Draft Watcher Knightmare's 2017 Draft Almanac

[richoatthedisco]

Extended Power Rankings

21. Lochie O’Brien

22. Gryan Miers

23. James Worpel

24. Ben Paton

25. Callum Coleman-Jones

26. Jarrod Brander

27. Sam Hayes

28. Sam Taylor

29. Cassidy Parish

30. Tim Kelly

31. Liam Ryan

32. Oscar Clavarino

33. Jack Payne (Brisbane – Academy)

34. Charlie Thompson

35. Jordan Houlahan

36. Brent Daniels

37. Lachlan Fogarty

38. Ed Richards

39. Aidan Bonar

40. Ryley Stoddart

41. Toby Wooller

42. Oskar Baker

43. Bailey Banfield

44. Hamish Brayshaw

45. Haiden Schloithe

46. Jack Petruccelle

47. Brandon Starcevich

48. Dylan Moore

49. Nathan Murphy

50. Jake Patmore

Naish not in your top 50???

 

[Inzy7]

Who would you say were the best overlooked players?

 

[gillo94]

My final phantom draft is up: http://www.espn.com.au/afl/story/_/...every-round-knightmare-full-afl-phantom-draft

Knightmare
Which duo from the top 10 can be more damaging in your opinions and which duo in order do you like the most for years to come

Brayshaw/Cerra
Dow/O’Brien
Clark/Coffield

 

[Sweet Jesus]

West Coast taking a tall instead of a midfielder would be stupid. They have one of the worst midfields in the AFL but great tall forwards.

WC went one better. They took two tall forwards. Check mate.

 

[Knightmare]

Apologies for not being able to get on here and respond sooner. The last through days as you can probably imagine have been hectic!

Hi KM,
I've been watching a little bit of footage trying my hand at doing my own rankings and was hoping I could get some advice. I've been paying attention to vision of Cerra lately and have loved some of his delivery into the forward 50 in matches, he seems to weigh his kicks extremely well. What I find is I question some of his kicks out of the defensive 50. At times these are great but I can't help notice there are moments when he seems to kick into space and it's only that his teammates realise that the kick is within marking range that they run on to it and mark the ball. To me it seems like he's a little lucky at these times where it looks like a great kick. Have you thought the same at times?

I also wanted to understand your view on Dow as you've rated Cerra above him (I've got them the other way around)? From memory there was a time earlier in the year where you had Dow at 2 but I don't remember Cerra being ranked higher than 3. Was there a main contributing factor to pushing him above Dow when you did your final rankings?

Limited sample with Cerra given how few games he has played. Most of his ball has been through the midfield. I imagine you're looking at some vision of Cerra?

I've found his placement out in front (either to lead onto or run onto going towards goal) on his kicks and vision both to be strengths. I haven't seen much of Cerra coming out of the back half, as it's not where he predominantly has played, but his kicking isn't something I find concerning.

I'll add a question. All players have weakness's but to me Cerra has a glaring one which he shares with Constable. That is that he just doesn't get on the move and often faces pressure or even contact when he has the ball. This has nothing to do with pace as lots of elite players have nice natural movement around the contest. What I do like is that Cerra does dispose of the ball under pressure, but that is usually after he has had a fair bit of time treading water on the ball. In the AFL he could to lose a ton of decision time with his style of play.

Knight, do you agree with the above concerns. And if so, you dont seem to put much weight on this weakness with you elevating his rank rather then dropping it

Cerra moves well and he does cover more ground in game than Constable. He does not share the same pace/endurance issues of Charlie and does hit the ball more on the move.

KM (& others), I know this is a left field type of question, but I am interested where you would put a fit 2014 Paul Ahern in this years draft?

I never rated Ahern all that highly and given he has missed the past two seasons with a knee he would be for mine a late/rookie choice if in this years draft.

Knightmare do you think the Tigers favor Hayes or Coleman-Jones more?
If the Tigers can land Brander it would be another win for the Tigers in 2017

The answer is now clearly known as to who Richmond favoured of Coleman-Jones v Hayes. Can't say I knew going into the draft.

