Draft Watcher Knightmare's 2017 Draft Almanac

[Knightmare]

No doubt pick 5 doesn't equal success.

But, picks 15, 18, 20 etc also dont equal success. And they are less likely to yield a good player than pick 5 is.

BTW: from that list, 8 of the 10 selected are pretty damn good players. That's not a mixed bag.

If Pies choose to move down the order, it wont be for a mixed bag of so so picks. It'd be for a half decent pick this yr and a 1st rounder next year. And given next years draft is supposedly quite good, I dont think the other team is going to do that unless they fall in love with a player at pick 5 this year (Brander slipping etc).

Last year the draft was quite deep so doing such a trade may have made sense (Although no-one still was trading pick 5 in such a trade). This year? Trading out of the top 5 into the complete uncertain range of 16-25 would be seriously ballsy.

Hurley is the only A-grader on that list.

If you are to look at picks 5, 15, 18 and 20 from the past 10 years.
2007:
5. Jarrad Grant
15. Robbie Tarrant
18. Alex Rance
20. Tony Notte

2008:
5. Michael Hurley
15. Mitchell Brown
18. Luke Shuey
20. Tom Swift

2009:
5. Ben Cunnington
15. Christian Howard
18. Luke Tapscott
20. Nat Fyfe

2010:
5. Jared Polec
15. Billie Smedts
18. Matthew Watson
20. Jayden Pitt

2011:
5. Matt Buntine
15. Brandon Ellis
18. Brad McKenzie
20. Hayden Crozier

2012:
5. Jake Stringer
15. Taylor Garner
18. Brodie Grundy
20. Tim Broomhead

2013:
5. Kade Kolodjashnij
15. Zac Jones
18. Luke Dunstan
20. Jack Leslie

2014:
5. Jordan De Goey
15. Jarrod Garlett
18. Isaac Heeney
20. Jayden Laverde

2015:
5. Darcy Parish
15. Daniel Rioli
18. Jade Gresham
20. Brayden Fiorini

2016: *too early to say
5. Will Setterfield
15. Jordan Gallucci
18. Sam Powell-Pepper
20. Isaac Cumming

--
From that span of 10 years. The best player of these listed was only taken in three of the 10 years. That's before considering that often more than one of those 15/18/20 players made the grade.

It also works out favourably for the 15/18/20 players if you are to rank an overall top 5 based on projected career outcome with only Michael Hurley the only pick five who would make such a top five list with Nat Fyfe, Alex Rance, Brodie Grundy and Isaac Heeney in some order the group I would have following.

Given all this, and given the dynamics in the draft better fit Collingwood's list if they are to trade down. I'll stand firm and say the trade would despite popular perception be advantageous. Particularly if the Collingwood look to turn over more than five senior listed players, which I am anticipating.

 

[GoGrows]

to be honest, its a strange exercise to look at the exact player taken in each of these spots. We have no idea where different clubs wouldve taken those players.

yes good players CAN be had later in the draft, but no doubt the better players are likely to be found at the higher part of the draft.

And Isaac Heeney was not a pick 18. He was bid on at pick 2. Nice try there.

 

[GoGrows]

in my opinion, you are far more likely to get an A grade player with a top 5 pick. You are more likely to get a good player with a top 5 pick and you are less likely to get a bust with a top 5 pick.

The only sport I can think of where a top end pick might be traded for those sorts of picks is in the NFL.

 

[RedmanWasHere]

Unless you love a talent at 5ish. Trading an early draft pick isn't as unwise as seems to be the perception. Early picks are consistently overrated.

Pick 5 doesn't necessarily always translate to success. It's a pretty mixed bag.
2007: Jarrad Grant
2008: Michael Hurley
2009: Ben Cunnington
2010: Jared Polec
2011: Matt Buntine
2012: Jake Stringer
2013: Kade Kolodjashnij
2014: Jordan De Goey
2015: Darcy Parish
2016: Sam Petrevski-Seton

The options this year at pick five for Collingwood are Brander or best available mid. If Collingwood decide their mids are fine and they don't like Brander. Moving down the draft and into more picks is one of the options to consider.

Given the strike rate at pick 5 from the last 10 years, and understanding the points system and the theory behind it. I'd go the quantity of picks. Particularly getting a higher points worth in picks this year + getting what would be a start or very early second round 2018 pick. Huge win for a club looking for more than one good young player to fill list needs.

The exception would be a situation such as GWS where they want to minimise list turnover and already have a lot of talent and for them it's all about gaining those final pieces and drafting that superiority of the most top end talents, more so than quantity of quality talent.

2016: *too early to say
5. Will Setterfield
15. Jordan Gallucci
18. Sam Powell-Pepper
20. Isaac Cumming

Setterfield was pick 5.

SPS was pick 6.

