List Mgmt. The 2024 Draft (Nov 20/21)

[Keys]

Quick links

• Player contract status
• Draft prospect video highlights (thanks to noobermensch)
• Provisional 2025 Draft order

---

Key Dates

Spoiler

• Oct 17 to Nov 8: Pick swap window
• Nov 1 to Nov 8: Delisted free agency period
• Nov 20-21: Telstra AFL Draft
• Nov 22: Telstra Pre-Season Draft and Rookie Draft

List Spots Available

Spoiler

• 6 Main list
• 1 Rookie list

Current Draft Picks

Spoiler

• Main Draft - 12,26,73,81,99
• Rookie Draft - 3

Recent News
• Luke Edwards delisted after deciding to step away from football due to ongoing concussion symptoms

 

[Keys]

We botched the TB trade, we could have got pick 14 for Tommy, forwarded it to Richmond and still have pick 3.

What might have been:

Barrass for 14,F2
14 for Baker

Draft hand - 3,26,63,68
Futures F1-4, F2(Hawthorn)

What we have:

Draft hand - 12,26,73,81
Futures - F1-3, F1-3(Hawthorn)

Difference
• 12 instead of 3
• Plus F1,F3 (Hawthorn) for our F4
• 73,81 instead of 63,68 (No difference really as one pick matches a Champion bid and the other likely doesn’t get used)

If Hawthorn miss finals then pick 3 for 12 and a top 10 pick in 2025 doesn’t look so bad. However, if they go on a tear and make a prelim which pushes that 2025 pick into the 15-18 range it gets a bit on the ugly side

By holding firm on the Barrass trade, Clarke and co were able to recover some of the ground they lost by trading pick 3, which shouldn’t have been done. So the overall situation across two drafts isn’t dire, but could have been better obviously

Biggest mistake was getting boxed in on a commitment to Baker and seemingly agreeing to a price with Richmond (pick 14) before we even had that in our hands

The media (here and over east) were very quick to link the Barrass and Baker trades giving the appearance it would virtually be a straight swap. Conjecture in the media, valid or otherwise, the club can’t control but they didn’t little, if anything, to debunk it - they should have made it clear from the outset the trades weren’t linked

Hawthorn were always going to be difficult. Once they landed Battle as a FA, Barrass was their only deal to be completed during trade week and given he was contracted, their only bargaining chip was time - they were always going to push this to the last hour in the hope we’d fold. It’s precisely why we shouldn’t have linked the trades and why, even though we went about it the wrong way, we did the right thing finding an alternative way to get Baker without using what we’d get for Barrass after the Hawks traded out 14.

With 14 off the table, pick 3 was our next option. I firmly believe that the 12 and 14 (plus the Owies) steak knives was the best offer we got for pick 3 - it’s probably why initially Daniels said we weren’t interested as we thought we’d get better but ultimately found out we wouldn’t, hence the Owies inclusion tipping it from no to yes

Now we could have pressed Richmond and said, we’re working on getting F1 from Hawthorn for Barrass so you’ll have to settle for that since 14 isn’t available now. Still a fair trade, actually more than fair

Or we could have told them we’d take 6 and Baker for 3. Or even 10 and Baker for 3. I suspect though, we did offer those but Richmond wouldn’t accept

Alternatively, after the Carlton trade we should’ve asked Sydney for 19 and 22 for 14 before going to Richmond. Give Richmond 19 for Baker and keep 22 - then we’d have 22 as well as 12,26 going into this draft which would be more palatable

Ultimately, we over promised to Baker and Richmond (pick 14 was always too high) leaving us to scramble once Hawthorn went rogue.

It was a harsh lesson and one I hope we’ll learn from should Warner ask for a trade to us next year

 

[Monocle]

What might have been:

Barrass for 14,F2
14 for Baker

Draft hand - 3,26,63,68
Futures F1-4, F2(Hawthorn)

What we have:

Draft hand - 12,26,73,81
Futures - F1-3, F1-3(Hawthorn)

Difference
• 12 instead of 3
• Plus F1,F3 (Hawthorn) for our F4
• 73,81 instead of 63,68 (No difference really as one pick matches a Champion bid and the other likely doesn’t get used)

If Hawthorn miss finals then pick 3 for 12 and a top 10 pick in 2025 doesn’t look so bad. However, if they go on a tear and make a prelim which pushes that 2025 pick into the 15-18 range it gets a bit on the ugly side

