Draft Review 2019 - Revisit the 2019 AFL Draft

[GWS Goose]

I really liked Sydney's first three picks. Their first two especially were real favourites of mine in this draft.

I thought Gold Coast's trade of 11 for 27 was the single worst decision of the whole off-season.

They didn't trade next year's 11 for 27, they traded it for Sharp specifically. It is not the same thing.
They rate the player as worthy of next year's 11 which is fair enough.
They also bring forward the development bringing another player into this crop rather than a player being a year younger.
It is not as terrible as people are making out

 

[Suma Magic]

They didn't trade next year's 11 for 27, they traded it for Sharp specifically. It is not the same thing.
They rate the player as worthy of next year's 11 which is fair enough.
They also bring forward the development bringing another player into this crop rather than a player being a year younger.
It is not as terrible as people are making out

The crowd collectively ranked him as the 27th best player. While GC may have ranked him higher, what are the odds that you get a better player available at 27 than 15*? Really low. They could get number 10 on their board next year at pick 15.

I get that they get a player a year earlier, but that means that they lose them a year earlier (at the end of their career). I don’t really buy the argument that bringing a player in this year is any better or worse than bringing a player in next year. If you think short-term it costs you long-term.

The trade might pay off but history tells us that the odds are stacked against Gold Coast.

*if 11 slides out to 15

 

[GWS Goose]

The crowd collectively ranked him as the 27th best player. While GC may have ranked him higher, what are the odds that you get a better player available at 27 than 15*? Really low. They could get number 10 on their board next year at pick 15.

I get that they get a player a year earlier, but that means that they lose them a year earlier (at the end of their career). I don’t really buy the argument that bringing a player in this year is any better or worse than bringing a player in next year. If you think short-term it costs you long-term.

The trade might pay off but history tells us that the odds are stacked against Gold Coast.

*if 11 slides out to 15

Not entirely true, the 26 prior picks had at least 1 in front of him (different to being ranked 27 by the crowd)
It is also a different group of players next year..

They bought in a class player, 2 X All Australian, they probably played slight overs, but it is far from a horrendous decision.

I tip that there will be heaps bigger flops than this in 5 years time

 

[Suma Magic]

Not entirely true, the 26 prior picks had at least 1 in front of him (different to being ranked 27 by the crowd)
It is also a different group of players next year..

They bought in a class player, 2 X All Australian, they probably played slight overs, but it is far from a horrendous decision.

I tip that there will be heaps bigger flops than this in 5 years time

If you’re drafted 27, then by the best measure possible, you are rated collectively by clubs as the 27th best player.

 

[T2B_]

This thread is, if nothing else, entertaining to read.

 

[GordonBlue]

There are plenty of Tigers fans on here who dispute that...

Well Carlton obviously thought that Richmond were about to.

Had we not traded to pick 20 and Richmond did not pick Philp up, then we would have picked him up with pick 22.
It made no difference except guarantee us Philp. We were not going to use pick 55, hence it made difference

According to Cal Towmey, quite a number of recruiters had Philp where he went.

So at the end of the day, 100% of my opinions come from youtube videos and I love what I see of Philp... more impressive than Dow's video... and I'm talking about both brothers.

 

[GordonBlue]

Its quite possible richmond wanted Philp over Dow.

however they said they same about Stocker/RCD and were proven wrong

either way Philp wasn't deemed good enough for Vic Metro iirc and was rated by some mid draft ...

Where's the proof?

Either way Philp was deemed to be a first round pick. Who are the "some"?

Listen to someone that has knowledge or listen to the guy who is paid to determine and speak to recruiters and Cal Towmey said that a number of recruiters had Philp going exactly where he went.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

If you’re drafted 27, then by the best measure possible, you are rated collectively by clubs as the 27th best player.

That’s a terrible way of looking at it

 

[bungalow_bill]

Lions list is looking amazing for under 25s

Clug
Gardiner
Andrews
Hipwood
Ah Chee
Berry
Witherden
Deven Robertson
Rayner

Plus
Brandon Starcevich
Ely Smith
Dan Mcstay
Zac Bailey

 

[Monkey King]

They didn't trade next year's 11 for 27, they traded it for Sharp specifically.

Yeah, it’s an old way of thinking that doesn’t capture what live trading is all about. Clubs don’t live trade for the pick, they do it for the player.

 

[Yoda_]

Have poored over our drafting for the last few days and looking back it's been a decent enough result for us.