 

[briztoon]

What about our current picks 15 and 18 (2097 points) for pick 5 (1878 points) KM? or pick 15 and next years 2nd rounder for pick 5?

I was thinking Michael Close and pick 15 or 18 for pick 5.

Close gives them a young but physically mature KPF, and pick 15 or 18 gives them a shot at Sam Hayes (who possibly slides like Tim English did last year), Oscar Allen from Perth or some one like Jack Petruccelle.

 

[Knightmare]

I was thinking Michael Close and pick 15 or 18 for pick 5.

Close gives them a young but physically mature KPF, and pick 15 or 18 gives them a shot at Sam Hayes (who possibly slides like Tim English did last year), Oscar Allen from Perth or some one like Jack Petruccelle.

Michael Close is not someone I would waste a list position on. He's a depth player.

I'd rather Brisbane's 2018 second round selection.

Ben Reid is fine in the interim as a key forward if another number is needed forward to support Moore.

 

[briztoon]

in my opinion, you are far more likely to get an A grade player with a top 5 pick. You are more likely to get a good player with a top 5 pick and you are less likely to get a bust with a top 5 pick.

The only sport I can think of where a top end pick might be traded for those sorts of picks is in the NFL.

The discussion revolves around that there aren't any KPF that suits Collingwoods requirements at pick 5, so what does Collingwood do.

Thing is, it's highly unlikely that any KPF drafted fills their need right away. Talls take time to develop.

 

[Turbocat]

I was thinking Michael Close and pick 15 or 18 for pick 5.

Close gives them a young but physically mature KPF, and pick 15 or 18 gives them a shot at Sam Hayes (who possibly slides like Tim English did last year), Oscar Allen from Perth or some one like Jack Petruccelle.

Just what pick would close be worth by himself?.. 15 into 5 .... place him as a P24,P25 ... I doubt you would get that.

 

[Resigned]

Hey KM any word on Callan Wellings?

 

[Apex36]

Hurley is the only A-grader on that list.

If you are to look at picks 5, 15, 18 and 20 from the past 10 years.
2007:
5. Jarrad Grant
15. Robbie Tarrant
18. Alex Rance
20. Tony Notte

2008:
5. Michael Hurley
15. Mitchell Brown
18. Luke Shuey
20. Tom Swift

2009:
5. Ben Cunnington
15. Christian Howard
18. Luke Tapscott
20. Nat Fyfe

2010:
5. Jared Polec
15. Billie Smedts
18. Matthew Watson
20. Jayden Pitt

2011:
5. Matt Buntine
15. Brandon Ellis
18. Brad McKenzie
20. Hayden Crozier

2012:
5. Jake Stringer
15. Taylor Garner
18. Brodie Grundy
20. Tim Broomhead

2013:
5. Kade Kolodjashnij
15. Zac Jones
18. Luke Dunstan
20. Jack Leslie

2014:
5. Jordan De Goey
15. Jarrod Garlett
18. Isaac Heeney
20. Jayden Laverde

2015:
5. Darcy Parish
15. Daniel Rioli
18. Jade Gresham
20. Brayden Fiorini

2016: *too early to say
5. Will Setterfield
15. Jordan Gallucci
18. Sam Powell-Pepper
20. Isaac Cumming

--
From that span of 10 years. The best player of these listed was only taken in three of the 10 years. That's before considering that often more than one of those 15/18/20 players made the grade.

It also works out favourably for the 15/18/20 players if you are to rank an overall top 5 based on projected career outcome with only Michael Hurley the only pick five who would make such a top five list with Nat Fyfe, Alex Rance, Brodie Grundy and Isaac Heeney in some order the group I would have following.

Given all this, and given the dynamics in the draft better fit Collingwood's list if they are to trade down. I'll stand firm and say the trade would despite popular perception be advantageous. Particularly if the Collingwood look to turn over more than five senior listed players, which I am anticipating.

Taking the piss a bit there listing Heeney as a pick 18 when he was bid on at pick 2...

 

[Apex36]

I was thinking Michael Close and pick 15 or 18 for pick 5.

Close gives them a young but physically mature KPF, and pick 15 or 18 gives them a shot at Sam Hayes (who possibly slides like Tim English did last year), Oscar Allen from Perth or some one like Jack Petruccelle.

Collingwood aren't going to trade out of the top 5 to late first round for one of your depth players. That would be ridiculous.

 

[DIDAIC0S]

Collingwood aren't going to trade out of the top 5 to late first round for one of your depth players. That would be ridiculous.

What he said, thanks for the laugh briztoon!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hellgood]

Unless you love a talent at 5ish. Trading an early draft pick isn't as unwise as seems to be the perception. Early picks are consistently overrated.

