Draft Watcher Knightmare's 2017 Draft Almanac

[GUMBLETRON]

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.

Be that as it may, the only way of gauging a draft is on how well you've done compared to your position. Otherwise, the higher the picks, the higher the ranking, purely based on available talent, which is utterly pointless.

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

How dull the world would be if we all agreed.

 

[Knightmare]

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

Crossley, pick 52 via Academy I evaluate the best ruckman in the draft class (rated 17 in my power rankings).

Ballard has the scope to be as good as any key forward in the draft and represents potentially incredible value at 42 (rated 18 in my power rankings).

Had Gold Coast picked someone more highly touted at 19 while still gaining this pairing later on, they may have been one of my A+ rated sides, with the value per pick they acquired.

 

[Chris25]

How dull the world would be if we all agreed.

Absolutely. That's why I'm doing my best to make things here as un-dull as possible.

 

[Cobbler]

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.

Fair enough.
Freo picked Dixon at 44. We clearly went for a key forward and we thought he was best fit at 44.
Which genuine forward did you have that we could've picked at 44?

Saying we missed Fogarty at 5 which was a 'needs' (by the way about 5 other clubs passed on him after us) but then saying we missed a whole stack of smalls you rated highly at 44 is contradictory.

Interested.

 

[Jazny]

Absolutely. That's why I'm doing my best to make things here as un-dull as possible.

Pick 44 was a good pick

 

[Cobbler]

What's also contradictory is that we missed all these guys that you rated but remained undrafted.
Wouldn't that mean they weren't rated by anyone? Thus everyone that didn't bring in these guys also suffer the same ranking as every club had the chance to pick up these guys.

Like I said it an opinion business.

 

[Knightmare]

How dull the world would be if we all agreed.

If everyone was agreeing with my perspectives, I'd be wondering if I'm the only person heading along to games every week.

It's an industry you need your own individual opinions on. Otherwise you'd never identify anyone the next person isn't.

 

[Knightmare]

Fair enough.
Freo picked Dixon at 44. We clearly went for a key forward and we thought he was best fit at 44.
Which genuine forward did you have that we could've picked at 44?

Saying we missed Fogarty at 5 which was a 'needs' (by the way about 5 other clubs passed on him after us) but then saying we missed a whole stack of smalls you rated highly at 44 is contradictory.

Interested.

The best key position player in my view remaining at 44, and he has yet to be chosen, is Jordan Butts. He's the youngest in the draft. Averaged a TAC Cup high 7.5 marks per game. Terrific at either end. I favour him as a key back, but as a key forward I'd still take him over Dixon with his marking, leading patterns, endurance and running in general far better.

What's also contradictory is that we missed all these guys that you rated but remained undrafted.
Wouldn't that mean they weren't rated by anyone? Thus everyone that didn't bring in these guys also suffer the same ranking as every club had the chance to pick up these guys.

Like I said it an opinion business.

It's based on my opinion, rather than the industry consensus.

Had a club taken say Cassidy Parish (rated 29 in my extended power rankings) I would been giving whichever club took him big props. Same goes with Charlie Thompson (34 in my extended power rankings).

They're among the variances in my opinion from the industry consensus, but if I feel a club has secured someone I rate much higher than the pick they go, I'm going to regard that pick highly.

 

[nightstalker]

Crossley, pick 52 via Academy I evaluate the best ruckman in the draft class (rated 17 in my power rankings).

Ballard has the scope to be as good as any key forward in the draft and represents potentially incredible value at 42 (rated 18 in my power rankings).

Had Gold Coast picked someone more highly touted at 19 while still gaining this pairing later on, they may have been one of my A+ rated sides, with the value per pick they acquired.

Sos drafted Carlton needs to a T. drafted Dow at 3 with beautiful inside speed and ball winning abilities, lochie obrien with excellent out side speed with one of the best lethal left foot kicks in this draft, Tom de koning a athletic ruck/ forward who went pick 30 was not rated as high due to missing most of the second half of the year with a lacerated kidney and his a raw talent. Pick 78 Jarrod Garlett was pick 15 in 2014 draft left afl due to brother having months to live. still 21 years old cant take his talent away from this kid he is still a star and you give them a d+. and Ballard kicked 1 goal in 5 game, he would be better as a key defender as he is great with intercept marking and good defensive pressure

 

[Dunny82]

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.

