Draft Watcher Knightmare 2020 Draft Almanac

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
AnEmptyChair said:
Just reading that last post again and JFC, imagine preferring Majak Daw over Aiden Corr for 2021 because of a single season rated as "Elite" by Champion Data before he had life-threatening injuries. THat statement alone should invalidate everything else he's said on North.
Click to expand...

I would absolutely much rather a year of Majak Daw as a rookie as opposed to being locked into Aidan Corr on a 5 year deal worth $2.75m! That's an awful deal for someone I wouldn't want as part of my best-22 now, let alone 5 years from now on that kind of money!

With clubs as we speak being forced to renegotiate deals with their players and back-end their deals, we're going to have armageddon in the next few years and more situations like Collingwood where clubs will need to shed good players for salary cap space.

North Melbourne would be wise instead to take on shorter contracts and more budget guys who don't impact too heavily on those better draft picks, and have salary cap space available to take a shot at the next Treloar or Stephenson who get forced out of a club.

Salary caps are managed with very little wiggle room and margin for error. You don't want to tie up money for long and you want to tie it up for low priced guys so you can actually be active in the trade and free agency markets for players who are actually worthwhile and going to move that needle if you're going to go trading for, or in this case, paying that kind of currency for someone.

That's one of several reasons why this offseason I've been talking about moneyball gets. Those undervalued players who won't cost anything to add. Those utilised in the wrong positions where clubs aren't maximising their games. Go get value, not bad contracts!
 
Knightmare said:
I would absolutely much rather a year of Majak Daw as a rookie as opposed to being locked into Aidan Corr on a 5 year deal worth $2.75m! That's an awful deal for someone I wouldn't want as part of my best-22 now, let alone 5 years from now on that kind of money!

With clubs as we speak being forced to renegotiate deals with their players and back-end their deals, we're going to have armageddon in the next few years and more situations like Collingwood where clubs will need to shed good players for salary cap space.

North Melbourne would be wise instead to take on shorter contracts and more budget guys who don't impact too heavily on those better draft picks, and have salary cap space available to take a shot at the next Treloar or Stephenson who get forced out of a club.

Salary caps are managed with very little wiggle room and margin for error. You don't want to tie up money for long and you want to tie it up for low priced guys so you can actually be active in the trade and free agency markets for players who are actually worthwhile and going to move that needle if you're going to go trading for, or in this case, paying that kind of currency for someone.

That's one of several reasons why this offseason I've been talking about moneyball gets. Those undervalued players who won't cost anything to add. Those utilised in the wrong positions where clubs aren't maximising their games. Go get value, not bad contracts!
Click to expand...

You would think his wage almost reflects the fact he’s an above average 26 year old defender, former first round pick, with elite speed that can play on smalls and talls. Funny that.

Oh and before you just lay this all on North again, Hawthorn made a late play to convince him over.

The AFL industry, North, Hawthorn and GWS’ coaching staff obviously sees him very differently to Knightmare.
 
Brenton Davy said:
IF the Crows take McDonald then Thilthorpe goes to North. Instant replacement for Brown
Click to expand...
The more I read about Thilthorpe, the more I prefer him to McDonald.

I wouldn't be upset with picking any of the top 5.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Knightmare said:
Zac is definitely a straight and direct kick. He has good vision and is a precise kick. Will move the ball quickly if he finds a meaningful target. Maybe not ultra penetrating as someone on more-so the short to medium kicks in particular I've found to be excellent and to have particularly good placement.

He's one of those solid, polished general defenders where his skills are good and he can intercept. He's one of those good footballers without a great deal of athleticism.

Stylistically you have the right general idea though.



To go through the names.

Daw was an elite stopper in 2018. Wasn't granted a single opportunity in defence this year. He's never been effective as a key forward or ruckman, so using him out of position isn't going to maximise his capabilities.

Pittard generates meaningful drive from defence. He's a veteran leader who adds not only drive but leadership. It's been well known who he is for a long time, and you need to be able to take the good with the bad. But with how quickly and aggressively he gets the ball moving forward, he's someone who can fill that role and is fine to keep if you don't have a better alternative.

Wood needs a season solid before he can prove he's not able in defence. He's athletic, can take a grab. Give him the chance to adjust to the position. Inconsistent and not good enough as a forward. Give him a decent shot to learn how to play back, as his mix of attributes suggest that's where he should be able to play his best footy, if he can get the intercepting/defence balance right and learn when he can peel off and when not to, and that comes with time.

Williams has long been an able stopper. Very strong 1v1, but then has run. Can't kick. But he's an able role player. I don't hate him either. He's alright as a component.

Ahern on the other hand, and he didn't get to play in defence at all this year to my disappointment, but in 2019 the only times he played good football was in defence for those who were watching. His ball use and the drive he generated from defence was pretty reasonable during that stretch of three games at the end of 2019 and that's something that should have been explored more this season.

