Rumour 2022 Draft Rumours

[PMBangers]

Strategy - Hypothetical Pick Trade Thread

For discussion around possible Pick swaps heading into, or during, the draft What is/ isn't fair, which picks are going to be the hottest property, the players that'll be in every clubs sights on night 2, etc.!

www.bigfooty.com

Consider posting your hypothetical Pick swaps, or opinions on what's fair, in the linked thread instead! That way, you can discuss in the proper space and this thread can remain more on topic

rumour (n)​

1. information, often a mixture of truth and untruth, passed around verbally
2. gossip or hearsay

 

[botts]

I’m no draft expert but just watched 2 videos of tsatas and can’t say I’m that fussed. His kicking is not great his hand balling quite good he doesn’t seem as quick as I thought overall I think he’s not a top 5 pick maybe that’s what is happening here. I would prefer Mackenzie or Philippou.

Watch probably the same two vids and thought the same. Turns it over a lot. Does get more of the footy than those two Though. Three pretty good prospects none the less. Saints will just take what falls there way.
It’s a good top ten

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Who are we wedded to? Clark?

Mackenzie?

 

[longlivelenny]

Tasatits, most likely for you guys

Some of the spelling of this blokes name on here is laughable
Tasa **** lol

On Pixel 6 Pro using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Saintscomemarchingin]

Wondering why? Hewett isn't rated in the top 10. Burst speed, good skills & powerful.

 

[_Cerberus_]

Wondering why? Hewett isn't rated in the top 10. Burst speed, good skills & powerful.

He is an inconsistent player. Will play a great game, then a quiet one. His kicking can be iffy at times and some question whether he finds enough of the ball. You want your top 10 picks to produce week in and out. That is not to say he is not top 10 worthy, as even the best have weaknesses. When he is on, he is really damaging. Hopefully he lands at the right club that will get the best out of him more often than not.

 

[philthy05]

Michealnanny isn’t eligible for f/s to crows.

Not so much even a rumour, as it’s been verified by several posters on the port board, and some crows posters also discovered months ago.

It centres around that old **** up with how the sanfl and afl counted games which ****ed port and crows over.

The sanfl counts all matches in totals (Including preseason cups, and other assorted cup comps that were running back then while the afl only counts league and finals matches)

So when the sanfl says a player played 211, the afl would only recognise the standard season and finals, bringing that number down.

The records are pretty spotty, but several posters have worked out Michealnannys involvement in enough of those cup games to bring his afl eligible games below the 200 mark.

Apparently the afl has had Michealnannys eligibility questioned by several clubs but the afl has not removed it for whatever reason.

How the it’s stayed out of the media is a surprise. Adelaide media must be aware of it as they scout bigfooty, and it’s surprising something hasnt come up by the clubs asking afl house to clarify.

 

[RUNVS]

He is an inconsistent player. Will play a great game, then a quiet one. His kicking can be iffy and some question whether he finds enough of the ball. You want your top 10 picks to produce week in and out.

He and Heeney would get along really well then.

 

[Ash1337]

Michealnanny isn’t eligible for f/s to crows.

Not so much even a rumour, as it’s been verified by several posters on the port board, and some crows posters also discovered months ago.

It centres around that old * up with how the sanfl and afl counted games which cactus port and crows over.

The sanfl counts all matches in totals (Including preseason cups, and other assorted cup comps that were running back then while the afl only counts league and finals matches)

So when the sanfl says a player played 211, the afl would only recognise the standard season and finals, bringing that number down.

The records are pretty spotty, but several posters have worked out Michealnannys involvement in enough of those cup games to bring his afl eligible games below the 200 mark.

Apparently the afl has had Michealnannys eligibility questioned by several clubs but the afl has not removed it for whatever reason.

How the it’s stayed out of the media is a surprise. Adelaide media must be aware of it as they scout bigfooty, and it’s surprising something hasnt come up by the clubs asking afl house to clarify.

It's 100 games for a F/S btw. Ed Allen wasn't eligible because Ben only played 96.

 

[TDS7]

It's 100 games for a F/S btw. Ed Allen wasn't eligible because Ben only played 96.

For SA teams it's 200 SANFL games, for WA teams in 150 WAFL games.

IF Jim Michalanney only played 199 SANFL regular season and finals league games for Norwood Max would not be eligible for father-son selection.

 

[Ash1337]

So from the rumors on this board. The top 11 atm will go something like this:

1. Cadman
2. Ashcroft
3. Sheezel
4. Wardlaw
5. Phillipou
6. Ginbey
7. Humphrey
8. Busslinger
9. Hewett
10. Tsatas
11. Hayes/Clark

Tsatas slides to Saints and Clark Slides outside top 10.

