2018 Draft thread

[Tom14]

Roar deal reviewing the draft is up featuring Steve Conole, Dom Ambrogio, Noble and Andrew Crowell. Really good stuff.

One interesting thing Dom discussed was the restrictions on live trading - including one that I wasn’t aware of where you can’t trade a pick back to someone you received it from.

So for eg the picks we got from Port in the Sam Mayes/pick swap we couldn’t trade to them to move up the order (I think it ended up being pick 40 and freos future third that couldn’t be traded to them). However we would have been able to include freos future third in a trade with freo as it had passed through port (but what became pick 36 couldn’t as we got it from freo).

This does explain why west coast and Sydney’s controversial swap involved multiple picks being traded, rather than the exact same ones. It also means that the risk of such trades is a bit less than I thought - it requires a particular set of circumstances where the clubs have enough picks to do it and can also make trades work with future picks.

 

[bungalow_bill]

If you can believe it Nat Fyfe was considered a reach at pick 20.

 

[Tom14]

I find it hard to fault the club's draft strategy. They have to be accountable for each selection they make. For them, the "market" is not much more than a guide. A failed draft selection is a failed draft selection, irrespective of whether the market agrees with you. It might make it better from a PR perspective if you go along with the market and fail but it doesn't help take the club forward.

So, if as a recruiting team, you are held to account based on the draft results, then I'd also be backing in my own assessments rather than trying to guess what the market might do. I'd create a list of every player I liked, in order of preference, and then simply work my way down the list. Ultimately, that's what a "draft board" is.

A lot of the amateur analysis done of the draft relies on almost a totalisator type model. People take every bit of analysis they can find (power rankings, phantom drafts, rumour etc), feed it into whatever their method of analysis is and out pops a "value". It is an OK way to think for the purposes of being a draft spectator but it doesn't help list managers. The "market average" of value means almost nothing when each club makes a selection. All that matters is how you rate the player and, to a lesser extent, how the clubs with a selection after you rate that player. Given clubs now hold their cards close to their chest at draft time, you aren't really going to know what decisions the clubs after you might make. Real time pick trading makes this even more complicated. Therefore, the only remaining piece of evidence left is your own recruiting team's assessment of value.

Further to this I strongly recommend people listen to Dom Ambrogio’s comments on live trading from the latest roar deal - it is really eye opening on how complicated the current system is with what trades can be done and how little time you have to try get a deal.

Five minutes between picks was awful for tv but in actuality it doesn’t sound like it left a lot of time to get deals done. Doesn’t mean it is impossible, but the chat does put it in perspective.

 

[luthor]

If you can believe it Nat Fyfe was considered a reach at pick 20.

I saw some utube vision a year or so ago of Fyfe's efforts at a State underage carnival, whenever it was that he played in that.

He was as skinny as a rake, missed targets, was a turnover merchant and generally looked a bit out of his depth.

At the time, he probably did look like a bit of a reach.

Freo must have known something that others didn't

 

[Judge]

And what do you say to my previous post suggesting that the lack of any other club wanting Ely at the draft would indicate that he wasn't even a backup option for the five clubs before us and one after us? I wasn't basing my suggestion that we reached on my scouting abilities. I know there's plenty of assumption there, but there's also reasonable logic.

I, for one, say that that you've convinced me that you are in fact the smartest guy in the room (or on BF, at least).

Are we good now?

 

[spotthedog1]

I, for one, say that that you've convinced me that you are in fact the smartest guy in the room (or on BF, at least).

Are we good now?

The post in question dismissed my (and other peoples') view on the grounds of "the recruiters are professionals", without bothering to delve any deeper, or provide any rebuttal to points already made. So I asked them address them. Gibbo provided his viewpoint, which was valid and reasonable, and everyone moves on.

It's not a huge deal. I've provided my viewpoint and my justification for it. If others want to post dismissing my viewpoint as wrong without rebutting me or providing their own justification, I'll ask for clarification.

 

[James North]

This whole thread is way too meta.

 

[jackess]

Noble explaining very well the strategy as well as the other considerations the club have when selecting players which is fans would know nothing about

Did also say we still need to add some run and speed

 

[Tassie4ever]

I know s**t about recruitment. However, on the evidence over recent past, we seem to have unearthed a couple of diamonds in the rough. I'll go with saying our recruitment chaps know what they are doing. Just a hunch.

Nevertheless, like everyone I'll reserve judgement on our recruitment skills until we can assess the sort of strength we actually run out on the field.

The last couple of seasons we haven't been so flash. Distinctly un-flash in fact. There have been blokes in our Firsts who wouldn't have gotten a game elsewhere, and others who have been in semi-retirement mode and who occasionally burst into life when their future might be threatened. Who don't throw the body in if danger presents. No names- this isn't the forum to bag out players who are playing within given team contraints. And pressure.

All sorts of arguments here about whether Recruit A or veteran B will get a gig. One thing's for certain- if we field a team anything like we have been sending out over the past few years, pretty much for sure we'll achieve pretty much the same results. Hopefully pressure imposed by latent talent in the 2's will mean no-one is guaranteed a gig, no matter their reputation. That's how we'll improve.

Personally I don't think we're too far away.

 

[xplo]

And what do you say to my previous post suggesting that the lack of any other club wanting Ely at the draft would indicate that he wasn't even a backup option for the five clubs before us and one after us? I wasn't basing my suggestion that we reached on my scouting abilities. I know there's plenty of assumption there, but there's also reasonable logic.

Others from the post draft function might be able to confirm my memory, but I'm 95% certain Andrew Farrell said Sydney were going to take Smith with their next pick (25). It was 23 or never.