As I said, I don't hate any of their games, and that's the point I'm making. It's a group of guys who either weren't played in their optional spots, or weren't given the opportunity to be tried in positions their games should be best suited to. If they can be upgraded upon, then absolutely go get rid of them. But I'm not seeing those upgrades and that's where my problem is with North Melbourne at this point. That defence is awfully young, and if you're going that young, you better have stars, because when you've got a young defence, that's when teams get slaughtered.

North Melbourne's outlook for 2021 at the moment is looking a lot worse than the outlook for 2020 at this point in time. It's a big step back, particularly in defence and a wish and hope that some youth comes good.



There will always based on performance be a number of clubs I'll be harsh on, and normally it's going to be those worse performing clubs.

Only time I've had agreement with a harsh review of late has been from my awarding Collingwood an F during the trade period, the first 'F' I've awarded. But I guess that's going to happen with Treloar, Stephenson and Phillips are given away for peanuts.

Carlton fans following the trade period were happy with me for the first time in a long time, so it seems that things go in swings and roundabouts based on how harsh or complementary I am of their club in a particular moment.
Click to expand...
Just stop. You need a watch a team regularly to analyse its list.
None of the players North delisted have been picked up by other teams, there is an obvious reason for that. North cut dead wood. And Marty Gleeson is not the answer.
 
Knightmare said:
I don't see any resemblance much in the play between Ford and Worpel.

Worpel as a junior, just as he is at AFL level was a super advanced and dominant midfielder. Ford can win his own ball, so he does have scope to develop into a midfielder, but ultimately he's still a developing player who you hope develops into that guy. It's comparing a dominant ball winner to a guy who may develop into a midfielder, but has been thrown all around the ground and to give Ford some credit has versatility and a few more tricks to him relatively. I can't speak for others, but I look at Ford as a highish upside guy, but he doesn't have nearly as high of a floor as Worpel. You could be right we haven't seen the best of Ford given he didn't get the midfield chances last year that he would have this year. When I think of Ford, he brings back bad memories of Jayden Laverde and Connor Menadue who had the attributes and looked like could become midfielders but never did. Ford is helped in that comparison by the better contested side to his game, so hopefully he does better, but I find him hard to include in say my top-20, just wanting that bit more evidence that as a mid he would justify the pick with a higher degree of certainty. Comparing Ford to Fyfe, Fyfe was by far and away the more dominant forward, he just couldn't kick to save himself eg. missing 15m direct set shots. Fyfe had only from what I remember shown he could play forward, so a bit like with Ford, thinking he could become a midfielder would be considered speculative. Fyfe was still thin and physically developing when drafted, but then in his first preseason put on more size, got stronger and was to my surprise able to play and even gain some midfield minutes which after a few years became regular midfield minutes.

Perkins with some of the talk around him of late. Hawthorn considering him with pick 4? Really? Essendon at 6/7/8? It's a lot earlier than I'd be prepared to take him, particularly on the speculation that he may be better 12 months on. He's more someone 15-20 I'd class as appropriate for drafting this year. Cox similarly is another upside guy, and even Reid I'd say similar of and rate a little lower, but they're more appropriate for selection certainly for me outside the top-15 with others better performed by position and having that more certain best position.



I'd be feeling pretty bad myself if I was wasting senior list positions on speculative talents when there are higher probability of career players available as delisted free agents. North Melbourne are an example of jumping the gun and not realising the opportunity to take advantage of this year's historic delisted free agency opportunity.

The offseason is hardly terrible overall for North Melbourne given the price Stephenson was gained for, but it is a great opportunity lost, as it is for all other clubs, with each list having down the bottom end of their lists numerous worse options than a number of these delisted free agents who either are still best-22 calibre players or have the scope to develop into. At least based off of my own talent identification and projections.
Click to expand...
He wasn’t saying Ford and Worpel had similar games, but rather Ford looks like he might slide and be an over looked talent, much like what happened to Worpel.
 
Pykie said:
You would think his wage almost reflects the fact he’s an above average 26 year old defender, former first round pick, with elite speed that can play on smalls and talls. Funny that.

Oh and before you just lay this all on North again, Hawthorn made a late play to convince him over.

The AFL industry, North, Hawthorn and GWS’ coaching staff obviously sees him very differently to Knightmare.
Click to expand...

Clubs rating guys doesn't make them good. Clubs get some calls right, some calls wrong.

Trusting the valuations of clubs doesn't lead to above average results. All clubs and all people making evaluations on rival talent, on draft talent need to make their own calls. That's the fundamental concept any good recruiter in the industry should tell you. That's what a now national recruiting manager taught me all the way back in 2014 and the more I've considered my thoughts on players and compared and contrasted that to the decisions clubs have made, I've found often my own evaluations are different. And sometimes it goes my way, sometimes it doesn't. I look at having different valuations as an incredibly positive thing. You're going to miss opportunities if you rate everyone the same as everyone else in the industry.

