Phantom Draft Dinnaz 2023 Draft Compendium

[dinnaz]

The mixture of heights around even though within 3cm is a factor

Ive seen Smith at 200 and Rudd at 192, not a ruck for Smith at AFL and not a KPF for Rudd at AFL but a 3rd tall

Smith can be a ruck for sure, just with likely losing hitouts has to be a really elite battler body on body a bit like Mumford, and then get around the ground better than the lumberers. Would want to kick a lot more goals in the WAFL colts if he's going to be a viable KPF though.
Rudd as a 3rd tall is his spot. Should be there as a rookie if anyone is keen on him.

 

[Keystone agony]

Smith can be a ruck for sure, just with likely losing hitouts has to be a really elite battler body on body a bit like Mumford, and then get around the ground better than the lumberers. Would want to kick a lot more goals in the WAFL colts if he's going to be a viable KPF though.
Rudd as a 3rd tall is his spot. Should be there as a rookie if anyone is keen on him.

I think by the time Ewan Smith is developed 6-7 years away rucks will need to be that 204cm size and those guys good jumpers

Rudd ill have going in ND at this stage, there is still a place for thise in between sizes as long as tou have certain assets, he moves quite well from what ive seen

 

[dinnaz]

I think by the time Ewan Smith is developed 6-7 years away rucks will need to be that 204cm size and those guys good jumpers

Rudd ill have going in ND at this stage, there is still a place for thise in between sizes as long as tou have certain assets, he moves quite well from what ive seen

If there's one thing i'm beginning to see is that there's an ideal player and athlete for each position yet most guys won't fit into that exact mould. Kind of like how Lance Franklin is a great player but isn't a great contested mark overhead which is a skill you that you would traditionally associate with a CHF.

There's always pro's and cons and ways around shortcomings. If you look at Luke Jackson, he is 199cm but compensates for a few cm by having a leap. He's great at center clearances but will be beaten at ball ups & throw ins (where there's no run up) by bigger bodies especially late in the game. Conversely he really follows up at ground level well and should be able to cover more ground game day as he carries less weight.

 

[Footy Heads]

Top 30 Draft board by any chance?

 

[dinnaz]

Top 30 Draft board by any chance?

Ill get on it. Still a few champs games to watch and then to change my mind 1000 times

 

[dinnaz]

Added some links to games for ease of access

 

[Footy Heads]

Keen to see your updated rankings Dinnaz

 

[dinnaz]

Keen to see your updated rankings Dinnaz

Been away for a little bit. However off the top of my head:

• Reid is great to watch but is a lot closer to the chasing pack than everyone would have you believe.
• I'm still very big on Connor O'Sullivan.
• Duursma is still a bit hit and miss, though he did spent a lot of time up forward in the champs which is the reason.
• Is Watson going to end up like Jack Higgins and be relegated to a fwd pocket/flank forever? I fully expect him to start off as a fwd pocket at AFL, but how much he will run through the midfield is the question.
• Sanders did his thing at the top level. Will only drop down if others really turn it on late in the season.
• McKercher, the same as Sanders. Has the pace and evasiveness but I still want to see him play well in tough conditions and show more of a contested side to his game.
• Archer Reid is going to drop down as he had periods of dominance but never tore a game apart like Walter.
• Edwards rucked the whole time but didn't have the impact I thought he was capable of. Just kind of took the hitouts and moved to the next stoppage. I have him early 20's, sliding but I think a club will take him earlier based on a need.
• Curtin was really good at times but I still have doubts on his ability to play tall. As a midfielder doesnt use his size all that well and isnt great on the deck. I see him settling like Jordan Ridley as a 3rd tall in defence, or a bit how Jack Watts was actually a pretty good flanker with his skills.
• Tholstrup has a bit of mongrel in him which is great to see in a fwd Great intangible.
• Kentfield was disappointing though I think though I still feel he is a solid choice in the second round.
• Hall was very vanilla, I expected more and have him sliding.
• Koen Sanches was very good up forward and in the midfield. I have him rising
• Moir was still quiet though SA were poor, others coming in ahead of him for sure.
• Delean has a bit more substance to his game than Moir but once again with SA poor there wasn't a lot of opportunity.
• Freijah was pretty quiet.
• Lual was good and i'll keep a closer eye on him.
• Im not massively high on Caddy especially with his patchy form.

