Draft Expert ModernArtillery 2022 Draft Thread

[ModernArtillery]

You don’t seem to rate Ed Allan at all? Why is that?

I'll preface this by saying that I'm probably wrong because clubs are showing top 10 interest for a reason. I just think his footy has a long way to go and I don't really see his development into a centre bounce/stoppage midfielder. I could see him being kind of a unique, rangey winger long-term, and for that perhaps I should've rated him higher, but I just worry about how far his footy needs to come for him to be up to the level.

Now that I've said that, book him in for Round 1 next year

I think Adelaide will likely throw a spanner in your works at some point. Surely they haven't opened up 2 list spots without their eye on a player or two as well as Michalanney.

Very strong word we've already put a deal at Essendon for their 1st rounder (Phillipou) which has been knocked back.

Word is we have interest in 2 other players, I suspect Harry Barnett is one of those and possibly Jakob Ryan.
I have a strong feeling that at least one of the 2 2023 2nd rounders we hold will be used to trade into this draft especially if Barnett is still on the table at the point a deal can be had.

I've not even bothered getting my hopes up on the Phillipou one. It's just not happening. I'd love Barnett. Rucks are typically difficult to predict because there's often only a few clubs interested. That being said, Melbourne and Sydney are two that are reportedly interested and they're likely to be able to take him before we trade in. If he's available in the second round though, I'd be all for that!

I don't think I'd be overly excited by adding Ryan, but it depends on the trade, where we can land him and at what cost. It seems like he's got a fair bit of interest at the back end of the first round and early second, so I suspect we'd have to pull the trigger pretty early in the second to get him if he's still available.

MA thanks for the massive effort.

I have to say that from a West Coast perspective that haul would disappoint me.
As matyc75 has said that doesn't address our most pressing need, reinforcements for our inside mids.
Tsatas would be a decent pick in isolation, but not having him paired with a genuine midfielder either balanced or inside, is a worry.
Busslinger while a good footballer I am not convinced that he will be more than a tall attacking HBF at the next level, all be it a quality one.
Jones ..... not sure where the feather weight plays at the next level.... he is IMO a very speculative pick, he could make it or he could be a total bust.
Gilbey is very injury prone and is limited positionally to HBF and Lord knows we have a surplus of those.

The Jones selection I could live with, however only if the next pick ( the Gilbey pick ) had been a midfielder.... Hustwaite or even your much latter picks in Szybkoski or Dowling would have a least filled a need.

The only consolation is that with a haul like that, is we will continue to be s**t for another few years and get the opportunity for more earlier picks and places us right in the Harley Reid stakes for 2023.

I hear and completely agree that there is a need for an inside midfielder. I probably look at this similarly to danster168 in the sense that I think there's value in West Coast accumulating talent rather than focusing on needs. That's really easy to say when it's not your club though and I reckon I'd probably feel exactly the same as you if this was my club (in fact, I know I would because I have!).

I think if you look at each of the picks in isolation perhaps the Jones selection is the only one I'd question whether West Coast are getting legit value (and I think we'd have plenty arguing for him too). I also mentioned before that if I was WC, I'd be positioning myself to trade up to get Hewett too, if possible. I imagine that would resolve some of the concerns with this haul.

Thanks for this, really well considered and informative list.

From a WCE point of view, I'd be happier if we picked Hewitt at our second pick and then speculated with a pick on Allen.

So Tsatas, Hewitt, Allen and Jones/Gilbey.

Busslinger would be surplus to needs as, even though Gov will retire in a few seasons, we already have Barrass, H Edwards, Bazzo for those spots.

I'm a huge Hewett fan, so I'll never knock any suggestions to target him. I do wonder whether there's going to be an opportunity for West Coast to get him with their third pick though. That would be such a great outcome.

I must admit, I was a little surprised that you guys weren't keen on drafting Busslinger. I understand the reasons for it given you've got Barrass, Bazzo and Edwards down there, but I do think Busslinger will be better than all of them. I guess the midfield is a greater concern at this point.

