Autopsy 2023 AFL Draft - Day 1 & 2 Kickoff at 7pm

Remove this Banner Ad

They were all U18 this year. I don’t know if it’s a deliberate strategy by the club, but the last three academy graduates we’ve put on the rookie list were all given an extra year to develop/make their case as U19s before winning that spot (Wicks, Edwards and now Kirk).

Even if it’s not deliberate, it should signal to them that they still have realistic opportunities if they stick with it.
Yes you're correct, Liz. We've taken them after an extra year of development pretty much all the time now.
 
Yes you're correct, Liz. We've taken them after an extra year of development pretty much all the time now.
After writing that post I realised I’d overlooked Sheather, who was taken as an U18. So maybe it’s not an absolute policy by the club, but it does show they don’t stop watching/developing them once they tick over to U19.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

They were all U18 this year. I don’t know if it’s a deliberate strategy by the club, but the last three academy graduates we’ve put on the rookie list were all given an extra year to develop/make their case as U19s before winning that spot (Wicks, Edwards and now Kirk).

Even if it’s not deliberate, it should signal to them that they still have realistic opportunities if they stick with it.
May may as well move to Victoria and chose a VFL team to develop with. We clearly made our choice and it wasn't him.
Wish the kid well.
 
Except we probably didn’t need to do the trade. I guess there was a small chance someone else would take him. But a small chance.

Still, clubs throw future picks round like confetti so I guess the cost wasn’t much.

Brisbane had another 3 picks after we moved up. They were not going to rookie him, they were taking him in the national draft for sure.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Brisbane had another 3 picks after we moved up. They were not going to rookie him, they were taking him in the national draft for sure.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Except they'd just drafted a tall (KPD), and passed two of those three picks (which was likely always their plan). The one pick they did take after ours was a smaller player.

In an interview posted on the Lions' website, their recruiting manager congratulated Snell and the Swans on finding each other, and stated - seemingly with a straight bat - that the Lions were not intending to draft Snell had the Swans not taken him first.
 
W ankers at Fox have given our draft C-
With pick 16 we pick arguably the best young ruck.
With shrapnel picks we land someone that Collingwood wants mid 20s.
We move up a few picks way down the order and in successive years we raid Brisbane's academy and steal a promising young KPD who Brisbane took for granted as a gimme.
Hard to please.
 
With pick 16 we pick arguably the best young ruck.
With shrapnel picks we land someone that Collingwood wants mid 20s.
We move up a few picks way down the order and in successive years we raid Brisbane's academy and steal a promising young KPD who Brisbane took for granted as a gimme.
Hard to please.
They never compare pick vs need/target vs player. Easy if you're Norf. Port on the other hand. In any case, call me again in 5 years when we know something.
 
They never compare pick vs need/target vs player. Easy if you're Norf. Port on the other hand. In any case, call me again in 5 years when we know something.
Don't even know where to start with Port's drafting.

Traded up twice to grab small forwards, that weren't even the best available, after just re-signing McEntee (who isn't that good, but still). Left local goal machine Delean for Freo to take.

Neglected getting a developing ruck, left midfield til the last pick (Harvey Johnston and George Stevens filled needs better, though Lorenz may turn out ok).

Walsh in the rookie draft isn't terrible, but missed opportunity with some of the other talls like ZZ that were still there after moving up in the ND.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Don't even know where to start with Port's drafting.

Traded up twice to grab small forwards, that weren't even the best available, after just re-signing McEntee (who isn't that good, but still). Left local goal machine Delean for Freo to take.

Neglected getting a developing ruck, left midfield til the last pick (Harvey Johnston and George Stevens filled needs better, though Lorenz may turn out ok).

Walsh in the rookie draft isn't terrible, but missed opportunity with some of the other talls like ZZ that were still there after moving up in the ND.

They obviously were best available in Port's opinion

It makes sense a team in win now mode, who just drafted a 25 yo and 27 yo ruck and with a stacked midfield could find value in adding goal scoring and pressure options. Small forwards make sense to my eye

Teams are trying to win flags and improve their best 22 as a priority not have the most neatly organised depth chart
 
With pick 16 we pick arguably the best young ruck.
With shrapnel picks we land someone that Collingwood wants mid 20s.
We move up a few picks way down the order and in successive years we raid Brisbane's academy and steal a promising young KPD who Brisbane took for granted as a gimme.
Hard to please.
I never read the draft ratings. It's nonsense as every club historically gets a pass (C or above). If this was the case, just about every player drafted plays Seniors with a min 40 games. I'd love to see ratings for each club based upon the trade/draft combined. Players in, draft picks in v players out/draft picks out. Clearly, we are one of the clubs which has improved our list massively since the end of the 2023 season (not including organic growth of our younger players).
 
I never read the draft ratings. It's nonsense as every club historically gets a pass (C or above). If this was the case, just about every player drafted plays Seniors with a min 40 games. I'd love to see ratings for each club based upon the trade/draft combined. Players in, draft picks in v players out/draft picks out. Clearly, we are one of the clubs which has improved our list massively since the end of the 2023 season (not including organic growth of our younger players).
Draft rating are just content for some poor journo's like Waterwoth , Zita etc
 
They obviously were best available in Port's opinion

It makes sense a team in win now mode, who just drafted a 25 yo and 27 yo ruck and with a stacked midfield could find value in adding goal scoring and pressure options. Small forwards make sense to my eye

Teams are trying to win flags and improve their best 22 as a priority not have the most neatly organised depth chart
Yes, they are under the faulty assumption they can win a flag under Hinkley, and addressing several medium-long term needs isn't on their radar. That's still part of why I don't think it makes sense.
 
