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

 

[Choogler]

This

We have so much coverage down back, mini will be able to move some magnets. But none of those magnets have proven they're capable of being a full time midfielder.

Tmac maybe
Ginbey I would like to see have another crack at it
Baker sure
Hough tagger only
Allan maybe

Everyone has either missed, or chosen to overlook, the discussion around Starcevich and a potential move into the midfield. It has been mentioned by Starcevich himself and was mooted as a reason for his move. I think it is worth trying because he is a quick, powerful unit and could end up rotating thru there with T-Mac.

 

[WCEConnor23]

5+21 or even 27 for 2, feels like a simple and win-win trade for both Essendon and WCE. WCE get 1 of Sharp or Cumming at 5, Essendon get Robey or CDT and keep two picks within the top 10. WCE gain another pick and select a good player with 21 or 27. We could even throw in a late pick if Essendon need points for their NGA's.

Then package 21+34 for Gold Coasts 15

 

[Farmer Lister]

Kickett talking about Tylah Williams

The 'Koby' he asked about is Koby LeCras.

Ahhh of course he said before he's mates with him. Got my Kobys mixed up.

 

[uptheWC]

Smillie’s height as a POD already has him beating Sharp in my books considering their comparable skill sets, aside from that I’d place Smillie’s athleticism a few tiers above Sharp’s especially from an agility standpoint (even considering they’re both not the fastest). I’d also say Smillie has much better kicking, even though I think Sharp’s is often undersold. Sharps main criticism being his ceiling is something Smillie will never have to worry about. Smillie gets taken over Sharp every day of the week by clubs.

From memory one of the biggest knocks on Smillie last year was that he was a bigger body beating up on kids, similar to what we hear to a lesser extent about Sharp, but an accusation that has put questions marks over their respective ceilings at AFL level. Smillie was also labelled as being very slow, more so than Sharp is now.

I can’t comment on Smillie’s athleticism, but I know he is a fair bit taller than Sharp which may come into play for some teams.

However I can’t see Smillie’s inside craft and cleanliness being near Sharp’s level, which may not be as high on team’s list of priorities as it should be. Given the choice I would take Sharp.

 

[txbyhull]

From memory one of the biggest knocks on Smillie last year was that he was a bigger body beating up on kids, similar to what we hear to a lesser extent about Sharp, but an accusation that has put questions marks over their respective ceilings at AFL level. Smillie was also labelled as being very slow, more so than Sharp is now.

They’re both slow in terms of bursting from stoppage and top speed, but one of them is 195cm with immense reach, and fantastic agility for his size. I disagree with idea that Smillie had or has ceiling concerns. He could very well turn into Cripps, which is obviously a lot less impressive saying it this year than last, but there’s not too many guys running around at 195cm with the skill, two-way accountability, and athleticism that Smillie has.

I can’t comment on Smillie’s athleticism, but I know he is a fair bit taller than Sharp which may come into play for some teams.

Definitely comes into play from a ceiling and long term viewpoint given their burst speed is comparable, but one will end up 195 and a unit.

However I can’t see Smillie’s inside craft and cleanliness being near Sharp’s level

This is true, it’s not, but he makes up for by being better up forward and a better kick.

which may not be as high on team’s list of priorities as it should be. Given the choice I would take Sharp.

That’s fair, it’s each to their own. I hold the same concerns about ceiling as some others, but I only want Sharp given the relative strength of the draft class. In most other years I’d be saying absolutely not go with xyz player, including Smillie.

 

[Happy Mastenator]

With the potential for 20 less boundary throw-ins per game due to rule changes, how does that impact the need for a stoppage player?

We know CDT isn't an elite ruckman, but with the ball potentially 'in play' more, does his elite running and athleticism bolster his claim at #2 and potentially dampen some of the need for Sharp?

MOodelling show's three less throw in's per game....

 

[WCEswift]

The ducking free kick rule change could effect daltons draft ranking negatively imo

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

So we are now starting to get some draft clarity

Pick 1 - Duursma to Lathlain Park without doubt or hesitation. I will go so far as to say we will not even bid before Duursma unless we want to teach the Suns a lesson.

Pick 2 - Cal normally regurgitates what he is hearing from his network so CDT is a real possibility, but so is us going for a mid, as well as that Tigers and Bombers both want CDT and Robey. Henceforth we can start with legitimate competition for pick 2. Is Clarke just playing it smart about Robey and CDT to keep the 2 teams wearing sashes keen!! I quite like the idea of Robey and Harley playing tag team so if it is Robey instead of Sharp, not preferred but I think it could be exciting.

