List Mgmt. 2022 AFL Draft & Rookie Draft

[Aphrodite]

 

[Sin City]

Appreciate all the input here. Just a curious question for the posters who have a more in-depth opinion about certain players. How do you do your homework? Are you watching their replays, highlight, reading articles/phantom drafts or attending any games in person?

Watching games. The rest (highlights videos, supposed research etc) counts for nothing and generally is where the misinformation posted on these boards comes from.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Mind blowing, I mean who was our small forwards in 2019[emoji849]

I think SOS lived off one draft with us, overrated


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

At that point we had quite a few small mids who were being used there - Fisher, Lang, Gibbons, Polson, Cuningham - as well as a number of genuine small forwards - Garlett, Fasolo, Pickett, Lebois, Owies.

Going into 2020 we:

- retained Fisher, Lang, Gibbons, Polson and Owies
- moved Murphy into more of a forward role (from memory)
- signed Betts and Martin
- drafted Honey
- cut Garlett, Fasolo, Pickett and Lebois

It wasn't really that big a need, and the talk at the time was that Melbourne reached a bit for Pickett. Then Weightman also went between our original pick and the one we ended up with to draft Kemp. Would have been nice to grab one of those two, for sure, but it's early days to be ruling that sliding back for Kemp was the wrong play.

 

[katmanblue]

Brian Cook: What do we need to do to get better?
Michael Voss: #1 focus is durability. We can't succeed with the injury toll we've had this year (and in past years).
Nick Austin: Hey, got this great plan at the draft to pick up Brayden George at a bargain cost.
Brian Cook: Bye, Nick.

Yes, George looks the goods. And yes, he may well become the sort of player we're crying out for. But we just cannot use a first round draft pick on a guy who we already know will be sitting out 2023 with an acl injury. Other clubs can take the risk, we can't. That's not to mean that our draft picks must be best 22 immediately, but will be looking to see they are developing and playing football at some level. We won't be taking risks with our first two picks (or any other picks we trade in). Can't afford to.

What about our 2nd? Especially if we can move up slightly if he drops.

On SM-F926B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Arr0w]

Not sure I would deem George the best player at our pick, I would be looking for a KPP, or outside run/footskills

 

[Bamboo Harvester]

Not sure I would deem George the best player at our pick, I would be looking for a KPP, or outside run/footskills

Hypothetically, if we end up jagging McAsey through the trade period, would we draft Busslinger if he was available at our first pick?

 

[Arr0w]

At pick 11 I'd agree...
However, if we spit pick 11 or got a later first rounder I'd seriously consider taking him there...

You keep throwing up these scenarios, but these so called trades need to have some validity

 

[Bletch]

Please, injured players have been picked up in the first round...
Underage players have still come back strong after early acl's... George is a type of player we need...
If he's the best at that position at our pick, take the risk and draft him, I bet he won't get past Richmond at 19...

One scenario was using our 2023 First rounder to get him...
He would effectively be our 2023 pick with a year of conditioning and learning at the club...

Ten, we aren't in a position to take risks. We have way too many injury-prone players at the club already. Unless we can somehow do a mass clear-out, or otherwise see a massive improvement in robustness and durability of those players - i.e. Cunners, Philp, Gov, Williams, Martin, Marchy, Ed C, Pitto, Honey, Boyd... and that's after losing Omac & Parks. Charlie & Kemp have both played more time this year after injury plagued last couple of years, but we need more. Compare our season, regularly 10-15 players out, to the likes of Brisbane, Sydney, Richmond etc.

George might come back just fine after his ACL and have a long and healthy career. But he might also be another Cuningham. Until we can improve our overall list health, imo, we just have to play it safe. And sure, we can pick a kid who hasn't missed a game in his entire junior career, he comes to us and immediately gets injured, that can happen. But it's about risk assessment. And there will be other options at 11, and again at 17 or 18 if we were to do one of the trade options you suggested, that will be comparable enough in skill/talent, and have a lower risk profile.

