Recruiting AFL Draft Watch 2022 - Tsatas, Hayes, Davey x2, Munkara & Montgomerie

[eDPS]

Quick links: Player Contract Status | Trade & Free Agency 2022 | JHA Father/Son and NGA | Adrian Dodoro

Spoiler: LIVE DRAFT ORDER (2022 Draft Order)

Spoiler: FUTURE PICK TRACKER (2023 Draft Order)

Spoiler: Value to match

2022 Draft Guide AFL

Get the 2022 AFL Draft Guide Fill out your details below to access the Draft Guide Please Note: If you have previously completed the above form, lost access to the draft guide and would like to view it again please check your email for a direct link. Features Each profile includes vitals...

central.rookieme.com

 

[citizen-erased]

It does but I am really struggling to understand the management of our talls since the end of 2020.

We've invested far too much draft capital and too many list spots only to end up with BZT, (a perennially injured) Stewart and (an average) Weidemann having jettisoned 2xNGA talls, who were showing encouraging signs, to now be looking at another high pick on a tall?

All of this with our mids?

There is a word that is in my mind when I think about the consequences of this for anyone responsible. It starts with 'sack' and ends with 'able'.

The Mahoney era is not proving itself to be above the Dodoro-led rubbish.

Mahoney joined the day before the 2020 draft, so I think that needs to be excused. He's really only had a hand in two trade periods & one draft to date sort out the 20 years of Dodoro mess.
So inclined to hold the horses on that front.

Endemic of our issues that Dodoro is still there overseeing the list....even if Mahoney is pulling the strings now.

 

[Howard Moon]

Reid is tracking fine, he's had some stress injuries in his back and lacked continuity and is a super tall KPD who usually take a number of years.

I know Eyre is the kind of player you'll fixate on because 'athletic profile' but Reid is clearly going fine and just needs continuity as he grows in to his body.

Cox spent half the season off with an LTI and was played out of position in the seniors in a struggling side, not sure how you draw much, if any, conclusions from how he's going.

Seems a lot like you've got a predetermined position you want to argue, and are just shoehorning players in to it despite them not actually fitting the argument you want to make.

The review of the findings even backed this up, non alignment ect.. plus isn't playing a kpp out of position part of its failings?

 

[citizen-erased]

Yawn.

Reid is tracking fine, he's had some stress injuries in his back and lacked continuity and is a super tall KPD who usually take a number of years.

I know Eyre is the kind of player you'll fixate on because 'athletic profile' but Reid is clearly going fine and just needs continuity as he grows in to his body.

Cox spent half the season off with an LTI and was played out of position in the seniors in a struggling side, not sure how you draw much, if any, conclusions from how he's going.

Seems a lot like you've got a predetermined position you want to argue, and are just shoehorning players in to it despite them not actually fitting the argument you want to make.

I'd argue Cox has no defined position in the side.
He's been forward, back but mostly plugged into a wing to try and force something.
I get drafting one or the other. Both Reid & Cox when Brand and Eyre were free hits was silly.

On that front, and goes to a bit of the recruitment via trade too - how much of it is collecting shiny things vs. building a comprehensive list that can compete and play.

Plenty of examples
-Picked Ridley a year after Francis who played the same role/position
-McGrath after Parish, then hunted Smith, then Shiel.
-No key backs outside Zerk (who was a 4th or 5th rounder) despite the looming age of Hooker and Hurley (loss of Carlisle too) and time needed for talks to develop
-No key forwards until Daniher asked to leave.
-Rucks have been projects since Ryder was drafted in '06.

Our list strategy has undermined us for a long time.

 

[Duster]

You know, when the report findings came out and mentioned there was no alignment regarding list management decisions between recruitment, development and coaching I reckon they were talking about this very scenario.
Totally perplexing list management. We took 4 FB/CHBs in the same draft ffs.

Eyre was drafted as an athletic KPF.

 

[faible]

The review of the findings even backed this up, non alignment ect.. plus isn't playing a kpp out of position part of its failings?

Somewhat, but Rutten was planning on playing Cox as a KPP this season anyway so Cox wouldn't appear to be a good representation of it.

