Draft Watcher Knightmare's 2017 Draft Almanac

[footylover18]

Shouldn't the pertinent point be that Knighmare provides a lot of information for this forum to people that otherwise would be far less familiar with prospective draftees than they are.

BUT HOW DARE HE. HE HAS NOWHERE NEAR THE INFO THE CLUBS HAVE.

 

[Chris25]

It seems to me that a couple people are getting their knickers in a knot because a draft blogger gave their club a shitty ranking. Get over it.

Just as much as people getting their knickers in a knot over a draft blogger being questioned. Interesting that KM doesn't seem to mind a bit of debate, he said himself he likes the ESPN shows with contrary opinions. Yet other posters seem to be getting offended for him.

 

[JuniorWatch]

An argument here seems to be...
'You shoudn't rate draftees and clubs draft performances because you don't have the same resources'.
Which is essentially a technocratic one. Only those who are the ones with the maximum amount of information can have an opinion.
Somehow that has worked out politically in Singapore but this is an opinion forum specifically for people with an amateur interest in a range of topics.

If you have a differing view about a player or a clubs draft then I think we she be arguing about the players themselves, their past performances and potential suitability to their designated clubs.

Play the ball and not the man in other words.

 

[footylover18]

Just as much as people getting their knickers in a knot over a draft blogger being questioned. Interesting that KM doesn't seem to mind a bit of debate, he said himself he likes the ESPN shows with contrary opinions. Yet other posters seem to be getting offended for him.

Not at all. Opinions being questioned is absolutely fine. In fact, welcomed.

But the rationale of: Clubs disagree with you so you can't be right!

Is lame.

 

[Chris25]

But the rationale of: Clubs disagree with you so you can't be right!

As opposed to the rationale that clubs disagree with me, so they can't be right.

 

[footylover18]

As opposed to the rationale that clubs disagree with me, so they can't be right.

Nope. I'm sure KM appreciates that he could be wrong. But he has his view.

Again, it is his opinion. It's a unique opinion, and i dont necessarily agree with it at all. But it's his opinion.

Most draft bloggers on here and pro writers suffer majorly from group think. And they will stick to the general consensus view out of fear of being made out to look like a fool. It's akin to managed funds taking large stakes in the large blue chips, they try to hug the index in order to ensure they dont deviate too much from the index, at least on the down side.

You had your view on Stephenson. You stuck with it, quite stubbornly i thought, but you stuck with it. That is ok. Your opinion holds no extra weight than KM's opinion. Just because he has a platform on ESPN to publish his opinions doesnt mean he should stick to the index. Heck, I certainly wouldn't blame him if he did.

 

[Chris25]

Opinions aside, this all started with arbitrary rankings. I merely questioned how Collingwood received such a good grade compared to others, when they clearly reached on all three of their picks (according to KMs own rankings). A point I felt worthy of being debated, given the media typically remains unbiased. It's ballooned from there.

 

[footylover18]

Opinions aside, this all started with arbitrary rankings. I merely questioned how Collingwood received such a good grade compared to others, when they clearly reached on all three of their picks (according to KMs own rankings). A point I felt worthy of being debated, given the media typically remains unbiased. It's ballooned from there.

Ok fair enough. I have only entered the conversation late, at a point where I feel KM is being unfairly treated.

As you rightly pointed out, KM has always been very open and willing to engage in discussion debating his rankings etc.

 

[HedgeFund]

Ok fair enough. I have only entered the conversation late, at a point where I feel KM is being unfairly treated.

As you rightly pointed out, KM has always been very open and willing to engage in discussion debating his rankings etc.

Nothing wrong with robust discussions - as long as we keep it nice, which it appears pretty much everyone has.

 

[Sector 7G]

But to suggest a player who wasn't rookied would have been a better selection than a guy taken at 43? I don't have issue with Knightmare having his own ranking system, but he's essentially saying 18 clubs with professional scouts are wrong.

No he is saying the recruiter who selected the guy 43 is potentially wrong.

We don't know where the other 17 recruiters would have selected that player.
A player like Butts might have been rated highly, but some teams like Carlton that weren't in the market for KPD or like the Saints may have taken KPD they ranked higher with earlier picks so didn't want him.

