List Mgmt. 2020 Draft Thread

[jackcass]

How does that work? using next years pick?

Can trade it for another teams pick this year.

 

[sr36]

It it was a normal draft year you would have a point - but the lack of exposed form may give advantages to Hine and his scouting team in finding some gems amongst the unfancied kids.
And you’re also forgetting we have the 2021 1st rounder to use to move up the draft.

Despite it being more likely that a top kid gets picked late, the lack of exposed form gives all recruiters disadvantages. You'd have to expect less accuracy across the draft.

 

[partypie]

I'd consider a future first for 13 (ideally 10) from GWS...

Not really sure about a trade with Port...

Really has to be pick 10 to be worthwhile for us.

We also need a later second round pick to match a bid for Reef. By my count we are currently sitting at 31 players on the senior list (including Madgens and Mihocek's promotions), so we have 5 spots to fill via DFA signings and the ND.

I'm still hoping against all hope that we can snare three first round picks + Reef in the ND and then maybe look for a KPP prospect with a late ND pick (Ollie Lord) or cheap DFA signing (Wooller?) to bring us up to the required 36 on the senior list.

 

[No SPIN]

How does that work? using next years pick?

Just trade next years pick for more picks in 2020.

 

[Pie 4 Life]

Updated and added to OP

View attachment 1019145

Love the work you do and it's fascinating to read, but there comes a time where if you're adding a few too many in, it's diluting the pool and accuracy of the pool. There's some players there who are a fair way off, where as others who aren't even on there who could be top 25-30 players. It's only because those who miss out on there might be 31-35 in the ratings of some but not published officially, whilst the top 50 ones will skew them.

 

[No SPIN]

Despite it being more likely that a top kid gets picked late, the lack of exposed form gives all recruiters disadvantages. You'd have to expect less accuracy across the draft.

Correct, so Clubs with the best scouting resources should have an advantage.

 

[Jen2310]

part of me is worried about someone... essendon, bidding on reef early. But then the other part of me thinks nobody should have him within the top 10, so we should be good.

 

[sr36]

Correct, so Clubs with the best scouting resources should have an advantage.

Yes - an advantage against other clubs, but still a disadvantage against other years. It's not a year that any club should be assuming that they will do better with their draft picks than they usually would.

 

[TradeDraft]

part of me is worried about someone... essendon, bidding on reef early. But then the other part of me thinks nobody should have him within the top 10, so we should be good.

Anything is Possible

 

[TradeDraft]

Can you Draft DFA'S?

 

[Jen2310]

Can you Draft DFA'S?

No. You can just list them for free. No need to draft them.

 

[TradeDraft]

No. You can just list them for free. No need to draft them.

Maybe teams see who the Draft with there Early Picks before Deciding who to get

 

[Apex36]

Maybe teams see who the Draft with there Early Picks before Deciding who to get

I doubt any guys who are available as free agents would bother nominating for the draft Dave.

 

[Jen2310]

I doubt any guys who are available as free agents would bother nominating for the draft Dave.

yeah. not when you're competing against kids and limited list spots.

 

[unplugged]

Love the work you do and it's fascinating to read, but there comes a time where if you're adding a few too many in, it's diluting the pool and accuracy of the pool. There's some players there who are a fair way off, where as others who aren't even on there who could be top 25-30 players. It's only because those who miss out on there might be 31-35 in the ratings of some but not published officially, whilst the top 50 ones will skew them.

My life would be so much simpler if more people put their balls on the line and ranked top 50s instead of just 20, 25 or 30



Honestly it becomes pretty useless after about 30 as you say. I put Davo-27's list on today because it contained a number of potential draftees that were picked in the BF phantom draft whom I didn't previously have anywhere on my sheet.

I like to go through it on draft night and work out who's still remaining to be drafted

Edit : I guess in the future I could still have the same spreadsheet but just present the Top 30, so I get your point.

Cheers mate

 

[TradeDraft]

I doubt any guys who are available as free agents would bother nominating for the draft Dave.

yeah. not when you're competing against kids and limited list spots.

Then IF we don't sign any DFA's we have about 9 Draft Picks on Draft Night

 

[Apex36]

Then IF we don't sign any DFA's we have about 9 Draft Picks on Draft Night

5 selections to make the minimum 36 senior spots I believe, which in a list refresh is a very good number, particularly if we can make the first four selections 3x 1st round picks + Reef

 

[Jen2310]

Then IF we don't sign any DFA's we have about 9 Draft Picks on Draft Night

Could leave some spots open for the sign periods next season.

 

[Apex36]

Could leave some spots open for the sign periods next season.

We’ll go in with a minimum senior list and leave a couple of rookie spots open for the signing periods during the year imo.

 

[Jen2310]

We’ll go in with a minimum senior list and leave a couple of rookie spots open for the signing periods during the year imo.

Makes sense, as there will be kids available in the signing periods who missed out on the draft.

 

[Kappa]

Yes - an advantage against other clubs, but still a disadvantage against other years. It's not a year that any club should be assuming that they will do better with their draft picks than they usually would.

How does that make anyone else? Everyone can't do worse, that's not possible. The clubs with better recruiting departments should have massive advantages, particularly later in the draft, than those run on the bare minimum this year.

 

[manicpie]

Then IF we don't sign any DFA's we have about 9 Draft Picks on Draft Night

I think most clubs are going to take the DFA in the rookie draft. I think we might take 4 or 5 in the draft and then top up with DFA

 

[sr36]

How does that make anyone else? Everyone can't do worse, that's not possible. The clubs with better recruiting departments should have massive advantages, particularly later in the draft, than those run on the bare minimum this year.

Of course it is possible for everyone to do worse. The 50 kids selected this year will be a different 50 that would have been selected if they'd all played footy this year. Some kids would have risen into the top 50 from out of it and some would have dropped out of the 50. I'd be backing the theoretical 50 with more exposed form over the 50 that will be picked with less exposed form.

I don't think all clubs will do worse, some might get a steal but there will be a heap of luck involved. Ultimately all clubs will be picking with less exposed form, so all of them should have a bit less confidence in their picks than normal, because there is less data to support the selection.

Basically, it's that little bit more of a crap shoot than usual, so you'd expect a higher percentage of busts.

 

[unplugged]

After his performance in the trade period, I wouldn't be surprised if Matt Rendell has told the whole world whom sits where on our draft board. Or has he possibly signed some sort of non-disclosure?

 

[Pistol Night]

After his performance in the trade period, I wouldn't be surprised if Matt Rendell has told the whole world whom sits where on our draft board. Or has he possibly signed some sort of non-disclosure?

Ned's probably prepared a power point presentation and sent it to all the other clubs anyway