It's like going back a few years and looking at my view of Jarryd Lyons for just one example. I was very vocal in saying he's worth a late first rounder or second rounder. He's unwanted, gets delisted. Knowing that valuation and understanding he wasn't rated by Gold Coast, getting dropped, he's someone where if it was clear other clubs had no interest. Lock him up for a late pick. He doesn't even need to get delisted. It was pretty obvious as Gold Coast's best player at that time that he was a piece. How did clubs miss that and no one offer Gold Coast anything? At the same time I came down hard on Collingwood's trade of Dayne Beams, offering two first round picks for a guy who was in his late 20s, lacked durability and was battling mental health issues. My valuation was he had approx 60 games left, based on the rate of games he was playing, and at that rate he's not worth one first round pick. No one needs to be a club and be surrounded by a group of professional recruiters to make those observations. They're going to get calls right sometimes, and wrong sometimes, just as I will.

It takes learning the game to get more of those calls right. Learning what's important and adds value in a given position. What contributes towards winning and makes teams better. What is a suitable valuation on a given player and whether you can get them for below what you think they're worth. Look back at draft and trade periods past. What works? What doesn't? Help that to guide your own evaluations post trade/draft, and help guide who you think your club should target. What are clubs missing? What are their blind spots?

It's an inexact science, and clubs are far from optimised list managers, or recruiters. Particularly when I can as a single man recruiting team have a better record over the last 20 years with the selections and non selections of key position players I rate inside my top-20 than clubs draft in those ranges. There is learning and getting better every year. And across the rest of the field, I need to get better to be able to match or exceed the performance of the AFL clubs through the draft.

When I'm looking at key backs, clubs need to stop recruiting guys who are just stoppers. It's like being a midfielder and not being able to win the contested ball or being a forward and not providing any forward pressure. It's like being in the NBA and not having a 3 point shot. If you're a defender, and that includes a key defender. You NEED to be able to intercept and ideally be able to take contested marks. More than shutting down opponents. More than rebounding. That's what you need to be able to give at that position as a non-negotiable. Why was I so vocal about Aliir Aliir? He's a great intercept mark and contested mark when used as a key defender. Let him do that and he can be a piece. You want guys in all positions to be able to do multiple things well and have a number of ways of impacting games, but you also by position needs to have weightings in accordance with what at a given position you need above all. With Corr neither an intercepter, nor a contested marking threat. He's not someone I would want on my senior list using up a list position. There were better options during the trade period and there are better options during this delisted trade period, and dramatically better in those aspects of the game, none of whom require a 5 year contract. If you want a third tall of a similar age demographic who doesn't need to be a key defender, go get Gleeson. He's a better player and can be had as a DFA on a shorter deal for a lot less money. Gleeson in 2019 was even inside the top-15 for intercepts per game, and 2017 he was top-20. And he's a guy at the same time who is winning his 1v1s. And if you're worried about age demographics, he's younger by a few months and doesn't impact on that either.

Why is my valuation different on Gleeson v Corr for just one example? It's looking at his attributes. Understanding what is needed for team success at that position. He's the better and more complete footballer, and for mine the better option if I don't need a key defender. If I need a key defender, I'd go younger and get Connor Ballenden - he can at least read it and take intercept marks. Or if I want someone who can play key defence, but can play smaller as required, and add athleticism, Jon Marsh I'd prefer as that better intercepter and contested mark, but with the bonus of being able to apply his speed and run offensively and having greater ground ball winning capabilities. He's another used out of position guy who St Kilda did no favours to by playing forward in his limited opportunities this year.
 
Can't believe we have blown the once in a century event to not add Martin Gleeson.

On SM-G950F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Knightmare said:
I'm more than happy to contradict a list management team when I believe their methodology is suboptimal as I would say is the case with North Melbourne in this case, particularly in the list position they're in. It's a case of shedding still able enough veterans when the youth is unextrodinary, adding more questionable youth (Atu/Young) and not making the most of the numerous trade period opportunities (aside from Stephenson who I feel is a great value recruit) and not making the most of this historic opportunity to add delisted talent during this delisted free agency period. When you're a bad team with a list that is light on and needs to add more talent and more good players, you need to make the most of every opportunity available to you and my opinion is North Melbourne haven't done that and have delisted the wrong guys then gone after the wrong guys.

I'm not sure why you're promoting North Melbourne's defence. Tarrant is excellent. McDonald had a breakout year and was excellent. Walker I like and rate in defence. Atley is serviceable. The rest of that group aren't any team best-22 players and are downgrades on those North Melbourne previously had.

Corr I don't rate. Less than 0.5 contested marks per game (outside the top 150). Outside the top 150 for intercepts per game also. Nothing wrong with him as a stopper and his ball use is fine. But if I want a key defender, I want someone who takes intercept marks and can take contested marks. There needs to be some component of that even if their role is to play primarily as a stopper. Nullifying a contest is no longer enough in the AFL game, scores come from turnovers. You need the forward pressure up the ground and the intercepting behind the ball to create those scores off turnovers and prevent the opposite by not allowing the opposing from half to get the ball to ground and create opportunities for their crumbers and pressure forwards to create opportunities.