 

[Arr0w]

Hypothetically, if we end up jagging McAsey through the trade period, would we draft Busslinger if he was available at our first pick?

McAsey replaces Omac, think we still need one more KPP and if Buslinger was there at 11, I would take him

In turn, we could look at taking a tall later in the draft

 

[Blue__Balls]

You keep throwing up these scenarios, but these so called trades need to have some validity

They do.

Future first for Sydney's #17, or trade down from 11 to 17 and 18. Both were suggested. Both are viable (though the latter may need something else going to the Swans unless there is a player they're super hot on at 11).

Partake in the discussion properly or just stay out of it.

Hell, there's no obligation to give trade scenarios at all, nothing wrong with someone having the view that George would be their preferred pick if we can manufacture a late first.

 

[AB_Blue]

Tell me more about Hotton’s boy…..

What position does he play and are we a shot at drafting him ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Coona Blues]

Tell me more about Hotton’s boy…..

What position does he play and are we a shot at drafting him ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Looks like a good kid. We could be a shot, depending on the mix we choose to draft.
Position? Forward/midfielder is his classification and can do both. More a hybrid mid than an inside type. Hard enough that that is not an issue. Some chance he could play wing, but probably not a classic type for that.

His best results were forward. Decent crumber and seems to get to the right areas, one of those he can “jump up” and take a grab for a relatively small player. I don’t see him as a first rounder, but said to be in the mix. Theoretically if we get Acres for the wing and choose to go tall for our first pick, he would be a really good option if he lasts to our second rounder. Offers a bit more variety to our forward mix and genuinely capable of playing midfield in time.

 

[macky99]

At pick 11 I'd agree...
However, if we spit pick 11 or got a later first rounder I'd seriously consider taking him there...

Why would you want to take that risk, when there looks to be strong talent around our pick 11 right now, there looks to be 3-5 strong options around our pick.
As some of the others have mentioned another key position player or a mid-fielder with some speed look to be more of a priority at this time.
I don't see us taking that risk with Voss indicating strongly we need a more durable/reliable playing list.

It would seem to make more sense to go up the draft order than the reverse.

 

[Arr0w]

They do.

Future first for Sydney's #17, or trade down from 11 to 17 and 18. Both were suggested. Both are viable (though the latter may need something else going to the Swans unless there is a player they're super hot on at 11).

Partake in the discussion properly or just stay out of it.

Hell, there's no obligation to give trade scenarios at all, nothing wrong with someone having the view that George would be their preferred pick if we can manufacture a late first.

Okay I will play

Why would the Swans give up their 1st rounder this year, and us giving up a future 1st when next years crop already looks better than this year's

We might be able to entice the Swans to give up 16, 17, with 10 and 28, but they could get a better deal from the Saints and moreso the Suns

My response was partaking in the discussion, I asked for a viable option, if you don't like it, take your own advice

George would be a great addition, but IMHO, not a priority when looking at other talent, even moreso given he has done an ACL and could still be there for our 2nd

 

[TENACIOUS]

You keep throwing up these scenarios, but these so called trades need to have some validity

Validity?
You tabled, you'd like to trade Pick 11 and pick 28 for Swans Pick 17 & 18, so your own post is not valid?

If anything, I would be looking to trade back slightly

10 and 28, for the Swans 16 and 17

Problem is, at times posters here only read posts until they find something to bitch about... Try reading posters full posts...
This is a discussion forum after all, full of different ideas and discussion...

 

[bmaurizio]

All good options. I'm a little scarred from the Kemp and Philp situation (not over yet but not looking great) to get excited about splitting picks but depends on the offers and who we rate.

It's not a bad pick to have as a club may offer way overs for it if a player they like slides out the top 10.