Berry Jnr was similar.

 

[dlanod]

Others from the post draft function might be able to confirm my memory, but I'm 95% certain Andrew Farrell said Sydney were going to take Smith with their next pick (25). It was 23 or never.

Berry Jnr was similar.

I recall a linkage between Smith and Sydney as well, especially after the trade up.

 

[Nunez]

Others from the post draft function might be able to confirm my memory, but I'm 95% certain Andrew Farrell said Sydney were going to take Smith with their next pick (25). It was 23 or never.

Berry Jnr was similar.

Please stop killing the narrative that we overpaid.

 

[WhiteLionFeva]

Please stop killing the narrative that we overpaid.

They got their Ely's and their Bailey's mixed up the duffers.

 

[mpal6]

Others from the post draft function might be able to confirm my memory, but I'm 95% certain Andrew Farrell said Sydney were going to take Smith with their next pick (25). It was 23 or never.

Berry Jnr was similar.

Ely is a classic sydney mould player. big body, tough, contested ball winner with a bit of dash. Luke Parker or Zak Jones type. No wonder we jumped in before they took him.

 

[a mayes ing]

Ely is a classic sydney mould player. big body, tough, contested ball winner with a bit of dash. Luke Parker or Zak Jones type. No wonder we jumped in before they took him.

Don't think he is like Zac Jones at all. Jones is probably more of a half back player and uses his elite speed (e.g. Jetta). However, l also think he has massive potential and could be an absolute gun if developed well.

 

[BigCat2]

I saw some utube vision a year or so ago of Fyfe's efforts at a State underage carnival, whenever it was that he played in that.

He was as skinny as a rake, missed targets, was a turnover merchant and generally looked a bit out of his depth.

At the time, he probably did look like a bit of a reach.

Freo must have known something that others didn't

Still a turnover merchant. It's just that he got strong and started winning the ball.

 

[Rosscoe_666]

Thomas Berry will be taking Jarrod's former #13 guernsey the same #13 Tom wore at the Rebels and Jarrod will be wearing #7 GWV Rebels reporting.

Hope it's not the same #13 he wore at GWVR. It'll look odd with Tom wearing a different jumper design to the rest of the team

 

[Football Pope]

Others from the post draft function might be able to confirm my memory, but I'm 95% certain Andrew Farrell said Sydney were going to take Smith with their next pick (25). It was 23 or never.

Berry Jnr was similar.

Yep...depending on who you read he was also on GWS, (24). Melbournes (27) West Coasts (26) radars

 

[Brizzys Squizzy]

The post in question dismissed my (and other peoples') view on the grounds of "the recruiters are professionals", without bothering to delve any deeper, or provide any rebuttal to points already made. So I asked them address them. Gibbo provided his viewpoint, which was valid and reasonable, and everyone moves on.

It's not a huge deal. I've provided my viewpoint and my justification for it. If others want to post dismissing my viewpoint as wrong without rebutting me or providing their own justification, I'll ask for clarification.

Asking for clarification from others is a bit rich coming from someone who has posted nothing but assumptions like other sides didn't want him, you don't know that for a fact wanting duursma when he was taken before our pick saying the club didn't or should've traded up to get him even though the club have said they tried had no takers I respect that smith wasn't your first choice your absolutely entitled to have that view.
So if your there and have pick 21 name me a player please that you would've picked.

 

[jonnobackpocket]

I'm going to make my call on this batch in 3 years. For the record though I think Witherden is a great pick in the 20's, alot of potential.

 

[Tom14]

I'm going to make my call on this batch in 3 years. For the record though I think Witherden is a great pick in the 20's, alot of potential.

Witherden was a home run pick - our first 3 in the 2016 draft all were. While the 2013 draft is providing a lot of solid-strong contributors, I’m confident that 2016 gave us 3 stars.

 

[Jivlain]

Tom Doedee is a great example of this. He was taken in the first round by Adelaide, a lot of people had never heard of him and there was a huge uproar about how Adelaide reached for him massively and wasted their first round pick etc etc. He has turned out to be one of the best players in that draft and one of the best intercept defenders in the competition. Adelaide recruiters obviously rated him much higher than the general community and for good reason. People need to have faith in the recruiters, they have been watching these kids on a weekly basis for years before they are drafted.

People also tended to take the piss a lot for those first few years when he was only in the twos. As we climb up we're going to draft players who are going to some spend time developing in the twos. And that's ok! We have a reserves team that the kids can develop in and a young kid spending some time playing NEAFL doesn't mean their career is doomed.

 

[trikster]

And what do you say to my previous post suggesting that the lack of any other club wanting Ely at the draft would indicate that he wasn't even a backup option for the five clubs before us and one after us?

GWS drafted Xavier O'Halloran at 22, he wasn't there.

 

[a mayes ing]

People also tended to take the piss a lot for those first few years when he was only in the twos. As we climb up we're going to draft players who are going to some spend time developing in the twos. And that's ok! We have a reserves team that the kids can develop in and a young kid spending some time playing NEAFL doesn't mean their career is doomed.

I think the issue wioth the NEAFL is that it is pretty bad. They probably wouldn't develop very well when compared to the VFL of SANFL. We also see that when a player does well in the 2's, they often get found out when in the seniors, mostly the speed of the game.

 

[SizeMatters]

I think the issue wioth the NEAFL is that it is pretty bad. They probably wouldn't develop very well when compared to the VFL of SANFL. We also see that when a player does well in the 2's, they often get found out when in the seniors, mostly the speed of the game.

Southport pumped the Swans in the GF though. I don't think the NEAFL is that bad anymore TBH.