Opinion 2024 AFL Draft - Nights 1 & 2, from 7pm AEST

[LukeParkerno1]

I agree on Cochran, but not really relevant.

4th pick is on a smaller KPD, which is fine, but didn't really address the bigger KPD need

I'd also have traded in, but going back to the Bice pick, I'd have no confidence that our list team uses it on a need.

The Bice pick is a need it’s immediate depth for the now while we are contending did we go early possibly but he’d be a type the Cats would have targeted late. It allows us to not play Lloyd or Campbell near defence and he’s possibly an upgrade on Fox.

 

[Bloods86]

The Bice pick is a need it’s immediate depth for the now while we are contending did we go early possibly but he’d be a type the Cats would have targeted late. It allows us to not play Lloyd or Campbell near defence and he’s possibly an upgrade on Fox.

Lloyd was on a wing for a chunk of the year, especially late, because of Roberts.

Campbell isn't needed at half back because of Blakey, Roberts, Florent and Jmac if needed (while Lloyd plays on wing).

We could probably drop one of these guys, and not play Campbell at HB, and still not need Bice.

And you're ignoring the others we drafted who can play at HB.

Lol at mentioning in comparison to Fox's usual role. Bice is no lockdown type, though Fox can play HB.

Bice was the least of our needs, but I understand you find it difficult to fault any drafting the club does.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Lloyd was on a wing for a chunk of the year, especially late, because of Roberts.

Campbell isn't needed at half back because of Blakey, Roberts, Florent and Jmac if needed (while Lloyd plays on wing).

We could probably drop one of these guys, and not play Campbell at HB, and still not need Bice.

And you're ignoring the others we drafted who can play at HB.

Lol at mentioning in comparison to Fox's usual role. Bice is no lockdown type, though Fox can play HB.

Bice was the least of our needs, but I understand you find it difficult to fault any drafting the club does.

I have already said I would have considered a KPF but not before a small forward. I was consistent there was no1 on my list of needs you disagree that’s fine, but we had zero depth in small forwards and don’t say Wicks lol

Bice allows us to have a guy that can come in right now. Ideally Roberts is in the mid mix to a degree and to do it you need someone like Bice (among others).

We have a couple of forwards coming next year to be fair anyway albeit one is possibly more a mid

I have been critical of many of our drafts- notably the Ling draft!

 

[bedford]

300 already !

 

[Bloods86]

I have already said I would have considered a KPF but not before a small forward. I was consistent there was no1 on my list of needs you disagree that’s fine, but we had zero depth in small forwards and don’t say Wicks lol

Bice allows us to have a guy that can come in right now. Ideally Roberts is in the mid mix to a degree and to do it you need someone like Bice (among others).

We have a couple of forwards coming next year to be fair anyway albeit one is possibly more a mid

I have been critical of many of our drafts- notably the Ling draft!

You keep picking little bits of what I've said, and not responding to the totality, so not really any point continuing to discuss Bice.

You could take Roberts out of defence and still not need Bice with the options we have.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

You keep picking little bits of what I've said, and not responding to the totality, so not really any point continuing to discuss Bice.

You could take Roberts out of defence and still not need Bice with the options we have.

If he’s better than the options we have why wouldn’t we? Was it top of my list on needs possibly not but it’s not as if we overlooked anyone obvious at that range. We took a ready made guy who can help us now. I’m sure we’d pick differently if we were rebuilding

 

[rustycrate]

You keep picking little bits of what I've said, and not responding to the totality, so not really any point continuing to discuss Bice.

You could take Roberts out of defence and still not need Bice with the options we have.

He does this continually. Just like a politition. He says this and that and when questioned he said that and ignores the other this and changes the subject. Will say it to your face like he is honest. I think he believes it too.

You won't stick him on anything. Like an eel. Slippery customer.

 

[Bloods86]

If he’s better than the options we have why wouldn’t we? Was it top of my list on needs possibly not but it’s not as if we overlooked anyone obvious at that range. We took a ready made guy who can help us now. I’m sure we’d pick differently if we were rebuilding

I don't think he's better than the options we have now. I do think we overlooked a stack of obvious players in different roles, including other mature agers, in areas of bigger need.

Who cares if he's ready made right, you were arguing against mature agers prior to the draft? Guys who could help now.

