Resource 2024 AFL Draft discussion thread (Wed Nov 20 to Fri Nov 22)

Which realistically available player SHOULD we pick at #4?

  • Sid Draper

  • Jagga Smith

  • Harvey Langford

Results are only viewable after voting.

Remove this Banner Ad

Crow till I die said:
He literally said this which is what i responded to? He does not have the height but sure has the speed.

SellarStardom said:
Draper looks brilliant, Butters like, just wish we could get someone with speed AND height
Click to expand...

You don't think some of those spins out of traffic and acceleration away wasn't dynamic?
Click to expand...

What does this question mean then??
 
Crow till I die said:
He literally said this which is what i responded to? He does not have the height but sure has the speed.

SellarStardom said:
Draper looks brilliant, Butters like, just wish we could get someone with speed AND height
Click to expand...
My comment on Draper is that we have players coming through the midfield now in Rankine (179), Rachele (180), Soli (179), Taylor (+80). Whilst Dawson is 190, Dowling 187, the only others are Pedlar at 183 (who knows).

Adding another 180 means a very similar profile, I think we need a 185-190 top liner
 

Log in to remove this ad.

SellarStardom said:
My comment on Draper is that we have players coming through the midfield now in Rankine (179), Rachele (180), Soli (179), Taylor (+80). Whilst Dawson is 190, Dowling 187, the only others are Pedlar at 183 (who knows).

Adding another 180 means a very similar profile, I think we need a 185-190 top liner
Click to expand...
Maybe, but look at Caleb Serong, a small midfielder that many were saying the same thing about before that draft. I would love to have him in our midfield right now. If Draper has elite characteristics as a midfielder, thats enough for me if picking a bigger guy at our pick means we are selecting someone not as highly skilled if that makes sense?
 
noobermensch said:
Not at all. I have him in the next group after the top 2 of Smillie and FOS.
Click to expand...
Of the players rated in the top 4 or 5 coming into the Nationals Smillie to my eye has been the least impressive.
What am I missing? Sure he's bigger than the average midfielder but does he really use that advantage?
 
Mutineer said:
Of the players rated in the top 4 or 5 coming into the Nationals Smillie to my eye has been the least impressive.
What am I missing? Sure he's bigger than the average midfielder but does he really use that advantage?
Click to expand...
It's so even that a soft patch of form will rightly enough cause people to question if there are better options at pick 1. I'm going to stick with Smillie until I see FOS back in action, and I'm not that concerned with his average Champs form.

My case for Smillie:

He isn't an aggressive player at stoppage, but his size is a factor. He's difficult to push off the ball, he makes it difficult for guys to get a clear run, and there are moments in every game where he draws multiple opponents to him. Similar to Bo Allan, guys that size at stoppage tend to create a gravity around them which opens things up for their teammates. I compare him a little to Jobe Watson who also wasn't a naturally aggressive stoppage player but his size made him extremely effective in there, and Smillie is much more agile than Jobe.

The other two things that shouldnt be underestimated is how effective he is at navigating heavy traffic to get outside for a clean and damaging disposal given how he can spear penetrating darts lace out to a leading forward. Also he's been the midfielder in this crop that's most consistently kicked goals, both from midfield and resting forward.
 
noobermensch said:
It's so even that a soft patch of form will rightly enough cause people to question if there are better options at pick 1. I'm going to stick with Smillie until I see FOS back in action, and I'm not that concerned with his average Champs form.

My case for Smillie:

He isn't an aggressive player at stoppage, but his size is a factor. He's difficult to push off the ball, he makes it difficult for guys to get a clear run, and there are moments in every game where he draws multiple opponents to him. Similar to Bo Allan, guys that size at stoppage tend to create a gravity around them which opens things up for their teammates. I compare him a little to Jobe Watson who also wasn't a naturally aggressive stoppage player but his size made him extremely effective in there, and Smillie is much more agile than Jobe.