Yes, they are under the faulty assumption they can win a flag under Hinkley, and addressing several medium-long term needs isn't on their radar. That's still part of why I don't think it makes sense.

Hinkley got a two year extension to try and win a flag. This is the board, coaches and list managers in sync for better or worse
 
Looking at this year's draft, I think it's become impossible to say one way or another that there's a particular well we like going to. A few years ago we seemed big on the West & South Australian kids. In the national drafts between 2019 & 2021, all eight of our non-academy picks were either from WA or SA. In the last two drafts however, four out of five of our non-academy picks have been from Victoria.

So I don't think there's a particular 'state' or 'pathway' that we prefer over others.

But I think one well we generally don't like going to is the APS well. In every national draft over the last decade, there have been 142 kids taken from the APS system. We've drafted 3.

Every club's APS representation in national drafts in that period:

Hawthorn (13)
Western Bulldogs (12)
Carlton (11)
Collingwood, GWS, St Kilda (10)
Essendon, Melbourne, North Melbourne (9)
Gold Coast, Port Adelaide, Richmond (7)
Adelaide Crows, Fremantle (6)
West Coast (5)
Brisbane Lions, Geelong (4)
Sydney Swans (3)

Two out of three of those picks for us were third round-or-later selections (Maibaum & Rankin), and neither are on the list anymore.

I've ranted before about the corruption that goes on in the APS system, favouring kids of the rich and influential. Just to be clear, I think it's a valid and legitimate pathway. Genuine gun players have come through the APS including names like Nick Daicos, Darcy Moore, Andrew Brayshaw, etc. But I think because of those shenanigans that happen behind the scenes, it muddles things; makes the water murky in terms of who is where they are because of hard work & talent, and who is where they are because of the size of mum or dad's pocket.

I think it'd be hard to find it a reliable and accurate source to draft players from for Beatson & co.

I'd also not be surprised if that entitlement that's enabled from a young age makes players a bit soft, which is where things like lack of professionalism and eventual homesickness comes into the equation down the road. For example, GWS are the exception to the interstate clubs in that list above, having gone for 10 players from the APS pathway. But 5 of them requested trades and are no longer with them.
 
Looking at this year's draft, I think it's become impossible to say one way or another that there's a particular well we like going to. A few years ago we seemed big on the West & South Australian kids. In the national drafts between 2019 & 2021, all eight of our non-academy picks were either from WA or SA. In the last two drafts however, four out of five of our non-academy picks have been from Victoria.

So I don't think there's a particular 'state' or 'pathway' that we prefer over others.

But I think one well we generally don't like going to is the APS well. In every national draft over the last decade, there have been 142 kids taken from the APS system. We've drafted 3.

Every club's APS representation in national drafts in that period:

Hawthorn (13)
Western Bulldogs (12)
Carlton (11)
Collingwood, GWS, St Kilda (10)
Essendon, Melbourne, North Melbourne (9)
Gold Coast, Port Adelaide, Richmond (7)
Adelaide Crows, Fremantle (6)
West Coast (5)
Brisbane Lions, Geelong (4)
Sydney Swans (3)

Two out of three of those picks for us were third round-or-later selections (Maibaum & Rankin), and neither are on the list anymore.

I've ranted before about the corruption that goes on in the APS system, favouring kids of the rich and influential. Just to be clear, I think it's a valid and legitimate pathway. Genuine gun players have come through the APS including names like Nick Daicos, Darcy Moore, Andrew Brayshaw, etc. But I think because of those shenanigans that happen behind the scenes, it muddles things; makes the water murky in terms of who is where they are because of hard work & talent, and who is where they are because of the size of mum or dad's pocket.

I think it'd be hard to find it a reliable and accurate source to draft players from for Beatson & co.

I'd also not be surprised if that entitlement that's enabled from a young age makes players a bit soft, which is where things like lack of professionalism and eventual homesickness comes into the equation down the road. For example, GWS are the exception to the interstate clubs in that list above, having gone for 10 players from the APS pathway. But 5 of them requested trades and are no longer with them.

Our taxes at work.
 
They never compare pick vs need/target vs player. Easy if you're Norf. Port on the other hand. In any case, call me again in 5 years when we know something.

It’s just the yearly let Essendon win the off season rankings that’s all. We did well and adhered to every need.

Honestly we took two talls of varying variety plus the mid in Cleary.
 
Good article about the hypocrisy of AFL supporters & clubs regarding the recent draft

 
Good article about the hypocrisy of AFL supporters & clubs regarding the recent draft

In part , it was a good article. Still not understanding of the disadvantages for Swans and Lions.
To highlight Tom Mitchell as one of our fruits of being an older club shows how much of a misunderstanding. A father son from a different state who left the club to play for a Victorian club.
Yes we have Blakey and yes Mitchell left for " reasons "....and yes we had to pay Mitchell more to come.

The big misunderstanding though is that the academies are an equalisation measure rather than to grow the game in Northern states to have talent to recruit in those states ...and to the afl in general.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top