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

 

[txbyhull]

I really don't understand this kind of take from posters on here. At most, posters watched some highlights and at worst are just parroting what they've read. Even those posters on here taht that watch underage football are just amateurs.

How can the concensus #2 pick be this roundly dismissed?

He is tall & athletic beyond what most 2004cm 18 year olds are, has good skills, can football. Is there any possibility that professional talent scouts are seeing what he brings to the table long term, and not assuming he's the finished product at age 18? Whereas most talls are said to take longer to develop, he's seen as being able to play AFL in year 1, let alone what he'll be when he's in his mid-20s? That his size, athleticism and skills fit into the what the future of AFL is?


Not directing it specifically at you GoEaglesGoSGIO. But gee wizz Yeahnahmate was spot on with his STI comment.

I think a lot of the discussion has been taken a bit too far. It was fine to start out saying we’d rather take Sharp based on need than CDT at #2, or Sharp and Cumming at 5 and 6 compared to only CDT, but the amount of sh**-canning this kid has received when he’s by all measure a fantastic young player and will go on to do great things is a bit astounding.

Even as a CDT-doubter myself, we can still say he’s supremely talented

 

[WCE777]

But i don't rate TDK as a ruck either?

No one is doubting that CDT is talented and has intriguing physical attributes. The questions is whether he will be a number 1 ruck (i say no), and if not, then what/where is he and do we need that role as opposed to an A grade midfielder.

I'm on the path of take Dursma, then try to convert pick 2 into Sharp, if that can be done by trading down and still getting Sharp and adding other assets then do it. If not, then just take Sharp, the gap isn't that far apart between him and CDT.

I agree.
I just see this as simple as either ESS or RICH would be the only teams trying to get in front of one another to warrant a trade for pick 2.

Take Duursma at 1, take Sharp at 2 and unless the offer for pick 2 is well overs and we get our desired targets like Sharp and Cumming we stay put.

Pick 2 & 13 for 5 & 6 would be the desired outcome best for WC if Sharp and Cumming are most likely available, but ESS would need to put something else in that deal for us to take it, a mid 2nd round pick would be the premium normally given to extract 2 & 13 so even a F3rd would be fair to WC.

Either way it needs to work for both, mutually agreed trade and mutually agreed players left on the table.
WC will know who RICH are targeting at 3 & 4 so its very simple.

 

[Lyyynnnchy]

I really don't understand this kind of take from posters on here. At most, posters watched some highlights and at worst are just parroting what they've read. Even those posters on here taht that watch underage football are just amateurs.

How can the concensus #2 pick be this roundly dismissed?

He is tall & athletic beyond what most 2004cm 18 year olds are, has good skills, can football. Is there any possibility that professional talent scouts are seeing what he brings to the table long term, and not assuming he's the finished product at age 18? Whereas most talls are said to take longer to develop, he's seen as being able to play AFL in year 1, let alone what he'll be when he's in his mid-20s? That his size, athleticism and skills fit into the what the future of AFL is?


Not directing it specifically at you GoEaglesGoSGIO. But gee wizz Yeahnahmate was spot on with his STI comment.

I think there's a valid concern among posters that

1. He doesn't have a clearly defined position, is it ruck, is it a forward, is it the first 200+ cm midfielder ever. (Jackson very, very rarely attends a bounce or throw in with Darcy rucking)

• Given where the club is at, can we afford to blow a pick on a player that never in his career has a defined position and floats around as a jack of all trades
• Nicnat in the middle with Cox failed every time. 200cm just don't have the same agility and quick thinking as typical height midfielders

2. Taller players generally take longer to develop

• Given where we are as a club, do we have the luxury of waiting 5-7 years until he starts hitting his prime

3. Good quality rucks can generally be traded for

• Do we focus on the midfield, where we are badly beaten at constantly, through the draft, and try to trade for a ruck in the next year or 2.

