Game Day LIVE - AFL 2023 Draftwatch for the WB

[doggies ftw]

Do we really want Lual that badly? I’d have though a Freijah type is more of a need.

Luals a great fit for us IMO, another great two way runner whose hard at it.

Can get back and help defence with his intercept marking or push forward and hit scoreboard with his booming kick. Or as a small defender offers more of a lockdown aspect.

Really rate him as a list fit, can’t see him being available at 40 though unfortunately

 

[Bulldogs85]

 

[Doggy]

Small forward and wing option would be good from here.

Rookie a ruck

 

[doggies ftw]

Wait so did we make a trade or not? There’s no reference to it online or in the updated draft order?

 

[_Cerberus_]

Assuming we will only be drafting two more players in the main draft?

 

[hujsh]

Wait so did we make a trade or not? There’s no reference to it online or in the updated draft order?

Yes, we now have 3 picks rather than 4 (before 70) because of the trade up. It's hard to see because the picks are moving around so much

 

[Sentinel]

That'll be a heartbreaker for some draft watchers, Collard was pretty liked.

Feel a bit sorry for West Coast here. Collard an academy player of theirs taken at 28 - a pick 9 spots below where their 2nd pick originally stood (19), before all of the North charity picks, F-S and Academy which pushed that pick down to 30 making him out of reach to them

The AFL draft is broken.

 

[Nat Fyfe]

Feel a bit sorry for West Coast here. Collard an academy player of theirs taken at 28 - a pick 9 spots below where their 2nd pick originally stood (19), before all of the North charity picks, F-S and Academy which pushed that pick down to 30 making him out of reach to them

The AFL draft is broken.

Suns get to match FOUR in the first round, while the wooden spooners don’t get to match even one. And it’s not like West Coast have a strong history of father/son picks. Did well with McIntosh (1989) and Cousins (1995) but had basically nothing since

 

[Doggy]

Suns get to match FOUR in the first round, while the wooden spooners don’t get to match even one. And it’s not like West Coast have a strong history of father/son picks. Did well with McIntosh (1989) and Cousins (1995) but had basically nothing since

GC get to cream off for the next few years

They need to change the rules .. either they can't match in the top 20 or whatever ... or everyone can match wherever the bid comes.

Stop giving northern academies preferential treatment ..

 

[Ash1337]

Draft sliders after tonight Ollie Murphy and Archie Roberts. Expect them to go in the next few picks. Also Jiath not taken either. He'll probably go at 1 of carlton or tigers pick.

 

[VitalDread]

Hopefully we can land Shaun Mannaugh and use him as a goal kicking wing/forward option

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

Norf been looked after. They really are the beggars of the AFL, please sir can I have some more.

I can remember some regular Norf posters complaining on priority picks other teams have including us with Griffen, they better stfu now.

 

[Dogs_r_barking]

Anyone else found it repulsive the way Hardwick presented the jumper to the draftees.

 

[Nat Fyfe]

GC get to cream off for the next few years

They need to change the rules .. either they can't match in the top 20 or whatever ... or everyone can match wherever the bid comes.

Stop giving northern academies preferential treatment ..

There’s so many simple changes they could make to instantly improve it. Change the 20% discount to a 20% premium. Don’t allow a club to ever hold more picks than list spots (to stop the additional trading the Suns did at the beginning of the draft). Only allow clubs to match with picks that fall with 10 spots of the bid

 

[Nat Fyfe]

Norf been looked after. They really are the beggars of the AFL, please sir can I have some more.

I can remember some regular Norf posters complaining on priority picks other teams have including us with Griffen, they better stfu now.

Saw someone refer to North as the Shinbeggars once, pretty appropriate nickname

 

[Doggy]

Norf been looked after. They really are the beggars of the AFL, please sir can I have some more.

I can remember some regular Norf posters complaining on priority picks other teams have including us with Griffen, they better stfu now.

They still think they should have alsi got Sanders at the bare minimum

 

[Doggy]

Saw someone refer to North as the Shinbeggars once, pretty appropriate nickname

It's Norf

 

[Doggy]

Anyone else found it repulsive the way Hardwick presented the jumper to the draftees.