Pick 13 - it is typical lazy journalism linking us to Farrow. If he was to become a midfielder like Young and Dawson, I would pounce. But he has not shown that at the carnival or at West Perth, so I question whether we can risk another HBF. I must admit to being a big fan of his left foot passes - depth, ball trajectory and accuracy. If it is a flanker at 13, I would rather risk a HFF/Mid in Phillipou, or an outside mid in Barker (he can actually play all three lines) or a small forward that could take a short stint at centre clearances in Dovaston. More important to build a group of high half forwards in the modern game.

So staying put at 13 is not a bad option. Loving that Oscar Taylor looks just like what GWS love in a HBF.

Picks 34 and 41 - Useful to keep these picks to find a slider, bundle up for a late R1, use on a speculative tall (Curtin, Murray, Ainsworth), match points on Williams or Evans or Banfield or to cash in for future value on the night.

Picks 53 and 58 - Minimal points now but will come in once the 3 Qld and Blues bids are matched and could be used or a trade.

A trade with Bombers
If Bombers believe neither Robey or CDT will be there at 5, they might be tempted. Despite what I may have wanted earlier, I cannot see a world where Dons do 2+13 for 5+6. It might be OK with 2+9 for 5+6 but we do not have 9. We could throw in 2+13+33 for 5+6 but will the Dons be able to trade with the Blues? This would leave us with 1, 5 and 6 which is a dream. Crows wanting 9 this year may be the sealer for Blues trading out and getting a 3rd F1. Use 11 for matching Dean. Might accept a trade on the night but I am wanting to commit to 11 early as the difference between 11 and 13 is minimal and Dean will likely get a bid by Tigers.

If we want to push value to 2026, then what Keys put forward of 5+F2+27 for 2+33 seems pretty fair. (assume F2 = 24)



A trade with Tigers
The other alternative is Tigers saying they would be open to a split or move value forward. My thoughts on this are we trade 2+13+Saints F2 for 3+4


That would leave us with 1 3 and 4 which would be outstanding. I think Tigers would only do that if they wanted to get ahead of Bombers. Probably too good to believe.

 

[Wooshaaaa]

Might go just before that, could last to there though.

Is stumpf a better option given he's had a year of development at VFL.? And would he likely get picked up in the draft or rookie. I feel he is the type of player clubs will look at given the shallow nature of key position stocks in this draft

 

[Happy Mastenator]

They’re both slow in terms of bursting from stoppage and top speed, but one of them is 195cm with immense reach, and fantastic agility for his size. I disagree with idea that Smillie had or has ceiling concerns. He could very well turn into Cripps, which is obviously a lot less impressive saying it this year than last, but there’s not too many guys running around at 195cm with the skill, two-way accountability, and athleticism that Smillie has.

Definitely comes into play from a ceiling and long term viewpoint given their burst speed is comparable, but one will end up 195 and a unit.

This is true, it’s not, but he makes up for by being better up forward and a better kick.

That’s fair, it’s each to their own. I hold the same concerns about ceiling as some others, but I only want Sharp given the relative strength of the draft class. In most other years I’d be saying absolutely not go with xyz player, including Smillie.

I'm not going to argue the merits of Sharp v Smillie because it doesn't matter given Smillie isn't in this draft.

I will say, and this goes to CDT as well. Being taller, doesn't make things better as a midfielder, otherwise everyone over 195cm would be a midfielder. You need agility, and speed of ball to foot/hand, that all suffer as you get taller. That's why those who can be inside mids at 195cm are so rare.

Being a better forward is almost irrelevant as well if you're talking about someone who you want as your number 1 clearance player. They will barely ever play forward they will be played in the guts. Not to mention that Sharp has shown he can play forward anyway

 

[Choogler]

It won't make much difference either way. The ball won't be live though so the value of mobility will be hedged against the value of aerially dominant rucks. Clubs will defend against last touch pretty easily.

The loss of boundary throw-ins will assist jumping ruckmen like Williams who won't have to wrestle as often.

The AFL's research shows just 3 boundary throw-ins per game will be lost, so it isn't gonna be the big impact people think it is.

It certainly won't turn Williams into anything other than the bang average player he currently is. He is a very poor mark, and really offers nothing around the ground as a ball winner or hit-up player because he lacks footy IQ.

CDT is very good post stoppage so I don't see the reduction in throw-ins as positive or negative.

I'd expect CDT to be a more valuable player than Williams by half-way thru his first season.

