List Mgmt. 2020 Draft Thread

[well left]

If we can get a pick in the 30s, we should be able to match a bid for Reef with discount and our cheap ones at the end (currently totalling to #61).

The strength of next year's draft is much stronger than this one, and if a club looks at this debacle of the Trade Period, it would not take too long to deduce every chance we could be in the Top 10 picks next year. That's just missing the finals. For a team like GWS for example that does not necessarily need all the picks, they might consider something, or a team that has a lot of players they are interested in at the top-end of next year's draft. Ideally if we can grab a late R2/early R3 pick somehow, that would be perfect. I can't see Reef getting a bid before Pick 16 at this stage, certainly not before 14, so we should be fine even if we ended up going to the draft with the current hand (though we would go into deficit next year, so need to get that extra pick in).

If we could end up with 3 1st round picks before Reef then I’d be open to trading in next year’s first. If clubs really want that 1st next year then giving up a 3rd this year would help us too.

Something like 10/13 & 52 from GWS for our first next year? That 52 potentially rolls into a pick 35-40 by the time NGA bids come in and some teams pass.

Gives us 10, 14 & 16. I’d deal with that with later picks used on Reef.

Or Adelaide might really want an SA kid that is still there at 16 and want to trade 22 & 23 to get them. 10, 14, 22 & 23. If you got Cox, Cook and Callow with the first 3 you might be tempted to roll the dice on Baldwin at 23.




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Pie 4 Life]

Our Top 10 Pick Next year be Nick Daicos unless we Finish Last

Exactly why we'd look to trade it out.

I don't think we'll need to get a pick in the 30s to match. With the big range in possible list sizes, this is one year where you can treat academy points like they were treated before they brought in the rule that you could only take in as many picks as you had available list spots - four nothing picks - for fake list spots that you're never going to main list someone - to add up to a pick 30. The draft probably won't even last deep enough for all the point carrying picks to get used. These picks should be dirt cheap as their only real value is to the clubs that have academy kids. That's why I'm annoyed that we didn't manage to get a couple thrown our way in the firesale.

There is every chance that we'll recieve a top 10 pick next year, but I don't think that any club would be banking on it. Then when you factor in that clubs tend to get less value for next years than they get for this year's picks. Even if next year's crop were tracking better in U16s, teams will have to be a bit wary as they didn't get to see if that tracking remained positive - plenty of highly rate u16s lose value before their u18 draft year. So I think there is no chance that next year's R1 pick gets traded for a top 10.

If we could end up with 3 1st round picks before Reef then I’d be open to trading in next year’s first. If clubs really want that 1st next year then giving up a 3rd this year would help us too.

Something like 10/13 & 52 from GWS for our first next year? That 52 potentially rolls into a pick 35-40 by the time NGA bids come in and some teams pass.

Gives us 10, 14 & 16. I’d deal with that with later picks used on Reef.

Or Adelaide might really want an SA kid that is still there at 16 and want to trade 22 & 23 to get them. 10, 14, 22 & 23. If you got Cox, Cook and Callow with the first 3 you might be tempted to roll the dice on Baldwin at 23.

It's possible we could trade a 2021 R1 pick for say another 10-15 pick this year and a R3 pick, or an array of picks to match. There are lots of possibilities with our draft hand.

Callow won't go in the first round, he is more of your 40+, but someone could pounce on maybe mid 30s. If we were going to pick up either Callow or Baldwin, I'd rather trade back and get them then.

If we headed in with the hypothetical 10/14/16, you'd go at least one (maybe two) tall/s (Cox/Reid/Chapman), another forward option (Perkins/Cook/Poulter) and best available (if not second tall).

I would put a premium on players who can win the ball and use it well too. It's annoying when there's one or the other, and they are okay for role players, but if they win their own ball, and able to distribute it well (like a Sidebottom type), then that is crucial to succeed at the top level.

 

[well left]

Exactly why we'd look to trade it out.




It's possible we could trade a 2021 R1 pick for say another 10-15 pick this year and a R3 pick, or an array of picks to match. There are lots of possibilities with our draft hand.

Callow won't go in the first round, he is more of your 40+, but someone could pounce on maybe mid 30s. If we were going to pick up either Callow or Baldwin, I'd rather trade back and get them then.

If we headed in with the hypothetical 10/14/16, you'd go at least one (maybe two) tall/s (Cox/Reid/Chapman), another forward option (Perkins/Cook/Poulter) and best available (if not second tall).

I would put a premium on players who can win the ball and use it well too. It's annoying when there's one or the other, and they are okay for role players, but if they win their own ball, and able to distribute it well (like a Sidebottom type), then that is crucial to succeed at the top level.

I like that mix and agree on ball use.

2-3 talls, a mid that goes forward as well and Reef would be a good draft result.

