Preview 2020 AFL National Draft thread

[King Corey]

Spoiler: Lore's 2020 Draft Order

 

[eDPS]

Too true...how do you feel about him making it back after his knee injuries? PS been loving your updates this year.

I hope he does, if he had a full season I’ve got no doubt he goes top 10.

cheers mate always happy to help with any queries

 

[Boozeroo]

This is bullshit.

The AFL are a tin pot competition with not a scerrick of credibility. F U Gil.

Sent from my VOG-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[King Corey]

I still want to keep pick 2. I don't like the whole "there's a few we rate equally" type argument.

You can't. If nobody traded for pick 2 then you'd be stuck with it and have to make a call.

It's a copout imo. If it's pick 11, sure. But pick 2 is rare gold.

Make a selection and take responsibility North. At 5 we might get a dynamic mid, a relatively short (196cm) for modern needs key forward, a ruck-forward, an intercepting backman or an inside mid.

Surely we should have the conviction to know which type and which player is the one we want/need the most rather than slide to 5+ and just be happy with what we get.

I get the argument that a trade might give us good collateral in future or later rounds but still doesn't balance up giving up dibs on the 2nd best player in the draft for mine.

 

[hellas_johnny]

5, 27, 37 & 2021 rd1 for 2, 70, 71

2020: 5, 11, 27, 30, 37, 39
2021: 1-6 7-12 + + +

Think we'd be stupid not to take this offer. We know that the top 5 this year are quality so still getting a gun pick and it also strengthens our hand for the rest of the draft whilst also giving us strength for next year

 

[Heaps of fun]

Would setup our forward line for the next 10 years.

I've knocked him for not quite having that established position but I can see how that's a strength of picking him from a list standpoint. Obviously you would develop him with the mind for making him the best possible forward who rucks or ruck that can go forward but the possibility that he could dominate in both positions means you can focus on smalls for pretty much the rest of the draft, barring maybe Cox who has unique attributes with his kicking and running.

 

[roos_fanatic08]

Jackson Callow primed to be the biggest disappointment from this draft IMO. Bit of a tweener who is quite limited in his skillset as a 'key' forward.

He is a hard one to place, that’s for sure. Not the ideal size for a KP player and a bit limited athletically. But from what I’m told he is as professional and competitive as they come. He’ll leave no stone unturned if he gets an opportunity on an AFL list.

 

[Shinboner1]

I've knocked him for not quite having that established position but I can see how that's a strength of picking him from a list standpoint. Obviously you would develop him with the mind for making him the best possible forward who rucks or ruck that can go forward but the possibility that he could dominate in both positions means you can focus on smalls for pretty much the rest of the draft, barring maybe Cox who has unique attributes with his kicking and running.

Take him and run larkey, thil and comben as 3 tall forwards with thil taking time in 2nd ruck with Xerri when goldy retires and we're set.
Being tall doesn't cause as many issues when you're so mobile and athletic, so happy to run 3 guys at 195+ especially with the good ball users and pace we'll have at the other forward/mid positions.

 

[Heaps of fun]

Take him and run larkey, thil and comben as 3 tall forwards with thil taking time in 2nd ruck with Xerri when goldy retires and we're set.
Being tall doesn't cause as many issues when you're so mobile and athletic, so happy to run 3 guys at 195+ especially with the good ball users and pace we'll have at the other forward/mid positions.

Yep, you could easily play those four in one side. Richmond won a flag playing Riewoldt, Lynch, Soldo and Nankervis last year. WC the year before did it with Kennedy, Darling, Vardy and Lycett. A shorter forward in each one of those line ups but if we think of that as being Comben then he's just as athletic as Darling and much more nimble than vintage Jack Riewoldt. Thilthorpe looks like a gazelle compared to Soldo and Lycett.

 

[AGC]

I still want to keep pick 2. I don't like the whole "there's a few we rate equally" type argument.

You can't. If nobody traded for pick 2 then you'd be stuck with it and have to make a call.

It's a copout imo. If it's pick 11, sure. But pick 2 is rare gold.

Make a selection and take responsibility North. At 5 we might get a dynamic mid, a relatively short (196cm) for modern needs key forward, a ruck-forward, an intercepting backman or an inside mid.

Surely we should have the conviction to know which type and which player is the one we want/need the most rather than slide to 5+ and just be happy with what we get.

I get the argument that a trade might give us good collateral in future or later rounds but still doesn't balance up giving up dibs on the 2nd best player in the draft for mine.

