VFL 2022 Sandringham Zebras

[gringo2011]

Berry, if in doubt pick a promising Gippsland boy

Yeah, there are some really good players and quite a few on their way. Adelaide had a good draft, Berry, Rowe and Tilthorp all look really high potential and already showing a bit. Collingwood absolutely smashed that draft. Had heaps of skin in it and got heaps right. Essendon too. Sydney got handed a pile of top academy talent as well. Gulden, Campbell and got Logan McDonald.

Freo got O'Driscoll who looks like a nice player with the pick after Allison to add to the pick straight after ours thing. Durdin already in Carlton's best side and Mc Creery looks likely.

 

[bergholt]

What does that have to do with anything when the brief was to get a key forward?

I’m sure you’re right but personally I fundamentally disagree with that strategy. Draft the best player available with a bias towards mids; trade for needs. Would have served us better over a long period.

 

[hayes]

I’m sure you’re right but personally I fundamentally disagree with that strategy. Draft the best player available with a bias towards mids; trade for needs. Would have served us better over a long period.

Yep we went looking for something that wasn’t there. Same as when we went looking for the next Rioli and got Long. Targeting a need is what trade week is for.

 

[aussierulesrules]

The big issue with all the above is the excessive cost of trading for key forwards.

Eg Boyd cost WB a mil a year, when he’d proven SFA, then you’ve got Jeremy Cameron

5

Jeremy Cameron

Age

31

Ht

196cm

Wt

94kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.5

3star

K

9.0

3star

HB

3.4

3star

M

5.4

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

2.6

5star

D

10.0

3star

K

7.1

3star

HB

2.9

2star

M

4.6

4star

T

2.0

3star

G

1.9

5star

D

8.2

2star

K

5.0

2star

HB

3.2

3star

M

4.6

5star

T

2.4

4star

G

2.0

5star

, who cost Geelong 3 first rounders, and look at the outrageous contract the incredibly average Dan McStay is reportedly going to get from Collingwood, etc.

At the time we took Allison we didn’t from memory have a single “key forward” outside of our best 22, which is a problem going forward for a list and still is.

And it’s also going to give you an incredibly unbalanced list if you just draft a handful of ‘inside mids’ every year from your 3 or 4 picks in the draft.

I fully agree that with early picks (especially top 10) it’s generally best to go best available, but as you get later in the draft you also need to look at your needs going forward and list balance, otherwise you can end up with big list imbalances.

 

[bergholt]

The big issue with all the above is the excessive cost of trading for key forwards.

Eg Boyd cost WB a mil a year, when he’d proven SFA, then you’ve got Jeremy Cameron, who cost Geelong 3 first rounders, and look at the outrageous contract the incredibly average Dan McStay is reportedly going to get from Collingwood, etc.

At the time we took Allison we didn’t from memory have a single “key forward” outside of our best 22, which is a problem going forward for a list and still is.

And it’s also going to give you an incredibly unbalanced list if you just draft a handful of ‘inside mids’ every year from your 3 or 4 picks in the draft.

I fully agree that with early picks (especially top 10) it’s generally best to go best available, but as you get later in the draft you also need to look at your needs going forward and list balance, otherwise you can end up with big list imbalances.

I don't think Boyd and Cameron are the right comparison. If you have a good midfield, you don't need to trade for a top quality key forward to be competitive, just a good one.

Finlayson - 3rd rounder
Kreuger - pick 40ish
Ben Brown - pick 30ish
Peter Wright - 4th rounder
Hogan - pick 50ish
Josh Jenkins - 4th rounder
Bruce - 2nd rounder
Patton - 4th rounder
Lobb - late 1st rounder
Hogan (again) - early 1st rounder
McGovern - 2nd rounder
Kreuger (again) - pick 40ish
Schache - 1st rounder
Jack Watts - pick 30ish
Aaron Black - very late pick
James Stewart - late pick
Travis Cloke - late pick
Kersten - late pick
Cam McCarthy - 2nd rounder
Charlie Dixon - 1st rounder

Brander - DFA
Tim O'Brien - UFA
Daniher - RFA
McKernan - DFA
Josh Walker - DFA
Buzza - DFA
Lynch - RFA
Vickery - RFA
Waite - UFA
Membrey - DFA

etc etc etc

Most years you can spend a single 1st or much cheaper to get a guy who has a decent chance of kicking some goals when your good midfield kicks to him.

Or you can spend more picks all the way through your list build grabbing guys who have no better (and usually worse) chance of working as an afl-quality key forward, and in the process of doing so make it less likely that you'll actually have a good midfield - which is the main thing that is fundamentally required to win games.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I don't think Boyd and Cameron are the right comparison. If you have a good midfield, you don't need to trade for a top quality key forward to be competitive, just a good one.