4. Can we make do for now with our rucks if we had a decent midfield

• See Brisbane. We just about broke even in hitouts, centre clearances and didn't do too badly in total clearances against them. I suspect we were fairing even better to half and 3 qtr time
• does our sh*t midfield exasperate the poor quality of our rucks

 

[Weshi]

I really don't understand this kind of take from posters on here. At most, posters watched some highlights and at worst are just parroting what they've read. Even those posters on here taht that watch underage football are just amateurs.

How can the concensus #2 pick be this roundly dismissed?

He is tall & athletic beyond what most 2004cm 18 year olds are, has good skills, can football. Is there any possibility that professional talent scouts are seeing what he brings to the table long term, and not assuming he's the finished product at age 18? Whereas most talls are said to take longer to develop, he's seen as being able to play AFL in year 1, let alone what he'll be when he's in his mid-20s? That his size, athleticism and skills fit into the what the future of AFL is?


Not directing it specifically at you GoEaglesGoSGIO. But gee wizz Yeahnahmate was spot on with his STI comment.

I agree with most of your opinion on CDT my only point is on what basis is he the consensus #2 (taking out academy picks).
I assume you are basing it on the footy journo's and I would say they probably see more than most BF posters though how many of them are fully employed to watch AFL juniors over several years, I would think none. How many travel interstate to watch games and interview the players, coaches, families?
The true ranking of CDT is going to be based off the recruiting teams opinions and I have not seen anything from them.

 

[The Gtrain]

I've got it at 37.33% recurring

Leeeeeeeeeroy Jenkins

 

[daddy_4_eyes]

I agree with most of your opinion on CDT my only point is on what basis is he the consensus #2 (taking out academy picks).
I assume you are basing it on the footy journo's and I would say they probably see more than most BF posters though how many of them are fully employed to watch AFL juniors over several years, I would think none. How many travel interstate to watch games and interview the players, coaches, families?
The true ranking of CDT is going to be based off the recruiting teams opinions and I have not seen anything from them.

Cal Twomey, widely considered to have strong inside word across the AFL, has CDT as the 2nd best from the open pool.
Rookieme, who have affiliation with the AFL around talent development, likewise has him at #2.
Kevin Sheehan, AFL national talent manager, has CDT also at #2.

And that's ignoring journalists, who while some are just plagiarising their lists/analysis, many have enough contacts in the industry they're reporting on to write somewhat informed articles.

 

[Lazzas]

4. Can we make do for now with our rucks if we had a decent midfield

• See Brisbane. We just about broke even in hitouts, centre clearances and didn't do too badly in total clearances against them. I suspect we were fairing even better to half and 3 qtr time
• does our sh*t midfield exasperate the poor quality of our rucks

This is a very valid point, the Cats used to counter Nick Nat, by playing as defensive mids and pushing our mids underneath the ball drop.

I'm trying to work out if this will become more of the norm anyway with the bounce going or if better tap rucks become actually more important, with more predictability with ball ups.

 

[TwoStriders]

CDT does have some really intriguing points of difference compared to most 2m Ruck/KPP prospects.

His ground work/follow-up has particularly impressed me. He's got that cat-like ability to always land on his feet, knees bent and ready to spring forward after an aerial contest - so even if he loses a hitout or marking contest he can often still win the ball with his second effort.

Also very composed in traffic with great spatial awareness (basketball background blah blah blah). Knows where the tacklers, open space and his team-mates are and keeps the ball flowing in transition. Plays like a genuine extra link-up midfielder in this way. Which I get would be useful for Mini's gameplan.

Great running power for a tall. And in a few years will be a nightmare to match-up on. Too tall and good enough overhead to dominate smalls, but will turn tall players inside-out at ground level.

If he had the chops to be a primary ruck... he'd be perfect for us. But as many others have pointed out, his biggest issue is his lack of a true position. His best use IMO will be as a tall-utility who can chop out in the ruck.

He'd be a great player off the interchange because he could theoretically back-up your FF, or your FB, or your ruck, and even in the midfield for stints.

So do we want to use a top 2 pick on a guy who is a versatile back-up, but not a stand-out in any particular position?

I would say no, but I also won't melt if we do take him. There is a good enough foundation there for him to develop into something special with a few years in an AFL system.