I still don’t get the knocks on Callow.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[manicpie]

Exactly why we'd look to trade it out.

It's possible we could trade a 2021 R1 pick for say another 10-15 pick this year and a R3 pick, or an array of picks to match. There are lots of possibilities with our draft hand.

Callow won't go in the first round, he is more of your 40+, but someone could pounce on maybe mid 30s. If we were going to pick up either Callow or Baldwin, I'd rather trade back and get them then.

If we headed in with the hypothetical 10/14/16, you'd go at least one (maybe two) tall/s (Cox/Reid/Chapman), another forward option (Perkins/Cook/Poulter) and best available (if not second tall).

I would put a premium on players who can win the ball and use it well too. It's annoying when there's one or the other, and they are okay for role players, but if they win their own ball, and able to distribute it well (like a Sidebottom type), then that is crucial to succeed at the top level.


Callow will go before 30 and we don't want another butcher like Sidebottom please, on what planet is sidebottom a good distributer except a couple of commentaters who seem to think he is.

 

[Pie 4 Life]

I like that mix and agree on ball use.

2-3 talls, a mid that goes forward as well and Reef would be a good draft result.

I still don’t get the knocks on Callow.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Doesn't have the athleticism of the others and his upside is lower than that of others. He has one elite trait - contested marking - as well as obviously being strong, a long kick etc. but there's just other areas fellow prospects have ahead of him. I like Callow, but not first round, and no point using a R1 on him if we know he will be there later.

 

[DaVe86]

I'm trying to work out the points scenario. At the moment, the picks we have add up to about pick 61... which obviously puts us in a deficit for a Bid of Reef.

If that happens, what is the penalty for going into points deficit? Does our future first round pick go backwards? If so, that would reduce it's value in a trade. Or is there a different penalty??

Secondly, given all the academy picks this year, is it likely that our late picks in the 60s and 70s actually come into top 60 picks and all of a sudden have points value? Or is the value only calculated on the points value from the starting point of the draft? Those picks may become attractive for someone with picks in the 40s or 50s if they want multiple late ones.

Otherwise, it was a huge failing at the trade table not to keep at least some points for Reef, or get some picks in the 40s or 50s minimum.

 

[Pie 4 Life]

It's possible we could trade a 2021 R1 pick for say another 10-15 pick this year and a R3 pick, or an array of picks to match. There are lots of possibilities with our draft hand.

Callow won't go in the first round, he is more of your 40+, but someone could pounce on maybe mid 30s. If we were going to pick up either Callow or Baldwin, I'd rather trade back and get them then.

If we headed in with the hypothetical 10/14/16, you'd go at least one (maybe two) tall/s (Cox/Reid/Chapman), another forward option (Perkins/Cook/Poulter) and best available (if not second tall).

I would put a premium on players who can win the ball and use it well too. It's annoying when there's one or the other, and they are okay for role players, but if they win their own ball, and able to distribute it well (like a Sidebottom type), then that is crucial to succeed at the top level.


Callow will go before 30 and we don't want another butcher like Sidebottom please, on what planet is sidebottom a good distributer except a couple of commentaters who seem to think he is.

Sidebottom is the definition of the ball user you want.

In his career he has averaged 24.4 disposals, predominantly kicks, rated elite in finding the ball, effective kicks and effective disposals. He is above average or elite in every category except contested possession rate and that's only because of the roles we use him in (wing/hf/hb). He can use either side too, absolutel

I'm trying to work out the points scenario. At the moment, the picks we have add up to about pick 61... which obviously puts us in a deficit for a Bid of Reef.

If that happens, what is the penalty for going into points deficit? Does our future first round pick go backwards? If so, that would reduce it's value in a trade. Or is there a different penalty??

Secondly, given all the academy picks this year, is it likely that our late picks in the 60s and 70s actually come into top 60 picks and all of a sudden have points value? Or is the value only calculated on the points value from the starting point of the draft? Those picks may become attractive for someone with picks in the 40s or 50s if they want multiple late ones.

Otherwise, it was a huge failing at the trade table not to keep at least some points for Reef, or get some picks in the 40s or 50s minimum.

Fremantle I think are in that very situation this year (deficit from Henry last year). They got around it by trading out their pick so the deficit went off their next pick I believe.

the points value comes off the point at the bid so if anything it makes it a a little tougher to match, but if clubs start passing then it brings it forward. But with bids to come in before Reef it will get knocked back at least three, maybe four picks. With live trading I can see us doing something on the night potentially if he slides a bit more than expected.

 

[Crazy Tails]

I'm trying to work out the points scenario. At the moment, the picks we have add up to about pick 61... which obviously puts us in a deficit for a Bid of Reef.

