Player Watch 2024 AFL Draft Thread

[BIGHAWK23]

Will struggle at Hawthorn. No real goal celebration to speak of and considering he kicks a few this would be a real limitation. Does tackle though and that gets Taj a few bonus points.

Cal has him going at 15 in his Phantom which is a fair way from our pick 33.

Rankings

Not Phantom

 

[hawkinoz]

Not sure which clip you have seen but this game in particular I am told Taj had a day out and shows the exact type of player he is.



After watching it myself, I can see why he is thought of very highly. Has great balance and decision making and looks to have plenty of time on the ball.

I know Sheezel started in defence at North, but he reminds me of him the way he moves and kicks. That’s off the limited footage I have seen of him though

Taj won't cross pick 11 IMO which means someone else will slide.

Who is the question and will they still be around GWS picks?

 

[MrBeefSeven]

Rankings

Not Phantom

Not to be that guy but he does call it the phantom form guide

 

[The Jet From Poowong]

Will struggle at Hawthorn. No real goal celebration to speak of and considering he kicks a few this would be a real limitation. Does tackle though and that gets Taj a few bonus points.

Cal has him going at 15 in his Phantom which is a fair way from our pick 33.

Yeah highly unlikely he lasts to early 20’s at a stretch

Been told St Kilda could pick him at 8, but after that, could go anywhere

 

[BIGHAWK23]

Not to be that guy but he does call it the phantom form guide

Which makes no sense

Its a ranking

Not a phantom draft

 

[Noel Gallagher]

We will need a miracle to land Hotton on draft night. Would have gone top 5 may top 3 if not for the ACL at worst. Think a club still may take him top 10

 

[Blackhawk42]

Yeah highly unlikely he lasts to early 20’s at a stretch

Been told St Kilda could pick him at 8, but after that, could go anywhere

AFL is a tough business.

Would be a little cruel for the Saints to take him after just delisting his brother after only 2 years on the list.

 

[Slainte]

We will no doubt handle the draft as well as any club. However, doubt we will have a positional target or a specific player that we want to bring to the club. Most likely we will have a short list of 6-10 and have them ranked. We will take the highest rank available and will only trade if a player we thought inaccessible is available via a trade.

I reckon Sam and the footy dept believe that we already have a premiership list. Anyone we pick up from now is just icing.

 

[FB19]

A few have Said it already but it’s simple negotiation. When they have what you want and they know it you overpay and when they specifically know exactly what you want (as when live trading for a player) even more so. That’s why trades in the trade period aren’t as expensive as on the night.
For us the player I’ve really warmed to is Jobe Shanahan. A forwardline with Lewis/Chol (and Ramsden for the future) at FF as the tall target with Dear and Shanahan either side as strong marking but also lead up forwards with Moore Ginni Watson is pretty amazing.
The most likely pick we could get would be Sydney’s 22. The weddle trade was roughly about double on DVI so getting 22 and f3 I expect would cost f1 and 33. That assumes he’s still on the board. Using Twomeys top 30 as a rough guide it will be close he is 17 of the non tied players and between there and 21 both whitlocks and Faull are there as well. You would expect one to get to 22.

 

[H00t]

You are still railing on about an equitable trade. Get over it if we do a trade for draft picks it will be on draft night for a specific player if that player is available. This trade will NOT be equitable. I am sure after we do the trade if it happens u will rally the troops for an enquiry even though I have tried to explain it multiple times that this is what will happen

It’s not so much the equitable trade that’s the problem. Live trading costs extra. That’s just the way of things.

It’s the mixed planning from the team that’s got me scratching my head more than anything.

We’ve traded out 14 for a F1 and F2 now might pay extra to trade back in. If a team solely trades into or out of a draft that makes sense.

Instead we potentially give up 33 for a f2 and f3 to move back 4-6 places in the draft. When other teams pay a fortune to move up we are paying to move back.

 

[TheFourPillars]

It’s not so much the equitable trade that’s the problem. Live trading costs extra. That’s just the way of things.

It’s the mixed planning from the team that’s got me scratching my head more than anything.

We’ve traded out 14 for a F1 and F2 now going to pay extra to trade back in. If a team solely trades into or out of a draft that makes sense.

Instead we give up 33 for a f2 and f3 to move back 4-6 places in the draft. When other teams pay a fortune to move up we are paying to move back.

West Coast wanted a 1st and a second. Preferably futures. 14 gave us a first and second that we could use that was going to broker the deal for barass so we paid 14 and a f3 for their f4 given there wouldn't be much difference in those two picks.

