Sorry if I've missed the earlier convo but has anyone ever been picked off by another club when committed to as a re-rookie?
Prediction National Draft 2024
- Thread starter King Huskii
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Nah I was legitimately wondering if thered been murmurings, as I thought it was rare (or even untested) but I guess not inconceivable.
- Feb 19, 2016
- 805
- 3,948
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
The 'if available' for Knobel is probably just being cautious but I don't like it
Brisbane offloaded the three picks in the 40’s because there was a bid on a player not expected to go in the ND. They didn’t want to waste one of those picks being absorbed by bid so traded all three out for F3 picks (WC, GC and WB) and then used 56 to match bid.
Watch WC swoop in and take him
Toby whan with that left foot cannon of his is a hbf star waiting to happen
Surprised so many keep forgetting about him
Brisbane’s draft hand for next year is now:
1st Rounder (Brisbane)
3rd Rounder (West Coast)
3rd Rounder (Essendon)
3rd Rounder (Gold Coast)
3rd Rounder (Western Bulldogs)
4th Rounder (St Kilda)
4th Rounder (Brisbane)
Their draft hand this year before trade period was:
Pick 18 (tied to Brisbane) - Would’ve been pick 27 btw
Pick 56 (tied to Brisbane)
Pick 69 (tied to Hawthorn)
They traded their 2nd Rounder and 4th Rounder in 2023.
By trading Harry Sharp they went from that to the below AND the 2025 Draft position they’ve got now:
- Pick 5 (Ashcroft)
- Pick 25 (Marshall)
- Pick 42 (Gallop)
Plus they distorted the picks 40-50 by trading out.
Another thing I noticed was of the 13 trades done post trade period only two didn’t involve Brisbane, Gold Coast or Essendon - the three teams with top 15 F/S and Academy prospects.
What a great system. Thank god it’s changing but it needs to change more.
Brissy actually traded their later pick too (60 to Saints)
They were probably going to trade those picks as each came up, likely to the highest bidder each time (Clubs could then see exactly who was on the board, probably causing others to pay more, Saints took advantage of this by paying more to trade in for Boxshall, Bombers got an F2 out of it, something Lions may have got if they weren't under bid pressure) but they were forced to fire sale them all at once during the bidding process.
They still did really well out of it but yeah Brissy went in with lots of extra spots, my point was that other clubs were all trying to get back in, Brissy's fortunate bidding circumstances (Ashcroft, Marshall late as) meant they had a bunch of picks to offload.
Its tightened up a lot now
Those F4s are pretty much worthless now
The system would be alright if clubs actually bid, Brissy got kissed with the bidding this year, it opened up a bunch of extra picks for them, atleast Cats forced them to sell those 40s picks a bit earlier but the loss would've been marginal for them anyway.
I feel like there's been too many times where people have talked up our academy prospects a year or two out and they end up not even being near it. I remember talk about us having a lot of small forwards coming through a while back and we ended up with no one (i guess motlop to carlton).
It’s crazy aye ?
rational and logic are the first things thrown out the cot it seems….
In fact if we lose Max after giving Reidy one year I may upchuck
- Apr 26, 2011
- 11,056
- 13,683
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Wimbledon AFC
What a shit draft.
The hand we had
Pressure is on Bolton to win a ****ing premiership
The hand we had
Pressure is on Bolton to win a ****ing premiership
I’m very skeptical whether the changes made have made even half the changes that are urgently required.
It’s still possible to match a top ten pick with a bunch of picks in the 30s and 40s if you’ve got enough of them. All they’ve done is bring what’s useful forward ten picks or so.
Discounts should’ve been entirely removed and going into deficit almost removed (I’m fine if clubs are short by very minimal amounts). Parameters on how many draft picks can be used to match a bid are also desperately needed.
Brisbane should’ve only been able to match the Ashcroft bid if they traded their future first and/or a best 22 player. I don’t think we’re ever getting there tbh but the draft is borderline broken until we do.
And yes, clubs actually bidding when they should would help a lot.
Last edited:
Taylor
Community Leader
- Moderator
- #1,418
I'll take the opportunity to reiterate that any changes applied that don't factor in historical advantages to clubs under the previous system only increases the advantage of those clubs.
Any changes should be grandfathered so that clubs that have already benefited since let's say 2010 are the ones moved to the new system first and those clubs with the fewest F/S or academy wins move into the new system later once they have had their lick of the ice cream.
Any changes should be grandfathered so that clubs that have already benefited since let's say 2010 are the ones moved to the new system first and those clubs with the fewest F/S or academy wins move into the new system later once they have had their lick of the ice cream.
I’m not sure it is. Looking at West Coast’s current situation I actually expect them to PASS at pick two.
They currently have 37 senior listed players, three rookies and two category B rookies.
They’ll move one of the category B rookies to category A to get Champion onto the list as pre-draft selection. They seemed happy to draft him if there was a bid so I’d be shocked to not see him added tomorrow.
It’ll leave them only one spot left and they’ve already offered Burgiel a train-on spot. Think they’ll look at him and another train on rather than select at pick 2 tomorrow. Unless they want to be a bunch of tossers to Burgiel. They’re like us now IMO - a bunch of nice guys. Anything they’ve even half promised Burgiel they’ll do.
The fella from Peel will be invited for train on - Michael Selwood along Burgiel. I don’t know of any LTI so they will need to keep a list spot open to get approval for the two of them do pre-season training.
My thinking exactly. I think most other clubs before us actually pick but they’ve either already committed to delisted players (North, Adelaide), already drafted a ruck today (St Kilda, Melbourne, Essendon) or have quite a few rucks on their list (Gold Coast). Combine that with the fact that most of the time these guys just get through anyway and it seems very very unlikely he’s not back on our list by lunch time tomorrow.
Clearly you’re new around here. You’re supposed to melt or make super bold predictions about our new recruits after the draft.
“They’ll be another [name a bad player]”.
“This guys gonna be another [name a hall of fame player]”
These are your only two options. Get in line, mate.
And since we’re on the subject, your insinuation that we have a complete list that is ready to contend without any holes is quite offensive.
At least that club bid on the bolter Gallop and forced their hand to trade a bunch of picks in the third round.
Yea fair enough but i don’t think we’ve genuinely had (besides Henry and Motlop) players rated as highly as whan (and even hart ) at this late stage - they’re rated where they are now not because of the NGA but as genuine talented prospects .
Anyway at the end of the day it’s the list managers/draft scouts jobs to look 1/2 even 3 years drafts ahead of schedule, let alone keep tabs on the clubs very own NGA products .
If they can’t somewhat accurately judge said players likelihood of “making it “by now (obviously with in reason) -then they’re pretty much not doing , or can’t do their job - and that includes factoring in what type and position these players may fill in the team going forward over the next few years and thus adjusting our drafting and list management to suit
- May 3, 2013
- 2,190
- 2,770
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Isn’t Rodrigues rated higher then them both or is he not NGA
Similar threads
