List Mgmt. 2024 National Draft - November 20-21

[Jen2310]

 

[manicpie]

We're not going to be the only ones trying to trade up, so whilst 34 might be possible it seems unlikely to me. I think their highest ones might get traded down a couple of times to maximise value.

I reckon it's already done with Brisbane as you said. I doubt we'll bother with 34.

 

[Forethought]

So we hold the picks for Brisbane and hand them over on draft night.

Eg: Pick swap Brisbane #34 (542 points) traded for Collingwoods #52 (246 points) + #55 (207 points) + #60 (146 points) + #66 (80 points) (total 669 points)
We then use #34 and 2 extra picks later in the draft.

Plus the later picks come in more increasing points and pick 34 goes out more to about pick 38. Making the points difference worth more to Brisbane.

Brisbane don’t have the list to trade 34 out and take 4 picks back for it. They can’t even do it in the 5 min period when on the clock for Ashcroft. Unfortunately just not possible

 

[sr36]

I reckon it's already done with Brisbane as you said. I doubt we'll bother with 34.

I've become more optimistic and hoping for 43 for 52 and 55. Means our last two picks won't be terrible as those 60s picks will come forward a heap.

 

[Forethought]

See this business with Brisbane is what the delisting of Markov/Johnson was about - Brisbane couldn't use the number of picks that they had because they didn't have list spots for all of them, but once the Ashcroft bid match happens, they'll extinguish a bunch of their picks and be able to take on more of them to match a bid on Marshall.

So we hold onto a couple of extra picks for them, which we can do because we have extra senior list spots from delisting Markov and Johnson, so we can carry those picks into the draft and hold them. Then we send them back to Brisbane once they have the list spots available to actually use the points from those picks, and trade us a pick back in return.

I think it's very clear we're set to move up the order through a trade with Brisbane on draft night.

If a pick for Ashcroft comes in 4th that wipes out their picks 27,34,42. ( That leaves pick 43 for us to trade up to)
Pick 3 and it wipes out their pick 43. ( That leaves only pick 49 to trade up to)

 

[manicpie]

I've become more optimistic and hoping for 43 for 52 and 55. Means our last two picks won't be terrible as those 60s picks will come forward a heap.

A very good scenario for us. I also have a feeling that the recruiting team would already know the players they want for our picks in the 50's, which will come down a few. It's our first pick that probably has a list of 4 or 5 that we're interested in and we might need to move up a few spots. Generally, clubs know where players will go and at what pick. I know that Luke Kennedy is still high up on our list. It might be him we're trying to get and then a tall or 2. Not sure

 

[sr36]

Brisbane don’t have the list to trade 34 out and take 4 picks back for it. They can’t even do it in the 5 min period when on the clock for Ashcroft. Unfortunately just not possible

I'm not sure what the rules are. I assumed that they could never exceed picks with list spots, but someone said you could and I think GC multiplied picks for more points before matching Walter last year - but it makes the list spot and pick rules ridiculous. So don't know.

 

[Pleasedontfail11]

We're not going to be the only ones trying to trade up, so whilst 34 might be possible it seems unlikely to me. I think their highest ones might get traded down a couple of times to maximise value.

Fair point. Brisbane have #27, #34, #42, #43, #49 and #58.

So let's see who could trade for those picks with current draft picks with points attached, which is what Brisbane need.

Gold Coast have #39 and #41 but they may need points as well.

Essendon have #31 and #40 for maybe pick #27


Essendon has #46, #53, #54 and #65 which is more points than us for #34 but Essendons picks might come in after matching to say #44, #48, #50 and #54, while Brisbane #34 goes out to about #38. So they may not want to do the deal.

Maybe there are other teams that could do a better deal but I might be wrong. Maybe the reason why we did the pick swap with Brisbane a few days ago was part of a pre-done deal to get us if not #34 then at least #42 or #43.

 

[Forethought]

I'm not sure what the rules are. I assumed that they could never exceed picks with list spots, but someone said you could and I think GC multiplied picks for more points before matching Walter last year - but it makes the list spot and pick rules ridiculous. So don't know.

Walter pick swaps were done before the trade. I think they went into the trade with a heap of late 20’s and mid 30’s.
They had the extra 5 list spots with the AFL deal but have lost those now.

 

[celestial]

Either way we probably will be involved in the first night of the draft. Think we probably had discussions about other trade scenarios with brisbane, just a matter of seeing which one will come to fruition.

The only thing I am curious about is the timing of the trade.There was no need to the pick swap on friday, could have waited until draft day to do it.

 

[celestial]

I'm not sure what the rules are. I assumed that they could never exceed picks with list spots, but someone said you could and I think GC multiplied picks for more points before matching Walter last year - but it makes the list spot and pick rules ridiculous. So don't know.

