Resource 2016 AFL Draft Order

[grouse mate]

Depending on what GWS has outside the 1st rounders they have, they may be able to get those kind of points available. 3 1st rounders again right now would be pretty crazy for GWS. Name a top 4 team that's ever been able to do that haha.

We will need 3 more for next year, reckon thats where our trading will be based on.

 

[dlanod]

Essendon won't. Brisbane and Freo are distinct possibilities.

Don't know that Brisbane would, with the exception of Bowes if he's still rated in the top 3 come the end of the year (homegrown lad, area of need, looks quality). I don't think they'll want Macreadie given they already have a surplus of talls.

 

[dlanod]

And not being in the inner sanctum of essendons recruiters, neither do you. But we have our opinions and that's fine.

Experts in the AFL recruiting have Macreadie in their top bunch so I'm basing my thoughts on that.

He doesn't have to be in the inner sanctum of Essendon recruiters - their recruiters have gone on the public record and said exactly what he's trying to explain to you after last year's draft period - Essendon don't even bother putting the academy kids (or father/sons) on their draft board and hence don't research them because they know they won't get them, and they view it as effectively wasting resources. It was why they didn't bid on Hopper when everyone expected them to. I remember it because I was very surprised that they'd say exactly that at the time because from an independent POV it undermines the bidding system and also gives opposing clubs a bit of a leg up.

 

[Ants]

Spreadsheet is incorrect Saints didn't trade their 2016 4rd round pick.

I didn't think it was possible to trade 4th round picks full stop.

He doesn't have to be in the inner sanctum of Essendon recruiters - their recruiters have gone on the public record and said exactly what he's trying to explain to you after last year's draft period - Essendon don't even bother putting the academy kids (or father/sons) on their draft board and hence don't research them because they know they won't get them, and they view it as effectively wasting resources. It was why they didn't bid on Hopper when everyone expected them to. I remember it because I was very surprised that they'd say exactly that at the time because from an independent POV it undermines the bidding system and also gives opposing clubs a bit of a leg up.

That's on the public record, but we did bid on Silvagni. So I'm not sure if I believe it. And I would be pretty annoyed (and surprised) if we weren't monitoring the academy/father son players. What happens if we rate one significantly higher than their own club? We would be fools to not bid in that situation.

 

[JD Tomahawk]

Clubs need to stop giving GC and GWS first round picks. Or they'll end up winning the next 10 flags

 

[boncer34]

Dodoro has previously said that he doesn't research academy prospects that intently, because if they're worth their salt the clubs won't let them leave. So no, they won't.

Would love to read his exact words?

 

[TerryWallet]

That's on the public record, but we did bid on Silvagni. So I'm not sure if I believe it. And I would be pretty annoyed (and surprised) if we weren't monitoring the academy/father son players. What happens if we rate one significantly higher than their own club? We would be fools to not bid in that situation.

My impression of the Dodoro bid on Silvagni was a pre-arranged nod and wink to his mate Steve Silvagni. They are good mates.

It was a token bid, just giving a touch of legitimacy for Carlton to use their pick on the Head Recruiters son.

EFC had NO thoughts on actually picking Jack Silvagni and doesn't detract from their apparently stated ethos on not wasting time on other Club's obvious pickups.

 

[coniglio_number1]

We have pulled all our scouts from every state except our own and have just phil Scully scouting in Victoria. We wont want a pick before our academy selections if we haven't even been watching them. Only Marshall would be selected with collingwoods pick if it remains a live selection at that stage.

Club will actively trade for future picks to secure our position in the 2017 draft and that all depends on if the league shifts the goalposts on academies yet again

 

[Donakebab]

My impression of the Dodoro bid on Silvagni was a pre-arranged nod and wink to his mate Steve Silvagni. They are good mates.

It was a token bid, just giving a touch of legitimacy for Carlton to use their pick on the Head Recruiters son.

EFC had NO thoughts on actually picking Jack Silvagni and doesn't detract from their apparently stated ethos on not wasting time on other Club's obvious pickups.