 

[dinnaz]

Update:
Data dump in the attached spreadsheet. Added a sh1tload of stats from the U18 state comps. Most comps have a month plus finals to go so i'll update it at the end of the year at some point.
By the way SA sucks to find dirt on players. Optus could take a leaf out of their book.

 

[dinnaz]

---August top 20---​

Champs are done and i've got a good handle on the top lot. As always ill flesh things out a little bit more as the year goes on. Finals are approaching and prospects are playing state league footy which is always a great thing to see. *I'll drop a phantom draft later, so as right now this is a pure best of list without taking into account bidding or needs.

Because everyone loves tiers:

	Player	#	Club
#1	Harley Reid	5	Bendigo Pioneers
#2	Connor O'Sullivan	8	Murray Bushrangers
#3	Colby McKercher	27	Tasmania Devils

-----

	Player	#	Club
#4	Jed Walter	36	Gold Coast
#5	Zane Duursma	9	Gippsland Power
#6	Ryley Sanders	15	Sandringham Dragons

-----
more to come...

 

[Coona Blues]

---August top 20---​

Champs are done and i've got a good handle on the top lot. As always ill flesh things out a little bit more as the year goes on. Finals are approaching and prospects are playing state league footy which is always a great thing to see. *I'll drop a phantom draft later, so as right now this is a pure best of list without taking into account bidding or needs.

Because everyone loves tiers:

	Player	#	Club
#1	Harley Reid	5	Bendigo Pioneers
#2	Connor O'Sullivan	8	Murray Bushrangers
#3	Colby McKercher	27	Tasmania Devils

-----

	Player	#	Club
#4	Jed Walter	36	Gold Coast
#5	Zane Duursma	9	Gippsland Power
#6	Ryley Sanders	15	Sandringham Dragons

-----
more to come...

WA poster and West Coast supporter talking Dan Curtin out of top half dozen. No agenda here…

 

[tenderwarrior]

WA poster and West Coast supporter talking Dan Curtin out of top half dozen. No agenda here…

O'Sullivan at 2 is more surprising than Curtin not in top 6

 

[dinnaz]

WA poster and West Coast supporter talking Dan Curtin out of top half dozen. No agenda here…

I've said it before: He's a good player, but I just don't rate his overhead ability which is kind of the point in drafting a tall. He's a terrific kick which is why you'll want to use him offensively maybe as a 3rd tall or winger where he can float around free and rack it up.

O'Sullivan at 2 is more surprising than Curtin not in top 6

He's an absolute beast and can everything pretty well. Is the kind of key defender you can build a team around. I think a lot are sleeping on him and you'll see a rise on a lot of boards late.

 

[Smythe]

I've said it before: He's a good player, but I just don't rate his overhead ability which is kind of the point in drafting a tall. He's a terrific kick which is why you'll want to use him offensively maybe as a 3rd tall or winger where he can float around free and rack it up.

He's an absolute beast and can everything pretty well. Is the kind of key defender you can build a team around. I think a lot are sleeping on him and you'll see a rise on a lot of boards late.

He has been in that 7-12 region for me most of the year. The best utility for years by a margin. I loved him last year and all this year. My last ranking a month or so ago i had him at 11 and can honestly see him being taken from as early as 5 onwards, but not 2.

 

[Futbolista]

Evan Smith is an interesting one. I'm surprised he got an invite to the national combine and I've watched every game he's played at colts level. He gives effort, immense effort in fact but whichever club drafts him has to understand that they are dealing with a very long term project player like Callum Jamieson (West Coast).

