Draft Watcher Knightmare 2020 Draft Almanac

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi KM,as mcdonald and thilthorpe gone by pick 12 of dockers, what tall forward option they have at 12? Do Rac reid worth pick 12 as a reliable forward as he is written as defender in many rankings? Do you think dockers better of going for cook or Carroll instead of reaching for a tall forward and pick a tall forward as a late pick? Matt allison or liam mcmahon or shannon neale any good?

On SM-A205YN using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
blueiris said:
I’m starting to feel we’re interested in Perkins he reminds me a lot of Rayner with the midfielder abilities Rayner doesn’t have the endurance for
Click to expand...

I think people are sleeping on Rayner and what he'll be able to do in the next few years.

I don't see him becoming Dustin Martin or Christian Petracca, but I see him starting to apply himself more over the next couple of seasons and follow a similar growth trajectory, albeit from a lower base to transition to become more than able to play through the midfield. Next year he'll make strides in that direction I'm hoping, but I think 2022/2023 is when he'll make a big jump.

Perkins I don't see as being on the same or nearly the same level as Rayner. He does't have that same size, strength and power to him on that same level. I'm actually finding myself slightly undecided on Perkins' best position. I almost think with the way he kicks and takes on the game half-back will be his best spot. Maybe he can become something like a Hunter Clark if things go right.
 
Vimal Anand said:
Hi KM,as mcdonald and thilthorpe gone by pick 12 of dockers, what tall forward option they have at 12? Do Rac reid worth pick 12 as a reliable forward as he is written as defender in many rankings? Do you think dockers better of going for cook or Carroll instead of reaching for a tall forward and pick a tall forward as a late pick? Matt allison or liam mcmahon or shannon neale any good?

On SM-A205YN using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...

Reid and Cox are the two talls around that Fremantle pick who will be considered. Reid may/may not be available, Cox probably will be. Reid is more a key defender/ruck. While Cox is more a tall wing/key forward. If I have a pick inside the top-20, they're guys I'd let others take, and pass on. After 20, I could justify a Cox relatively more. But I'd much rather a Jackson Callow later on if I don't have a top-2 pick to get a Logan McDonald this year and can't get anything during the trade period.
I'd much rather a Carroll or Cook with that pick. For me it's a reach and too speculative to go for a Reid/Cox given no play this year to track their rate of improvement, as two guys you're drafting off of attributes rather than performance from 2019, which isn't for me enough to justify such an early selection.

Allison and McMahon aren't on my draft board but Shannon Neale is. Neale is intriguing given his combination of rate of improvement in combination with his athleticism. I see Neale as a ruckman rather than a key forward, with his height/athleticism combination interesting me as a good leaper, but then also a good speed/endurance athlete. If he gets stronger without losing his athleticism, I'm interested once he hits his mid 20s how his game can transform.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Thank you
Knightmare said:
Reid and Cox are the two talls around that Fremantle pick who will be considered. Reid may/may not be available, Cox probably will be. Reid is more a key defender/ruck. While Cox is more a tall wing/key forward. If I have a pick inside the top-20, they're guys I'd let others pass on. After 20, I could justify a Cox relatively more. But I'd much rather a Jackson Callow later on if I don't have a top-2 pick to get a Logan McDonald this year and can't get anything during the trade period.
I'd much rather a Carroll or Cook with that pick. For me it's a reach and too speculative to go for a Reid/Cox given no play this year to track their rate of improvement, as two guys you're drafting off of attributes rather than performance from 2019, which isn't for me enough to justify such an early selection.

Allison and McMahon aren't on my draft board but Shannon Neale is. Neale is intriguing given his combination of rate of improvement in combination with his athleticism. I see Neale as a ruckman rather than a key forward, with his height/athleticism combination interesting me as a good leaper, but then also a good speed/endurance athlete. If he gets stronger without losing his athleticism, I'm interested once he hits his mid 20s how his game can transform.
Click to expand...

On SM-A205YN using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Hi KM.

The Dees are looking unlikely to have an early pick which are often used on inside/gun mids or KPPs, and with a need for small forwards (and small forwardsoften able to play fairly early senior footy), which players might be the good options for us here?

I think we’d be more interested in an agile, industrious pressure style forward rather than a low possession goal sneak.
 
Demon 16 said:
Hi KM.

The Dees are looking unlikely to have an early pick which are often used on inside/gun mids or KPPs, and with a need for small forwards (and small forwardsoften able to play fairly early senior footy), which players might be the good options for us here?

I think we’d be more interested in an agile, industrious pressure style forward rather than a low possession goal sneak.
Click to expand...

Lots of small forwards in this draft.

The two best pressure forwards are players where other clubs have first access to them. Specifically Maurice Rioli Jr and Blake Coleman. Rioli Jr is the best pressure player in the draft and is one of those who will bring the second, third and fourth pressure efforts, with Coleman good in his own right.

