Resource 2020 Draft Watch (picks 1, 9, 20, 30, 45, 50, 60, 74) - updated R17 15/9/20

[Deaneus!]

​

 

[Scorpus]

I think we proactively need to move on two or three players in the 24 to 28 age range. We actually now have too many players around that age, compared to our team performance.

Knight, Kelly and Atkins are the obvious three and you could easily thrown in Hartigan plus put Laird on the trade table

 

[kulak]

I agree. I'd go so far as to say that we should be entertaining offers for any of Brown, Laird, Smith, Seedsman, Atkins, Lynch, Kelly or even Walker. Personally I'd add the Crouches to that too. Its a touchy area and by no means should we be getting rid of even close to all of them.

However, given where we sit as a club, our best 22 is still flush with 25-32 year old players, to the extent that our list/experience profile of our top 30 is such that we should be in contention for the top 4.

The trouble is we're not challenging for the top 4, which means there's going to be a number of players clogging our 22 and stifling development opportunities.

Its a similar issue to when Blight arrived at the club. All these senior, experienced, big named players who just aren't getting the results. Individually still very good players, but as a team we're just not going anywhere.

The difficulty is, if you go too far, you become a basketcase like Melbourne or Carlton, but if you don't go hard enough, you just become an irrelevant club on a long slow mediocre burn to the bottom 4. Kangaroos have done this. IMO Brisbane did this after their dominant era. Melbourne started off like this, then went too far the other way.

I do think a lot of these analyses in general are an evidence free zone

GWS has great culture despite a tonne of early losses.

Collingwood put the cue in the rack pretty early the year they drafted Pendles and Daisy.

Genuine basket case teams like Stynes Melbourne and Primus Port which set out to lose had plenty of problems

I suspect that it doesn’t really matter if you lose, and it only matters a little bit if you are getting thrashed

But that it matters a lot that you have senior players who demonstrate professionalism (even if they are cooked) - and that you attack each moment of each match really trying to win, even if you are miles off the quality

 

[Mismatched]

I'm absolutely positive the talk of any issues with Neddy are a figment of that posters imagination btw.

Are the cheap attacks necessary?

 

[Mutineer]

Are the cheap attacks necessary?

Attacks?

Maybe provide some actual evidence behind the reasoning because I've sure as hell seen no evidence whatsoever that this kind of talk has any basis.

 

[Mismatched]

Attacks?

Maybe provide some actual evidence behind the reasoning because I've sure as hell seen no evidence whatsoever that this kind of talk has any basis.

Yes, you chose an off the cuff, snide comment designed to belittle another poster's opinion, rather than actually engaging in the discussion meaningfully.

I'm happy to retract it if it clearly triggers others who aren't adult enough to have a meaningful conversation. I admitted from the start that it was largely based on a gut feel, however the injury issues that he has had (complicated concussion and recurring back injury), often signify or can go hand in hand with a larger issue. This is compounded when your dealing with an otherwise ultra fit and health 19yo male, who is in his 1st, now 2nd, year living away from home.

As I said, I hope I'm wrong, because when he has played, I've loved what I've seen from Ned.

 

[Mutineer]

Yes, you chose an off the cuff, snide comment designed to belittle another poster's opinion, rather than actually engaging in the discussion meaningfully.

I'm happy to retract it if it clearly triggers others who aren't adult enough to have a meaningful conversation. I admitted from the start that it was largely based on a gut feel, however the injury issues that he has had (complicated concussion and recurring back injury), often signify or can go hand in hand with a larger issue. This is compounded when your dealing with an otherwise ultra fit and health 19yo male, who is in his 1st, now 2nd, year living away from home.

As I said, I hope I'm wrong, because when he has played, I've loved what I've seen from Ned.

He's signed a contract extension until the end of 2022 hardly the actions of a player with any doubts as to where his future football will be played at this time.

Neddy was attending boarding school so don't really think the living away from home is a factor IMO

 

[1990crow]

I don't hate that but next year's draft is meant to be pretty good, so I'd be hesitant to give up that pick - and I'm hoping we can get Hately from GWS with at worst their first (but hopefully a second?).