 

[ModernArtillery]

ModernArtillery what are your thoughts on Barkla? Will probably make his way to our Cat B list. Keen to hear your thoughts.

I actually really enjoyed watching Barkla this year. He's a really well-balanced kid that does a lot of things well and has the versatility to fill a number of different roles. I just don't think he quite has the AFL-standard traits or qualities required to succeed at the next level, but maybe the sum of all the parts will be enough for him to find a role.

 

[Andre the Giant]

I'll preface this by saying that I'm probably wrong because clubs are showing top 10 interest for a reason. I just think his footy has a long way to go and I don't really see his development into a centre bounce/stoppage midfielder. I could see him being kind of a unique, rangey winger long-term, and for that perhaps I should've rated him higher, but I just worry about how far his footy needs to come for him to be up to the level.

Now that I've said that, book him in for Round 1 next year


I've not even bothered getting my hopes up on the Phillipou one. It's just not happening. I'd love Barnett. Rucks are typically difficult to predict because there's often only a few clubs interested. That being said, Melbourne and Sydney are two that are reportedly interested and they're likely to be able to take him before we trade in. If he's available in the second round though, I'd be all for that!

I don't think I'd be overly excited by adding Ryan, but it depends on the trade, where we can land him and at what cost. It seems like he's got a fair bit of interest at the back end of the first round and early second, so I suspect we'd have to pull the trigger pretty early in the second to get him if he's still available.


I hear and completely agree that there is a need for an inside midfielder. I probably look at this similarly to danster168 in the sense that I think there's value in West Coast accumulating talent rather than focusing on needs. That's really easy to say when it's not your club though and I reckon I'd probably feel exactly the same as you if this was my club (in fact, I know I would because I have!).

I think if you look at each of the picks in isolation perhaps the Jones selection is the only one I'd question whether West Coast are getting legit value (and I think we'd have plenty arguing for him too). I also mentioned before that if I was WC, I'd be positioning myself to trade up to get Hewett too, if possible. I imagine that would resolve some of the concerns with this haul.


I'm a huge Hewett fan, so I'll never knock any suggestions to target him. I do wonder whether there's going to be an opportunity for West Coast to get him with their third pick though. That would be such a great outcome.

I must admit, I was a little surprised that you guys weren't keen on drafting Busslinger. I understand the reasons for it given you've got Barrass, Bazzo and Edwards down there, but I do think Busslinger will be better than all of them. I guess the midfield is a greater concern at this point.

At least you have the courage of your convictions to challenge popular convention. That’s admirable whether right or wrong

 

[citizen-erased]

This has been about a week in the making, but I've finally completed my final phantom draft. I've listed some interesting tidbits and called out some of the more challenging picks below, with some notes on who else I considered for those clubs. I'm sure there's a serious blunder or omission somewhere, but I had to get this out before Twomey

Round 1
1. GWS - Aaron Cadman
2. Brisbane - Will Ashcroft* (matched bid)
3. North Melbourne - Harry Sheezel
4. North Melbourne - George Wardlaw
5. Essendon - Mattaes Phillipou
6. Gold Coast - Reuben Ginbey
7. Hawthorn - Jhye Clark
8. Geelong – Ed Allan
9. West Coast - Elijah Tsatas
10. St Kilda - Cam Mackenzie
11. Carlton - Bailey Humphrey
12. Western Bulldogs – Oliver Hollands
13. West Coast – Jedd Busslinger
14. Melbourne – Harry Barnett
15. Sydney – Matthew Jefferson
16. GWS – Jacob Konstanty
17. Brisbane – Jaspa Fletcher* (matched bid)
18. Collingwood – Lachie Cowan
19. Sydney – Brayden George
20. GWS – Charlie Clarke