Corey Durdin and Bailey Laurie otherwise are two who in the second round probably feature and can play those crumbing/pressure forward roles otherwise.

And if miss out for whatever reason, a Will Papley and if you don't mind someone more medium size, a Jackson Cardillo are others who could play those roles and probably only require a last pick in the draft/rookie draft pick. Jack Ginnivan another for scoreboard impact. Options a plenty.

So there are options a plenty this year. Small forwards are a type there is uncommonly good depth of able numbers this year.
 
Last edited:
Knightmare said:
Lots of small forwards in this draft.

The two best pressure forwards are players where other clubs have first access to them. Specifically Maurice Rioli Jr and Blake Coleman. Rioli Jr is the best pressure player in the draft and is one of those who will bring the second, third and fourth pressure efforts, with Coleman good in his own right.

Corey Durdin and Bailey Laurie otherwise are two who in the second round probably feature and can play those crumbing/pressure forward roles otherwise.

And if miss out for whatever reason, a Will Papley and if you don't mind someone more medium size, a Jackson Cardillo are others who could play those roles and probably only require a last pick in the draft/rookie draft pick. Jack Ginnivan another for scoreboard impact. Options a plenty.

So there are options a plenty this year. Small forwards are a type there is uncommonly good depth of able numbers this year.
Click to expand...


Where do you see MRJ going?

A lot of varying views which reminds me of Daniel’s draft year.
 
Scham said:
Where do you see MRJ going?

A lot of varying views which reminds me of Daniel’s draft year.
Click to expand...

Rioli Jr I personally like and consider a best-25 in the draft quality prospect. I see him as largely comparable to Daniel Rioli with a very similar game.

Where does he go? I haven't heard any clubs suggest they'll bid anything inside the first two rounds. So probably 40+ there may be a bid. Though looking at his game and how much clubs like those quick pressure forwards now it does surprise me there hasn't been talk of a bid at least somewhere second round.
 
Hi KM love your work mate best draft guru around just wondering what do you think the swans will do with pick 3 and do you think we will draft a ruckman later one in the draft and will we have enough points left after matching Campbell and gulden cheers Madswan
 
Madswan88 said:
Hi KM love your work mate best draft guru around just wondering what do you think the swans will do with pick 3 and do you think we will draft a ruckman later one in the draft and will we have enough points left after matching Campbell and gulden cheers Madswan
Click to expand...

I think Swans will be lucky enough to not have to match bids on Campbell at 3. Denver Grainger-Barras is my best guess as the favoured player by most clubs here, with Elijah Hollands the other I expect to be strongly considered if Sydney decide they're fine in defence as from a needs perspective many have suggested.

There are a few variables at play re. points and whether there are more picks beyond matching bids. Do Sydney add more players during the trade period? Will more players be delisted? What picks may go in/out? How many players do Sydney want on the senior list? And then you've got the question of what the list sizes will be. With all those question marks it's difficult to say with any certainty how many picks any club would be taking. I suggest most clubs will only be taking three though, so my expectation is Sydney just take the three players.

As things stand, if pick 4 is bid on Campbell and there is a bid say in the early 20s for Gulden as some are predicting, Sydney will be in deficit unless picks are traded in so as to avoid that.
 
The secrets behind how I select key position players better than AFL clubs, analysis of whether clubs should be taking kpps later than they are and where this year's best should go based on those key lessons:
 
Hi KM great job as always specially in a year where very little to no games were played in vic and to even attempt to do this amount of work is brilliant - Well done mate.

Just wanting your thoughts on best available KPF/FF thats the most suitable for the RFC at pick #22/23 or would it be better to go best available mid

2 players im keen on are Liam McMahon & Eddy Ford. Where do you seen them going in the draft range and who in the current game do you see them most like
Also hoping that Maurice Rioli slips past our pick #36 so our rd rounder is utilized but the worry as usual would be DoDo
 
THE_GUN said:
Hi KM great job as always specially in a year where very little to no games were played in vic and to even attempt to do this amount of work is brilliant - Well done mate.

Just wanting your thoughts on best available KPF/FF thats the most suitable for the RFC at pick #22/23 or would it be better to go best available mid

2 players im keen on are Liam McMahon & Eddy Ford. Where do you seen them going in the draft range and who in the current game do you see them most like
Also hoping that Maurice Rioli slips past our pick #36 so our rd rounder is utilized but the worry as usual would be DoDo
Click to expand...

No key forwards I'd personally target at 22/23. Maybe Nik Cox is there and he's a worthy consideration, but my guess is he's gone and personally if I want a key position player I'd prefer Callow. I'd personally use that pick for something else and personally on a best available selection.

If Richmond want a key forward through the draft go get Jackson Callow or Kaine Baldwin at 36. One of them if not both will be there. Or that's what I'd do.

McMahon I see late second round onwards, Ford second round onwards also. Again, at 36 one, the other, if not both should be available. McMahon isn't on my draft board but Ford is, albeit lowish on my board.

