No Oppo Supporters 2025 AFL General Discussion

[LukeParkerno1]

It's in our interest to get Opening Round sorted out to include all teams ASAP, otherwise the AFL is going to fold to the Victorian clubs and pull the whole thing.

Not fussed if they do, the early season bye sucks so much. You can still have “opening round” and start all the games on the same weekend. It’s average having what 4 games one week and then what 6. Who needs a bye in round 2?

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I will never credit a Vic, SA or WA club for good list management, as the whole system is literally geared in their favour.

But I will criticise the Vic, SA or WA clubs for poor list management, as they really have no excuse.

West Coast's decisions re drafting Harley Reid, signing Tim Kelly etc. come to mind.

Every club on the planet would have drafted Reid and they will keep him anyway he’s a generational talent. Before you say oh trade pick 1…you realise how bad the deals were for pick 1? North didn’t offer pick 2 in any deal, they were only trading 1 if 2 was involved. What did you want them to do in the Reid year, 3 rubbish teens picks wasn’t getting near what pick 1 was worth forget points they are irrelevant to a developing club.

The Kelly one was bad though probably made worse by the cost and the fact they could have drafted him in the first place as he was under their nose.

 

[bedford]

Not fussed if they do, the early season bye sucks so much. You can still have “opening round” and start all the games on the same weekend. It’s average having what 4 games one week and then what 6. Who needs a bye in round 2?

We did and a player wouldn't have been rubbed out as well as a key defender through injury

 

[LukeParkerno1]

We did and a player wouldn't have been rubbed out as well as a key defender through injury

No club needs it round 2, it’s just such a lacklustre start. Surely it’s canned after next year at most. You can still start with a northern game and have all the games in one weekend, Brisbane on Thursday night works, then have Sydney on Saturday night with the Carl/Rich game on Friday. Fill the rest.

 

[mattpolo8]

What I would give for the Swans to start doing long-sleeve kits, especially with the Gather Round one.

I bought the red v long sleeve last year from swanshop at hq

 

[Dubai Quacker]

Mark Bayes and Brad Seymour two that come to mind. Jamie Lawson also from memory. All great players too.

I remember sitting in the Brewongle Concourse many years ago & the chap that sat behind me each week used to call Seymour “Butt Boy”.

It took me ages to figure out why.

Wish I had Simpsons aficionado bedford around back in those days - would have saved me the embarrassment of not knowing why Seymour was “Butt Boy”.

 

[caesar88]

Every club on the planet would have drafted Reid and they will keep him anyway he’s a generational talent. Before you say oh trade pick 1…you realise how bad the deals were for pick 1? North didn’t offer pick 2 in any deal, they were only trading 1 if 2 was involved. What did you want them to do in the Reid year, 3 rubbish teens picks wasn’t getting near what pick 1 was worth forget points they are irrelevant to a developing club.

The Kelly one was bad though probably made worse by the cost and the fact they could have drafted him in the first place as he was under their nose.

The bolded I just cannot agree with and is where I think West Coast went wrong.

In the last twenty years, pick 1s have produced two premiership players - Cam Rayner & Tom Boyd (neither All Australians)

Pretty good return. But in the first 35 picks of each draft, it's matched by picks 6, 8, 16, 20, 21, 32 and 35. All those picks have produced the same number of premiership players as pick 1.

Picks 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33 & 34 have all produced more premiership players than pick 1.

And that is just in the first 35 picks of each draft. I couldn't be arsed going further.

I think Harley Reid looks a promising player. I don't know that I can say with much confidence that he will have a better career than guys like Colby McKercher, Nick Watson, Caleb Windsor, Daniel Curtin, Ethan Read, Nate Caddy, Connor O'Sullivan, Darcy Wilson, Will Graham, Lance Collard, Logan Morris, Hugo Garcia, Archie Roberts, Calsher Dear, Harvey Thomas or Lawson Humphries, all promising young players who were also taken in the same draft.