Round 2
21. GWS – Elijah Hewett
22. West Coast – Darcy Jones
23. Western Bulldogs – Lewis Hayes
24. GWS – Harry Rowston* (matched bid)
25. Essendon – Olli Hotton
26. Adelaide – Max Michalanney* (matched bid)
27. North Melbourne – Josh Weddle
28. Essendon – Alwyn Davey Jr* (matched bid)
29. Hawthorn – Coby Burgiel
30. Collingwood – Jakob Ryan
31. West Coast – Sam Gilbey
32. Collingwood – Henry Hustwaite
33. St Kilda – Max Gruzewski
34. Carlton – Isaac Keeler
35. Fremantle – Jed Adams
36. St Kilda – Noah Long
37. Port Adelaide – James Van Es
38. Melbourne – Phoenix Foster

Round 3
39. Western Bulldogs – Jaxon Binns
40. North Melbourne – Cooper Harvey
41. Hawthorn – Harry Lemmey
42. Hawthorn – Cooper Vickery* (matched bid)
43. Sydney – Harvey Gallagher
44. Fremantle – Billy Dowling
45. Fremantle – Jed Hagan
46. Gold Coast – Kaleb Smith
47. Carlton – Nick Sadler
48. Richmond – Jovan Petric
49. Geelong – Mitch Szybkowski

Remaining picks
50. Port Adelaide – Jason Gillbee
51. Richmond – Blake Drury
52. Adelaide – Hugh Bond
53. Essendon – Jayden Davey
54. Brisbane – Ethan Phillips


1. I've long been unsure what Melbourne will do with their first round selection. I get the impression that they're not sold on Jefferson, despite being heavily linked to him. Jason Taylor's comments yesterday suggested that they could use their second round pick to address their KPF needs and with a number of options likely to be available in that range (ie Keeler, Gruzewski, Foster, Lemmey, Scully etc), perhaps it makes sense for them to go in a different direction with that first selection.

Taylor also gave some indication that they felt confident a player they liked would be available at their second pick, but were nervous about their first selection. Reading between the lines, I'm taking a guess that Ed Allan is the guy they were hoping to get and I would've had him landing at Melbourne if available at their first pick.

Once I'd decided against Jefferson it came down to Barnett and Brayden George. I think Barnett represents a greater long term need and so he gets the nod in a very close call.

2. I always find Sydney hard to read and with two picks inside the first round it makes phantom drafting really difficult. Jefferson sliding through got the edge over Lachie Cowan with the first of their two picks and Brayden George nudged Darcy Jones for the second selection.

3. St Kilda's pick 33 on-wards has taken me days (which I've only had thanks to catching COVID while on parental leave) and is the part of the draft I'm least satisfied with.

4. The range of some of these players threw me for a loop. In earlier versions I had Max Gruzewski as a first rounder. He ends up at pick 33. I felt most comfortable about Keeler in the 40's but couldn't find an option that made more sense than him for clubs in the 30's. I still wouldn't be overly surprised if he landed in the first round. Jed Adams was another I liked in the 40's but ended up late second round. Harry Lemmey at 40 feels a bit too early. He doesn't really seem like a Sam Mitchell type, but I wanted a KPF there and he felt like the best option left on the board.

5. I couldn't find a club for Adam D'Aloia in the National Draft. I think this is probably closer to 50/50 than many of us expected. When I startedthe exercise, I didn't expect to land here, but unfortunately it was harder to find a landing spot for him than I anticipated.

6. No Munkara bid might surprise some too. I'm a bit skeptical that a club will bid. Similar to D'Aloia, I think it's probably closer to 50/50 than we think.

Love that draft for the dons, albeit with the slight disappointment hewett doesnt last that little bit longer.

 

[conVINCEd]

ModernArtillery - you nailed Hugh Bond to the Crows.

Did you have any intel on our interest?

 

[ModernArtillery]

ModernArtillery - you nailed Hugh Bond to the Crows.

Did you have any intel on our interest?

Nah just a bit of luck to be honest! We've talked alot about going after competitors and I thought Bond might be of interest at that point of the draft.