 

[dinnaz]

Essendon fans have had it in their minds for like a month now that they're gonna be fleecing us for either picks 1 or 2. They really REALLY f*cking want Duursma, man.

Would we accept 5 plus a future 2nd for #1???

 

[Monocle]

I think a lot of the discussion has been taken a bit too far. It was fine to start out saying we’d rather take Sharp based on need than CDT at #2, or Sharp and Cumming at 5 and 6 compared to only CDT, but the amount of sh**-canning this kid has received when he’s by all measure a fantastic young player and will go on to do great things is a bit astounding.

Even as a CDT-doubter myself, we can still say he’s supremely talented

I think you need to divorce yourself from the notion that posters are shit-canning the kid per se, as I am not seeing that being posted.

What I am seeing is posters taking umbrage and disagreeing with the notion that CDT is the next Luke Jackson or TDK.

Most posters acknowledge that CDT has some very impressive traits that are rarely seen in a kid so big and young, however many are not convinced, or unsure that the skillset necessarily translates to the next level, it may do, but equally it may not either, hence the apprehension.

Coupled with this is the fact, that our recent drafting history has sadly, been hurt and scared with speculative picks of players with unique skill sets, but serious question marks as to where the skill set is utalised at the next level: Jarrod Brander, Tom Lamb, Matt Allen , then the plethora of flankers that we selected with midfield potential: Duggan, Venables, Foley, Petrucclee, Ainsworth. Winder, Chesser and Ginbey.

Then to make things worse, when we have had opportunity to actually get genuine midfielders, we have traded back and not utilised a pick that could have netted us a genuine midfielder.

So there should be some understanding as to why there is apprehension, as to again being speculative with a highly valuable piece of draft capital.

If we could pick up a genuine midfielder with pick 1, that would ease much of the apprehension about taking CDT at 2.

As it is this year it's projected that #1 is Duursma, who is clearly, talent wise, at the top of the list.

However there is no guarantee that he becomes a midfielder, although at worst , he would appear to project as a really accomplished and damaging wingman.

Posters have been.... and are ...... pissed off with year after year seeing on game day, us being smashed at centre clearances and stoppages, being outplayed at contested possessions and yet come draft time, fail to get ourselves multiple "needle movers" in that aspect of the game ( Harley being the exception ).

Until we get some genuine midfield help, the barbarians are going to be at the gate and voicing their displeasure if we again take speculative players and or flankers that have midfield potential.

So for the love of god, "IF", there are a couple of genuine midfielders in the draft at out pick FFS please take them.

The angst isn't directed at CDT the person, it's more so directed at our woeful drafting history and failure to draft what we desperately need ... genuine midfielders.

 

[Deplorable trumpster]

Cal Twomey, widely considered to have strong inside word across the AFL, has CDT as the 2nd best from the open pool.
Rookieme, who have affiliation with the AFL around talent development, likewise has him at #2.
Kevin Sheehan, AFL national talent manager, has CDT also at #2.

And that's ignoring journalists, who while some are just plagiarising their lists/analysis, many have enough contacts in the industry they're reporting on to write somewhat informed articles.

I agree. I don't understand how posters with no skill at evaluating junior footballers can have such strong opinions on potential draftees.

I would probably breathe a sigh of relief if we didn't take CDT just based on the fact that rucks are statistically proven to be the hardest players to evaluate when they are teenagers.

That being said, if they were still sure he was the best option for us at Pick 1 or 2 i wouldn't criticise or be angry about it. It's their job to make the call.

 

[Farmer Lister]

While it is generally accepted that rucks take 5+ years to develop, a lot of people seem to write off CDT as a ruck prospect when he hasn't even turned 18 yet. I get that we need on field support now so picking a project player doesn't seem like a good idea, given where we are at present.

Still, if CDT turns out to be an absolute monster, and Sharp simply a serviceable mid, there'll be much hand wringing about the choice we made.

 

[Barrybran]

I think you need to divorce yourself from the notion that posters are shit-canning the kid per se, as I am not seeing that being posted.

What I am seeing is posters taking umbrage and disagreeing with the issue that CDT is the next Luke Jackson or TDK.