Cox is a 2m player with an elite tank, it made sense to trial him on the wing to see if he could be a POD there. He (at this stage at least) appeared to be failing in that position, so playing him back in a role he's familiar with makes sense. Then the season ending LTI meant he didn't really have the chance to play out the season at either level.

 

[faible]

-No key backs outside Zerk (who was a 4th or 5th rounder) despite the looming age of Hooker and Hurley (loss of Carlisle too) and time needed for talks to develop

Both Reid & Cox when Brand and Eyre were free hits was silly.

The former kind of proves the latter wasn't silly, and the club would have had a fair idea of how likely it was Brand and Eyre made it as KPP's (keeping in mind Eyre was a forward when drafted).

They left it late to draft KPPs to replace Hurley & Hooker, though how much of that was because Francis + Ridley didn't turn out to be a KPD pairing? Daniher's departure meant that 2020 was a loaded up draft, and Francis very much struggling to become a KPP instead of a 3rd tall forced us to pick more KPPs than we'd have hoped for had Francis worked out.

The disruption caused by the player suspensions, and subsequent departures shouldn't be underestimated in terms of how much it's messed with the list strategy.

We had a maturing playing group in 2012 - 2015 that should have been playing regular finals, that got suspended and lost a year but also had multiple disrupted seasons prior due to various appeals / investigations. Some players departed, some returned and the club drafted / traded for immediate success e.g. Stringer / Smith / Saad / Shiel.

It's a big what-if period in the clubs history; IF 2012 didn't happen, IF the club rebuilt off the back of 2016 and traded out suspended players, IF Daniher didn't go down for two season with OP then request a trade, IF Francis had been able to hold down true CHB alongside Ridley.

I don't think our list position is that dire, we've got a heap of young talent stockpiled and looks to be another good draft for young talent this year with our first rounder and Davey Jnr being two more first-round talents into the list. Our list mostly needs time for those young guys to make it or not make it now.

 

[andleanback]

That's incorporated in my point unless you think pick 39 and 58, or whatever it was, is 'too much draft capital'.

Reid has done jack s**t at the same level as Brand and Eyre. He's done less than that at AFL level. It tells me the delistings are not about development. That's a complete failure of management.

Why take 2 talls in the top 10 when you've got 2 locked away later in the draft?

Why then sign a guy whose limit is c grade journeyman to a 2 year contract in 2021? Then we have a 2 year deal for a 27/28 yo who cant get on the park and bring in an underpeforming 25 year old in 2022.

This isn't planning. It's getting boxed in to dumb decisions by the whims in the same cycle of what is supposed to be a rebuild.

These people are idiots.

Reid has done way more at vfl level than eyre and brand

 

[Howard Moon]

Somewhat, but Rutten was planning on playing Cox as a KPP this season anyway so Cox wouldn't appear to be a good representation of it.

Cox is a 2m player with an elite tank, it made sense to trial him on the wing to see if he could be a POD there. He (at this stage at least) appeared to be failing in that position, so playing him back in a role he's familiar with makes sense. Then the season ending LTI meant he didn't really have the chance to play out the season at either level.

im still pretty adamant the wing experiment will put his development back - might even jeopardise his development at all. Toward the end he looked a shadow of the player he was, totally bereft of confidence, didnt know where to go , what to do, disposal even suffered.

I dunno, i think the whole thing was a bit odd. Sure you can have a large tank, that dosent automatically mean you can make it as a wingman - most wingman with a tank also have speed - thats where he was being exposed, and he wasnt getting into the right spots to use his actual advantage - his marking height over another wingman

anyhow, i reckon id rather get some kpp development into him from day one if thats what he was destined to be

 

[andleanback]

I'd argue Cox has no defined position in the side.
He's been forward, back but mostly plugged into a wing to try and force something.
I get drafting one or the other. Both Reid & Cox when Brand and Eyre were free hits was silly.

On that front, and goes to a bit of the recruitment via trade too - how much of it is collecting shiny things vs. building a comprehensive list that can compete and play.