Maurice fortunately for Richmond hasn't at least to my knowledge attracted that early draft talk. I find it surprising given his capabilities and those pressure forwards attracting high picks in recent years so we'll see if that changes, but my feeling is a bid for Maurice comes later than 36.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Interested in what you class as second round?

The second round is currently slated to start at pick 21.

But with nga bids and matching, that could see the second round not start until pick 26’ish.

Would it not be better to mention bands, such as top 10 or top 20, 20 to 30, 30 to 40, etc.

There’s every chance this years draft only lasts 3 rounds or between 50 to 60 picks.
 
This is about the draft in general but I can't think of a year which was more up in the air a month out than in 2020.

I mean we don't have a clean number 1 selection right now. Right now conventional wisdom says that Adelaide will pick either McDonald or Hollands, and then North Melbourne will pick the one they don't take, but I was on the north board today and they are getting more and more excited at the prospect of DGB, and how he could be a pick two, so it could see one of Hollands or McDonald falling down a bit further than expected. Also what will the Swans do, I don't have a clue and once we reach Hawthorn, well all bets are off as for all we know McDonald could fall that far, would Hawthorn take McDonald if he fell to their pick.

It is an interesting discussion as right now we don't actually know much of anything, which is unusual as usually by this time the draft order, or at least the top 5 to 10 players is getting more and more set.
 
briztoon said:
Interested in what you class as second round?

The second round is currently slated to start at pick 21.

But with nga bids and matching, that could see the second round not start until pick 26’ish.

Would it not be better to mention bands, such as top 10 or top 20, 20 to 30, 30 to 40, etc.

There’s every chance this years draft only lasts 3 rounds or between 50 to 60 picks.
Click to expand...

By second round, to be specific, those picks that are categorised as second round picks before bidding/before the draft.

When I talk about picks, I'm talking about picks in the context of: this is the pick number today. Bidding comes later and moves all that around, but a second round pick is always a second round pick, regardless of whether it starts at pick 19 or pick 30.
 
RUNVS said:
This is about the draft in general but I can't think of a year which was more up in the air a month out than in 2020.

I mean we don't have a clean number 1 selection right now. Right now conventional wisdom says that Adelaide will pick either McDonald or Hollands, and then North Melbourne will pick the one they don't take, but I was on the north board today and they are getting more and more excited at the prospect of DGB, and how he could be a pick two, so it could see one of Hollands or McDonald falling down a bit further than expected. Also what will the Swans do, I don't have a clue and once we reach Hawthorn, well all bets are off as for all we know McDonald could fall that far, would Hawthorn take McDonald if he fell to their pick.

It is an interesting discussion as right now we don't actually know much of anything, which is unusual as usually by this time the draft order, or at least the top 5 to 10 players is getting more and more set.
Click to expand...

Certainly in terms of the Victorian talent there is a lot of speculation and it will depend ultimately on how much clubs are willing to speculate on a lot of them. I'm speculating minimally, but clubs I suspect will speculate more aggressively as happened last year with the likes of Mitch Georgiades who did not play in his draft year as an interesting precedence to follow and perhaps that best sign as to the way clubs will approach this draft.

I'm expecting Adelaide either bid on JUH first or take Thilthorpe who has mostly been spoken about as their target at 1. Leaving North Melbourne with Logan McDonald at 2 who is believed to be their preferred pick.

Hollands and DGB should be there for Sydney at 3. If Sydney feel comfortable with their existing key defenders, Hollands may be the pick at 3, leaving Hawthorn with DGB.
 
Knightmare said:
I think Swans will be lucky enough to not have to match bids on Campbell at 3. Denver Grainger-Barras is my best guess as the favoured player by most clubs here, with Elijah Hollands the other I expect to be strongly considered if Sydney decide they're fine in defence as from a needs perspective many have suggested.

There are a few variables at play re. points and whether there are more picks beyond matching bids. Do Sydney add more players during the trade period? Will more players be delisted? What picks may go in/out? How many players do Sydney want on the senior list? And then you've got the question of what the list sizes will be. With all those question marks it's difficult to say with any certainty how many picks any club would be taking. I suggest most clubs will only be taking three though, so my expectation is Sydney just take the three players.

As things stand, if pick 4 is bid on Campbell and there is a bid say in the early 20s for Gulden as some are predicting, Sydney will be in deficit unless picks are traded in so as to avoid that.
Click to expand...
Hey KM thanks mate very good read yeah my thoughts are being in Holland’s if available to to partner up with heeney in forward line would be a deadly set up thanks again for the msg back 👍🏻
 
Knightmare said:
Lots of small forwards in this draft.

The two best pressure forwards are players where other clubs have first access to them. Specifically Maurice Rioli Jr and Blake Coleman. Rioli Jr is the best pressure player in the draft and is one of those who will bring the second, third and fourth pressure efforts, with Coleman good in his own right.