The other two things that shouldnt be underestimated is how effective he is at navigating heavy traffic to get outside for a clean and damaging disposal given how he can spear penetrating darts lace out to a leading forward. Also he's been the midfielder in this crop that's most consistently kicked goals, both from midfield and resting forward.
Click to expand...
I think Sam Lalor can do all that and more yet he doesn't seem to be in the same discussion, maybe it's because he hasn't had much exposure with his hip/groin issue during preseason and then the foot issue and unfortunately the VC coaches seem to be taking that into account given he's being played forward way way more than midfield?
 
Mutineer said:
I think Sam Lalor can do all that and more yet he doesn't seem to be in the same discussion, maybe it's because he hasn't had much exposure with his hip/groin issue during preseason and then the foot issue and unfortunately the VC coaches seem to be taking that into account given he's being played forward way way more than midfield?
Click to expand...
I agree with that. I think Lalor is in theory the most well rounded prospect in the pool. He just needs to find consistency and form and produce a couple more games like he did the weekend before last and he'll be right in contention.
 
SellarStardom said:
My comment on Draper is that we have players coming through the midfield now in Rankine (179), Rachele (180), Soli (179), Taylor (+80). Whilst Dawson is 190, Dowling 187, the only others are Pedlar at 183 (who knows).

Adding another 180 means a very similar profile, I think we need a 185-190 top liner
Click to expand...
Hopefully Charlie Edwards turns into that player
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

noobermensch said:
My case for Smillie:

He isn't an aggressive player at stoppage, but his size is a factor. He's difficult to push off the ball, he makes it difficult for guys to get a clear run, and there are moments in every game where he draws multiple opponents to him. Similar to Bo Allan, guys that size at stoppage tend to create a gravity around them which opens things up for their teammates. I compare him a little to Jobe Watson who also wasn't a naturally aggressive stoppage player but his size made him extremely effective in there, and Smillie is much more agile than Jobe.

The other two things that shouldnt be underestimated is how effective he is at navigating heavy traffic to get outside for a clean and damaging disposal given how he can spear penetrating darts lace out to a leading forward. Also he's been the midfielder in this crop that's most consistently kicked goals, both from midfield and resting forward.
Click to expand...
Always appreciate the feedback

Is this a case of big kid dominating age groups and finding it tough at the higher levels?

Or does he project better?
 
GreyCrow said:
Always appreciate the feedback

Is this a case of big kid dominating age groups and finding it tough at the higher levels?

Or does he project better?
Click to expand...
Its difficult to tell, there are the same questions most years when a big or physically developed kid comes through. Harley had the same questions, "he wont be able to fend off at AFL level like he does against skinny kids".

Smillie was one of the best across the two academy games against VFL opponents, and he relies more on his evasiveness and skills than his physical advantages. I expect he'll have no problems with the step up, or no more than any draftee does.
 
Excellent article and a great idea by Cal Twomey...

www.afl.com.au

The draft capsule: How to solve recruiting's hindsight problem

Cal Twomey writes how a 'draft capsule' would solve recruiting's revisionism problem
www.afl.com.au www.afl.com.au

OPINION

The draft capsule: How to solve recruiting's hindsight problem​

Cal Twomey writes how a 'draft capsule' would solve recruiting's revisionism problem

WE ARE calling it the 'draft capsule' and it needs to be added to the draft landscape as a key part of the year-round discussion.

Here's what we're putting forward: at the conclusion of every national draft, each club anonymously submits its top-30 list of draft prospects for that season into an online AFL portal.


They are ranked in order from No.1 to 30 and collectively each pick is assigned points. The system automatically collates the points for each player depending on where they are put by the clubs and then generates a consensus top 30 draft prospects, in order, as judged by the clubs and recruiters themselves.