By holding firm on the Barrass trade, Clarke and co were able to recover some of the ground they lost by trading pick 3, which shouldn’t have been done. So the overall situation across two drafts isn’t dire, but could have been better obviously

Biggest mistake was getting boxed in on a commitment to Baker and seemingly agreeing to a price with Richmond (pick 14) before we even had that in our hands

The media (here and over east) were very quick to link the Barrass and Baker trades giving the appearance it would virtually be a straight swap. Conjecture in the media, valid or otherwise, the club can’t control but they didn’t little, if anything, to debunk it - they should have made it clear from the outset the trades weren’t linked

Hawthorn were always going to be difficult. Once they landed Battle as a FA, Barrass was their only deal to be completed during trade week and given he was contracted, their only bargaining chip was time - they were always going to push this to the last hour in the hope we’d fold. It’s precisely why we shouldn’t have linked the trades and why, even though we went about it the wrong way, we did the right thing finding an alternative way to get Baker without using what we’d get for Barrass after the Hawks traded out 14.

With 14 off the table, pick 3 was our next option. I firmly believe that the 12 and 14 (plus the Owies) steak knives was the best offer we got for pick 3 - it’s probably why initially Daniels said we weren’t interested as we thought we’d get better but ultimately found out we wouldn’t, hence the Owies inclusion tipping it from no to yes

Now we could have pressed Richmond and said, we’re working on getting F1 from Hawthorn for Barrass so you’ll have to settle for that since 14 isn’t available now. Still a fair trade, actually more than fair

Or we could have told them we’d take 6 and Baker for 3. Or even 10 and Baker for 3. I suspect though, we did offer those but Richmond wouldn’t accept

Alternatively, after the Carlton trade we should’ve asked Sydney for 19 and 22 for 14 before going to Richmond. Give Richmond 19 for Baker and keep 22 - then we’d have 22 as well as 12,26 going into this draft which would be more palatable

Ultimately, we over promised to Baker and Richmond (pick 14 was always too high) leaving us to scramble once Hawthorn went rogue.

It was a harsh lesson and one I hope we’ll learn from should Warner ask for a trade to us next year

Great post.

 

[Ruben Grubarb]

What picks were Barrass and Gov taken?

Sam Taylor at GWS?

Top KP defenders often get taken in the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

Just so you know, I have been saying for years not to spend top picks on KPDs because most of the good ones are 2nd or 3rd rounders.

People wanted Buslinger with our first pick. I said that was silly.
People melted when we took Judd over Polak. Guess who was just about the only guy to say, "I'm happy with Judd. Even though we have Cuzz and Kerr, you build from the midfield, out".

I didn't say we should choose a KPD with that top pick, I said the best KPDs don't usually come into play until that range (that's what clubs do, it's not what I'd do unless there was a clear need). But of course, you like straw manning people and arguing over FA. You're tiresome. You're a punish.

 

[Keys]

I'm starting to think Carroll won't be joining our team as a DFA boiz.

Is there any benefit to signing someone as a DFA over leaving a spot free and getting them as a train on to maybe be an SSP signing?

I’d rather get a look at them in training first given before committing a list spot given they are ultimately discarded players.

Clubs in general, not just us, seem to be holding over any potential DFA signings until after the draft to give themselves as much flexibility in the draft as possible given list spots are tighter than usual

Only Membrey (Collingwood) and Martin (Geelong) have been signed and there’s very little chatter in the media about any other imminent signings before Friday’s deadline

We have two usable draft picks (12,26) and a pick we likely use to match a bid on Champion and up to 6 main list spots to fill and 7 overall including the rookie list

I’d be surprised if we don’t trade back into this draft at some point between 25-50 to take at least one other draftee

Leaves us with 3 list spots (can be rookie or main list) to fill using any of the following options :

• Another draft pick either by trade or using wherever pick 73/81 lands and if there’s a bid on Champion
• Pick 3 in the rookie draft - either Champion if there’s no bid, a young player who unexpectedly went undrafted or potentially white anting Freo by drafting Knobel
• SSP signing(s) with or without a train on period - Carroll, Prior, Grainger-Barrass, Clurey and Burgiel are among the options

 

[JackOutback]

Clubs in general, not just us, seem to be holding over any potential DFA signings until after the draft to give themselves as much flexibility in the draft as possible given list spots are tighter than usual