Corey Durdin and Bailey Laurie otherwise are two who in the second round probably feature and can play those crumbing/pressure forward roles otherwise.

And if miss out for whatever reason, a Will Papley and if you don't mind someone more medium size, a Jackson Cardillo are others who could play those roles and probably only require a last pick in the draft/rookie draft pick. Jack Ginnivan another for scoreboard impact. Options a plenty.

So there are options a plenty this year. Small forwards are a type there is uncommonly good depth of able numbers this year.
Click to expand...
Where do you see Charlie Lazarro in the picture?
 
tugga said:
Where do you see Charlie Lazarro in the picture?
Click to expand...

Lazarro is draftable. Had a solid 2019 season. He's a mid-late draft chance without being a draft certainty.

Outside those top-30, maybe top-40 after bidding there will be a lot of interpretation given we haven't seen the Victorians this year.
 
Hi KM,

Thanks for all your work.

One thing that I've always wondered about when you talk about your methodology is why you use a rating scale of 0, 0.5, 1 for each criteria.

I would have thought that you would need more points in the scale to be able to judge players accurately. Especially for something like production.

If I had to rate AFL players on production I'd need a scale from 1-10 and even then I reckon if be dishing out a lot of half marks.

Is there a reason that you do it in this way?
 
Knightmare said:
By second round, to be specific, those picks that are categorised as second round picks before bidding/before the draft.

When I talk about picks, I'm talking about picks in the context of: this is the pick number today. Bidding comes later and moves all that around, but a second round pick is always a second round pick, regardless of whether it starts at pick 19 or pick 30.
Click to expand...
When you do rankings, you include nga and father son kids in your rankings.

However these kids are largely considered outside the open draft pool.

So when people look at rankings without the nga and fs kids, you get a truer sense of the depth of the draft.

Which raises the question for me, are Cox and Reid actually going to be available in the second round?

I know you have discussed not drafting tall defenders early in the draft, and believe you can pick them up later in the draft.

But this totally neglects that these kids are most likely gone mid to late first round.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Callow goes top 30, and possibly Baldwin.

We saw it last year, where teams jumped on the perceived second and third tier tall forwards much earlier than where draft watchers rated them.

I believe people need to watch draft trends, as well as consider their own rankings when discussing who might be available and when.
 
flipper83 said:
Hi KM,

Thanks for all your work.

One thing that I've always wondered about when you talk about your methodology is why you use a rating scale of 0, 0.5, 1 for each criteria.

I would have thought that you would need more points in the scale to be able to judge players accurately. Especially for something like production.

If I had to rate AFL players on production I'd need a scale from 1-10 and even then I reckon if be dishing out a lot of half marks.

Is there a reason that you do it in this way?
Click to expand...

A great question and the type of question I was hoping I would receive.

KPPs are the one spot where I have a 'criteria' I follow and maybe I need to develop that with other positions/rolls in future years as my picking of KPPs has of any region on the ground been my strongest. I find with other positions I place a much greater weighting on who they are now and whether they will be a best 22 player pretty well right away and whether there is a clear best position they can settle into v KPPs who you're projecting those 3-4 years ahead on. So it's a much greater focus on production as they're closer to where they'll be. And in that /3 criteria maybe for mids/general forwards or defenders maybe that number is more like /1.5 for production with /0.75 for those other two categories as a quick educated feel as to what I'd consider as that rough balance. Going into 0.75s is messier than I'd ideally like, but perhaps if each of those can be broken into three different components within each category somewhere in there and maybe that works. That might be something I investigate into the future.

I use 0/0.5/1 as a method to keep things tight and not bring too many unnecessary variables into the equation. It could just as easily be counted as 0/1/2 and there is no objective difference. It's just viewing it as like marks out of 100% which is why I play it as /1.

Production absolutely is a key and I've learnt when I haven't included production on a high enough level how that can backfire (Sam Day is that one that really showed me how vital it is with my overrating of him in his draft year), but I've also learnt from watching guys like say Harry McKay where it's speculating that he'll have the production in the future based on late year birthday/being tall and having that expected later physical improvement/still growing meaning he ticks that upside box completely and has the points of difference to go with it. So it's really looking for me pretty evenly at that production, improvement and points of difference characteristics pretty evenly, with history telling me that you want the optimal combination of each of those for maximised chances of success.

Points of difference I feel like is what clubs place too heavy of a weighting into with KPPs as that's generally when you talk to a recruiter what they're talking about first like that's what makes/breaks a prospect and wanting them to be mutli-dimensional and athletic. And I understand their case that guys need to be multi-dimensional and having athleticism is beneficial, but it's leaving out too much of the rest of the pie and it means those such as a Tom Lynch who developed later may not get the credit they should and more often than not those bigger more advanced key forwards who have out and out dominated don't get that level of credit either that perhaps they should.