It remains anonymous and under lock and key for 12 months and isn't released publicly until a week before the following year's draft – when the fanfare, interest and buzz on the next generation is at fever pitch. With time, the opening of the draft capsule will become a key part of the draft news cycle, bringing with it storylines on who was actually ranked where and how the first years of the players' careers had panned out against expectations.

Here's why the draft capsule is needed.

Recruiting has a revisionism problem. More broadly, it is human nature to use hindsight to turn the narrative the way that suits a current position.
But the clandestine nature of drafting means it is very easy years down the track to twist where certain players were ranked and how keen (or not) clubs were on them depending on how successful (or not) their careers are. Often the comparisons are used to skewer the scouts who made the choices, even though they were often in line with where the general view was of the player's draft range.

The draft capsule will take out the guesswork. Richard Tambling at pick No.4 ahead of Lance Franklin? Well, the capsule might have told you that the consensus was that Tambling was ahead of Buddy and it wasn't just the Tigers.
Dustin Martin at No.4 behind Tom Scully and Jack Trengove? The consensus might have said that's exactly where he was – and exactly who clubs also had ahead of him.

But the draft capsule concept won't just defend picks that don't turn out well – it will be able to shine a light on the riskier selections that work or challenge those that don't.
Where did the consensus draft actually have Marcus Bontempelli before the Bulldogs took him at No.4 in 2013? Or Clayton Oliver when Melbourne grabbed him at the same number two years later?

Both were considered genuine draft bolters, but were they really according to the recruiters? What about the Wil Powell type of examples? Unspoken about in the lead-up to the 2017 draft, the Suns swooped at No.19. The draft capsule would certainly not have had Powell in the consensus top 30 but he has proven to be a terrific pick.
And then there's the Chad Warner example. He got to the Swans' fourth pick in the 2019 draft at No.39 overall. Would he have featured in the consensus top 30?

In 2018, after the introduction of live trading during the draft, we started at AFL.com.au a now annual tradition of diving into the machinations of the first round of the draft in the days following it. It digs into all the what ifs, tactics and bluffs as well as the priorities for each club.
Every year since, the story has covered the deals that happened and those that didn't, the offers that fell flat and which players each clubs were really after with their picks. It serves as a reference point for down the track.

Of course, the draft capsule relies on recruiter and club honesty – the AFL wouldn't be able to enforce that other than suggesting the clubs would also get something out of the exercise.

Club recruiting teams often go back and revisit why some picks worked and others didn't, what they missed or what they mistook and any clues to help the next draft night they're on the clock. Some of those assessments can be informed further by the capsule each year, with not only content but more importantly context being borne out of the exercise.
 
Mutineer said:
Excellent article and a great idea by Cal Twomey...

www.afl.com.au

The draft capsule: How to solve recruiting's hindsight problem

Cal Twomey writes how a 'draft capsule' would solve recruiting's revisionism problem
www.afl.com.au www.afl.com.au

OPINION

The draft capsule: How to solve recruiting's hindsight problem​

Cal Twomey writes how a 'draft capsule' would solve recruiting's revisionism problem

WE ARE calling it the 'draft capsule' and it needs to be added to the draft landscape as a key part of the year-round discussion.

Here's what we're putting forward: at the conclusion of every national draft, each club anonymously submits its top-30 list of draft prospects for that season into an online AFL portal.


They are ranked in order from No.1 to 30 and collectively each pick is assigned points. The system automatically collates the points for each player depending on where they are put by the clubs and then generates a consensus top 30 draft prospects, in order, as judged by the clubs and recruiters themselves.

It remains anonymous and under lock and key for 12 months and isn't released publicly until a week before the following year's draft – when the fanfare, interest and buzz on the next generation is at fever pitch. With time, the opening of the draft capsule will become a key part of the draft news cycle, bringing with it storylines on who was actually ranked where and how the first years of the players' careers had panned out against expectations.

Here's why the draft capsule is needed.

