Draft whispers, rumours & scuttlebut

[Adoyle]

Can this topic please get back to draft rumours or change the thread name please??

 

[TwentyNine]

I hear all the clubs are chasing a weitering/Weideman hybrid called 'weiderman'

Weiderman
Weiderman
Does whatever a weider can

 

[blueiris]

I hear all the clubs are chasing a weitering/Weideman hybrid called 'weiderman'

Weitderman

 

[SumTingWong]

You can't compare SOS to anyone defender from the modern era because he was allowed to punch, hold, scrag, push, pinch, {redacted}, abuse anybody he played on. But SOS played on some of the best FF's the game has ever known.
Scarlett was the best offensive backmen of the three but in the second half of his career barely actually played on a key forward of note.
Rance is a great defender who plays on the best forward every week with severe restrictions on defensive tactics compared to any other era and can often provide rebound that would seem impossible to most. If he continues his career the way it is going he will be the equal of the three but let us wait until his career is at least almost over to make that call.

P.S. I thought this thread was about draft whispers?

 

[hepd]

It's not really Brisbane that concerns me, it's the fact that Sydney and GWS seem to be producing anywhere between 1-4 prospects each year and getting a free hit at them. Sydney have had two top 5 prospects in Heeney and Mills despite finishing top 4 the last two years. GWS have had years of concessions and are now producing multiple highly rated prospects. These are teams that are not in need of extra assistance, particularly Sydney, who have had two flags in the past decade.

I was thinking about this and there's a few things I wanted to point out. For one, these clubs finance their academies themselves so if you remove the drafting privileges, there's no incentives to actually run these academies because why funnel money into a player's development if another team reaps the rewards. So unless the AFL offers to fund these themselves and keep them viable, it wouldn't make sense to remove the privileges unless you want to massively hinder the growth of the sport in NSW and QLD.

A solution could be perhaps join the academies in QLD as well as NSW so Sydney and the Giants have to bid for NSW kids as a collective and Brisbane/GCS bid for theirs which might drive the paying price up.

Also, if you consider Sydney's situation, the idea that they've had to sacrifice ALL their draft picks really compromises the position of their list - instead of bringing in several youngsters to develop, they're only able to bring in one (albeit a gun) and that's just not sustainable with an ageing list unless they're going to rely on trading or FA for list regeneration. Additionally, they've stockpiled picks which 'shows their hand' so clubs know that they're only interested in Mills and could bid earlier to make them pay overs. I'll also add that Lloyd Perris and Jack Hiscox were also very highly rated talents picked up by Sydney through the academy but at the moment, are looking like busts.

So while it seems like a huge advantage, the points system has done really well to try minimise this. It could be tweaked better though.

 

[philthy05]

For one, these clubs finance their academies themselves so if you remove the drafting privileges, there's no incentives to actually run these academies because why funnel money into a player's development if another team reaps the rewards.

The crows and port Adelaide pretty much almost entirely funded the sanfl for years so interstate teams could draft griffin , Trengove , waters , hurn , Pavlich , Cooney , Ebert , Polec , Mayes and dozens more. These players were developed in the sanfl.

If the people running the clubs have zero interest in helping to develop players and the game in the region regardless of whether they have first shot at them or not then you probably have the wrong people running the clubs.

 

[Apex36]

I was thinking about this and there's a few things I wanted to point out. For one, these clubs finance their academies themselves so if you remove the drafting privileges, there's no incentives to actually run these academies because why funnel money into a player's development if another team reaps the rewards. So unless the AFL offers to fund these themselves and keep them viable, it wouldn't make sense to remove the privileges unless you want to massively hinder the growth of the sport in NSW and QLD.

I've been saying for ages that the AFL should be funding and running the academies if the end game is growing the sport in the northern states. The current implementation is what I don't agree with, not the concept.

A solution could be perhaps join the academies in QLD as well as NSW so Sydney and the Giants have to bid for NSW kids as a collective and Brisbane/GCS bid for theirs which might drive the paying price up.

That would be a complicated solution which would still provide northern clubs with an advantage, particularly with the current points system.

Also, if you consider Sydney's situation, the idea that they've had to sacrifice ALL their draft picks really compromises the position of their list - instead of bringing in several youngsters to develop, they're only able to bring in one (albeit a gun) and that's just not sustainable with an ageing list unless they're going to rely on trading or FA for list regeneration. Additionally, they've stockpiled picks which 'shows their hand' so clubs know that they're only interested in Mills and could bid earlier to make them pay overs.