Pick 5 doesn't necessarily always translate to success. It's a pretty mixed bag.
2007: Jarrad Grant
2008: Michael Hurley
2009: Ben Cunnington
2010: Jared Polec
2011: Matt Buntine
2012: Jake Stringer
2013: Kade Kolodjashnij
2014: Jordan De Goey
2015: Darcy Parish
2016: Sam Petrevski-Seton

The options this year at pick five for Collingwood are Brander or best available mid. If Collingwood decide their mids are fine and they don't like Brander. Moving down the draft and into more picks is one of the options to consider.

Given the strike rate at pick 5 from the last 10 years, and understanding the points system and the theory behind it. I'd go the quantity of picks. Particularly getting a higher points worth in picks this year + getting what would be a start or very early second round 2018 pick. Huge win for a club looking for more than one good young player to fill list needs.

The exception would be a situation such as GWS where they want to minimise list turnover and already have a lot of talent and for them it's all about gaining those final pieces and drafting that superiority of the most top end talents, more so than quantity of quality talent.

Would say that is not even remotely a mixed bag. 9 out of 10 are quality footballers who'd be in or if not extremely close to any sides best 22 today. Only iffy one being Grant (which was ten years ago) and who even then has had his moments over the years.

 

[Knightmare]

Hey KM any word on Callan Wellings?

I watched the game online. Though they didn't report anything as far as I can recall.

Only had the three disposals, all in the first quarter.

Would also be interested in an update.

Would say that is not even remotely a mixed bag. 9 out of 10 are quality footballers who'd be in or if not extremely close to any sides best 22 today. Only iffy one being Grant (which was ten years ago) and who even then has had his moments over the years.

By mixed bag. There is only one star - Hurley.

Cunnington is good. Stringer while at his best is impactful remains inconsistent. The others on the list are either still developing (De Goey, Parish and Setterfield). Capable but only good (Kolodjashnij), inconsistent (Polec), depth (Buntine) or not AFL quality (Grant).

 

[Knightmare]

This weeks AFL Draft weekly wrap with a focus on the TAC Cup's tallest player: http://www.espn.com.au/afl/story/_/...ruck-prospect-ned-reeves-shows-forward-smarts

 

[PattyKwasagun]

Possibly stupid question, but KM, what was the reason there weren't any stats on Paddy Dow last weekend? Is he not playing TAC Cup at the moment?

 

[Bishop]

Possibly stupid question, but KM, what was the reason there weren't any stats on Paddy Dow last weekend? Is he not playing TAC Cup at the moment?

Had the week off, was up in QLD watching his brother play at the Under 16 Champs for Vic Country. Will play school footy for Geelong Grammar on Saturday.

 

[PattyKwasagun]

Had the week off, was up in QLD watching his brother play at the Under 16 Champs for Vic Country. Will play school footy for Geelong Grammar on Saturday.

Ah right, thanks for that.

 

[GoGrows]

The discussion revolves around that there aren't any KPF that suits Collingwoods requirements at pick 5, so what does Collingwood do.

Thing is, it's highly unlikely that any KPF drafted fills their need right away. Talls take time to develop.

You dont like Brander?

 

[briztoon]

You dont like Brander?

Where is his best position?

Seriously, if you're a team that is in desperate need for a KPF, drafting one this year isn't going to help next season any way. I'd be focused the KPP's in next years draft. Especially if the AFL introduce live pick trading on draft night.

 

[pugsville]

If you are to look at picks 5, 15, 18 and 20 from the past 10 years.

From that span of 10 years. The best player of these listed was only taken in three of the 10 years. That's before considering that often more than one of those 15/18/20 players made the grade.

Every draft has it quirks and curves of talent, both perceived ahead of it and the increasing lens of hindsight. I think this companion needs a little bigger sample size, competing exact picks is arbitrary, (academy picks, F/S talent pool etc) expand the sample size. \Sample size. I think take picks 4,5,6, and compare 17,18,19,20,21,22 or similar to ecmapnd the sample size.

From a collinwood perspective I'm hung up of tall forwards, maybe against best available depending. But whats the chance of getting a good tall forward 5 v 18 ? Say there is a new coaching regime next year and somehow the pies have a good year and have pick 12 or something and no good tall forward prospects are available.? Given the list I think it's just too important to possibly fix ( all drafting is a risk) that particular hole. This year the mids in general are not the demanding (though there's a way to go yet, and my opinion is very second hand amatuer).

 

[Knightmare]

Every draft has it quirks and curves of talent, both perceived ahead of it and the increasing lens of hindsight. I think this companion needs a little bigger sample size, competing exact picks is arbitrary, (academy picks, F/S talent pool etc) expand the sample size. \Sample size. I think take picks 4,5,6, and compare 17,18,19,20,21,22 or similar to ecmapnd the sample size.