If you asked me whether I'd prefer to have Corr, Perez, McKay, Hayden and Young. Or as an alternative have the chance to have Daw, Pittard, Wood (he can be better in defence),Williams and Ahern as defenders. I'd take the latter group and at each position. I don't LOVE any of those group you're proposing, Corr included. They're more guys where you hope they develop, but you just don't know if they'll be good enough.

As a methodology I completely disagree with North Melbourne's approach to list management this offseason. It's copying Melbourne's failed formula from 10 years ago where they did away with the bulk of their veterans and left little in the way of leadership or able established footballers. Put a bunch of young players of mild at best talent together and it's not only going to hurt performance and memberships in the short term but it's also going to more importantly over the long term hurt rather than help the development of their youth.

It's incredible when you look back and actually analyse lists past. Were Melbourne able to maximise the development of Jack Watts, Tom Scully or Jack Trengove?

What about Carlton with Marc Murphy, Bryce Gibbs and Matthew Kreuzer?

Why did those scenarios work out worse than the likes of Pendlebury to Collingwood? Buddy to Hawks? Selwood to Geelong? Dangerfield to Adelaide? Why were those guys more successful? It's a simple formula. Have a good head coach, good assistant and development coaches, have a good captain, have good veteran leadership, and through all that develop a strong culture.

Who did Pendlebury have? Mick Malthouse and a bunch of assistant coaches who went on to senior head coaching jobs. What about as leadership? How about Buckley/Maxwell/Burns/Clement/Rocca etc.
Who did Buddy have? Clarkson. Future head coaches. What about as leadership? How about Hodge/Mitchell/Crawford/Vandenberg etc.
Who did Selwood have? Thompson. Future head coaches. What about as leadership? How about Harley/Ling/Bartel/Corey/Scarlett/Milburn etc.
Who did Danger have? Several coaches and several assistants, but each coach he played under had a 50% or higher win record. What about leadership? Goodwin/McLeod/Thompson/Rutten/Edwards. They still had that veteran core.

North Melbourne's current position is one where there are still a small few veterans, but until there are young players worth bringing into the senior team (I disagree with your identification of North Melbourne's talent in that I don't see them as a collective as being worth bringing in) then there is no point moving on still reasonable senior players. What needs clearing out is North Melbourne's youth with a view towards bringing in better players. And I'd be bringing in a better leadership group and I'd be looking at the broader coaching group and deciding on what's a formula that will work better, as what has been there certainly hasn't gotten the club anywhere meaningful, with North Melbourne's last top-4 opportunity being in 2007.

As for North Melbourne's midfield, I'd actually spoken North Melbourne's midfield up throughout the year if you go through my posting history. Simpkin is good already and LDU I agree with you can develop into a piece with his late season signs positive and suggesting he's while slower than expected at least trending now in the right direction finally as someone who certainly has the talent to become good. Cunnington is good. Anderson is fair and plays a role. Dumont is another good piece, though outside does his best work. T.Thomas could eventually play some midfield, Bonar will need to improve though first and hasn't to date done enough. Zurhaar I like forward of centre as a target and good user but don't feel like he'd be good enough through the midfield, though more than happy to be proven wrong if he can add that to his game. Stephenson is mostly a forward at this stage though I give him a chance to make it on a wing given he has both the speed, aerobic capacity and is an able mark, but as a midfielder he'd need to radically improve the contested side of his game so I'm not seeing that in his future either.
If I'm picking that midfield, Cunnington, Anderson and Simpkin start inside with LDU rotating mid/fwd and Kennedy able to flip mid/fwd with him. Ziebell can rotate through the mids. Polec I like on the outside, and Hall I still view as viable for selection consideration. Kennedy is hardly old at just 23 and fits the age demographic North Melbourne will be looking to add to. If you don't rate Kennedy on talent, fair enough, but I see him as someone who on a lot of teams is genuine best-22 quality as someone I'd back to win 10 contested possessions per game while still getting forward and taking a few important marks and kicking nearing a goal per game. I think as a mid that's more than enough to make him justifiable for a lot of teams, with his improvement this year really impressing me.
If a star midfielder is brought in be it this year and/or next year, I don't see that as a problem. Having a good number of good mids is a good problem to have, and a lot of those guys can play forward. Polec/Hall/Cunnington/Ziebell are nearing the end, so if there is a pick where a mid is the best available player, there is room for North Melbourne to add more good mids.



Who did North Melbourne just waste senior list positions on? Atu and Young. Corr I don't rate and would prefer not to have to utilise as one of my key defenders given he's neither an intercepter nor a contested marking threat.

Who should North Melbourne have added?
Through delisted free agency: Connor Ballenden (upgrade on Corr/McKay and big upgrade on Durdin), Matthew Kennedy (good rotation mid who can also rest forward - and I feel like for a lot of teams he could be a good 4th best mid), Marty Gleeson (aside from McDonald would be instantly North Melbourne's next best general defender and depending on preferences some may say Atley, but I prefer Gleeson if I could have one or the other as the better stopper, intercepter and ball user), Noah Gown (with Brown going would be a good choice to pair with Larkey, particularly if McDonald goes pick 1).

