Game Day 2024 AFL Draft - Nights 1 & 2, from 7pm AEST

[hairy biker]

Quick search seems to indicate there hasn't been much discussion on the NM 2025 1st rounder that they had on the table.

Apparently from Pick 8 in the 2024 draft they were offering up their 2025 pick, originally as a direct swap and then, according to the NM list boss, from the late teens onwards they were looking at getting something back.

Of course they finally did the deal with Richmond.
The Tigers pick 27 (2024) and Richmond's 2nd rounder (2025) for NM's 1st pick in 2025.

It seems to me to be a potential missed opportunity for the Swans.

This is the league ladder at the end of 2024;


Does anyone see NM making significant improvement?
For example Adelaide in 15th spot, 'won' 5 and a half games more and had a % better by 30%.

In 2025 we have 3 relatively highly rated Academy players.
Twomey had King in his 10 to watch for 2025 and rookieme central had King, Carmichael and Chamberlain on their 25 for 2025 watchlist.
(As an aside Kade Herbert made both lists for 2024 and went undrafted, so certainly not foolproof).

Nonetheless I think it's reasonable to assume that there will be bidding on Academy players relatively early in the 2025 draft and that our 2025 1st rounder will need to be traded out to acquire points to meet bids.

So the question I have is why did we not trade out one of our 1st rounders in 2024 to acquire a likely very early pick in 2025 and hopefully pick up a top 5 player in that draft, prior to being forced to bid match.
In the worse case scenario of a bid coming for one of our academy players prior to our 2025 'NM' pick we would likely receive significant offers for that pick (and associated points).

Using positions and draft value index points equivalent for 2024;
Richmond pick 27 (703 points), Richmond 2nd rounder 2025 - pick 28 (677) total = 1380
NM pick 2 2025 (2517).

Difference = 1137 (equivalent to pick 15).

Now the DVI will change in 2025 and I have made the assumption that Richmond and NM will finish bottom 2 again, but nonetheless it indicates the desperation of NM to get back into the 2024 draft to select a KPD.

So doing the maths if we gave up pick 22 and our 2nd rounder in 2025 (again based on our 2024 finishing position) and similar bidding patterns year on end;
Pick 22 (845) and Syd 2nd rounder 2025 - pick 39 (446) total = 1291

Difference = 1226 (equivalent to pick 13).

So the points differential in trading with Richmond is marginally better (by 89 points), but it doesn't account for us being potentially worse in 2025 (Richmond of course can't be worse) and it provides greater certainty for NM with them having access to pick 22 rather than 27 and the potential for their target being off the board by 27.

Now yes lots of assumptions, but a deal that I think NM would have accepted (preferring 22 rather than dealing with the uncertainty of getting their target and working on a Swans drop off in 2025) and a deal that would allow us to pick up a top 5 player in 2025, when we are almost certainly going to have to trade out our 'natural' 1st rounder in 2025 for points to match bids on Academy players.

So the choice; lose Dattori (of course could still have been there at 26) and the points associated with our 2nd rounder in 2025 and pick up a top 5 pick in 2025 instead.

I would have done the trade.

tl;dr We should have traded pick 22 to NM for their 2025 1st rounder and picked up a top 5 player in 2025 prior to having match bids for our 2025 Academy prospects.

 

[anotherletdown]

Quick search seems to indicate there hasn't been much discussion on the NM 2025 1st rounder that they had on the table.

Apparently from Pick 8 in the 2024 draft they were offering up their 2025 pick, originally as a direct swap and then, according to the NM list boss, from the late teens onwards they were looking at getting something back.

Of course they finally did the deal with Richmond.
The Tigers pick 27 (2024) and Richmond's 2nd rounder (2025) for NM's 1st pick in 2025.

It seems to me to be a potential missed opportunity for the Swans.

This is the league ladder at the end of 2024;
View attachment 2174584

Does anyone see NM making significant improvement?
For example Adelaide in 15th spot, 'won' 5 and a half games more and had a % better by 30%.

