Review 2023 National Draft Review Thread II [McKercher, Z.Duursma, Goad, W.Dawson, Hardeman, Maley]

[My Left Foote]

Only 30 more days until the draft, keep those crazy pick swap scenarios coming.

 

[BoomerRoo]

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

We're certainly having a good look at young Koltyn

 

[Psicosis]

We don't need or want Watson at 2 or 3

Yeah I’m not suggesting we take Watson at 2 or 3. I’m suggesting that if we were to slide back, it would require Watson to be available which wouldn’t be later then pick 5 IMO.

 

[Merlin007]

Only 30 more days until the draft, keep those crazy pick swap scenarios coming.

… yeah, or not

 

[Ura]

Trade scenario…

Pick 2, 15 and 18 for pick 1 and 23
Then. (1, 3, 17, 23)
Pick 3 for 6 and 11
Then. (1, 6, 11, 17, 23)
Pick 11 and 17 for pick 8

Enter draft with 1, 6, 8 and 23… problem solved… good fantasy though.

 

[Tas]

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

If only they had a pick around 16...

 

[marklovesbeer]

The “mail” I’ve got is Clarkson just does not value rucks that highly. He wants bulldozers that provide physical presence around the ball and a contest down the line.

I was actually going to post in the Xerri thread the other day (I had zoned out a bit in a meeting & couldn’t exactly do it at the time & subsequently forgot)…

Does Clarko just like Xerri because he’s a hard prick who will smash & bash a bit & Coarko is going to just back the midfielders in to win the ball regardless (since we will have the best midfield in the league soon)?

 

[justroyal]

The “mail” I’ve got is Clarkson just does not value rucks that highly. He wants bulldozers that provide physical presence around the ball and a contest down the line.

Must have hated Goldie.

I sure did when he couldn’t provide this.

 

[danj]

The “mail” I’ve got is Clarkson just does not value rucks that highly. He wants bulldozers that provide physical presence around the ball and a contest down the line.

Makes sense as to why we let Goldie go and aligns with my earlier thoughts that we just have guys who are nominated ruck in each zone. Good strategy allows us to have an extra body either at in front or behind the contest

 

[shinboner magic]

We're certainly having a good look at young Koltyn

For kangalotto

 

[hsquid]

Do you want to watch the draft and think "Who would Souup pick?"?
Do you want to understand the actual draftee implications of a six dimensional pick swap?
Do you want to jump with joy when Sydney unexpectedly picks George Topwhistle and you can see who that means we can get?
Or do you just want to get way too nuffy into all this for no good reason at all?

My annual "Draft Tracker" spreadsheet is for YOU.

--
Instruction are inside but summary is:

Before the draft:

• List the players you would like us to pick in column D (careful not to mess up the conditional formatting if you copy-paste).
• My understanding of other people's rankings are in N, O, P, Q (Souups top 10 just in 'guess' order)
• Correct the North picks in AI9:13 if there are any pick swaps.

Draft night:

• Mark off the pick numbers people are selected in column F.
• There is automatic handling of tied players assuming all are matched.
• The "worst case" North selections according to each pundit are highlighted.

This year I also added some basic "list balance" info on the right for reference but it doesn't autoupdate with picks.

Enjoy!

 

[zoomba23]

A lot of context there, though

Daicos was the number 1 pick but was F/S. The same for Ashcroft.

If we're being brutally honest, JHF was rated very similarly to Daicos. Both of them were touted as more exciting than the number one picks in the years prior

Edit: And that prediction has come true. JHF's attitude is the only thing stopping him from rapidly closing in on the elite echelon of players

 

[danj]

If we're being brutally honest, JHF was rated very similarly to Daicos. Both of them were touted as more exciting than the number one picks in the years prior

Mate that’s kind of self evident that each year the number 1 draft pick is going to be touted as more exciting than previous years. What we really want is to pick the diamonds in the rough, the later draft picks that actually turn out to be top gun AFL players, so I suppose what we need are the best recruiters in the game

 

[ferball]

If we're being brutally honest, JHF was rated very similarly to Daicos. Both of them were touted as more exciting than the number one picks in the years prior

If JHF had the application of Sheezel or Kane turner he'd have won the Rising Star as well.

Everyone in the AFL is talented. The best players work hard.

 

[FootySmartSimpson]

Must have hated Goldie.

I sure did when he couldn’t provide this.

Never mind about the most hit outs to advantage and the silver service he gave for 15 years…

 

[JGreezy]

If we're being brutally honest, JHF was rated very similarly to Daicos. Both of them were touted as more exciting than the number one picks in the years prior

He was definitely up there, and maybe equal. But I think that we take Daicos if there is no f/s.

 

[Nugget 83]

If JHF had the application of Sheezel or Kane turner he'd have won the Rising Star as well.

Everyone in the AFL is talented. The best players work hard.

JHF was never in the running for the star because he needed surgery.

 

[Masked Avenger]

He was definitely up there, and maybe equal. But I think that we take Daicos if there is no f/s.

Daicos looks obvious in hindsight and so does taking a local over an interstate kid.