Harrison Jones - Long term KPF, post Joe could be the one to take us forward. Not sure he will be ready in time but the ceiling for this bloke is high enough. We've been short on KPF's for some time so he is certainly one for us to get excited about.

Nick Bryan - Second best ruckmen in this years draft pool, as we've noted at Essendon, he was the bloke serving Rowell, Anderson and co at Metro and Oakleigh. e wanted a young ruck, especially with our 21 highly regard ruck Sam Draper on the mend from an ACL and no guarantees to make it back to what was projected to be his best.


Ned Cahill - One of the better small forwards in this years crop. Almost 1.5 goals a game is a decent enough return in a poor Vic Country side. Has endurance and scope to push up the field is a big positive in todays game. With question marks over Fantasia and Mosquito, we needed some extra depth here.

Lachlan Johnson - The most intriguing one for mine. Why did we pick up a bloke we've instantly placed on the inactive list? 2 - for - 1 is all I can think of. Gives us an opportunity to replace him and rehab LJ under our watch having seen him most of the year in our NGA.

Mitch Hibberd - Gives us instant depth in the midfield, could even play round 1. A great story for this former North Melbourne second round selection. A big body (191cm is huge for us lol) so definitely interested to see when he gets his opportunity.

We still have two spots open on our list for the SPP period, one sounds like we'll select Jacob Townsend, the other? Hopefully on moe midfield depth like a Daniel Mott. We wanted to move up to pick 23 to get Dev Robertson it sounded like but Port Adelaide/Brisbane were not interested, could see AD snuffing at the thought of overpaying like Brisbane did but we'd need to to get above Brisbane's trade proposal.

The two guys I was disappointed to miss out on were Jake Riccardi who I've been a huge advocate for all year. Once we picked Jones, it was unlikely we take Riccardi. The other was Jay Rantall who was available at our 3rd selection (pick 38) whom went two spots later (pick 40) to Collingwood.

Anyways, some interesting choices and a big need (big bodied mid) somewhat filled by a role player (Mitch Hibberd). Still, a few talented guys into our football club to get excited about and a couple of places still to be filled possibly.

 

[bungalow_bill]

What if that one pick ends up being as good or better than Walsh. Last year you might have got 3 1st round picks for pick 1 but SOS would have none of it. Point is that only time will tell whether the 3 players picked are better than the one you forfeited

These trades are always a risk - example Dees trade 2 (Josh Kelly) for Tyson/Salem

 

[Peel67skin]

If you’re drafted 27, then by the best measure possible, you are rated collectively by clubs as the 27th best player.

Next year Pick 11 for Sharp, Alex Davies ( prelisted) worth it. If AFL scrap the academy players pre listed rule, GCs no longer have to move pick 11 around to avoid bid on academy players and use GCS second Rd pick to match Alex Davies with Sharp already on the list. If Eagles got a first round academy players and pick 11 next year and a player like sharp around I think you will trade it out also. Is actually no different to Eagles trading out their first round for multiple second Rd from GCS few years ago.

Pick 19 for multiple second Rd compare to pick 11 for Pick 27 I think is pretty fair.

Last year Brisbane trade this year first round for pick 19 and GCS this year second Rd nobody talk about it too. Pick 15 for pick 19 and 22.

The rule stated that you can move up or trade your pick if you have second Rd, third Rd and 4th Rd or your first Rd pick , Eagles don't have 1st and second Rd this year, how you can move up.

 

[raffrox]

If you’re drafted 27, then by the best measure possible, you are rated collectively by clubs as the 27th best player.

I don't think it's as straight forward as that.

What history will show as well is that the best measure (according to your logic) is not usually the best measure to show who was the best players from a draft.

 

[bungalow_bill]

Jon ORourke (too small, constantly injured)
Pat McKenna (cricketer recruited from country leagues, not good enough, no exposed form against top players)
Liam Sumner (too short and small in his draft year)
Patrick Dow (too small to play inside mid)

Ill leave out Pickett because he is not a centre square mid but same story, too small.

Just curious how small is too small to play inside mid?

Neale is 177 CM for reference

 

[bungalow_bill]

I reckon so...Gould at KFC will be something to behold

EFA

 

[LukeParkerno1]

EFA

I don’t care if has a family feast every night if he is great on field

 

[Suma Magic]

I don't think it's as straight forward as that.

What history will show as well is that the best measure (according to your logic) is not usually the best measure to show who was the best players from a draft.

I agree its not that straight forward. I'm just saying that the best measure we have (flawed as it is) to indicate who will be better players is the pick they were taken.

