Resource 2024 AFL Draft discussion thread (Wed Nov 20 to Fri Nov 22)

[Vader]

Lol, Strachan has always been very fringe. You couldn't get any more very fringe! There is absolutely no need to give him more than 1 year deals.

Same goes for other players like Borlase.

There will always be players like this on the list who should be getting 1 year deals.

Notice how the better clubs like the Cats do this with many of their players.

Not going to argue with Borlase. Like you, I don't understand why he was given a multi-year contract. Similarly, I don't understand why Cook was given a contract at all - let alone a 2-year deal.

Strachan fills a very specific role, and it's not easy finding players who are both willing & capable of filling it. Lowden & Graham both failed in the role, Strachan has done an excellent job.

Yes, Strachan's shortcomings have become readily apparent in 2024. No argument there. However, it is revisionist garbage to suggest that Reid should have had the prescience to foresee this when negotiating the contract extension in mid-2023.

 

[50BC]

Meh... I'll give you Smith, whose contract was extended when he was stupidly allowed to reach the trigger point this season (at which point his form was beyond abysmal). Strachan & Burgess were already contracted.

More concerning were the decisions to re-sign Cook & Berry, who could have been delisted with no complications. Cook in particular is every bit the list clogger that Burgess/Strachan/Smith are.

Problem is if we had extra list vacancies then the extra picks would have ended up in the 70s when everyone else was done, hardly the pointy end of the draft. We already traded away those rd2 and rd3 picks

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Not going to argue with Borlase. Like you, I don't understand why he was given a multi-year contract. Similarly, I don't understand why Cook was given a contract at all - let alone a 2-year deal.

Strachan fills a very specific role, and it's not easy finding players who are both willing & capable of filling it. Lowden & Graham both failed in the role, Strachan has done an excellent job.

Yes, Strachan's shortcomings have become readily apparent in 2024. No argument there. However, it is revisionist garbage to suggest that Reid should have had the prescience to foresee this when negotiating the contract extension in mid-2023.

There are plenty of other (better) ruckmen than Strachan.

One is playing for Norwood.

 

[Vader]

Problem is if we had extra list vacancies then the extra picks would have ended up in the 70s when everyone else was done, hardly the pointy end of the draft. We already traded away those rd2 and rd3 picks

Not necessarily. If we'd known that we had an extra vacancy to fill then we would have negotiated different trades (e.g. we wouldn't have traded pick #46 to Melbourne, in exchange for their F3.

They were willing to trade away most of our 2024 picks because they knew that we only had 2 vacancies to fill. The second of those was always going to be Welsh, and they were confident that early picks would not be required for bid matching.

 

[Vader]

There are plenty of other (better) ruckmen than Strachan.

One is playing for Norwood.

Boyd wasn't an option when Strachan's contract was signed in mid-2023.

A bird in the hand...

We all get that you hate Strachan. Unfortunately, your whole argument against his retention is based on revisionist nonsense.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Boyd wasn't an option when Strachan's contract was signed in mid-2023.

A bird in the hand...

We all get that you hate Strachan. Unfortunately, your whole argument against his retention is based on revisionist nonsense.

The point is there is no need to give Strachan more than 1 year deals as he is very fringe & can be easily replaced... because we would be replacing buggar all!

You are posting like I'm talking about ROB.

 

[Vader]

The point is there is no need to give Strachan more than 1 year deals as he is very fringe & can be easily replaced... because we would be replacing buggar all!

You are posting like I'm talking about ROB.

The failures of Graham & Lowden says otherwise. Strachan's role is NOT so easily filled.

Let's not forget that there were still people on here arguing that Strachan was better than ROB this time last year. They look like proper gooses (geese) now, but it wasn't as clear cut back then as it is now. Strachan's limitations were exposed this year, but at the time of the contract signing he was still looking the goods.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

The failures of Graham & Lowden says otherwise. Strachan's role is NOT so easily filled.

Let's not forget that there were still people on here arguing that Strachan was better than ROB this time last year. They look like proper gooses (geese) now, but it wasn't as clear cut back then as it is now. Strachan's limitations were exposed this year, but at the time of the contract signing he was still looking the goods.

Lol, it's not hard to find another ruckman who can replace Strachan who can't even run out a game.

It's like your commenting on a completely different player.

Explain to me why he would be hard to replace given he can't even run out an AFL game.

I would prefer to play T Murray & Thilthorpe combo & invest in the future.

 

[Vader]

Lol, it's not hard to find another ruckman who can replace Strachan who can't even run out a game.

It's like your commenting on a completely different player.

Explain to me why he would be hard to replace given he can't even run out an AFL game.

I would prefer to play T Murray & Thilthorpe combo & invest in the future.

Except that his inability to run out a game wasn't apparent in 2023. That was only exposed this year.

You're attacking Reid's 2023 decision based on information which only became apparent in 2024. It's revisionist garbage.

On SM-A5360 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Danger in Texas]

Except that his inability to run out a game wasn't apparent in 2023. That was only exposed this year.

You're attacking Reid's 2023 decision based on information which only became apparent in 2024. It's revisionist garbage.

On SM-A5360 using BigFooty.com mobile app

We still shouldn’t have re-signed a depth ruckman that had only played two career games in five years, at age 28, to a two-year deal. One year I would’ve understood, but a player like him should be contracted on a year-by-year basis

 

[whattagun07]

Just a Draft comment ….. it always amazes me Clubs who end up with multiple picks late in Drafts

ESS have been notorious culprits …. COLL and WB in this draft
You invariably end up with list cloggers

To our credit, whilst we don’t take large numbers of draftees usually …. we don’t take large numbers of draft backend players like others

Give me an unknown list clogger over a known list clogger any day

 

[Vader]

We still shouldn’t have re-signed a depth ruckman that had only played two career games in five years, at age 28, to a two-year deal. One year I would’ve understood, but a player like him should be contracted on a year-by-year basis

That's his role though - and it's one he's filled much better than Graham & Lowden before him.

