Game Day The 2025 Draft Day Thread

[UseR2006]

And a song to sing as we watch,

Hey Matty Clarke by Kevin (Random260) Wilson :

Hey Matty Clarke you campaigner, where the **** is Sharp
I’ve looked at all these other spuds and there’s no one that I like
I wrote you a ****ing letter and posted about it twice
You dopey ****ing Richmond fart, you forgot my ****ing Sharp

If I wanted a stupid ruckman type, I would’ve bloody asked
And this half back flank and temu mid, you can shove right up your arse
You’ve stuffed the bloody order up, it’s enough to make you spew
But it’s not just me who’s snakey, SGIO is dirty too

Next time I come to see ya, I’m going to punch you in the guts
And I’ll sack the other recruiting knobs and kick Toddy in the nuts
You just wait 'til next year when you go back to the draft
And me and me little GIO come stomping through the door
And we'll say, yeah, you wait for it

Hey Pyke and Woosh you smell his breath
And check his bloodshot eyes
And don't listen to him eagles fans 'cause he tells ****ing lies
He's just a ****ing useless campaigner and he's not even very bright
'Cause the stupid ****in' w***er, forgot me ****in' Sharp

Hey Matty Clarke you campaigner, where the **** is Sharp
I’ve looked at all these other spuds and there’s no one that I like
I wrote you a ****ing letter and posted about it twice
You dopey ****ing Richmond fart, you forgot my ****ing Sharp

A Quick Ai rendition: https://suno.com/s/blQP3cSnulhqYb5g
It's funny how it interrupted the lyrics XD

 

[Forward Press]

The fact their entire draft strategy is built around accumulating and trading for draft points says it all really.

Which is fine if it's academy and father/son selections. I have no issue with the attempt to properly value academy and F/S picks using the draft pick system.

It's just the concept of being able to accumulate a gazillion trash picks to dump it all on one list spot which demonstrated the system was flawed. I actually prefer we revert to the old system of using a pick in the same round as the one which a club is attempting to acquire the club-tied player. Simple, easy to use and sure it may lead to some unjust valuations but in my view it all evens out in the end.

 

[dispute]

Do we know why it was leaked that we were interested in Addinsall? Surely it would have been to our benefit to keep it under wraps until the draft. That way GC wouldn't have enough time to accumulate the required points.

 

[Bender_]

I believe our data there is correct, over the course of the entire trade and draft period. Eg it doesn’t list Saints F2 as an in then an out, it just skips it in our section.

Next year we own:
R1 (WCE)
R2 (WCE)
R3 x 2 (WCE and SYD)
R4 x2 (WCE and WB)

In 2027 we have our own 1/2/4, and have Hawks R3 instead of our own.

So with the new draft rules we won't be able to do what every other club has done in the past (assuming of NGA or F/S kid is highly rated) and use our R3 x 2 & R4 x 2 to pay for them?

 

[HoneyBadger35]

So with the new draft rules we won't be able to do what every other club has done in the past (assuming of NGA or F/S kid is highly rated) and use our R3 x 2 & R4 x 2 to pay for them?

Correct. But it’s a good price to pay if it stops the generational rot*

*of course Gold Coast have a free first rounders factory now with too many talented kids to play so they’ll constantly be able to sell Flanders tier guys for the necessary high end ammo to match for at least a few more years, but I digress.

 

[bzparkes]

Do we know why it was leaked that we were interested in Addinsall? Surely it would have been to our benefit to keep it under wraps until the draft. That way GC wouldn't have enough time to accumulate the required points.

Addinsall himself, or his manager, probably would've told GC we were interested.

Pretty hard to keep that stuff secret.

 

[Underdog]

Addinsall himself, or his manager, probably would've told GC we were interested.

Pretty hard to keep that stuff secret.

This. People get agro at the club for "leaks" that are, realistically, performed by outsiders, particularly managers who want to position their client optimally.

The club doesn't have any control over that but still needs to do its due diligence with prospects.

 

[Wooshaaaa]

I didn’t, had him rated as the best midfielder for most of the year just behind Duursma.

Ah but you still took Robey ahead of him in our mock 2.0

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

From what I understand Addinsall was keen to stay on the Gold Coast, so there's no way he/his manager wouldn't have told Gold Coast we were keen.

Still, I reckon we could have had him if we bid smarter and not so strictly based on our internal rankings. That was dumb.

 

[eaglevision]

Should be going after that GC quartet.

Our next two first rounders should be going straight to them for a combination of those 4 depending on where their value sits come the end of the year.

I’d hang onto our 2027 1R as it’s the only way be realistically have a shot at Axel Walsh but I’d be ok trading other capital. Maybe 2026 1R and 2028 1R depending on where we finish next year.

Let’s hope Axel says no to Tasmania offering to prelist him as a 17yo.

 

[EagleMan87]

Correct. But it’s a good price to pay if it stops the generational rot*

*of course Gold Coast have a free first rounders factory now with too many talented kids to play so they’ll constantly be able to sell Flanders tier guys for the necessary high end ammo to match for at least a few more years, but I digress.

I think that's exactly what the AFL was going for; creating a perpetual draft machine like GWS.