Hi KM,
Yeah I've only been able to watch what I can find on youtube so the vision available probably isn't that great to form an opinion off. It's only this year that I thought I'd try having a go at watching some games, seeing what opinion I can form of the draftees and having a go at doing some rankings.

I noticed it a couple of times in his match against SA in the first quarter when the play was in the back half of the ground. On those occasions I noted that rather than kicking to a teammate he kicked in between 2 contests, I'm guessing with the goal of getting a teammate to run on to the ball. I don't see this as an issue when kicking forward as it gives the crumbers a chance at goal if the ball hits the deck but I think it may be an unnecessary risk at causing a turnover in the middle of the ground. I could be completely wrong though so it's interesting hearing from someone more experienced.

Also, out of interest what made you put Cerra above Dow in your final rankings?

 

[Cobbler]

The best key position player in my view remaining at 44, and he has yet to be chosen, is Jordan Butts. He's the youngest in the draft. Averaged a TAC Cup high 7.5 marks per game. Terrific at either end. I favour him as a key back, but as a key forward I'd still take him over Dixon with his marking, leading patterns, endurance and running in general far better.



It's based on my opinion, rather than the industry consensus.

Had a club taken say Cassidy Parish (rated 29 in my extended power rankings) I would been giving whichever club took him big props. Same goes with Charlie Thompson (34 in my extended power rankings).

They're among the variances in my opinion from the industry consensus, but if I feel a club has secured someone I rate much higher than the pick they go, I'm going to regard that pick highly.

No worries. I get it.

We'll see how Dixon goes. No expectations. One thing that's a certainty is that he's going better then Jordan Butts right now.

 

[db26]

Gday Knightmare just on the tigers really happy with our picks Higgins just reminds me of a player with great footy smarts and good in everything he does .What I like about our picks there versatile not set on one position.Rapt with Miller at 64.I think Balta can't have a better player then Rance to teach him in defence if he goes there.Coleman -Jones you have liked for while.

 

[Knightmare]

Sos drafted Carlton needs to a T. drafted Dow at 3 with beautiful inside speed and ball winning abilities, lochie obrien with excellent out side speed with one of the best lethal left foot kicks in this draft, Tom de koning a athletic ruck/ forward who went pick 30 was not rated as high due to missing most of the second half of the year with a lacerated kidney and his a raw talent. Pick 78 Jarrod Garlett was pick 15 in 2014 draft left afl due to brother having months to live. still 21 years old cant take his talent away from this kid he is still a star and you give them a d+. and Ballard kicked 1 goal in 5 game, he would be better as a key defender as he is great with intercept marking and good defensive pressure

Dow is a solid choice at 3.

O'Brien at 10 has the pace - kicking is his best quality and he may be the best kick in the draft even. What concerns me is his contested ball winning which is not of the level I would expect of a top 10 choice.

De Koning moves well for someone his height and is capable at ground level. His overhead marking though is the worst of any key tall taken in the draft. He drops as many marks as he takes. I lack optimism that he can develop into anything.

Jarrod Garlett was an interesting choice. For the record, I don't mind it. If he wants it, he is one with the scope to make it. He's just one as a rookie I wouldn't have said no to given he has the pace and x-factor when up and going, but in the national draft I'm not sure I would have taken the chance.

Hi KM,
Yeah I've only been able to watch what I can find on youtube so the vision available probably isn't that great to form an opinion off. It's only this year that I thought I'd try having a go at watching some games, seeing what opinion I can form of the draftees and having a go at doing some rankings.

I noticed it a couple of times in his match against SA in the first quarter when the play was in the back half of the ground. On those occasions I noted that rather than kicking to a teammate he kicked in between 2 contests, I'm guessing with the goal of getting a teammate to run on to the ball. I don't see this as an issue when kicking forward as it gives the crumbers a chance at goal if the ball hits the deck but I think it may be an unnecessary risk at causing a turnover in the middle of the ground. I could be completely wrong though so it's interesting hearing from someone more experienced.

