Player Watch 2023 AFL Draft Pool Discussion Thread

[Strapping Young Lad]

Same rule applies to this thread as other years, keep it on topic about the kids.
Don’t get bogged down on what other teams might do or where they will finish.

Trade speculation belongs here.
That's also where you can discuss your mock drafts or pick trades.

Any McCabe, Dear or Maginness talk belongs here.

 

[Roger Rogerson]

It’s not about his upper body. All about his legs and core. Going to be against players with 15+ kilos on him.

He’s going to be a nugget. No issue there.

 

[nelk boys]

Spot on. Xavier Duursma is great evidence to this. Those that can’t accept this metric as judgement are simply clutching at straws.

They are absolutely comparable and are built very similar. Kg and Cm wise.

Xavier had a good first two years but has done nothing since. Just traded for a packet of chips to the drug cheats. A very replaceable player.

Same DNA. One brother won’t miraculously be quicker/stronger than the other.

So your saying his failure will be based on his brother's performances?

Jesus christ.

 

[projectdingley]

So your saying his failure will be based on his brother's performances?

Jesus christ.

Where did I say that? I said it’s a metric that can be used for judgement.

I.e. his ceiling and what he can become.

 

[Blackhawk42]

I've watched him play a few times. The open nature of U18 football and the pushing out of the extremes in stature, strength, athletic performance and skill in the AFL make his height very relevant. What he can do around other U18 footballers who aren't nearly as talented, in a game that isn't nearly congested, isn't going to match up to what he can do in the AFL. It makes him less likely to be able to impact in the midfield, it makes him more easily defended by taller and more athletic defenders, and it makes him more easily exploited defensively if we were to potentially play him as a half back.

Lack of height to the extreme of Watson is a hard ceiling to how much he can achieve in the AFL.

Lachie Neale is 177cm. Has won two Brownlows.

Dylan Moore is 177cm. One of a handful of elite players to average over 20 touches and a goal a game in the past 24 months.

Caleb Daniel is 168cm and is an All Australian and plays in all thirds of ground.

Nic Watson has more X-factor, explosiveness and cleaner one-touch skills than all 3 of those wonderful players. Height is zero issue.

 

[nelk boys]

Where did I say that? I said it’s a metric that can be used for judgement.

I.e. his ceiling and what he can become.

They are totally different players.

One is a half forward flanker who has the aerial ability of a Heeney and a Fritsch. In fact he looks better than them at the same age, with the ability to pinch in the midfield.

AFL scouts are comparing him to Fyfe at a similar age. He's put on 9kgs in the last two years, he's on a similar trajectory in terms of position and body composition.

If he grows another 2cms he could be a key forward.

While Xavier is a winger who does not win his own footy and is not built to be a midfielder.

 

[KermitJagger]

Lachie Neale is 177cm. Has won two Brownlows.

Dylan Moore is 177cm. One of a handful of elite players to average over 20 touches and a goal a game in the past 24 months.

Caleb Daniel is 168cm and is an All Australian and plays in all thirds of ground.

Nic Watson has more X-factor, explosiveness and cleaner one-touch skills than all 3 of those wonderful players. Height is zero issue.

Watson is almost 10cm shorter than both Neale and Moore. They're already short players and that's a significant amount shorter.

Plus he's not at all a cleaner player than Caleb Daniel. I watched a lot of junior footy when Daniel was coming through and he was a better, more complete midfielder at that level than anyone else in that draft - Petracca included. Athletically he's elite - second all time draft combine for the beep test, sub 3s sprint, 10m 3km time trial. He was dobbing goals on the run, outside 50, getting clearances at will. As a player he has zero weaknesses besides his height. In spite of that he's spent most of his career as a half back with only cameos anywhere else. Daniel is the perfect example of height being an issue and a limiting factor. He's a great player, but he's a significantly more limited player than he'd be if he were 10cm taller.

Watson will end up a good player, but whether you like to admit it or not he will be limited by his height - and if he succeeds in will be in spite of it.

 

[projectdingley]

They are totally different players.

One is a half forward flanker who has the aerial ability of a Heeney and a Fritsch. In fact he looks better than them at the same age, with the ability to pinch in the midfield.

AFL scouts are comparing him to Fyfe at a similar age. He's put on 9kgs in the last two years, he's on a similar trajectory in terms of position and body composition.

If he grows another 2cms he could be a key forward.

While Xavier is a winger who does not win his own footy and is not built to be a midfielder.

Im sorry mate. You can not expect Zane duursma to develop into a key forward. That is ridiculous.

All potential draftees get compared to AFL players. Not just Duursma.

Xavier and Zane may be different positional players but their body compositions are VERY similar.

Xavier during his draft year 185cm/71kg
Zane during his draft year 189cm/79kg.