Mills has been regarded as top 3-5 all year anyway and Sydney know it. It's doubtful that Carlton or Brisbane will bid on him, so worst case scenario is pick 3 which they've been planning for anyway. As for the comment about using all their picks? Wha...?
Heeney cost them pick 18 last year and Mills will cost them equivalent to their first, second, and a couple of picks traded in after 30. Sounds steep, but it's not bad given how shallow the draft is this year. And Hawthorn have proven that smart trading and FA can keep you at the top. Sydney's main issue will be how the hell they're going to find money for their young guns with Buddy and Tippett taking up stupid amounts of salary cap.

I'll also add that Lloyd Perris and Jack Hiscox were also very highly rated talents picked up by Sydney through the academy but at the moment, are looking like busts.

Weren't first round prospects. Can't expect every guy who comes through the system to be a star.

So while it seems like a huge advantage, the points system has done really well to try minimise this. It could be tweaked better though.

It's helped, but it's still broken imo.

 

[Happy Daze]

You can't compare SOS to anyone defender from the modern era because he was allowed to punch, hold, scrag, push, pinch, rape, abuse anybody he played on. But SOS played on some of the best FF's the game has ever known.
Scarlett was the best offensive backmen of the three but in the second half of his career barely actually played on a key forward of note.
Rance is a great defender who plays on the best forward every week with severe restrictions on defensive tactics compared to any other era and can often provide rebound that would seem impossible to most. If he continues his career the way it is going he will be the equal of the three but let us wait until his career is at least almost over to make that call.

P.S. I thought this thread was about draft whispers?

Re: SOS, that cuts both ways though. The full-forwards of that time were allowed to do the same thing, scragging etc. How would Rance go in a wrestling match with prime Tony Lockett or Gary Ablett Snr? Because the direction the game has gone in Rance gets a lot more help from his fellow defensive backs; its very rare you'll see a full-forward have a one on one match up in the forward line as other defenders provide chop-outs/3rd man up etc. All Silvagni had was himself. I would argue full-backs have it a lot easier these days compared to back then, and the lack of goals compartively from full-forwards these days proves that point. SOS has 5 All-Australians, and that takes into account the fact there was no such thing as All-Australians for the first seven years of his career.

As for Scarlett: Rance hasn't won one premiership yet, let alone three, let alone all the other decorations Scarlett has. Any claims Rance is anywhere near either of these players is absurd; I guess though this digression on this thread has provided some entertainment for us neutral fans, seeing how deluded some fans are is gigglesome. What next in terms of claims by Tigers fans? Cotchin the equal of Voss? Deledio a better outside-inside player than 2003-Judd? Vickery in terms of talent somewhere between NRoo and Carey? Those are very similar comparisons to Rance and SOS/Scarlett.

 

[SumTingWong]

Re: SOS, that cuts both ways though. The full-forwards of that time were allowed to do the same thing, scragging etc. How would Rance go in a wrestling match with prime Tony Lockett or Gary Ablett Snr? Because the direction the game has gone in Rance gets a lot more help from his fellow defensive backs; its very rare you'll see a full-forward have a one on one match up in the forward line as other defenders provide chop-outs/3rd man up etc. All Silvagni had was himself. I would argue full-backs have it a lot easier these days compared to back then, and the lack of goals from compartively from full-forwards proves that point. SOS has 5 All-Australians, and that takes into account the fact there was no such thing as All-Australians for the first seven years of his career.

As for Scarlett: Rance hasn't won one premiership yet, let alone three, let alone all the other decorations Scarlett has. Any claims Rance is anywhere near either of these players is absurd; I guess though this digression on this thread has provided some entertainment for us neutral fans, seeing how deluded some fans are is gigglesome. What next in terms of claims by Tigers fans? Cotchin the equal of Voss? Deledio a better outside-inside player than 2003-Judd? Vickery in terms of talent somewhere between NRoo and Carey? Those are very similar comparisons to Rance and SOS/Scarlett.

You are clueless. But witnessing that rabble from the western suburbs for the last few years will do that to you I guess.

 

[Super Hans]

Alex Rance is the greatest player ever.