The strategy was sound. We were always losing 14 but we manipulated it so that we didn't pay much more than that for Barrass. It was great wheeling and dealing by us

 

[matey]

Like the look of Hamish Davis with my limited expert draft knowledge.

 

[Judd2Sewell]

Yeah highly unlikely he lasts to early 20’s at a stretch

Been told St Kilda could pick him at 8, but after that, could go anywhere

They just delisted his brother, that could make it awkward for him if he ends up there.

(Well, I assume they are brothers)

 

[Platten44]

West Coast wanted a 1st and a second. Preferably futures. 14 gave us a first and second that we could use that was going to broker the deal for barass so we paid 14 and a f3 for their f4 given there wouldn't be much difference in those two picks.

The strategy was sound. We were always losing 14 but we manipulated it so that we didn't pay much more than that for Barrass. It was great wheeling and dealing by us

We paid pick 14, our future 1st, future 2nd and future 3rd for Barrass, Carlton’s future 1st, Carlton’s future 2nd and West Coast’s future 4th. It will depend on where we and Carlton finish next season to get a better idea of how good the dealing was.

 

[H00t]

West Coast wanted a 1st and a second. Preferably futures. 14 gave us a first and second that we could use that was going to broker the deal for barass so we paid 14 and a f3 for their f4 given there wouldn't be much difference in those two picks.

The strategy was sound. We were always losing 14 but we manipulated it so that we didn't pay much more than that for Barrass. It was great wheeling and dealing by us

In isolation I have no problem with the deal.

It’s trading 14 for future picks then having to pay extra to get back in.

If we had of traded f1 and 33 which fits the first and second. While costing slightly more for Barrass.

After having to trade back in though we finish ahead as we have pick 14 not 18-20. We end up losing 4-6 positions just trying to be cute.

 

[DogDaySonny]

In isolation I have no problem with the deal.

It’s trading 14 for future picks then having to pay extra to get back in.

If we had of traded f1 and 33 which fits the first and second. While costing slightly more for Barrass.

After having to trade back in though we finish ahead as we have pick 14 not 18-20. We end up losing 4-6 positions just trying to be cute.

This argument is almost too obtuse to respond to, but I’m sitting here with a couple spare minutes so I’ll explain why it’s obtuse.

• You ignore TFP’s statement that West Coast preferred future picks to this year.
• You’re ignorant of Hawthorn’s draft objectives this year.
• You assume the club’s motivation is to be cute with trade ideas, like they are posters on BigFooty or something.

So, given that ignorance, you propose an alternative that West Coast didn’t want for a draft pick profile you don’t know that we need, all in an effort to avoid looking cute.

 

[TheFourPillars]

In isolation I have no problem with the deal.

It’s trading 14 for future picks then having to pay extra to get back in.

If we had of traded f1 and 33 which fits the first and second. While costing slightly more for Barrass.

After having to trade back in though we finish ahead as we have pick 14 not 18-20. We end up losing 4-6 positions just trying to be cute.

We didn't want to get rid of our first and 2nd round picks this year. We obviously felt like that was too much. There is no guarantee we buy back into this draft. That part is conditional. By obtaining another 1st and second We felt that the price was right. West Coast were not going to accept a F1 with 14 on the table. We removed that option and got the deal done

 

[TheFourPillars]

We paid pick 14, our future 1st, future 2nd and future 3rd for Barrass, Carlton’s future 1st, Carlton’s future 2nd and West Coast’s future 4th. It will depend on where we and Carlton finish next season to get a better idea of how good the dealing was.

It doesn't matter in regards to the picks and where we finish. We obviously still back ourselves. What we did was a pick slide rather than give up a 1st and a second. I am gonna take that every day of the week.

 

[2008wasoverDEW!]

Barrass was contracted for 3 years. West Coast always had the upper hand in that trade, but I thought we did quite well in the end.

We currently have pick 33. We either wait to see who slides through to us, in a relatively deep draft, or we attempt to trade up on the night if a player we rate very highly slides to a particular point.
Two years ago Hawthorn was initially criticised for overpaying just to draft an undersized half-back flanker named Josh Weddle. It might not always pay off, but if we aggressively trade up to secure a kid we are keen on, I'm happy to back our recruiters in.
Adding more talented kids to an already exciting youthful list will only entice more Free-Agents.