This is not me saying that if you have pick 1 you should just automatically trade it for a pick 3 or pick 26 (six premiership players each in the last twenty drafts.) I just think you can never be so narrow-minded as to think the number one pick and the guy you get with it is the be all that ends all. The number one pick rarely ends up the best player from his draft, so I think for West Coast to go all-in on one player when they could've had two or three instead, was incredibly stupid and foolish by them.

And they did go all in on Reid. I mean FFS they finished 18th with a percentage of 53% and didn't have another pick after Reid until pick 30. Absolute buffoonery.

 

[The King!]

The bolded I just cannot agree with and is where I think West Coast went wrong.

In the last twenty years, pick 1s have produced two premiership players - Cam Rayner & Tom Boyd (neither All Australians)

Pretty good return. But in the first 35 picks of each draft, it's matched by picks 6, 8, 16, 20, 21, 32 and 35. All those picks have produced the same number of premiership players as pick 1.

Picks 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33 & 34 have all produced more premiership players than pick 1.

And that is just in the first 35 picks of each draft. I couldn't be arsed going further.

I think Harley Reid looks a promising player. I don't know that I can say with much confidence that he will have a better career than guys like Colby McKercher, Nick Watson, Caleb Windsor, Daniel Curtin, Ethan Read, Nate Caddy, Connor O'Sullivan, Darcy Wilson, Will Graham, Lance Collard, Logan Morris, Hugo Garcia, Archie Roberts, Calsher Dear, Harvey Thomas or Lawson Humphries, all promising young players who were also taken in the same draft.

This is not me saying that if you have pick 1 you should just automatically trade it for a pick 3 or pick 26 (six premiership players each in the last twenty drafts.) I just think you can never be so narrow-minded as to think the number one pick and the guy you get with it is the be all that ends all. The number one pick rarely ends up the best player from his draft, so I think for West Coast to go all-in on one player when they could've had two or three instead, was incredibly stupid and foolish by them.

And they did go all in on Reid. I mean FFS they finished 18th with a percentage of 53% and didn't have another pick after Reid until pick 30. Absolute buffoonery.

Pick 1 in 2003 went ok premiership wise convenient to cut it at 20 years

 

[LukeParkerno1]

The bolded I just cannot agree with and is where I think West Coast went wrong.

In the last twenty years, pick 1s have produced two premiership players - Cam Rayner & Tom Boyd (neither All Australians)

Pretty good return. But in the first 35 picks of each draft, it's matched by picks 6, 8, 16, 20, 21, 32 and 35. All those picks have produced the same number of premiership players as pick 1.

Picks 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33 & 34 have all produced more premiership players than pick 1.

And that is just in the first 35 picks of each draft. I couldn't be arsed going further.

I think Harley Reid looks a promising player. I don't know that I can say with much confidence that he will have a better career than guys like Colby McKercher, Nick Watson, Caleb Windsor, Daniel Curtin, Ethan Read, Nate Caddy, Connor O'Sullivan, Darcy Wilson, Will Graham, Lance Collard, Logan Morris, Hugo Garcia, Archie Roberts, Calsher Dear, Harvey Thomas or Lawson Humphries, all promising young players who were also taken in the same draft.

This is not me saying that if you have pick 1 you should just automatically trade it for a pick 3 or pick 26 (six premiership players each in the last twenty drafts.) I just think you can never be so narrow-minded as to think the number one pick and the guy you get with it is the be all that ends all. The number one pick rarely ends up the best player from his draft, so I think for West Coast to go all-in on one player when they could've had two or three instead, was incredibly stupid and foolish by them.

And they did go all in on Reid. I mean FFS they finished 18th with a percentage of 53% and didn't have another pick after Reid until pick 30. Absolute buffoonery.

You do realise that NONE of the top 6 picks were offered, I don't know how many times WCE can say it to everyone, they were only trading 1 (and rightly so by the way) if a top 5 pick was in the deal that was the starting point, a bunch of junk teen picks that went out to the 20's would have been the worst deal a club could have made. They tried to trade their F1 live so they actually were actively trying to get inside that first round but it wasn't accepted (Crows traded in to get Curtin).

Forget points, they are so irrelevant here, people on our board and well clubs that use the points always point to the points value, there's a reason that 'index' was changed, it was horrible in determining true value, junk picks don't equal a top 10 pick and teens picks don't equal top 3 picks.