Brander was going to Richmond at 17 or 20. WCE also wanted Brander and jumped in earlier at 13 to ensure they got their guy. I sensed WCE would take Brander if there at 21, as they like their types who have had strong junior careers and had good underage years, but I was expecting others to be favoured at 13 to Brander.

any news on matt guelfi's chances?

Was considered a chance. Didn't pick it, but drafted.

 

[Knightmare]

GWS academy prospect Jack Powell seems to have fallen off the radar a bit, he a chance at a late pick or more likely rookie?

Don't know whether GWS have or will commit to him via their academy, I'm sure someone will tell me if he is, but he has spoken to three clubs and should go as a rookie.

Who is your best bet for Carlton at 10 as it stands at the moment, cheers

With Fogarty getting through to 10, he was in the moment my pick. But not expecting him to get through, Lochie O'Brien and Ed Richards were the two being spoken about with Carlton looking for pace at that choice. O'Brien as predicted in my phantom draft the choice.

Why take Cerra at 2 and lose LDU when you could have both? Unless for some obscure reason they don't have LDU in their top 5? Flight risk maybe?

The late talk was Fremantle wanted Cerra and Brayshaw, rating both ahead of LDU. They got their pair, and could have gone in either order, but figured it would be safer to go Brayshaw first, with North probably more likely to take Brayshaw than Cerra based on having a slow midfield.

West Coast taking a tall instead of a midfielder would be stupid. They have one of the worst midfields in the AFL but great tall forwards.

They took two with their first two picks as it turns out. Rating both Brander and Allen as their two best available's with those two choices.

The issue for West Coast is that Kennedy is 30 and they need some new key forwards. Good ones are hard to find, and West Coast found two with their first two picks they clearly like.

So surely they'd take Allen, no? Local kid and he's the better player?

I'm not trying to piss in your pocket. I'm just wondering what might commend Brander over Allen. Versatility? Genuine KPP height?

Allen has the production on the board. Best for his side in the Under-18 All-Star game and also won the Larke Medal for the best player during the Under-18 Championships.

Brander by contrast averaged one goal per game and just the 10 disposals, 4.667 marks and 1 goal per game + struggled so badly in the 1st quarter down back v Lukosius during the U18 Championships that the Allies had to remove Brander from the matchup and find an alternative matchup for Lukosius.

Overall Brander lacks the consistency marking overhead and also hasn't performed as consistently. By contrast, Allen has the performances on the board at all levels and is the more reliable mark overhead, both are good at ground level but Allen is slightly better. Allen also has hit the scoreboard more leading the U18 Champs for goals kicked.

Allen is the clearly better player (on performance in 2017).

West Coast just wanted Brander more - clearly liking what he showed in 2016 and viewing him more as a genuine key position player, with Allen at 191cm on the short side by position.

Everyone seems to have the Lions linked to the same 3 players two forwards in Rayner Fogarty and Bailey who I know nothing about never looked less forward to a draft than this year normally I love the draft

We were mostly right. Fogarty made the most sense and there was no other midfielder that seemed to make sense, knowing that Brisbane wanted the three midfielders/non-kpps. Turns out to the surprise of us all, Brisbane had their eyes on Starcevich who while he doesn't have the numbers has the attributes to potentially develop.

I have seen Raynor compared to at least a dozen players, admittedly i have only seen highlights tapes but to me the player he reminds me the most of is Brad Johnson, KM do you think this is an accurate account or are some of the other comparisons like Jamie Elliot, Heeney, Petracca, Young GAJ etc more accurate.

Johnson is a pretty good comparison really in terms of who he may develop into with time. He won't step into the midfield right away, but there are similarities in terms of the types of things they can do forward of centre. Martin/Petracca/Johnson/Gray are all suitable comparisons.

He's most likely to become something like what Petracca is likely to develop into, and follow a similar developmental pathway.

Hey KM, how confident are you that Freo take Cerra over LDU with Pick 2? Is there still a lot of movement going around at the top end of the draft? Cheers.