 

[Danger in Texas]

That's his role though - and it's one he's filled much better than Graham & Lowden before him.

That’s not a high bar, to be fair

Either way, a depth ruckman, no matter how good they are in the SANFL, shouldn’t be getting multi-year deals

 

[50BC]

Not necessarily. If we'd known that we had an extra vacancy to fill then we would have negotiated different trades (e.g. we wouldn't have traded pick #46 to Melbourne, in exchange for their F3.

They were willing to trade away most of our 2024 picks because they knew that we only had 2 vacancies to fill. The second of those was always going to be Welsh, and they were confident that early picks would not be required for bid matching.

Well we could have held onto our 3rd round pick 46, not sure were that would have ended up on the night, nearer 50 maybe. I can't see we were ever going to be able to hold our 2nd rounder and still bring in 2 trades, maybe could have gotten a late pick as change at best

 

[Vader]

Well we could have held onto our 3rd round pick 46, not sure were that would have ended up on the night, nearer 50 maybe. I can't see we were ever going to be able to hold our 2nd rounder and still bring in 2 trades, maybe could have gotten a late pick as change at best

Our 4th round pick ended up at 59.

Our 3rd round pick would have been early enough to grab Dodson.

We can only speculate what picks we could have ended up with if they were trading with the intention of using them in the ND.

Maybe we wouldn't have been so quick to send 25 to Melbourne for ANB...

Don't forget that only 2 of Cumming/ANB/Peatling were trades. They could well have been looking at 1 trade and 1 FA, with a 3rd pick in the ND.

 

[50BC]

Our 4th round pick ended up at 59.

Our 3rd round pick would have been early enough to grab Dodson.

We can only speculate what picks we could have ended up with if they were trading with the intention of using them in the ND.

Maybe we wouldn't have been so quick to send 25 to Melbourne for ANB...

Don't forget that only 2 of Cumming/ANB/Peatling were trades. They could well have been looking at 1 trade and 1 FA, with a 3rd pick in the ND.

Yeah I did quote it as 2 trades. we didn't have much capital to trade with. I just can't see a scenario where we kept rd2 and got those trades done. But it's a bit of a chicken and egg argument.
Personally I dont place nearly as much value on picks after around 20 as many seem to. Of the 30 players selected from picks 21 to 50, history says around 10 will make it and and 20 will fail. They aren't great odds tbh

 

[Vader]

Yeah I did quote it as 2 trades. we didn't have much capital to trade with. I just can't see a scenario where we kept rd2 and got those trades done. But it's a bit of a chicken and egg argument.
Personally I dont place nearly as much value on picks after around 20 as many seem to. Of the 30 players selected from picks 21 to 50, history says around 10 will make it and and 20 will fail. They aren't great odds tbh

We couldn't have done all 3 trades and kept our 2nd.

If we were only landing 2 of our fish, then we're probably only doing 1 trade and 1 FA. In that case, it becomes much easier.

 

[StonesThrow]

Why haven’t we over recent years then?

Yeah good question

 

[Captain Furious]

Lol, Strachan has always been very fringe. You couldn't get any more very fringe! There is absolutely no need to give him more than 1 year deals.

Same goes for other players like Borlase.

There will always be players like this on the list who should be getting 1 year deals.

Notice how the better clubs like the Cats do this with many of their players.

Bit harsh on Borlase. He’s stepped up and done his job every time it’s asked of him, shown he can compete at the level. No one has 5 star KPDs, everyone needs quality depth. If we offer him 1 year, someone offers him more and he leaves.

 

[Crows I Am]

Problem is if we had extra list vacancies then the extra picks would have ended up in the 70s when everyone else was done, hardly the pointy end of the draft. We already traded away those rd2 and rd3 picks

If we had a list vacancy we could have traded back into this year's draft earlier with one of our F3 picks and grabbed Dodson.

 

[Danger in Texas]

If we had a list vacancy we could have traded back into this year's draft earlier with one of our F3 picks and grabbed Dodson.

Yeah I don’t even mind trading away the 2nds for ANB and Peatling

The main issue I have is not opening up that extra list spot

 

[GrommoT]

Saints…

His nickname's all set ... Alex Garron Dodson

 

[ftmch]

Yep some for sure , I’m pretty sure others just wait until they need one then trade one in

But most have at least 2 capable of not 3

We seem to be 0.80 + 0.25 worth of rucks

Yep, exactly right. Mystifying

 

[Mutineer]

Bit harsh on Borlase. He’s stepped up and done his job every time it’s asked of him, shown he can compete at the level. No one has 5 star KPDs, everyone needs quality depth. If we offer him 1 year, someone offers him more and he leaves.

Hasn't looked like ever having any interest not even from the mob down the road.

I'm pretty sure he's been in the same situation as Schoenberg and Burgess in the past and again no interest.

 

[Mostyn]

Yeah I don’t even mind trading away the 2nds for ANB and Peatling

The main issue I have is not opening up that extra list spot

Yeah, me too.

It's the Smith extension that's the issue. We have enormous depth there and he'll spend the whole year in the SANFL. That is an error.

We delist Smith, we keep 46 and we take someone like Charlie West, Dodson, Sam Davidson or Jasper Alger. Or a small forward - but it's absolutely worth doing.