But good luck to the guy. I enjoy watching him play and one can never be in doubt that he is totally invested in his mighty black ducks.

The 198cm ruck/utility that is catching my eye is Kayle Gerreyn (WP/2006). He is dominating PSA/state/colts every time he plays. Started the year listed at 192cm and is now listed at 198cm. Great ruck craft. Dare I say it, I don't think he needs to grow any more to be a successful ruck. He will outcraft bigger guys and has those lovely Indigenous skills to boot.

 

[RedmanWasHere]

The 198cm ruck/utility that is catching my eye is Kayle Gerreyn (WP/2006). He is dominating PSA/state/colts every time he plays. Started the year listed at 192cm and is now listed at 198cm. Great ruck craft. Dare I say it, I don't think he needs to grow any more to be a successful ruck. He will outcraft bigger guys and has those lovely Indigenous skills to boot.

He's Gerreyn up for 2024 domination.

Has to be a monty for the AFL's Academy.

 

[Futbolista]

He's Gerreyn up for 2024 domination.

Has to be a monty for the AFL's Academy.

All jokes aside, he's WA's best hope for a first round pick in 2024. Check out some of the footage of him in the 16's champs playing as an overager (And dominating as he should). Imposing player!

 

[flipper83]

I've said it before: He's a good player, but I just don't rate his overhead ability which is kind of the point in drafting a tall. He's a terrific kick which is why you'll want to use him offensively maybe as a 3rd tall or winger where he can float around free and rack it up.

If I recall you were a fan of Busslinger last year. How would you compare the two?

 

[dinnaz]

All jokes aside, he's WA's best hope for a first round pick in 2024. Check out some of the footage of him in the 16's champs playing as an overager (And dominating as he should). Imposing player!

Ill keep an eye out for him but he wasn't very noticeable having only played 3 colts games for a poor team this year.
My singular note next to him is that he's good overhead
If he was to be a 1st round talent for 2024 i'd hope he would be one of the better players now and even pushing for a reserves/league berth as an underager.

 

[Futbolista]

Ill keep an eye out for him but he wasn't very noticeable having only played 3 colts games for a poor team this year.
My singular note next to him is that he's good overhead
If he was to be a 1st round talent for 2024 i'd hope he would be one of the better players now and even pushing for a reserves/league berth as an underager.

He's stuck away in PSA for Wesley mate. He dominates in PSA. Obviously he can't play colts often. Let's see if West Perth pull the trigger on him in 2 weeks time, then finals, if they make it, as East Perth might catch them.

 

[dinnaz]

If I recall you were a fan of Busslinger last year. How would you compare the two?

Yeah he's a gun too and I think the dogs got a good one there. Busslinger got on the end of everything that came in at colts level.
Busslinger is better overhead and elite at reading the play. I have him as quite a bit better with his bodywork too. Plays like a true KPP like a McGovern/May type of roadblock. The only real negative I had was he's a tad slow off the mark.

Curtin is a lot more athletic and mobile though nothing like Luke Jackson which is why a lot of people don't think he will thrive as a midfielder. I think he's a poor key fwd based on the few early games at colts this year. He really plays best as a loose defender and will be busy in the back half with the uncontested possessions. Is a better kicks you'll see in a tall player and is one of the best this year maybe even the best. I kind of get Lukosius/Sicily vibes but not as good.

Curtin looks more AFL ready at the same point as he's more filled out (8kg heavier at the same point) and has a bit of versatility and I think is best suited as a 3rd tall in defence. Higher floor but lower ceiling.

 

[dinnaz]

Player development over a career:​

The majority of players follow a traditional trajectory of development which would include junior footy, U18's footy, state league, and finally AFL. The largest gains for development happen when young. Each year growing, becoming stronger & fitter, learning and experiencing. Improvements then come incrementally along with natural fluctuations (good/bad seasons, injury, personal) during peak years.

