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

 

[Bacchus]

Twomey has Sharp at 9
ESPN at 11
Sportingnews at 7
Zerohanger at 10

Those are the first four Google results. Even the BigFooty phantom draft threads with various posters has Sharp nowhere near 2.

What are these guys missing that apparently the fans here at BigFooty are picking up? Why is Dyson Sharp consensus number 2 amongst many of you? Serious question.

If you take out the three QLD midfielders and Dean, Sharp is actually pick 5 or 6, the gap is not that much.
One draft watch has CDT at thirteen. There is not much between their rating.

 

[FootyOutlier]

1. Duursma, Sharp, Cumming
2. Duursma, Sharp, Dovaston
3. Duursma, Sharp, F1 (RICH/ESS/NM/MELB)

Or reality. Duursma, Robey, Farrow

 

[Bacchus]

I understand that, don't get me wrong, but are we saying these draft watchers are getting it wrong for our team too? Everyone is rating CDT above Sharp, for example. At pick 2, should we be drafting for need instead of clear best available? Well, clearly better than Sharp, anyway.

I don’t think the draft watchers are really thinking about or know our team.

 

[Forward Press]

Well what if we take Duursma at 1, then bid on Uwland then Patterson then Annable then Dean then take Sharp at 6? Not far away from where he is rated in the pool at all.

Fair, of course it then more closely matches the phantom drafts.

I'm happy either way, I will back whoever is read out on the night.

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

1. Duursma, Sharp, Cumming
2. Duursma, Sharp, Dovaston
3. Duursma, Sharp, F1 (RICH/ESS/NM/MELB)

I could go with any of these 3. With 34 and 41, we will have options on other mids (Leray, Dalton, BOB) or a tall. By the time we get to 34, we will only need a list space so we could also look at trading up one the Suns picks get gobbled up.

I could see St Blunders knocking on our door if Phillipou mark II is still there with our pick 13 offering a F1.

 

[PremiershipNo4]

Yes I too cant wait for

CDT struggling in twos (cant see him projecting/do better then first year Archer who has good hands. He 100% will not do better then first yearJobe)

Duursma struggling on the AFL wing since its a hard position

Farrow having no set position as we are stacked in HBF already.


I like the Duursma and Farrow (hbf with elite kick) pick but I call it like I see it. The odd one out is CDT

Our best recruit this offseason and performer for next is Dev by the legnth of flemmington

CDT can kick a goal from 55m so he’s got Archer covered by the width of the Flemington straight.

 

[Balls In]

So much paralysis by analysis going on here. The only thing that matters is getting at least 3 bona fide A grade 200+ game players from those first three picks. Don't get too cute with it. Get the best available and don't **** it up.

 

[kobe0824]

AsterixTheGaul - interested in your view.

Does the development of Charlie Banfield (particularly later in 2025 season) change the Eagles drafting focus for Pick 2? Is Banfield projected to be a good enough midfielder such that a Sharp or Robey is less of a priority than CDT?

 

[CoastersFlag No.5]

So much paralysis by analysis going on here. The only thing that matters is getting at least 3 bona fide A grade 200+ game players from those first three picks. Don't get too cute with it. Get the best available and don't **** it up.

Easy how hard can it be?! I will hope whoever we pick goes well.

 

[juice568]

AsterixTheGaul - interested in your view.

Does the development of Charlie Banfield (particularly later in 2025 season) change the Eagles drafting focus for Pick 2? Is Banfield projected to be a good enough midfielder such that a Sharp or Robey is less of a priority than CDT?

Dont think so

 

[Peptide Pig]

Multiple head recruiters at clubs nowhere near the pointy end of the draft have Sharp as a top 2 player in the open pool and top 4 outright.

This is in contrast to the cohort of amateur power ranking junkies who copy each other's work. I include Cal in this who just watches the odd game in Victoria.

Who? Have you spoken to them? They don’t. Provide names and quotes or you are talking shite.

There are a plethora of random rankings out there which I wouldn’t bother reading. I’m not sure what your definition of amateur is but Twomey does it for a job, like professionally, and he is incredibly accurate. Most other ranks are just variations of his.

He also speaks to actual scouts and recruiters (not make believe ones like you have referenced), therefore doesn’t have to watch every single game and make his own assessment, although I would guarantee he watches a lot more than most casual footy fans and more than “the odd game in Victoria”.

I don’t exactly enjoy his content and cringe references, but to suggest he doesn’t know his stuff is just wrong and clearly you are only stating it because his professional intel doesn’t align with your amateur opinion.

Seriously, cal does his ranking based on conversations he has, imitation as you've eluded to and watching videos like the rest of us. And, he is the mouthpiece if the AFL, that need clicks and engagement.