Regarding production I tend not too much to mind how they're doing it. Different guys have their own unique ways of dominating, though if they're a key forward they need to be hitting the scoreboard enough and the more additional facets of the game they're dominating adds to that case. With production it's very much 0=below average production 0.5= to expectation production 1=great production. So you look at a Logan McDonald and what he's doing this year and it's obvious at nearly three goals per game, WAFL team of the year, no one will dispute he has that production. We can look at a Jackson Callow at what he was doing last year and pretty confidently I'd give him a 1/1. Whereas say a Nik Cox or Zac Reid and they're putting up the sort of numbers you'd expect at that age for someone of draft relevance but without dominating, so it's a pretty clear-cut 0.5 for production with those guys. Then you look at an Ollie Lord as one example and he averaged 5d, less than 1m less than 0.5g and he's a clear-cut 0 for production. Add more numbers and opportunity for variation of numbers and I would find unnecessary added complexity would be entering the equation.

If there are property investors or stock investors out there, it's a bit like a rule that quickly enables you to either qualify and investing opportunity as something worth perusing or quickly disqualify an opportunity, and equally it's a quick way to separate prospects. Often you'll find there will be prospects who will score the same, but at least being able to categorise them based on that points value can tell me that pretty clearly a say Josh Schache is a 2/3 prospect and therefore will not become a star key forward v a say Lukosius/Jamarra/Logan McDonald as those 2.5/3 prospects who pretty clearly are on another level and are those elite key forwards. It's more when you get those guys on the same level or same number of points, then you can really start to go through: who specifically of those two has the better production, who is still growing or showing that rate of improvement on a higher level and who has a more diverse range of points of difference on levels that will translate to AFL play.
 
briztoon said:
When you do rankings, you include nga and father son kids in your rankings.

However these kids are largely considered outside the open draft pool.

So when people look at rankings without the nga and fs kids, you get a truer sense of the depth of the draft.

Which raises the question for me, are Cox and Reid actually going to be available in the second round?

I know you have discussed not drafting tall defenders early in the draft, and believe you can pick them up later in the draft.

But this totally neglects that these kids are most likely gone mid to late first round.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Callow goes top 30, and possibly Baldwin.

We saw it last year, where teams jumped on the perceived second and third tier tall forwards much earlier than where draft watchers rated them.

I believe people need to watch draft trends, as well as consider their own rankings when discussing who might be available and when.
Click to expand...

The NGA, A, F.S kids are all in the pool and can be bid on earlier.

What if I legitimately think that Maurice Rioli Jr is a dead-set top-25 pick and I need someone who can play that kind of role. Will Richmond match bids? I'd suggest probably not. There are guys who go unmatched each year. I flat out loved Biggy Nyuon last year. He wasn't matched even being picked outside-50.

I don't feel like on that basis you necessarily need to exclude those guys.

I understand what you're saying as when those guys are picked, your other picks move back, and that impacts early draft, though with those picks used once you get into the latter part of the draft you're back to getting players at your pick you'd expect more-so. And early draft it will mean dynamics where I could have pick 6 let's say, but Jamarra and Campball may be bid on. Maybe I then feel like a Jones is a best available pick there, and I'm not from my draft board as a result at that pick likely to get someone I see as even the 6th best pick, as it would then be moving back a few spots. Ultimately when you're picking you're fully aware of that context of how valuable a pick is and how far it will likely move back and you account for that during the trade period when making moves and those you may be able to select from at your pick, but at the same time you need those academy/f.s prospects in there as your pick may come up and the highest on your board may be one of those.

Reid certainly, and I'd say most likely Cox will also go first round. Reid is probably before bidding a 5-15 pick, Cox a 10-20 pick for a narrow draft range. And with bidding maybe that extends Cox's range from 15-25, but you're still looking at the same thing and you're still aware in the context which few picks he might be considered for selection if he's someone you're targetting.

Regarding selecting key defenders, those rated high this year I don't consider to be worth where they're likely to go. Callow I'd pick as a key defender and rate higher than I beleive clubs do, so he would be the one I'd be able to take, but with a lot of the rest of the guys eg. Cody Brand I don't consider draftable and he won't feature inside my top-50, whereas on draft day I'd expect a bid comes in the second or third round. That comes down to different talent identification. On occasion I'll rate a KPP higher than clubs will (I did on Biggy last year), but a lot of the time cubs are taking them too early and not taking them necessarily in the right order. If that happens consistently and that's a list need of mine to get a key defender and I don't think one will prove best available value at my pick - I'd be targeting someone either during the trade/free agency period. This year I'd be over the moon if I could get an Aliir Aliir or Tom McDonald through the trade period or Majak Daw as a DFA depending on whether I need more that higher intercepting key defender or someone to play deeper and take the best opposition key forward. They can all play and are all undervalued, to just name three top of mind. If clubs are going to waste picks on particular players earlier than they should and pick someone early than they should out of need, it means all the more opportunity for me picking a player of another type with a higher probability of an AFL career, or stronger AFL career. There is more to teams than key position players and particularly with key forwards their importance has diminished dramatically to the extent that I wouldn't consider any one key forward in the competition to be a top-30 player in the competition today. We no longer have that Buddy level (he's no longer who he was), N.Riewoldt, Pavlich, Fevola, Hall etc. There is no guy on that level or more precisely put that can have that kind of impact on games as consistently anymore with the best key forwards today a clear tier below, just as none of those guys impacted games like Lockett/Dunstall/Carey before them to name just a few. Key defenders on the other hand today are better and more effective than ever and have more diverse games, but as with key forwards, you need to go pick the good ones and not waste your time on guys who project most likely as depth or have a lower probability of career than your risk profile at a given pick suggests would be wise.