 

[Neverwas]

Bowman looks a lot taller than the 186cm in his biog. Must have grown.

Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk

 

[Bloods86]

Bowman looks a lot taller than the 186cm in his biog. Must have grown.

Sent from my Pixel 8 Pro using Tapatalk

Judging by the pic of Matty Roberts visiting him, he's maybe 2-3cm taller, and Roberts is 184cm.

I think it's because he's skinny, so looks lankier.

 

[hairy biker]

Lloyd was on a wing for a chunk of the year, especially late, because of Roberts.

Campbell isn't needed at half back because of Blakey, Roberts, Florent and Jmac if needed (while Lloyd plays on wing).

We could probably drop one of these guys, and not play Campbell at HB, and still not need Bice.

And you're ignoring the others we drafted who can play at HB.

Lol at mentioning in comparison to Fox's usual role. Bice is no lockdown type, though Fox can play HB.

Bice was the least of our needs, but I understand you find it difficult to fault any drafting the club does.

I've never seen Bice play, but his strengths according to rookieme central (RMC) are;
Dare
Kicking
Outside run

They also add;
The Murray Bushrangers graduate, who had previously played VFL footy with GWS, did so in a relatively new role. Bice's exposure across half-back and the wing worked wonders, as his strengths were allowed to shine. Namely, he could utilise his daring overlap run and kicking ability on the way forward.

Bice's ball use is terrific and is part of what makes him such an effective, attacking defender. He goes by foot 76 per cent of the time and thrives when unleashed to the outside. (RMC)

We also took a rookie in Leidler who is also considered a 'dashing, daring defender' who 'boasts electric speed', with kicking penetration (according to RMC).

We have Blakey as a dasher off HB, but lock him down and there really isn't any great speed down back.

Dean Cox was clearly invested on draft night and it may simply be that he wants to tweak our game style and get more speed, run and carry off HB and that Bice was considered the best option, with those attributes, at that pick.

 

[Kiama Chris]

2024 AFL DRAFT RUNDOWN OF EVERY TEAM - The Mongrel Punt

How did your team do in the 2024 AFL Draft? The Wolfman takes a look at all teams and what they were able to acquire

themongrelpunt.com

 

[Bloods86]

I've never seen Bice play, but his strengths according to rookieme central (RMC) are;
Dare
Kicking
Outside run

They also add;
The Murray Bushrangers graduate, who had previously played VFL footy with GWS, did so in a relatively new role. Bice's exposure across half-back and the wing worked wonders, as his strengths were allowed to shine. Namely, he could utilise his daring overlap run and kicking ability on the way forward.

Bice's ball use is terrific and is part of what makes him such an effective, attacking defender. He goes by foot 76 per cent of the time and thrives when unleashed to the outside. (RMC)

We also took a rookie in Leidler who is also considered a 'dashing, daring defender' who 'boasts electric speed', with kicking penetration (according to RMC).

We have Blakey as a dasher off HB, but lock him down and there really isn't any great speed down back.

Dean Cox was clearly invested on draft night and it may simply be that he wants to tweak our game style and get more speed, run and carry off HB and that Bice was considered the best option, with those attributes, at that pick.

We were clear on top of the ladder, in large part due to our intercept and rebound game. With Blakey, Florent, Jmac, as well as slower movers like Roberts all playing a significant role in that. We were dominant in that area.

But then come finals, the contest is key. So I'd rather be a bit less daring during H&A, maybe we don't finish on top, but hopefully prepare better for finals.

I'd be playing Fox to partner Cunningham in defence on smalls/mediums, alongside Roberts and Blakey as the half backs. Gulden, Jmac and Florent (off the bench) on the wings will be there as the next line of rebounders when the ball is in D50, with the latter two relieving at half back proper when needed. I'd also be pushing Warner out of the square, preferably half forward, but if not, he'll spend time on the wing as well.

This isn't all to say Bice is terrible, he's not, but with all our wing and half back options, enough of them attacking types, and then having drafted some more afterwards that can be backups, I just don't see how picking an attacking half back is better than a bunch of other things we could have done with the pick.

All this without mentioning Lloyd and Campbell, who we won plenty of games with in the 22. Nor Jordon who will play off a wing sometimes.

