Pick 14

[Galapagoose]

I have heard from my niece's uncle that Clarke is a massive flight risk. He didn't want to keep playing cricket cos international cricket means weeks away from family.

 

[apuchar]

I have heard from my niece's uncle that Clarke is a massive flight risk. He didn't want to keep playing cricket cos international cricket means weeks away from family.

A jouro asked him whether he thought new players should have mandatory 3 year deals instead of 2 and he said no, two is enough in case you want to go home.

 

[theGav56]

A jouro asked him whether he thought new players should have mandatory 3 year deals instead of 2 and he said no, two is enough in case you want to go home.

Most players go whether contracted or not if they want to (Kelly the aberration). All that 3 years seems to achieve is a better possible trade outcome for the club.

 

[Paracleet]

It’s in Twomeys podcast. He mentioned 20 kids get invited and that Ian Hill hadn’t got an invite.

I’m assuming 20 as it’s roughly the first round. Or maybe it’s 20 to make sure the top 10 are present. I don’t actually know why 20 are invited.

Just reporting what’s stated in Twomeys podcast.

Either way Ian Hill seems to be slipping.

This is the list of 2017 invitee* and their subsequent draft position

Cameron Rayner 1
Andrew Brayshaw 2
Paddy Dow 3
Luke Davies-Uniacke 4
Adam Cerra 5
Jaidyn Stephenson 6
Hunter Clark 7
Nick Coffield 8
Aaron Naughton 9
Lochie O'Brien 10
Aiden Bonar 11
Darcy Fogarty 12
Jarrod Brander 13
Ed Richards 16
Jack Higgins 17
Oscar Allen 21
Lachie Fogarty 22
Patrick Naish 34
Nathan Murphy 39
Nick Shipley 64

As you can see of the top 20 all of the top 13 were invited and of the top 22 only 14,15,18,19 and 20 weren't there

Doesn't offer definitive interpretations, but: The 5 in question are Ling, Bailey, Starcevich, Powell and Coleman-Jones. Just going on memory at least three of those were bolters so I think you can interpret these ways in order of likelihood:
- Hill is definitely not in the top ten of any club
- Hill is almost certainly not in the top 15 or so of any club
- Hill is probably going close to sliding out of the top 20 (statistically a 80% chance based on the above).



*Sourced from AFL draft central and not official. Likely to be pretty close to right though

 

[nurries]

If Clark slips to us (big IF), when would Hill go?

 

[Monument Hills]

If Clark slips to us (big IF), when would Hill go?

worse case 20* or 22* to WC no doubt

 

[Scham]

If Clark slips to us (big IF), when would Hill go?

At one of the next 3 picks imo. Richmond love his type and lost Stengle during the trade period and there are doubts over Bolton hanging around so they’ll take him if Port and Adelaide don’t.

 

[eastfreo75]

This is the list of 2017 invitee* and their subsequent draft position

Cameron Rayner 1
Andrew Brayshaw 2
Paddy Dow 3
Luke Davies-Uniacke 4
Adam Cerra 5
Jaidyn Stephenson 6
Hunter Clark 7
Nick Coffield 8
Aaron Naughton 9
Lochie O'Brien 10
Aiden Bonar 11
Darcy Fogarty 12
Jarrod Brander 13
Ed Richards 16
Jack Higgins 17
Oscar Allen 21
Lachie Fogarty 22
Patrick Naish 34
Nathan Murphy 39
Nick Shipley 64

As you can see of the top 20 all of the top 13 were invited and of the top 22 only 14,15,18,19 and 20 weren't there

Doesn't offer definitive interpretations, but: The 5 in question are Ling, Bailey, Starcevich, Powell and Coleman-Jones. Just going on memory at least three of those were bolters so I think you can interpret these ways in order of likelihood:
- Hill is definitely not in the top ten of any club
- Hill is almost certainly not in the top 15 or so of any club
- Hill is probably going close to sliding out of the top 20 (statistically a 80% chance based on the above).



*Sourced from AFL draft central and not official. Likely to be pretty close to right though

We will have pick 16.

 

[D_train]

It’s in Twomeys podcast. He mentioned 20 kids get invited and that Ian Hill hadn’t got an invite.

I’m assuming 20 as it’s roughly the first round. Or maybe it’s 20 to make sure the top 10 are present. I don’t actually know why 20 are invited.

Just reporting what’s stated in Twomeys podcast.

Either way Ian Hill seems to be slipping.

Is there a list of those 20 anywhere, or can you remember roughly what stage of his podcast that he went through them?

 

[Paracleet]

We will have pick 16.

Oh I'm pretty sure that he will be available at our pick.

The question I'm pondering is will we only be taking him if on balance he is the best option at that pick (which will entirely depend on where he is on our list)? If he is about the mark then me might take him as the local option with all other things being equal.
If that isn't the case then the only other scenarios I can see are:
- We don't take him as there are players clearly higher on our list when we get to 16 still available.
- We do take him because we were the only club that rated him inside the top ten or so that didn't actually have a top ten pick (Unlikely I'd have thought)
- We do take him as there has been a little passive draft tampering going on (We haven't told him to stooge and and he hasn't asked, but it's all understood with a nod and a wink).