Draft trends I consider worth analysing for sure and being aware of. I find often however it's out of overcompensating, whether it's passing on Brodie Grundy until pick 18 by so many teams as so many ruckmen taken early had not lived up to expectation and clubs overadjusted on the wrong player, to Sydney taking a Matthew Ling too early when clubs overvalued speed/athleticism to name just one. You need to make your own calls and make your own analysis as to where guys should be drafted, don't follow the trends yourself and capitalise when clubs overadjust a particular way or have particular preferences that don't match your own. And with KPPs early in the draft they are generally on average taken too early, but there will always also be guys worth that pick so early as a Jamarra and Logan are this year and when that's the case, you take them, just as you would if looking at a draft in hindsight and ordering them based on career performance.

One trend I'm seeing with this draft it feels like to me, and assessing based on past history that medium marking types are getting overvalued. The talk of Henry top-10 according to same makes that plainly obvious that positional/type valuation based on his so-so performance is a long way off. And they're the calls when you're putting a draft board together you need to make. You have to think about when clubs are wrong and make your own player assessments entirely unrelated to what clubs may think. I'm much more interesting in history of success of types in various spots in the draft and looking at how good their game was, and using that to guide me in my future evaluations, than I am with what clubs are concerning themselves with and favouring with the sole relevance in that being where I could if picking snag particular guys or tell me if I can get someone I like later than I otherwise may.

On Callow and Baldwin, I'm not expecting either to go top-30. I might be wrong, but I see clubs passing on Callow due to his physical profile. If we're trend watched we'll observe so many similar physical size guys get overlooked completely. Whereas with a Baldwin having those two major injuries and it's speculative whether a club goes early and that might come down to medicals, but I predict clubs will be somewhat risk averse, particularly within the first-30 when there are guys with good probabilities of AFL careers (with good talent ID) but no body question marks.
 
Knightmare said:
The NGA, A, F.S kids are all in the pool and can be bid on earlier.

What if I legitimately think that Maurice Rioli Jr is a dead-set top-25 pick and I need someone who can play that kind of role. Will Richmond match bids? I'd suggest probably not. There are guys who go unmatched each year. I flat out loved Biggy Nyuon last year. He wasn't matched even being picked outside-50.

I don't feel like on that basis you necessarily need to exclude those guys.

I understand what you're saying as when those guys are picked, your other picks move back, and that impacts early draft, though with those picks used once you get into the latter part of the draft you're back to getting players at your pick you'd expect more-so. And early draft it will mean dynamics where I could have pick 6 let's say, but Jamarra and Campball may be bid on. Maybe I then feel like a Jones is a best available pick there, and I'm not from my draft board as a result at that pick likely to get someone I see as even the 6th best pick, as it would then be moving back a few spots. Ultimately when you're picking you're fully aware of that context of how valuable a pick is and how far it will likely move back and you account for that during the trade period when making moves and those you may be able to select from at your pick, but at the same time you need those academy/f.s prospects in there as your pick may come up and the highest on your board may be one of those.

Reid certainly, and I'd say most likely Cox will also go first round. Reid is probably before bidding a 5-15 pick, Cox a 10-20 pick for a narrow draft range. And with bidding maybe that extends Cox's range from 15-25, but you're still looking at the same thing and you're still aware in the context which few picks he might be considered for selection if he's someone you're targetting.

Regarding selecting key defenders, those rated high this year I don't consider to be worth where they're likely to go. Callow I'd pick as a key defender and rate higher than I beleive clubs do, so he would be the one I'd be able to take, but with a lot of the rest of the guys eg. Cody Brand I don't consider draftable and he won't feature inside my top-50, whereas on draft day I'd expect a bid comes in the second or third round. That comes down to different talent identification. On occasion I'll rate a KPP higher than clubs will (I did on Biggy last year), but a lot of the time cubs are taking them too early and not taking them necessarily in the right order. If that happens consistently and that's a list need of mine to get a key defender and I don't think one will prove best available value at my pick - I'd be targeting someone either during the trade/free agency period. This year I'd be over the moon if I could get an Aliir Aliir or Tom McDonald through the trade period or Majak Daw as a DFA depending on whether I need more that higher intercepting key defender or someone to play deeper and take the best opposition key forward. They can all play and are all undervalued, to just name three top of mind. If clubs are going to waste picks on particular players earlier than they should and pick someone early than they should out of need, it means all the more opportunity for me picking a player of another type with a higher probability of an AFL career, or stronger AFL career. There is more to teams than key position players and particularly with key forwards their importance has diminished dramatically to the extent that I wouldn't consider any one key forward in the competition to be a top-30 player in the competition today. We no longer have that Buddy level (he's no longer who he was), N.Riewoldt, Pavlich, Fevola, Hall etc. There is no guy on that level or more precisely put that can have that kind of impact on games as consistently anymore with the best key forwards today a clear tier below, just as none of those guys impacted games like Lockett/Dunstall/Carey before them to name just a few. Key defenders on the other hand today are better and more effective than ever and have more diverse games, but as with key forwards, you need to go pick the good ones and not waste your time on guys who project most likely as depth or have a lower probability of career than your risk profile at a given pick suggests would be wise.