Sure a bunch of those picks went well, they could also end up with a bunch of Konstanty's or something. I'd be taking Harley Reid and it's actually not a debate.

The matching issues caused the mess that was this year, too many academy, nga, FS and it compromised the draft massively. The new index helps this a bit and it will be good to see this in action for all clubs, it's as fair as it's going to get, drafts are never completely fair. It would actually help if clubs actually bid on players where they should ie. Daicos at 1 for goodness sakes, Will Ashcroft at 1, Levi at 1..

 

[Bloods86]

You do realise that NONE of the top 6 picks were offered, I don't know how many times WCE can say it to everyone, they were only trading 1 (and rightly so by the way) if a top 5 pick was in the deal that was the starting point, a bunch of junk teen picks that went out to the 20's would have been the worst deal a club could have made. They tried to trade their F1 live so they actually were actively trying to get inside that first round but it wasn't accepted (Crows traded in to get Curtin).

Forget points, they are so irrelevant here, people on our board and well clubs that use the points always point to the points value, there's a reason that 'index' was changed, it was horrible in determining true value, junk picks don't equal a top 10 pick and teens picks don't equal top 3 picks.

Sure a bunch of those picks went well, they could also end up with a bunch of Konstanty's or something. I'd be taking Harley Reid and it's actually not a debate.

The matching issues caused the mess that was this year, too many academy, nga, FS and it compromised the draft massively. The new index helps this a bit and it will be good to see this in action for all clubs, it's as fair as it's going to get, drafts are never completely fair. It would actually help if clubs actually bid on players where they should ie. Daicos at 1 for goodness sakes, Will Ashcroft at 1, Levi at 1..

I feel like you've just ignored much of the post you're responding to, and then just stated there's no debate.

Personally if I'm rebuilding from a low point, with needs everywhere, and I have any faith in my draft analysts, I'd consider getting a bunch of later first rounders instead of betting big on 1 guy who is widely expected to want to go home in a few years, thus delaying the rebuild.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I feel like you've just ignored much of the post you're responding to, and then just stated there's no debate.

Personally if I'm rebuilding from a low point, with needs everywhere, and I have any faith in my draft analysts, I'd consider getting a bunch of later first rounders instead of betting big on 1 guy who is widely expected to want to go home in a few years, thus delaying the rebuild.

You need extreme quality to win premierships, you just do, look at Brisbane yes they have some great role players but Rayner is pick 1, Clugg is pick 3. That's high end quality. Even we have Mills and Heeney who are top 3 picks.

WCE may have considered it, if a top 5 pick was included in the deal, it wasn't the best offer was a rubbish deal from North that didn't include any of their picks 2/3. That's not a deal any club would take. They tried to trade in, didn't work, so be it.

WCE will get a better deal if Reid goes home than they would if they took the North deal, he goes to Essendon they are getting their first (a top 5 pick) plus their f1/f2 at least. That's already significantly better.

 

[Bloods86]

You need extreme quality to win premierships, you just do, look at Brisbane yes they have some great role players but Rayner is pick 1, Clugg is pick 3. That's high end quality. Even we have Mills and Heeney who are top 3 picks.

WCE may have considered it, if a top 5 pick was included in the deal, it wasn't the best offer was a rubbish deal from North that didn't include any of their picks 2/3. That's not a deal any club would take. They tried to trade in, didn't work, so be it.

WCE will get a better deal if Reid goes home than they would if they took the North deal, he goes to Essendon they are getting their first (a top 5 pick) plus their f1/f2 at least. That's already significantly better.

We've beaten teams in grand finals that have better players on paper and had more high draft picks.

What about Neale, Zorko, Lohmann, Cameron etc? Were they top draft picks or are they not high end quality?

Eagles will be getting draft picks in your scenario, which means their rebuild is delayed/stifled by a few years.

 

[SM]

We've beaten teams in grand finals that have better players on paper and had more high draft picks.

What about Neale, Zorko, Lohmann, Cameron etc? Were they top draft picks or are they not high end quality?