 

[wayToGo_]

This is the list of 2017 invitee* and their subsequent draft position

Cameron Rayner 1
Andrew Brayshaw 2
Paddy Dow 3
Luke Davies-Uniacke 4
Adam Cerra 5
Jaidyn Stephenson 6
Hunter Clark 7
Nick Coffield 8
Aaron Naughton 9
Lochie O'Brien 10
Aiden Bonar 11
Darcy Fogarty 12
Jarrod Brander 13
Ed Richards 16
Jack Higgins 17
Oscar Allen 21
Lachie Fogarty 22
Patrick Naish 34
Nathan Murphy 39
Nick Shipley 64

As you can see of the top 20 all of the top 13 were invited and of the top 22 only 14,15,18,19 and 20 weren't there

Doesn't offer definitive interpretations, but: The 5 in question are Ling, Bailey, Starcevich, Powell and Coleman-Jones. Just going on memory at least three of those were bolters so I think you can interpret these ways in order of likelihood:
- Hill is definitely not in the top ten of any club
- Hill is almost certainly not in the top 15 or so of any club
- Hill is probably going close to sliding out of the top 20 (statistically a 80% chance based on the above).



*Sourced from AFL draft central and not official. Likely to be pretty close to right though

Going by this there is a higher chance the person we take at our pick won't be one of the 20 invitees.

 

[Walkingwounded]

I think I’m on record of thinking/saying Knightmare is an egotistical knob.. it’s sort of confirmed when he says that Ian Hill isn’t in his top 50 phantom draft..

WA seems a bit too far away from the TAC cup U18’s.

No doubt we will go about our business and not give him a whiff of who we are likely to select.

 

[Joao]

I think I’m on record of thinking/saying Knightmare is an egotistical knob.. it’s sort of confirmed when he says that Ian Hill isn’t in his top 50 phantom draft..

WA seems a bit too far away from the TAC cup U18’s.

No doubt we will go about our business and not give him a whiff of who we are likely to select.

I find him to be an extremely difficult person to like based on his work on BF. Drinks a fair amount of his own bathwater.

 

[Taylor]

It would be great to pick up Hill with our second pick but I don't expect speed and skill like that to be left on the table that long.

 

[Chris25]

I really shouldn’t comment on his thread again...

 

[Clems Knee]

I really shouldn’t comment on his thread again...

I’ll go and read it now!

Edit: No comment. Did you delete?

 

[E Shed]

I find him to be an extremely difficult person to like based on his work on BF. Drinks a fair amount of his own bathwater.

I remember querying his rating a couple of years after when he revised his draft why Neale still didn't rate top 50 from his year while there were several Collingwood players above him who had done very little and his reply was very dismissive, said Neale had still no shown anything to say he can play.

 

[Clems Knee]

I remember querying his rating a couple of years after when he revised his draft why Neale still didn't rate top 50 from his year while there were several Collingwood players above him who had done very little and his reply was very dismissive, said Neale had still no shown anything to say he can play.

He is similarly dismissive of Andrew Brayshaw.

 

[E Shed]

He is similarly dismissive of Andrew Brayshaw.

its an opinion business but I'm sceptical of people who seem to operate from preconceived bias and won't adapt to new data.
I wasn't sure about Brayshaw but he did a few things in his first year that I just thought wow.

 

[Arcassius]

its an opinion business but I'm sceptical of people who seem to operate from preconceived bias and won't adapt to new data.
I wasn't sure about Brayshaw but he did a few things in his first year that I just thought wow.

To be unbiased would mean watching every game without prejudice - something KM wouldn't bother to do, instead he relies on popularism

 

[Arcassius]

Guess who (from WAFL stats - actual in green vs league average in yellow) -

1)


2)


3)


4)


5)





Answers -
Jordan Clark
Ian Hill
Tom Medhat
Sydney Stack
Luke Foley

Bonus -

Jason Carter

 

[Joao]

its an opinion business but I'm sceptical of people who seem to operate from preconceived bias and won't adapt to new data.
I wasn't sure about Brayshaw but he did a few things in his first year that I just thought wow.

His inability or lack of desire to change his opinion when presented with irrefutable evidence is the most distasteful thing about him.

His opinion is useful to get a feel for what sort of players the Vic kids are but I wouldn't trust his ratings beyond 15 (where everyone is much the same because they hear it from recruiters).

 

[Purple Suit]

its an opinion business but I'm sceptical of people who seem to operate from preconceived bias and won't adapt to new data.
I wasn't sure about Brayshaw but he did a few things in his first year that I just thought wow.

Was one of them getting punched in the head? I went wow that day...

 

[E Shed]

Was one of them getting punched in the head? I went wow that day...

Not what I was thinking of but yes, definitely a wow moment.

 

[Purple Jesus]

I have heard from my niece's uncle that Clarke is a massive flight risk. He didn't want to keep playing cricket cos international cricket means weeks away from family.

So you heard it from yourself?