List Mgmt. Draft thread - 2025 (remaining picks: 29, 34)

[Keys]

Live draft hand
R1: 1 (Duursma), 4 (CDT), 19 (Lindsay)
R2: 29, 34
RD: 1

Draft picks pre-draft
R1: 1, 2, 13
R2: 34, 41
RD: 1

List spots available
Main list: 2 (includes Duursma, CDT, Lindsay)
Cat A Rookie list: 1 (expecting Robertson, Macrae and Schoenberg to join as SSP signings)
Cat B Rookie list: 1

Draft order

Spoiler

Draft prospect video highlights (thanks to noobermensch)

Rookie Me Central 2025 Draft Guide

2025 AFL Draft Guide

online.fliphtml5.com

Matthew Clarke on Gettable 17/11

Spoiler

Cal Twomey’s Phantom Draft

Spoiler

 

[eaglevision]

Id prefer Farrow/Greeves/Barker. Im leaning towards Barker. We just need a true winger for once

But didn’t you just say we need to draft a midfielder to play midfield? Barker is a winger, Farrow is a HBF.

Greeves is a mid but there are a number of red flags on him football and non football related. Would you still take him over Dovaston?

 

[eaglevision]

At pick 13 take the best player still available which is likely to be whoever is left from the likes of Farrow, Dovaston, Lindsay or Grlj.

It’s also possible that those four will all be gone as it needs at least one, possibly two of Marsh, Greeves, Phillipou, Hibbins-Hargreaves or Oskar Taylor to be taken prior to our pick - otherwise we’re picking from this group or possibly Barker

Getting pick 9 off Carlton would be ideal but I think Adelaide are well ahead of us in that race and Carlton moving back from 11 to 13, even if we throw in 34, doesn’t help them that much

Can see why we might entertain splitting pick 2 if we can get 3 picks inside 10 by doing so - pick 13 is in an awkward spot

I actually think if we are taking best talent available then 13 will pick itself, the last of that tier of players before we move onto high upside but more speculative picks Phillipou, O Taylor, Barker.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

But didn’t you just say we need to draft a midfielder to play midfield? Barker is a winger, Farrow is a HBF.

Greeves is a mid but there are a number of red flags on him football and non football related. Would you still take him over Dovaston?

Wing is part of the midfield IMO.

Id really want Barker over anyone at that pick.

 

[txbyhull]

A good reason Dovaston kicked more goals... Ill let you figure out why

Williams kicked 5.7 across 10 games at Colts level. 12 touches a game and 3 goals in 4 at champs. 13 touches and 9 goals for Dov. 38.22 across 16 games at CTL level. Uncomparable players

 

[MrWoollie]

I'm not sure if this belongs in the draft or contracts thread due to the significant overlap but...

I cannot but feel that we are setting ourselves up to miss on an NGA or F/S due to someone putting a bid on and we have no slots to match. And it could be easily avoided by doing as hundreds have suggested and move Cripps to the rookie list.

Doesn't hurt the club,
doesn't hurt the player,
doesn't cost player earnings.

It's not as if it is a new experiment or hasn't been done before.

I just cannot think of one reason not to do it. And don't use the player respect/senior citizen argument. That might fly for a Peter Matera

Peter Matera

Age

57

Ht

183cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.8

5star

K

14.0

5star

HB

4.9

4star

M

3.6

4star

T

2.4

4star

G

0.9

4star

No current season stats available

D

12.2

3star

K

9.0

4star

HB

3.2

3star

M

3.2

4star

T

0.6

3star

G

0.6

3star

(and even then I would have floated it privately but given him the choice) or Glen Jakovich

Glen Jakovich

Age

53

Ht

193cm

Wt

102kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.2

4star

K

12.0

4star

HB

5.2

4star

M

4.2

4star

T

1.0

3star

No current season stats available

D

17.6

5star

K

11.2

4star

HB

6.4

4star

M

4.2

4star

T

0.6

3star

but not a loyal but middling player. If you don't do it for a player like Cripps you'll never do it.

 

[FatPizza]

Can the whole 'delist and rookie' Cripps things still happen? Or was the deadline last week?

The club obviously knows that kind of mechanism is available since we've used it before. So there must be valid(ish) reason for our current strategy.

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

At pick 13 take the best player still available which is likely to be whoever is left from the likes of Farrow, Dovaston, Lindsay or Grlj.