 

[blueiris]

So from the rumors on this board. The top 11 atm will go something like this:

1. Cadman
2. Ashcroft
3. Sheezel
4. Wardlaw
5. Phillipou
6. Ginbey
7. Humphrey
8. Busslinger
9. Hewett
10. Tsatas
11. Hayes/Clark

Tsatas slides to Saints and Clark Slides outside top 10.

Yeah and Fletcher at 13 apparently

 

[philthy05]

It's 100 games for a F/S btw. Ed Allen wasn't eligible because Ben only played 96.

Lol

Nah, the afl and sanfl stitched us up. We have different f/s rules.

Brad eberts dad played 180ish games (off the top of my head) for port and Brad wasn’t eligible.

Even Brett who port got as a father son wasn’t actually eligible lol, they only realised afterwards. Which just shows how farcical the rule is when the progeny of Russell ****ing ebert doesn’t qualify.

Also from memory gibbs would have qualified under f/s to port had his old man not cracked the shits and had Glenelg reassigned to the crows only for him not to be eligible to the crows due to crossing 200 games after the crows joined the comp (the cutoff date to reach 200 games under the rules).

 

[Ash1337]

Yeah and Fletcher at 13 apparently

Eagles or Demons? Because I can see Dees do it with wanting another wing in their side even after getting Hunter.

 

[robbo1981]

I have a gut feeling Phillipou might be heading to Essendon?

Great we will have to deal with dodo at the end of next yr

 

[pushintheback]

So from the rumors on this board. The top 11 atm will go something like this:

1. Cadman
2. Ashcroft
3. Sheezel
4. Wardlaw
5. Phillipou
6. Ginbey
7. Humphrey
8. Busslinger
9. Hewett
10. Tsatas
11. Hayes/Clark

Tsatas slides to Saints and Clark Slides outside top 10.

It could quite possibly end up like this, but I'm still backing Tsatsas to be at the Kangas...thats if they dont trade pick 3.

 

[flipper83]

For SA teams it's 200 SANFL games, for WA teams in 150 WAFL games.

IF Jim Michalanney only played 199 SANFL regular season and finals league games for Norwood Max would not be eligible for father-son selection.

I didn't realise the WA teams had access to sons of wafl players too. Was there some sort of end date in these arrangements?
It seems like it would become an unfair advantage once the WA and SA teams have existed long enough to generate father sons from the AFL teams.

 

[TDS7]

I didn't realise the WA teams had access to sons of wafl players too. Was there some sort of end date in these arrangements?
It seems like it would become an unfair advantage once the WA and SA teams have existed long enough to generate father sons from the AFL teams.

It was going to be limited to teams' first 20 years in the comp, but considering how few FS picks the interstate clubs have gotten they extended it indefinitely. Note that the cutoff is games played before the VFL became the AFL, it's not for current state-league players.

 

[Lore]

It was going to be limited to teams' first 20 years in the comp, but considering how few FS picks the interstate clubs have gotten they extended it indefinitely. Note that the cutoff is games played before the VFL became the AFL, it's not for current state-league players.

At some point players who played more than 150/200 games across a particular number of clubs in the WAFL/SANFL before 1996 (or whatever) get too old to have kids anyway, and grandkids don’t count.

The youngest 200 gamer in 1996 if they were ~30 in 1996 would be ~55 by now… 150 gamers might be a bit younger. The children of most 55 year olds would by now be between 15 and 30 (with some outliers of course). With draft age being eighteen there wouldn’t be that many eligible kids coming in under the old rules now.

Oldest players at Port with at least 100 club games for the AFL team were born in the 70s, so if they had kids they’d be born around 1990 at the earliest but most likely hitting draft age in the last few years.

 

[Blackhawk42]

I wouldn't say it's a rumour per say, but Humphrey to Hawthorn suddenly made sense to me today.

1. One media report said we were interested in bigger bodied mids.
2. We lack a genuine mid/fwd with match winning capabilities (Dylan Moore

13

Dylan Moore

Age

26

Ht

177cm

Wt

77kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

11.9

3star

K

5.1

2star

HB

6.7

4star

M

4.4

4star

T

2.9

4star

G

0.3

3star

No current season stats available

D

12.2

3star

K

6.0

3star

HB

6.2

4star

M

5.4

5star

T

2.8

5star

G

0.4

3star

the closest since Wingard doesn't play in the guts anymore).
3. He posted a story on Instagram standing near to the Kennedy statue at Waverly recently, so clearly we have interest in him.