 

[uptheWC]

They’re both slow in terms of bursting from stoppage and top speed, but one of them is 195cm with immense reach, and fantastic agility for his size. I disagree with idea that Smillie had or has ceiling concerns. He could very well turn into Cripps, which is obviously a lot less impressive saying it this year than last, but there’s not too many guys running around at 195cm with the skill, two-way accountability, and athleticism that Smillie has.

Definitely comes into play from a ceiling and long term viewpoint given their burst speed is comparable, but one will end up 195 and a unit.

This is true, it’s not, but he makes up for by being better up forward and a better kick.

That’s fair, it’s each to their own. I hold the same concerns about ceiling as some others, but I only want Sharp given the relative strength of the draft class. In most other years I’d be saying absolutely not go with xyz player, including Smillie.

I don’t think Sharp is slow bursting from the pack, can’t comment on Smillie, but neither are very quick over a longer run I agree. While being 195cm may elevate the ceiling, it may also prove harder to adjust to the midfield at AFL level at that height.

I don’t think being a better kick or supposedly being better up forward makes up for lesser inside craft as a primary inside mid.

 

[txbyhull]

I'm not going to argue the merits of Sharp v Smillie because it doesn't matter given Smillie isn't in this draft.

I will say, and this goes to CDT as well. Being taller, doesn't make things better as a midfielder,

Not inherently, but being equal level to someone and being taller will never be a bad thing, only raises the ceiling.

otherwise everyone over 195cm would be a midfielder. You need agility, and speed of ball to foot/hand, that all suffer as you get taller. That's why those who can be inside mids at 195cm are so rare.

Exactly my point why Smillie was and is so popular

Being a better forward is almost irrelevant as well if you're talking about someone who you want as your number 1 clearance player.

The game is going away from 1 dimensional players as we have spoken about in this thread many times. Players like Sharp and Smillie need more strings to their bow to survive in the modern game.

They will barely ever play forward they will be played in the guts. Not to mention that Sharp has shown he can play forward anyway

True, but I wouldn’t put him in the same class as Smillie, who is much more versatile up forward due to his height in the same way he is in the middle.

 

[txbyhull]

I don’t think Sharp is slow bursting from the pack

Well he’s definitely not quick. That won’t be something he’s drafted for by any means.

,can’t comment on Smillie, but neither are very quick over a longer run I agree. While being 195cm may elevate the ceiling, it may also prove harder to adjust to the midfield at AFL level at that height.

Definitely true, but as often spoke about, you’re supposed to be drafting for potential at the top end. I’m sure this is something we both don’t ascribe to, but if you’ve got 2 even prospects and 1 is a higher ceiling they’ll obviously be preferred.

I don’t think being a better kick or supposedly being better up forward makes up for lesser inside craft as a primary inside mid.

I’d say so, considering as mentioned above and a lot previously the modern game requires more versatility from mids to actually succeed.

 

[uptheWC]

Well he’s definitely not quick. That won’t be something he’s drafted for by any means.

Definitely true, but as often spoke about, you’re supposed to be drafting for potential at the top end. I’m sure this is something we both don’t ascribe to, but if you’ve got 2 even prospects and 1 is a higher ceiling they’ll obviously be preferred.

I’d say so, considering as mentioned above and a lot previously the modern game requires more versatility from mids to actually succeed.

If they had a very even inside game then yes, Smillie’s forward abilities might give him the edge. But being drafted as a hopeful future No.1 ball winner for their respective teams, inside game should be the priority first and foremost.

Sharp has shown he is more than capable up forward, complimenting his superior inside game nicely.

Either way, I would take Smillie if he was in this draft and Sharp was not.

 

[Astro7]

Everyone has either missed, or chosen to overlook, the discussion around Starcevich and a potential move into the midfield. It has been mentioned by Starcevich himself and was mooted as a reason for his move. I think it is worth trying because he is a quick, powerful unit and could end up rotating thru there with T-Mac.

My thoughts also, he's exactly what's needed to support Harley, regardless of any other mids drafted. We will certainly have more rotational choices post draft for backline and mid.

 

[Bleedblueandgold]

We literally need to delist 1 more player to accommodate potential bids on Williams, Banfield and Evans. Don't want to make a choice of only 2 of them. Getting nervous that we don't have the foresight to get this done.
I'd personally take Banfield & Evans out of the 3 of them, but the decision might be taken out of our hands since Williams seems likely to be the first to attract a bid.