Most posters acknowledge that CDT has some very impressive traits that are rarely seen in a kid so big and young, however many are not convinced, or unsure that the skillset necessarily translates to the next level, it may do, but equally it may not either, hence the apprehension.

Coupled with this is the fact, that our recent drafting history has sadly, been hurt and scared with speculative pick of players with unique skill sets, but serious question marks as to where the skill set is utalised at the next level: Jarrod Brander, Tom Lamb, Matt Allen , then the plethora of flankers that we selected with midfield potential: Duggan, Venables, Foley, Petrucclee, Ainsworth. Winder, Chesser and Ginbey.

Then to make things worse, when we have had opportunity to actually get a genuine midfields, we have traded back and not utilised a pick that could have netted us a genuine midfielder.

So there should be some understanding as to why there is apprehension, as to again being speculative with a highly valuable piece of draft capital.

If we could pick up a genuine midfielder with pick 1, that would ease much of the apprehension about taking CDT at 2.

As it is this year it's projected that #1 is Duursma, who is clearly, talent wise, at the top of the list.

However there is no guarantee that he becomes a midfielder, although at worst , he would appear to project as a really accomplished and damaging wingman.

Posters have been.... and are ...... pissed off with year after year seeing on game day, us being smashed at centre clearances and stoppages, being outplayed at contested possessions and yet come draft time, fail to get ourselves multiple "needle movers" in that aspect of the game ( Harley being the exception ).

Until we get some genuine midfield help, the barbarians are going to be at the gate and voicing their displeasure if we again take speculative players and or flankers that have midfield potential.

So for the love of god, "IF", there are a couple of genuine midfielders in the draft at out pick FFS please take them.

The angst isn't directed at CDT the person, it's more so directed at our woeful drafting history and failure to draft what we desperately need ... genuine midfielders.

Yep. Contested footy wins premierships. Sharp + Cumming.

 

[Balls In]

Duursma isn't a genuine midfielder. CDT isn't a genuine ruck. Sharp is the only "genuine" position player of the three, yet he has his own limitations. Sheer talent is always the differentiator, prioritise that.

 

[garlic munchers]

Still, if CDT turns out to be an absolute monster, and Sharp simply a serviceable mid, there'll be much hand wringing about the choice we made.

No there will be no hand wringing at all, not one bit.........

rather there will be just a self righteous, obnoxious, smug, self satisfied, won't let it go "told you all so" like I did when saying the "P" in SPS stands for potato, OA is injury prone, brockman is bang average, we overpaid for a tiny person who kicks like my son did in his first game of Auskick, we will be shite in 2025 and anyone thinking we will win more than 3 games is deluded, enough is enough...Petrol needs to be moved on etc etc etc etc



also, can probably handle being wrong once, as actually accepting that Garlic munchers could be fallible will only result in Garlic munchers becoming more perfect.

 

[Wooshaaaa]

I think there's a valid concern among posters that

1. He doesn't have a clearly defined position, is it ruck, is it a forward, is it the first 200+ cm midfielder ever. (Jackson very, very rarely attends a bounce or throw in with Darcy rucking)

• Given where the club is at, can we afford to blow a pick on a player that never in his career has a defined position and floats around as a jack of all trades
• Nicnat in the middle with Cox failed every time. 200cm just don't have the same agility and quick thinking as typical height midfielders

2. Taller players generally take longer to develop

• Given where we are as a club, do we have the luxury of waiting 5-7 years until he starts hitting his prime

3. Good quality rucks can generally be traded for

• Do we focus on the midfield, where we are badly beaten at constantly, through the draft, and try to trade for a ruck in the next year or 2.

4. Can we make do for now with our rucks if we had a decent midfield

• See Brisbane. We just about broke even in hitouts, centre clearances and didn't do too badly in total clearances against them. I suspect we were fairing even better to half and 3 qtr time
• does our sh*t midfield exasperate the poor quality of our rucks

Preach from the rafters. %

 

[PremiershipNo4]

Temu Jackson at extreme best.