 

[THE_GUN]

Re: SOS, that cuts both ways though. The full-forwards of that time were allowed to do the same thing, scragging etc. How would Rance go in a wrestling match with prime Tony Lockett or Gary Ablett Snr? Because the direction the game has gone in Rance gets a lot more help from his fellow defensive backs; its very rare you'll see a full-forward have a one on one match up in the forward line as other defenders provide chop-outs/3rd man up etc. All Silvagni had was himself. I would argue full-backs have it a lot easier these days compared to back then, and the lack of goals compartively from full-forwards these days proves that point. SOS has 5 All-Australians, and that takes into account the fact there was no such thing as All-Australians for the first seven years of his career.

As for Scarlett: Rance hasn't won one premiership yet, let alone three, let alone all the other decorations Scarlett has. Any claims Rance is anywhere near either of these players is absurd; I guess though this digression on this thread has provided some entertainment for us neutral fans, seeing how deluded some fans are is gigglesome. What next in terms of claims by Tigers fans? Cotchin the equal of Voss? Deledio a better outside-inside player than 2003-Judd? Vickery in terms of talent somewhere between NRoo and Carey? Those are very similar comparisons to Rance and SOS/Scarlett.

Carey,Richardson,Mooney and few other past gun fowards have mentioned that they would have loved to have played now with all the restrictions on what the backman can and cant do. The main thing is chopping of the arms and pushing players out of contests.

Your point about how rance would go against lockett and ablett - its always going to be a contentious issue and there is never a right or wrong but if you look at rance and his playing style i think he would do well as he is extremely athletic as well as being very very strong
Tony Lockett was 191cm and 118kgs - He was a monster that bullied players out of contests, sos was 194cm and 95 kgs and similar to rance very agile and athletic so i believe against both ablett and lockett it would have been similar out comes

Many people believe that Lance Franklin is the best foward to have played the game and just about all full backs say that thank god they didnt have to play on franklin but rance destroys franklin just about every time

Glen Jakovich was another player that could be considered to be 1 of the great backman and he is on record as saying that alex rance is up there with the best full backs and if continues his current trend could be the best, He also mentioned that it is harder to defend today than in his playing days.

Now when you mention scarlett and his premierships in an argument about the playing talent of individual players , All you do is lose credibility as Bob Skilton is a much better player than Matthew Suckling and Mathew Richardson was a better foward than David Hale but on your criteria the premierships out weigh other achievements.

There is no prefect formula to get a result when comparing past to present and the longer the past is the better they were, But im 52 and can just go by what i witnessed and the last 2-3 years rance's performances are just as good as anything that i seen from SOS the only difference is at the time sos was playing he was the only full back that could do these things but these days its starting to become the norm.

 

[The Major]

I was thinking about this and there's a few things I wanted to point out. For one, these clubs finance their academies themselves so if you remove the drafting privileges, there's no incentives to actually run these academies because why funnel money into a player's development if another team reaps the rewards. So unless the AFL offers to fund these themselves and keep them viable, it wouldn't make sense to remove the privileges unless you want to massively hinder the growth of the sport in NSW and QLD.

A solution could be perhaps join the academies in QLD as well as NSW so Sydney and the Giants have to bid for NSW kids as a collective and Brisbane/GCS bid for theirs which might drive the paying price up.

Also, if you consider Sydney's situation, the idea that they've had to sacrifice ALL their draft picks really compromises the position of their list - instead of bringing in several youngsters to develop, they're only able to bring in one (albeit a gun) and that's just not sustainable with an ageing list unless they're going to rely on trading or FA for list regeneration. Additionally, they've stockpiled picks which 'shows their hand' so clubs know that they're only interested in Mills and could bid earlier to make them pay overs. I'll also add that Lloyd Perris and Jack Hiscox were also very highly rated talents picked up by Sydney through the academy but at the moment, are looking like busts.

So while it seems like a huge advantage, the points system has done really well to try minimise this. It could be tweaked better though.

Thanks for seeing them as they are.

And that's good for the game.

 

[Apex36]

Thanks for seeing them as they are.

And that's good for the game.

Witts to GWS?

 

[Happy Daze]

You are clueless. But witnessing that rabble from the western suburbs for the last few years will do that to you I guess.

I think the general consensus on here is that I'm not the clueless one.