Recruiting has a revisionism problem. More broadly, it is human nature to use hindsight to turn the narrative the way that suits a current position.
But the clandestine nature of drafting means it is very easy years down the track to twist where certain players were ranked and how keen (or not) clubs were on them depending on how successful (or not) their careers are. Often the comparisons are used to skewer the scouts who made the choices, even though they were often in line with where the general view was of the player's draft range.

The draft capsule will take out the guesswork. Richard Tambling at pick No.4 ahead of Lance Franklin? Well, the capsule might have told you that the consensus was that Tambling was ahead of Buddy and it wasn't just the Tigers.
Dustin Martin at No.4 behind Tom Scully and Jack Trengove? The consensus might have said that's exactly where he was – and exactly who clubs also had ahead of him.

But the draft capsule concept won't just defend picks that don't turn out well – it will be able to shine a light on the riskier selections that work or challenge those that don't.
Where did the consensus draft actually have Marcus Bontempelli before the Bulldogs took him at No.4 in 2013? Or Clayton Oliver when Melbourne grabbed him at the same number two years later?

Both were considered genuine draft bolters, but were they really according to the recruiters? What about the Wil Powell type of examples? Unspoken about in the lead-up to the 2017 draft, the Suns swooped at No.19. The draft capsule would certainly not have had Powell in the consensus top 30 but he has proven to be a terrific pick.
And then there's the Chad Warner example. He got to the Swans' fourth pick in the 2019 draft at No.39 overall. Would he have featured in the consensus top 30?

In 2018, after the introduction of live trading during the draft, we started at AFL.com.au a now annual tradition of diving into the machinations of the first round of the draft in the days following it. It digs into all the what ifs, tactics and bluffs as well as the priorities for each club.
Every year since, the story has covered the deals that happened and those that didn't, the offers that fell flat and which players each clubs were really after with their picks. It serves as a reference point for down the track.

Of course, the draft capsule relies on recruiter and club honesty – the AFL wouldn't be able to enforce that other than suggesting the clubs would also get something out of the exercise.

Club recruiting teams often go back and revisit why some picks worked and others didn't, what they missed or what they mistook and any clues to help the next draft night they're on the clock. Some of those assessments can be informed further by the capsule each year, with not only content but more importantly context being borne out of the exercise.
Click to expand...
I don't mind it. Some of the clubs may not like it if it exposes some of the aforementioned "tactics and bluffs" they like to use, so they might want to release it at 3 years rather than 12 months, which would still provide lots of interesting information.

But it's an original solution, even if I don't think it's the biggest problem the AFL has right now.
 
Mutineer said:
Excellent article and a great idea by Cal Twomey...

www.afl.com.au

The draft capsule: How to solve recruiting's hindsight problem

Cal Twomey writes how a 'draft capsule' would solve recruiting's revisionism problem
www.afl.com.au www.afl.com.au

OPINION

The draft capsule: How to solve recruiting's hindsight problem​

Cal Twomey writes how a 'draft capsule' would solve recruiting's revisionism problem

WE ARE calling it the 'draft capsule' and it needs to be added to the draft landscape as a key part of the year-round discussion.

Here's what we're putting forward: at the conclusion of every national draft, each club anonymously submits its top-30 list of draft prospects for that season into an online AFL portal.


They are ranked in order from No.1 to 30 and collectively each pick is assigned points. The system automatically collates the points for each player depending on where they are put by the clubs and then generates a consensus top 30 draft prospects, in order, as judged by the clubs and recruiters themselves.

It remains anonymous and under lock and key for 12 months and isn't released publicly until a week before the following year's draft – when the fanfare, interest and buzz on the next generation is at fever pitch. With time, the opening of the draft capsule will become a key part of the draft news cycle, bringing with it storylines on who was actually ranked where and how the first years of the players' careers had panned out against expectations.

Here's why the draft capsule is needed.