The 2024 Draft Explainer/Confuser

The Draft Basic Stuff Determining Draft Order The draft order is the reverse of the finishing order, with some notes. So the number 1 pick goes to the team that finished 18th, pick 2 to the 17th ranked team, etc, etc. For the mid-season draft, when finals haven’t happened yet, that continues all...

discourse.bomberblitz.com

"Although the rule exists that a team can’t start the draft with more picks than they have senior list spots, this doesn’t apply once the draft starts."

If this true, it could be like one poster said earlier that we are just holding the picks for brisbane.

 

[sr36]

Fair point. Brisbane have #27, #34, #42, #43, #49 and #58.

So let's see who could trade for those picks with current draft picks with points attached, which is what Brisbane need.

Gold Coast have #39 and #41 but they may need points as well.

Essendon have #31 and #40 for maybe pick #27


Essendon has #46, #53, #54 and #65 which is more points than us for #34 but Essendons picks might come in after matching to say #44, #48, #50 and #54, while Brisbane #34 goes out to about #38. So they may not want to do the deal.

Maybe there are other teams that could do a better deal but I might be wrong. Maybe the reason why we did the pick swap with Brisbane a few days ago was part of a pre-done deal to get us if not #34 then at least #42 or #43.

Essendon are in the most interesting position. They've got a highly rated academy kid, but heaps of points already. They'll probably be looking to trade their earlier picks either out of this year or to try to get back into the first round and split their later picks to increase points.

In terms of 34, I think Brissy would be looking at something like GWS 37 and 56. Then 37 for Geelong 45 and 57. Without looking at dvi I'd assume 45, 56 and 57 trumps us - with a further potential to split 45. I also suspect that we'd prefer our last two picks to not be right at the end so would be reluctant to throw them all in.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

There was no need to the pick swap on friday, could have waited until draft day to do it.

No, because Brisbane would've lost pick #66 if they did that, because they didn't have the list spots. It would have just vanished into thin air.

So we hold it until the draft and then trade it back to them whenever the rules allow us to, and that's an extra pick

 

[Hotpiescoldbeers]

I'm not sure what the rules are. I assumed that they could never exceed picks with list spots, but someone said you could and I think GC multiplied picks for more points before matching Walter last year - but it makes the list spot and pick rules ridiculous. So don't know.

Weve got 5 list spots so can hold 5 picks in the draft, maybe Brisbane don't have enough list spots to hold all those picks so we're holding it for them until after Ashcroft's bid then we trade those picks back to them

 

[celestial]

Hopefully this deal puts us ahead of other teams in competition for pick 43 if it does become available.

 

[sr36]

Weve got 5 list spots so can hold 5 picks in the draft, maybe Brisbane don't have enough list spots to hold all those picks so we're holding it for them until after Ashcroft's bid then we trade those picks back to them

I think a deal is done. My bet is 52 and 55 for 43.

It doesn't have to be after the Ashcroft bid it seems. Looks like they can start splitting picks to increase points as soon as the draft opens. So they'll be trading picks down straight away.

 

[greening22]

COLLINGWOOD

Harry O’Farrell (KEY DEF; Calder Cannons)

Collingwood isn’t scheduled to make a selection until No. 52, which will come on November 21 — but when it finally does, there could be a few diamonds in the rough waiting for an opportunity. Defending and in particular key-position depth were sore spots for the Magpies this year as they struggled to offset a Nathan Murphy-sized void, and while a first-year draftee — a third-rounder at that — is unlikely to make an instant impact, it is worth investing in the position given the premium price paid for All-Australian flanker Dan Houston in the trade period. O’Farrell, who this year represented the AFL Academy against Coburg, is flexible in terms of the size of the opponents he is capable of playing on — and for the Pies, who are hoping for more support for Darcy Moore and Jeremy Howe in 2025, that is an obvious plus. The versatile Maribyrnong Park product also has the ability to swing forward. The question will be whether he is still on the board when Collingwood finally picks.

He sounds good but I think that he will be gone by the time our 1st pick comes around.

 

[Lings of Geelong]

No, because Brisbane would've lost pick #66 if they did that, because they didn't have the list spots. It would have just vanished into thin air.

So we hold it until the draft and then trade it back to them whenever the rules allow us to, and that's an extra pick

We can't trade 60 or 66 (or whatever they become) back to Brisbane

 

[Jen2310]

Lets hope richmond and north don't bid on Ashcroft.

Pick 2 bid - 2013 points ( picks 27,picks 34, 49,58 = 2097 points )
Pick 3 bid - 1788 points (picks
27, 34, 42, 58 = 1810 points)

With the picks they currently hold this is how it might look to keep 43 from getting swallowed in an ashcroft bid. Obviously they might execute further trades after the first pick.