Interesting that GWS bid on Darcy at 2 and when it was matched then chose Callaghan.

Daicos wasn't bid on until pick 4 by GC.

 

[Deleted member 98541]

Do you want to watch the draft and think "Who would Souup pick?"?
Do you want to understand the actual draftee implications of a six dimensional pick swap?
Do you want to jump with joy when Sydney unexpectedly picks George Topwhistle and you can see who that means we can get?
Or do you just want to get way too nuffy into all this for no good reason at all?

My annual "Draft Tracker" spreadsheet is for YOU.

--
Instruction are inside but summary is:

Before the draft:

• List the players you would like us to pick in column D (careful not to mess up the conditional formatting if you copy-paste).
• My understanding of other people's rankings are in N, O, P, Q (Souups top 10 just in 'guess' order)
• Correct the North picks in AI9:13 if there are any pick swaps.

Draft night:

• Mark off the pick numbers people are selected in column F.
• There is automatic handling of tied players assuming all are matched.
• The "worst case" North selections according to each pundit are highlighted.

This year I also added some basic "list balance" info on the right for reference but it doesn't autoupdate with picks.

Enjoy!

^Send this to the club, looks heaps better than the current system...

 

[JGreezy]

Daicos looks obvious in hindsight and so does taking a local over an interstate kid.

Interesting that GWS bid on Darcy at 2 and when it was matched then chose Callaghan.

Daicos wasn't bid on until pick 4 by GC.

I'm pretty sure that draft triggered the AFL to crack down on under the table agreements to not bid on players.

GWS traded for that pick from Collingwood and agreed to not bid on Daicos.

 

[Horace]

We hear constantly that this years draft is very weak (something that Mick Ablett disagrees with by the way) and beyond the first half dozen or so, it falls away.

I just counted up the number of retirements and delistings, which include players off both the main and rookie lists and there is a quite astonishing 105 players retired or delisted. We top the ladder at 11 players in this category so at least we are "good" at something.

Now I'm not sure if lists have to reduce again this year, but through a combination of all of the drafts, that's quite a lot of spots that need to be filled. You have to wonder why some clubs have cut so heavily this year, if they too, think that this is a weak draft year.

It seems to me that some clubs may look to top up from those who have been delisted, with some names, going by club alphabetically who might get a second chance (in my very uneducated opinion) being Hately, Mathiesen, O'Brien (not Tim or at least not in our case I hope) Bianco, Ruscoe, Simpson (dubious), McLaughlin, Bonner (dubious) and Gould.

Of that lot I think Hately, Mathiesen, Bianco and Gould, might be worth looking at, though more as depth players than anything else. Of course we may consider rookeing one or two of the boys we delisted.

 

[Merlin007]

We hear constantly that this years draft is very weak (something that Mick Ablett disagrees with by the way) and beyond the first half dozen or so, it falls away.

I just counted up the number of retirements and delistings, which include players off both the main and rookie lists and there is a quite astonishing 105 players retired or delisted. We top the ladder at 11 players in this category so at least we are "good" at something.

Now I'm not sure if lists have to reduce again this year, but through a combination of all of the drafts, that's quite a lot of spots that need to be filled. You have to wonder why some clubs have cut so heavily this year, if they too, think that this is a weak draft year.

It seems to me that some clubs may look to top up from those who have been delisted, with some names, going by club alphabetically who might get a second chance (in my very uneducated opinion) being Hately, Mathiesen, O'Brien (not Tim or at least not in our case I hope) Bianco, Ruscoe, Simpson (dubious), McLaughlin, Bonner (dubious) and Gould.

Of that lot I think Hately, Mathiesen, Bianco and Gould, might be worth looking at, though more as depth players than anything else. Of course we may consider rookeing one or two of the boys we delisted.

You can count on two completely contradictory urban myths every year - there's a 'generational talent' at #1, and it's a weak draft.

Guaranteed.

 

[Merlin007]

Do you want to watch the draft and think "Who would Souup pick?"?
Do you want to understand the actual draftee implications of a six dimensional pick swap?
Do you want to jump with joy when Sydney unexpectedly picks George Topwhistle and you can see who that means we can get?
Or do you just want to get way too nuffy into all this for no good reason at all?

My annual "Draft Tracker" spreadsheet is for YOU.

--
Instruction are inside but summary is:

Before the draft:

• List the players you would like us to pick in column D (careful not to mess up the conditional formatting if you copy-paste).
• My understanding of other people's rankings are in N, O, P, Q (Souups top 10 just in 'guess' order)
• Correct the North picks in AI9:13 if there are any pick swaps.

Draft night:

• Mark off the pick numbers people are selected in column F.
• There is automatic handling of tied players assuming all are matched.
• The "worst case" North selections according to each pundit are highlighted.

This year I also added some basic "list balance" info on the right for reference but it doesn't autoupdate with picks.

Enjoy!

Fabulous work, but you probably need to get outdoors more

 

[marklovesbeer]

Is this suggesting that’s what we’re going with?

Probably not. Social media has not much to talk about right now I guess.

 

[krakouers]

Fabulous work, but you probably need to get outdoors more