Analysis 2025 Draft watch

[Aphrodite]

 

[carlton_99]

if North and Dogs don't bid on Ison, do we have enough points to match if we were to select another player at pick 28 ?

Yep

 

[Coona Blues]

Have to say during last year with Ludowyke as an underaged KPF, I thought he projected as a top 5 pick this year. Injured through season, logic says he is a no brainer if available unless there is a residual health issue.

 

[marcmurphy3]

Just any team in the top 4 should be more restricted in their access to high draft picks and free agents.

No problems with bottom 4 teams preparing their lists to gain access to these types.(eg. Tigers in the past 2 seasons)

GWS, Suns and Brizzy can continue to trade out 1 or 2 semi decent players per year to recieve multiple high picks

Dont like top 4 block out. A club might get a gun fs once in 20 years. Shouldnt lose them because they happen to finish top 4 that year. The fact they will have poorer picks makes it harder to match already. Dont need to restrict further.

The issue with the compromised draft for me is not so much top teams, getting top players. It's the volume that's making a mess of the 1st round. And that's primarily driven by the academy's. Not fs. Restrict the number and that problem is alleviated.

 

[manang magoos]

I know we've been desperate for some flogs in our team... But I'm not sure I can handle that much flog

Yer let the saints have so he can play with his flog brother who if I remember correctly was the best thing ever also according to him

 

[Uncle Fester]

They should look at only 1 player per round or discount only applies to 1 player per year.

Arent their carazzo triplets somewhere in the system….

 

[Blue_Fusion]

Gold Coast walk away with 4 top 20 picks plus Petracca this off season.

What did they have to give up to get all that?

 

[Revenant1995]

Dont like top 4 block out. A club might get a gun fs once in 20 years. Shouldnt lose them because they happen to finish top 4 that year. The fact they will have poorer picks makes it harder to match already. Dont need to restrict further.

The issue with the compromised draft for me is not so much top teams, getting top players. It's the volume that's making a mess of the 1st round. And that's primarily driven by the academy's. Not fs. Restrict the number and that problem is alleviated.

I'm also one who thinks if a player leaves via FA, no compensation picks (but some allowances for salary cap adjustments). Take out FA compensation, and remove discounts for F/S and Acadamy players... just me...

 

[The Blue Weirdo]

Dont like top 4 block out. A club might get a gun fs once in 20 years. Shouldnt lose them because they happen to finish top 4 that year. The fact they will have poorer picks makes it harder to match already. Dont need to restrict further.

The issue with the compromised draft for me is not so much top teams, getting top players. It's the volume that's making a mess of the 1st round. And that's primarily driven by the academy's. Not fs. Restrict the number and that problem is alleviated.

No block out, just continue to raise the DVI for higher placed teams only.
Eventually we'll reach a correct level where the lower placed teams can crawl their way up the ladder faster.

 

[manang magoos]

I wonder if the rest of the clubs have seen us pay way overs for Dean so have let Ison slide.

I seriously hate WC now. What a bunch of B-grade morons.

Yer morons even wheeled out there club great to hand out the jumper

 

[The Bighouse]

WC bid on Zeke Uwland at 2, Jai Murray at 17 & Beau Addinsall at 18. GC matched all 3 bids.

Let’s hope the WCE get a few bids put their way (if they have the talent) for the foreseeable future, and beyond.

 

[Ninja Worrier]

Dont like top 4 block out. A club might get a gun fs once in 20 years. Shouldnt lose them because they happen to finish top 4 that year. The fact they will have poorer picks makes it harder to match already. Dont need to restrict further.

The issue with the compromised draft for me is not so much top teams, getting top players. It's the volume that's making a mess of the 1st round. And that's primarily driven by the academy's. Not fs. Restrict the number and that problem is alleviated.

This.... I get the arguments that they paid full price, but access to so many guns still troubles me in an equalisation system...I'd think about restricting northern academies to matching one player per round

 

[josephone]

I get the argument about Gold Coast, but I'm a bit more sympathetic. They've toiled up there for over a decade now, and whatever talent they developed has walked out the door at the first opportunity. I find Richmond's complaints to be especially ironic given they picked up Tom Lynch when he was captain of the club.

So now against all odds they have managed to put together a good crop of local youngsters. They've grown bananas in the desert. And after feasting off Suns players for a decade, now the other clubs are jealous? Of a club that only made finals for the first time this year?

The issue is with the system, not the Suns. Even then you have to credit them with developing four top 20 talents, a couple of whom they basically poached from other sports.

 

[Opium]

What did they have to give up to get all that?

Flanders and Ainsworth?? The facts are strong clubs are getting stronger. To get that level of talent in one off season confirms the frustration when we have used most of our draft capital on one player while losing alot talent at the same time.

 

[Fabab]

WC bid on Zeke Uwland at 2, Jai Murray at 17 & Beau Addinsall at 18. GC matched all 3 bids.

Cheers mate,so no bids on any other top rated boys,they get issues with us and GC it seems.

 

[marcmurphy3]

I'm also one who thinks if a player leaves via FA, no compensation picks (but some allowances for salary cap adjustments). Take out FA compensation, and remove discounts for F/S and Acadamy players... just me...