The club will know exactly who they want in the draft order, and have an indicative draft order for next year as well (notwithstanding the significant uncertainty) to inform this decision, and i'd trust Brady/Luff/Clayton to weight up the risks and rewards in making the decision. They'll also have a sense of what other clubs may want, which will inform the decision.

Say the club rated Phillips as their second best player, but remained confident that he would slip to pick 5. Wouldn't it make sense that we traded back to 5 (where we could still get our man), and then got an additional draft pick next year? We'd still get who we rated as the second best player, whilst picking up additional high end selections.

Even if they did rate Hollands as the 2nd best player (and traded the chance away to get him) at pick 2, if we traded in a hypothetical scenario Pick 5 + GC's 1st rounder, and the club through its ratings, rated Phillips + an indicative player at circa. pick 8 next year as greater than Hollands - we'd be silly to not the deal - particularly in a highly rated draft.

The only point in which is becomes a bad deal is if the club didn't feel that the combination of players we'd pick up with our picks would be significantly less than the player at Pick 2 (i.e. there's no point stockpiling picks 6,7 and 8 if we think the three players that are there are rubbish.) I'm sure the club will only slide back as far as they knew that we'd still be guaranteed a player they really wanted.

 

[AnEmptyChair]

I still want to keep pick 2. I don't like the whole "there's a few we rate equally" type argument.

You can't. If nobody traded for pick 2 then you'd be stuck with it and have to make a call.

It's a copout imo. If it's pick 11, sure. But pick 2 is rare gold.

Make a selection and take responsibility North. At 5 we might get a dynamic mid, a relatively short (196cm) for modern needs key forward, a ruck-forward, an intercepting backman or an inside mid.

Surely we should have the conviction to know which type and which player is the one we want/need the most rather than slide to 5+ and just be happy with what we get.

I get the argument that a trade might give us good collateral in future or later rounds but still doesn't balance up giving up dibs on the 2nd best player in the draft for mine.

Hypothetically, what if our draft board looks like: 1: Thilthorpe, 2: Grainger-Barass, 3: Phillips, 4: McDonald, 5: Hollands, but our intel and knowledgeable predictions suggest that other teams rate McDonald and Hollands higher, and therefore we can still get one of the kids we rate in the top 3 at 5? In that scenario, we would obviously consider it an easy decision to trade down to 5, especially if it adds another first rounder next year.

It's fun discussing who we might take or what trade moves we could make, but a lot of judgments or criticisms we make on prospective moves, including from myself, are difficult because we don't actually know what our draft board looks like.

 

[R00StaR]

The club will know exactly who they want in the draft order, and have an indicative draft order for next year as well (notwithstanding the significant uncertainty) to inform this decision, and i'd trust Brady/Luff/Clayton to weight up the risks and rewards in making the decision. They'll also have a sense of what other clubs may want, which will inform the decision.

Say the club rated Phillips as their second best player, but remained confident that he would slip to pick 5. Wouldn't it make sense that we traded back to 5 (where we could still get our man), and then got an additional draft pick next year? We'd still get who we rated as the second best player, whilst picking up additional high end selections.

Even if they did rate Hollands as the 2nd best player (and traded the chance away to get him) at pick 2, if we traded in a hypothetical scenario Pick 5 + GC's 1st rounder, and the club through its ratings, rated Phillips + an indicative player at circa. pick 8 next year as greater than Hollands - we'd be silly to not the deal - particularly in a highly rated draft.

The only point in which is becomes a bad deal is if the club didn't feel that the combination of players we'd pick up with our picks would be significantly less than the player at Pick 2 (i.e. there's no point stockpiling picks 6,7 and 8 if we think the three players that are there are rubbish.) I'm sure the club will only slide back as far as they knew that we'd still be guaranteed a player they really wanted.

Risk the 2nd best player because you think your the only one that can see the talent? Risk 2nd best because you think your jedi mind reading is force is stronger (knowing what other clubs will do)?

Not only that risk giving 2nd best player to a club thats looking to win flags at the same time we would.

 

[Shinboner1]

Yep, you could easily play those four in one side. Richmond won a flag playing Riewoldt, Lynch, Soldo and Nankervis last year. WC the year before did it with Kennedy, Darling, Vardy and Lycett. A shorter forward in each one of those line ups but if we think of that as being Comben then he's just as athletic as Darling and much more nimble than vintage Jack Riewoldt. Thilthorpe looks like a gazelle compared to Soldo and Lycett.

Throw in a couple of tall defenders and we're set.
Opposition players are going to find it hard to mark North guys when they're going to mark taller and outpace most of them.