If that happens, what is the penalty for going into points deficit? Does our future first round pick go backwards? If so, that would reduce it's value in a trade. Or is there a different penalty??

Secondly, given all the academy picks this year, is it likely that our late picks in the 60s and 70s actually come into top 60 picks and all of a sudden have points value? Or is the value only calculated on the points value from the starting point of the draft? Those picks may become attractive for someone with picks in the 40s or 50s if they want multiple late ones.

Otherwise, it was a huge failing at the trade table not to keep at least some points for Reef, or get some picks in the 40s or 50s minimum.

How did you come up with pick 61 in points Dave? Are you not counting 14 & 16?

Yes if we need to go into deficit the value will come off our first pick next year (our own not from trade ins). So if we trade our future first out it will come off our future 2nd.

Lastly; yes our late picks are likely to come right in once the amount of picks each club is taking is known and once they start getting absorbed in matched bids. If those points come in they might end up having points attached.

If worst comes to worst on the night we might be able to trade a future 2nd to one this year that has points. We’d need to target a team who may be done by then.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[TradeDraft]

How did you come up with pick 61 in points Dave? Are you not counting 14 & 16?

Yes if we need to go into deficit the value will come off our first pick next year (our own not from trade ins). So if we trade our future first out it will come off our future 2nd.

Lastly; yes our late picks are likely to come right in once the amount of picks each club is taking is known and once they start getting absorbed in matched bids. If those points come in they might end up having points attached.

If worst comes to worst on the night we might be able to trade a future 2nd to one this year that has points. We’d need to target a team who may be done by then.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

But we still need points next year for Nick Daicos

 

[DaVe86]

How did you come up with pick 61 in points Dave? Are you not counting 14 & 16?

Yes if we need to go into deficit the value will come off our first pick next year (our own not from trade ins). So if we trade our future first out it will come off our future 2nd.

Lastly; yes our late picks are likely to come right in once the amount of picks each club is taking is known and once they start getting absorbed in matched bids. If those points come in they might end up having points attached.

If worst comes to worst on the night we might be able to trade a future 2nd to one this year that has points. We’d need to target a team who may be done by then.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Yes I've ignore picks 14 and 16 because we will obviously have enough points for Reef with those. But after than, I calculate the equivalent of pick 61 with what is left.

I think if a bid came in before 14, we might look to trade 14 down to Melbourne's 18 & 19 so we still get the 3 first round picks + Reef (16, 18, 19, Reef).

Beyond that, if we think we are going to go into deficit and our future pick is reduced in value, then that would add weight to trading it off into this year based on how you've explained it above. It would be more valuable to another team than us considering it will get pushed down the draft order due to the deficit.

In terms of the points attached to late picks (which might ultimately come in), I'm struggling to get my head around it. Let's say pick 60 eventually comes in 50 after some passes and absorbed NGA bids....that's only going to start happening one the draft starts getting into the 3rd or so round. If we have to bid in the late first or 2nd, then I assume those picks won't have come in yet.....so still won't possess value until much later in the draft once the passes start happening. By that time, Reef bid will have come.

So I hope we are looking to palm off those picks for a higher pick with more points.

 

[Crazy Tails]

But we still need points next year for Nick Daicos

We can work that out next off season Dave (if it comes to that). Will have plenty of options.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Crazy Tails]

Yes I've ignore picks 14 and 16 because we will obviously have enough points for Reef with those. But after than, I calculate the equivalent of pick 61 with what is left.

I think if a bid came in before 14, we might look to trade 14 down to Melbourne's 18 & 19 so we still get the 3 first round picks + Reef (16, 18, 19, Reef).

Beyond that, if we think we are going to go into deficit and our future pick is reduced in value, then that would add weight to trading it off into this year based on how you've explained it above. It would be more valuable to another team than us considering it will get pushed down the draft order due to the deficit.

In terms of the points attached to late picks (which might ultimately come in), I'm struggling to get my head around it. Let's say pick 60 eventually comes in 50 after some passes and absorbed NGA bids....that's only going to start happening one the draft starts getting into the 3rd or so round. If we have to bid in the late first or 2nd, then I assume those picks won't have come in yet.....so still won't possess value until much later in the draft once the passes start happening. By that time, Reef bid will have come.

So I hope we are looking to palm off those picks for a higher pick with more points.

It is all very fluid. Yes it will depend on when the bid comes and how many picks have been absorbed before that. The picks might come right in but they might not come in enough before the bid; which is the risk.

Dogs will probably use up 3 on JUH, Sydney might need 3. Are there other NGAs due before Reef?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[SnakePlisskin]

Don’t know if it’s already been mentioned but got the members email today from CEO Mark Anderson , there’s a mention of going into the draft with a stronger hand than what we have at the moment.