It seems your understanding of delisted free agency in this case is the incorrect understanding.
– At List Lodgement (1), any Player a Club wishes to transfer under this provision is delisted per the AFL Rules, for the following reasons:
Allows all 18 AFL Clubs to consider offering a delisted Player a Primary List spot for 2021.
Allows a delisted Player to receive free agency for life status.
– During the Delisted Free Agency Period (2), Clubs will be permitted to transfer a maximum of two Players who were previously on the Club’s 2020 Primary List directly onto their 2021 Category A Rookie List.
– If the Club and Player cannot come to an agreement, the Player will be considered a Delisted Free Agent, per the AFL Rules, and has the opportunity to nominate for the 2020 NAB AFL National Draft or the 2020 NAB AFL Pre-Season Draft.
The deadline for List Lodgement (2) is 2:00pm (AEDT) Monday November 30, 2020.

Key dates for the 2020 NAB AFL Draft Period
Wednesday 25 November
• List Lodgement 1
• Nomination of Draft Eligible Father/Son Players Lodged
• Nomination of Draft Eligible Northern & NGA Academy Players Lodged
Thursday 26 November
• AFL Delisted Player Free Agency Period (1) Commences
Sunday 29 November
• AFL Delisted Player Free Agency Period (1) Closes
Monday 30 November
• List Lodgement 2
• Out of Contract Listed AFL Primary List Players Draft Nomination Form and Player Request for Removal from List Form Lodged with AFL
• Final date for Primary List delistings
Tuesday 1 December
• AFL Delisted Player Free Agency Period (2) Commences
Wednesday 2 December
• AFL Delisted Player Free Agency Period (2) Closes

Where are we up to? We're still delisted free agency period 1 as per the dates listed above which allows clubs to secure the likes of Ballenden/Kennedy/Gleeson as free agents. This still gives these delisted players opportunities to join rival clubs as delisted free agents before the clubs that have delisted them (yes Ballenden/Kennedy/Gleeson have all been formally delisted) can be added onto their rookie lists directly, and not having to go through the draft to do so.

I'm not news reporter. I'm a freelance journalist and a draft analyst, but I have indeed having a strong interest in this delisted free agency period in particular been following the unique rules that have come about this offseason with the list size reduction.

Now that we are up to date with the rules. Let's move onto the interesting stuff with talent what I find interesting.

What about during the trade period who should North Melbourne have targeted?
Callum Coleman-Jones, Jack Sinclair, Darcy MacPherson, Lachie Fogarty, Josh Caddy, Alex Sexton, Alex Witherden, Dylan Roberton and Sydney Stack all as budget and underutilised types if available on the cheap all are among a quick shortlist of guys who could have improved North Melbourne's best 22 and have provided good position fits based on existing list needs, as with the delisted free agents available. Of those incredibly only Fogarty and Witherden moved, and none of them were must keeps for their existing clubs.

This is why I talk about this offseason as the transferring of wealth. From the unintelligent to the intelligent. North Melbourne were smart enough to go get Stephenson, but they've entirely missed the opportunity to add a long list of players who are plug and play best 22 and can improve the list immediately at no meaningful cost. And North Melbourne are hardly alone in missing opportunities, clubs across the competition really have failed to realise the opportunities that this trade period in particular presented, with only a small few capitalising, though even many of those that did could have in my view done even more to improve their lists to greater degrees through the trade period.

I've already gone through the North Melbourne midfield and gone through why I like North Melbourne's midfield on a relative basis, but feel there is always opportunity to add. Phasing out Dumont would be a mistake. He's a good outside mid. All the mids you mention barr Bonar who also has a lot of developing to do are capable. I'm not however of the opinion that having just those guys is enough. Midfield isn't the number one need of North Melbourne by any stretch, but when there is opportunity to add able mids at little or no cost, or when they represent decisive best available value through the draft, absolutely you go get that.

Like with the previous poster I have already responded to, I see no reason to talk up Corr, Perez or Hayden and I share none of your excitement about any of them at this point in time. Perez and Hayden are still developing players who you're hoping will be good enough while Corr is below average by position.

What I can agree on to some extent with is that there will be mid-season draft opportunities to add worthwhile talent, though if history tells us anything, clubs will probably be looking at a lot of mature agers as opposed to those overlooked from this year's pool more than they should and a number will still make it through into the draft proper as Jake Riccardi was last year, albeit from the VFL, one year removed from playing as an overager in the TAC Cup. I do however view the delisted free agency opportunities favourably despite this, and this is yet another opportunity that only adds fuel to my view that you want to clear list positions of players who aren't best 22 players and get rid of any speculative/unlikely to develop youth in favour of opportunities during this trade and delisted free agency periods, with at the same time still a look ahead in as much as least as to have opportunities available to add talent during the year.
Click to expand...
Knightmare you are aware that the AFL made a special rule this year, announced just last week, that clubs could delist 2 contracted players and move them straight on to the rookie list, without the need to send them to the rookie draft.