 

[dispute]

Addinsall himself, or his manager, probably would've told GC we were interested.

Pretty hard to keep that stuff secret.

Ah yep, that makes sense. Didn't consider it from the prospective.

 

[wirra44]

He's not an NGA, so he's not in the program to begin with, I'd have thought but we have had father sons train with the club during the offseason before.

I highly doubt he'd give up on the opportunity to participate in an AFL environment just because his brother got drafted to a different club.

You'd think people would be more pragmatic than that.

The father sons are part of the “program”, they all come under the Naitanui academy and play in the couple of games they have against freo each year. Plus have the same access as what some of the nga hopefuls get.

 

[bzparkes]

The father sons are part of the “program”, they all come under the Naitanui academy and play in the couple of games they have against freo each year. Plus have the same access as what some of the nga hopefuls get.

Sure. If he's in the program, even better.

I very much doubt he'd give up development in a professional environment just because his brother went elsewhere though.

That's cutting your nose to spite your face.

Collingwood didn't even nominate Tom McGuane and he's now an SSP training with Adelaide.

Richmond did nominate Lucas Kellaway then didn't even draft him altogether.

At the very least, we made a promise to take him if he made it through tot he rookie draft. He didn't and got a better contract.

I don't think he, or the family, would particularly care all that much.

 

[Coasters7]

I’d hang onto our 2027 1R as it’s the only way be realistically have a shot at Axel Walsh but I’d be ok trading other capital. Maybe 2026 1R and 2028 1R depending on where we finish next year.

Let’s hope Axel says no to Tasmania offering to prelist him as a 17yo.

True. I just think next year is the year to extract maximum value out of that pick.

Could be selling it as a top 5 pick with a decent chance it’s not that. Other clubs may also see it the same but I think next year is the year to trade future assets for established 21-22 year olds.

 

[CountryLad]

Ah but you still took Robey ahead of him in our mock 2.0

If you read the mock draft I did that just to mix things up and get some people actually talking about him. (Robey) it was nothing to do with where I rated Cumming.

 

[RustyShacklefordFalcon]

Reported hot property Ted Clohsey signed for WWT in the SANFL. Eagles, Dons and Suns all linked at one stage

I don't think Will Phillips ended up on a list either. Anyone heard the news on him?

 

[Ilkka Sinisalo]

Addinsall himself, or his manager, probably would've told GC we were interested.

Pretty hard to keep that stuff secret.

I think there's a way to interview lots of players without telegraphing that you are particularly keen on one of them.

 

[TerryFilk]

The Walter situation is interesting, if he’s in and out of the team, I have little doubt he’ll look to leave and we’d be his preferred landing spot - he turned down Carlton this past off season, he likes comments all the time about him and West Coast too haha.

But if we got him there’d be significant balance issues here, we’ll probably be forcing CDT into the team fairly quickly along with Archer, Flynn, Waterman and Shanahan, adding Walter into that mix makes things pretty tough, becomes less tough if Archer becomes a genuine #1 ruck but he’s likely 3-4 years away from that if ever.

Would Waterman look elsewhere if we wanted Walter? Given his age and the clubs timeline, maybe… but seems unlikely still, so there’d be a pretty big logjam.

 

[plays tall 1]

Really interesting article from Twomey - releaved to hear we're not a completely incompent organisation haha.

• Essendon's interest in offering two top 10 picks was for pick 1 only - they baulked at the price for pick 2 being similar.
• We were trying to move up the order from the Dees pick 11/12 (unaware of their interest in Pickett)
  • We offered a F2 to Dees & Essendon to move up for Sharp
  • We offered a F2 to NM to move up for Dovaston
• We traded F2 to Hawks to make sure we got 1 of the 3 remaining players we ranked at the same tier (Murry, Addinsall & Lindsay)
• Our play for Addinsall was essentially undone when the GWS bid for Kyle was matched by Swans - though Suns still had options to match Addinsall regardless.

The article doesn’t state that Essendon’s offer of 2 top 10 picks was for pick 1 only, you’re speculating. It suggests that Essendon were prepared to offer 2 top 10 picks but didn’t bother to formalise it because it became apparent the price for pick 2 was something akin to the price for pick 1, which price was higher than 2 top 10 picks.

The article doesn’t state we were trying to move up for Sharp, it says we were trying to move up for the Sharp pick i.e. the pick Essendon used on Sharp. It’s certainly open to interpretation that we were trying to move up for Dovaston not Sharp.

 

[Ilkka Sinisalo]

The article doesn’t state that Essendon’s offer of 2 top 10 picks was for pick 1 only, you’re speculating. It suggests that Essendon were prepared to offer 2 top 10 picks but didn’t bother to formalise it because it became apparent the price for pick 2 was something akin to the price for pick 1, which price was higher than 2 top 10 picks.

The article doesn’t state we were trying to move up for Sharp, it says we were trying to move up for the Sharp pick i.e. the pick Essendon used on Sharp. It’s certainly open to interpretation that we were trying to move up for Dovaston not Sharp.