It’s also possible that those four will all be gone as it needs at least one, possibly two of Marsh, Greeves, Phillipou, Hibbins-Hargreaves or Oskar Taylor to be taken prior to our pick - otherwise we’re picking from this group or possibly Barker

Getting pick 9 off Carlton would be ideal but I think Adelaide are well ahead of us in that race and Carlton moving back from 11 to 13, even if we throw in 34, doesn’t help them that much

Can see why we might entertain splitting pick 2 if we can get 3 picks inside 10 by doing so - pick 13 is in an awkward spot

I was previously with you on pick 13 but I’ve come round to there being a very desirable player available. I think one of Dovaston, Phillipou, Grlj or Barker will be available at 13 and I’d prioritise them in that order.

There is a reason Adelaide are giving up a F1 and still wanting to keep 16. I guess they are hoping one of Schubert Sharp or Cumming are still there at 9. At 16, Marsh or Barker would be targets.

The top 5 is likely to be Duursma CDT Robey Sharp and Cumming with one of Grlj or XTaylor rounding out 6.

Dees at 7+8 I have taking Schubert and Grlj. They have undersized KPF’s at present so Schubert makes so much sense and they need midfield speed. Taking Lindsay last year makes me think they pass on Farrow

I can see the Crows being disappointed at 9. That is assuming they target SA talent. Farrow would be an option but I wouldn’t discount Marsh or Phillipou.

Hawks expected to take Greeves at 10

Is 11 swallowed up by Dean or do the Blues trade back?

GWS being linked to Oscar Taylor for tsunami surges, but they might just go another small forward in Dovaston as that is what they do and he would be mentored by Toby.

 

[Knifey Spoony]

Wes Walley feels like the perfect Cat B rookie. Clearly talented, but hasn't clicked this year along with some injury concerns. Excited to see what he can become.

 

[PRANKSTER666]

Grjl won't still be there at our 3rd pick, he has plenty of upside and I reckon he will be a star.

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

Grjl won't still be there at our 3rd pick, he has plenty of upside and I reckon he will be a star.

In discussion with a respected Tiger poster, he believes Grlj is an option a 4, but if Richmond don’t take him, he might slide through to 13.

I cannot see Demons letting him past 8

 

[Bacchus]

There was a path where we would have been able to guarantee all of Williams, Evans and Banfield made it to West Coast if other clubs made a bid on all three. All it required was for Cripps (or another player) to be delisted and then redrafted as a rookie- not a big deal as Cripps being poached by another club was very low risk especially when you consider we have pick 1 in the rookie draft

Picks 34 and 41 would in all likelihood be sufficient points to cover a Williams bid as early as low 20’s. Pick 53 would also have come in several places and have some additional points value if needed.

Bids on Banfield and Evans are not likely until after pick 37 so all we’d have needed was the vacant list spot - we already have 5 vacancies so moving Cripps to the rookie list would have created the 6th spot necessary to match a bid on both players

There’s a valid argument that with pick 34, which will be more like pick 30 on draft night, we would be able to draft a better player than Williams- that’s fair enough. Missing out on Williams because another club reaches for him is a reasonable position albeit you’d hope the club hasn’t misread his ability by not matching.

Either way, whether Williams is matched or not we still have a 5th spot to match a bid on Evans or Banfield. If we don’t match Williams we also have pick 41 (probably around 35ish on draft night) so it’s possible the club rates a player at that pick higher than both but that’s also a decision based on relative talent assessments

Without that 6th spot however, we would be unable to match any bid for either Banfield or Evans depending on which of the two was bid on first. So we’d lose that player and then be filling that spot with a SSP signing or RD selection

We’re gambling on at least one of Banfield or Evans not attracting a bid, which is possible given the expectation that the draft will cap at around pick 55 or thereabouts.

So the only conclusion we can draw is that the club doesn’t rank at least one of that pair in their top 50 and are only prepared to add them to our list as a rookie. If we rated both in the top 50 we’d have created the necessary list position

It’ll be nerve-racking for us on draft night hoping that there’s no bid on either Evans or Banfield

* Wes Walley I don’t think gets bid on so I’ve left him out of the above

Agree with all that you have said but I still can’t see the point of recontracting Cripps to the main list when spots are scarce.

You must be right that the club doesn’t rate them that highly but even then they’ve limited their options for any other players in the draft so they don’t rate the whole cohort highly. But I get sick of this kicking the can down the road into next year and then that draft will become weak and so it goes on. When will they take the bull by the horns?

Retaining Cripps on the main list just seems like such a pointless exercise.

A more ruthless and it could be argued professional club like Sydney have placed two of their aged stalwarts in Lloyd and Rampe on the delist pile to be re-rookied.