I mean yeah kinda… but there’s a difference in a conversation between random footy fans versus professional discussions had between people who actually shape the draft order and make the selections. Just like there’s a difference between watching a couple of YouTube clips on the dunny versus the footage that is analyzed by recruiters and how that reflects what clubs are actually looking for.

I really don’t mind who shares or doesn’t share my opinion, but if you’re going to say a decision is weak just because you have a different opinion rather than on merit there’s going to be some push back.

There are 18 head recruiters and team whose opinions determine the actual draft order. Come draft night Cal generally gets that pretty right but just because he’s got a particular view a month out that’s certainly not going to sway mine.

FYI it was another poster that called your opinion weak, not I. The discussions and opinions are what BF is all about, but when we start discounting experts and trying to weight our nuffy opinions above the professionals then it looks pretty dumb. But I can respect you sticking to your guns

 

[Balls In]

Easy how hard can it be?! I will hope whoever we pick goes well.

I just reckon drafting to fill positional gaps by selecting player types isn't the way to go at this stage of our rebuild. It's too limiting seeing as we lack class all over the ground. At this stage of our rebuild having access to the front end of the draft means prioritising best available, end of. Pretty choofed there's a talented big man thereabouts though, just saying.

 

[Wedgetailed Westerner]

I don't want Sharp unless it's with our current third pick or a manipulated third pick.

Come at me inside mid cuck lords.

Remember that time with Corey Adamson

 

[Peptide Pig]

so let me get this straight.. taking sharp over robey is considered the reach ? Robey who had a month of good footy at u18 level?
What timeline is this ?


People treat group think rankings like gospel at this time of year.

Duursma + sharp is a huge win as far as I’m concerned. Who ever slips at 13 is the cherry on the top.

Yes. You can dismiss the experts all you want but no one is taking Sharp above Robey. The fact that Sharp was better as an underager is irrelevant.

The biggest group think is the stiffys on here for Sharp. I don’t think anyone would be unhappy if Sharp slid to our third pick (very possible) but pick 2 is a reach. Alternatively split pick 2 and grab Sharp plus something else but we bang on about taking the best talent at 1 & 2 so a split seems counterintuitive now, especially if we can move up to Carlton’s pick and get another decent kid… maybe even Sharp!

 

[uptheWC]

Yes. You can dismiss the experts all you want but no one is taking Sharp above Robey. The fact that Sharp was better as an underager is irrelevant.

The biggest group think is the stiffys on here for Sharp. I don’t think anyone would be unhappy if Sharp slid to our third pick (very possible) but pick 2 is a reach. Alternatively split pick 2 and grab Sharp plus something else but we bang on about taking the best talent at 1 & 2 so a split seems counterintuitive now, especially if we can move up to Carlton’s pick and get another decent kid… maybe even Sharp!

Sharp has had a 10x better year than Robey had this year as well

 

[Barrybran]

Yes. You can dismiss the experts all you want but no one is taking Sharp above Robey. The fact that Sharp was better as an underager is irrelevant.

The biggest group think is the stiffys on here for Sharp. I don’t think anyone would be unhappy if Sharp slid to our third pick (very possible) but pick 2 is a reach. Alternatively split pick 2 and grab Sharp plus something else but we bang on about taking the best talent at 1 & 2 so a split seems counterintuitive now, especially if we can move up to Carlton’s pick and get another decent kid… maybe even Sharp!

I think twce13 put things very well. Selecting Robey at 2 would be some leap of faith. Duff-Tytler, I would understand, as he has been highly touted all year, showed some things in his VFL outing, and backed up with his combine performance. There's a lot of recency bias about Robey.

 

[uncleoatmeal]

What pick gives us a chance at sharp? Ie what do we need to trade up to from 13 to be in with a shot.

 

[eaglevision]

FYI it was another poster that called your opinion weak, not I. The discussions and opinions are what BF is all about, but when we start discounting experts and trying to weight our nuffy opinions above the professionals then it looks pretty dumb. But I can respect you sticking to your guns

I know you didn’t make that comment, he called what was perceived as retention being the reason for drafting weak when it was in fact a side effect and not the reason.

Cal et al often make comments that make you go back and watch the footage again because you may have missed something but their opinions shouldn’t influence yours if you’re watching the draftees objectively. You call it as you see it.

 

[txbyhull]

Likely one of melbournes picks at least

What pick gives us a chance at sharp? Ie what do we need to trade up to from 13 to be in with a shot.

 

[Keys]

What pick gives us a chance at sharp? Ie what do we need to trade up to from 13 to be in with a shot.

