Analysis 2023 Draft Watch

[GT619]

I will hurt someone!!

I rate him comfortably as a 1st rounder, so I guess it is unlikely he slides to us

Yeah me

 

[GT619]

Haven't seen much talk about archer reid am I missing something

 

[GT619]

I wonder if Schoenmaker would free up Kemp to try a shift into the midfield/fwd?

Schoenmaker certainly a more damaging ball user. Both have some work to do on their defensive games but Kemp the superior ground level player and interceptor

Whats his contest and pressure rating like

 

[The Bighouse]

Haven't seen much talk about archer reid am I missing something

May have heard him mentioned for NMFC’s later picks, if they hold them.

 

[The Return of the Paf]

You seem intent on getting all of your "I told you Austin is a poor list manager" ducks in a line well before the draft.

You can't win around here unless you praise him or give him half baked approval at the very least. If it was after the draft I would be accused of not putting my money where my mouth is. I'm quite prepared to praise the picks if I think he's done well or give him a pass if I think he's done reasonably well. However, it predates Austin, we kind of have a history of receiving little resistance in getting 'our man'. That can't be a good look if it's a pattern, particularly with our record. I just hope we aren't reaching for phantom players.

 

[The Return of the Paf]

I will hurt someone!!

I rate him comfortably as a 1st rounder, so I guess it is unlikely he slides to us

If one of those clubs gets him at 13 or 15 and not later then I'll be fine with it.

 

[The Blue Weirdo]

Just had word through the grapevine that North and St Kilda are doing a lot of homework on Charlie Edwards. He might not fall to our pick I’m afraid.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

If one of those clubs gets him at 13 or 15 and not later then I'll be fine with it.

SOS will pick Charlie with Saints #21, just to be annoying. grrrr.

 

[BigFrizz36]

You can't win around here unless you praise him or give him half baked approval at the very least. If it was after the draft I would be accused of not putting my money where my mouth is. I'm quite prepared to praise the picks if I think he's done well or give him a pass if I think he's done reasonably well. However, it predates Austin, we kind of have a history of receiving little resistance in getting 'our man'. That can't be a good look if it's a pattern, particularly with our record. I just hope we aren't reaching for phantom players.

You do realise that phantom drafts are just people with no idea having a guess? "We kind of have a history of receiving little resistance in getting our man" doesn't make any sense, when it comes to our pick we choose from what is available. Some we would like will have gone - we choose what we consider to be the best of what is available.

Would love to hear some examples of this new thesis of yours.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

Would love to hear some examples of this new thesis of yours

I'm not supporting Paf or potting our recruiting guys but I reckon there are examples across all clubs every year. It will be in the press that "club z likes X player and think he'll be available for their third round pick". Low and behold the guy is there and the club "gets their man". The thing is I don't have a problem with it. To think that anyone can rank the available draftees accurately from 1 to whatever is nonsense. After the first batch which are well researched it surely becomes a case of having groups of players listed who would be of interest at particular picks and of those clubs will have done due diligence on some more than others and will be very mindful of list profile needs.

 

[HarryFlashman]

I'm not supporting Paf or potting our recruiting guys but I reckon there are examples across all clubs every year. It will be in the press that "club z likes X player and think he'll be available for their third round pick". Lo and behold the guy is there and the club "gets their man". The thing is I don't have a problem with it. To think that anyone can rank the available draftees accurately from 1 to whatever is nonsense. After the first batch which are well researched it surely becomes a case of having groups of players listed who would be of interest at particular picks and of those clubs will have done due diligence on some more than others and will be very mindful of list profile needs.

It’s all best guess, there’s pretty much always contention around who’s the better pick at what spot.
It gets interesting when there’s a player u really rate internally which u hope slides to u (sliding as u rate them highly).
Look at Gulden - he was 32- massive slide, yes he was academy but every club had the opportunity to bid and make swan “earn” him.

 

[HarryFlashman]

For all the “select for needs” IMO it’s bullshit.
You take the best possible player at every pick (within reason - u can’t recruit 3 small forwards etc).
Quality is quality, if u land a very good player, u trade out whoever they replace & hunt a player in the system for the need. Unless it’s a very specific kid (ruck) where they end up on the ground is a guess - Caleb Daniels is a great example

 

[Sheephead]

So, you hear all kinds of things at your local coffee shop.

I wander in wearing my Carlton top and a stranger says, “Go Blues”

I/S - “Thanks mate. What do you think of the off-season so far”
H/S - “We’ll see. Looking forward to the draft though.”
I/S - “Me too. Any goss?”
H/S - “Noise is, we’re looking to trade up. Get in front of Adelaide.”
I/S - “Wilson?” (Darcy)
H/S - “Yep. Adelaide see him as a Dangerfield type, so do we.”
…..