That being said - not sure how we get the currency for the players you've outlined without doing something similar to what you've said.

Western Bulldogs and Collingwood picks might be gettable too?

Perhaps something more like this:

Crows first = Thilthorpe
GWS first + Crows 2nd = trade up to get Baldwin
Dogs 2nd = Edwards
Rest = Newchurch and Borlase

Then in 2021 draft best available mid which will likely be an elite mid.

Spine:

McPherson ~ Butts/Borlase ~ Doedee
Sholl ~ McAsey ~ Hamill
Thilthorpe ~ Edwards ~ 2021 1st
Milera ~ Jones ~ Schoenberg
Newchurch/Gollant/Davis ~ Baldwin ~ McHenry
Dudley/McAdam/Stengle ~ Fogarty ~ Worrell

Galluci, Murphy, M.Crouch, Laird, ROB, Atkins, O’Connor

Then fill out positions as required via free agency and draft/trade for either players above that don’t come on as aspected, leave or improve on.
Eg go hard at Rankine end of 2022.

 

[SaltPeter]

Perhaps something more like this:

Crows first = Thilthorpe
GWS first + Crows 2nd = trade up to get Baldwin
Dogs 2nd = Edwards
Rest = Newchurch and Borlase

Then in 2021 draft best available mid which will likely be an elite mid.

Spine:

McPherson ~ Butts/Borlase ~ Doedee
Sholl ~ McAsey ~ Hamill
Thilthorpe ~ Edwards ~ 2021 1st
Milera ~ Jones ~ Schoenberg
Newchurch/Gollant/Davis ~ Baldwin ~ McHenry
Dudley/McAdam/Stengle ~ Fogarty ~ Worrell

Galluci, Murphy, M.Crouch, Laird, ROB, Atkins, O’Connor

Then fill out positions as required via free agency and draft/trade for either players above that don’t come on as aspected, leave or improve on.
Eg go hard at Rankine end of 2022.

A forward line with Fogarty, Thilthorpe and Baldwin sounds enticing right now

 

[1990crow]

A forward line with Fogarty, Thilthorpe and Baldwin sounds enticing right now

And later Rankine + Dudley
Would be hard to beat if we could get a good enough midfield together.

 

[briztoon]

If you don’t mind a neutral voice.

Please read to the end, as I mention how you can have 5 first round draft picks this and next year, as well as match any second round bid on Edwards this year.

Who is out of contract this year?

If the AFL is serious about cutting lists and saving money, only out of contract players will be delisted.

Unless a contracted player the club is happy to let walk for free approaches and asks to be let out of his contract.

So who of your out of contract players are must keeps?

Of your current academy and father son kids, if they’re not worth selecting with your top four or five picks or in the first two rounds, don’t waste downgrading picks just to match a later bid.

You can always bring undrafted academy kids back as 19 year olds in to your academy. They just go in to next years draft and you have first rights to them again.


The Bulldogs should definitely be trading their first round pick for the highest combination of second round picks they can get, before the draft.

Collingwood should hold their first round pick and trade it on the night.


Do you have any academy or father son kids for next year?

Some clubs (like Collingwood) might potentially have a top rated kid in next years draft, might be proactive and consider trading their 2021 first round pick this year.

If you expect the bid for Edwards to come in the second round, I would be trying to trade this years and next years second round picks for another first round pick this year, and another first round pick next year.

You can effectively match the Edwards bid with a third round pick this year, and another third round pick next year.

Bid matching and draft deficit rule is that any draft deficit is paid from the pick in the corresponding round the following year.

So if Edwards is bid on in the second round, you partially match with a third round pick this year, and then next year, because you have already traded your 2021 second round pick, you pay the deficit with next years third round pick.

And this all occurs at the beginning of 2021’s trade period, so it doesn’t affect what you do during the trade a draft period next year.