Recruiting has a revisionism problem. More broadly, it is human nature to use hindsight to turn the narrative the way that suits a current position.
But the clandestine nature of drafting means it is very easy years down the track to twist where certain players were ranked and how keen (or not) clubs were on them depending on how successful (or not) their careers are. Often the comparisons are used to skewer the scouts who made the choices, even though they were often in line with where the general view was of the player's draft range.

The draft capsule will take out the guesswork. Richard Tambling at pick No.4 ahead of Lance Franklin? Well, the capsule might have told you that the consensus was that Tambling was ahead of Buddy and it wasn't just the Tigers.
Dustin Martin at No.4 behind Tom Scully and Jack Trengove? The consensus might have said that's exactly where he was – and exactly who clubs also had ahead of him.

But the draft capsule concept won't just defend picks that don't turn out well – it will be able to shine a light on the riskier selections that work or challenge those that don't.
Where did the consensus draft actually have Marcus Bontempelli before the Bulldogs took him at No.4 in 2013? Or Clayton Oliver when Melbourne grabbed him at the same number two years later?

Both were considered genuine draft bolters, but were they really according to the recruiters? What about the Wil Powell type of examples? Unspoken about in the lead-up to the 2017 draft, the Suns swooped at No.19. The draft capsule would certainly not have had Powell in the consensus top 30 but he has proven to be a terrific pick.
And then there's the Chad Warner example. He got to the Swans' fourth pick in the 2019 draft at No.39 overall. Would he have featured in the consensus top 30?

In 2018, after the introduction of live trading during the draft, we started at AFL.com.au a now annual tradition of diving into the machinations of the first round of the draft in the days following it. It digs into all the what ifs, tactics and bluffs as well as the priorities for each club.
Every year since, the story has covered the deals that happened and those that didn't, the offers that fell flat and which players each clubs were really after with their picks. It serves as a reference point for down the track.

Of course, the draft capsule relies on recruiter and club honesty – the AFL wouldn't be able to enforce that other than suggesting the clubs would also get something out of the exercise.

Club recruiting teams often go back and revisit why some picks worked and others didn't, what they missed or what they mistook and any clues to help the next draft night they're on the clock. Some of those assessments can be informed further by the capsule each year, with not only content but more importantly context being borne out of the exercise.
Click to expand...
Haha!! That would make it very hard for some of the whingers on here to pick on the recruiters with their amazing hindsight abilities- hang on, no it wouldn't! Forget I said that.
 
Mutineer said:
Excellent article and a great idea by Cal Twomey...

www.afl.com.au

The draft capsule: How to solve recruiting's hindsight problem

Cal Twomey writes how a 'draft capsule' would solve recruiting's revisionism problem
www.afl.com.au www.afl.com.au

OPINION

The draft capsule: How to solve recruiting's hindsight problem​

Cal Twomey writes how a 'draft capsule' would solve recruiting's revisionism problem

WE ARE calling it the 'draft capsule' and it needs to be added to the draft landscape as a key part of the year-round discussion.

Here's what we're putting forward: at the conclusion of every national draft, each club anonymously submits its top-30 list of draft prospects for that season into an online AFL portal.


They are ranked in order from No.1 to 30 and collectively each pick is assigned points. The system automatically collates the points for each player depending on where they are put by the clubs and then generates a consensus top 30 draft prospects, in order, as judged by the clubs and recruiters themselves.

It remains anonymous and under lock and key for 12 months and isn't released publicly until a week before the following year's draft – when the fanfare, interest and buzz on the next generation is at fever pitch. With time, the opening of the draft capsule will become a key part of the draft news cycle, bringing with it storylines on who was actually ranked where and how the first years of the players' careers had panned out against expectations.

Here's why the draft capsule is needed.

Recruiting has a revisionism problem. More broadly, it is human nature to use hindsight to turn the narrative the way that suits a current position.
But the clandestine nature of drafting means it is very easy years down the track to twist where certain players were ranked and how keen (or not) clubs were on them depending on how successful (or not) their careers are. Often the comparisons are used to skewer the scouts who made the choices, even though they were often in line with where the general view was of the player's draft range.