 

[Kiama Chris]

I've never seen Bice play, but his strengths according to rookieme central (RMC) are;
Dare
Kicking
Outside run

They also add;
The Murray Bushrangers graduate, who had previously played VFL footy with GWS, did so in a relatively new role. Bice's exposure across half-back and the wing worked wonders, as his strengths were allowed to shine. Namely, he could utilise his daring overlap run and kicking ability on the way forward.

Bice's ball use is terrific and is part of what makes him such an effective, attacking defender. He goes by foot 76 per cent of the time and thrives when unleashed to the outside. (RMC)

We also took a rookie in Leidler who is also considered a 'dashing, daring defender' who 'boasts electric speed', with kicking penetration (according to RMC).

We have Blakey as a dasher off HB, but lock him down and there really isn't any great speed down back.

Dean Cox was clearly invested on draft night and it may simply be that he wants to tweak our game style and get more speed, run and carry off HB and that Bice was considered the best option, with those attributes, at that pick.

Possibly Bice, Paton and Leidler were chosen because they were thought to be HARDER? Just a thought.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I don't think he's better than the options we have now. I do think we overlooked a stack of obvious players in different roles, including other mature agers, in areas of bigger need.

Who cares if he's ready made right, you were arguing against mature agers prior to the draft? Guys who could help now.

I was against some mature ages and not drafting Hynes. I got my wish there phew. Look if we took the KPD then Bice would you feel better? It’s the same thing we took one with our next selection albeit a long term project one.

 

[Bloods86]

I was against some mature ages and not drafting Hynes. I got my wish there phew. Look if we took the KPD then Bice would you feel better? It’s the same thing we took one with our next selection albeit a long term project one.

I'm ok with the Andrew pick, since we passed on Cochran anyway. Ok with the rookie picks as actual defender potential, though not sure why we went with both of them.

Aside from that I'd have rathered us pick any of the following instead of an attacking half back at Pick 40:

KPF
Bigger KPD
Inside Mid
Another Medium Fwd
On par with yet another small fwd/mid

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I'm ok with the Andrew pick, since we passed on Cochran anyway. Ok with the rookie picks as actual defender potential, though not sure why we went with both of them.

Aside from that I'd have rathered us pick any of the following instead of an attacking half back at Pick 40:

KPF
Bigger KPD
Inside Mid
Another Medium Fwd
On par with yet another small fwd/mid

Only think I'll say with the inside mid and this is pure hope as I feel Cox won't stubbornly not pick the bloke is Sheldrick is there and ready to play next year, we may also see CC take some inside minutes. We do have Adams too. I did expect us to take an inside mid though.

Key forward was one I wanted but second priority after a small forward/mid. We took the SF first up like we should have doubt Dattoli gets through to our next and there was a significant drop after Kako/Hannaford/Dattoli/Berry.

Was fine taking another medium forward, thought we'd do it in the rookie that was the one pick I wasn't on board with and wasting a list spot on Francis is just weird.

 

[Bloods86]

Only think I'll say with the inside mid and this is pure hope as I feel Cox won't stubbornly not pick the bloke is Sheldrick is there and ready to play next year, we may also see CC take some inside minutes. We do have Adams too. I did expect us to take an inside mid though.

Key forward was one I wanted but second priority after a small forward/mid. We took the SF first up like we should have doubt Dattoli gets through to our next and there was a significant drop after Kako/Hannaford/Dattoli/Berry.

Was fine taking another medium forward, thought we'd do it in the rookie that was the one pick I wasn't on board with and wasting a list spot on Francis is just weird.

I understand your priority was small forward (though we agreed largely on other needs pre-draft). But to me the logical thing after addressing that, is then addressing other needs/priorities. Especially with later picks where you are on record saying they should be for needs.

Rather than going "oh well, they addressed some needs, it's all fine if they ignore others to address something that wasn't what I thought our biggest needs were pre-draft".

 

[zyzzbruh]

You keep picking little bits of what I've said, and not responding to the totality, so not really any point continuing to discuss Bice.

You could take Roberts out of defence and still not need Bice with the options we have.

The problem is we have players who 'can' play in other positions, rather we should have players that play in 'specific' positions. I'm sick to death of seeing positional musical chairs. It's something that has almost killed Campbell's career thus far.

