Phantom Draft Stats

[Russian]

               Footydraft  Burgan  BigFooty
Exact              12        21        9
Picked Passes       6         7       NA
Correct Club       15        22       11
Within 5 picks     25        32       21
On the list        51        52       49

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Well done, very interesting - thanks for posting it.

 

[GOALden Hawk]

I hope all those people who bagged Burgan the other day will post an apology in this thread - 22 exact is an outstanding effort, especially considering things started going differently from pick 2.

Reasonably happy with how footydraft.com went - I can't believe Kirkby and Grundy weren't selected, and there is no way you can predict someone like James Gwilt.

I'd heard the Roughead at 2 rumour earlier in the week but discounted it because I didn't think we'd be that stupid. (No disrespect to Roughead, who I think is going to be great - but we should have taken Tambling).

 

[Lenny*]

Sorry for calling you a bogan Mr.Burgan

 

[Crow-mosone]

I hope all those people who bagged Burgan the other day will post an apology in this thread - 22 exact is an outstanding effort, especially considering things started going differently from pick 2.

Reasonably happy with how footydraft.com went - I can't believe Kirkby and Grundy weren't selected, and there is no way you can predict someone like James Gwilt.

I'd heard the Roughead at 2 rumour earlier in the week but discounted it because I didn't think we'd be that stupid. (No disrespect to Roughead, who I think is going to be great - but we should have taken Tambling).

taking roughhead at no.2 reminds me of 1997.
Kris Massie was a lock for no.3 to you guys, the 3rd of the great trifecta in that year. you surprised by taking croad for the same reasons, and it turned out better for you. Now I am not saying Tambling = massie, but i see parallels nonetheless. Massie was a can't miss Leigh Colbert type at the time, but you went size first.

the issue is how good is Roughead really? if he's the business, all will forgiven mighty soon.

 

[feher]

taking roughhead at no.2 reminds me of 1997.
Kris Massie was a lock for no.3 to you guys, the 3rd of the great trifecta in that year. you surprised by taking croad for the same reasons

not sure about that, 97 top 3 were Ottens, Johnstone and Croad by all the reports i can remember reading, i don't think we were ever going to want Massie at 3, we would have taken Johnstone or Ottens had Croad not being their.

 

[m.diddy]

burgan is a guru!!!

 

[DIG]

Massie was definitely rated a top 3 prospect prior to the draft. I remember the Blues couldn't believe their luck when he slipped thru to them. Makes me cringe now.

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

Burgan has a great advantage over GH. He talks to the recruiters, coaches team managers and even if they dont say who theyre taking they will tell who everyone else is taking.
so its a matter of filling the blanks.

GH does a terrific job too.

However, we get swayed by the buzz on certain players IMHO.
If you read what GH says about both Kirkby and Grundy he does have some big concerns. Sometimes you just have to look at those more seriously.
Overall fantastic job GH and a great guide to most people who dont get a chance to see them all.

Also a gold star on having the foresight to isolate Raso as a potential late pick for next year. Hughesy must be reading. To me thats worth a few points on the accuracy report because noone else would have had the balls to make that statement .

 

[Snickers]

when i did my phantom draft i got........
exact in the order: 14 (including F/S)
picked passes: 3
correct club: 15
with in 5 picks: 26
On the list: 51

 

[Portia]

I would like to see a comparison between the phantom drafts on the basis of `types of player' that clubs selected, as opposed to predicted.

Burgan is playing for exactly these points as shown, not to actually give a useful prediction of how clubs will draft for their needs.

 

[GOALden Hawk]

Also a gold star on having the foresight to isolate Raso as a potential late pick for next year. Hughesy must be reading. To me thats worth a few points on the accuracy report because noone else would have had the balls to make that statement .

Don't know if it was that brave a statement - I said it for a few others as well. But Raso definitely struck me as a player who could have gone top 30 next year - he showed glimpses of talent in the games I saw, but he has a long way to go.

It's sensible drafting with a pick that late really. Of course they could be the next Lochie Veale, but it's probably worth the punt. For example, John Meesen was available last year.

 

[DIG]

Don't know if it was that brave a statement - I said it for a few others as well. But Raso definitely struck me as a player who could have gone top 30 next year - he showed glimpses of talent in the games I saw, but he has a long way to go.

Good call on Chris Knights too. You eventually just slid him out of your mock draft but you qualified that by saying he was too good not to be picked up by someone with a late pick, which the Crows did.

 

[InForAPenny]

A couple more stats:

All Australians drafted - 14
TAC Cup Team of the year drafted - 14

 

[Star]

Well done Burgan!

 

[GOALden Hawk]

Good call on Chris Knights too. You eventually just slid him out of your mock draft but you qualified that by saying he was too good not to be picked up by someone with a late pick, which the Crows did.

Well I saw a fair bit of Chris in 2003 and he was just dominating, so I kept that in mind even after he stagnated a bit in 2004. Was worried when he didn't get a draft camp invite but personally I thought he was a good selection by the Crows.

You get some right, you get some wrong. Kirkby and Grundy I don't feel so bad about because everyone had them in.

On the other hand should have removed Earl Shaw once it became clear Sydney weren't interested. And knew clubs were keen on McCormack but because he didn't really set the world alight in the games I saw was a bit biased. Had Stribling in early on but he didn't get a mention so I figured no one was interested.

 

[bLUE_bALLs]

I think GOALden Hawk should be commended just as much as Burgan. His strike rate was pretty good as well, and im sure he didnt have the same sort of "inside info" that Burgan would have received from the clubs themselves.

Cheers

 

[The Hitman]

While Matt Burgan did speak to reps of every club, he didn't see much underage football bar the national championhips, as he covers AFL.

GOAlden Hawk saw a lot of TAC games, the national championships and trial games. He too has his contacts.

Both did sensational jobs, and deserve to be applauded for the effort, research and information they put into their work.

The Hitman

 

[FIGJAM]

I suppose I should appologise to him for saying he always lumped us with roughies.

He was spot on with Rusling. Speaking to insiders would help and the fact that we had the kid down the Lexus Centre would have sent a strong hint around town.