H/S - “Your kids play (basketball) at xxxxxxxxx yeah?”
I/S - ‘They do.. How come?”
H/S - “I’m mates with Tim (Lamb. xxxxx plays with mine). He told me. “


There was an article somewhere recently which said Adelaide had basically guaranteed Wilson they’d select him. Talked about his parents coming around to the idea or something. Maybe, just maybe, the Geelong pick is in calculations.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

For all the “select for needs” IMO it’s bullshit.
You take the best possible player at every pick (within reason - u can’t recruit 3 small forwards etc).
Quality is quality, if u land a very good player, u trade out whoever they replace & hunt a player in the system for the need. Unless it’s a very specific kid (ruck) where they end up on the ground is a guess - Caleb Daniels is a great example

It’s a hard one, I agree never reach too far but I imagine it’s rare that there is a big gap between a group of players who are available at your selection. I also think your judgment of players either consciously or unconsciously changes considering your needs.
If tomorrow we had the choice of drafting a second Walsh or Rankine I’d go with Rankine. Lesser quality but better fit.

I wouldn’t reach too far though and would be more then happy if we trade down on draft night if no player is a good fit at 22.

 

[HarryFlashman]

It’s a hard one, I agree never reach too far but I imagine it’s rare that there is a big gap between a group of players who are available at your selection. I also think your judgment of players either consciously or unconsciously changes considering your needs.
If tomorrow we had the choice of drafting a second Walsh or Rankine I’d go with Rankine. Lesser quality but better fit.

I wouldn’t reach too far though and would be more than happy if we trade down on draft night if no player is a good fit at 22.

I agree, funny thing is- if u took a second Walsh u could trade it for Rankine (his deal was circa pick 5 and some 3rd-4th round swaps).
Walsh (the 2nd one) would get u 2 top 10 picks.
You would still better off picking the better talent & trading for the need.
Think moving forward clubs will get more mercenary with players & trade for peak value more.
IMO there’s a pretty big discrepancy in values in few areas- eg can’t believe West Coast haven’t sold Pick 1 yet - I’d take 2-3 & 6-12 in a heart beat

 

[Ninja Worrier]

So, you hear all kinds of things at your local coffee shop.

I wander in wearing my Carlton top and a stranger says, “Go Blues”

I/S - “Thanks mate. What do you think of the off-season so far”
H/S - “We’ll see. Looking forward to the draft though.”
I/S - “Me too. Any goss?”
H/S - “Noise is, we’re looking to trade up. Get in front of Adelaide.”
I/S - “Wilson?” (Darcy)
H/S - “Yep. Adelaide see him as a Dangerfield type, so do we.”
…..

H/S - “Your kids play (basketball) at xxxxxxxxx yeah?”
I/S - ‘They do.. How come?”
H/S - “I’m mates with Tim (Lamb. xxxxx plays with mine). He told me. “


There was an article somewhere recently which said Adelaide had basically guaranteed Wilson they’d select him. Talked about his parents coming around to the idea or something. Maybe, just maybe, the Geelong pick is in calculations.

Funny you should say that, the more I've been watching, the more I wanted us to trade up for Wilson...I don't see him as explosive as danger, but a very rounded neat footballer that will play 200 AFL games... another great runner too

 

[Arr0w]

I'd take Windsor well ahead of Wilson

 

[ferrisb]

I'd take Windsor well ahead of Wilson

Not alphabetically...

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

I'd take Windsor well ahead of Wilson

I'd be the opposite but wouldn't trade up to Geelongs pick 8 for either

 

[macky99]

It’s a hard one, I agree never reach too far but I imagine it’s rare that there is a big gap between a group of players who are available at your selection. I also think your judgment of players either consciously or unconsciously changes considering your needs.
If tomorrow we had the choice of drafting a second Walsh or Rankine I’d go with Rankine. Lesser quality but better fit.

I wouldn’t reach too far though and would be more then happy if we trade down on draft night if no player is a good fit at 22.

I would suggest it is highly unlikely we would trade down any further, right now we have two picks in the 20's, there should be some talented players in that range, much more likely we will try to trade up with our F1st than go further down the order.

 

[Ninja Worrier]

I really like Windsor, he may end up more inside in time but feel Wilson is a more balanced mid and feel the better fit for our list

 

[swuzzlebubble]

I would suggest it is highly unlikely we would trade down any further, right now we have two picks in the 20's, there should be some talented players in that range, much more likely we will try to trade up with our F1st than go further down the order.

Trading up probably means we get a later pick too (and not just end of draft).

 

[Blue and Silver]

Can't see Wilson as a Dangerfield type. Much more slender build

On Pixel 7 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[GT619]

I'd take Windsor well ahead of Wilson

I'd take him ahead of caddy too

 

[GT619]

I'd be the opposite but wouldn't trade up to Geelongs pick 8 for either

Who said we are

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

I would suggest it is highly unlikely we would trade down any further, right now we have two picks in the 20's, there should be some talented players in that range, much more likely we will try to trade up with our F1st than go further down the order.

I’m just saying if the club thinks the last thing we need is slower inside mids and we get to pick 22 and the clear best 3 players are slower inside mids then I would trade down, if you think you could get a similar player at ~32 then what you would otherwise reach for at 22 and get decent steak knives then I would do it