It was looking more likely than likely that Fremantle would not take LDU, with the talk that Fremantle wanted the Cerra/Brayshaw pairing. They just manipulated the order to ensure the picks went based on their draft order as smoothly as possible.

Do you have the pies taking Fog on any mail or just a feeling?

I had the Pies taking Fogarty but the talk on draft day was that Collingwood would take Stephenson. There were lots of hints throughout the day, not in the least coming from Scott Pendlebury who stated that Collingwood would surprise with their pick.

Wow - you really think we get LDU? I won’t get my hopes up too high.

Fremantle liked Brayshaw/Cerra. So that's why it happened with Carlton seeming to rate Dow highest overall, as was the talk throughout the week.

 

[Knightmare]

Naish not in your top 50???

Nope.

Numbers not enough averaging only 19 disposals in the TAC Cup and not winning enough of the contested ball. Skills lack consistency. Overall there are plainly others I much prefer based on performance.

Who would you say were the best overlooked players?

No one I expected to see feature in the first half of the draft was overlooked, so there wasn't anyone I was sure would get drafted, that got overlooked, which is unusual, but maybe the draft rumours I was listening to were pretty good this year?

As per my extended power rankings.

Jordan Butts, Cassidy Parish, Charlie Thompson, Bailey Banfield and Haiden Schloithe are the best players not picked, and those only undrafted players from my top 50, though I didn't expect Parish or Thompson to get picked up coming into the draft, as two of the better performed but lesser regarded players this year.

 

[Knightmare]

Knightmare
Which duo from the top 10 can be more damaging in your opinions and which duo in order do you like the most for years to come

Brayshaw/Cerra
Dow/O’Brien
Clark/Coffield

An interesting question.

I'd back Brayshaw and Cerra. Cerra was my highest rated of these (ever so marginally to Dow, I could have gone either way in my rankings), and Brayshaw was my third highest rated. Both are high probability of an AFL career and can be long term mids.

O'Brien I'm not as certain on with his contested ball winning a question-mark.

Clark's decision making and Coffield's ball winning capabilities are also question-marks.

Which places those three behind Cerra/Dow/Brayshaw.

 

[Knightmare]

AFL Draft winners and losers: http://www.espn.com.au/afl/story/_/id/21543047/knightmare-2017-afl-draft-winners-losers

 

[ShueLike]

Hey KM, interested to hear your opinion on Ainsworth. I'm liking the look of him.

 

[Chris25]

Collingwood get two players you rated at #11 and #49. And one you said you wouldn't draft. They get a B and would be 'stoked'.

Fremantle get two players you rated at #3 and #8. They get a D+.

Yeah that makes sense.

 

[Knightmare]

Hey KM, interested to hear your opinion on Ainsworth. I'm liking the look of him.

Overage mid. Strong contested ball winner who can burst out of the contest. Performed strongly in WAFL reserves. Went a touch higher than expected, but potentially developable.

 

[jackess]

Drafting players highly rated by phantom drafters but not rated by actual professional recruiters doesn't necessarily mean they drafted well.

 

[Knightmare]

Collingwood get two players you rated at #11 and #49. And one you said you wouldn't draft. They get a B and would be 'stoked'.

Fremantle get two players you rated at #3 and #8. They get a D+.

Yeah that makes sense.

Collingwood had players they rated at 3 and somewhere around 6 with picks 6 and 38. That is why they are "stoked". That is a comment with regard only to Collingwood's feelings about how they drafted, rather than my own. I suspect they are not alone in the feeling that Collingwood secured value, with the majority of phantom drafters predicting Murphy would feature inside the first round, I suspect other reviews will grade Collingwood more positively than I did. All three of Stephenson, Murphy and Brown were in my view taken in appropriate draft ranges. With regard to my views on Tyler Brown, I was never going to take him in the bigfooty official phantom draft when there were players inside my top 50 I knew would be available. If I was to tier my power rankings. I had a clear top four, five and six I rated similarly, then 7-11 range that next tier down. 40-50 was my other tier. Had Brown been bid on and matched before pick 38, I would have come down hard on Collingwood. Likewise if they had taken Murphy at 6.