In 2025 we have 3 relatively highly rated Academy players.
Twomey had King in his 10 to watch for 2025 and rookieme central had King, Carmichael and Chamberlain on their 25 for 2025 watchlist.
(As an aside Kade Herbert made both lists for 2024 and went undrafted, so certainly not foolproof).

Nonetheless I think it's reasonable to assume that there will be bidding on Academy players relatively early in the 2025 draft and that our 2025 1st rounder will need to be traded out to acquire points to meet bids.

So the question I have is why did we not trade out one of our 1st rounders in 2024 to acquire a likely very early pick in 2025 and hopefully pick up a top 5 player in that draft, prior to being forced to bid match.
In the worse case scenario of a bid coming for one of our academy players prior to our 2025 'NM' pick we would likely receive significant offers for that pick (and associated points).

Using positions and draft value index points equivalent for 2024;
Richmond pick 27 (703 points), Richmond 2nd rounder 2025 - pick 28 (677) total = 1380
NM pick 2 2025 (2517).

Difference = 1137 (equivalent to pick 15).

Now the DVI will change in 2025 and I have made the assumption that Richmond and NM will finish bottom 2 again, but nonetheless it indicates the desperation of NM to get back into the 2024 draft to select a KPD.

So doing the maths if we gave up pick 22 and our 2nd rounder in 2025 (again based on our 2024 finishing position) and similar bidding patterns year on end;
Pick 22 (845) and Syd 2nd rounder 2025 - pick 39 (446) total = 1291

Difference = 1226 (equivalent to pick 13).

So the points differential in trading with Richmond is marginally better (by 89 points), but it doesn't account for us being potentially worse in 2025 (Richmond of course can't be worse) and it provides greater certainty for NM with them having access to pick 22 rather than 27 and the potential for their target being off the board by 27.

Now yes lots of assumptions, but a deal that I think NM would have accepted (preferring 22 rather than dealing with the uncertainty of getting their target and working on a Swans drop off in 2025) and a deal that would allow us to pick up a top 5 player in 2025, when we are almost certainly going to have to trade out our 'natural' 1st rounder in 2025 for points to match bids on Academy players.

So the choice; lose Dattori (of course could still have been there at 26) and the points associated with our 2nd rounder in 2025 and pick up a top 5 pick in 2025 instead.

I would have done the trade.

tl;dr We should have traded pick 22 to NM for their 2025 1st rounder and picked up a top 5 player in 2025 prior to having match bids for our 2025 Academy prospects.

I would have probably had both on the table. One in to the future and the other to split into 2 later picks. Depth from 20-45 was relatively even this year.

That NM deal would have probably put us ahead of any potential bid. Pretty short sighted really

 

[McRobie]

I tell you what if anyone goes by Fox they will never know , because they don't know F all

It was one example. Anyone who can’t read between those lines knows F all.

 

[McRobie]

Twomey had him going at 30 and a possible as high as 18.

Cal Twomey's Phantom Draft: Top 30, late picks, whispers

Who will your club take in this year's AFL Draft? Our guru makes the call

www.google.com

Maybe his range for some people was in the 30's but our club could have had him higher on their own board (his athletic potential is definitely higher for instance).

And differences in opinion are one thing but I'm sorry but you are literally ruling out a kid before he has even stepped in the club, that is a vast overreaction.

He had a brilliant second half of the year and actually fits a need on our list.

I would have liked us personally to look at an Armstrong or Whitlock, but I trust our recruiters so will back us in from here. Plus the AFL is gradually moving away from talls (even the Port Adelaide recruiter mentioned this).

A vast over reaction to say he was “brilliant”. He did some good things and had decent games.
Of course he can be a good player, but odds suggest he won’t make it. With low disposal numbers and inconsistent performances to date.
Our recruiters have been dreadful in the first round. What have they done to earn your trust to suggest they didnt whiff on this one? Even McDonald looks a bust.
I bet you’ve been all in on every round 1 pick we’ve had sighting “I trust the recruiters”.
The last time we hit on someone in the first round was Rowbottom in 2018. I mean that’s truly embarrassing. And then you’re telling me I’m an idiot for casting doubt in this flyer.
The odds of on you being right on this one are very low, that’s just factual.