Only Membrey (Collingwood) and Martin (Geelong) have been signed and there’s very little chatter in the media about any other imminent signings before Friday’s deadline

We have two usable draft picks (12,26) and a pick we likely use to match a bid on Champion and up to 6 main list spots to fill and 7 overall including the rookie list

I’d be surprised if we don’t trade back into this draft at some point between 25-50 to take at least one other draftee

Leaves us with 3 list spots (can be rookie or main list) to fill using any of the following options :

• Another draft pick either by trade or using wherever pick 73/81 lands and if there’s a bid on Champion
• Pick 3 in the rookie draft - either Champion if there’s no bid, a young player who unexpectedly went undrafted or potentially white anting Freo by drafting Knobel
• SSP signing(s) with or without a train on period - Carroll, Prior, Grainger-Barrass, Clurey and Burgiel are among the options

Don't we also have other draft picks after 73 as an option? Now, that would usually seem like a wasted pick, but once bids bring them back into the 60s and the allegedly deep nature of this draft, they might use one of those picks to nab a player that would otherwise have been unlucky not to get drafted.

 

[Obeanie1]

Just so you know, I have been saying for years not to spend top picks on KPDs because most of the good ones are 2nd or 3rd rounders.

People wanted Buslinger with our first pick. I said that was silly.
People melted when we took Judd over Polak. Guess who was just about the only guy to say, "I'm happy with Judd. Even though we have Cuzz and Kerr, you build from the midfield, out".

I didn't say we should choose a KPD with that top pick, I said the best KPDs don't usually come into play until that range (that's what clubs do, it's not what I'd do unless there was a clear need). But of course, you like straw manning people and arguing over FA. You're tiresome. You're a punish.

What are you on? Seriously.

You posted an opinion that the top line players including KP defenders are taken in the top 15.

That is incorrect with defenders and KP defenders. I provided three examples of gun KP defenders taken well outside the 1st round. I could provide a much longer list.

Simple facts. No strawman anything. Your statement was incorrect.

 

[Keys]

Don't we also have other draft picks after 73 as an option? Now, that would usually seem like a wasted pick, but once bids bring them back into the 60s and the allegedly deep nature of this draft, they might use one of those picks to nab a player that would otherwise have been unlucky not to get drafted.

I did mention that as an option but my wording was probably a bit clunky

• Another draft pick either by trade or using wherever pick 73/81 lands and if there’s a bid on Champion

We have picks 73 and 81 - pick 73 will come in about 8-10 spots due to earlier bid matching but probably gets swallowed up matching a bid on Champion around pick 50 or later (my guess)

Leaves pick 81 that comes in to somewhere in the high 60’s due to bid matching and clubs passing on late picks in that range which we could use

It’s what I meant in my post but wasn’t entirely clear

 

[amazingjoshy]

Guess who was just about the only guy to say, "I'm happy with Judd. Even though we have Cuzz and Kerr, you build from the midfield, out".

For so many reasons I'd love to see the evidence here

 

[Ruben Grubarb]

You posted an opinion that the top line players including KP defenders are taken in the top 15.

Cool, you're being a dick like usual.

I said: The top KPDs (in the draft) get taken in the 5-15 range.

You chose to interpret this as me saying "all the top defenders in the AFL get taken between 5-15", even though I have said ad nauseum for years that you should not spend top 10 picks on KPDs because you can get them later in the draft.

But there's more....

I then tell you point blank what I actually meant but you have decided to hold me to what you decided I meant (the strawman).

You can't help yourself. You're a punish of a poster. You turn everything into an argument.

 

[Ruben Grubarb]

For so many reasons I'd love to see the evidence here

What is going throught your recruiters heads?????

What is going through your recruiters heads????? Your team is obviuosly in dier need of key position players.And your desperately need forwards. What where they thinking, yes Judd looks the good as a strong midfielder. But no club in the AFL needs key position players like Polak.Polak was...

www.bigfooty.com

Lol, that floglodyte Sabre.

 

[Shueygod]

I hope the ones melting over missing FOS aren’t the same people that are questioning Allan’s production.

 

[amazingjoshy]

What is going throught your recruiters heads?????

What is going through your recruiters heads????? Your team is obviuosly in dier need of key position players.And your desperately need forwards. What where they thinking, yes Judd looks the good as a strong midfielder. But no club in the AFL needs key position players like Polak.Polak was...

www.bigfooty.com

Lol, that floglodyte Sabre.