Finlayson - 3rd rounder
Kreuger - pick 40ish
Ben Brown - pick 30ish
Peter Wright - 4th rounder
Hogan - pick 50ish
Josh Jenkins - 4th rounder
Bruce - 2nd rounder
Patton - 4th rounder
Lobb - late 1st rounder
Hogan (again) - early 1st rounder
McGovern - 2nd rounder
Kreuger (again) - pick 40ish
Schache - 1st rounder
Jack Watts - pick 30ish
Aaron Black - very late pick
James Stewart - late pick
Travis Cloke - late pick
Kersten - late pick
Cam McCarthy - 2nd rounder
Charlie Dixon - 1st rounder

Brander - DFA
Tim O'Brien - UFA
Daniher - RFA
McKernan - DFA
Josh Walker - DFA
Buzza - DFA
Lynch - RFA
Vickery - RFA
Waite - UFA
Membrey - DFA

etc etc etc

Most years you can spend a single 1st or much cheaper to get a guy who has a decent chance of kicking some goals when your good midfield kicks to him.

Or you can spend more picks all the way through your list build grabbing guys who have no better (and usually worse) chance of working as an afl-quality key forward, and in the process of doing so make it less likely that you'll actually have a good midfield - which is the main thing that is fundamentally required to win games.

In fact Wood is a better key forward than some of those, and certainly Alison.

 

[gringo2011]

The big issue with all the above is the excessive cost of trading for key forwards.

Eg Boyd cost WB a mil a year, when he’d proven SFA, then you’ve got Jeremy Cameron, who cost Geelong 3 first rounders, and look at the outrageous contract the incredibly average Dan McStay is reportedly going to get from Collingwood, etc.

At the time we took Allison we didn’t from memory have a single “key forward” outside of our best 22, which is a problem going forward for a list and still is.

And it’s also going to give you an incredibly unbalanced list if you just draft a handful of ‘inside mids’ every year from your 3 or 4 picks in the draft.

I fully agree that with early picks (especially top 10) it’s generally best to go best available, but as you get later in the draft you also need to look at your needs going forward and list balance, otherwise you can end up with big list imbalances.

Josh Bruce got pick 64 or something. Not all key forwards cost overs.

 

[gringo2011]

In fact Wood is a better key forward than some of those, and certainly Alison.

Wood struggled at North as a true KPF. He's more a tall high half forward wing. Battle would have been a better option. We can't even fit Coops in.

 

[stfan]

The big issue with all the above is the excessive cost of trading for key forwards.

Eg Boyd cost WB a mil a year, when he’d proven SFA, then you’ve got Jeremy Cameron, who cost Geelong 3 first rounders, and look at the outrageous contract the incredibly average Dan McStay is reportedly going to get from Collingwood, etc.

At the time we took Allison we didn’t from memory have a single “key forward” outside of our best 22, which is a problem going forward for a list and still is.

And it’s also going to give you an incredibly unbalanced list if you just draft a handful of ‘inside mids’ every year from your 3 or 4 picks in the draft.

I fully agree that with early picks (especially top 10) it’s generally best to go best available, but as you get later in the draft you also need to look at your needs going forward and list balance, otherwise you can end up with big list imbalances.

Your picks in the first two rounds should always be best available.

Later picks and rookie picks as well as trade can be used for needs.

Plus talls are generally a lot riskier in terms of making it.


Trying to be too cute with early picks had us take Ball over Judd and Petracca over McCartin.

 

[Grav]

Your

Picks in the first two rounds should always be best available.

Later picks and rookie picks as well as trade can be used for needs.

Plus talls are generally a lot riskier in terms of making it.


Trying to be too cute with early picks had us take Ball over Judd and Petracca over Billings.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Your picks in the first two rounds should always be best available.

Later picks and rookie picks as well as trade can be used for needs.

Plus talls are generally a lot riskier in terms of making it.


Trying to be too cute with early picks had us take Ball over Judd and Petracca over McCartin.

Armitage over Riewoldt?

 

[bergholt]

Armitage over Riewoldt?

Yeah as I’ve said before, this strategy obviously doesn’t guarantee every pick will work perfectly, it’s about the overall expected value. Equally you could quote Gumbleton over Boak and Selwood and it would be just as useless as a single example which proves nothing.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Yeah as I’ve said before, this strategy obviously doesn’t guarantee every pick will work perfectly, it’s about the overall expected value. Equally you could quote Gumbleton over Boak and Selwood and it would be just as useless as a single example which proves nothing.