I think compensation picks are ok but change band 1 compensation to be mid first round, after pick 10 (after all non finalists have picked).

Also, conversial opinion. I would be happy to bring back some kind of priority pick sysyem for teams that have been poor for a number of years. Nobody is tanking 3 years to get an additional pick. Prefer that then the AFL twisting its own rules, like with WC this year, to manipulate a scenario. At least it'd be consistent.

 

[BRADLESTICKS]

You genuinely don't think that Roos future 2nd might come in handy getting Cody Walker? If both us and the Swans have good seasons we may well struggle to have enough points to match a bid at say pick 2 or 3.

It holds some value but hawthorn showed last night how easily 2nd round picks can be acquired.

If you lose Curnow, Dekoning and Silvagni in one off season we should have been easily able to get the necessary collateral to cover Dean plus a lot more however we’ve essentially walked away with Dean, Hayward ( who I rate as a player) then some minor pick upgrades in the next two drafts. The 3 first round picks for Charlie are a myth if you look closely.

Have a look at what the swans 2027 first round pick will look like if they finish top 4 which is a good chance once you take into account the Tasmania concessions. Tassie get to auction off up to 4 mini-draft players eg. (Jessie hogan, Jack Martin) rule . They get access to pre list 17 year olds (Jeremy Cameron, Dylan Shiel) rule let’s say conservatively they list 7/8 that’s already 10 plus players taken out of the 2027 draft pool.

They also get access to any uncontracted players limited to 1 per club and the AFL will hand out compensation picks lets say they take 10 players that first year thats 10 places further the swans pick gets pushed back, then again conservatively add 6/7 academy or father sons. Then add other clubs free agency compo picks the 2027 swans pick we will be picking up a player in their 18th year who would be normally ranked in the low to mid 40s.

We could of and should of got a lot more.

 

[Uncle Fester]

Maybe but we brought in 9 and 11 in the trade period but I don't remember many saying Dean will be take in the top few then. Even Cal said it was unlikely at the time from memory. I think our refusal to do a deal with Eagles for 9 annoyed them.

was there an actual conversation yesterday about picks 9 and 13?

 

[carlton_99]

was there an actual conversation yesterday about picks 9 and 13?

No just reports leading into the draft I think

 

[bigblueboy]

Likely that north will trade 26 with clubs keen to have first pick tonight. Unlikely we have the picks to match what other clubs will offer.
Unlikely any club trading up to 26 will be doing that to target Ison.
Still a chance the Bulldogs bid at 27.

 

[KnaveyBlue]

Archie Ludowyk looks good to me. Tall, mobile, classy and marks at the highest point. Very Adam Cadman like. Key will be interviews and how much growth we believe he has.

IMO if he is available at 28 we jump on him. He is a need

My main concern on Ludowyke is whether he'll fill out enough to compete against bigger bodies at AFL level. His frame is so... narrow.

I guess it's not as big an issue if you're jumping over the top of them tho. And we are absolutely desperate for a developing KPF.

 

[carlton_99]

Likely that north will trade 26 with clubs keen to have first pick tonight. Unlikely we have the picks to match what other clubs will offer.
Unlikely any club trading up to 26 will be doing that to target Ison.
Still a chance the Bulldogs bid at 27.

As long as they let us know we could trade out of 28 prior to the bid. And then use 38 and 44 to match.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

Hard to see Dogs taking Ludowyke given their batch of young key forwards, after losing Charlie is the most obvious selection for us. Could be a risk that Dogs trade to another club looking to bolster KPF like North.

If not Archie, Hibbins -Heargraves upside looks exciting and in a position of need.

 

[Stamos]

Thats 9 first round picks in 3 years for them, including 5 in the top 10.

AFL should probably limit clubs to matching 1 bid a year.

They had to pay a lot to get their players this year though.

Completely different to 2023.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

Dont like top 4 block out. A club might get a gun fs once in 20 years. Shouldnt lose them because they happen to finish top 4 that year. The fact they will have poorer picks makes it harder to match already. Dont need to restrict further.

The issue with the compromised draft for me is not so much top teams, getting top players. It's the volume that's making a mess of the 1st round. And that's primarily driven by the academy's. Not fs. Restrict the number and that problem is alleviated.

Yeah I dont mind the restriction of numbers, cap it at 1 NGA or father son in the top 10 and an additional one in the 11-30 range, would be a max 2 per club each year.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Flanders and Ainsworth?? The facts are strong clubs are getting stronger. To get that level of talent in one off season shows the frustration when we have used most of our draft capital on one player.

Last year they also traded out Lukosius, Atkins and Picks 13, 29, 47 and 50 in deals that secured them two additional first rounders and a third rounder this year.

Then this year they got 7 for Flanders, 29 for Aisworth and 37 for Budarick.

They've also, during the draft, traded a future 2nd rounder (MEL), and two future 3rd rounders (ESS and GC).

Sure, they landed 4 players inside the top 20. But they've committed their full 2025 draft hand, as well as 3 best 22 players, two fringe-ish players, and multiple picks from years either side of this draft to do so.