2019 Young Talent Time

[Bring back Drum]

As an aside I listened to the latest Bleeding Purple podcast just now, and they mentioned that 21% of players that we drafted when Phil Smart was our recruiter went on to play 150 AFL games, where the AFL average is 8.2%. Anyone got Phil's phone number?

He had an amazing rise in football. He was down at Innaloo amateurs as team manager, next minute he’s at Claremont with Neesham then onto Freo.
He’s currently GM of Football at Swan Districts.
Great fella too.

 

[LemmingMaster]

I think Sharp projects more as a Nathan Wilson type half back, rather than outside midfielder.

I think he would have to spend a year or two at WAFL level working on his back craft. He reads the play well and can go for the ball at times, he just seems to pick and choose when he wants to run for a contest.

 

[Taylor]

I'd expect Sharp to play as a half forward more than a half back.

 

[Chris25]

I think he would have to spend a year or two at WAFL level working on his back craft. He reads the play well and can go for the ball at times, he just seems to pick and choose when he wants to run for a contest.

He’d definitely need to improve his defensive game, but I think his best football has been at half back when he gets to set play up and zone off.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Chris25 - outside of Henry, who is the best small forward, forward flank, wing, and half back.

Ideally players who are quick with good skills. We are really crying out for good users of the ball on the outside.

 

[LemmingMaster]

Chris25 - outside of Henry, who is the best small forward, forward flank, wing, and half back.

Ideally players who are quick with good skills. We are really crying out for good users of the ball on the outside.

Henry
Weightman - More small forward provinding great pressure
Williams - Dynamic forward that may be able to play midfield
Taylor - Pure talent is top line but lacks some defensive attribute
Taheny - Can do amazing things but looks like he goes at half speed and may annoy many people long term. Reminds me of Mundy back in the day, always looks liked he was not giving his best efforts.

 

[briztoon]

What is frustrating this year is that the points used on Henry will rob us a chance of getting a WA talent like Taylor, Sharpe, Jackson, Ruscoe and Rivers.

Just no.

Henry is not robbing you of anything. You get to draft an elite talent with a later pick.
You’re actually robbing the draft pool of a player and getting him at a discount.

You don’t have match a bid on Henry. You can pass and then draft one of those other players, if you really want one of them instead of Henry.

 

[briztoon]

Not a big issue. Adelaide will finish 8th or 9th. They played very well against WCE. Therefore will be pick 10,11 or 12 (GCS might get a mid range first round Priority pick set at 11) or 11/12 if GCS get the first PP at no. 1.

When I say we want an another early 1st round pick I’m saying pick 5-7 before our first pick which will likely be pick 7 or 8. So my point remains and we use a couple of second round picks to match a bid at 10-12. We effectively end up with 3 picks in the top 12 which is a win whatever way you look at things. Early 1st picks and 2nd round picks is the key.

If we gain Tim Kelly it will be for one of the top 10 picks which is fine and doesn’t change anything. Instead of 6,8,12 we end up with Tim Kelly, 8,12. I would expect Langdon if he in fact goes will get us a very early second rounder which combined with our existing 2nd pick will have quite a few points left over (after discount).

Ie say we have to use pick 21 (from Langdon trade) and pick 27 to bid match pick 12 (after discount will cost 1014 pts). 21 and 27 combined is 1581pts and therefore the net effect is 27 slides back to 33.

So you expect to pay less for Tim Kelly than what you demanded for Lachie Neale.

Neale cost us picks 6 & 18.

 

[Joao]

So you expect to pay less for Tim Kelly than what you demanded for Lachie Neale.

Neale cost us picks 6 & 18.

6 & 18 for Neale and 30 plus 1 year vs 0 on contract.

 

[hoopdaloop]

So you expect to pay less for Tim Kelly than what you demanded for Lachie Neale.

Neale cost us picks 6 & 18.

And we gave 30 along with him don’t forget.

 

[briztoon]

6 & 18 for Neale and 30 plus 1 year vs 0 on contract.

And Geelong will play hardball, even if he’s out of contract.

 

[Joao]

And Geelong will play hardball, even if he’s out of contract.

They won't get what we did for Neale.

Especially since I think he is West Coast bound and they have much less than us to offer.

 

[briztoon]

Some frustrating reading the last 7 odd pages.

Many people not up with a lot of the academy rules, or pick trading rules.

You can go in to the Draft with 6 picks, with your last being a pick in the 70’s, and if there’s a player there in the 50’s after your 5 previous picks have been used, you can do a draft day trade of a future pick to get a pick in the 50’s from another club to pick said player.

We did this last year, when we traded up to get Noah Answerth, by trading with North.

A couple of points though.

1. You must still hold a future first round pick. Can be yours, or one you have traded in from another club.

2. You have to have a club with a pick in the 50’s willing to trade. They’re likely asking for a future 3rd round pick.

3. You lose the pick in the 70’s, as you now have filled all your National Draft list spots.

 

[eastfreo75]

Just no.