Unless there is another measure that I'm unaware of for more accurately predicting which players will be better at the time of the draft?

 

[Suma Magic]

Next year Pick 11 for Sharp, Alex Davies ( prelisted) worth it. If AFL scrap the academy players pre listed rule, GCs no longer have to move pick 11 around to avoid bid on academy players and use GCS second Rd pick to match Alex Davies with Sharp already on the list. If Eagles got a first round academy players and pick 11 next year and a player like sharp around I think you will trade it out also. Is actually no different to Eagles trading out their first round for multiple second Rd from GCS few years ago.

Pick 19 for multiple second Rd compare to pick 11 for Pick 27 I think is pretty fair.

Last year Brisbane trade this year first round for pick 19 and GCS this year second Rd nobody talk about it too. Pick 15 for pick 19 and 22.

The rule stated that you can move up or trade your pick if you have second Rd, third Rd and 4th Rd or your first Rd pick , Eagles don't have 1st and second Rd this year, how you can move up.

But there is no indication they will scrap the prelist rule. So that's irrelevant.

GC's trades with west coast and brisbane were horrible in hindsight. But a big reason for this is us winning the flag and brissy finishing near the top when neither were expected to. And gold coast was down the bottom both years. So at the time of the trades they didn't look like howlers for Gold Coast.

 

[raffrox]

I agree its not that straight forward. I'm just saying that the best measure we have (flawed as it is) to indicate who will be better players is the pick they were taken.

Unless there is another measure that I'm unaware of for more accurately predicting which players will be better at the time of the draft?

There isn't one really but adopting a flawed one as some kind of rationale for an opinion is most probably just as flawed.

 

[GWS Goose]

I agree its not that straight forward. I'm just saying that the best measure we have (flawed as it is) to indicate who will be better players is the pick they were taken.

Unless there is another measure that I'm unaware of for more accurately predicting which players will be better at the time of the draft?

The average of the experts (determining who is included here is very subjective) power rankings would be a better guide. Where they are drafted is not even where the recruiters making the selection see them, there is the needs based assessment. I would say virtually every club would have had Robertson and Jackson ahead of Philp on a straight list. But at pick 20 Carlton had him at the top of their list.

 

[bungalow_bill]

I don’t care if has a family feast every night if he is great on field

Yeah just joshing would be very happy if the Lions drafted him.

 

[Suma Magic]

There isn't one really but adopting a flawed one as some kind of rationale for an opinion is most probably just as flawed.

I think the flawed rationale that is most common, is comparing what they rated Sharp as on their board versus the pick they are likely to have next year.

I'd say the best way to try to help make the decision would be to use previous data to assess likelihood that the future pick will be better than the current.

Say GC rate sharp as 7.5/10, and as the 12th best player in the draft.

You could look back at previous drafts to see what player on their board was available at each pick, and what their rating was. You could then use this to work out if pick 15 (as 11 slides back with bids) is likely, based on history, to be better than 8/10. In previous years at pick 15 gold coast might have had on average their 8th highest rated player available, with an average rating of 8.0 for example.

This method could quantify the likelihood that they can get a better player next year. You could also make an assumption around draft strengths.

 

[Peel67skin]

But there is no indication they will scrap the prelist rule. So that's irrelevant.

GC's trades with west coast and brisbane were horrible in hindsight. But a big reason for this is us winning the flag and brissy finishing near the top when neither were expected to. And gold coast was down the bottom both years. So at the time of the trades they didn't look like howlers for Gold Coast.

During that time didn't look like howlers, so Sharp could be better than next year pick 11 during this time for GCS.

 

[Peel67skin]

I think the flawed rationale that is most common, is comparing what they rated Sharp as on their board versus the pick they are likely to have next year.

I'd say the best way to try to help make the decision would be to use previous data to assess likelihood that the future pick will be better than the current.

Say GC rate sharp as 7.5/10, and as the 12th best player in the draft.

You could look back at previous drafts to see what player on their board was available at each pick, and what their rating was. You could then use this to work out if pick 15 (as 11 slides back with bids) is likely, based on history, to be better than 8/10. In previous years at pick 15 gold coast might have had on average their 8th highest rated player available, with an average rating of 8.0 for example.

This method could quantify the likelihood that they can get a better player next year. You could also make an assumption around draft strengths.

That's a flaw, look at where Eagles and Brisbane finish after looking at past data trading with GCS. you don't do the same thing in two consecutive years when thing not working looking at past data. In both year GCS trade Eagles and Brisbane first round out to other team anywhere getting return worse than future pick 11, pick 27.