He's one of my favourites in this pool too, so I was very, very pleased!

 

[RedmanWasHere]

Another year is done MA.

2023, we ready.

 

[ModernArtillery]

I've just been reflecting on the draft and pulled together a bit of a gimmicky read with some lessons/reflections. I'll have to make myself read this before finalising my 2023 pre-draft rankings next year to make sure it sticks!

If you can't run, you can't play.
I'm thinking of Adam D'Aloia and Mitch Szybkowski specifically here. It's pretty devastating to see guys who genuinely have the talent miss out on an opportunity because their running isn't up to the level. This is something that I've known for some time, but that didn't stop me falling into the Szibba trap. After working through my final phantom, it became clearer and clearer to me that D'Aloia was a strong chance to miss out. I think it's easy to fall into the trap of saying the clubs got it wrong, but the reality is, if you can't get your running up to the standard, you can't compete at the level.

Form is temporary, attributes are forever
I could call this the Harry Lemmey award, but there are a number of players who were favoured over their better-performed peers based on attributes rather than form. Testing and athletic data is such a key component to projecting the scope and success of these prospects and as an amateur who gets limited access to data outside of pre-season and combine testing, it's probably the biggest barrier I face in building my rankings.

There's a place for tweeners
I kind of expected some of the defenders in that 'not quite key position, not quite flanker' zone to be viewed less favourably. That just wasn't the case with Michalanney and Weddle selected as first rounders and Gruzewski and McCallum (and Hustwaite depending on how you view him) taken in the second round. In hindsight, perhaps I should've predicted that backman with both defensive and offensive capabilities would be valued highly, but I did anticipate them being graded a little lower on the basis of them being a little in between positions.

Bigger is better, even if bigger isn't better
You're certainly at an advantage if you're a key position size who's shown a little bit of promise vs a talented small who's performed well through their junior career. Van Es, Adams, Davies, Knobel, Lemmey, Scully, and Marshall all got a look-in through the second half of the draft, while Drury and Campbell had to wait for the rookie draft, and the likes of Hagan, Sadler, Lovelock, Ryan and Schuback all missed out. This isn't a knock or a complaint, I completely get it. It does create a bit of a dilemma when creating my own rankings though. I'm not really sure whether I should be excluding guys I rate higher, knowing they won't get drafted, for guys who I don't rate as highly, but know are more likely to be on a clubs radar.

Leave the Phantom's to Cal
Was the draft more fun when we didn't know every single first round pick before it happened? Took Kinnear's huge EFF YOU to actually create something interesting on that first night.

It's mostly a pointless exercise, but I'll probably pull together a draft winners and losers/grading post sometime tonight or tomorrow. Just for a bit of fun.

 

[ModernArtillery]

Another year is done MA.

2023, we ready.

Thanks for your contributions to the board this year mate, always appreciated!

 

[LemmingMaster]

If you can't run, you can't play.
I'm thinking of Adam D'Aloia and Mitch Szybkowski specifically here. It's pretty devastating to see guys who genuinely have the talent miss out on an opportunity because their running isn't up to the level. This is something that I've known for some time, but that didn't stop me falling into the Szibba trap. After working through my final phantom, it became clearer and clearer to me that D'Aloia was a strong chance to miss out. I think it's easy to fall into the trap of saying the clubs got it wrong, but the reality is, if you can't get your running up to the standard, you can't compete at the level.

This was my potential issue with Rayner back in his draft year and not wanting to rate him super high, even with all his upside. Guys with no tank really get their positions limited at AFL level.

Form is temporary, attributes are forever
I could call this the Harry Lemmey award, but there are a number of players who were favoured over their better-performed peers based on attributes rather than form. Testing and athletic data is such a key component to projecting the scope and success of these prospects and as an amateur who gets limited access to data outside of pre-season and combine testing, it's probably the biggest barrier I face in building my rankings.