 

[H00t]

This argument is almost too obtuse to respond to, but I’m sitting here with a couple spare minutes so I’ll explain why it’s obtuse.

• You ignore TFP’s statement that West Coast preferred future picks to this year.
• You’re ignorant of Hawthorn’s draft objectives this year.
• You assume the club’s motivation is to be cute with trade ideas, like they are posters on BigFooty or something.

So, given that ignorance, you propose an alternative that West Coast didn’t want for a draft pick profile you don’t know that we need, all in an effort to avoid looking cute.

View attachment 2158386

If west coast wanted future picks that’s all the more reason not to trade 14. If it’s the pick 33 you disagree with had we flipped it for a future 2nd then we could have done the exact same trade with the eagles that we just did.

As for our draft objectives this year we only know what gets put on here which is that we are looking at trading back in. When we’ve just traded 14 out.

The idea wasn’t clearly just to be cute from our list management team but if we do end up trading back in it means that in an attempt to pay less for Barrass we give up more at the end of the day.

 

[TheFourPillars]

If west coast wanted future picks that’s all the more reason not to trade 14. If it’s the pick 33 you disagree with had we flipped it for a future 2nd then we could have done the exact same trade with the eagles that we just did.

As for our draft objectives this year we only know what gets put on here which is that we are looking at trading back in. When we’ve just traded 14 out.

The idea wasn’t clearly just to be cute from our list management team but if we do end up trading back in it means that in an attempt to pay less for Barrass we give up more at the end of the day.

We don't give up more because in our eyes the player we r targetting has a much higher value in terms of the draft. As an example let's take hotton. Who we rate at say 8 or 9 and he is still there at pick 19. We will pull the trigger for said pick which we had set up prior to the draft. For us that is worth it

There is no certainty in us upgrading our pick. It only happens in a scenario similar to the above

 

[H00t]

We didn't want to get rid of our first and 2nd round picks this year. We obviously felt like that was too much. There is no guarantee we buy back into this draft. That part is conditional. By obtaining another 1st and second We felt that the price was right. West Coast were not going to accept a F1 with 14 on the table. We removed that option and got the deal done

From what’s come out it seems we didn’t even offer up 14 outright. We wouldn’t have gotten close to offering 14 and 33.

It’s not just as simple as a first and second is what they needed. As firsts and seconds all have different values.

Just as we might not trade in if we had 14 on draft night we could easily trade it out. Teams will be looking to trade into this draft.

We had barely spoken to the eagles before trading 14. f1 and 33 should have at least been offered in this case.

 

[H00t]

We don't give up more because in our eyes the player we r targetting has a much higher value in terms of the draft. As an example let's take hotton. Who we rate at say 8 or 9 and he is still there at pick 19. We will pull the trigger for said pick which we had set up prior to the draft. For us that is worth it

There is no certainty in us upgrading our pick. It only happens in a scenario similar to the above

Targeting a player and paying extra to move into a draft isn’t the issue here. It’s that we’ve traded out a better pick for less where the chances of our player(s) being available is higher.

We are lucky that our is list is strong where any drafted player is a luxury rather than a necessity. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be looking to maximise the value we get.

 

[TheFourPillars]

From what’s come out it seems we didn’t even offer up 14 outright. We wouldn’t have gotten close to offering 14 and 33.

It’s not just as simple as a first and second is what they needed. As firsts and seconds all have different values.

Just as we might not trade in if we had 14 on draft night we could easily trade it out. Teams will be looking to trade into this draft.

We had barely spoken to the eagles before trading 14. f1 and 33 should have at least been offered in this case.

Mate we had hardly spoken to the eagles? The eagles wanted first and second. Our initial offer wasn't going to get it done. They did want 14 but wanted the rest of the picks as futures. We knew 14 was gone. We were never holding it either way. There was never a scenario where we get Barrass and keep 14. That was even with a player being part of the deal. So we went to work and took 14 out of the equation. It was a smart move to get barass because it still means we have the flexibility to upgrade our pick in the draft. We have more options thus way. Once again we were never keeping 14

 

[TheFourPillars]

Targeting a player and paying extra to move into a draft isn’t the issue here. It’s that we’ve traded out a better pick for less where the chances of our player(s) being available is higher.

We are lucky that our is list is strong where any drafted player is a luxury rather than a necessity. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be looking to maximise the value we get.

No it's not luck. We only make the play for barrass knowing we have a good list and now we r plugging holes. We r maximising the value we get trading pick 14 was doing that