When if ever the story of the darkest period in WC history in the 2020’s is ever written then poor list management must feature as a significant contributing factor.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

We should trade down from 13 to the first pick in the second round and then reap the rewards of trading that pick for 5 future first rounders.

 

[Hook461123]

I'm not sure if this belongs in the draft or contracts thread due to the significant overlap but...

I cannot but feel that we are setting ourselves up to miss on an NGA or F/S due to someone putting a bid on and we have no slots to match. And it could be easily avoided by doing as hundreds have suggested and move Cripps to the rookie list.

Doesn't hurt the club,
doesn't hurt the player,
doesn't cost player earnings.

It's not as if it is a new experiment or hasn't been done before.

I just cannot think of one reason not to do it. And don't use the player respect/senior citizen argument. That might fly for a Peter Matera (and even then I would have floated it privately but given him the choice) or Glen Jakovich but not a loyal but middling player. If you don't do it for a player like Cripps you'll never do it.

The only reason I can think of is that we already have plans for the rookie list spots and they are allocated to some delisted free agents. Maybe they rate them ahead of our NGA, because there's a lot going around this offseason.
Phillips, Dev, Shoenburg, Macrea, Mitchell, Berry, Clohesy
We may prefer an extra one of these types rather than Evans/Walley
Not saying I agree, it's just the only reason I can think of why we didn't open up an extra list spot.

 

[Seadog]

Agree with all that you have said but I still can’t see the point of recontracting Cripps to the main list when spots are scarce.

You must be right that the club doesn’t rate them that highly but even then they’ve limited their options for any other players in the draft so they don’t rate the whole cohort highly. But I get sick of this kicking the can down the road into next year and then that draft will become weak and so it goes on. When will they take the bull by the horns?

Retaining Cripps on the main list just seems like such a pointless exercise.

A more ruthless and it could be argued professional club like Sydney have placed two of their aged stalwarts in Lloyd and Rampe on the delist pile to be re-rookied.

When if ever the story of the darkest period in WC history in the 2020’s is ever written then poor list management must feature as a significant contributing factor.

One can only assume the club aren't confident enough in some of the nga's that they will commit to them for 2 years, would rather they were given 1 year rookie contracts or nothing at all. One could argue they are being ruthless and are prepared to turn rookies over quickly in the hunt for players over the next few years.
Or it could be they are recklessly incompetent and know less than posters on BF.

 

[Bacchus]

One can only assume the club aren't confident enough in some of the nga's that they will commit to them for 2 years, would rather they were given 1 year rookie contracts or nothing at all. One could argue they are being ruthless and are prepared to turn rookies over quickly in the hunt for players over the next few years.
Or it could be they are recklessly incompetent and know less than posters on BF.

Your position appears to be that the experts know what they are doing.

How then do you explain the last five years?

 

[woosha24]

Your position appears to be that the experts know what they are doing.

How then do you explain the last five years?

Clashing directives from those higher up the chain.

IIRC Simmo last year did an interview where he said that he and the board believed that the club could "get the band back together" (regarding injured B22 players) in 2021 and push for a flag, so we built a list to do that. Lo and behold, it didnt pan out and we find ourselves in the situation we're in now.

 

[dinnaz]

Blicavs has less talent than CDT yes.

Define Talent

Is it? I’m not sure talent can be defined by output. Harley Bennell would be one of the more talented AFL players in the 21st century, him flaming out doesn’t change the fact.

I’m confident CDT is more talented than Blicavs, whether he makes the most of said talent is another question.

People confuse speed with talent. Take that out of your considerations and then reassess how someone will perform after pinging 5 hammies.

 

[dinnaz]

Williams can fill that positional need...If he cant then we shouldnt draft him at all

Not worth drafting. We probably plan reverse draft knowing we have access to small forwards at the back end which will fill that spot.

I suspect we promote taking players from aligned NGA/Academy/Reserves as a bit of a carrot for the future even if it is a long shot.

 

[daddy_4_eyes]

This doesn't work for the Eagles for a number or reasons. First reason is we have quite a few academy boys next year as well as another father and son prospect. We need our future picks to ensure we will be able to secure these boys if we so choose.

Another reason is because we do not need more picks in this draft. We were looking to upgrade 13 if possible but adding another pick will not help us as we only have 5 list spots open and potentially will have to match an academy prospect (Williams) and a father and son (Banfield). This means we will most likely only look to take 3 picks outside of these boys.

1 is locked in so we don't have a need for 5, 9 & 11. We'd be better just taking 1, 2 & 13 and keeping our future draft capitol and our pick in the 40's to match Williams and Banfield.