Totally agree. Even remember a cheeky smile from both Dodo and SOS on draft day when it was called out.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-dr...he-20s-for-jack-silvagni-20151124-gl748w.html

Essendon recruiter Adrian Dodoro is a friend of Stephen Silvagni's and he had a laugh as he called Jack Silvagni's name out for the Bombers.

"I laughed. I thought it was quite funny," Stephen Silvagni said. "They actually interviewed Jack quite a few times. It was nice they rated him quite highly and I thought he was a chance to get called out at 24, 25, but once that got through I knew something was coming.

"I had no say in the decision but certainly my understanding was we would match (a pick for Jack) in that second round."

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-11-...ierce-rivals-pay-fair-price-for-jack-silvagni

Essendon list manager Adrian Dodoro said he was determined to not let Carlton recruit Silvagni with a later draft pick.

"I just want to keep the opposition down the road honest, that's all," he said.

"We weren't going to let them get away with murder.

"The kid is a very good player in his own right and he deserved to get drafted a little higher than when he was picked."

It even reads as a bit of banter between mates.

 

[Lore]

Spreadsheet is incorrect Saints didn't trade their 2016 4rd round pick.

Thanks for pointing it out, I'll double check and fix it.


If anyone else notices anything in the spreadsheet that's inaccurate or if you can suggest any improvements, just tag me and let me know.

edit: fixed. Turns out there was some slightly ambiguous language on one of the AFL's draft things on their website that I originally used as reference.

 

[boncer34]

So Essendon may use pick 1 to bid.

 

[HBF]

So Essendon may use pick 1 to bid.

Sounds like it.

 

[Freoforever86]

He doesn't have to be in the inner sanctum of Essendon recruiters - their recruiters have gone on the public record and said exactly what he's trying to explain to you after last year's draft period - Essendon don't even bother putting the academy kids (or father/sons) on their draft board and hence don't research them because they know they won't get them, and they view it as effectively wasting resources. It was why they didn't bid on Hopper when everyone expected them to. I remember it because I was very surprised that they'd say exactly that at the time because from an independent POV it undermines the bidding system and also gives opposing clubs a bit of a leg up.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/ess...h/news-story/c0956ff3da96a0a413c3fe90a85bb071

So.. this is exactly what I was talking about. I was talking about Essendon bidding with pick 2 if Brisbane got pick 1 though.

As the cats poster said above, clubs need to make GWS (not so much GC) use their early picks on academy's & not gift them 1st rounders.

 

[dlanod]

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/ess...h/news-story/c0956ff3da96a0a413c3fe90a85bb071

So.. this is exactly what I was talking about. I was talking about Essendon bidding with pick 2 if Brisbane got pick 1 though.

I don't think there was any confusion about what you were talking about. You just seemed to think it required "inner sanctum" knowledge to suggest that Essendon is unlikely to bid on Bowes, which is incorrect - it easily follows from public comments by Essendon staff last year.

That article does absolutely nothing to change that as it is purely just speculation by "staff writers" - no quotes or indication of Essendon's actual thinking. As an additional note, anyone claiming that "In other words, there would be no No. 1 pick in next year’s draft." undermines any credibility on draft commentary they might have laid claim to. Anyone with any familiarity with academy bidding or even last year's draft would know that Gold Coast would end up with pick 1 and Essendon moves down to pick 2.

 

[Freoforever86]

I don't think there was any confusion about what you were talking about. You just seemed to think it required "inner sanctum" knowledge to suggest that Essendon is unlikely to bid on Bowes, which is incorrect - it easily follows from public comments by Essendon staff last year.

That article does absolutely nothing to change that as it is purely just speculation by "staff writers" - no quotes or indication of Essendon's actual thinking. As an additional note, anyone claiming that "In other words, there would be no No. 1 pick in next year’s draft." undermines any credibility on draft commentary they might have laid claim to. Anyone with any familiarity with academy bidding or even last year's draft would know that Gold Coast would end up with pick 1 and Essendon moves down to pick 2.