With regard to Fremantle's picks. It is a review of all picks. Not just the first two. Of Fremantle's last six picks, none were rated inside my top 50. With the likes of Worpel, Paton, Crossley and Miers all available at 44. And the likes of Jordan Butts, Haiden Schloithe, Cassidy Parish and Charlie Thompson going undrafted. Fremantle still had opportunities to take players who I rated favourably. The top picks were not overly impressive either. Fremantle had a shot at LDU and D.Fogarty with 2/5, as two possible best in draft players and one in Fogarty who was an ideal list fit. Brayshaw was two tiers below my top four and in my view taken earlier than he should have. LDU who was the best available player was also overlooked by Fremantle. D.Fogarty is another with best in draft potential and he also was overlooked.

 

[Chris25]

So Collingwood drafted well because of how they rated the players, not how you did.

Fremantle drafted poorly because of how you rated the players, not how they did.

Just seems like you're changing the rules as you go. Fremantle got two consensus top 5 players, that alone gets higher than a D+. We could have passed on all our remaining selections, and they'd still have done well. Considering most of our picks were after 60, we drafted about as well as we could. None of the players you listed would have been good fits for Fremantle anyway. A couple wold be lucky to be rookie listed.

Oh well, everyone gets an opinion.

 

[redcan81]

hey km love your work mate. just like to say im stoked with the fogarty steal in the draft! do you think he has the potential to maybe turn into a fyfe like player for us? also wondering how many rookie picks the crows have and who.you think they may select on monday

 

[chels]

Thank you for your phantoms and comments KM. I enjoy the knowledge and thought process you employ.

Chris25 I enjoy the quality of your thoughtful views and the passion you have for Freemantle.

Let's not lose sight that all the forecasts and comments are opinions rather than fact. Informed debate is healthy,

 

[Knightmare]

hey km love your work mate. just like to say im stoked with the fogarty steal in the draft! do you think he has the potential to maybe turn into a fyfe like player for us? also wondering how many rookie picks the crows have and who.you think they may select on monday

Adelaide secured great value with Fogarty. He could be anything.

He's something like a Jake Stringer in that he has all the attributes and could become anything. Has the explosive run when he's up and healthy, long damaging kick, can win it in the contest and also take a grab up front or behind the play.

My hope is in time he develops more into that big bodied midfielder.

I don't see Fyfe's ceiling and sheer contested possession and clearance numbers. But he certainly has the scope to be a weapon through the midfield.

If I'm not mistaken, Adelaide have 39 senior listed players (someone correct me if wrong) and have just the two senior listed players.

With clubs able to have 40 (senior listed players)/4 (rookies), 39/5 or 38/6. Adelaide should have three rookie choices.

As for who Adelaide pick. Jackson Edwards will be one since he got through. The other two are unclear. Stefan Giro has been linked to Adelaide, similarly Alex Martini, both being South Australians, to give you a couple of names.

 

[Cobbler]

Collingwood had players they rated at 3 and somewhere around 6 with picks 6 and 38. That is why they are "stoked". That is a comment with regard only to Collingwood's feelings about how they drafted, rather than my own. I suspect they are not alone in the feeling that Collingwood secured value, with the majority of phantom drafters predicting Murphy would feature inside the first round, I suspect other reviews will grade Collingwood more positively than I did. All three of Stephenson, Murphy and Brown were in my view taken in appropriate draft ranges. With regard to my views on Tyler Brown, I was never going to take him in the bigfooty official phantom draft when there were players inside my top 50 I knew would be available. If I was to tier my power rankings. I had a clear top four, five and six I rated similarly, then 7-11 range that next tier down. 40-50 was my other tier. Had Brown been bid on and matched before pick 38, I would have come down hard on Collingwood. Likewise if they had taken Murphy at 6.