I think you will find there will not be many clubs looking to sell future picks to get into this draft, if anything it will be the other way around.

The flaw with that logic is that you value Williams or Banfield, who may get bid on late, over the talent that would otherwise be taken at 9.

With 5 list spots, using Twomey's rankings:
Current: Duursma(1), CDT(2), Marsh(13), Wililams(bid), Banfield(bid)
vs
Proposed: Duursma(1), Sharp (5), Farrow (9), Phillipou(11), Banfield* (bid)

I'm taking the proposed option every day of the week.

*Personal assumption that we'd rate Banfield as a f/s a priority over Williams, passing on a Williams bid if it comes before a Banfield bid.

 

[Shueygod]

Define Talent

People confuse speed with talent. Take that out of your considerations and then reassess how someone will perform after pinging 5 hammies.

Give them the same speed and CDT still has more natural footballing ability than Blicavs.

This shouldn’t even be a debate, blokes in here seem to think he’s a consensus pick 2 for no reason.

 

[Mr Q]

Can the whole 'delist and rookie' Cripps things still happen? Or was the deadline last week?

The club obviously knows that kind of mechanism is available since we've used it before. So there must be valid(ish) reason for our current strategy.

I would expect it's a list management thing.

The option was there if there was a need for more spaces this year. But the cost of moving Cripps (or Barnett or Johnston) to the rookie list is that their one year of contract is replaced by new draftees on two years minimum - meaning it's even harder next year to find list spaces, in a year with even more NGAs and a much stronger draft.

As simple as sacrificing one draft spot this year for one next year.

I would say that the decision would be that it's better to use up the rookie spaces, take a risk on being unable to match a bid in the draft and if Cripps/Barnett/Johnston are no longer going to be on the list in '27, we have three spaces easily freed up. We do have a bunch of other players playing for their careers this year, but these will be the most likely.

That said, there are a lot of players apparently coming out of contract next year (as below), and I reckon of them, only Elijah Hewett and Ryan Maric would be feeling fairly safe.

 

[mattyc75]

Agree with that but its still the lesser spot for him. I want to draft a midfielder to play midfield. Not a small forward to play midfield. We are easily 6 midfielders short right now in our team. We need 3 x mids in the next 2 drafts. We cant afford to waste one of our top picks on a spot we already have covered

The cupboard is bare as far as small forwards is concerned , I think dovaston will be gone by 13 tho. If he's there we should take him
Barker next if dovaston is gone

 

[Boots73]

I'm not sure if this belongs in the draft or contracts thread due to the significant overlap but...

I cannot but feel that we are setting ourselves up to miss on an NGA or F/S due to someone putting a bid on and we have no slots to match. And it could be easily avoided by doing as hundreds have suggested and move Cripps to the rookie list.

Doesn't hurt the club,
doesn't hurt the player,
doesn't cost player earnings.

It's not as if it is a new experiment or hasn't been done before.

I just cannot think of one reason not to do it. And don't use the player respect/senior citizen argument. That might fly for a Peter Matera (and even then I would have floated it privately but given him the choice) or Glen Jakovich but not a loyal but middling player. If you don't do it for a player like Cripps you'll never do it.

Fully agree on this , would like some to ask Eagles after the draft what was there thought process on this.
Not really going to give away there draft strategy before draft night

 

[flamingEMBERS]

I’m coming around to 2 + 13 for 5 + F1 (Essendon) as an ideal trade.

Gets us Duursma and one of Sharp, Cumming, Robey. Possibly even our choice of those three, if Richmond take Grjl and Taylor.

Leaves us 3 main list spots after that so we can guarantee our club-tied players - unless we see better options.

And in two steps (the Starcevich trade, then this one) we turn an early 2R pick in 2025 into what is likely to be an early 1R pick in 2026.

I reckon this could be the reason we didn’t delist Cripps.
Go to the draft with 1, 5, 34, 41, 53 & 58. Guarantees we can take the 3 NGA if we choose, or look at getting a KPP and still get 2 of them. Gives us two first next year.

Think I prefer this than three in the top 13 like we have.

 

[Eastcoasteagle]

I dont think Williams/Dovaston is that big a difference to be like we must pick him. In the end theyd be competing for a similar role

Instead of going with 6 back pockets and 6 small forwards id rather just have players we actually need at 13 and that is a midfielder

There is a difference, Dovaston does a lot of work in the contest and brings manic pressure also has a much better goal scoring record.

Williams more outside with speed and agility.