List Mgmt. 2024 Draft & Trade Hypotheticals

[Ticky009]

 

[Bandicoot]

After watching numerous mock drafts it seems our two picks could come from Dattoli, Hannaford, Trainor, Whitlock x 2, Faull or Hynes. These are the players these so called experts have Sydney selecting.
One thing that is quite certain. If Beatson was making the decision, we would not select any of them.

 

[Bandicoot]

In this mock Trainor falls to us and then we get Dattoli.

Of all the many mock drafts I've watched, I am most impressed with this guy.
It seems every day I open up youtube, there's another mock draft to watch.

 

[RUNVS]

In this mock Trainor falls to us and then we get Dattoli.
Personally I don't think much of Trainor looking at his "highlights". Dattoli might be useful for us though.

Do not want a small forward. Would be really annoyed if we got a small forward with our first two picks. We need a KPD and inside mid ideally, but if that is not possible either two KPD's or a KPD and KPF.

 

[Kbroome]

Of all the many mock drafts I've watched, I am most impressed with this guy.
It seems every day I open up youtube, there's another mock draft to watch.

Yep love the conversation i have had with him and seems like a victorian that is genuinely interested in Northern footy rather than being Vic centric. Don't necessarily agree with the Trainor selection but think i understand the reasoning behind it and have forgotten who was still on his board at this point in the mock

 

[Kiama Chris]

After watching numerous mock drafts it seems our two picks could come from Dattoli, Hannaford, Trainor, Whitlock x 2, Faull or Hynes. These are the players these so called experts have Sydney selecting.
One thing that is quite certain. If Beatson was making the decision, we would not select any of them.

Ignoring the last comment the expert consensus does seem pretty similar to the board consensus in that our first two picks are likely to be spent on a KPP (mostly a forward) and a small or medium forward and the names that are likely to be available are pretty consistent.
Drafting for need in a deep draft.
A lot less consensus about what happens after that except that if Cochran is bid on we will match and if not we'll take him as a rookie. To me that means we'll take 4 at most in the ND (excluding Cochran) and we seem to have chatted with a fair number of kids at that end of the draft so surprises await!
Still wondering if we have any interest in McCartin 3.0 or Lloyd 2.0.

 

[RUNVS]

Ignoring the last comment the expert consensus does seem pretty similar to the board consensus in that our first two picks are likely to be spent on a KPP (mostly a forward) and a small or medium forward and the names that are likely to be available are pretty consistent.
Drafting for need in a deep draft.
A lot less consensus about what happens after that except that if Cochran is bid on we will match and if not we'll take him as a rookie. To me that means we'll take 4 at most in the ND (excluding Cochran) and we seem to have chatted with a fair number of kids at that end of the draft so surprises await!
Still wondering if we have any interest in McCartin 3.0 or Lloyd 2.0.

We really do need a 198cm or more key defender as we often struggle against the 200cm key forwards who are popping up more and more regularly in the modern game.

 

[bedford]

After watching numerous mock drafts it seems our two picks could come from Dattoli, Hannaford, Trainor, Whitlock x 2, Faull or Hynes. These are the players these so called experts have Sydney selecting.
One thing that is quite certain. If Beatson was making the decision, we would not select any of them.

So called

 

[tombomb]

As frustrating as it would be, I wonder if the smart play is to trade one of our first two picks.

It's a massive seller's market.

 

[Kiama Chris]

We really do need a 198cm or more key defender as we often struggle against the 200cm key forwards who are popping up more and more regularly in the modern game.

I agree. At the moment Edwards is closer than any draftee would be. We just don't know whether either will get there and when. Nothing in the trade market.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Do not want a small forward. Would be really annoyed if we got a small forward with our first two picks. We need a KPD and inside mid ideally, but if that is not possible either two KPD's or a KPD and KPF.

We badly need a small forward who are the small forwards we have? Papley and then who? Hanily hasn’t played a game, Wicks is utter average at best so do tell who are the SF’s we have?

 

[LukeParkerno1]

As frustrating as it would be, I wonder if the smart play is to trade one of our first two picks.

It's a massive seller's market.

I would do it for Easendons F1 but the deal has to be in our favour not just “fair”

 

[tombomb]

I would do it for Easendons F1 but the deal has to be in our favour not just “fair”

Well that is kind of my point. I think there could be very aggressive offers for either of our first two selections.

It is kind of the perfect storm of having a really strong top 40 and all but probably four clubs thinking they are going to play finals next year. Our picks are perfectly positioned to capitalise on that.

 

[ShireSwan]

Do not want a small forward. Would be really annoyed if we got a small forward with our first two picks. We need a KPD and inside mid ideally, but if that is not possible either two KPD's or a KPD and KPF.

While I agree we need both KPFs and KPDs I can't fathom the rationale behind thinking we need an inside mid.
We have literally the best collection of them in the history of the club. OK, second best given Parker just left.

I just assume it's a wind-up at this point saying we need an inside mid over a small forward or KP player tbh.

 

[tombomb]

While I agree we need both KPFs and KPDs I can't fathom the rationale behind thinking we need an inside mid.
We have literally the best collection of them in the history of the club. OK, second best given Parker just left.

I just assume it's a wind-up at this point saying we need an inside mid over a small forward or KP player tbh.

There are inside mids and there are inside mids.

There are the Luke Parker/James Rowbottom style who just grab the ball and boot it as far as they can, and there is the Lachie Neale/Tom Liberatore style who get the ball, absorb pressure and set up a teammate up in a better position.

