Opinion 2020 Draft picks 1/9/22/23/40/56/66/80 (2021 + Melb 2nd, 4th, Haw 4th)

[Deaneus!]

Crows Draft Hand Tweet



KEY DATES

Oct 30 – Nov 6: AFL Free Agency Period
November 4 – 12: AFL Trade Period
November 20: List Lodgment 1
November 27: List Lodgment 2
November 30: AFL Draft Nominations close
w/c December 7: NAB AFL Draft and Rookie Draft (exact date to be confirmed in due course)
Mid-December: Final List Lodgment & TPP estimates​

As God is my witness, finding anything useful on the AFL.com.au site is practically impossible, may whoever designed it burn in hell.

 

[FAITH]

Voted for by people who have never seen any of them play.

but he's South Australian, which is most important.

 

[Atypical7]

Another day closer to a very important period of the AFC. I’m starting to feel we won’t bid on Ugle-Hagan at pick one just for aesthetics of making our first choice be the pure number one.

Also starting to feel confident that almost we will be a certainty to a pick trade however that looks, So the curiosity has me looking at starting list spots on other teams to who may trade a pick between 9 & 15 for x2 2nd round picks.

Fremantle are light on for picks and may be willing to be a candidate for pick trades, Any Logistical views on this?

 

[Stan16]

Judging by the comments from Edwards management, it seems that he was interested in coming to the Crows and we declined.

Is this going to be another Kane and Chad Cornes scenario where we are too good for them and they end up having better careers than we expected?

 

[DJ75]

Can anyone explain why the Draft isn't being held this week? All exams are finished. Trade week is done. Just do the draft already!!

 

[Hodgy]

We finished bottom, everything is a need for our team

Sorry that’s just not true. We don’t need running halfbacks, we don’t need key defenders and we don’t need ruckmen. We need inside and outside midfielders and arguably a key forward.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Isn't "the risk" that you miss out on someone as good or close but with a full bill of health?

Not so much whether the injured player is a risk in themselves

Following that line of thought ...wouldn't HAW also be saying the same at # 4 ......and us again at #9

I can't see where the risk is reduced inside the top 10, using your argument

 

[Hodgy]

OK ...I'm a logical sort of guy, but this logic escapes me

Hollands a risk at pick #1 due to an ACL ......so he apparently slides to pick #4, where he's not a risk ?

View attachment 1016786

Last year Brodie Kemp was touted as a #9 or #10 ......he slid to #17 CARL , which makes sense on a risk v reward level, backend of Round 1, start Round 2

Baldwin was touted as a Top 10 pick .....two knees have him touted as an middle to end of Round 2 ......this is logical

But if Hollands IS ANY RISK AT ALL .....that risk is not mitigated for any team in the Top 10 .....whether #1, #4, or #9 .......it's just illogical thinking by Phantom Drafters

Come at me .....change my mind

Kemp was going to miss the whole year, whereas Hollands is 8 months into his recovery so not only can he play next year, but clubs can assess his recovery much better.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Following that line of thought ...wouldn't HAW also be saying the same at # 4 ......and us again at #9

I can't see where the risk is reduced inside the top 10, using your argument

There are better other players available for the team picking at 4 than the team picking at 9

The risk is the other choices turning out better

The lower down you go the less that risk is

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Kemp was going to miss the whole year, whereas Hollands is 8 months into his recovery so not only can he play next year, but clubs can assess his recovery much better.

CARL actually have actually held Kemp back .....I'd expect a slower than normal recovery for Hollands .....why take any risk on a 15 year career

If you're correct, and I think you are .....no reason NOT to take the best talent in this Draft at #1

 

[hey shorty]

Sorry that’s just not true. We don’t need running halfbacks, we don’t need key defenders and we don’t need ruckmen. We need inside and outside midfielders and arguably a key forward.

We don't need half backs and we probably don't need KPDs.

That's it.

 

[johnnypanther]

Judging by the comments from Edwards management, it seems that he was interested in coming to the Crows and we declined.

Is this going to be another Kane and Chad Cornes scenario where we are too good for them and they end up having better careers than we expected?

How so?
Re the Edwards - havent we given them the scenario they preferred as stated by Tyson after Jackson was delisted. Tyson family cant have it both ways. Luke gets selected on merit not because he is a son. Any Club would rank draft players in order and Luke Edwards was obviously way out of kilter vis-a-vis our order & our draft picks available, plus taking into account the irrational criticism if we nominated him but then didnt select him.