Also, out of interest what made you put Cerra above Dow in your final rankings?

That whole top four I had clumped together and found near impossible to separate at the top of my power rankings (Rayner/LDU/Cerra/Dow). They're all exceptional.

I could have gone either way but gave the slightest of edges to Cerra. Dow has the explosiveness edge on Cerra, but Cerra I favoured based on his better ball use and greater composure in traffic.

Gday Knightmare just on the tigers really happy with our picks Higgins just reminds me of a player with great footy smarts and good in everything he does .What I like about our picks there versatile not set on one position.Rapt with Miller at 64.I think Balta can't have a better player then Rance to teach him in defence if he goes there.Coleman -Jones you have liked for while.

Coleman-Jones is solid and gives Richmond options. I'd favour him as a relieving ruckman who mostly plays forward and shares the load behind Nankervis. He'll clunk his contested marks up forward and find plenty of the ball through the ruck.

Balta could be anything, at either end. Big bodied midfielder? He has the capacity to be anything. I like him most as a key forward, and he could learn his craft from Riewoldt and learn just as easily from playing on Rance. He gives Richmond a lot of options.

Higgins is round one ready and I'd be looking to place him into the senior side, along with Shai Bolton who I also rate, ahead of a few premiership players. Blasphemy?

Miller I'm not as high on as others, late draft is right for me. But he has the athleticism, size and really moves well with ball in hand. He's a wildcard who is another as a KPP where if he keeps improving and starts hitting the scoreboard more up forward, he could surprise.

 

[Cobbler]

Just so I get it sort of straight.

Let's say you rated Brayshaw at 8 and we took him at 2. Technically this gives us a negative 6 rating etc etc?

Because we took guys that you didn't rate is a large reason as to why we got a D+.

If that's the case I totally get it and fair enough. At least you have a previous ranking etc as to how you grade.

If it's just 'your hunch' rating like other pundits, then that's truly opinion.

If the former, I can't argue.

If we had taken Hayes at 44 our ranking would've been higher as you viewed him highly?

Because you nailed most of who we were going to pick in Brayshaw, Cerra, Dixon later and Jones earlier.

So again it's not who we got, but where we got them and relative to your pre-draft rankings.

I don't mind it. Good job.

 

[6yearsold]

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.

gives yourself a day off. free and carl were the two worst performers.

 

[Purpellian Anchor]

The best key position player in my view remaining at 44, and he has yet to be chosen, is Jordan Butts. He's the youngest in the draft. Averaged a TAC Cup high 7.5 marks per game. Terrific at either end. I favour him as a key back, but as a key forward I'd still take him over Dixon with his marking, leading patterns, endurance and running in general far better.


It's based on my opinion, rather than the industry consensus.

Had a club taken say Cassidy Parish (rated 29 in my extended power rankings) I would been giving whichever club took him big props. Same goes with Charlie Thompson (34 in my extended power rankings).

They're among the variances in my opinion from the industry consensus, but if I feel a club has secured someone I rate much higher than the pick they go, I'm going to regard that pick highly.

Ah you had me worried...stirring up an anti Freo sentiment with a D+ apparently. Your explanation I understand but perhaps you may have assessed a little differently if you had heard LLoyd's summary prior to your assessment re what was looked for with each pic, who was looked at, and why they were picked.
The Freo recruitment specific is best available for the most identified need.

Butts and Krueger yes....and there is no doubt that they would have picked either of them and Sam Hayes too....so why did they not? It is because of other factors for sure after due diligence.

One thing you overlooked in your comparison of Butts v's Dixon, and that is defensive pressure and creating opportunites to those around through contested possession. Dixon well ahedad of Butts in this crucial area as a CHF.
My opinion granted

 

[Knightmare]

Just so I get it sort of straight.

Let's say you rated Brayshaw at 8 and we took him at 2. Technically this gives us a negative 6 rating etc etc?

Because we took guys that you didn't rate is a large reason as to why we got a D+.