Until all the teams have to submit a list or their draft order we have no real idea how players are ranked across the board.

Jared Grant is a classic example of how teams rank players differently. Clayton ranked him close to the top of the draft while I know of another club that had him in the mid 20s on their list.

Knightmare should stick to his guns and give his opinion on how the draft went not someone else's. Having said that I too am puzzled how the Pies got a good mark for picking 3 players early than they should have and not addressing needs.

 

[Pie 4 Life]

Conveniently omitting that I openly stated at the time it would probably be about as accurate as Levi Casboult kicking for goal at Blundstone Arena.

Still I got Brayshaw way closer than KM did, (and plenty of others if you bother to have a proper look).

Still can't believe Your Mum didn't find a place on a rookie list. You have no idea sir!

 

[HedgeFund]

Still can't believe Your Mum didn't find a place on a rookie list. You have no idea sir!

Didn’t come across well in the aptitude test or the interview, so all she got was an apple and directions to the train station.

 

[Pie 4 Life]

Didn’t come across well in the aptitude test or the interview, so all she got was an apple and directions to the train station.

Doesn't have a daughter called Stacey by any chance?

 

[HedgeFund]

Doesn't have a daughter called Stacey by any chance?

Yup - she’s eligible for AFLW in a couple of years. She’s “got it going on”.

 

[briztoon]

I respect everyone's right to have an opinion. I find it arrogant to dismiss the opinions and judgements of others, and simply say that anyone's opinion that is different to mine is wrong. I find it absolutely extraordinary that an individual draft commentator, would pass judgement on the recruiting departments of 18 clubs, and give scores based purely on how a clubs picks matched their own. To me it seems dam obvious that a well resourced, professional recruiting department, with psychologists, behavioural experts, access to private testing results, game footage, previous football clubs, schools, parents, friends, etc. are more likely to get a draft selection right than one individual watching SOME games. Further, the clubs recruiters have a "bit" of a heaad start on external draft experts because they know exactly what their club is after. In reality, Knightmare should be giving himself a score not the club. Example - he got a D+ for his analysis of Fremantles draft.

I'm not sure how many people here follow the NBA or NFL, follow College basketball or gridiron, or how many people read the American version of ESPN, CBS Sport, Yahoo Sports, Sports Illustrated, etc .

Any one who follows US pro sports, particularly those with drafts, will be well aware with the type of media coverage, and the race post draft, for media organisations to post their draft assessments complete with grades and reasonings why, etc.

Do I agree with all of Knightmare's team grades. No. Even though I do believe Fremantle had a very good draft. Am I going to rip him for it. Can't be arsed. If I so desired, I might engage him in a civil discussion. Do I expect to be able to sway @Knighmare to my way of thinking. Hell no. Especially if I'm going to become overbearing and rude in my manner.

Generally I find the people will sometimes change their mind if they have a good discussion, and then have time to go away and think about. But rarely in my experience do people change their mind if they are continually or relentlessly bombarded with the same stuff.

 

[briztoon]

Opinions aside, this all started with arbitrary rankings. I merely questioned how Collingwood received such a good grade compared to others, when they clearly reached on all three of their picks (according to KMs own rankings). A point I felt worthy of being debated, given the media typically remains unbiased. It's ballooned from there.

er, what?

 

[Jootube]

I believe I am objective. Seeing Fremantle receive a D+ for their draft efforts should give a West Coast supporter a warm fuzzy feeling. It doesn't because that rating is wrong and indefensible. Fremantle got the draft right. They nailed picks 2 (Brayshaw) & 5 (Cerra) which gives them an automatic B. Sorry, throw your power rankings out, they are wrong. Overhaul your methods of analysis. Think twice about giving subjective assessments which fly in the face of popular opinion unless you have reasons which prove it is highly likely to be wrong. Popular and expert (recruiters) opinion will usually be correct. In this case it is. I am with the dockers - did I just say that - they nailed the draft and scored an A. Just my opinion. You have the reasons for it.

You've been posting on the Freo board since September, 0 posts ever on the Eagles board.
Pretending that you're some huge West Coast fan seems like a vain attempt to not show favoritism.