 

[Adoyle]

Oh ffs would somebody change the name of this thread, there's about 2 posts related to draft rumours and the rest belongs elsewhere

 

[hepd]

I've been saying for ages that the AFL should be funding and running the academies if the end game is growing the sport in the northern states. The current implementation is what I don't agree with, not the concept.


That would be a complicated solution which would still provide northern clubs with an advantage, particularly with the current points system.

Mills has been regarded as top 3-5 all year anyway and Sydney know it. It's doubtful that Carlton or Brisbane will bid on him, so worst case scenario is pick 3 which they've been planning for anyway. As for the comment about using all their picks? Wha...?
Heeney cost them pick 18 last year and Mills will cost them equivalent to their first, second, and a couple of picks traded in after 30. Sounds steep, but it's not bad given how shallow the draft is this year. And Hawthorn have proven that smart trading and FA can keep you at the top. Sydney's main issue will be how the hell they're going to find money for their young guns with Buddy and Tippett taking up stupid amounts of salary cap.

Weren't first round prospects. Can't expect every guy who comes through the system to be a star.


It's helped, but it's still broken imo.

That's fine, that's your opinion and it's completely valid but I'm just pointing out that the advantages aren't as clear cut as you might like to see them to be. The system isn't perfect and needs some tweaking but it's heading in the right direction. The points system is a hugely exponential curve so you're paying top dollar for the first few picks.

Heeney was a big problem, that's something I don't agree with and that's something the points system was implemented to fix. Yes, Sydney use ALL their picks to pick up a gun in Mills so instead of regenerating your list with say 5-6 kids, you've got one which means the list progressively gets older faster and there's no guarantee Mills will make it - if he doesn't, massive repercussions for Sydney, especially if they go into deficit this year. I don't see how Hawthorn is relevant to this discussion - if anything, it just proves the academies aren't a huge advantage if you do smart trading and FA.

Perris was touted to be a top 20 pick - but under AFL rules, was listed as a rookie under Sydney because he didn't enter the draft (which obviously, was a huge flaw by the AFL).

Obviously, we're going off topic, happy to move discussion to PM if you want.

 

[Keystone agony]

My opinion is that Curnow is a more modern day midfeilder. Like his long running family he has a huge tank already. Just needs to improve on his disposal a little and his game awareness somewhat more and he's this year's draft Watson. The Essendon kind not the blues sort

I dont think he will be much better than the blues one.

Is not a midfielder just because you can run all day which is questionable 14.5 isnt massive. Alot of the afl mids would be going around in 15s/16s.

Tomlinson can also run all day is abput 193cm give or take from memory but hes never gonna be a midfielder. He has a better tank then Curnow.

I just dont see the midfield attributes in Curnow from what ive seen - which may not be enough but confident enough to call it

 

[Keystone agony]

To keep on topic bombers mostly aligned to Weideman and Oliver at 4/5 it seems

Rioli if available at 24/25 i reckon we will also take him. Done a fair bit of ground work on him it seems

 

[Taylor]

I was thinking about this and there's a few things I wanted to point out. For one, these clubs finance their academies themselves so if you remove the drafting privileges, there's no incentives to actually run these academies because why funnel money into a player's development if another team reaps the rewards. So unless the AFL offers to fund these themselves and keep them viable, it wouldn't make sense to remove the privileges unless you want to massively hinder the growth of the sport in NSW and QLD.

A solution could be perhaps join the academies in QLD as well as NSW so Sydney and the Giants have to bid for NSW kids as a collective and Brisbane/GCS bid for theirs which might drive the paying price up.

Also, if you consider Sydney's situation, the idea that they've had to sacrifice ALL their draft picks really compromises the position of their list - instead of bringing in several youngsters to develop, they're only able to bring in one (albeit a gun) and that's just not sustainable with an ageing list unless they're going to rely on trading or FA for list regeneration. Additionally, they've stockpiled picks which 'shows their hand' so clubs know that they're only interested in Mills and could bid earlier to make them pay overs. I'll also add that Lloyd Perris and Jack Hiscox were also very highly rated talents picked up by Sydney through the academy but at the moment, are looking like busts.

So while it seems like a huge advantage, the points system has done really well to try minimise this. It could be tweaked better though.