Xavier 5 years in the system 186cm/82kg. Body developed, game hasn’t.

 

[projectdingley]

Watson is almost 10cm shorter than both Neale and Moore. They're already short players and that's a significant amount shorter.

Plus he's not at all a cleaner player than Caleb Daniel. I watched a lot of junior footy when Daniel was coming through and he was a better, more complete midfielder at that level than anyone else in that draft - Petracca included. Athletically he's elite - second all time draft combine for the beep test, sub 3s sprint, 10m 3km time trial. He was dobbing goals on the run, outside 50, getting clearances at will. As a player he has zero weaknesses besides his height. In spite of that he's spent most of his career as a half back with only cameos anywhere else. Daniel is the perfect example of height being an issue and a limiting factor. He's a great player, but he's a significantly more limited player than he'd be if he were 10cm taller.

Watson will end up a good player, but whether you like to admit it or not he will be limited by his height - and if he succeeds in will be in spite of it.

Watson is the same height as a player named Kozzie Pickett. Very similar weight as well.

The Caleb Daniel comparison is ridiculous. A lot of spin on his overview considering he was a pick 46.

Watson is a top 5 pick. Different brackets in terms of talent.

 

[KermitJagger]

Im sorry mate. You can not expect Xavier duursma to develop into a key forward. That is ridiculous.

All potential draftees get compared to AFL players. Not just Duursma.

Xavier and Zane may be different positional players but their body compositions are VERY similar.

Xavier during his draft year 185cm/71kg
Zane during his draft year 189cm/79kg.

Xavier 5 years in the system 186cm/82kg. Body developed, game hasn’t.

He's more than 10% heavier than Xavier. That's not similar composition, in boxing it's 3 weight classes.

 

[KermitJagger]

Watson is the same height as a player named Kozzie Pickett. Very similar weight as well.

The Caleb Daniel comparison is ridiculous. A lot of spin on his overview considering he was a pick 46.

Watson is a top 5 pick. Different brackets in terms of talent.

He was a pick 46 because of his height, exclusively because of his height. You can look up any draft profile from 2014 and I can guarantee they'll say exactly what I did.

I'm not sure why I'm taking arguably the least serious poster on this board seriously but I do think you should probably have the slightest clue of what you're talking about before you talk about it.

 

[projectdingley]

He's more than 10% heavier than Xavier. That's not similar composition, in boxing it's 3 weight classes.

Xavier is currently 82kg. 3 kg heavier than Zane. Made no difference to his game and is arguably not up to AFL level.

 

[projectdingley]

He was a pick 46 because of his height, exclusively because of his height. You can look up any draft profile from 2014 and I can guarantee they'll say exactly what I did.

I'm not sure why I'm taking arguably the least serious poster on this board seriously but I do think you should probably have the slightest clue of what you're talking about before you talk about it.

Right. I’m not sure what you’re trying to say because Watson won’t go any lower than the Dogs pick 6.

You’re comparing a Pick 6 to 46.

You have to ask yourself why Watson won’t be slipping any lower.

 

[TheFourPillars]

Watson is almost 10cm shorter than both Neale and Moore. They're already short players and that's a significant amount shorter.

Plus he's not at all a cleaner player than Caleb Daniel. I watched a lot of junior footy when Daniel was coming through and he was a better, more complete midfielder at that level than anyone else in that draft - Petracca included. Athletically he's elite - second all time draft combine for the beep test, sub 3s sprint, 10m 3km time trial. He was dobbing goals on the run, outside 50, getting clearances at will. As a player he has zero weaknesses besides his height. In spite of that he's spent most of his career as a half back with only cameos anywhere else. Daniel is the perfect example of height being an issue and a limiting factor. He's a great player, but he's a significantly more limited player than he'd be if he were 10cm taller.

Watson will end up a good player, but whether you like to admit it or not he will be limited by his height - and if he succeeds in will be in spite of it.

Mate Caleb Daniel is a great kick but as far as comparisons go to Nick Watson, Caleb will never be a match winner. Watson will win matches for you. He has great agility and acceleration and top end speed probably in the 2.8s range for 20m. He also has pretty good hands and can take marks even hangers (a lot like poppy). All of that and he has great endurance. More comparable to Cyril before all of his hammies than Caleb. Yes the only thing getting in his way is his height. This is a serious player and the only reason he is still said to be going in the top 5.

 

[Blackhawk42]

He was a pick 46 because of his height, exclusively because of his height. You can look up any draft profile from 2014 and I can guarantee they'll say exactly what I did.

I'm not sure why I'm taking arguably the least serious poster on this board seriously but I do think you should probably have the slightest clue of what you're talking about before you talk about it.

But that's my point also. He doesn't go 46 in a redraft. Recruiters were wrong to dismiss him due to his height.