Ha cool read

"Just about the only guy" is a bit of a stretch though

There's the OP and one WC supporter that called it a bad decision, everyone else is happy

 

[Dark Sharks]

Could've won multiple flags with Polak, don't @ me.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

fair enough going for the best player, but will Judd stay in Perth after 2 years??

thats the risk the club has taken

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

We had balls back then though. Took the Vic Metro Mummy's Boy, and a premiership, Brownlow and Norm Smith later, trade him for our all-time leading goalkicker, Masto and Notte.

 

[Wooshaaaa]

2 things Holding him back .

1 . Hip issues had surgery and played water polo for many years which destroys you hips .

2 . He is a massive FIGJAM .

1. The surgery he had wasnt on his hip. It was on his pelvis. The actual hip joint don't get touched in the realignment procedure he had done.

Also, Water polo doesn't ruin your hips. That's just not the case.

2. Good, we need more figjam. I've had enough of Mr nice guy, " he's quality person".

On Pixel 6 Pro using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[chaddy22]

Don't we also have other draft picks after 73 as an option? Now, that would usually seem like a wasted pick, but once bids bring them back into the 60s and the allegedly deep nature of this draft, they might use one of those picks to nab a player that would otherwise have been unlucky not to get drafted.

If we were to use all our six picks in the trade it would be 12,26,73,81,99,117.
Obviously the draft wont get to pick 117 due to picks being used up by matching bids and clubs only having a certain number of spots on their lists.
I am happy trading into the draft like Keys mentioned in the 25-50 range as it seems we can get some good value without destroying the picks we have for next year.
We are not getting back into the pointy end of the draft and hopefully we nail it this year and we snare a slider.

 

[Hoskin300]

Top 5 = best bulls or balanced mids
Top 1-10 = best KPF
Top 5-15 = best KPD, SF, outside mid

We gave up the chance to get the best bull/balanced mid. Why use pick 12 to get the 10th best bull/balanced mid? Why not use pick 12 to get the best outside mid?

My question on Lindsay is, is he going to be able to play when our contested ball is shit? My question on Bro Allen is, is he going to be good enough at all? Or will he be that guy who wins a heap of contests but has average disposal and average decision making?

I don't have a crystal ball, but at pick 12 I'd be taking Lindsay and using #3 next year for top mid or Chaddles.

Yeah I said I agree with you Lindsay is the go to option at pick 14. However, that doesnt mean Allan is a bad pick.

 

[Mattman93]

Huge hypothetical, but if Hotton did not injure his ACL where do you all think he would be picked?

Well his 2024 three-game exposed form yielded averages of 28.7 disposals, 7.3 marks, 9.0 ground ball gets, 4.7 inside-50s, 9.0 score involvements and 1.7 goals; so if he'd maintained anywhere near that he'd be at least tied for pick 1.

Conversely his rating might be benefitting from one purple patch without the chance to be exposed as the season progressed. Eg if Moraes was in the same boat he might be going higher than he will having played the season out. It's also tricky with Sandy being so dominant.

Definitely the most intriguing prospect for 12 though.

 

[Ruben Grubarb]

Ha cool read

"Just about the only guy" is a bit of a stretch though

There's the OP and one WC supporter that called it a bad decision, everyone else is happy

Go find the thread that had all the draft talk on it. People were melting like a Paul's Billabong.

 

[Ruben Grubarb]

Yeah I said I agree with you Lindsay is the go to option at pick 14. However, that doesnt mean Allan is a bad pick.

I think Allan is more of a risk. So many players like him, if they're not elite, they just end up spuds. Players like Lindsay - put them in a good team and they look a million bucks. He just has to bide his time while we build a good team.

 

[Elite Pete]

The weirdest DFA is Clurey. Gave up a 1 year for what looks like a possible train on spot.

 

[Keys]

The weirdest DFA is Clurey. Gave up a 1 year for what looks like a possible train on spot.

He was delisted because Port needed the list spot

Gets paid anyway

 

[Bacchus]

Melbourne won't get much at the trade table for Oliver with his baggage.

Even after paying half his salary.

Geelong will recruit him for chips and make him into a gun player again

 

[garlic munchers]

Really depends on how Hawthorn go next year

More relevant is how the player picked with our given away 3, goes.

 

[eaglevision]

More relevant is how the player picked with our given away 3, goes.

It’s going to be Finn O’Sullivan and it’s going to be over a decade of regret.