GC suns legend Hardwick?

 

[Doggy]

Hopefully we can land Shaun Mannaugh and use him as a goal kicking wing/forward option

Pick 47 maybe

 

[dogwatch]

So our trading/drafting result was as follows.

OUT:
Pick 11 (became Melbourne's pick 13 after bids)
Pick 18 (became North's pick 23 after bids)
Pick 40
Our 2024 first rounder

IN:
Ryley Sanders
Jordan Croft
Pick 43 (traded up for pick 48 & 61)
Pick 45

Has this been good trading?

To even start answering that we have to consider what might have happened if we had NOT traded up to get Sanders. A perilously fraught quest, but I'll give it a try.

Scenario 1:
We'd have been left with pick 13 but some smartarse club might have tried to bid on Croft to destroy that pick. GWS took Gothard at pick 12 for instance and could have decided a bid on Croft was worthwhile. That would have left us with pick 18 (drifting out to pick 23) and probably pick 56 with the residue points from pick 13.

At pick 23-ish we could have gone for someone like Hardeman, De Mattia, Lual or Collard but most of them feel like a reach. Or we could have gone for best available which might have been a KPP or ruckman. Ollie Murphy would have suited us well there.

By then our pick 40 would have come in maybe a few spots to the high 30s which is not much better than the pick 43 we now have. However that might just be enough to land Lual. We don't know.

Net result:​

We still get Croft. We also get someone like De Mattia or Collard or Murphy instead of Sanders. And maybe a Freijah or Lual with our late 30s pick. The important thing is we keep our 2024 first rounder which could be anywhere from about pick 7 to pick 16. Pick 56 might come in to about pick 48-50.​

Scenario 2:
There's no bid on Croft at 13 but instead there's a bid at 15 (as we saw tonight).
In this scenario we are able to draft someone like Tholstrup or Leake with our pick 13 but our pick 18 gets burned on Croft with not much small change coming back.

We still have a pick in the late 30s (our original pick 40) so the commentary on that is the same as Scenario 1.

Net result:​

We still get Croft. We also get someone like Tholstrup or Leake or Murphy instead of Sanders. And maybe a Freijah or Lual with our late 30s pick. The important thing is we keep our 2024 first rounder which could be anywhere from about pick 7 to pick 16.​

​

So what's the verdict?
It comes down to the fact that we appear to have strongly targeted Sanders. And assessing how much better Sanders will be than say Leake or Tholstrup or De Mattia or Murphy (or similar). At this stage I'd like to think that it'd be a considerable difference, maybe an A-grader against a B or C grader. But there are always surprises once they debut, so who knows? Then we've got to ask is that difference worthwhile against losing our mid first round pick in 2024? By this stage we're into imponderable upon imponderable - we won't be much wiser until we see how good Sanders turns out to be.

I was dubious about the deal because I didn't want to lose our first rounder in what is supposed to be a stronger draft in 2024. Next year's draft is also reported to be especially strong for midfielders which is our biggest need. However if Sanders is a genuine gun I think I'm coming around to giving the deal the thumbs up. Especially if we can somehow trade our way back into the first round between now and the 2024 National Draft.

I'll give it a B- for now.

But ask me again in 18 months time and the answer could be very different!

 

[Doggy]

So our trading/drafting result was as follows.

OUT:
Pick 11 (became Melbourne's pick 13 after bids)
Pick 18 (became North's pick 23 after bids)
Pick 40
Our 2024 first rounder

IN:
Ryley Sanders
Jordan Croft
Pick 43 (traded up for pick 48 & 61)
Pick 45

Has this been good trading?

To even start answering that we have to consider what might have happened if we had NOT traded up to get Sanders. A perilously fraught quest, but I'll give it a try.

Scenario 1:
We'd have been left with pick 13 but some smartarse club might have tried to bid on Croft to destroy that pick. GWS took Gothard at pick 12 for instance and could have decided a bid on Croft was worthwhile. That would have left us with pick 18 still (and probably pick 56 with the residue points from pick 13).