Agree and let’s not forget Stocker too

My research is as thorough as it could be from a distance. Already looking at next years “crop”, not based on looking at a couple of clips when most supporter’s focus changes at season’s end. Multi watched all carnival games, with focus on the types we “need”. Some highlights packages, particularly non Victorian. Reports abound on the Vics. From years of following draft “experts” you learn the strengths, weaknesses and sometimes bias of each. Like to think I can “weight” the hype some players receive over other (who knows, I may be delusional). Look for various traits, positives, weaknesses, suitability for roles. e.g. Lewis Hayes in top tier of KPD options in draft. Was looking forward to footage before it was available because of our need. He is a good, even great interceptor, but has limited speed to cover leading types. His contested capabilities are so far a small sample. Like him, but we are not short of interceptors. Dependent on Young’s role and development, for mine, we more need a “beast tamer” if we are taking a tall defender. That’s why I am looking more at mids able to play on the outside and two way running.

I do cringe at some of the criticism levelled by some supposed in the know posters. Recent assessments of Mattaes Phillipou were clearly done by people basing opinions on his most recent championship game where he was injured early and played on under duress. Kid is a gun. His draft profile is very similar to the Dangerfield, Fyfe, Petracca model of decent size forward mid athletes with upside. A few behavioural rumours doing the rounds, but not putting much stock in them. Kid is driven, listened to a podcast many months ago outlining his dedication and determination.

Told myself not to get too involved with the endless opinions and assertions on here regarding draft prospects and trade hypotheticals. Anything I offer is well researched, as much as one can second and third hand on much of the feedback. Every draft has a player or two taken very early who has not been spruiked by the “experts”. Similarly there is always, “the steal” who slid to the second round or beyond who is off a list when their first contract expires. You learn to take much of the press with a grain of salt, even the professionals representing clubs can get it wrong after days of footage, testing, and multiple interviews.

Enjoyed reading your post, succinctly explained, agree with you on the young lad Mattaes Phillipou, probably will be the first picked in his state, talented prospect, the lad will be a ripper.
Its astounding that some will pick up on petty gossip each draft , the media picks upon eventually for midriven knee jerk

Not sure I would deem George the best player at our pick, I would be looking for a KPP, or outside run/footskills

Agree with ArroW and within our pick range its either Keeler/Barnett/Jefferson/Busslinger or Hollands /Hewett /Fletcter if we pluck him from Lions.
any one these options are very good additions

 

[Arr0w]

Validity?
You tabled, you'd like to trade Pick 11 and pick 28 for Swans Pick 17 & 18, so your own post is not valid?



Problem is, at times posters here only read posts until they find something to bitch about... Try reading posters full posts...
This is a discussion forum after all, full of different ideas and discussion...

A lot different to a future 1st wouldn't you say?

 

[Bletch]

They do.

Future first for Sydney's #17, or trade down from 11 to 17 and 18. Both were suggested. Both are viable (though the latter may need something else going to the Swans unless there is a player they're super hot on at 11).

Partake in the discussion properly or just stay out of it.

Hell, there's no obligation to give trade scenarios at all, nothing wrong with someone having the view that George would be their preferred pick if we can manufacture a late first.

Playing Sydney for a bit...

• 17 for Carlton's future first. I think they'd call that a slight win, banking on us not finishing top 2-3 next year. But that'll depend on where they finish of course, if they're out in straight sets it might be different. And they'll prob try to push 18 rather than 17, but overall, yeah a reasonable deal.
• 17 and 18 for Carlton's 11. No way. I think the something else would need to be substantial, even Carlton's 28 would be a stretch, but it might pass. That works out around even on points anyway.

The problem with using this as a method to obtain Brayden George, is that Sydney would probably prefer to keep 17 and 18 and use one of those to get George for themselves. They are in a far better position to take on a player like George than we are.

And it does come down to where they finish, and what their draft priorities are. But the two picks makes their hand an interesting one to play with. Brisbane's first round pick is also likely on the table (for points), and might be worth investigating - but we'd like to have more picks in the 30+ range for that.

North putting up pick 1 throws a cat amongst the pigeons, and what Gold Coast do with their many picks will also have a bearing on what else can be done.