The fact that Brisbane is sending all three of our delisted players to the rookie draft, and “risking” (read hoping) another club picks them up as a delisted player, or in the National Draft, should tell you how Brisbane rates the three players.

I go and watch Brisbane train every Wednesday afternoon. I guarantee I have seen much more on Ballenden than you. He’s not the player your thinking or making him out to be. He’s soft as butter. Great skills, great kick, great uncontested mark, limited laterally. But no physical presence what so ever. I’ve seen him pushed under the ball repeatedly by players 20cm shorter and 20kgs lighter than him.
 
Kangaroos4eva said:
The more I read about Thilthorpe, the more I prefer him to McDonald.

I wouldn't be upset with picking any of the top 5.
Click to expand...

Thilthorpe has game. I'm a McDonald guy on the basis of his rate of development, but Thilthorpe brings a rare combination of strengths to the table for someone his height and size.

briztoon said:
He wasn’t saying Ford and Worpel had similar games, but rather Ford looks like he might slide and be an over looked talent, much like what happened to Worpel.
Click to expand...

Is Ford going where Worpel did sliding though? If I recall correctly, Twomey I don't believe rated Ford inside his top-40. He's a reflection it seems of the mainstream view, and tends to base his views largely on what recruiters think from what I can gather.

Ford has his fans on bigfooty, but I'm not sure within the industry he's rated as say something like a first rounder. I have Ford somewhere around 35 on my own board for example, with the view that I'd have wanted to see him play midfield this year to be able to justify having him higher and assuming he can become that at the next level. I can't speak for club recruiters, but I feel like going somewhere probably second round is roughly what we'll see. If he was there in the third round, I'd think he'd represent good value, but not great on the level of a Worpel who I felt was a clear best-25 player in his draft.
 
Knightmare said:
Thilthorpe has game. I'm a McDonald guy on the basis of his rate of development, but Thilthorpe brings a rare combination of strengths to the table for someone his height and size.



Is Ford going where Worpel did sliding though? If I recall correctly, Twomey I don't believe rated Ford inside his top-40. He's a reflection it seems of the mainstream view, and tends to base his views largely on what recruiters think from what I can gather.

Ford has his fans on bigfooty, but I'm not sure within the industry he's rated as say something like a first rounder. I have Ford somewhere around 35 on my own board for example, with the view that I'd have wanted to see him play midfield this year to be able to justify having him higher and assuming he can become that at the next level. I can't speak for club recruiters, but I feel like going somewhere probably second round is roughly what we'll see. If he was there in the third round, I'd think he'd represent good value, but not great on the level of a Worpel who I felt was a clear best-25 player in his draft.
Click to expand...
Again, you’re displaying a lack of comprehension. But that’s not a discussion I could be bothered with.

Oh, and for the record, Twomey didn’t rate Worpel, either, based on what he was hearing from recruiters.

He even had a very public “discussion” on Twitter with the then coach of the Falcons of his non rating of Worpel.
 
briztoon said:
Knightmare you are aware that the AFL made a special rule this year, announced just last week, that clubs could delist 2 contracted players and move them straight on to the rookie list, without the need to send them to the rookie draft.

The fact that Brisbane is sending all three of our delisted players to the rookie draft, and “risking” (read hoping) another club picks them up as a delisted player, or in the National Draft, should tell you how Brisbane rates the three players.

I go and watch Brisbane train every Wednesday afternoon. I guarantee I have seen much more on Ballenden than you. He’s not the player your thinking or making him out to be. He’s soft as butter. Great skills, great kick, great uncontested mark, limited laterally. But no physical presence what so ever. I’ve seen him pushed under the ball repeatedly by players 20cm shorter and 20kgs lighter than him.
Click to expand...

In that case you're the prefect person to be having this discussion with.

I see Ballenden's strengths and weaknesses similarly, but from rounds 1-9 in the NEAFL in 2019 he was 7th in the competition for intercept marks. He brings that and has, as you say, the skills. That's precisely what I want in a defender. He does need to improve particularly 1v1 as you point out, and when you're talking about a 200cm guy, not many at that height have incredible lateral quickness.

My suspicion with Ballenden is as you will then be aware if you have watched him lots at training, is that he gets thrown around the ground too often. Asked to play key forward often, in the ruck. Has not had a long enough stretch of games as a key back.

Why do talented KPPs fail most? Lack of positional continuity.

What you need to do is particularly when they're young. Tell them the position and role you want them to play. Simplify it. Give them clear focuses. I haven't seen that of Ballenden. Jack Lukosius is a great example of a player this year who was told - this is what you're going to do - this is what you're expected to do. And it allowed him to have an incredible season as the competition's best rebounding tall already, just in his second season. Ballenden needs that same continuity and simplified role. And specifically to be asked to play as a key defender.

As a ruckman, as a key forward. I'm not advocating him for those roles. That's not him. Behind the ball though he can really read it and can be an intercept marking force. I'd be more than happy to let him be him, and just work with him on his 1v1 craft and convert that into an area of strength, as he's more than big enough at 101kg, and long enough at 200cm, with long limbs to develop that to a reasonable enough level.