We aren't strong in the second type, especially when they refuse to even make Sheldrick an emergency.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Well that is kind of my point. I think there could be very aggressive offers for either of our first two selections.

It is kind of the perfect storm of having a really strong top 40 and all but probably four clubs thinking they are going to play finals next year. Our picks are perfectly positioned to capitalise on that.

Only f1’s I’d be interested in and are realistic are Essendon and North Melbourne the rest don’t interest me as they are t getting us a pick next year early enough

 

[SGBeach]

Of all the many mock drafts I've watched, I am most impressed with this guy.
It seems every day I open up youtube, there's another mock draft to watch.

I haven't watched any of the you tube mock drafts.. but
I reckon this guy got it completely wrong, will even say he was lazy with the Swans selections

Why would we take a 194cm defender (to help Blakey) with our first pick?
Why would we take our academy 194cm defender with our 3rd?
2022 we drafted 197cm Edwards - 2024 extended his contract
2023 we drafted 194cm Snell who plays a similar role to who this guy suggested we'll pick. - 2024 extended his contract
McCartin and Melican are both around that same (under)sized key defenders.
We'll match a bid on 194cm Cochran , but we won't need to use our 3rd to do it.

agree with RUNVS, if we draft a tall defender.. Our need is a TALL defender

 

[tombomb]

Only f1’s I’d be interested in and are realistic are Essendon and North Melbourne the rest don’t interest me as they are t getting us a pick next year early enough

That's exact attitude I hope we don't have.

We should be much more open minded to what we can do with our selections.

 

[SGBeach]

Well that is kind of my point. I think there could be very aggressive offers for either of our first two selections.

It is kind of the perfect storm of having a really strong top 40 and all but probably four clubs thinking they are going to play finals next year. Our picks are perfectly positioned to capitalise on that.

Its kind of the perfect storm, except GWS and Richmond will likely both be looking to trade out one of their picks for a F 1st too.
The Bombers could definitely look to trade in, Hawthorn & West Coast too, other teams ??????

Only f1’s I’d be interested in and are realistic are Essendon and North Melbourne the rest don’t interest me as they are t getting us a pick next year early enough

So not only are you an expert on our list, our coaching, all the draftees.. but you know how the ladder will finish next year! Wow, amazing!

 

[LukeParkerno1]

That's exact attitude I hope we don't have.

We should be much more open minded to what we can do with our selections.

Name a f1 you’d accept as we aren’t accepting a f2 to trade out well we sure as anything shouldn’t. You’d want the f1 to be inside the top 8, if we assume a king bid at 10 ish, you’d only trade out to get a pick before the bid. Seems a risk that personally wouldn’t do it’s a significantly worse draft

 

[tombomb]

Name a f1 you’d accept as we aren’t accepting a f2 to trade out well we sure as anything shouldn’t. You’d want the f1 to be inside the top 8, if we assume a king bid at 10 ish, you’d only trade out to get a pick before the bid. Seems a risk that personally wouldn’t do it’s a significantly worse draft

I wouldn't necessarily be doing it as a straight swap.

If Geelong offered us f1 + 45 for our second selection, I'd think about it. Would that be enough? maybe not, but I would listen.

There are heaps of scenarios I could list that I would listen to, but we aren't going to get North or Essendon's F1 for a pick in the mid 20s.

The three main teams I would be looking at would be Geelong, Hawthorn (the carlton f1) and West Coast (the hawthorn f1). I wouldn't be doing any of them as a straight swap.

And I don't think any of us know for sure where the bids are likely to land next year, but there is a clearly a chance that we are going to have to match multiple bids in the first round.

 

[Kbroome]

Name a f1 you’d accept as we aren’t accepting a f2 to trade out well we sure as anything shouldn’t. You’d want the f1 to be inside the top 8, if we assume a king bid at 10 ish, you’d only trade out to get a pick before the bid. Seems a risk that personally wouldn’t do it’s a significantly worse draft

Realistically teams that would trade in
NM, WCE (Theirs but not HAW), STK, ESS (both them and Melb selections), Adelaide, GCS

Think every other team is a massive top 8 threat and thus its a breakeven trade

 

[tombomb]

Its kind of the perfect storm, except GWS and Richmond will likely both be looking to trade out one of their picks for a F 1st too.
The Bombers could definitely look to trade in, Hawthorn & West Coast too, other teams ??????

Good point about Richmond.

They are going to be there on draft night just picking off all the best players ... and doing all the best trades.

It is ridiculous what West Coast and GC just handed over to them.

 

[tombomb]

Realistically teams that would trade in
NM, WCE (Theirs but not HAW), STK, ESS (both them and Melb selections), Adelaide, GCS

Think every other team is a massive top 8 threat and thus its a breakeven trade

Thinking we could get offers from those clubs of their f1 for a pick in the 20s is not realistic.

 

[Kbroome]

Thinking we could get offers from those clubs of their f1 for a pick in the 20s is not realistic.

Yep those are the teams both realistic and also that will be outside the top 8 imo so we would be getting a pick in the low teens if not top 10 next year which could sneak before some of our academy boys

 

[tombomb]

Yep those are the teams both realistic and also that will be outside the top 8 imo so we would be getting a pick in the low teens if not top 10 next year which could sneak before some of our academy boys

I think the clubs you listed are the only ones that aren't realistic.

It clearly has to be a club that is happy to gamble that they will be good next year.