The draft capsule will take out the guesswork. Richard Tambling at pick No.4 ahead of Lance Franklin? Well, the capsule might have told you that the consensus was that Tambling was ahead of Buddy and it wasn't just the Tigers.
Dustin Martin at No.4 behind Tom Scully and Jack Trengove? The consensus might have said that's exactly where he was – and exactly who clubs also had ahead of him.

But the draft capsule concept won't just defend picks that don't turn out well – it will be able to shine a light on the riskier selections that work or challenge those that don't.
Where did the consensus draft actually have Marcus Bontempelli before the Bulldogs took him at No.4 in 2013? Or Clayton Oliver when Melbourne grabbed him at the same number two years later?

Both were considered genuine draft bolters, but were they really according to the recruiters? What about the Wil Powell type of examples? Unspoken about in the lead-up to the 2017 draft, the Suns swooped at No.19. The draft capsule would certainly not have had Powell in the consensus top 30 but he has proven to be a terrific pick.
And then there's the Chad Warner example. He got to the Swans' fourth pick in the 2019 draft at No.39 overall. Would he have featured in the consensus top 30?

In 2018, after the introduction of live trading during the draft, we started at AFL.com.au a now annual tradition of diving into the machinations of the first round of the draft in the days following it. It digs into all the what ifs, tactics and bluffs as well as the priorities for each club.
Every year since, the story has covered the deals that happened and those that didn't, the offers that fell flat and which players each clubs were really after with their picks. It serves as a reference point for down the track.

Of course, the draft capsule relies on recruiter and club honesty – the AFL wouldn't be able to enforce that other than suggesting the clubs would also get something out of the exercise.

Club recruiting teams often go back and revisit why some picks worked and others didn't, what they missed or what they mistook and any clues to help the next draft night they're on the clock. Some of those assessments can be informed further by the capsule each year, with not only content but more importantly context being borne out of the exercise.
Click to expand...
Be careful what you wish for, you might not be able to use hindsight in defending Hamish ;)

Will this capsule explain why we haven’t drafted a starting mid with a top 20 pick since Brad Crouch or why we haven’t drafted a developing ruckman?
 
Mutineer said:
Excellent article and a great idea by Cal Twomey...

www.afl.com.au

The draft capsule: How to solve recruiting's hindsight problem

Cal Twomey writes how a 'draft capsule' would solve recruiting's revisionism problem
www.afl.com.au www.afl.com.au

OPINION

The draft capsule: How to solve recruiting's hindsight problem​

Cal Twomey writes how a 'draft capsule' would solve recruiting's revisionism problem

WE ARE calling it the 'draft capsule' and it needs to be added to the draft landscape as a key part of the year-round discussion.

Here's what we're putting forward: at the conclusion of every national draft, each club anonymously submits its top-30 list of draft prospects for that season into an online AFL portal.


They are ranked in order from No.1 to 30 and collectively each pick is assigned points. The system automatically collates the points for each player depending on where they are put by the clubs and then generates a consensus top 30 draft prospects, in order, as judged by the clubs and recruiters themselves.

It remains anonymous and under lock and key for 12 months and isn't released publicly until a week before the following year's draft – when the fanfare, interest and buzz on the next generation is at fever pitch. With time, the opening of the draft capsule will become a key part of the draft news cycle, bringing with it storylines on who was actually ranked where and how the first years of the players' careers had panned out against expectations.

Here's why the draft capsule is needed.

Recruiting has a revisionism problem. More broadly, it is human nature to use hindsight to turn the narrative the way that suits a current position.
But the clandestine nature of drafting means it is very easy years down the track to twist where certain players were ranked and how keen (or not) clubs were on them depending on how successful (or not) their careers are. Often the comparisons are used to skewer the scouts who made the choices, even though they were often in line with where the general view was of the player's draft range.