 

[Baird]

Imagine if we don’t draft a key forward

 

[Soups]

Imagine if we don’t draft a key forward

We probably won’t. Have to draft a KB got that.

 

[Piestration]

Don’t know if it’s already been mentioned but got the members email today from CEO Mark Anderson , there’s a mention of going into the draft with a stronger hand than what we have at the moment.

It needed to go out to the members. Some may see this as being a bit too late but we needed some sort of explanation/reasoning or spin as most will see it.

I don't have an issue on why it happened and I understand the reason of making room for future opportunities and stability. The issue is how this played out and the circus show that resulted from apparently a planned event which ultimately led to a hugely compromised return.

 

[TradeDraft]

Imagine if we don’t draft a key forward

That would not be a Shock Really might not even draft a KPP full stop

 

[sr36]

Doesn't have the athleticism of the others and his upside is lower than that of others. He has one elite trait - contested marking - as well as obviously being strong, a long kick etc. but there's just other areas fellow prospects have ahead of him. I like Callow, but not first round, and no point using a R1 on him if we know he will be there later.

Is he like Mihocek?

 

[Pie 4 Life]

Is he like Mihocek?

Bigger bodied more of a KPF size, but similar versatility, a bit slower/less agility. He's like 194/195cm and 100kg.

 

[Apex36]

It's possible we could trade a 2021 R1 pick for say another 10-15 pick this year and a R3 pick, or an array of picks to match. There are lots of possibilities with our draft hand.

Callow won't go in the first round, he is more of your 40+, but someone could pounce on maybe mid 30s. If we were going to pick up either Callow or Baldwin, I'd rather trade back and get them then.

If we headed in with the hypothetical 10/14/16, you'd go at least one (maybe two) tall/s (Cox/Reid/Chapman), another forward option (Perkins/Cook/Poulter) and best available (if not second tall).

I would put a premium on players who can win the ball and use it well too. It's annoying when there's one or the other, and they are okay for role players, but if they win their own ball, and able to distribute it well (like a Sidebottom type), then that is crucial to succeed at the top level.


Callow will go before 30 and we don't want another butcher like Sidebottom please, on what planet is sidebottom a good distributer except a couple of commentaters who seem to think he is.

Not so sure why you’re so insistent that Callow will go so early when many draft watchers like P4L are saying otherwise. They generally have a better handle on things than us mug punters who only rely on highlight reels.

 

[JOELY]

ft

Dogs will probably use up 3 on JUH, Sydney might need 3. Are there other NGAs due before Reef?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Jones from Port. Also Gulden from Sydney I've seen in some mock drafts around the mark but generally after Reef so maybe not.

 

[Jen2310]

Can Nik Cox be turned into a key forward? Or better go with someone like Baldwin, even though he had one two ACLs

 

[manicpie]

Not so sure why you’re so insistent that Callow will go so early when many draft watchers like P4L are saying otherwise. They generally have a better handle on things than us mug punters who only rely on highlight reels.

He is rated a 20 to 30 chance, he won't go later than that, it's another Georgiades case, we have to try and get him at 16 or we won't get him. Unless you'd prefer a couple of spindly tall fellas who have years of development before they are any good. What's to say that Callow in 5 years time won't improve also? The difference is you either want someone who could have an impact next year and even more so the following years, or a a player because he is tall. That's my opinion and I am going to stick with it.

 

[DaVe86]

Bigger bodied more of a KPF size, but similar versatility, a bit slower/less agility. He's like 194/195cm and 100kg.

194/195 and 100kg has been the standard KPF height since as long as I can remember. Only in recent years has 200cm become the norm for a key forward.

But Kennedy and Hawkins are 195/196cm, Darling 192cm, Jack Riewoldt 195cm.

Travis Cloke was 195cm.

So I dont think an 18 year old with probably a centimetre or 2 to grow at 194cm is a massive issue. If we could get another 2nd round pick and nab him there, it would be a good get i reckon.

 

[Apex36]

He is rated a 20 to 30 chance, he won't go later than that, it's another Georgiades case, we have to try and get him at 16 or we won't get him. Unless you'd prefer a couple of spindly tall fellas who have years of development before they are any good. What's to say that Callow in 5 years time won't improve also? The difference is you either want someone who could have an impact next year and even more so the following years, or a a player because he is tall. That's my opinion and I am going to stick with it.

Georgiades isn’t really a similar case at all. He was rated unanimously as a first round prospect until he injured himself and was on the sidelines for his draft year. Slipped in rankings to maybe 30 but Port took the gamble that he could produce that high quality seen in his bottom age year. Baldwin is in a similar boat to Georgiades but more extreme and I don’t think clubs will risk an early pick on that knee.

I actually like Callow, but I’m not as convinced that he’ll go as early as you think. He seems to be in that 30-40 or later range going by most draft watchers aside from a select few.