 

[Schraderbrau]

Is there not a point where you accept that your opinion is not entirely correct? Perhaps you're missing important information on player's personality or health. Regardless if a 18 clubs with fully funded scouting and recruiting divisions don't take a player, even as a rookie, then surely you can accept that you were wrong in your judgement of that player and maybe rating a clubs draft poorly because they didn't take said undrafted players is a little bit hard headed.

It's obvious that clubs rate different players differently but when 110+ players are taken and a player you rated top 50 isn't one of those, that doesn't reflect poorly on the clubs, it reflects poorly on you. Then to double down and deny that you got anything wrong is laughable.

so lets give every club an A+

 

[jock graeme]

You've been posting on the Freo board since September, 0 posts ever on the Eagles board.
Pretending that you're some huge West Coast fan seems like a vain attempt to not show favoritism.

You have got me wrong. I have been a part time Eagles and East Perth fan since moving to WA, a few years ago. Just like watching live footy, and it made sense to have some allegiance to a team here. I follow Tas footy still and it hurt seeing no one drafted last year. It encouraged me to follow the Tassie Mariners in the U/18s Div 2, the Allies in u/18 Div 1 and the Kingston Tigers in the TSL this year. Hugh Dixon played in all those teams and I was saw him develop over the year. I quickly rated him and saw him as Tassie's hope. I am glad the Dockers drafted him and believe they got a beauty. I wll be following Freo and Eagle this year. I really rate Brander, and I am a huge fan of his as well. He can absolutely dominate. Just needs to be more consistent.

 

[HedgeFund]

so lets give every club an A+

Let’s just relax and see how the new draftees develop over the next 12 months

 

[Kenny_01]

You've been posting on the Freo board since September, 0 posts ever on the Eagles board.
Pretending that you're some huge West Coast fan seems like a vain attempt to not show favoritism.

Thanks for the insight Columbo.

 

[Knightmare]

All class

Side note what do you think made garner slide? Lack of ball numbers + uncertain positions; where do you see him best and do you reckon himself and patmore can play in the afl side 2018?

Cheers dont let these warrioes get to you; you do the utmost brilliant work of any poster in this website

With Garner, he slid I expect because of his production and performance this season. 16 disposals per game isn't enough. Other factors of interest worth noting: His numbers haven't improved from 2016. In my view he lacks a clear best position - is he a back, mid or forward? I haven't fallen in love with him anywhere particularly. I've also found his games to be mostly quiet. He'll have the odd good moment where he might use the ball well by foot, but the frequency of impactful moments is minimal. An ok enough contested ball winner. All the character information comes back very strongly. School captain at Scotch College etc.

As for Garner v Patmore. I favour Patmore. He has the production behind him and is the better runner.

 

[year of the cat]

With Garner, he slid I expect because of his production and performance this season. 16 disposals per game isn't enough. Other factors of interest worth noting: His numbers haven't improved from 2016. In my view he lacks a clear best position - is he a back, mid or forward? I haven't fallen in love with him anywhere particularly. I've also found his games to be mostly quiet. He'll have the odd good moment where he might use the ball well by foot, but the frequency of impactful moments is minimal. An ok enough contested ball winner. All the character information comes back very strongly. School captain at Scotch College etc.

As for Garner v Patmore. I favour Patmore. He has the production behind him and is the better runner.

Similarly, why do you think Murphy slid from pre-draft expectations?

 

[jock graeme]

Let’s just relax and see how the new draftees develop over the next 12 months

Yes, good call. I think we have strayed off course a little. I know I became focussed on a small part of KM's work. I appreciate his time, insights and generally his opinions. Respect the fact that he puts his out there.

 

[Knightmare]

Similarly, why do you think Murphy slid from pre-draft expectations?

There were several clubs with first round picks who had him only a small few places down their power rankings behind those they took, then those clubs with second round picks didn't rate Murphy as highly.

In that regard Collingwood got lucky with Western Bulldogs, Greater Western Sydney, Sydney and maybe one other club having some interest in the first round.

At the end of the day, if a player isn't number one on your draft board/preferences list at the pick, they will keep sliding until they're top of someones list.