Funding the academies is a good point, I'm sure that Essendon would enjoy the same if they were allowed to but the WA sides get to pay for the WAFL development programming and get no priority access.

Also, would all teams trade all their picks to get a top five pick? Yes. If the AFL allowed a club to trade in three picks in the 20s for a top five pick there would be a rush on AFL house to do it.

Personally I didn't take issue with the father son and academy plsyer process before, it was just the benefit of having a strong culture that kept touch with families and helped the young men develop, for the teams without the 20 year history the academies performed the same role.

The only issue I had with it was that the players who should be top ten could potentially miss out on a better base contract value because their #5 ranking turned into #28 draft placing etc but many of the father son picks I remember had signed deals on even better money than the base draft deal anyway.

 

[Funk]

.... and had private training sessions with Hooker!!

You mean EFC set him up with a hooker?

Seriously - that club will do whatever it takes!

 

[Funk]

Well with pick 6 & 16 I dont think the GC will bother the lions much this draft in bidding. No way will they bid on Keays or Hipwood at pick 6... and pick 16 would be around the mark anyway

Still.. It would be great if the northern clubs just stayed clear of bidding on each other year after year... just to piss eddie off if nothing else

Nothing stopping the Pies bidding - except they traded all their picks!

 

[HalAlaric]

I dont think he will be much better than the blues one.

Is not a midfielder just because you can run all day which is questionable 14.5 isnt massive. Alot of the afl mids would be going around in 15s/16s.

Tomlinson can also run all day is abput 193cm give or take from memory but hes never gonna be a midfielder. He has a better tank then Curnow.

I just dont see the midfield attributes in Curnow from what ive seen - which may not be enough but confident enough to call it

Well you shouldn't be confident enough. He was out for over half the season so of course he's aerobic levels at the combine would suffer.

Did you ever seen the kid play when he was 15-17? Played through the midfield with great ability and used to break through tackles. Played just fwd this year as was returning from a long stint on the bench.

The kid ain't no Judd and definitely not worth a #3 pick in comparison to others but very doubtful he will be around at the Blues 2nd or 3rd pick.

 

[The Major]

Witts to GWS?

Not this year.

 

[doona]

Perris was touted to be a top 20 pick - but under AFL rules, was listed as a rookie under Sydney because he didn't enter the draft (which obviously, was a huge flaw by the AFL).

Perris was not an Academy player. He was a NSW scholarship player. The same system that got Adelaide Taylor Walker.

So Perris was drafted under a system where any club was able to have NSW scholarship players, however most clubs didn't bother.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

Carey,Richardson,Mooney and few other past gun fowards have mentioned that they would have loved to have played now with all the restrictions on what the backman can and cant do. The main thing is chopping of the arms and pushing players out of contests.

Your point about how rance would go against lockett and ablett - its always going to be a contentious issue and there is never a right or wrong but if you look at rance and his playing style i think he would do well as he is extremely athletic as well as being very very strong
Tony Lockett was 191cm and 118kgs - He was a monster that bullied players out of contests, sos was 194cm and 95 kgs and similar to rance very agile and athletic so i believe against both ablett and lockett it would have been similar out comes

Many people believe that Lance Franklin is the best foward to have played the game and just about all full backs say that thank god they didnt have to play on franklin but rance destroys franklin just about every time

Glen Jakovich was another player that could be considered to be 1 of the great backman and he is on record as saying that alex rance is up there with the best full backs and if continues his current trend could be the best, He also mentioned that it is harder to defend today than in his playing days.

Now when you mention scarlett and his premierships in an argument about the playing talent of individual players , All you do is lose credibility as Bob Skilton is a much better player than Matthew Suckling and Mathew Richardson was a better foward than David Hale but on your criteria the premierships out weigh other achievements.

There is no prefect formula to get a result when comparing past to present and the longer the past is the better they were, But im 52 and can just go by what i witnessed and the last 2-3 years rance's performances are just as good as anything that i seen from SOS the only difference is at the time sos was playing he was the only full back that could do these things but these days its starting to become the norm.

Nobody over the age of 20 thinks Franklin is the best forward of all time. Drew Petrie destroys Rance 9 games in 10, imagine what prime Carey would do to him.

Compare Rance to SOS and Scarlett at the end of their careers. The comparison is laughable atm as Rance has been the best FB in the game for only 2 seasons.