 

[briztoon]

And later Rankine + Dudley
Would be hard to beat if we could get a good enough midfield together.

I believe you’re going to have to give up the Rankine dream.

He likes the Gold Coast to much, and has already taken on some leadership roles within the indigenous group up there.

With their Darwin zone and academy, they’re going to have a lot of indigenous boys joining their club in the next couple of years.

 

[Mutineer]

If you don’t mind a neutral voice.

Please read to the end, as I mention how you can have 5 first round draft picks this and next year, as well as match any second round bid on Edwards this year.

Who is out of contract this year?

If the AFL is serious about cutting lists and saving money, only out of contract players will be delisted.

Unless a contracted player the club is happy to let walk for free approaches and asks to be let out of his contract.

So who of your out of contract players are must keeps?

Of your current academy and father son kids, if they’re not worth selecting with your top four or five picks or in the first two rounds, don’t waste downgrading picks just to match a later bid.

You can always bring undrafted academy kids back as 19 year olds in to your academy. They just go in to next years draft and you have first rights to them again.


The Bulldogs should definitely be trading their first round pick for the highest combination of second round picks they can get, before the draft.

Collingwood should hold their first round pick and trade it on the night.


Do you have any academy or father son kids for next year?

Some clubs (like Collingwood) might potentially have a top rated kid in next years draft, might be proactive and consider trading their 2021 first round pick this year.

If you expect the bid for Edwards to come in the second round, I would be trying to trade this years and next years second round picks for another first round pick this year, and another first round pick next year.

You can effectively match the Edwards bid with a third round pick this year, and another third round pick next year.

Bid matching and draft deficit rule is that any draft deficit is paid from the pick in the corresponding round the following year.

So if Edwards is bid on in the second round, you partially match with a third round pick this year, and then next year, because you have already traded your 2021 second round pick, you pay the deficit with next years third round pick.

And this all occurs at the beginning of 2021’s trade period, so it doesn’t affect what you do during the trade a draft period next year.

Why would we want 5 1st round picks given this year's draft where there is so little disclosed form available to ascertain if players have come on as anticipated or plateaued or in some cases maybe gone backwards? Isn't this draft also considered to be compromised already with so many F/S NGA's and Academy lads?

You'd want to have massive confidence in your recruiting staff to go down that path under the circumstances that prevail this draft IMO.

 

[briztoon]

Why would we want 5 1st round picks in a draft year where there is so little disclosed form available to ascertain if players have come on as anticipated or plateaued or in some cases maybe gone backwards? Isn't this draft also considered to be compromised already with so many F/S NGA's and Academy lads?

You'd want to have massive confidence in your recruiting staff to go down that path under the circumstances that prevail this draft IMO.

You didn’t read it did you?

 

[Mutineer]

You didn’t read it did you?

Yeah I did initially missing the next year but the same still applies.

Edit : and that also applies to this year's under agers that recruiters usually short list to priortise their interests for the following year's draft.

 

[briztoon]

Yeah I did initially missing the next year but the same still applies.

3 first round picks plus Edwards this year, 2 first round picks next year.

Fits in with the discussion on the last two pages about who to maximise the draft while lists are being reduced.

 

[Mutineer]

3 first round picks plus Edwards this year, 2 first round picks next year.

Fits in with the discussion on the last two pages about who to maximise the draft while lists are being reduced.

All premature until the AFL negotiations with TV rights are signed off on I would have thought. A lot of talk now that the list cuts will not be anywhere near those that were first anticipated. When club's and players know where that sits will be the time for that discussion.

 

[briztoon]

All premature until the AFL negotiations with TV rights are signed off on I would have thought. A lot of talk now that the list cuts will not be anywhere near those that were first anticipated. When club's and players know where that sits will be the time for that discussion.

Mate, it’s been most of the discussion on the last two pages here.

Listening to Niall and Caro, the next tv rights will be (significantly?) less.

I’m not sure what talk you’re listening to.

The AFL media podcasts I listen to have mentioned there’s going to be some intense discussions between the AFL and AFLPA in regards to the salary cap and list sizes.