I suspect the offer was probably not 5 and 6, but either 5 and 9 or 6 and 9. The article notes that the Eagles had Cumming and Robey among their next group and it was becoming pretty clear that Cumming was bound for Richmond, so trading 2 out meant that they lost CDT, wouldn't get Cumming and possibly wouldn't get Robey (depending if Richmond selected Robey, or Essendon gave us 6 and 9 and picked Robey with 6). Which could potentially leave the Eagles with Duursma, Farrow and someone like Grlj or Sharp.

As it turned out if the offer was 5 and 9 then the Eagles could've ended up with Duursma, Robey and Sharp which... well, let's just hope CDT turns out to be really good because that would've been a pretty sweet haul too.

 

[bzparkes]

The Walter situation is interesting, if he’s in and out of the team, I have little doubt he’ll look to leave and we’d be his preferred landing spot - he turned down Carlton this past off season, he likes comments all the time about him and West Coast too haha.

But if we got him there’d be significant balance issues here, we’ll probably be forcing CDT into the team fairly quickly along with Archer, Flynn, Waterman and Shanahan, adding Walter into that mix makes things pretty tough, becomes less tough if Archer becomes a genuine #1 ruck but he’s likely 3-4 years away from that if ever.

Would Waterman look elsewhere if we wanted Walter? Given his age and the clubs timeline, maybe… but seems unlikely still, so there’d be a pretty big logjam.

A few clubs play with 3 talls in the fwd line.

Adelaide do it, Freo do it, Brisbane did it 2 years ago and will likely do it next year.

Would leave Archer and CDT sharing ruck long term, with Waterman, Shanahan and Walters playing as the keys. All are highly mobile, it's when they slow and can't chase that there's a problem.

Having 5 on the bench makes it a lot easier to carry the extra tall also.

 

[Ilkka Sinisalo]

Which is fine if it's academy and father/son selections. I have no issue with the attempt to properly value academy and F/S picks using the draft pick system.

It's just the concept of being able to accumulate a gazillion trash picks to dump it all on one list spot which demonstrated the system was flawed. I actually prefer we revert to the old system of using a pick in the same round as the one which a club is attempting to acquire the club-tied player. Simple, easy to use and sure it may lead to some unjust valuations but in my view it all evens out in the end.

I don’t really see how this fixes the problem though. A really good team (Brisbane) still gets the Ashcrofts and Annable for super cheap. There’s also the issue that for any clear top 10 talent, any club is just going to trade down to the bottom of the first round. Say the Pies were a bottom 3 club the year that Nick Daicos hit the draft. If you can get him with the last pick in the first round there’s no point in just sitting there and picking him. They’d just trade down with the flag winners or runners up and get some additional draft capital for that year or future years. Which makes it a problem in two ways - they still get Daicos for a bargain bin price and the really good teams quite often will have an opportunity to trade up into the top of the first round.

 

[Forward Press]

I don’t really see how this fixes the problem though. A really good team (Brisbane) still gets the Ashcrofts and Annable for super cheap. There’s also the issue that for any clear top 10 talent, any club is just going to trade down to the bottom of the first round. Say the Pies were a bottom 3 club the year that Nick Daicos hit the draft. If you can get him with the last pick in the first round there’s no point in just sitting there and picking him. They’d just trade down with the flag winners or runners up and get some additional draft capital for that year or future years. Which makes it a problem in two ways - they still get Daicos for a bargain bin price and the really good teams quite often will have an opportunity to trade up into the top of the first round.

Luck of the draw. Basically, I am fine with a reversion to the old system.

Academy picks can also be treated the same way.

Maybe limit it to a maximum of one each in the first round, one each in the second etc but the idea is that yeah it can be unfair but sometimes a generational talent like Ben Cousins, an Ashcroft and Nick Daicos happens to fall into your lap purely because of who their father was and if you can trade to minimise your draft pick paid, all power to you. The current system was an attempt to make clubs pay fair value but now it's very obvious how clubs like Gold Coast stretch the rules - and fair play to them for that. But I think it's inherently broken and I am glad 2026 tightens it up (a bit late now, but oh well).

 

[TerryFilk]

A few clubs play with 3 talls in the fwd line.

Adelaide do it, Freo do it, Brisbane did it 2 years ago and will likely do it next year.

Would leave Archer and CDT sharing ruck long term, with Waterman, Shanahan and Walters playing as the keys. All are highly mobile, it's when they slow and can't chase that there's a problem.

Having 5 on the bench makes it a lot easier to carry the extra tall also.

Yes, but does it work? Usually one of them has to ruck a fair bit and or they need elite smalls and half forwards around them.

If Archer and CDT are good enough to handle the ruck duties the equation becomes a lot easier, it’s just if we also need a pure ruck on top of the key forwards where it becomes a big issue.

 

[bzparkes]

Yes, but does it work? Usually one of them has to ruck a fair bit and or they need elite smalls and half forwards around them.

If Archer and CDT are good enough to handle the ruck duties the equation becomes a lot easier, it’s just if we also need a pure ruck on top of the key forwards where it becomes a big issue.

That's true but all of our blokes are very mobile, especially at ground level, which is usually the issue when you play too many talls.

If they all had the mobility of Matt Flynn, then it'd be a massive issue.