 

[Passmore]

Risk the 2nd best player because you think your the only one that can see the talent? Risk 2nd best because you think your jedi mind reading is force is stronger (knowing what other clubs will do)?

Not only that risk giving 2nd best player to a club thats looking to win flags at the same time we would.

There's no definitive rankings that set a 2nd best player. 5 clubs might have 5 different opinions. We need to back out own ability to spot talent. If we think our 2nd best (or even best) player gets to 5, or even further out, then we cash in. If not, we keep pick 2.

 

[Swallow_Wood]

Bailey Laurie

View attachment 1013697

He's one that really interests me. His kicking is frikken sexy but he lacks a little toe. Not slow, but not particularly quick, aglie and evasive.

 

[LB2Snake]

Typical garbage made-up-on-the-fly year to year crap.

 

[pitchster]

I still want to keep pick 2. I don't like the whole "there's a few we rate equally" type argument.

You can't. If nobody traded for pick 2 then you'd be stuck with it and have to make a call.

It's a copout imo. If it's pick 11, sure. But pick 2 is rare gold.

Make a selection and take responsibility North. At 5 we might get a dynamic mid, a relatively short (196cm) for modern needs key forward, a ruck-forward, an intercepting backman or an inside mid.

Surely we should have the conviction to know which type and which player is the one we want/need the most rather than slide to 5+ and just be happy with what we get.

I get the argument that a trade might give us good collateral in future or later rounds but still doesn't balance up giving up dibs on the 2nd best player in the draft for mine.

Who says pick 2 will be the second best player in the draft? Doesnt work like that.

 

[Thewlis Dish]

Who says pick 2 will be the second best player in the draft? Doesnt work like that.

No, but it gives you greater odds of picking the second best player in the draft.

 

[pitchster]

No, but it gives you greater odds of picking the second best player in the draft.

I wont argue with that but as some have alluded to if DGB for example went at pick 5 theres every chance he would be the best player from this draft pool. Some seem to be hung up on the fact pick 2 is the highest pick we have had since 2002. Be happy with whoever we pick even if its pick 5 knowing they are an elite talent.

 

[Shinboner1]

Who says pick 2 will be the second best player in the draft? Doesnt work like that.

Nobody but you get much greater choice than getting the leftovers of the top 6-8 choosing at pick 5.

 

[Shinboner1]

I wont argue with that but as some have alluded to if DGB for example went at pick 5 theres every chance he would be the best player from this draft pool. Some seem to be hung up on the fact pick 2 is the highest pick we have had since 2002. Be happy with whoever we pick even if its pick 5 knowing they are an elite talent.

But DGB wouldn't really be a need for the side unless we lost a backman or 2 due to trading. If the top 3 are all forwards and we're desperate for a good one then we're kinda screwed if they're taken and then we're picking up someone who's 2nd tier relatively.

 

[R00StaR]

There's no definitive rankings that set a 2nd best player. 5 clubs might have 5 different opinions. We need to back out own ability to spot talent. If we think our 2nd best (or even best) player gets to 5, or even further out, then we cash in. If not, we keep pick 2.

We think X is best player but might go at 5 so trade to 5. Thats great, until you realize you dont have jedi mind reading abilities and X player gets taken.

Im afraid to ask why the Crows arent all over this fantastic deal. I say affraid because i operate out of an assumption pick 1 is better than pick 2. Who the FK knows these days.

 

[Swallow_Wood]

No, but it gives you greater odds of picking the second best player in the draft.

In a normal year.

 

[pitchster]

I will also say this, after watching and reading a bit more about these top 5 prospects i think we have our eye on Thilthorpe. Hes every bit the forward McDonald is and can chop out in the ruck. Already has an Afl body and will only mature into it over the years, will be a monster in 5-6 years and be unstoppable.

 

[pitchster]

But DGB wouldn't really be a need for the side unless we lost a backman or 2 due to trading. If the top 3 are all forwards and we're desperate for a good one then we're kinda screwed if they're taken and then we're picking up someone who's 2nd tier relatively.

We couldnt find a spot for DGB in our backline? Really? If he was recruited Atley would finally be told to pack his bags and thanks for your service.

 

[roos_fanatic08]

But DGB wouldn't really be a need for the side unless we lost a backman or 2 due to trading. If the top 3 are all forwards and we're desperate for a good one then we're kinda screwed if they're taken and then we're picking up someone who's 2nd tier relatively.

You could park DGB at FF next year if we were really keen on him.

A future backline of Mckay, Corr and DBG is very very appealing.