AFL	Age	Output compared to career max
Year 1	19	38%
Year 2	20	69%
Year 3	21	74%
Year 4	22	91%
Year 5	23	100%
Year 6	24	90%
Year 7	25	90%
Year 8	26	94%
Year 9	27	88%
Year 10	28	85%
Year 11	29	96%
Year 12	30	87%
Year 13	31	83%
Year 14	32	78%

After being drafted this player developed each year with the majority of improvement coming in the first few years 1-4 with a somewhat logarithmic growth style. This player had their best season by year 5 in the afl (age 23) but produced peak football from years 4 to 11 before declining afterwards.
Those games played in years 1, 2 and 3 are actually played at below AFL standard (which is about 80% in this case) but that investment paid off quickly and that match experience no doubt helped.



As shown above, even the draftees with the highest potential need to improve with the hope that they will continue to develop into the upper echelons of the AFL and become stars of the comp.



Adding to the previous example, this new player (orange) failed to improve past their second season and spent the entire career below or just at the AFL standard (80%) before being delisted. The first 2 years were promising, yet failed to progress past that point in years 3 and 4.



Having looked at a traditional AFL developmental trajectory how can we apply this to drafting and predicting an outcome - boom (blue) or bust (orange)?

The first outcome I take is that once in the system you have 3-4 years to improve and reach a decent level of play to show AFL viability. As a draftee it helps to be ready to push your limits from day one if you are already at a reasonable level. The best players each year (top 10) are amongst the fittest and strongest already, which is one of the reasons why so many play large portions of their debut season and improve from there to be successful.

The obvious disadvantage to being at peak fitness/strength/skills at age 18 when drafted, is that there's less room to improve in those areas. This player here hit peak form in year 1 (amazing) and kept that form over their whole career before slowly diminishing after 30. The AFL standard in this case would be around 85% so the full career was at average or above average without reaching elite levels.

 

[dinnaz]

Projecting player development​

When analysing draftees I think of what kind of trajectory they will have in the back of my mind. If you are picking them then you are automatically thinking optimistically. Will they improve through the roof and be a 10 year player at an elite level (example 1 from above), or will they be limited in improvement but still be good enough like example 3 from above.

I'm of the opinion that you draft not really ever knowing what you are going to get so it's better to minimise the guesswork. A safe pick when drafting (to me anyway) is a player that is already competing at a high level that you hope can become even better. Best case an elite top 10 in the competition player, worst case a 200 game clubman. A risky pick is a player who has to bridge a bigger gap to get to that similar level no matter how they project to improve.

You can never know for sure but an indicators for a draftee are the gap between their 17th year and 18th year. The competition is similar for the two seasons and it's a lot closer to the finished product.

	K	H	D	M	HO	T	G
Age 17	5.3​	4.7​	10​	3.3​	0​	2​	0.7​
Age 18	12.2​	12.6​	24.8​	4​	0​	6.6​	0.8​

There's a huge difference here indicating a higher rate of improvement similar to example 1.

	K	H	D	M	HO	T	G
Age 17	10.1​	11.9​	22​	3.4​	0​	2.5​	0.4​
Age 18	12.7​	13.7​	26.3​	4.3​	0​	3.3​	0.7​

A small improvement across the board. This indicates a smaller amount of projected development like seen in example 2.

	K	H	D	M	HO	T	G
Age 17	11.4	6.9	18.3	4.4	2.4	4.5	2.1
Age 18	11.9	8.7	20.6	3.3	0.1	4.4	1.4

Two seasons of similar output with the underage year actually being slightly better with more goals. This player seems to have stagnated, indicating a career trajectory similar to example 3.

 

[dinnaz]

Time for some concepts​

At first view of the draft most regular supporters check who their team drafted with little insight as to why. This comes with the basic assumption that players are taken in consecutive order, best to worst with rookies all being long shots at best. After all everyone knows how much of a star the upcoming #1 pick will be.

I have always looked at the draft and have been amazed at how the late hits are overlooked and how many early picks are busts. This comes along with a little chuckle at the AFL boffins drafting athletes over players and some healthy skepticism about how good player X is.