Re the Cornes - where has it been implied that our Club was too good for them. They simply were not available to us as father/sons - (albeit thanks to the Club's stupid decision not to take up Graham Cornes' offer to stay onboard in some minor role after his coaching role finished in 1994, but that had nothing to do with being too good for them).
Thereafter, Chad was a top 10 draft pick in a draft where our first pick was at 17.
Kane was pick 19 in the draft where we chose Angwin at 7 (IMO the correct decision at that time - Angwin was an elite talent). Our major stuff-up in that draft was trading out pick 12!!! for Bode (which ended up handing Shaun Burgoyne

9

Shaun Burgoyne

Age

42

Ht

186cm

Wt

89kg

Pos.

D/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.0

4star

K

9.9

4star

HB

8.1

5star

M

3.5

4star

T

3.8

5star

MG

162.7

3star

D

10.0

3star

K

5.6

2star

HB

4.4

3star

M

1.7

2star

T

2.6

4star

MG

162.7

3star

D

6.2

2star

K

3.2

2star

HB

3.0

3star

M

1.2

2star

T

1.6

4star

to Port Power in the draft).

 

[Hodgy]

CARL actually have actually held Kemp back .....I'd expect a slower than normal recovery for Hollands .....why take any risk on a 15 year career

If you're correct, and I think you are .....no reason NOT to take the best talent in this Draft at #1

If we are happy with his recovery then no reason at all. Unless we think McDonald is an even better talent I suppose.

 

[Hodgy]

We don't need half backs and we probably don't need KPDs.

That's it.

Well you might not be sold on O’Brien, but I’m pretty sure the club is.
we didn’t finish last because of our rucking.

 

[Vader]

Judging by the comments from Edwards management, it seems that he was interested in coming to the Crows and we declined.

Is this going to be another Kane and Chad Cornes scenario where we are too good for them and they end up having better careers than we expected?

WTF? Chad & Kane weren't eligible for F/S selection under the rules which existed at the time.

 

[Scorpus]

Can anyone explain why the Draft isn't being held this week? All exams are finished. Trade week is done. Just do the draft already!!

The AFL need another 3 weeks to make as many confusing, unexplained rule changes as possible

 

[Clayton Lamb]

but he's South Australian, which is most important.

Of the three in the poll, which is the biggest flight risk? Thilthorpe, McDonald or Hollands?

 

[Thetrader15]

OK ...I'm a logical sort of guy, but this logic escapes me

Hollands a risk at pick #1 due to an ACL ......so he apparently slides to pick #4, where he's not a risk ?

View attachment 1016786

Last year Brodie Kemp was touted as a #9 or #10 ......he slid to #17 CARL , which makes sense on a risk v reward level, backend of Round 1, start Round 2

Baldwin was touted as a Top 10 pick .....two knees have him touted as an middle to end of Round 2 ......this is logical

But if Hollands IS ANY RISK AT ALL .....that risk is not mitigated for any team in the Top 10 .....whether #1, #4, or #9 .......it's just illogical thinking by Phantom Drafters

Come at me .....change my mind

Risk is a function of likelihood and consequence (or impact). The consequence at a later pick is lower, thus the risk is lower.

For example, the likelihood of another injury is medium (let's say). The consequence (or what you are risking) at pick 1 is Very High, thus overall risk is High Risk (8).
The consequence at pick 10 is High, thus the overall risk rating is Medium (6).

 

[Hodgy]

Of the three in the poll, which is the biggest flight risk? Thilthorpe, McDonald or Hollands?

Equal. All 3 would play their whole careers here.

 

[Gary123]

View attachment 1016792

That looks familiar

 

[Gary123]

I would have thought DGB to Sydney and Phillips to GCS are the biggest locks on the board.

Hawthorn won't take Phillips. They have a one paced midfield and he's more of what they've got.

GCS want to reunite Phillips with Rowell and Anderson, and they genuinely need more too shelf midfield talent.

Hawthorn are the unpredictable one. I'm assuming Thilthorpe, but they could roll the dice on a Henry or Reid, and throw everyone's predictions out.

I think Sydney will take whoever Adelaide and North don't take. Thilthorpe, Mcdonald or Hollands

 

[Crows I Am]

Sorry that’s just not true. We don’t need running halfbacks, we don’t need key defenders and we don’t need ruckmen. We need inside and outside midfielders and arguably a key forward.

We need a back up ruck

 

[Clayton Lamb]

Equal. All 3 would play their whole careers here.

I Disagree. McDonald presents as the biggest flight risk of the three.

 

[Hodgy]

We need a back up ruck

You want to use pick 1 on a back up ruckman.

 

[Disco Fox]

I think Sydney will take whoever Adelaide and North don't take. Thilthorpe, Mcdonald or Hollands

Alternatively they'll take DGB as many wise footy heads rate him just as highly as the other 3 lads.

 

[Crows I Am]

You want to use pick 1 on a back up ruckman.

Sorry didn't realise you were talking about pick 1. Just read that you said we don't need a ruck. I'd like us to take a back up ruck at some point, most likely in the rookie draft.