The Humphrey/Ginbey/Clark/Mackenzie/Phillipou logjam is an intriguing one if the top 5 go as anticipated.

 

[Thetrader15]

For SA teams it's 200 SANFL games, for WA teams in 150 WAFL games.

IF Jim Michalanney only played 199 SANFL regular season and finals league games for Norwood Max would not be eligible for father-son selection.

Refer Ross Gibbs and Graham Cornes

 

[Saintscomemarchingin]

Yeah fair point. I'd do that. Or pick 4 and 22 for Saints 9 and 2023 first. Maybe steak knives pick swaps also.
Which would help us with a potential Davey bid at 22

Would definitely be keeping our 2023 1st round pick, in a stronger draft.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

He is an inconsistent player. Will play a great game, then a quiet one. His kicking can be iffy and some question whether he finds enough of the ball. You want your top 10 picks to produce week in and out.

Is part of the reason that he played in the WAFL seniors for most of the year?

Where was he being used positionally?

Yes ... I did watch highlights tonight and got seduced. I mean, we have a Jack Martin inconsistency problem too.

 

[Ysaye]

Is part of the reason that he played in the WAFL seniors for most of the year?

Where was he being used positionally?

Yes ... I did watch highlights tonight and got seduced. I mean, we have a Jack Martin inconsistency problem too.

My view was that the WAFL seniors which he did play pretty much all year has significantly contributed to this view of inconsistency, although the primary driver was probably that championships game where he effectively invisible on the ground.

From what I saw, at WAFL seniors level he played mainly half forward, often with a defensive bent although certainly he kicked some goals and was genuinely creative when he got his hands on it. The defensive bent and the positioning probably led to some low involvement games at that level, particularly early on in the season.

I am not sure where the comment about his kicking being iffy comes from; for mine he has always been consistently good in that regard.

As Chris25 said at one point, in some draftability senses it is better for WA draftees to play colts till the championships and smash it at that level, rather than playing with men and getting their full extents exposed, even if the can contribute to the team at that level.

 

[Mostyn]

Michealnanny isn’t eligible for f/s to crows.

Not so much even a rumour, as it’s been verified by several posters on the port board, and some crows posters also discovered months ago.

It centres around that old * up with how the sanfl and afl counted games which cactus port and crows over.

The sanfl counts all matches in totals (Including preseason cups, and other assorted cup comps that were running back then while the afl only counts league and finals matches)

So when the sanfl says a player played 211, the afl would only recognise the standard season and finals, bringing that number down.

The records are pretty spotty, but several posters have worked out Michealnannys involvement in enough of those cup games to bring his afl eligible games below the 200 mark.

Apparently the afl has had Michealnannys eligibility questioned by several clubs but the afl has not removed it for whatever reason.

How the it’s stayed out of the media is a surprise. Adelaide media must be aware of it as they scout bigfooty, and it’s surprising something hasnt come up by the clubs asking afl house to clarify.

As I understand it, it was queried and approved by the AFL, and double checked with the Norwood club historian.

I think it stems from the AFL counting in-season NFL games in the 1970s, but not preseason Escort Cup games. I believe Michalanney only played 8 preseason games, and his 203 keeps him qualified. That's how it was explained to me, anyway.

Port posters WERE successful with getting Bryce Gibbs status as a Father-son removed, so perhaps it is true though.

 

[Mutineer]

Michealnanny isn’t eligible for f/s to crows.

Not so much even a rumour, as it’s been verified by several posters on the port board, and some crows posters also discovered months ago.

It centres around that old * up with how the sanfl and afl counted games which cactus port and crows over.

The sanfl counts all matches in totals (Including preseason cups, and other assorted cup comps that were running back then while the afl only counts league and finals matches)

So when the sanfl says a player played 211, the afl would only recognise the standard season and finals, bringing that number down.

The records are pretty spotty, but several posters have worked out Michealnannys involvement in enough of those cup games to bring his afl eligible games below the 200 mark.

Apparently the afl has had Michealnannys eligibility questioned by several clubs but the afl has not removed it for whatever reason.

How the it’s stayed out of the media is a surprise. Adelaide media must be aware of it as they scout bigfooty, and it’s surprising something hasnt come up by the clubs asking afl house to clarify.

You still carrying on with the same baloney. Get over it FFS.

At least spell the lad's name right if you insist on yet another Michalanney rant.