The easy answer to the question is to say that they got it wrong, which is true when assessing the outcomes, but that's not always true when looking with a bit more insight. Sometimes things just don't work out. The more correct answer is that recruiters had no idea that player X could produce such high level football.

The amount of safe picks in any year is quite low. Something like 15 players a year will play 200 games with maybe 10 in the 1st round of the national draft, plus another 5 throughout various other avenues. Outside of the first round things get a lot harder to predict as players have more flaws, or are a long way off being match ready or in general just aren't as good.

When taking a purely whose best approach where do you go after the sure things are off the board? At this point everyone has their own opinions & ideas.

• Do you pick the elite testing athlete? Imagine you have two identical players in every way except one has better endurance and pace, it's an obvious pick.
• Do you pick the injured 16 yr old star? They were in the top handful 2 years ago before serious injury. Are they still projecting to be elite?
• Do you pick the best attribute? The best contested mark available can't kick straight and struggles to read the play.
• Do you pick the late bloomer? Who has switched codes only a year ago but is great with little experience.
• Do you pick the lazy footballer? Produces results but is unfit and plays selfishly.
• Do you pick the next best? Hope they can carve out a career as a role player despite projecting to be sub par - average.

 

[Davo-27]

Projecting player development​

When analysing draftees I think of what kind of trajectory they will have in the back of my mind. If you are picking them then you are automatically thinking optimistically. Will they improve through the roof and be a 10 year player at an elite level (example 1 from above), or will they be limited in improvement but still be good enough like example 3 from above.

I'm of the opinion that you draft not really ever knowing what you are going to get so it's better to minimise the guesswork. A safe pick when drafting (to me anyway) is a player that is already competing at a high level that you hope can become even better. Best case an elite top 10 in the competition player, worst case a 200 game clubman. A risky pick is a player who has to bridge a bigger gap to get to that similar level no matter how they project to improve.

You can never know for sure but an indicators for a draftee are the gap between their 17th year and 18th year. The competition is similar for the two seasons and it's a lot closer to the finished product.

	K	H	D	M	HO	T	G
Age 17	5.3​	4.7​	10​	3.3​	0​	2​	0.7​
Age 18	12.2​	12.6​	24.8​	4​	0​	6.6​	0.8​

There's a huge difference here indicating a higher rate of improvement similar to example 1.

	K	H	D	M	HO	T	G
Age 17	10.1​	11.9​	22​	3.4​	0​	2.5​	0.4​
Age 18	12.7​	13.7​	26.3​	4.3​	0​	3.3​	0.7​

A small improvement across the board. This indicates a smaller amount of projected development like seen in example 2.

	K	H	D	M	HO	T	G
Age 17	11.4	6.9	18.3	4.4	2.4	4.5	2.1
Age 18	11.9	8.7	20.6	3.3	0.1	4.4	1.4

Two seasons of similar output with the underage year actually being slightly better with more goals. This player seems to have stagnated, indicating a career trajectory similar to example 3.

it doesnt account for changes in these players roles, as you probably know, in their underage years they are given roles in the team to enter the team, not as a top talent for the year usually, for example a player who is a midfielder will play forward hurting his ability to show his real ability, then in his draft year he is given that primary role of midfielder, boosting his stats, it might even go vice versa, where he gets his primary role as an underager and then tries to add flexibility to his resume in his draft year, hurting his stats ect, stats are useless without context, also it doesnt indicate how good they played or whether they were getting useless poss, like kick ins ect(trust me theres a lot of players who try and find ways to stat pad knowing that people will judge them not on quality but on stats), i think looking at stats should be the last thing you do, 1st see if they can play at a level needed to play AFL competitively.

imo the best way to view who can really play is at the state champs, forget state leagues ect, so many look good at the CTL, sanfl u18s and wafl colts to then flop when the pressure is on at the state rep games, thats the real acid test.