 

[SeanM]

Our recruiters have been dreadful in the first round. What have they done to earn your trust to suggest they didnt whiff on this one? Even McDonald looks a bust.

When you look at all the players taken after Logan. I still think he was close to best available at our pick in that draft.

 

[McRobie]

When you look at all the players taken after Logan. I still think he was close to best available at our pick in that draft.

I’ll concede that. Just looked. It’s a truly woeful draft.

 

[bedford]

I’ll concede that. Just looked. It’s a truly woeful draft.

Key forwards take time and his work rate is 1st class , let's hope he goes to another level and remember the blokes around him vanish at times , McLean , Amartey and Wayward

 

[tombomb]

A vast over reaction to say he was “brilliant”. He did some good things and had decent games.
Of course he can be a good player, but odds suggest he won’t make it. With low disposal numbers and inconsistent performances to date.
Our recruiters have been dreadful in the first round. What have they done to earn your trust to suggest they didnt whiff on this one? Even McDonald looks a bust.
I bet you’ve been all in on every round 1 pick we’ve had sighting “I trust the recruiters”.
The last time we hit on someone in the first round was Rowbottom in 2018. I mean that’s truly embarrassing. And then you’re telling me I’m an idiot for casting doubt in this flyer.
The odds of on you being right on this one are very low, that’s just factual.

McDonald needs to keep improving but calling him a bust is ridiculous.

 

[Bonz]

A vast over reaction to say he was “brilliant”. He did some good things and had decent games.
Of course he can be a good player, but odds suggest he won’t make it. With low disposal numbers and inconsistent performances to date.
Our recruiters have been dreadful in the first round. What have they done to earn your trust to suggest they didnt whiff on this one? Even McDonald looks a bust.
I bet you’ve been all in on every round 1 pick we’ve had sighting “I trust the recruiters”.
The last time we hit on someone in the first round was Rowbottom in 2018. I mean that’s truly embarrassing. And then you’re telling me I’m an idiot for casting doubt in this flyer.
The odds of on you being right on this one are very low, that’s just factual.

I would hardly call Logan a failure.

His improving by the season, and ended out with 32 goals in 23 and 37 in 24. His only 22 and still building as well.

Next year his on track for a 45 odd goal season as a player who leads up the ground and also also assists in defence. His several years younger than Amartey/ Mclean and well and truly ahead of the two of them at the same age. Will easily be playing 200 odd games in our side.

I haven't been all in on every first round pick we have selected and have had doubts on players before, but all being said outside of turning up on that last Saturday in September (yes it hurts, but there is no reason to overreact about it), our club has shown to be pretty astute in their recruiting generally and can build a successful list (Something we have been doing for over 20 years now).

Also note Rowbottom was a mid 20's pick (similar to both lads we drafted this year), generally that's second round. (It's good to note that players drafted between 20-30 in the draft play on average 67 games with their drafted club, our ratio here really isn't that bad.

Lastly I never called you an idiot in any of my posts. I never attack the man, nor do I attack freshly drafted players who would likely be reading all these comments on themselves after they get drafted.

 

[Bonz]

McDonald needs to keep improving but calling him a bust is ridiculous.

His improved season on season, he kicked 37 goals this year as a forward who spends half his time up the ground whilst also chopping out in defence.

His developing completely fine, the angst over him on here is a bit ridiculous.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

His improved season on season, he kicked 37 goals this year as a forward who spends half his time up the ground whilst also chopping out in defence.

His developing completely fine, the angst over him on here is a bit ridiculous.

People forget it was basically his second season as a key forward as we barely played him the season prior. 37 goals, I'd expect that to got to 48 ish this year.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

As for the North pick, they were wanting something back with our selections so it wasn't as simple for us.

 

[Bandicoot]

Maybe.

It is a bit strange to me that we didn't trade for at least one extra future selection. Could be a real problem next year.

I agree with you yet LP1 wanted us to trade our F1 for a pick this year.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I agree with you yet LP1 wanted us to trade our F1 for a pick this year.

I would have yes still maintain we should have. Doubt it would have got more than 25 ish though

 

[Bloods86]

I agree with you yet LP1 wanted us to trade our F1 for a pick this year.