I just hope the new ruck rules help his game

The good thing about your opinion, is the opposite is most likely the truth.
CDT locked in for 3 Brownlow's.

 

[tigger_ferret]

I agree. I don't understand how posters with no skill at evaluating junior footballers can have such strong opinions on potential draftees.

I would probably breathe a sigh of relief if we didn't take CDT just based on the fact that rucks are statistically proven to be the hardest players to evaluate when they are teenagers.

That being said, if they were still sure he was the best option for us at Pick 1 or 2 i wouldn't criticise or be angry about it. It's their job to make the call.

I have no issue with people questioning our recruiters decisions. We have come off the worst season ever and our recruiters and list management have a lot to answer for.

(I am aware there has been a bit of a clean out of these areas)

 

[Eastern Rangers]

I been trying to understand the hype behind CDT myself.

But say what you will about Cal Twoomey, but he is well connected in recruitment circles, so the hype must be real in said circles.

There’s group think that CDT is vastly overrated, I’m guilty too. But there must be something special about him for all this hype. It doesn’t make sense otherwise.

Hybrid athlete with great skills, that's rare in a young ruck. B.Williams is a more explosive type and lacks CDT skills. Clubs will believe they can teach him the craft as he's pretty competitive type.

His deficiencies are obvious given his lack of aerial attack and the fact he's more smooth moving than explosive in game play. The problem stems from talking him up as a unique athletic talent when there similar athletes who haven't performed at AFL with similar junior careers.

Placing that pressure on him is unfair and unjustified.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Temu Jackson at extreme best.

I just hope the new ruck rules help his game

Ideally B.Williams still has his best football ahead of him. Maybe for Tassie.

 

[Wooshaaaa]

Hybrid athlete with great skills, that's rare in a young ruck. B.Williams is a more explosive type and lacks CDT skills. Clubs will believe they can teach him the craft as he's pretty competitive type.

His deficiencies are obvious given his lack of aerial attack and the fact he's more smooth moving than explosive in game play. The problem stems from talking him up as a unique athletic talent when there similar athletes who haven't performed at AFL with similar junior careers.

Placing that pressure on him is unfair and unjustified.

Brander 2.0 come on down!

 

[dinnaz]

Hybrid athlete with great skills, that's rare in a young ruck. B.Williams is a more explosive type and lacks CDT skills. Clubs will believe they can teach him the craft as he's pretty competitive type.

His deficiencies are obvious given his lack of aerial attack and the fact he's more smooth moving than explosive in game play. The problem stems from talking him up as a unique athletic talent when there similar athletes who haven't performed at AFL with similar junior careers.

Placing that pressure on him is unfair and unjustified.

Skills aren't great especially for the last disposal i50.

Out of the players who played all games at the national champs CTD had the 6th worst disposal efficiency at 55%.

Also:
Charlie Banfield went at 56 %
Wes Walley was at 45%

 

[Eastern Rangers]

While it is generally accepted that rucks take 5+ years to develop, a lot of people seem to write off CDT as a ruck prospect when he hasn't even turned 18 yet. I get that we need on field support now so picking a project player doesn't seem like a good idea, given where we are at present.

Still, if CDT turns out to be an absolute monster, and Sharp simply a serviceable mid, there'll be much hand wringing about the choice we made.

The problem is it's speculation either way.

The facts are that rucks do take longer to develop. When the development occurs later, then the possibility that a player like Louis Emmet, for example, becomes better than Duff-Tyler is higher than it is when compared to midfielders. Harry Barnett is a perfect example of this; best of a bad bunch at the time, and he hasn't developed and might never come on.

I really like Axel Walsh and would take him ahead of 3 CDT's, but he might be the best he's ever going to be right now.