Eagles will be getting draft picks in your scenario, which means their rebuild is delayed/stifled by a few years.

We've also been smashed in several GFs by teams with high draft picks?

Interesting names you've picked out there, and not one of the best on ground players Cam Rayner. What pick was he?

I don't think anyone is saying that every player in the side has to be pick one mate..

 

[LukeParkerno1]

We've beaten teams in grand finals that have better players on paper and had more high draft picks.

What about Neale, Zorko, Lohmann, Cameron etc? Were they top draft picks or are they not high end quality?

Eagles will be getting draft picks in your scenario, which means their rebuild is delayed/stifled by a few years.

Lohmann was a first rounder for starters you know and Cameron cost one to trade him from Adelaide, they weren't cheap.

Again you are not understanding it, WCE said it straight out the trade had to include a top 5 pick (they liked McKercher especially and Curtin) plus extras to get them talking.

So again you are asking a team to accept a deal that's complete rubbish. If North offered 2/3 plus a pick in the teens then sure WCE would have considered it, but the offer was their 3 picks in the teens which went out to 25 plus...

Go on tell me a trade they SHOULD have accepted, and don't use the points back then please it's been canned for a very good reason.

I wouldn't even trust their recruiting staff, they traded 3 out for Baker and Ed Allen when they could have taken a jet midfieder. Least they can't stuff up taking Reid and being done.

 

[Bloods86]

We've also been smashed in several GFs by teams with high draft picks?

Interesting names you've picked out there, and not one of the best on ground players Cam Rayner. What pick was he?

I don't think anyone is saying that every player in the side has to be pick one mate..

The claim was you need extreme quality (being connected to high picks) to win premierships. If I can show that isn't necessarily true (comparative to the other team), then I've proved the point I'm making.

I mean, if someone specifically mentions a player (Rayner) as a high pick, and is using him to tout the need to have high picks to win premierships, then a) why would I bring up the same player as a counter argument (bizarre) and b) showing that high quality, even better quality imo, can be found with later picks, undercuts the argument I'm countering.

 

[Bloods86]

Lohmann was a first rounder for starters you know and Cameron cost one to trade him from Adelaide, they weren't cheap.

Again you are not understanding it, WCE said it straight out the trade had to include a top 5 pick (they liked McKercher especially and Curtin) plus extras to get them talking.

So again you are asking a team to accept a deal that's complete rubbish. If North offered 2/3 plus a pick in the teens then sure WCE would have considered it, but the offer was their 3 picks in the teens which went out to 25 plus...

Go on tell me a trade they SHOULD have accepted, and don't use the points back then please it's been canned for a very good reason.

I wouldn't even trust their recruiting staff, they traded 3 out for Baker and Ed Allen when they could have taken a jet midfieder. Least they can't stuff up taking Reid and being done.

Lohmann was a late first which you've just been scoffing at!

Cameron was a rookie pick! We're talking about drafting quality here.

I am understanding it. You and West Coast seem to think that they had to get a Top 5 pick in order to get a good deal. I'm not saying they accept the deal in front of them, but refusing to accept anything unless there was a Top 5 pick included, when their focus player came with significant go home risk, then it seems a bit blinkered tbh.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

The claim was you need extreme quality (being connected to high picks) to win premierships. If I can show that isn't necessarily true (comparative to the other team), then I've proved the point I'm making.

I mean, if someone specifically mentions a player (Rayner) as a high pick, and is using him to tout the need to have high picks to win premierships, then a) why would I bring up the same player as a counter argument (bizarre) and b) showing that high quality, even better quality imo, can be found with later picks, undercuts the argument I'm countering.

If you don't like Rayner, how about McCluggage (pick 3)...teens picks are all well and good, if they aren't actually 24 plus on draft night. Blame the matching system for the mess luckily it's been cleaned up a bit this year

WCE will get a significantly better deal this year if he goes to Essendon or Hawthorn actually, and even then I don't even think he leaves yet, FA maybe but that's whatever.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Lohmann was a late first which you've just been scoffing at!

Cameron was a rookie pick! We're talking about drafting quality here.