Draft trends I consider worth analysing for sure and being aware of. I find often however it's out of overcompensating, whether it's passing on Brodie Grundy until pick 18 by so many teams as so many ruckmen taken early had not lived up to expectation and clubs overadjusted on the wrong player, to Sydney taking a Matthew Ling too early when clubs overvalued speed/athleticism to name just one. You need to make your own calls and make your own analysis as to where guys should be drafted, don't follow the trends yourself and capitalise when clubs overadjust a particular way or have particular preferences that don't match your own. And with KPPs early in the draft they are generally on average taken too early, but there will always also be guys worth that pick so early as a Jamarra and Logan are this year and when that's the case, you take them, just as you would if looking at a draft in hindsight and ordering them based on career performance.

One trend I'm seeing with this draft it feels like to me, and assessing based on past history that medium marking types are getting overvalued. The talk of Henry top-10 according to same makes that plainly obvious that positional/type valuation based on his so-so performance is a long way off. And they're the calls when you're putting a draft board together you need to make. You have to think about when clubs are wrong and make your own player assessments entirely unrelated to what clubs may think. I'm much more interesting in history of success of types in various spots in the draft and looking at how good their game was, and using that to guide me in my future evaluations, than I am with what clubs are concerning themselves with and favouring with the sole relevance in that being where I could if picking snag particular guys or tell me if I can get someone I like later than I otherwise may.

On Callow and Baldwin, I'm not expecting either to go top-30. I might be wrong, but I see clubs passing on Callow due to his physical profile. If we're trend watched we'll observe so many similar physical size guys get overlooked completely. Whereas with a Baldwin having those two major injuries and it's speculative whether a club goes early and that might come down to medicals, but I predict clubs will be somewhat risk averse, particularly within the first-30 when there are guys with good probabilities of AFL careers (with good talent ID) but no body question marks.
Click to expand...

I was going to write a post on my overall thoughts on the game, positional value, etc. earlier, but didn't get around to it.

Here goes ...

I mentioned this in a previous post, but I think the Western Bulldogs changed the modern game, and Richmond took what they did and built on it.

Some notes on winning modern day finals and Grand finals (these are just general thoughts - not some precise formula):

- It starts from how your team plays stylistically and also together as a sum of the parts ... 9 times out of 10, a team built on winning contested ball, pressure (leading to coughing up the ball), and capitalizing on chances going the other way with skill and speed once the ball is turned over, or won, is going to beat a more free flowing style team in a final, even if the latter team has arguably more talent or has won more regular season games that year. See Adel vs Rich, and GWS vs Rich as very good examples of this. If you get this part right - your spread of individual talent matters far less. You can find more available players to fit your system and to fit individual roles (providing you can also develop them internally). This is the most important thing to get right with your team in modern football (admittedly, it starts from other things like good club culture, board stability, and so on), and is so important, it can void some of the other points I'm making below.

- Your team has actually got the be able to execute this game plan comes finals time. This is where I place Richmond perhaps on a different level to the Hawks. Although the Hawks teams deserve a lot of credit for showing up consistently come finals time and executing, in my opinion, Richmond have done it to a similar level, but have done it with less talent coming into the club via free agency, and perhaps less individual talent overall on their list. They've relied more on their internal development of players, culture and gameplan. To me - Brisbane are a good example of a team that has improved their gameplan and mentality over the last few years to be more suitable for finals (Brisbane also certainly have the talent to win a GF), but they still aren't executing at the level they need to be come finals time for 4 quarters to beat other teams

- Key forwards aren't usually consistently the best player on your team - but they can certainly win you games almost single handedly in one given finals game (on the way to the grand final), and help carry the load throughout the year. Three examples - Richmond arguably doesn't make it to the GF in 2019 without the game Tom Lynch played against Geelong (I think it was Geelong from memory). West Coast had Kennedy and Darling the year they won it (but I admit their gameplan was still very effective that year). Look at what Hawkins did this year in 1 on 1 contests. At the very least - a good key forward can help you structure up, almost always make a F50 contest 50/50 by bringing the ball to ground, and sometimes entirely dominate a game 1 on 1 vs an opponent and win you a game. It a really tough one on how much to pay the absolute top tier of key position forwards (a Lynch, a Hawkins based on how he played this year and age aside). 800-900k might seem reasonable as long as they are on that top tier level, and are genuinely match winners.