The inner sanctum quote was a sarcastic remark to another poster who was having a go about my opinion, so you're taking it out of context.

Never said the article was gospel, just stating that it's popular opinion that teams need to bid early to force the expansions to use their early picks on the stud academy players where they should be used.

The no number 1 pick comment on the article was strange

 

[boncer34]

I don't think there was any confusion about what you were talking about. You just seemed to think it required "inner sanctum" knowledge to suggest that Essendon is unlikely to bid on Bowes, which is incorrect - it easily follows from public comments by Essendon staff last year.

That article does absolutely nothing to change that as it is purely just speculation by "staff writers" - no quotes or indication of Essendon's actual thinking. As an additional note, anyone claiming that "In other words, there would be no No. 1 pick in next year’s draft." undermines any credibility on draft commentary they might have laid claim to. Anyone with any familiarity with academy bidding or even last year's draft would know that Gold Coast would end up with pick 1 and Essendon moves down to pick 2.

Considering the bloke was getting slammed for having the opinion that Essendon might bid and low and behold turns out he's not the only one thinking it I'd argue a simple "Yep turns out your not the only one that thinks that" would do.

Also I would still love to read Dodoro saying we don't bother looking at academy players? Be fascinating to here his justification. I asked eth-dog for the quote but he seems to have vanished from this thread temporarily.

 

[dlanod]

Never said the article was gospel, just stating that it's popular opinion that teams need to bid early to force the expansions to use their early picks on the stud academy players where they should be used.

I'm sure it's a popular opinion, but I find clubs don't tend to base their actions off popular opinion. Instead they tend to trust their own judgement, and in this case Essendon is unlikely to bid on anyone, Brisbane is unlikely to bid on Macreadie, and I won't claim to know what Fremantle will do.

 

[dlanod]

Also I would still love to read Dodoro saying we don't bother looking at academy players? Be fascinating to here his justification. I asked eth-dog for the quote but he seems to have vanished from this thread temporarily.

I recall it hearing it on radio. I did have a quick search and it didn't seem to have been widely reported, which is not unexpected given it was an off-hand comment and probably means more to us draft nerds than the average AFL follower.

 

[boncer34]

I recall it hearing it on radio. I did have a quick search and it didn't seem to have been widely reported, which is not unexpected given it was an off-hand comment and probably means more to us draft nerds than the average AFL follower.

Trade radio?

 

[dlanod]

Trade radio?

I was thinking SEN, but it could've been trade radio. Could've even been replayed audio from a TV interview. Unfortunately eight months or so ago is a bit of a stretch where I heard something.

 

[boncer34]

I was thinking SEN, but it could've been trade radio. Could've even been replayed audio from a TV interview. Unfortunately eight months or so ago is a bit of a stretch where I heard something.

Fair enough. I just, sadly, listened to an absurd amount of the TR last year so wondered if I'd missed it.

Hopefully eth-dog may have a quote lying around.

 

[eth-dog]

Fair enough. I just, sadly, listened to an absurd amount of the TR last year so wondered if I'd missed it.

Hopefully eth-dog may have a quote lying around.

I heard it on radio. I can't give the exact quote but it was along the lines of "we don't use resources on academy players, as we think it's a waste of time"

 

[boncer34]

I heard it on radio. I can't give the exact quote but it was along the lines of "we don't use resources on academy players, as we think it's a waste of time"

Hmm interesting.

But just because its been said doesn't mean its a guarantee.

 

[dlanod]

Hmm interesting.

But just because its been said doesn't mean its a guarantee.

Yep, it's entirely possible Essendon has changed its approach given a year will have passed but at the moment a bid seems unlikely.

 

[boncer34]

Yep, it's entirely possible Essendon has changed its approach given a year will have passed but at the moment a bid seems unlikely.

Well actually I was more speaking in general that just because they apparently said it at the time doesn't mean its actually a guarantee to happen.