No matter how you slice it, they will have a deficit going into next years draft. It is just a matter of limiting the hit.

Richmond wont. North unsure, but carlton at pick 3 prob bids

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

We can't trade 60 or 66 (or whatever they become) back to Brisbane

We'll see. I'm pretty sure we've seen moves like this happen, and it's not like these rules are published clearly anywhere.

 

[sr36]

We'll see. I'm pretty sure we've seen moves like this happen, and it's not like these rules are published clearly anywhere.

There is a rule like that but it was in response to in draft trading when to he pick swap was reversed straight after matching. It might only apply when both parts are in-draft trading. Who knows?

 

[celestial]

Pick 2 bid - 2013 points ( picks 27, 34, 42,49,58 = 2080 points )

But if brisbane trade 43 to collingwood:
27,34,42,52,55 = 2076
They get to keep picks 49 and 58

Pick 3 bid - 1788 points (picks
27, 34, 42, 58 = 1810 points)

If Brisbane trades 43 to us ,
Picks 27, 34,52,55 ,58 = 1868 points
They get to keep the more valuable pick 42 to themselves.

 

[sr36]

No, because Brisbane would've lost pick #66 if they did that, because they didn't have the list spots. It would have just vanished into thin air.

So we hold it until the draft and then trade it back to them whenever the rules allow us to, and that's an extra pick

Possible.

Seems more likely that we'll move into the 40s with our first two and keep the later picks for ourselves.

 

[Pleasedontfail11]

Essendon are in the most interesting position. They've got a highly rated academy kid, but heaps of points already. They'll probably be looking to trade their earlier picks either out of this year or to try to get back into the first round and split their later picks to increase points.

In terms of 34, I think Brissy would be looking at something like GWS 37 and 56. Then 37 for Geelong 45 and 57. Without looking at dvi I'd assume 45, 56 and 57 trumps us - with a further potential to split 45. I also suspect that we'd prefer our last two picks to not be right at the end so would be reluctant to throw them all in.

Forgot about Kako.

Guess that GWS deal is okay. Although it's nothing special points wise it enables them to trade #37 for more picks.

We could beat that Geelong deal fairly easily for #37 and Geelong don't have any more points after that. They only have #45, #57 and #75. They may be happier to keep #45 and #57 because #37 will only be a few picks before #45. After GC, Essendon, Brisbanes picks (#39, 40, 41, 42, 43) are all eaten up.
I also feel that after Father/Son/Academy selections I don't think there would be to much difference between Geelongs #45 and our #52. I also don't think Brisbane could split pick #45 that easily if Brisbane picked it up. It's worth 347 points. Which if you swap it for a couple of picks in the mid 50's you will be luckly to get an extra 20-40 points.

To be honest I don't think there would be much difference between an end of draft pick and our #66 or even #60 for that matter. If we gave away all our picks for 1 our last 2 picks would probably be very close to those 2 picks anyway.
Anyway maybe something interesting happens or maybe not but why help Brisbane out by picking up #66 unless they help us in return.

 

[Apex36]

Pick 47. (Collingwood) – Thomas Sims
Northern Knights/Vic Metro – FWD, 199cm
Collingwood’s search for a key forward will lead them straight to Tom Sims, who made his forward presence felt through his contested marking capability and leading patterns inside 50, with a downside of inconsistency hitting the scoreboard.


Pick 50. (Collingwood) – Charlie Nicholls
Central District/South Australia – FWD, 197cm
The tall forward moves extremely well for his height, able to get into great spots with his leading patterns inside 50, and the ability to push higher up the ground and make use of his kicking in transition.


Pick 54. (Collingwood) – Hugh Boxshall
Claremont/Western Australia – MID, 188cm
Boxshall has generated some good interest off the back of strong combine testing, presenting well as an endurance-based midfield with some spark around the stoppage, and a tough body with his tackling pressure.


Pick 58. (Collingwood) – Sam Toner
Dandenong Stingrays/Vic Country – FWD, 184cm
The Narre-Warren local came into contention with a plethora of goal-scoring performances at local level, seeing him get the invite to Dandenong, where he turned it on yet again with a bag of five goals early in his Talent League career. Injury unfortunately brought an early end to 2024, but his upside is quite evident.

SEN's 2024 AFL full Phantom Draft

Draft expert Nathan Sepe makes his predictions for every selection in the 2024 AFL National Draft.

www.sen.com.au

We won't pick 4 players though

I’d be pretty chuffed with that haul (minus the 4th pick obvs) tbh.

 

[Mollythedolly]

There is a rule like that but it was in response to in draft trading when to he pick swap was reversed straight after matching. It might only apply when both parts are in-draft trading. Who knows?

Or the same picks used in both trades maybe.