 

[Jimmae]

While we have a want for quick mids and rebounding defenders, I would have zero issues if we wound up taking Busslinger and Keeler with our first two picks. Fantastic footballers.

 

[Arr0w]

Just another example of not reading a post before you go off half cocked...
I never said a future first for Sydney's Picks 17 & 18...

Half cocked?

This is what you posted

At pick 11 I'd agree...
However, if we spit pick 11 or got a later first rounder I'd seriously consider taking him there..

Could you see this as an unfinished trade/half cocked?

Didn't mention a future 1st ?

List Mgmt. - 2022 AFL Draft & Rookie Draft

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Bletch]

While we have a want for quick mids and rebounding defenders, I would have zero issues if we wound up taking Busslinger and Keeler with our first two picks. Fantastic footballers.

Yes please, sign me up!

 

[Coona Blues]

While we have a want for quick mids and rebounding defenders, I would have zero issues if we wound up taking Busslinger and Keeler with our first two picks. Fantastic footballers.

Keeler has some attitude questions, but absolutely on pure ability, we could do a lot worse. Gives us a tall at either end, and Keeler may end up a Paddy Ryder type ruck, which would make him a perfect foil for a mature TDK in the ruck down the track.

We do need that link mid-forward, so expending both of our prime picks on talls could be questionable.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Playing Sydney for a bit...

• 17 for Carlton's future first. I think they'd call that a slight win, banking on us not finishing top 2-3 next year. But that'll depend on where they finish of course, if they're out in straight sets it might be different. And they'll prob try to push 18 rather than 17, but overall, yeah a reasonable deal.
• 17 and 18 for Carlton's 11. No way. I think the something else would need to be substantial, even Carlton's 28 would be a stretch, but it might pass. That works out around even on points anyway.

The problem with using this as a method to obtain Brayden George, is that Sydney would probably prefer to keep 17 and 18 and use one of those to get George for themselves. They are in a far better position to take on a player like George than we are.

And it does come down to where they finish, and what their draft priorities are. But the two picks makes their hand an interesting one to play with. Brisbane's first round pick is also likely on the table (for points), and might be worth investigating - but we'd like to have more picks in the 30+ range for that.

North putting up pick 1 throws a cat amongst the pigeons, and what Gold Coast do with their many picks will also have a bearing on what else can be done.

Absolutely, but this is the thing with BF trade chat, it's all speculative. Maybe Sydney like next year's draft more, maybe not. Maybe they have some academy kids next year that would make late first rounders obsolete, or maybe they have a top 3 prospect who they need points for, or maybe they have some second round talents and would like to secure a few early draftees before matching bids in the second round. Maybe they love Busslinger and are prepared to cough up to get a pick in the top dozen, or maybe they love Brayden George and would rather take him at 17 or 18 themselves.

 

[goreds]

Absolutely, but this is the thing with BF trade chat, it's all speculative. Maybe Sydney like next year's draft more, maybe not. Maybe they have some academy kids next year that would make late first rounders obsolete, or maybe they have a top 3 prospect who they need points for, or maybe they have some second round talents and would like to secure a few early draftees before matching bids in the second round. Maybe they love Busslinger and are prepared to cough up to get a pick in the top dozen, or maybe they love Brayden George and would rather take him at 17 or 18 themselves.

Next year we will need to be able to land both Camporeales…

Will need points and picks…

 

[Blue__Balls]

Next year we will need to be able to land both Camporeales…

Will need points and picks…

Think they're the year after, and while we should plan to get them there is no guarantee they'll nominate us.

 

[TENACIOUS]

Half cocked?

This is what you posted

At pick 11 I'd agree...
However, if we spit pick 11 or got a later first rounder I'd seriously consider taking him there..

Could you see this as an unfinished trade/half cocked?

Didn't mention a future 1st ?

List Mgmt. - 2022 AFL Draft & Rookie Draft

www.bigfooty.com

Did you read the post you quoted?
At no stage did I say we would trade 2023 first for Sydney's Pick 17 & 18, as you suggested...