 

[bzparkes]

We literally need to delist 1 more player to accommodate potential bids on Williams, Banfield and Evans. Don't want to make a choice of only 2 of them. Getting nervous that we don't have the foresight to get this done.
I'd personally take Banfield & Evans out of the 3 of them, but the decision might be taken out of our hands since Williams seems likely to be the first to attract a bid.

We have 5 spots currently but I'm not sure if that factors in Cripps or not, who I believe is still unsigned.

 

[Keys]

We have 5 spots currently but I'm not sure if that factors in Cripps or not, who I believe is still unsigned.

If Cripps is delisted we’d have 6 main list spots and down to 2 rookie list spots assuming he’s redrafted as a rookie

We have 8 spots overall which allows for Robertson to be signed on post draft

Delisting Livingstone would open up a Cat B spot for either Evans or Walley.

 

[stallon]

Pick 13 - it is typical lazy journalism linking us to Farrow. If he was to become a midfielder like Young and Dawson, I would pounce. But he has not shown that at the carnival or at West Perth, so I question whether we can risk another HBF. I must admit to being a big fan of his left foot passes - depth, ball trajectory and accuracy. If it is a flanker at 13, I would rather risk a HFF/Mid in Phillipou, or an outside mid in Barker (he can actually play all three lines) or a small forward that could take a short stint at centre clearances in Dovaston. More important to build a group of high half forwards in the modern game.

So staying put at 13 is not a bad option. Loving that Oscar Taylor looks just like what GWS love in a HBF.
bably too good to believe.

So you dont think there is a world where McCarthy is a midfielder full time next year, leaving us a distributor sized hole in our d50 that Farrow would instantly fill? (im putting Duursma on a wing primarily in season 1)
Or are you happy with Ginbey/Starcevich/Duggan distributing from D50?

Then it doesnt matter if Farrow becomes a mid later on, ideally he would have that in him but if not at least he would be filling a big need at hbf, while McCarthy fills a huge need in the midfield while the likes of Duursma develops as a transition player that can play stoppages

Just comparing having McCarthy in the middle with Farrow at hbf VS getting a Poo/Barker though the midfield with McCarthy at hbf.
McCarthy in the middle would help us more immediately, and imo is not any worse long term

 

[Obeanie1]

Not inherently, but being equal level to someone and being taller will never be a bad thing, only raises the ceiling.

Exactly my point why Smillie was and is so popular

The game is going away from 1 dimensional players as we have spoken about in this thread many times. Players like Sharp and Smillie need more strings to their bow to survive in the modern game.

True, but I wouldn’t put him in the same class as Smillie, who is much more versatile up forward due to his height in the same way he is in the middle.

Sharp can rest and impact forward.

Certainly more flexible than say a Priddis type inside mid.

 

[Knifey Spoony]

Probably already been proposed but a potential three way trade:

Eagles
Give: 2 and 13
Get: 5 and 9

Essendon
Give: 5 and 21
Get: 2

Carlton
Give : 9
Get: 13 and 21

Eagles lose first choice of the second tier (CDT, Robey, Sharp, Cumming) but gurantee one of them while upgrading 9. Essendon give up 21 in potential bid range for their NGA to have first choice of the second tier. Carlton slide back but get more points for Dean or a handy pick.

 

[Barrybran]

Probably already been proposed but a potential three way trade:

Eagles
Give: 2 and 13
Get: 5 and 9

Essendon
Give: 5 and 21
Get: 2

Carlton
Give : 9
Get: 13 and 21

Eagles lose first choice of the second tier (CDT, Robey, Sharp, Cumming) but gurantee one of them while upgrading 9. Essendon give up 21 in potential bid range for their NGA to have first choice of the second tier. Carlton slide back but get more points for Dean or a handy pick.

Talk about give something to get something. Carlton get an extra 450 points here, equivalent to pick 31.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

But it will be live more often presumably?

Where we used to have 20 boundary throw ins, that won't be replaced by 20 free kicks as teams will look to avoid taking the ball out, so the game will be in motion more, thus benefitting the runners and transition players?

I know the rule allows spoils over the line to still be thrown in, but I could see teams wanting to go corridor a bit more and having tall mobile players could become more valuable.

I'm not convinced. Kicking the ball to touch and defending behind it is better than keeping pace on the game and being opened up.

 

[uncleoatmeal]

Carlton will want a future 1 sounds like Adelaide are keen so they are in the box seat for 9. Pretty annoying how the trade period ended up as I thought we’d be shoe ins for pick 7.