If i.e florent or Blakey is injured - I want to see Bice straight in. None of this Mcinerney to Half back, Cambell to a flank, Hayward upto a wing bullshit.

Bice is a big tick for me. Especially with Florents fluctuating form and Lloyds age.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I understand your priority was small forward (though we agreed largely on other needs pre-draft). But to me the logical thing after addressing that, is then addressing other needs/priorities. Especially with later picks where you are on record saying they should be for needs.

Rather than going "oh well, they addressed some needs, it's all fine if they ignore others to address something that wasn't what I thought our biggest needs were pre-draft".

We could have done that trading our f1 in but everyone was against that. I'm on board with the Bowman gamble, this will either be a home run or it won't work but in a window you can take the risk. Did I think they would take the key forward there, maybe, but if we move to two keys (down from 3) we have an extra one anyway. I still did want one, do think if Faull slipped we'd have taken him, he didn't unfortunately and we obviously saw him the best one.

Maybe we could have grabbed Davis late but there was probably a reason he slipped, and I missed. He was the one big slider on my rankings.

 

[Bloods86]

The problem is we have players who 'can' play in other positions, rather we should have players that play in 'specific' positions. I'm sick to death of seeing positional musical chairs. It's something that has almost killed Campbell's career thus far.

If i.e florent or Blakey is injured - I want to see Bice straight in. None of this Mcinerney to Half back, Cambell to a flank, Hayward upto a wing bullshit.

Bice is a big tick for me. Especially with Florents fluctuating form and Lloyds age.

My point isn't that Bice should never come in to replace an attacking half back (though if we have better existing players at the time I will).

It's that I think we gain more from the type we could have picked at the selection, in areas of greater need, than having one less of our now umpteen half back options.

And Roberts is already the Lloyd replacement, Bice is a different player.

 

[Bloods86]

We could have done that trading our f1 in but everyone was against that. I'm on board with the Bowman gamble, this will either be a home run or it won't work but in a window you can take the risk. Did I think they would take the key forward there, maybe, but if we move to two keys (down from 3) we have an extra one anyway. I still did want one, do think if Faull slipped we'd have taken him, he didn't unfortunately and we obviously saw him the best one.

Maybe we could have grabbed Davis late but there was probably a reason he slipped, and I missed. He was the one big slider on my rankings.

I think it's a cop out (of the club) if we went "oh well, our best KPF option, who we were willing to take with a first rounder because it's such a need, is gone, therefore we won't bother at all".

If you have needs, pick the best you can to fill it. Stop trying to be clever and waiting for future drafts.

Obviously that's an if. Maybe we didn't intend to pick up a KPF at all.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I think it's a cop out (of the club) if we went "oh well, our best KPF option, who we were willing to take with a first rounder because it's such a need, is gone, therefore we won't bother at all".

If you have needs, pick the best you can to fill it. Stop trying to be clever and waiting for future drafts.

Obviously that's an if. Maybe we didn't intend to pick up a KPF at all.

If you don't rate anyone other than that guy well you aren't going to take someone you don't rate much. We weren't into Armstrong as much as I thought we were. I did expect if he was there we would take him BUT we took the small forward which was a clear need having traded one for a packet of used Twisties.

Did we have other needs absolutely but no club can cater for every single need in one draft, not unless you had Richmonds picks.

 

[Adnico26Parker]

On Gettable:

Cal claiming Richmond took Faull at 14 and Trainor at pick 21 because of us - they didn't want to take the risk of us trading up to get Faull, and thought we might take Trainor if he got to our 1st pick

GETTABLE: The superstars in clubs' sights in 2025, draft turning point, Lions' hunt on

Riley Beveridge and Cal Twomey recap the 2024 Draft and project forward to the 10 contract stories to watch in 2025

www.afl.com.au

 

[Bloods86]

If you don't rate anyone other than that guy well you aren't going to take someone you don't rate much. We weren't into Armstrong as much as I thought we were. I did expect if he was there we would take him BUT we took the small forward which was a clear need having traded one for a packet of used Twisties.

Did we have other needs absolutely but no club can cater for every single need in one draft, not unless you had Richmonds picks.

So... just never fill needs because you only rate one guy in the draft pool. Got it.

List managers should do their job and pick the next best they can.