I am understanding it. You and West Coast seem to think that they had to get a Top 5 pick in order to get a good deal. I'm not saying they accept the deal in front of them, but refusing to accept anything unless there was a Top 5 pick included, when their focus player came with significant go home risk, then it seems a bit blinkered tbh.

Cameron was a rookie pick, he was traded to Brisbane for pick 11 pretty sure, was around that range. That's paying for quality. It's fine having one pick in the teens and he was seen at the time as a what on earth pick, was a massive bolter. You don't need 3 picks.

You still haven't told me a deal from a club they should have accepted.

There was nothing on the table that was near even fair, and yes a top 6 pick had to be included, we are talking selection 1 here. The North deal was terrible, so what other deal should they have been open to? Look at the draft from 15 onwards that year and bare in mind Cleary wasn't available it thinned out massively.

 

[Bloods86]

If you don't like Rayner, how about McCluggage (pick 3)...teens picks are all well and good, if they aren't actually 24 plus on draft night. Blame the matching system for the mess luckily it's been cleaned up a bit this year

WCE will get a significantly better deal this year if he goes to Essendon or Hawthorn actually, and even then I don't even think he leaves yet, FA maybe but that's whatever.

I've already responded to your earlier post about needing extreme quality (connected to high picks). You responded by countering your own point about late first rounders e.g. with Lohmann and ignoring Cameron was a rookie pick.

Eagles may well get a higher pick or picks if Reid goes, but it'll be several years down the track and a delayed/stifled rebuild.

Of course, if your aim is to win drafts and/or trade periods, that's fine. But I would argue that building a better team, and earlier, is probably worth considering.

 

[SM]

The claim was you need extreme quality (being connected to high picks) to win premierships. If I can show that isn't necessarily true (comparative to the other team), then I've proved the point I'm making.

I mean, if someone specifically mentions a player (Rayner) as a high pick, and is using him to tout the need to have high picks to win premierships, then a) why would I bring up the same player as a counter argument (bizarre) and b) showing that high quality, even better quality imo, can be found with later picks, undercuts the argument I'm countering.

What on earth are you on about? You handpicked several players which someone else pointed out were predominantly trades in from other clubs (for high draft picks) and ignored a number one pick they had in their side who was one of their best performers. No one is suggesting that all your players need to be extreme quality but that having extreme quality complemented by other players wins premierships. All you've proved is you haven't understood the point being made.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I've already responded to your earlier post about needing extreme quality (connected to high picks). You responded by countering your own point about late first rounders e.g. with Lohmann and ignoring Cameron was a rookie pick.

Eagles may well get a higher pick or picks if Reid goes, but it'll be several years down the track and a delayed/stifled rebuild.

Of course, if your aim is to win drafts and/or trade periods, that's fine. But I would argue that building a better team, and earlier, is probably worth considering.

It's not worth taking way under the odds and that's what you are asking WCE to do. What deal should they have taken, actually tell us a club, and what they could have offered and if it's the North deal it was terrible. I've already said if they got pick 3 plus lets say pick 18 or whatever plus a swap the next draft (say their third for north's second) that would be about right, but none of picks 2/3 were on the table.

You are asking WCE to be like our blokes taking unders, sure it can work one in 5, the other 4 times though...

 

[Dubai Quacker]

The bolded I just cannot agree with and is where I think West Coast went wrong.

In the last twenty years, pick 1s have produced two premiership players - Cam Rayner & Tom Boyd (neither All Australians)

Pretty good return. But in the first 35 picks of each draft, it's matched by picks 6, 8, 16, 20, 21, 32 and 35. All those picks have produced the same number of premiership players as pick 1.

Picks 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33 & 34 have all produced more premiership players than pick 1.

And that is just in the first 35 picks of each draft. I couldn't be arsed going further.

I think Harley Reid looks a promising player. I don't know that I can say with much confidence that he will have a better career than guys like Colby McKercher, Nick Watson, Caleb Windsor, Daniel Curtin, Ethan Read, Nate Caddy, Connor O'Sullivan, Darcy Wilson, Will Graham, Lance Collard, Logan Morris, Hugo Garcia, Archie Roberts, Calsher Dear, Harvey Thomas or Lawson Humphries, all promising young players who were also taken in the same draft.