Likely one of melbournes picks at least

If we trade up to Carlton’s pick 9 and ignoring academy players:

1. Willem Duursma - WCE
2. Cooper Duff-Tytler - WCE
3. Sullivan Robey - Richmond
4. Sam Grlj - Richmond
5. Sam Cumming - Essendon
6. Aidan Schubert - Essendon
7. Xavier Taylor - Melbourne
8. Lachy Dovaston - Melbourne
9. Dyson Sharp - WCE

Now before anyone pipes up to say that’s unrealistic, the only change I’ve made to the names in the top 8 from the ESPN phantom published today is to elevate Schubert such that Sharp slips from 7 in theirs to 9 here (I’ve also slightly rearranged which order players are picked from 3-8)

The key is Richmond picking Grlj as he isn’t linked as strongly to Essendon and Melbourne as he seems to be to Richmond. If Richmond pick Robey and Taylor for example, Grlj may slip out of that top 8

Probably then need Essendon or Melbourne to take a tall (Schubert) and both of them to prioritise outside types over Sharp - Melbourne have Langford so might pass on Sharp

It’s unlikely, but there is a path that sees Sharp slide to the first Carlton pick.

How we get that pick is another matter but 13,34,41 for 9,43 should go close along with a silent nod to forget Dean exists

 

[eaglevision]

How we get that pick is another matter but 13,34,41 for 9,43 should go close along with a silent nod to forget Dean exists

If we can get 9 I think 2,9 for 5,6 is very much in play. Using your trade net result being:

2,13,34,41 for 5,6,43.

Yes I’d do it after Richmond tell us they are taking two of Robey, Taylor and Grlj.

 

[txbyhull]

This is how a perfect draft for us I think plays out, trading up for 9.

WCE - Duursma
WCE - CDT
RIC - Robey
RIC - Grlj
ESS - Cumming
ESS - X Taylor
MEL - Dovaston
MEL - Literally anyone that’s not Sharp
WCE - Sharp

 

[txbyhull]

Keys I think I’ve asked this before, but how does the DVI change after bid matching? For example, if Carlton bid with 11 worth 1205 points, a new pick cannot then be recalculated in a subsequent bid matching process at 1205 can it? Am I right in saying it’s removed from the order entirely the same way the pick is?

Our later picks, in the 50s, will they not be as useful for bid matching if this is the case? Regardless of how far they come in due to prior picks being eaten up?

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

AsterixTheGaul - interested in your view.

Does the development of Charlie Banfield (particularly later in 2025 season) change the Eagles drafting focus for Pick 2? Is Banfield projected to be a good enough midfielder such that a Sharp or Robey is less of a priority than CDT?

Yes, I am now seeing Charlie as a balanced mid. I would be ok taking Sharp and Banfield.

In fact my desired outcome is

1. Duursma at 1
2. Sharp at 2
3. Dovaston at 13 (maybe trade up using 34)
4. Banfield matched
5. Curtin or a tall at 34 or 41
6. Evans Walley Williams slide through to the rookie list

Assuming it is Dev plus someone like Will Phillips as pure mids in the rookie list, we meet needs. If we don’t get a tall in the draft, I’d get Stumpf to train on. I’d like to see him play CHB

 

[Keys]

Keys I think I’ve asked this before, but how does the DVI change after bid matching? For example, if Carlton bid with 11 worth 1205 points, a new pick cannot then be recalculated in a subsequent bid matching process at 1205 can it? Am I right in saying it’s removed from the order entirely the same way the pick is?

Our later picks, in the 50s, will they not be as useful for bid matching if this is the case? Regardless of how far they come in due to prior picks being eaten up?

The draft order is a live beast once the draft starts with picks constantly moving up and down as bids are made and matched

I’ll use a bid on Uwland at pick 2 as an example and assume it’s matched by Gold Coast

• Pick 2 becomes Zeke Uwland and all the following picks move back one spot (2 becomes 3, 3 becomes 4 and so on)
• Gold Coast need 2233 points to match. The picks they hold before the bid was lodged are 15,18,24 which have a combined value of 2430 points - an excess of 197 points which is equivalent to pick 43
• So picks 15,18,24 are deleted and the order resets - so our pick 34 for example goes up to 35 with Uwland added in then down to 32 with the three matching picks removed
• Gold Coast are then given pick 43 which slots into the revised order and each pick after that gets pushed back one place

That process is repeated each time a bid is made.

It’s important to note that whatever points value clubs hold at the start of the draft will change each time a bid is matched as the draft picks have whatever value they shift to. So again using pick 34 as an example, it will have a higher points value after the Uwland bid than it did prior because it’s now pick 32 and not 34

I hope all that makes sense