With regard to Fremantle's picks. It is a review of all picks. Not just the first two. Of Fremantle's last six picks, none were rated inside my top 50. With the likes of Worpel, Paton, Crossley and Miers all available at 44. And the likes of Jordan Butts, Haiden Schloithe, Cassidy Parish and Charlie Thompson going undrafted. Fremantle still had opportunities to take players who I rated favourably. The top picks were not overly impressive either. Fremantle had a shot at LDU and D.Fogarty with 2/5, as two possible best in draft players and one in Fogarty who was an ideal list fit. Brayshaw was two tiers below my top four and in my view taken earlier than he should have. LDU who was the best available player was also overlooked by Fremantle. D.Fogarty is another with best in draft potential and he also was overlooked.

Seems like an excessively long response.

Could've just said you don't like Freo.

 

[Knightmare]

Seems like an excessively long response.

Could've just said you don't like Freo.

I gave Fremantle an "A" for their efforts during trade week. Crediting Fremantle for the additions of Wilson and Matera while also crediting Fremantle for winning the Weller deal.

Overall, despite a sub-optimal draft with some wasted late picks, I view Fremantle's offseason as a relatively positive leaning one, as I overall place a greater weighting on moves made through the trade and free agency period than I do the draft.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

Fremantle got two consensus top 5 players, that alone gets higher than a D+.

Pointless as rating drafts immediately is, I don't follow. With two top 5 picks you would bloody hope you got two consensus top 5 players. Doing what is expected is a middling result, a C or so, so entirely plausible the rest of the draft drags it down. You want a good internet score, you need to draft better than your position suggests you would.

 

[Cobbler]

I gave Fremantle an "A" for their efforts during trade week. Crediting Fremantle for the additions of Wilson and Matera while also crediting Fremantle for winning the Weller deal.

Overall, despite a sub-optimal draft with some wasted late picks, I view Fremantle's offseason as a relatively positive leaning one, as I overall place a greater weighting on moves made through the trade and free agency period than I do the draft.

Everyone gave Freo an A during trade week.
Many have given us decent ratings for our draft too, but you essentially said we failed. Certainly had us as the worse performed on draft night.

All good. It's opinion based business and enjoy your posts. But how some clubs get an A or B with limited picks and we get a D+ doesn't really compute.

For what it's worth picks after 40 can be viewed with a grain of salt and history has shown we do ok with them.

We passed on many you viewed should've gone higher... yet Freo get the D+? What about all the teams before us that passed on them??

Anyway. All good. I enjoy your work.

 

[Chris25]

Pointless as rating drafts immediately is, I don't follow. With two top 5 picks you would bloody hope you got two consensus top 5 players. Doing what is expected is a middling result, a C or so, so entirely plausible the rest of the draft drags it down. You want a good internet score, you need to draft better than your position suggests you would.

A good player is a good player.

Can hardly draft better than your position suggests you would when you're picking in the top 5. That would make every top 10 pick an average pick.

And most accept that our later picks were quite good for where we were picking.

 

[nightstalker]

AFL Draft winners and losers: http://www.espn.com.au/afl/story/_/id/21543047/knightmare-2017-afl-draft-winners-losers

Carlton a d+ collingwood b wow what a joke and you rate GC a b+ i would give them A BIG D.

 

[Knightmare]

Everyone gave Freo an A during trade week.
Many have given us decent ratings for our draft too, but you essentially said we failed. Certainly had us as the worse performed on draft night.

All good. It's opinion based business and enjoy your posts. But how some clubs get an A or B with limited picks and we get a D+ doesn't really compute.

For what it's worth picks after 40 can be viewed with a grain of salt and history has shown we do ok with them.

We passed on many you viewed should've gone higher... yet Freo get the D+? What about all the teams before us that passed on them??

Anyway. All good. I enjoy your work.

It's all around value per pick and assessing the performance of each club based on those available at the picks. Understanding in the grading that if you enter the draft in the 40s, you're expecting someone rated closer to that point. Whereas those with high end picks, it's judging based on those alternatives available and whether they took the best player there or not.

Fremantle didn't pick duds with Cerra or Brayshaw. Nor did Carlton with Dow. Brayshaw was sub-optimal value given the other options available (based on my analysis) and those players picked later by Carlton and Fremantle didn't do anything for me, with all those other players chosen outside my top 60 power rankings.