- Although some backmen are good, and you do need a minimum number of certain types of backmen (for example - you need at least two average key defenders, powerful running skillful flankers, and one lockdown small/medium defender) - I don't think any backman is worth paying top dollar to apart from maybe your best key defender if he's amongst the best in the comp (and even then - I'm perhaps only going as high as 700k to 800k if he's truly irreplaceable. But then again - who predicted Grimes would be able to step in like he did when Rance went down for Richmond, and also look at where they took Balta in the draft despite him becoming a star now). You can 'scheme' your backline perhaps better than any part of the ground, as long as your overall game style is effective. Essentially, as long as your overall game plan is effective enough, and you set up your backline structure and gameplan effectively enough - I don't think you need many big name stars there like you might need in the midfield and forward, and you can more easily find 'moneyball' type players to plug in holes or fill a role. Look at Houli - traded from Essendon. Jayden Short and Baker at Richmond as well. Ridley at Essendon. The list goes on. I especially think the pure intercept players (unless they have other traits like speed, elite use of the ball coming out of the backline to set up play, etc) are going to become more dime a dozen in the future - the reality is that it's far easier find guys with athleticism and 'scheme' up third man up scenarios or loose man in defence to intercept, than it is to find other positions on the ground like a really effective small forward (a Charlie Cameron), a good hybrid mid/fwd, a key forward, and so on. You can more easily pull these guys from other positions too - look at Rory Laird for example switching from back to mid for example.

- You absolutely do not need a star ruckman to win a GF, and quite frankly it's a huge mistake paying top dollar in a salary cap based competition unless you have an absolute unicorn that could also go forward and kick goals as a genuine key forward (or massively impact the game in some other way), and has amazing durability (doesn't get injuries). Playing a game style like Richmond for example almost completely negates the need for a top dollar ruckman.

- Team and club culture and stability plays a reasonable part in itself

- Some players are just special as match winners and impact makers, and are generational players. We may not ever see another Dusty for example. His ability to either win finals game outright, or be a huge mismatch nightmare, can win you matches, or throw the other team off their game and structures, and cause them to panic. If there are players that are worth paying $1 million dollars to - it's a Dusty type of hybrid player that can genuinely play midfield and forward, kick you goals, and make game winning plays. Dangerfield is in a similar mold where he can be so damaging going forward from the midfield with his athleticism and physical profile. These hybrid players give you so much value for what you are paying them, even if you're paying them top dollar. These guys also pay for their pricetag in marketing and ticket sales too. Something that is almost never mentioned too is that every player on your team likely knows what another guy is getting paid (roughly). I don't think there's any guy in the AFL that wouldn't get behind paying these sorts of guys $1 million plus as a teammate (and it wouldn't impact team chemistry one bit) - Dusty especially. It's absolutely crucial too that your top paid players perform - you can't afford to miss on these contracts from a list management perspective in a salary cap system.

- It also helps a bit to be a destination club (a Hawthorn, a Richmond, a Collingwood, a Geelong, as examples) that can attract a big name free agent, or a handful of decent free agents purely for match winning capability, or list depth/need purposes (so you aren't solely relying on nailing your picks in the draft every year). This isn't the be all and end all, but it can help over multi year periods with list health, sustainability, and regeneration. It's pretty nice if you're a Richmond to get a Tom Lynch to eventually replace an aging Riewoldt, or if you're a Geelong, and you get a Paddy Dangerfield coming home, or a Jeremy Cameron wanting to come to your club (and can be your next key forward after Tom Hawkins).

There's other things I could write and say, but that's it for this brain dump.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

G
Phantom Draft Goodoil's Phantom Draft
2 3
Replies
66
Views
6K
Lingsface
Lingsface
DQ 4EVER
Phantom Draft Phantom Drafts Advent Calendar
Replies
2
Views
679
RedmanWasHere
RedmanWasHere
Davo-27
Phantom Draft Davo-27's 2025 Draft Thread
Replies
7
Views
624
RedmanWasHere
RedmanWasHere
G
Club Focus Goodoil's Draft Grades
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Richo83
R
I Wouldnt But Greenwood
Struzyna & Doecke 2024 Phantom Draft Edition.
Replies
22
Views
2K
THE_GUN
THE_GUN
Michaels
Phantom Draft AFL 2024 1st Round Mock Draft - No trades or Bids, from the Tigercast crew.
Replies
2
Views
901
RUNVS
RUNVS
PMBangers
Draft Expert PMBangers 2024 Draft Thread and psuedo general draft discussion apparently
17 18 19 20 21
Replies
523
Views
77K
Yoda_
Yoda_

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top