the draft is completely unencumbered, as in, no team having priority access to any prospect. With regards to every team having there own academy, this is very similar to what used to exist in the league with priority recruiting zones. There is a very good reason they moved away from this model. There is no way to make it a fair and level playing field. Inevitably, some zones/academies will produce better talent, and more frequently, favouring the teams that hold those zones. It is the exact opposite direction that the game should be heading in. The draft is proven internationally to be the fairest and the most successful way of maximising parity. An unencumbered draft should be the ultimate goal IMO

 

[Apex36]

What, it's a crime to have opinions on a draftee, especially one who couldn't get a game in one of the weakest forward lines in the comp, who was also a top 10 pick?? For all I know he could become a jet, but I don't think that's likely to happen.

Key position players often don't play seniors in their first year of footy, the adjustment from playing on 17-18 year olds to adults is often too great. As a general rule you won't see them having an impact at AFL level for at least 2-3 years, even in a weak team, especially if they have injuries.

(Sorry, didn't realise he was injured for so long, but the point is still there.)

Hahah it's really not. It's ridiculous to even have the word 'bust' go through your head in regards to a key position player only 1 year in to their career.

 

[HARKER]

I always think of Harry McKay when Marshall is brought up. And when I think of Harry McKay I think 'major bust'.

McKay is a lot more aggressive than Marshall.
Only reason he didn't play seniors this year was because of his back issue.

Maybe it's because both their surnames start with M, that has you confused...........can happen to anyone.

 

[RudyBlue]

(Sorry, didn't realise he was injured for so long, but the point is still there.)

Makes your point useless actually.

No problem having an opinion, just think of a better reason why you'll think he busts.

 

[Gollo]

Makes your point useless actually.

No problem having an opinion, just think of a better reason why you'll think he busts.

Ok.

In his draft year, he struggled to kick more than 2 goals in a game, and his marking numbers were relatively poor. He was picked at 10 based on potential, similar to why Marshall will be picked this year. He's raw and young, and KPFs that struggle with injury tend to struggle with it for a while. His athleticism is good but not a standout feature, and he doesn't really work up the ground. This all shows me warning signs that he may not develop as he is expected to.

For all those thinking I'm being hasty and rash, these are my reasons for thinking he could be a bust no. 10 pick. You can disagree with me all you want, but don't critisise me for having a rational opinion.

 

[RudyBlue]

Ok.

In his draft year, he struggled to kick more than 2 goals in a game, and his marking numbers were relatively poor. He was picked at 10 based on potential, similar to why Marshall will be picked this year. He's raw and young, and KPFs that struggle with injury tend to struggle with it for a while. His athleticism is good but not a standout feature, and he doesn't really work up the ground. This all shows me warning signs that he may not develop as he is expected to.

For all those thinking I'm being hasty and rash, these are my reasons for thinking he could be a bust no. 10 pick. You can disagree with me all you want, but don't critisise me for having a rational opinion.

Yeah fair enough assessment.

I have similar fears for him too, but SOS wanted a key forward for the future and Harry was the best available.

I feel there's a lot of Tom Lynch about him. Lynch only really hit his straps at 22-23.

Long way to go.

 

[BluesRule]

Define 'expanding the game'? If you mean that they are attracting/retaining talented young athletes who may choose other sports if not for the academy assistance, I get that. But there is no reason for the academy to be attached to a specific club. Why don't the AFL themselves run academies in each state, and then the players produced/nurtured enter the draft just like any other prospect rather than being linked to a club unnecessarily. The real purpose of the academies is not just to retain these players in the AFL system, it's to artificially advantage teams in non-AFL markets, ensuring them on-field success for the expressed purpose of maximizing TV audiences and therefore TV revenues. If they were just interested in retaining the young athletes, then as I have said, they would run the academies themselves.

I just disagree with you on academies and father/sons. I long for a day when the draft is completely unencumbered, as in, no team having priority access to any prospect. With regards to every team having there own academy, this is very similar to what used to exist in the league with priority recruiting zones. There is a very good reason they moved away from this model. There is no way to make it a fair and level playing field. Inevitably, some zones/academies will produce better talent, and more frequently, favouring the teams that hold those zones. It is the exact opposite direction that the game should be heading in. The draft is proven internationally to be the fairest and the most successful way of maximising parity. An unencumbered draft should be the ultimate goal IMO

I think being attached to a club makes it so much more real and compelling for the kids. We are competing with other sports that do this and often pay kids in academies.
Everybody does AFL sponsored OzKick. Good kids want more.
The Academies makes sure the programs are cutting edge if they get an end benefit so much easier to align interests. I am OK with the concept, just think the 20% price discount is too big (which gives a club like GWS an advantage when they have so many kids).