Henry is not robbing you of anything. You get to draft an elite talent with a later pick.
You’re actually robbing the draft pool of a player and getting him at a discount.

You don’t have match a bid on Henry. You can pass and then draft one of those other players, if you really want one of them instead of Henry.

Not sure you understand what I saying.

Yes, Henry is a bargain.

To get a bargain, we need picks before Henry and points for Henry.

To get maximum value, we need to downgrade our second round pick for two third round picks. Recreating surplus of points.

If we wanted to go after the likes of Rivers, Jackson, Taylor we need extra first and second round picks.

The issue is that the bid on Henry will take two picks.

Then we won’t be able to get Jackson, Rivers and Taylor anyway without losing the bargain for Henry.

By the way, what’s with the tone?

 

[Chris25]

Chris25 - outside of Henry, who is the best small forward, forward flank, wing, and half back.

Ideally players who are quick with good skills. We are really crying out for good users of the ball on the outside.

Best small forwards would be Cody Weightman and Kysaiah Pickett for me. Weightman is a good all rounder, has a handy knack of finding the goals and looks good up on a wing too. Pickett is just a super talented kid. Forward flankers are where you're looking at Caleb Serong and Sam Flanders at the top of the draft, Elijah Taylor and Cam Taheny are as talented as anyone.

The top wing for me is Dylan Stephens, with Darcy Cassar and Miles Bergman also up there. The wing position and half back sort of go together, a lot of the top kids play the two roles like Lachie Ash and Jeremy Sharp.

Not draft related but I actually think we have a perfect winger on our list already, Connor Blakely. I'd pencil him into that position next year, particularly if we had a Langdon/Hill/Dylan Stephens type opposite him. Sort of sort follows with what Brisbane have done with Mitch Robinson - hard running, contested ball winner, push forward and back.

 

[briztoon]

Not sure you understand what I saying.

Yes, Henry is a bargain.

To get a bargain, we need picks before Henry and points for Henry.

To get maximum value, we need to downgrade our second round pick for two third round picks. Recreating surplus of points.

If we wanted to go after the likes of Rivers, Jackson, Taylor we need extra first and second round picks.

The issue is that the bid on Henry will take two picks.

Then we won’t be able to get Jackson, Rivers and Taylor anyway without losing the bargain for Henry.

By the way, what’s with the tone?

Ideally you want as many picks as possible between 1 and 25, knowing that one of the late teen picks will be used to match a bid on Henry.

Yes, these picks will likely come from trading out players ideally you don’t want to lose. And yes, one of those picks will be budgeted for Henry. It’s a price you pay for having high end academy talent.


The tone, wasn’t solely towards you. I just read so much misinformation and misunderstanding in the last few pages, I just couldn’t reply to all of it.


I believe you’re idea of trading down for later multiple picks is flawed, and isn’t thinking right.

When GWS, Brisbane or Gold Coast have done that under the current rules, we’ve done it because we’ve had a highly rated academy prospect, plus a lesser rated academy prospect, who we planed to pick up late in the draft with the residual pick generated from the left over points of the two mid draft picks.

Or do what GWS more commonly do, trade up to get an extra high pick before the bid is projected to come, and then multiple later picks. Knowing you going to draft a couple of high end talents, plus end of draft talents.

 

[eastfreo75]

Ideally you want as many picks as possible between 1 and 25, knowing that one of the late teen picks will be used to match a bid on Henry.

Yes, these picks will likely come from trading out players ideally you don’t want to lose. And yes, one of those picks will be budgeted for Henry. It’s a price you pay for having high end academy talent.


The tone, wasn’t solely towards you. I just read so much misinformation and misunderstanding in the last few pages, I just couldn’t reply to all of it.


I believe you’re idea of trading down for later multiple picks is flawed, and isn’t thinking right.

When GWS, Brisbane or Gold Coast have done that under the current rules, we’ve done it because we’ve had a highly rated academy prospect, plus a lesser rated academy prospect, who we planed to pick up late in the draft with the residual pick generated from the left over points of the two mid draft picks.

Or do what GWS more commonly do, trade up to get an extra high pick before the bid is projected to come, and then multiple later picks. Knowing you going to draft a couple of high end talents, plus end of draft talents.

Swans trade down to get points for Blakely.

Roos traded down for Thomas and Scott

Collingwood trade down for their NGA and father - son.

Western Bulldogs traded down for West.

Why wouldn’t Freo do the same?

 

[Taylor]

I'd hope that we get as many picks as possible before the Henry bid and that will then end our draft with us passing on the last pick rather than taking that newly gifted pick at the end of the draft after a couple of our mid draft picks are chewed up matching Henry's bid.

 

[briztoon]

Swans trade down to get points for Blakely.

Roos traded down for Thomas and Scott

Collingwood trade down for their NGA and father - son.

Western Bulldogs traded down for West.

Why wouldn’t Freo do the same?

Swans traded their first pick, then used later picks, then traded back in a first pick. And then they had a couple of back of draft picks they didn’t use because the Swans always run with a 38 man senior list, partly due to Budies contract, so they always have extra draft picks they don’t use.

