List Mgmt. 2019 Draft and Trade Hypotheticals Thread

[RobbieK]

Is it? Take out the academy picks which anyone could have picked these are the ones we've drafted in the last say 8 years

2011- Tom Mitchell (academy)
2012- Dean Towers (fail)
2013- Zac Jones (pass- likely to be traded for lower than selection though)
2014- Isaac Heeney (academy)
2015- Callum Mills (academy)
2016- Oliver Florent (tick)
2017- Matthew Ling (questionable reach- might work, but at this stage it's not looking great)
2018- Blakely (academy)

With the exception of Florent, which ones have been hits aside from academy selections? That is hardly a glowing strike rate on top end talents. That said Darymple is in now which is a good thing and he can only improve this.

Why would you take out the academy picks? Those are picks that our clubs have decided to take. We could have chosen to pass on them because we didn't think they were worth matching them and gone with someone else.

You also missed Will Hayward from 2016, another successful selection.

Towers was a pick 22 in a very weak draft. Not many players picked after him did better. Other than that only Ling, who has suffered through injury, hasn't clearly been a good pick. He may yet to be, he just has to get on the field for a decent stretch.

Other than Ling and Towers everyone else is looking on track to play at least 200 AFL games. 7 out of 9. That's good drafting.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Why would you take out the academy picks? Those are picks that our clubs have decided to take. We could have chosen to pass on them because we didn't think they were worth matching them and gone with someone else.

You also missed Will Hayward from 2016, another successful selection.

Towers was a pick 22 in a very weak draft. Not many players picked after him did better. Other than that only Ling, who has suffered through injury, hasn't clearly been a good pick. He may yet to be, he just has to get on the field for a decent stretch.

Other than Ling and Towers everyone else is looking on track to play at least 200 AFL games. 7 out of 9. That's good drafting.

Our live selections haven't been great though, as I said Darymple is a huge positive there though as he's built a very good Western Bulldogs list. The Ling reach was probably the biggest head scratcher though, and it's not that we picked him in the first round but more that we could have traded down (banked an extra third or whatever) and still picked him. Thought that was one trade period where we weren't great. Every club has them though, we won't be the last club to have a poor night.

Hayward was an oversight thought he was the first of the second round, was wrong.

 

[RobbieK]

Our live selections haven't been great though, as I said Darymple is a huge positive there though as he's built a very good Western Bulldogs list. The Ling reach was probably the biggest head scratcher though, and it's not that we picked him in the first round but more that we could have traded down (banked an extra third or whatever) and still picked him. Thought that was one trade period where we weren't great. Every club has them though, we won't be the last club to have a poor night.

Hayward was an oversight thought he was the first of the second round, was wrong.

Define "great"?

Our non-academy selections in the first round have been at picks 14, 11, 21, 15 and 22. Those picks got us Ling, Florent, Hayward, Jones and Towers. None of them in the top 10, two of them were already in the 20s. These picks have not been giving us access to the very top end of talent.

In saying that, players picked between 11 and 20 average 117 game careers. Players picked 21 to 30 average 80 game careers. See: https://www.draftguru.com.au/analysis/pick-value-comparison

It would appear that Florent, Hayward and Jones are all going to go well beyond the average player at their selection. Towers fell short of the average (57 games) but still managed more than 45% of draftees in his range. Ling we really don't know if he will come good. This is a small sample size, but on the whole we would appear to be selecting more players that are going to surpass the average careers of players in their draft range than not.

But again I have to stress it really makes no sense to criticise our drafting by saying that Mitchell, Heeney, Mills and Blakey don't count. They do count. We used up first round picks (either directly or indirectly) in order to get them on to our list. That's because we rated them. In all cases bids came for them from other clubs and we had to choose to match those bids. We could have chosen not to match the bid and select another player. If we had, I'm certain that you would be considering the merits of the players we did select in this discussion, so it simply defies reason to rule out the academy selections from this discussion.

When you add those four to your consideration of how good our drafting has been at the top end of the draft we have been doing very, very well in the last few years.