At pick 23-ish we could have gone for someone like Hardeman, De Mattia, Lual or Collard but most of them feel like a reach. Or we could have gone for best available which might have been a KPP or ruckman.

By then our pick 40 would have come in maybe a few spots to the high 30s which is not much better than the pick 43 we now have. However that might just be enough to land Lual. We don't know.

Net result:​

We still get Croft. We also get someone like De Mattia or Collard instead of Sanders. And maybe a Freijah or Lual with our late 30s pick. The important thing is we keep our 2024 first rounder which could be anywhere from about pick 7 to pick 16. Pick 56 might come in to about pick 48-50.​

Scenario 2:
There's no bid on Croft at 13 but instead there's a bid at 15 (as we saw tonight).
In this scenario we are able to draft someone like Tholstrup or Leake with our pick 13 but our pick 18 gets burned on Croft with not much small change coming back.

We still have a pick in the late 30s (our original pick 40) so the commentary on that is the same as Scenario 1.

Net result:​

We still get Croft. We also get someone like Tholstrup or Leake instead of Sanders. And maybe a Freijah or Lual with our late 30s pick. The important thing is we keep our 2024 first rounder which could be anywhere from about pick 7 to pick 16.​

​

So what's the verdict?
It comes down to the fact that we appear to have strongly targeted Sanders. And assessing how much better Sanders will be than say Leake or Tholstrup or De Mattia (or similar). At this stage I'd like to think that it'd be a considerable difference, maybe an A-grader against a B or C grader. But there are always surprises once they debut, so who knows? Then we've got to ask is that difference worthwhile against losing our mid first round pick in 2024? By this stage we're into imponderable upon imponderable - we won't be much wiser until we see how good Sanders turns out to be.

I was dubious about the deal because I didn't want to lose our first rounder in what is supposed to be a stronger draft in 2024. Next year's draft is reported to be especially strong for midfielders which is our biggest need. However if Sanders is a genuine gun I think I'm coming around to giving the deal the thumbs up. Especially if we can somehow trade our way back into the first round between now and the 2024 National Draft.

I'll give it a B- for now.

But ask me again in 18 months time and the answer could be very different!

You didn't notice all the teams happy to trade out of next year's draft?

"The next one is always better" until it isn't.

We'll have a first rounder next year anyway

 

[dogwatch]

You didn't notice all the teams happy to trade out of next year's draft?

"The next one is always better" until it isn't.

We'll have a first rounder next year anyway

For every team that trades out there has to be a team trading in. They all have different motivations, different needs, and different temporal factors (eg players to match bids on, perceived "windows", etc).

Yes I've heard that next year's draft is always better but it usually gets overshadowed by the hype on this year's draft. TBH I have heard one comment that next year's is not so good but most have said it's better. Opinions on it will all have changed in 12 months time anyway.

Where do you see the first rounder coming from? Baz?

 

[Euku]

Was absolutely the right play Sanders looks like he could be captain material if we had 13 a club would have bid everyone knows it, Sanders and croft Coffield for picks 13 23 and maybe pick 10, I'm doing that deal everyday even without Coffield

 

[Doggy]

For every team that trades out there has to be a team trading in. They all have different motivations, different needs, and different temporal factors (eg players to match bids on, perceived "windows", etc).

Yes I've heard that next year's draft is always better but it usually gets overshadowed by the hype on this year's draft. TBH I have heard one comment that next year's is not so good but most have said it's better. Opinions on it will all have changed in 12 months time anyway.

Where do you see the first rounder coming from? Baz?

We won't keep all of JUH, English and Smith.

Priorities will be JUH and English.

I'd love to keep them all and build around them all but it won't happen. Will lose either Smith or English or both

 

[dogwatch]

We won't keep all of JUH, English and Smith.

Priorities will be JUH and English.

I'd love to keep them all and build around them all but it won't happen. Will lose either Smith or English or both

O ye of little faith!!