Its also a grey area trying to "guess" who was the best available.

That was an interesting draft and hits home a few points.

We saw 6 talls taken top 10. Three cruelled by injury, three kind of ho hum. Jacobs was picked as a rookie.
The mids taken were Gibbs, Boak , Selwood and Armitage , who all turned out pretty decent. Gibbs probably a bit overrated at the time, but still a very good player at his best and i can see why he was rated highly.

The "best available " judgement between those players was actually pretty close to the reality.
Talls far less predictable.

 

[stfan]

Armitage over Riewoldt?

I am not talking about hindsight picks.


Was Jack Reiwoldt rated higher and also at that time did we have a need for another young key forward? I think the answer is no on both counts. Jack worked out very well, but there are many talls who did not. More so than mids too.

Judd was rated higher than Ball, but we're cute in trying to predict other clubs pick selections and we got it wrong.

Pet was the better player but Trout went with Paddy as he panicked to get a key forward and because he thought Petracca's ego was too big.

I mean who would have thought that a once in generation type player might have a big ego as an unusual trait!

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Wood struggled at North as a true KPF. He's more a tall high half forward wing. Battle would have been a better option. We can't even fit Coops in.

I agree, wouldn't want him as a main KPF, but as "backup" he's good to have on the list.
There are a fair few on that list i wouldn't want as a main KPF.
Jack Watts is on it FFS, though he might have done better if they painted nipples on the ball.

 

[Remboy]

View attachment 1457635

Forgot Gresham over Parish.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I am not talking about hindsight picks.


Was Jack Reiwoldt rated higher and also at that time did we have a need for another young key forward? I think the answer is no on both counts. Jack worked out very well, but there are many talls who did not. More so than mids too.

Judd was rated higher than Ball, but we're cute in trying to predict other clubs pick selections and we got it wrong.

Pet was the better player but Trout went with Paddy as he panicked to get a key forward and because he thought Petracca's ego was too big.

I mean who would have thought that a once in generation type player might have a big ego as an unusual trait!

Jesus if you didn't see us staring down the barrel of a forwards crisis back then.
Gehrig close to retirement. Kosi limited.
Flash forward a few years and we are playing Archer , Sipos, Maister, Lee or a ruckman.

 

[bergholt]

Forgot Gresham over Parish.

Good that we took Stewie Loewe ahead of Cale Morton though

 

[stfan]

Jesus if you didn't see us staring down the barrel of a forwards crisis back then.

You seem to be ignoring that our midfield also had aging players who needed replacements as well. Banger was 35, Thompson 34, Stephen Powell 30 and in his last year. So perhaps there was a pressing need for another mid?

Gehrig close to retirement. Kosi limited.

Gtrain had not yet stuffed up his hand.
Kosi played another 7 years.

Flash forward a few years and we are playing Archer , Sipos, Maister, Lee or a ruckman.

Siposs was pick 75 and worth a shot..

Maister and Lee examples of our poor trading of that time.


Back on Jack. Tigers did very well in hindsight, but even they did not value him as a pick 8 which was their first pick, and traded picks to get Polak in.



Former Richmond coach Terry Wallace has revealed how confident his team at the time was when they drafted Jack Riewoldt.

The now-300-gamer was selected with pick 13 in the 2006 National Draft, but the Tigers actually finished the year with pick eight.


Wallace has revealed they were locked into taking Riewoldt early, but knew other teams wouldn’t select him.

They therefore opted to trade down the draft order, working out a deal with Fremantle and Collingwood.

It was a big trade at the time, seeing Chris Tarrant move to the Dockers and Paul Medhurst to the Magpies, while the Tigers moved back from eight to 13 and picked up Graham Polak.

“We actually had pick eight that year. If we’d gone to the draft with pick eight, Jack would’ve been pick eight rather than being pick 13,” Wallace told AFL Nation.

“We had done our homework and knew that no one else was going to take him that high.

“Again, it was because he wasn’t seen as an athletic player. When he tested at the combine, the high-end testing wasn’t there. He didn’t have natural speed, but he was a natural footballer.

“We’d seen him play in senior games and every time he came up against an AFL player, he stepped up to a higher level and Jade Rawlings had given him an enormous praise for his footy acumen.

“What we said was, if no one else was going to pick him first up, why do we need to use pick eight?


“So we went to Fremantle and there was a three-way trade between Fremantle, Collingwood and ourselves for us to get Graham Polak into the club.

“What we did was we got Polak out of Fremantle and got their pick 13. We knew there was no danger of losing Jack at all. We thought we might as well get the extra player in.