Edit: *At the same age/stage I'd compare Ballenden to Cale Hooker. Hooker early career could intercept and use it but was a complete liability 1v1. Ballenden with time can develop similarly if given that key defence post.
 
Last edited:
Knightmare said:
In that case you're the prefect person to be having this discussion with.

I see Ballenden's strengths and weaknesses similarly, but from rounds 1-9 in the NEAFL in 2019 he was 7th in the competition for intercept marks. He brings that and has, as you say, the skills. That's precisely what I want in a defender. He does need to improve particularly 1v1 as you point out, and when you're talking about a 200cm guy, not many at that height have incredible lateral quickness.

My suspicion with Ballenden is as you will then be aware if you have watched him lots at training, is that he gets thrown around the ground too often. Asked to play key forward often, in the ruck. Has not had a long enough stretch of games as a key back.

Why do talented KPPs fail most? Lack of positional continuity.

What you need to do is particularly when they're young. Tell them the position and role you want them to play. Simplify it. Give them clear focuses. I haven't seen that of Ballenden. Jack Lukosius is a great example of a player this year who was told - this is what you're going to do - this is what you're expected to do. And it allowed him to have an incredible season as the competition's best rebounding tall already, just in his second season. Ballenden needs that same continuity and simplified role. And specifically to be asked to play as a key defender.

As a ruckman, as a key forward. I'm not advocating him for those roles. That's not him. Behind the ball though he can really read it and can be an intercept marking force. I'd be more than happy to let him be him, and just work with him on his 1v1 craft and convert that into an area of strength, as he's more than big enough at 101kg, and long enough at 200cm, with long limbs to develop that to a reasonable enough level.
Click to expand...
Did you watch any of the NEAFL in 2019, specifically Brisbane? Or are you just quoting stats?
 
Christ , having just popped back in and read the past few pages it’s clear the draft can’t come quick enough .
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

briztoon said:
Did you watch any of the NEAFL in 2019, specifically Brisbane? Or are you just quoting stats?
Click to expand...

I am quoting stats and have seen numerous games of Brisbane from 2019, 2018, 2017 etc.

Brisbane's reserves, as with that of Gold Coast and GWS I have viewed for a few years now as a recruiting ground.

That's precisely why I was advocating Ben Keays get re-drafted last year. Capable and underutilised.
 
Knightmare said:
It takes learning the game to get more of those calls right. Learning what's important and adds value in a given position. What contributes towards winning and makes teams better. What is a suitable valuation on a given player and whether you can get them for below what you think they're worth. Look back at draft and trade periods past. What works? What doesn't? Help that to guide your own evaluations post trade/draft, and help guide who you think your club should target. What are clubs missing? What are their blind spots?

It's an inexact science, and clubs are far from optimised list managers, or recruiters. Particularly when I can as a single man recruiting team have a better record over the last 20 years with the selections and non selections of key position players I rate inside my top-20 than clubs draft in those ranges. There is learning and getting better every year. And across the rest of the field, I need to get better to be able to match or exceed the performance of the AFL clubs through the draft.
Click to expand...

Jesus Christ mate, take the night off. The above is bordering on narcissism.
Those of us who have been around here long enough remember some of your horrendous calls and yes we remember the late minute edits following phantoms dropped by the media to cover up half of them.
 
Hi Knightmare, how would you rate Reid and Cox?

Reid the better KPD, but worse KPF, or is Cox better both as a KPD and as a KPF?
 
Knightmare said:
I am quoting stats and have seen numerous games of Brisbane from 2019, 2018, 2017 etc.

Brisbane's reserves, as with that of Gold Coast and GWS I have viewed for a few years now as a recruiting ground.

That's precisely why I was advocating Ben Keays get re-drafted last year. Capable and underutilised.
Click to expand...
You should go read the last page of our trade thread, as there is a current discussion about Ben Keays.

As for the NEAFL in 2019.

Our senior team was very settled in 2019, with very, very few injuries.

So our reserves team was at full strength the whole season.

The NEAFL was basically a walk in the park the whole season, with most teams giving up by half time.

We blew the second placed team out of the water late in the season by 10 goals, barely getting out of first gear.

I wouldn’t read anything in to any stats from the NEAFL in 2019.

Due to our depth of talls, Ballenden played across all three lines, being our primary back up ruck, as he was the least capable of our tall players.
 
Prochard123 said:
Hi Knightmare, how would you rate Reid and Cox?

Reid the better KPD, but worse KPF, or is Cox better both as a KPD and as a KPF?
Click to expand...

On quality I regard both as best 15-25 guys in this pool. And had the season gone ahead, I may well rate one or the other much higher, or much lower depending on rate of improvement this year which is the unknown that makes selecting either so risky when that's perhaps the most important variable in calculation of upside by position at their heights.

Where do they both likely go? There is top-10 talk surrounding both and for Collingwood it would require a trade with Essendon to get one or the other most likely.