 

[KermitJagger]

Right. I’m not sure what you’re trying to say because Watson won’t go any lower than the Dogs pick 6.

You’re comparing a Pick 6 to 46.

You have to ask yourself why Watson won’t be slipping any lower.

Possibly because trends in drafting change over time. You can check yourself with how much the value of key position players and rucks have fluctuated over the past 2 decades. The success of players like Caleb Daniel, Touk Miller, Lachie Neale mean teams show less reservation for shorter players.

 

[CaptainWorpedo]

So your saying his failure will be based on his brother's performances?

Jesus christ.

The Crawford brothers are an example of how wrong this assumption is ….

* The post Nelk boy was referring to - The younger brother will fail as the older brother has failed.

 

[KermitJagger]

But that's my point also. He doesn't go 46 in a redraft. Recruiters were wrong to dismiss him due to his height.

I don't disagree, Pick 46 was a massive undervaluing of Caleb Daniel just like Pick 1 was a massive overvaluing of Paddy McCartin. The league was far more bearish on shorter players and far more bullish on key position players at that stage.

As I mentioned above though, as good as Daniel is he's still limited. He could be one of the top players in the league, perennial Brownlow competitor - he's just too small and that's a limitation. I doubt a player like Patrick Cripps even gets drafted at 168cm tall, that's the advantage of height.

 

[CaptainWorpedo]

Watson has my vote ! Ginnivan and Watson combination really appeals and I feel they will both get under the oppositions skin. Oh and kick a lot of goals !

 

[projectdingley]

Possibly because trends in drafting change over time. You can check yourself with how much the value of key position players and rucks have fluctuated over the past 2 decades. The success of players like Caleb Daniel, Touk Miller, Lachie Neale mean teams show less reservation for shorter players.

If teams show less reservation for shorter players, tell me when the last time a player shorter than 175cm was taken in the top 5. You have absolutely contradicted yourself. So perhaps you should have the slightest clue before even speaking.

 

[Hoogmeister]

Lachie Neale is 177cm. Has won two Brownlows.

Dylan Moore is 177cm. One of a handful of elite players to average over 20 touches and a goal a game in the past 24 months.

Caleb Daniel is 168cm and is an All Australian and plays in all thirds of ground.

Nic Watson has more X-factor, explosiveness and cleaner one-touch skills than all 3 of those wonderful players. Height is zero issue.

Seems like clubs are always wary of recruiting shorter players with good skills but they almost always turn out to be stars.

• Lachie Neale, pick 58
• Dylan Moore, pick 67
• Caleb Daniel, pick 46

For Watson to be ranked in the top 10 despite his height, it speaks volumes. He'll probably gain an inch or two over the next couple of years as well.

A few more short players: Paul Puopolo 173cm (mature-age recruit), Eddie Betts 174cm (pre-season draft), Shai Bolton 176cm (pick 29), Cyril Rioli 177cm (pick 12).

 

[KermitJagger]

If teams show less reservation for shorter players, tell me when the last time a player shorter than 175cm was taken in the top 5. You have absolutely contradicted yourself. So perhaps you should have the slightest clue before even speaking.

Showing less reservation towards shorter players still means that the shorter player has to present themselves as draftable. They're not just going to start drafting them early just because they're short.

 

[suedehead]

No matter who we go for, it's good to keep in mind the initial reaction (lots of disappointment on here) when we used our top pick on a "skinny, medium-sized half back flanker" named Will Day.

Sent from my SM-F711B using Tapatalk

 

[Millsie69]

You don't think Dodoro would take great delight in bidding on McCabe at their pick 9? We would end up with pick 6, still get McCabe and only a few extra points to shw for it. I will be very surprised if neither Swans or Bombers bid on McCabe with their first rounders.

Father-Son’s/Academy picks don’t often go as early as expected though?

 

[Hoogmeister]

Showing less reservation towards shorter players still means that the shorter player has to present themselves as draftable. They're not just going to start drafting them early just because they're short.

Really proves how talented Watson is if he's being considered a top 5 pick. Still presents as highly draftable in spite of his height.

 

[KermitJagger]

Really proves how talented Watson is if he's being considered a top 5 pick. Still presents as highly draftable in spite of his height.

I agree.

Let me clarify my position here. I'm happy to draft Watson, I think he's a great choice for us given where our list is at and our land of the giants midfield, but my point is a pretty simple one - as good as he is, height to the extreme that Watson lacks it is a limitation. If a Fyfe or a Cripps were 168cm tall they'd likely go undrafted. If Watson was 190cm tall there'd be daylight between him and Harley Reid, and we'd have 18 teams tanking for the chance at drafting him.

It's not criticising Watson, it's just the truth.