I also would have prior to the draft, but based on our first 3 picks, we probably would have picked a speculative winger with it.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

More confident and happy with the picks we took after looking a bit deeper into the ones from our second to 4th selections.

 

[Kbroome]

More confident and happy with the picks we took after looking a bit deeper into the ones from our second to 4th selections.

Yep when you start to link it in with the future academy selections and how players will be positioned in the VFL squad i think we got the right roles just hope these guys can kick on and be nurtured in the right positions in the VFL to prep them to play in the seniors

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Yep when you start to link it in with the future academy selections and how players will be positioned in the VFL squad i think we got the right roles just hope these guys can kick on and be nurtured in the right positions in the VFL to prep them to play in the seniors

I just hope with the selections we reduce the key talls, the structure was our issue when it counted and no it's not just the GF it's all the big games

 

[Kbroome]

I just hope with the selections we reduce the key talls, the structure was our issue when it counted and no it's not just the GF it's all the big games

Yep and i think thats why Bowman was selected even if it was a "bolter" as per some. Gives us more marking depth but gives us more speed in the forward line. Also is good depth to Hayward if we want 1 medium forward.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Yep and i think thats why Bowman was selected even if it was a "bolter" as per some. Gives us more marking depth but gives us more speed in the forward line. Also is good depth to Hayward if we want 1 medium forward.

I'd be playing Dattoli first but agree. Cleary obviously is in for Parker, though I hope we don't pigeon hole him as a forward, I'd like him to take a few centre midfield minutes too

 

[Kbroome]

I'd be playing Dattoli first but agree. Cleary obviously is in for Parker, though I hope we don't pigeon hole him as a forward, I'd like him to take a few centre midfield minutes too

Cleary should in all honesty be taking Gulden's minutes in the centre circle.

Gulden should be exclusively on the outside as whenever he goes inside he tends to just snap it over his shoulder.

Agree with Dattoli in for Campbell

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Cleary should in all honesty be taking Gulden's minutes in the centre circle.

Gulden should be exclusively on the outside as whenever he goes inside he tends to just snap it over his shoulder.

Agree with Dattoli in for Campbell

Realistically Cleary won't be ready to do all the mid minutes but even if it's taking the 15-20% where Heeney rests forward or whatever.

I like those changes you named. Not a massive fan of Campbell to be honest

 

[Bonz]

I'd be playing Dattoli first but agree. Cleary obviously is in for Parker, though I hope we don't pigeon hole him as a forward, I'd like him to take a few centre midfield minutes too

Dattoli and Bowman are quite different players and have different traits.

Wouldn't rule out either right now depending on what the coaches think is required.

Agree Clearly should be in front though, would love to see a forward line of McDonald, Amartey, Papley, Haywood, Clearly l, Campbell and Wicks round 1 (with the option of a resting Heeney, Warner type). Would be quite mobile, fast with good added pressure.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Dattoli and Bowman are quite different players and have different traits.

Wouldn't rule out either right now depending on what the coaches think is required.

Agree Clearly should be in front though, would love to see a forward line of McDonald, Amartey, Papley, Haywood, Clearly l, Campbell and Wicks round 1 (with the option of a resting Heeney, Warner type). Would be quite mobile, fast with good added pressure.

Dattoli for Campbell for me, unless he shows a fair bit in the prseason. Whoever shows more in the pre season gets that spot.

 

[Bandicoot]

and Nankervis, Darcy Cameron. Other players don't want to move to Sydney. Even father sons like Dunkley would rather play in Melbourne. That is OK.
We need more players from home staying home.
Look at Warner. We also have two of them and the best one won't dispel rumors of moving back to WA. This will be one of the biggest news stories of 2025.
Victoria has about 70% of the draft players. GWS players don't go to Sydney. They usually find a club back in their home state, usually Victoria. Like I said. That is OK.
The Academy just evens it up.

It wasn't that Dunkley didn't want to move to Sydney. It was that his father hated the Swans due to his forced retirement. Obviously as a kid growing up he would have been subjected to his father's feelings.