Cox I favour of the two and consider the better and more advanced footballer. Both have impressive skills, but Cox is the better athlete and can do more both up the field and forward of centre. Reid is a key defender or ruck, though for mine is best as a key defender. Cox could be anything from a key back, to key forward to a wing. Probably a bit light to play ruck and not sure he ever develops that body where that would be what I'd want from him. Cox I feel like probably also settles in defence with his kick and run from defence, in addition to his intercepting suggesting that's probably his spot, though as a tall wing if his contested marking expands - given he's an incredible speed and endurance athlete, he could really become something there.
 
Psicosis said:
This is some of the worst analysis of North I’ve read this year, and in a year that we finished 17th and crucified by the media, that is truly saying something.

In regards to cutting our defensive stocks “so deep”. Pittard, Macmillan, VW, Durdin & Williams have all been cut and will not be picked up by any of the other 17 clubs, does that not just say it all? All these players are either injury plagued or poorly skilled, in modern footy you need to be able to use the ball well coming out of the back half, these players don’t. You also neglected to mention the recruitment of Corr.

HB - Mcdonald - Corr - Perez
FB - Tarrant - McKay - Hayden/Young
Click to expand...
This is probably the worst back 6 in the AFL.
 
The German Hunter said:
You guys come on Knightmares page expecting him to paint a glorious picture of what a great list North have. It’s laughable really.
Why don’t you guys take your wonderful appraisals back to the North board
Click to expand...
Exactly lol.

Kinda hilarious when a bunch of delusional posters supporting one of the most hopeless lists in the AFL, what, you expect Knightmare to lie about your situation and make you feel better?
 
briztoon said:
You should go read the last page of our trade thread, as there is a current discussion about Ben Keays.

As for the NEAFL in 2019.

Our senior team was very settled in 2019, with very, very few injuries.

So our reserves team was at full strength the whole season.

The NEAFL was basically a walk in the park the whole season, with most teams giving up by half time.

We blew the second placed team out of the water late in the season by 10 goals, barely getting out of first gear.

I wouldn’t read anything in to any stats from the NEAFL in 2019.

Due to our depth of talls, Ballenden played across all three lines, being our primary back up ruck, as he was the least capable of our tall players.
Click to expand...

You can win a game of footy by a lot, but you can still track contest for contest what happens. And there are moments that can be worth taking from that.

Talking talls, Josh Walker was another last offseason, and again I was screaming from the rooftops, someone go get him, and he's someone North Melbourne did well adding and is an able component for them. So Brisbane actually did have a good mix of talls in the NEAFL even.

With the likes of Walker and Keays running around in the 2s. That's why I was watching Brisbane's NEAFL side. Looking at how Ballenden is tracking. Watching McFadyen who I like and feel can come good. Watching the Academy prospects when they're there. If I'm tracking a state league side and watching them frequently as I did with Brisbane particularly in 2019, it's purposeful watching. There are guys I want to watch.

Wooller is a good key forward and is one where I feel like he could join a state league side next year and prove in a better competition to be someone. I had a long think about including him in my delisted free agency video, but felt he was just outside the calibre of player I'd want as a key forward for me, but not far off as someone I view as more likely good depth than that optimal long term best 22 guy.

I'd definitely agree with you in suggesting Ballenden isn't as advanced as those guys.

On the other hand. Ballenden is better than Payne in 2019 and still prefer him to Payne. Better than Fullarton and again still prefer him. I like him to the much older Eagles. I feel like he'll reach a higher level than McStay if he gets that continuity of role, with McStay someone I'd class as someone I'd rather not have to play, and if I had to play him, it would be as a key back rather than key forward. Sam Skinner - always hurt so didn't offer any value. So I don't rate him as that worst tall from 2019. Ballenden just lacked opportunity to play consistently where he is best suited. Give a tall continuity of position and role and they'll play their best footy. KPPs need to know what is expected of them and have the opportunity to do their thing every week. So I'm definitely not going to categorise Ballenden as Brisbane's worst tall. He's not in that conversation for me. I'm looking at him as very much untapped.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

G
Phantom Draft Goodoil's Phantom Draft
2 3
Replies
68
Views
8K
Futbolista
Futbolista
DQ 4EVER
Phantom Draft Phantom Drafts Advent Calendar
Replies
2
Views
795
RedmanWasHere
RedmanWasHere
Davo-27
Phantom Draft Davo-27's 2025 Draft Thread
2 3 4
Replies
77
Views
8K
Davo-27
Davo-27
G
Club Focus Goodoil's Draft Grades
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Richo83
R
RedmanWasHere
Resource AFL Draft Injury Thread and Updates.
Replies
0
Views
98
RedmanWasHere
RedmanWasHere
I Wouldnt But Greenwood
Struzyna & Doecke 2024 Phantom Draft Edition.
Replies
22
Views
2K
THE_GUN
THE_GUN
noobermensch
Resource Noob's 2025 Draft Prospect Video Thread
Replies
9
Views
598
noobermensch
noobermensch

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top