 

[Keys]

Drove to the eastern side of Toodyay to visit my in-laws yesterday so had some think time on the drive since my wife did her usual passenger princess routine and slept the whole way

Turned my mind to what it would take to move up from 13 to the pick 9 held by Carlton and who they would give us access to as potential selections

On face value picks 9,34,41 for picks 9,43 is pretty fair and would give Carlton an upgrade of 121 points. Dropping off 43 coming back would make it a no brainer as it’d give Carlton an extra 305 points

Seemed a no brainer. But it isn’t

In essence, Carlton’s draft position and requirements in matching a probable top 10 bid on Charlie Dean mean that there’s no incentive to trade out either pick 9 or 11 unless it is for a F1 pick

Neither Richmond or West Coast are likely to bid on Dean but they are likely to bid on the three northern academy kids at some point. That means that the earliest a bid will come for Dean is Essendon’s first pick which will be pick 8.

By that point Carlton’s picks will be 12 and 14. To match a bid at 8, Carlton would lose those two picks but get pick 17 back. If we had traded 13 for 9 (16 for 12 on draft night) Carlton would still lose their two R1 picks but only get pick 24 back. The extra points gained by having our later pick(s) back are of no value to them in matching a bid

Working through the scenarios, Carlton can basically get Dean and use another R1 pick in the mid teens without doing any trades. So there’s no incentive for them to do so, unless they trade out for a F1 pick from another club

So trading up for 9 isn’t likely going to be an option for us. The good news is that the first of Carlton’s picks will be lost to bid matching and the second one will be pushed behind ours - so instead of drafting the 13th best player in the open pool we will be looking at the 11th best

By that point the following are certainly/most likely off the board:

• Duursma
• Duff-Tytler
• Robey
• X Taylor
• Sharp
• Schubert

That would give us a choice between at least 3 of the following after Melbourne x2, Hawthorn and GWS take their picks:

• Cumming
• Grlj
• Marsh
• Greeves
• Dovaston
• Farrow
• Lindsay

If somehow Cumming gets past Melbourne and is there at Hawthorn’s pick I’d be offering them our St Kilda F2 to move up two spots

Otherwise the best outcome would be Farrow, Dovaston or perhaps Lindsay being one of the players getting through

 

[amazingjoshy]

Drove to the eastern side of Toodyay to visit my in-laws yesterday so had some think time on the drive since my wife did her usual passenger princess routine and slept the whole way

Turned my mind to what it would take to move up from 13 to the pick 9 held by Carlton and who they would give us access to as potential selections

On face value picks 9,34,41 for picks 9,43 is pretty fair and would give Carlton an upgrade of 121 points. Dropping off 43 coming back would make it a no brainer as it’d give Carlton an extra 305 points

Seemed a no brainer. But it isn’t

In essence, Carlton’s draft position and requirements in matching a probable top 10 bid on Charlie Dean mean that there’s no incentive to trade out either pick 9 or 11 unless it is for a F1 pick

Neither Richmond or West Coast are likely to bid on Dean but they are likely to bid on the three northern academy kids at some point. That means that the earliest a bid will come for Dean is Essendon’s first pick which will be pick 8.

By that point Carlton’s picks will be 12 and 14. To match a bid at 8, Carlton would lose those two picks but get pick 17 back. If we had traded 13 for 9 (16 for 12 on draft night) Carlton would still lose their two R1 picks but only get pick 24 back. The extra points gained by having our later pick(s) back are of no value to them in matching a bid

Working through the scenarios, Carlton can basically get Dean and use another R1 pick in the mid teens without doing any trades. So there’s no incentive for them to do so, unless they trade out for a F1 pick from another club

So trading up for 9 isn’t likely going to be an option for us. The good news is that the first of Carlton’s picks will be lost to bid matching and the second one will be pushed behind ours - so instead of drafting the 13th best player in the open pool we will be looking at the 11th best

By that point the following are certainly/most likely off the board:

• Duursma
• Duff-Tytler
• Robey
• X Taylor
• Sharp
• Schubert

That would give us a choice between at least 3 of the following after Melbourne x2, Hawthorn and GWS take their picks:

• Cumming
• Grlj
• Marsh
• Greeves
• Dovaston
• Farrow
• Lindsay

If somehow Cumming gets past Melbourne and is there at Hawthorn’s pick I’d be offering them our St Kilda F2 to move up two spots

Otherwise the best outcome would be Farrow, Dovaston or perhaps Lindsay being one of the players getting through

Imagine if your wife was awake you could've explained this all to her