Rather they look for players on cheap contracts in the rookie draft.

And, it’s hard to explain here properly, best to listen to Lystics AFL podcast for a full explanation, but that trade cost them a high second round pick in this years draft in the end. They ended up giving up the same pick, just a year later. They moved from pick 24 to pick 26 last year, and gave up what is currently pick 22 this year to do so, and get back pick 52.


Think you need to go look in more detail at some of those trades.

North didn’t trade down. They traded out their first pick for Polec and traded in some later picks. And then had to pick at the end of the draft with their residual pick.

Same with Collingwood. Traded out their first pick for Beams, then traded in later picks. Collingwood also had a later rated NGA kid, who they picked at the end of the draft, with the residual pick left over from matching on Quaynor.

Bulldogs actually traded 30 & 57 to get in 34 and 41 from your lot. They used both 34 and 41 to draft players in the draft, as they used a single pick which they kept to match a bid on West. So they kept 3 picks around his value, with the intention of using one to match, while keeping the others for the draft.

 

[briztoon]

You’re far better off trying to get as many early picks as possible, and just accept one will be used for Henry. Especially if you’re chasing the WA kids.

Even offer your 2020 first round pick for a later 2019 first round and a future second round pick.

Or try and package your 2019 and 2020 second round picks to get an earlier first round pick.

Go after one of GWS’s first round picks.

Try and get your rebuild largely done in one draft and trade period.

And the more picks you have in the 10 to 25 range, the less chance there is of another team having a pick to bid on Henry.

Unless a team actually needs a small forward, they’re less likely to bid on Henry because they don’t want to take a chance of ending up with a player they don’t need.

 

[eastfreo75]

Swans traded their first pick, then used later picks, then traded back in a first pick. And then they had a couple of back of draft picks they didn’t use because the Swans always run with a 38 man senior list, partly due to Budies contract, so they always have extra draft picks they don’t use.

Rather they look for players on cheap contracts in the rookie draft.

And, it’s hard to explain here properly, best to listen to Lystics AFL podcast for a full explanation, but that trade cost them a high second round pick in this years draft in the end. They ended up giving up the same pick, just a year later. They moved from pick 24 to pick 26 last year, and gave up what is currently pick 22 this year to do so, and get back pick 52.


Think you need to go look in more detail at some of those trades.

North didn’t trade down. They traded out their first pick for Polec and traded in some later picks. And then had to pick at the end of the draft with their residual pick.

Same with Collingwood. Traded out their first pick for Beams, then traded in later picks. Collingwood also had a later rated NGA kid, who they picked at the end of the draft, with the residual pick left over from matching on Quaynor.

Bulldogs actually traded 30 & 57 to get in 34 and 41 from your lot. They used both 34 and 41 to draft players in the draft, as they used a single pick which they kept to match a bid on West. So they kept 3 picks around his value, with the intention of using one to match, while keeping the others for the draft.

2018 Trade for Shane McAdam and Mitch McGovern - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

Swans traded pick 13 for picks 26,28 and 40.

That’s a downgrade.

2018 Fremantle and North Melbourne Trade for Draft Picks - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

Roos trade 31 for 47,49 and 55

That’s a downgrade

The in draft trades is red herrring.

 

[more_of_bito]

Bulldogs actually traded 30 & 57 to get in 34 and 41 from your lot. They used both 34 and 41 to draft players in the draft, as they used a single pick which they kept to match a bid on West. So they kept 3 picks around his value, with the intention of using one to match, while keeping the others for the draft.

Appreciate the high level of knowledge and education here specific to points and trading etc... as a Brisbane fan you would have a serious experience when dealing academy picks and picks/points.

FWIW I’m very comfortable that Valente will play more than bulldogs Vandameer/Cavarra combined.

 

[briztoon]

2018 Trade for Shane McAdam and Mitch McGovern - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

Swans traded pick 13 for picks 26,28 and 40.

That’s a downgrade.

2018 Fremantle and North Melbourne Trade for Draft Picks - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

Roos trade 31 for 47,49 and 55

That’s a downgrade

The in draft trades is red herrring.

Yeah, but they weren’t looking like potentially having 4 picks in the top 25. Even if Hill gets you a top 10 pick, what’s Langdon worth? a late first or early second.

You’re only trading down if it’s your last pick, and you need more points.

Even in the Sydney trade of pick 13, they’re still on trading that pick 28 with Hanebury to get another early pick in a future draft. And let’s face it, the Hanebury trade was a salary dump by Sydney.

There’s usually a bigger picture to a trade period than just trading back one pick for points.

 

[briztoon]

FWIW I’m very comfortable that Valente will play more than bulldogs Vandameer/Cavarra combined.

Probably.

Having Valente sort of makes drafting Robertson redundant, as they’re basically the same player.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Probably.

Having Valente sort of makes drafting Robertson redundant, as they’re basically the same player.

You a fan of Rivers Briztoon? Wish he had of played more midfield minutes in the champs. I almost prefer him to Robertson, especially for us