This is often with talls, you're looking for glimpses of form or attributes that are AFL quality. (Kind of links to your bigger is better point).
The hard part for rookie drafters and I am sure AFL drafters, where to rank them? This year there seemed to be a few tiers of where it was okay to ignore certain aspects of a player.

Top 15 - You basically want that player to have a defined position and as few a flaws as possible.
16-30 - This is where you can take the tweeners that have a tonne of AFL attributes but you're not 100% sure where they will go with those attributes and often you wished they were 5 cms tall and they would have been a lock in the top 16. Place Weddle's attributes onto a 196cm kid and he is locked in the first round.

31+ This is where you can roll the dice on project players, looking for as many AFL potential qualities as possible. Lemmey, height, hands, goal kicking.... If he manages to find his under 17's form and do it on a regular basis, he will make it.

Rookie draft - Throw a project ruck here if you don't have one or fill it with delisted AFL players for depth.

There's a place for tweeners
I kind of expected some of the defenders in that 'not quite key position, not quite flanker' zone to be viewed less favourably. That just wasn't the case with Michalanney and Weddle selected as first rounders and Gruzewski and McCallum (and Hustwaite depending on how you view him) taken in the second round. In hindsight, perhaps I should've predicted that backman with both defensive and offensive capabilities would be valued highly, but I did anticipate them being graded a little lower on the basis of them being a little in between positions.

Michalanney and Weddle are two players with a heap of AFL qualities but I was not sure where they would go. In a twisted way, I still think they got drafted a little too earlier. May, Ryan, Sciliy... They're showing that a lockdown attacking defender can be very helpful.

Bigger is better, even if bigger isn't better
You're certainly at an advantage if you're a key position size who's shown a little bit of promise vs a talented small who's performed well through their junior career. Van Es, Adams, Davies, Knobel, Lemmey, Scully, and Marshall all got a look-in through the second half of the draft, while Drury and Campbell had to wait for the rookie draft, and the likes of Hagan, Sadler, Lovelock, Ryan and Schuback all missed out. This isn't a knock or a complaint, I completely get it. It does create a bit of a dilemma when creating my own rankings though. I'm not really sure whether I should be excluding guys I rate higher, knowing they won't get drafted, for guys who I don't rate as highly, but know are more likely to be on a clubs radar.

Height is always a plus, I was talking to some others and saying Knobel was a dark horse long term and a huge reason was the glimpses of ability. The only reason I could ignore his flaws was the fact he is 207cm with those glimpses. Hagan is a prime example of ticking so many boxes for me, but maybe ends up being a 200 game WAFL player that every team wants, just not enough elite AFL qualities.

Before trading of draft picks, I loved trying to do mock drafts, now it feels almost pointless as there are too many factors that ruin a mock draft.
Davies, I am still scratching my head, but his height is there.

 

[baaaallllll]

If you can't run, you can't play.
I'm thinking of Adam D'Aloia and Mitch Szybkowski specifically here. It's pretty devastating to see guys who genuinely have the talent miss out on an opportunity because their running isn't up to the level. This is something that I've known for some time, but that didn't stop me falling into the Szibba trap. After working through my final phantom, it became clearer and clearer to me that D'Aloia was a strong chance to miss out. I think it's easy to fall into the trap of saying the clubs got it wrong, but the reality is, if you can't get your running up to the standard, you can't compete at the level.

When you are referring to can't run, are you referring to speed or endurance or both? I watched plenty of D'Aloia in his juniors and whilst not the quickest didn't look slow or poor endurance (but admit may have been blinded by the fact he generally dominated). But tip my hat that you picked he wouldn't get drafted. I was pretty surprised he didn't, can't do much more than he did to get drafted.

 

[Sphynx]

I've just been reflecting on the draft and pulled together a bit of a gimmicky read with some lessons/reflections. I'll have to make myself read this before finalising my 2023 pre-draft rankings next year to make sure it sticks!