“Graham was just starting to establish himself right until he got hit by a tram which probably didn’t help him too much along the journey.

“That was why we went to pick 13. We always knew we were going to be able to pick him up. We were always very confident in Jack at pick 13.”

Richmond was so confident in drafting Jack Riewoldt they deliberately traded their top draft pick

Terry Wallace tells the story of Jack Riewoldt's drafting.

www.sen.com.au

 

[SaintsSeptember]

You seem to be ignoring that our midfield also had aging players who needed replacements as well. Banger was 35, Thompson 34, Stephen Powell 30 and in his last year. So perhaps there was a pressing need for another mid?


Gtrain had not yet stuffed up his hand.
Kosi played another 7 years.


Siposs was pick 75 and worth a shot..

Maister and Lee examples of our poor trading of that time.


Back on Jack. Tigers did very well in hindsight, but even they did not value him as a pick 8 which was their first pick, and traded picks to get Polak in.



Former Richmond coach Terry Wallace has revealed how confident his team at the time was when they drafted Jack Riewoldt.

The now-300-gamer was selected with pick 13 in the 2006 National Draft, but the Tigers actually finished the year with pick eight.


Wallace has revealed they were locked into taking Riewoldt early, but knew other teams wouldn’t select him.

They therefore opted to trade down the draft order, working out a deal with Fremantle and Collingwood.

It was a big trade at the time, seeing Chris Tarrant move to the Dockers and Paul Medhurst to the Magpies, while the Tigers moved back from eight to 13 and picked up Graham Polak.

“We actually had pick eight that year. If we’d gone to the draft with pick eight, Jack would’ve been pick eight rather than being pick 13,” Wallace told AFL Nation.

“We had done our homework and knew that no one else was going to take him that high.

“Again, it was because he wasn’t seen as an athletic player. When he tested at the combine, the high-end testing wasn’t there. He didn’t have natural speed, but he was a natural footballer.

“We’d seen him play in senior games and every time he came up against an AFL player, he stepped up to a higher level and Jade Rawlings had given him an enormous praise for his footy acumen.

“What we said was, if no one else was going to pick him first up, why do we need to use pick eight?


“So we went to Fremantle and there was a three-way trade between Fremantle, Collingwood and ourselves for us to get Graham Polak into the club.

“What we did was we got Polak out of Fremantle and got their pick 13. We knew there was no danger of losing Jack at all. We thought we might as well get the extra player in.

“Graham was just starting to establish himself right until he got hit by a tram which probably didn’t help him too much along the journey.

“That was why we went to pick 13. We always knew we were going to be able to pick him up. We were always very confident in Jack at pick 13.”

Richmond was so confident in drafting Jack Riewoldt they deliberately traded their top draft pick

Terry Wallace tells the story of Jack Riewoldt's drafting.

www.sen.com.au

Kosi played another 7 because we had no options.

I' don't think i ever saw a player so inadequate on their last game.

 

[jwikked]

I' don't think i ever saw a player so inadequate on their last game.

I'm not sure that's a fair metric given he was clearly in so he could hit 200 games played. Apparently his GPS module ended up in someone elses guernsey during training that week to make sure Ross picked him.

 

[my name was taken]

I'm not sure that's a fair metric given he was clearly in so he could hit 200 games played. Apparently his GPS module ended up in someone elses guernsey during training that week to make sure Ross picked him.

Swapped with Joey, think he told the story on Front Bar or something like that and would have been Watters. Probably why they were able to pull it off

 

[bergholt]

Kosi played another 7 because we had no options.

I' don't think i ever saw a player so inadequate on their last game.

They still should have given him that goal which was touched on the line

 

[Enclosed_Animal]

Judd was rated higher than Ball, but we're cute in trying to predict other clubs pick selections and we got it wrong.

Geez some people forget how bloody good pre OP Luke Ball was.

Second year was runner-up in our B+F (in a team that was a kick off a GF - and I believe is the best Saints side of my lifetime)
Third year was B+F & AA (in a team that was 30 bad minutes of football off a GF)
Fourth year was named captain

Yes our drafting has been far from perfect, but taking Ball over Judd was absolutely not a drafting mistake. Ball probably goes number 1 in any single draft other than 2000 or 2001.

Was an absolute freak cruelled by bad injury management*

*And I say this hating everything about that traitorous pr**k

 

[Falchoon]

Kosi played another 7 because we had no options.

I' don't think i ever saw a player so inadequate on their last game.

Kosi's most under appreciated game was that 2009 home and away game vs Geelong. He took Scarlett every where.