From a collinwood perspective I'm hung up of tall forwards, maybe against best available depending. But whats the chance of getting a good tall forward 5 v 18 ? Say there is a new coaching regime next year and somehow the pies have a good year and have pick 12 or something and no good tall forward prospects are available.? Given the list I think it's just too important to possibly fix ( all drafting is a risk) that particular hole. This year the mids in general are not the demanding (though there's a way to go yet, and my opinion is very second hand amatuer).

I'm wondering with the talls who may be there at 18/20 whether they're better than Brander.

Brander, Coleman-Jones and Balta are all top 10 on my draft board and may all be there or if not then a combination of those three are predicted to be available. Any of them may become better than Brander. Given this, the possibility of gaining two of these is very appealing. Particularly if both become AFL quality and there is still a start of second round pick coming the following year.
With Collingwood lacking good young talls. A trade along these lines would be a way to gain several good ones in a hurry - if the club agrees with my evaluation, which they probably don't, but they'll make their own call as I'll make mine, which is what you do in the talent ID game.

 

[pugsville]

I'm wondering with the talls who may be there at 18/20 whether they're better than Brander.

Brander, Coleman-Jones and Balta are all top 10 on my draft board and may all be there or if not then a combination of those three are predicted to be available. Any of them may become better than Brander. Given this, the possibility of gaining two of these is very appealing. Particularly if both become AFL quality and there is still a start of second round pick coming the following year.
With Collingwood lacking good young talls. A trade along these lines would be a way to gain several good ones in a hurry - if the club agrees with my evaluation, which they probably don't, but they'll make their own call as I'll make mine, which is what you do in the talent ID game.

you do the trade and your intelligence is wrong and clubs ger-zup you and they ant there at 18-20 where are you then? i just uncomfortably with betting the other guys are (for want of a better word, ) stupid saying that what 10 clubs are not going see the value you see. Thing seem to change even between trading an draft day.

I just think getting another tall forward is such a need i would just make sure we got it covered this draft. I wouldn't mind getting a second if we could trade a mid a pick 10-13 would be attractive to pick up a tall slider, I would be stoked in we could get two of Brander, Coleman-Jones and Balta.

It's rare quality talls are taken outside the pointy end, we the shape of the competition right now who knows what our draft situation would be next year.

I think that Collingwood have been well too cute at times with our recruiting/drafting and it's just essential to nail some things down. NQR, project talls, we have to invest to get quality, rather than hoping. Just my opinion from the cheap seats , i don't follow this anywhere near as close as others here.

 

[briztoon]

Currently which team below you on the ladder drafts a KPF?

Brander is almost guaranteed to be there at pick 5, so to Darcy Fogarty. Fogarty might not be KPP size, but he is close and has the frame to impact right away.

 

[Knightmare]

you do the trade and your intelligence is wrong and clubs ger-zup you and they ant there at 18-20 where are you then? i just uncomfortably with betting the other guys are (for want of a better word, ) stupid saying that what 10 clubs are not going see the value you see. Thing seem to change even between trading an draft day.

I just think getting another tall forward is such a need i would just make sure we got it covered this draft. I wouldn't mind getting a second if we could trade a mid a pick 10-13 would be attractive to pick up a tall slider, I would be stoked in we could get two of Brander, Coleman-Jones and Balta.

It's rare quality talls are taken outside the pointy end, we the shape of the competition right now who knows what our draft situation would be next year.

I think that Collingwood have been well too cute at times with our recruiting/drafting and it's just essential to nail some things down. NQR, project talls, we have to invest to get quality, rather than hoping. Just my opinion from the cheap seats , i don't follow this anywhere near as close as others here.

Your logic about key forwards not getting taken often outside of the pointy end of the draft is what I have long preached.

Though with Brander, it's still unclear until we see him over the second half of the year how good he is. He may slide himself having played inconsistent footy. And it's not yet clear whether he is a key forward or key defender either. At this stage, I'm in the consideration stage with him, but I wouldn't be confident selecting him.

It might be worth consulting other draft boards to get further confirmation to back up my early feel on where these guys will land.

In the recent bigfooty trial phantom draft as just one example the selections were as follows: Balta (20), Ballenden (32), Coleman-Jones (33). If Collingwood had picks 18/20 in that draft scenario. You'd have the pick of the group.

You've got for a mainstream personality Cal Twomey having Coleman-Jones at 23 and Balta 24 on his July draft board, though for variation, he has Ballenden at 13.

My opinions of Balta, Ballenden and Coleman-Jones relative to most others is very much elevated. For me, each of those is in the same category as Brander. Coleman-Jones is the best performed of each of those. Balta the most talented. Ballenden the most sure and likely to establish himself in a key (defence) post. Brander is more just the default top tall this year, without convincingly being that guy.

This year with the incredible variation on draft boards, it's a year where you back yourself in. I expect Collingwood to back in there draft board. To back in my draft board, I'm trading down that pick, and even if I get one of those talls with pick 18, and I'd expect at least one of those talls to be there, I'd consider it a won deal.