The draft capsule will take out the guesswork. Richard Tambling at pick No.4 ahead of Lance Franklin? Well, the capsule might have told you that the consensus was that Tambling was ahead of Buddy and it wasn't just the Tigers.
Dustin Martin at No.4 behind Tom Scully and Jack Trengove? The consensus might have said that's exactly where he was – and exactly who clubs also had ahead of him.

But the draft capsule concept won't just defend picks that don't turn out well – it will be able to shine a light on the riskier selections that work or challenge those that don't.
Where did the consensus draft actually have Marcus Bontempelli before the Bulldogs took him at No.4 in 2013? Or Clayton Oliver when Melbourne grabbed him at the same number two years later?

Both were considered genuine draft bolters, but were they really according to the recruiters? What about the Wil Powell type of examples? Unspoken about in the lead-up to the 2017 draft, the Suns swooped at No.19. The draft capsule would certainly not have had Powell in the consensus top 30 but he has proven to be a terrific pick.
And then there's the Chad Warner example. He got to the Swans' fourth pick in the 2019 draft at No.39 overall. Would he have featured in the consensus top 30?

In 2018, after the introduction of live trading during the draft, we started at AFL.com.au a now annual tradition of diving into the machinations of the first round of the draft in the days following it. It digs into all the what ifs, tactics and bluffs as well as the priorities for each club.
Every year since, the story has covered the deals that happened and those that didn't, the offers that fell flat and which players each clubs were really after with their picks. It serves as a reference point for down the track.

Of course, the draft capsule relies on recruiter and club honesty – the AFL wouldn't be able to enforce that other than suggesting the clubs would also get something out of the exercise.

Club recruiting teams often go back and revisit why some picks worked and others didn't, what they missed or what they mistook and any clues to help the next draft night they're on the clock. Some of those assessments can be informed further by the capsule each year, with not only content but more importantly context being borne out of the exercise.
Click to expand...
Would be interesting I guess but what's the actual point? So recruiters can justify poor selections? I fear it would just shine even more of a spotlight on the kids that haven't lived up to their draft spot which does absolutely nothing good for their mental health (elite athletes I know, but after 12 months they are still just kids).
 
rabidcrow said:
Can’t imagine North West Coast Richmond Saints or Hawks entering a trade for their firsts

Maybe a Bulldogs or GC perhaps swapping and taking and first next year plus something else?

I reckon it will be near impossible for us to add an early pick and given we don’t have our second you would imagine the Melbourne second will cover Welsh - so a pick around 42 will be our next pick


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Click to expand...
Depends what you consider early.

Brisbane, Carlton, Gold Coast and Freo will all be looking to unload first round picks.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Resource 2024 AFL Draft discussion thread (Wed Nov 20 to Fri Nov 22)

Similar threads

ams4crows
Game Day AFL Finals 2024 - Match discussion party thread
280 281 282 283 284
Replies
7K
Views
148K
Moonwatcher
Moonwatcher
n4sir
Adelaide AFL 2024 Midseason Draft
9 10 11 12 13
Replies
322
Views
13K
Crow till I die
Crow till I die
George Kramer
2024 AFL Trade Period
Replies
6
Views
522
Crow-eater
Crow-eater
brucetiki
Review Round 10 v Geelong - Friday 1 November @ GHMBA Stadium
2 3 4 5
Replies
113
Views
2K
dplggr47
dplggr47
brucetiki
  • Sticky
Preview Qualifying Final v North Melbourne: Friday 8 November @ Ikon Park
Replies
4
Views
119
radiojake
radiojake
H
This time next week (dated Tuesday 20 August, 2024)
2
Replies
28
Views
949
StickerMan
StickerMan
Bob Neil
Analysis 2024 AFC Stats Thread
Replies
6
Views
702
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?
Back
Top