This is not me saying that if you have pick 1 you should just automatically trade it for a pick 3 or pick 26 (six premiership players each in the last twenty drafts.) I just think you can never be so narrow-minded as to think the number one pick and the guy you get with it is the be all that ends all. The number one pick rarely ends up the best player from his draft, so I think for West Coast to go all-in on one player when they could've had two or three instead, was incredibly stupid and foolish by them.

And they did go all in on Reid. I mean FFS they finished 18th with a percentage of 53% and didn't have another pick after Reid until pick 30. Absolute buffoonery.

Just noticed a typo in your post caesar88 & thought I'd better bring it to your attention (I know you're a stickler for accuracy). I've amended accordingly, to save you the trouble.

I think Harley Reid looks a promising player. I don't know that I can say with much confidence that he will have a better career than guys like Angus Sheldrick, Colby McKercher, Nick Watson, Caleb Windsor, Daniel Curtin, Ethan Read, Nate Caddy, Connor O'Sullivan, Darcy Wilson, Will Graham, Lance Collard, Logan Morris, Hugo Garcia, Archie Roberts, Calsher Dear, Harvey Thomas or Lawson Humphries, all promising young players who were also taken in the same draft.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

What on earth are you on about? You handpicked several players which someone else pointed out were predominantly trades in from other clubs (for high draft picks) and ignored a number one pick they had in their side who was one of their best performers. No one is suggesting that all your players need to be extreme quality but that having extreme quality complemented by other players wins premierships. All you've proved is you haven't understood the point being made.

Daniher was also a former top 10 selection who had a big influence on their year, and if the new matching rules were in he'd have been pick 1-3. Finding gems in the middle rounds are critical but I'm yet to see a side least lately that doesn't have at least 2-3 real top A line draft selections. We have 3 ourselves in Heeney, Mills and Blakey. Pies have a few including Daicos, Brisbane have them, if the Hawks win this year they have them in Watson, etc

 

[Bloods86]

Cameron was a rookie pick, he was traded to Brisbane for pick 11 pretty sure, was around that range. That's paying for quality. It's fine having one pick in the teens and he was seen at the time as a what on earth pick, was a massive bolter. You don't need 3 picks.

You still haven't told me a deal from a club they should have accepted.

There was nothing on the table that was near even fair, and yes a top 6 pick had to be included, we are talking selection 1 here. The North deal was terrible, so what other deal should they have been open to? Look at the draft from 15 onwards that year and bare in mind Cleary wasn't available it thinned out massively.

Again, we are talking about DRAFTING quality. Unless you say that Cameron isn't quality, then my counter-point is valid.

Didn't the Eagles knock back Pick 2, and 2 late firsts from North, for 1 and 23?

They also knocked back an offer from the Dees which included 6 and 11, and a future 1st.

I think these are reasonably fair for a player looking likely to want to leave.

May have even been able to swing some future swaps as well.

Eagles reject three first-rounders and huge FOUR-pick offer as Pick 1 trade talks ramp up

Pick 1 trade talks ramp up as Eagles reject three first-rounders, huge FOUR-pick offer

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[SM]

Again, we are talking about DRAFTING quality. Unless you say that Cameron isn't quality, then my counter-point is valid.

Didn't the Eagles knock back Pick 2, and 2 late firsts from North, for 1 and 23?

They also knocked back an offer from the Dees which included 6 and 11, and a future 1st.

I think these are reasonably fair for a player looking likely to want to leave.

May have even been able to swing some future swaps as well.

Eagles reject three first-rounders and huge FOUR-pick offer as Pick 1 trade talks ramp up

Pick 1 trade talks ramp up as Eagles reject three first-rounders, huge FOUR-pick offer

www.foxsports.com.au

Your argument seems to use a healthy dose of hindsight to make it work. You're essentially arguing that Cameron as a quality pick up late in the draft is the rule not the exception and WCE should have been happy to take late picks because they can be confident of picking up a player of Cameron's quality.

Which is rubbish.