As a side point to that, and not to distract from the afore mentioned discussion, I found it interesting that the AFL provides most of the funding for the AFLPA.

That’s a nice bargaining chip for the AFL to hold. Most player unions or associations around the world are paid for from a small percentage of the players wages.

The AFL can say, fine have your xyz, but fund your own association from now on.

 

[briztoon]

Oh, and you’d still rather two first round picks and two second round picks this year, instead of three first round picks and a third round pick?

 

[1990crow]

Oh, and you’d still rather two first round picks and two second round picks this year, instead of three first round picks and a third round pick?

Depends on quality of the picks and list needs. If the two firsts are Thilthorpe and Baldwin over 3 mediocre midfielders I am going the first two.

 

[briztoon]

Depends on quality of the picks and list needs. If the two firsts are Thilthorpe and Baldwin over 3 mediocre midfielders I am going the first two.

Gees you guys look for the downside in everything.

What is easier to use trade up in to the top 10?

2 first round picks tied to GWS and Collingwood? Or 1 first round pick tied to GWS and 2 second round picks tied to yourself and the Bulldogs?


You have two second round picks and two third round picks this year.

At least one of those second round picks will be used to match Edwards, depending on where the bid comes.

Depending on what happens with lists, it’s entirely possible you might not be able to take both those third round picks to the draft.

Ideally you’d want to trade one of those third round picks to another club for a future third round pick. And package the Bulldogs second round pick you hold, with the other third round pick to trade up for a better second round pick, say Fremantle’s.

It’s all about maximising picks you’re possibly not going to end up using. If you’re not going to be able to use them as draft picks, then use them as trade chips to improve the picks you are going to use.

And use the system to your advantage. Why pay for Edwards with a second round pick, when you can pay for him with a third round pick you probably never intend to use anyway.

 

[Mutineer]

Mate, it’s been most of the discussion on the last two pages here.

Listening to Niall and Caro, the next tv rights will be (significantly?) less.

I’m not sure what talk you’re listening to.

The AFL media podcasts I listen to have mentioned there’s going to be some intense discussions between the AFL and AFLPA in regards to the salary cap and list sizes.

As a side point to that, and not to distract from the afore mentioned discussion, I found it interesting that the AFL provides most of the funding for the AFLPA.

That’s a nice bargaining chip for the AFL to hold. Most player unions or associations around the world are paid for from a small percentage of the players wages.

The AFL can say, fine have your xyz, but fund your own association from now on.

We'll see on that as initial negotiations are under way on the TV rights currently.....only then will clubs and players know the lay of the land into the future.

Media talk means little at this juncture and my money will be on no drastic cuts to lists, certainly not those anticipated by some.

 

[craig crowing]

The concern in reducing squad numbers is of course how do you fill a second team .
This season will highlight how important for those not in AFL team to have a actual real game to play for their development and to create real opportunities for the young players.

 

[briztoon]

We'll see on that as initial negotiations are under way on the TV rights currently.....only then will clubs and players know the lay of the land into the future.

Media talk means little at this juncture and my money will be on no drastic cuts to lists, certainly not those anticipated by some.

Caro is reporting the media deal will be less than the previous deal. And that it’s close to done.

The deal might get done, but not announced for a while.

She’s mentioned that it will be less several times over the last 3 or 4 weeks.

As for AFL cost cutting, it now has a $600 million debt to service.

The rookie list goes to start with. Rookie listed players are paid out of the soft cap, not from tpp salary cap.

With the soft cap being cut significantly, and possibly made in to a hard cap, rookie lists will go.

What happens after that, we’re all waiting to see.

 

[SaltPeter]

As for AFL cost cutting, it now has a $600 million debt to service.

It's not a debt. It's a line of credit secured against Marvel Stadium. In essence its a draw down facility

 

[briztoon]

It's not a debt. It's a line of credit secured against Marvel Stadium. In essence its a draw down facility

Semantics.

Will the AFL have to pay back money borrowed with interest?