If that's the case I totally get it and fair enough. At least you have a previous ranking etc as to how you grade.

If it's just 'your hunch' rating like other pundits, then that's truly opinion.

If the former, I can't argue.

If we had taken Hayes at 44 our ranking would've been higher as you viewed him highly?

Because you nailed most of who we were going to pick in Brayshaw, Cerra, Dixon later and Jones earlier.

So again it's not who we got, but where we got them and relative to your pre-draft rankings.

I don't mind it. Good job.

If I was to number crunch, I would do so more from a multiplication perspective. eg. Brayshaw x.25, Cerra x1.2 ect and continue that on with all prospects. Whipping it up last night though, I didn't spend that much time doing the maths. I just know where I rate players if I'm to keep extending my draft board out and which picks I liked, which ones I don't and overall how much I like each clubs picks based on my own power rankings.

My power rankings are on page one (including my top 50 prospects).

My phantom draft of course is the prediction of where I see players going based on what the industry was saying, with many of those players I had going to Fremantle rumoured or types Fremantle were expected to target.

Ah you had me worried...stirring up an anti Freo sentiment with a D+ apparently. Your explanation I understand but perhaps you may have assessed a little differently if you had heard LLoyd's summary prior to your assessment re what was looked for with each pic, who was looked at, and why they were picked.
The Freo recruitment specific is best available for the most identified need.

Butts and Krueger yes....and there is no doubt that they would have picked either of them and Sam Hayes too....so why did they not? It is because of other factors for sure after due diligence.

One thing you overlooked in your comparison of Butts v's Dixon, and that is defensive pressure and creating opportunites to those around through contested possession. Dixon well ahedad of Butts in this crucial area as a CHF.
My opinion granted

Hayes is an interesting one for so many to pass on.

He was passed on mostly due to poor endurance and to a lesser extent a relative lack of improvement this season from where he was at in 2016. (Improvement being one of the key indicators with talls, as it's all about particularly with ruckmen who they become when they're 24).

Dixon has areas he's superior to Butts. He has really good football smarts. He's cleaner at ground level. A better user of the footy. I'd also agree on pressure. That said, you can compare anyone at any position and find something they do better than someone else who is more highly regarded.

Why I rate Butts so far ahead of Dixon is based on a combination of production (17.2 disposals per game and 7.5 marks per game), being younger and having greater scope to improve and also having more pronounced and dominating points of difference (marking is dominant on another level).

 

[Purpellian Anchor]

If I was to number crunch, I would do so more from a multiplication perspective. eg. Brayshaw x.25, Cerra x1.2 ect and continue that on with all prospects. Whipping it up last night though, I didn't spend that much time doing the maths. I just know where I rate players if I'm to keep extending my draft board out and which picks I liked, which ones I don't and overall how much I like each clubs picks based on my own power rankings.

My power rankings are on page one (including my top 50 prospects).

My phantom draft of course is the prediction of where I see players going based on what the industry was saying, with many of those players I had going to Fremantle rumoured or types Fremantle were expected to target.



Hayes is an interesting one for so many to pass on.

He was passed on mostly due to poor endurance and to a lesser extent a relative lack of improvement this season from where he was at in 2016. (Improvement being one of the key indicators with talls, as it's all about particularly with ruckmen who they become when they're 24).

Dixon has areas he's superior to Butts. He has really good football smarts. He's cleaner at ground level. A better user of the footy. I'd also agree on pressure. That said, you can compare anyone at any position and find something they do better than someone else who is more highly regarded.

Why I rate Butts so far ahead of Dixon is based on a combination of production (17.2 disposals per game and 7.5 marks per game), being younger and having greater scope to improve and also having more pronounced and dominating points of difference (marking is dominant on another level).

fair enough Do you think the overlooking of Kreuger was simply that he was'nt getting the ball enough?

 

[Knightmare]

fair enough Do you think the overlooking of Kreuger was simply that he was'nt getting the ball enough?

It's a key component with KPPs - finding the footy. Those as juniors who don't find much of it, rarely go on and achieve anything.

I strongly suspect that's exactly why he was overlooked.