If you can't run, you can't play.
I'm thinking of Adam D'Aloia and Mitch Szybkowski specifically here. It's pretty devastating to see guys who genuinely have the talent miss out on an opportunity because their running isn't up to the level. This is something that I've known for some time, but that didn't stop me falling into the Szibba trap. After working through my final phantom, it became clearer and clearer to me that D'Aloia was a strong chance to miss out. I think it's easy to fall into the trap of saying the clubs got it wrong, but the reality is, if you can't get your running up to the standard, you can't compete at the level.

Form is temporary, attributes are forever
I could call this the Harry Lemmey award, but there are a number of players who were favoured over their better-performed peers based on attributes rather than form. Testing and athletic data is such a key component to projecting the scope and success of these prospects and as an amateur who gets limited access to data outside of pre-season and combine testing, it's probably the biggest barrier I face in building my rankings.

As an FYI.

Szybkowsi can run. His 2km, agility and 5/10/20m times are decent.

D'Aiola has middling endurance in line with Tsatas/Hotton etc, but is a tad on the slow side at a 3.09.

Both tested faster over 20m than both Charlie Clarke and Jhye Clark in all pre/post season testing.


I don't agree with your point about Lemmey, as aside from his endurance (which is very good for his height), his agility, vertical, speed tests were all horrible, even for a player of his size.

He's got the turning circle of the queen mary and he ran a 3.173 20m. He has some of the slowest first 5m splits indicating his his separation ability for a tall, he tested alongside unathletic Max Noble 206cm in this regard..

I'd argue his physical testing once out of Covid was one of the reasons he started getting on the nose with recruiters.

 

[ModernArtillery]

When you are referring to can't run, are you referring to speed or endurance or both? I watched plenty of D'Aloia in his juniors and whilst not the quickest didn't look slow or poor endurance (but admit may have been blinded by the fact he generally dominated). But tip my hat that you picked he wouldn't get drafted. I was pretty surprised he didn't, can't do much more than he did to get drafted.

I'm more looking at the endurance base. I think speed is certainly desired, but power and strength can make up for lack of speed for inside midfielders when we're talking about getting separation at the contest.

I'm pretty gutted for him. You're absolutely right, there's nothing from a performance aspect that he could've done more. Perhaps he needed to show clubs he'd improved that endurance base and he just failed to do that. Still, hard to see well-performed kids like him miss out.

As an FYI.

Szybkowsi can run. His 2km, agility and 5/10/20m times are decent.

D'Aiola has middling endurance in line with Tsatas/Hotton etc, but is a tad on the slow side at a 3.09.

Both tested faster over 20m than both Charlie Clarke and Jhye Clark in all pre/post season testing.

Szybkowski is certainly a better runner than D'Aloia and probably better than I gave him credit for in my earlier post. However his 2km was still in the bottom few for midfielders at the Combine. He was in the bottom-half for speed and agility too for his position.

D'Aloia certainly wasn't middling for endurance. His 2km was the slowest for his position. He was also bottom-half for his position in speed and agility.

Hotton and Tsatas were poor in the 2km, but they were stronger in the speed and agility. When you evaluate them for an athletic point of view, I think Hotton and Tsatas project more favourably in terms of being able to improve that endurance base, compared to D'Aloia and Szybkowski.

I don't agree with your point about Lemmey, as aside from his endurance (which is very good for his height), his agility, vertical, speed tests were all horrible, even for a player of his size.

He's got the turning circle of the queen mary and he ran a 3.173 20m. He has some of the slowest first 5m splits indicating his his separation ability for a tall, he tested alongside unathletic Max Noble 206cm in this regard..

I'd argue his physical testing once out of Covid was one of the reasons he started getting on the nose with recruiters.

Lemmey is a 200cm CHF, who as you said, runs a pretty elite 2km and as is a very good ball user for his size. I think those combination of traits, rather than form, were the reason he got drafted. I completely agree re turning circle, agility, speed etc. But size, length, endurance and ball use are all strengths of his and appealing traits.