Plenty of examples
-Picked Ridley a year after Francis who played the same role/position
-McGrath after Parish, then hunted Smith, then Shiel.
-No key backs outside Zerk (who was a 4th or 5th rounder) despite the looming age of Hooker and Hurley (loss of Carlisle too) and time needed for talks to develop
-No key forwards until Daniher asked to leave.
-Rucks have been projects since Ryder was drafted in '06.

Our list strategy has undermined us for a long time.

Why was it silly, it’s be proven they eyre and brand probably aren’t up to it. If the elite tall talent is there at the top end you take it, you don’t pass on it because you get free hits on KPP further back in the draft, who likely aren’t as good.

 

[faible]

im still pretty adamant the wing experiment will put his development back - might even jeopardise his development at all. Toward the end he looked a shadow of the player he was, totally bereft of confidence, didnt know where to go , what to do, disposal even suffered.

I dunno, i think the whole thing was a bit odd. Sure you can have a large tank, that dosent automatically mean you can make it as a wingman - most wingman with a tank also have speed - thats where he was being exposed, and he wasnt getting into the right spots to use his actual advantage - his marking height over another wingman

anyhow, i reckon id rather get some kpp development into him from day one if thats what he was destined to be

ant has posted a bit on it, but part of the issue seemed to be that Cox was caught choosing between running to where he should be to follow the play, or running to a hole in the zone that had been left due to other players failing.

Playing the wing in a dysfunctional team would be a tough gig, especially for a guy who hadn't played as a wingman in U18 (that I know of anyway?).

When our team-wide pressure was better in 2021, Cox looked a lot more capable because he wasn't wasted energy running to cover people.

An ultra-tall wingman with an elite tank (e.g. Blicavs) would be a good POD, but it probably relies on them having a properly functioning midfield zone around them, whereas playing CHB / 3rd tall might allow him to focus on just his game and not be as impacted by what the midfield is doing.

 

[citizen-erased]

Why was it silly, it’s be proven they eyre and brand probably aren’t up to it. If the elite tall talent is there at the top end you take it, you don’t pass on it because you get free hits on KPP further back in the draft, who likely aren’t as good.

For me it was too many scattered shots to land one or two given the state of our list.
I guess it's a double edged sword. You pass on Reid or Cox, who are likely best 22 players, given two speculatives.
Or you don't and neglect another position (e.g. O'Driscoll and our midfield depth/balance)

 

[andleanback]

For me it was too many scattered shots to land one or two given the state of our list.
I guess it's a double edged sword. You pass on Reid or Cox, who are likely best 22 players, given two speculatives.
Or you don't and neglect another position (e.g. O'Driscoll and our midfield depth/balance)

The smart move would be to not match both bids, but we were always going to. Odriscoll was taken in the mid 20s and wouldn’t have even been in the conversation.

 

[citizen-erased]

The smart move would be to not match both bids, but we were always going to. Odriscoll was taken in the mid 20s and wouldn’t have even been in the conversation.

O'Driscoll @ 10 is where I would have taken him.
I do now wonder how much clubs let him slide as a WA kid/freo fan. But he was my pick for 10. With Archie & either of Cox and Reid.

 

[Lore]

Our list as it was in 2020, and as it is now, sorted by height. Those who were delisted/traded/retired at the end of that year have their contract expiry date struck off.

 

[Keystone agony]

Those who dont think a stick like Cox shouldve been played on a wing in his first 1.5 years, are you ok with what Geelong have done with Blicavs? The player that can be most likened to Cox that i can think of

Also people need to remember Cox had basically zero preseason and played 4 games. Not exactly a great sample to examine that the wing role was a poor choice for the start of his 2nd year. Also the 4 games he played we were terrible and he had 21 disposals in the 2nd round

 

[Keystone agony]

O'Driscoll @ 10 is where I would have taken him.
I do now wonder how much clubs let him slide as a WA kid/freo fan. But he was my pick for 10. With Archie & either of Cox and Reid.