Still a rookie chance though. Has more than enough tricks to have clubs thinking about him.

 

[Michael Jezz]

Y

Dow is a solid choice at 3.

O'Brien at 10 has the pace - kicking is his best quality and he may be the best kick in the draft even. What concerns me is his contested ball winning which is not of the level I would expect of a top 10 choice.

De Koning moves well for someone his height and is capable at ground level. His overhead marking though is the worst of any key tall taken in the draft. He drops as many marks as he takes. I lack optimism that he can develop into anything.

Jarrod Garlett was an interesting choice. For the record, I don't mind it. If he wants it, he is one with the scope to make it. He's just one as a rookie I wouldn't have said no to given he has the pace and x-factor when up and going, but in the national draft I'm not sure I would have taken the chance.



That whole top four I had clumped together and found near impossible to separate at the top of my power rankings (Rayner/LDU/Cerra/Dow). They're all exceptional.

I could have gone either way but gave the slightest of edges to Cerra. Dow has the explosiveness edge on Cerra, but Cerra I favoured based on his better ball use and greater composure in traffic.



Coleman-Jones is solid and gives Richmond options. I'd favour him as a relieving ruckman who mostly plays forward and shares the load behind Nankervis. He'll clunk his contested marks up forward and find plenty of the ball through the ruck.

Balta could be anything, at either end. Big bodied midfielder? He has the capacity to be anything. I like him most as a key forward, and he could learn his craft from Riewoldt and learn just as easily from playing on Rance. He gives Richmond a lot of options.

Higgins is round one ready and I'd be looking to place him into the senior side, along with Shai Bolton who I also rate, ahead of a few premiership players. Blasphemy?

Miller I'm not as high on as others, late draft is right for me. But he has the athleticism, size and really moves well with ball in hand. He's a wildcard who is another as a KPP where if he keeps improving and starts hitting the scoreboard more up forward, he could surprise.

Knightmare your rating of Carlton at D+ touches on bias. You even question Garlett at pick 78-a no risk selection. De Konig is beast like and pick 30 in a weak draft. Any less risk than Worpel the turnover merchant? You are entitled to a balanced opinion not a biased opinion

 

[Knightmare]

Y

Knightmare your rating of Carlton at D+ touches on bias. You even question Garlett at pick 78-a no risk selection. De Konig is beast like and pick 30 in a weak draft. Any less risk than Worpel the turnover merchant? You are entitled to a balanced opinion not a biased opinion

A bias towards those who feature in my power rankings? (Worpel at 23). He can turn over the ball, but if he kicks less and handballs more - an easy change. I fully expect he will be fine and make the grade.

De Koning on the other hand wouldn't feature inside my top 80 power rankings. With all the marks he drops, he is not one I would draft in the national draft.

Garlett I like as a talent, but in the national draft is a risk. You're paying him for two years and committing a senior list spot to him. Maintaining the flexibility taking him as a rookie might have been wiser.

 

[adammania9]

Nobody wants to admit it but the Pies did extremely well on draft night. Only fault was passing on our fourth selection rather than selecting a project KPP like Butts or Kreuger.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[raffrox]

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.

Better? What does that mean? Better than what?

Where was Sean Darcy in most rankings last year by the way?

 

[raffrox]

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

I think your methodology for grading is poorly thought out and unclear. Saying Fremantle did the worst in the draft from any kind of real world standard is just a bit weird.

This is clearly an in exact science and Sean Darcy says hi to your draft rankings.

Using your exact rankings to determine some kind of mathematical rank is not going to be an accurate representation.

 

[Stroppy]

The least relevant parts of trade week and draft day are the evaluation grades.
But as supporters we all want immediate vindication that our team did a good job. So the grades are popular and if KM wants to keep his gig with espn he has to do one.

Suspect he puts a lot lot lot less thought into it than anything else draft related.

A+ or D? Come back in 3 or 4 years, especially for those teams with top 10 picks.
You miss one of those and it is a D every day of the week. As a Suns fan, this is known.
You miss two of those in the same draft? F. As a Suns fan, this is also known.