I must admit i was surprised we went with 2 talls, at the time and said it should just be 1. I was happy with Bruhn or Powell with our last pick from memory

Need to remember we didnt know Laverde was a capable defender at the time

 

[citizen-erased]

I must admit i was surprised we went with 2 talls, at the time and said it should just be 1. I was happy with Bruhn or Powell with our last pick from memory

Need to remember we didnt know Laverde was a capable defender at the time

I liked Bruhn and Powell too. but eDPS got me on as an O'Driscoll fanboi (and I'm still there....kid is a joy to watch play)

 

[andleanback]

Those who dont think a stick like Cox shouldve been played on a wing in his first 1.5 years, are you ok with what Geelong have done with Blicavs? The player that can be most likened to Cox that i can think of

Also people need to remember Cox had basically zero preseason and played 4 games. Not exactly a great sample to examine that the wing role was a poor choice for the start of his 2nd year. Also the 4 games he played we were terrible and he had 21 disposals in the 2nd round

Blicavs also went to a wing once he was a mature body who was well equipped at afl level. He had already learnt the game, cox is still finding his feet. There’s no reason why he can’t be a blicavs (play ruck forward back and wing) when he’s 27-28. But for now he needs to learn how to play his best position at afl level.

 

[Keystone agony]

Blicavs also went to a wing once he was a mature body who was well equipped at afl level. He had already learnt the game, cox is still finding his feet. There’s no reason why he can’t be a blicavs (play ruck forward back and wing) when he’s 27-28. But for now he needs to learn how to play his best position at afl level.

Didnt he start mainly on a wing? Before going to a key back role and then this year moving into an onball role

 

[andleanback]

Didnt he start mainly on a wing? Before going to a key back role and then this year moving into an onball role

He started as a ruck

 

[Keystone agony]

Everyone reluctant touching F1 which is understandable

22 and F1 for 13 and F1 (Tied freo)

Isnt horribly too far off for me. If the right player is there at 13 like a Hewett, Mckenzie, Hollands, Jefferson? then id consider this. We probably need some late extra points from Melbourne aswell

 

[eth-dog]

Everyone reluctant touching F1 which is understandable

22 and F1 for 13 and F1 (Tied freo)

Isnt horribly too far off for me. If the right player is there at 13 like a Hewett, Mckenzie, Hollands, Jefferson? then id consider this. We probably need some late extra points from Melbourne aswell

Top 6 pick and 22 for 14 and a pick likely in the late teens? No way.

22 and F2 might not get 14 from Melbourne but it'll interest Sydney's 15 or 18, GWS's 16, 19 or 20 or Collingwood's 17. No need to panic and throw in an F1 because of it.

 

[Keystone agony]

Top 6 pick and 22 for 14 and a pick likely in the late teens? No way.

22 and F2 might not get 14 from Melbourne but it'll interest Sydney's 15 or 18, GWS's 16, 19 or 20 or Collingwood's 17. No need to panic and throw in an F1 because of it.

I have a clear top 14 so i quite like the melbourne pick personally and i see it drop off a bit after that but obviously that isnt everyones opinion. A few names such as George, Konstanty, Hayes, Ed Allen, Hustwaite ect that arent in that top group might not be that far behind on list

Based on betting markets it would be

F6+22 for F10+13+ (Plus a few extra shitty points for us)

I do however feel were pretty confident that 22 comes before Davey with the way weve worked our list

 

[citizen-erased]

Everyone reluctant touching F1 which is understandable

22 and F1 for 13 and F1 (Tied freo)

Isnt horribly too far off for me. If the right player is there at 13 like a Hewett, Mckenzie, Hollands, Jefferson? then id consider this. We probably need some late extra points from Melbourne aswell

I don't see how we improve that much beyond maybe the hawks slipping behind us and possibly the Crows (who I feel are slightly tanking it a bit)

I'd only entertain GCS' pick 5 if im honest and it's quite the gamble still.
Scott will have a pretty good read on the list, how the pieces fit and where we need to address this time next year. I'd hate to lose a top 3-6 pick for something that doesn't really deliver a critical need.

 

[Keystone agony]

I don't see how we improve that much beyond maybe the hawks slipping behind us and possibly the Crows (who I feel are slightly tanking it a bit)

I'd only entertain GCS' pick 5 if im honest and it's quite the gamble still.
Scott will have a pretty good read on the list, how the pieces fit and where we need to address this time next year. I'd hate to lose a top 3-6 pick for something that doesn't really deliver a critical need.

Well we were the 4th worst side this year and both hawks and crows finished above us