No, I meant those players that were evaluated by the paid professionals in the media and were considered at one stage or another to be a fairly high draft pick and have now fallen down the ladder or off the radar completely.

This was purely to see which player the posters here think will fall down the most, say from being a potential top 5 pick to somewhere in the mid to late teens.

Do you mean a paid professional like Mark Stevens? The same Mark Stevens that wrote an enlightening piece about the 'fact' that Sydney were interested in rebuilding their spine with an 196cm Gary Rohan? Even though the player in question lacks the necessary skills to be a KP player and 4 inches?

Or do you mean Emma Quayle?

Where would the amateur Draft expert be without Emma?

She's an enabler really...

Do you mean a paid professional like Mark Stevens? The same Mark Stevens that wrote an enlightening piece about the 'fact' that Sydney were interested in rebuilding their spine with an 196cm Gary Rohan? Even though the player in question lacks the necessary skills to be a KP player and 4 inches?

Or do you mean Emma Quayle?

If a player rated by Quayle or Burgan in their phantom drafts slid then there may be some basis for this thread.

But they haven't puiblished their phantoms yet so there's no even approximate source.

And it's quite possible they are being deliberately fed (or even promulgating) misinformation to confuse.

There's only one draft.

If a player rated by Quayle or Burgan in their phantom drafts slid then there may be some basis for this thread.

But they haven't puiblished their phantoms yet so there's no even approximate source.

And it's quite possible they are being deliberately fed (or even promulgating) misinformation to confuse.

There's only one draft.

If you feel this is a waste of time then the answer is simple; don't participate.

There have been plebty of reports by the journalists you mentioned suggesting where players may or may not be in the pecking order.

If a player rated by Quayle or Burgan in their phantom drafts slid then there may be some basis for this thread.

But they haven't puiblished their phantoms yet so there's no even approximate source.

And it's quite possible they are being deliberately fed (or even promulgating) misinformation to confuse.

There's only one draft.

Mate surely you get what this thread is about its hard to understand.

Based on all the hype generated through out the year through the media, up until draft day, which players do we expect to "slide"?

For me i just remember watching Future Stars and remember seeing both Christensen and Fitzpatrick being highly rated.

If you feel this is a waste of time then the answer is simple; don't participate.

There have been plebty of reports by the journalists you mentioned suggesting where players may or may not be in the pecking order.

No I don't think it's a waste if you couch it in terms of which players phantom drafters have over-rated.

AFAIK EQ and MB have so far only provided ranges for draftees so far so to be "a slider" he'd need to fall outside their predicted range.

It's quite wrong to suggest that players slide - each team in turn has the option to pick the player and has made their rating.

No I don't think it's a waste if you couch it in terms of which players phantom drafters have over-rated.

AFAIK EQ and MB have so far only provided ranges for draftees so far so to be "a slider" he'd need to fall outside their predicted range.

It's quite wrong to suggest that players slide - each team in turn has the option to pick the player and has made their rating.

Daniel Rich - rated top 3, went at 7, ended up no.1 = slider

Daniel Rich - rated top 3, went at 7, ended up no.1 = slider

Oh really?

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/emma...7491840994.html

My point exactly!

It's an important difference that seems too subtle for some.

Oh really?

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/emma...7491840994.html

My point exactly!

It's an important difference that seems too subtle for some.

Those that responded to the thread were aware of what it was all about but if you want to make something else out of it that's your prerogative. It was meant to stimulate discussion not an argument and quite frankly if that's what you want you'll have to look elsewhere, I can't be bothered.

Either Scully or Trengove will be the biggest slider. Both should be number 1, one will slide to number 2. Whichever boy slides will be an absolute steal at number 2!!!

I think Trengove will slide from 1 to 2

Sorry jnrmac, you beat me to it! Think you are right though, Jim Stynes made reference to Tom Scully on Twitter the other day after the big article on him in the Herald Sun, saying how he is going to be a fantastic player (or something along those lines).

Old that phantom by EQ was done the day before the draft (by which stage most of the early selections were fairly set in stone, similarly to this year).

The point of this exercise is to assess 'slider' from a general hype point of view (including journos and internet experts, over the context of the last year or so). Rich was a lock as a top-3 (and a possible number 1) up until the last few weeks before the draft. Considering that late last year into early this year early predictions considered it to be a Scully-Butcher quinella, if Butcher ends up outside the top 7 or so then that is a substantial slide.

If you don't like it then don't participate, there's a place for you next to Oscar in his garbage can.

Those that responded to the thread were aware of what it was all about but if you want to make something else out of it that's your prerogative. It was meant to stimulate discussion not an argument and quite frankly if that's what you want you'll have to look elsewhere, I can't be bothered.

You might think I'm making a pedantic point.

But it really goes to the heart of the perceived authority of phantom drafts.

No-one slides - phantom drafters just get it wrong.

The only type of slider that exists is if Barry Prendergast sees more of a player during the year and subsequently rates him lower than he previously did and that's a very different thing.

In so far are we're talking about someone 'sliding' from their perceived range to a lower pick...

I'm gonna go with Troy Taylor. Some have him first round, some early second round. I think he'll drop a fair way because despite the excitement factor he is unlikely to be much in his first couple of seasons - he really struggled at draft camp, particularly with fitness tests, and will take some development. Bring that together with the -perceived- risk of misbehaviour or Rhan Hooper style AWOL incidents, and clubs may just keep going for the slightly safer option.

I say perceived because my own reckoning is that he's a good kid at heart and with good support will work out just fine. When someone else consistently believes in him, it'll make a world of difference.

You might think I'm making a pedantic point.

But it really goes to the heart of the perceived authority of phantom drafts.

No-one slides - phantom drafters just get it wrong.

The only type of slider that exists is if Barry Prendergast sees more of a player during the year and subsequently rates him lower than he previously did and that's a very different thing.

Ok, from this point onwards the sole aim of the thread is to predict which players have been overhyped in regards to what position they will go in the draft... will that stop you whinging about semantics..?

(even if you are 100% correct)

One name Fitzpatrick never rated the bloke saw him play slow lazy and really no good he is tall thats it hope like hell we don't touch him

You might think I'm making a pedantic point.

But it really goes to the heart of the perceived authority of phantom drafts.

No-one slides - phantom drafters just get it wrong.

True but nit-picky. Yes, in essence any player who is picked up later than what the 'experts' predict (read guess) has been over- or mis-rated.

But the point of this thread was pretty clear, and all you've done is modify the description.

FWIW, I'm hoping Rohan is the slider/over-rated player.

True but nit-picky. Yes, in essence any player who is picked up later than what the 'experts' predict (read guess) has been over- or mis-rated.

But the point of this thread was pretty clear, and all you've done is modify the description.

FWIW, I'm hoping Rohan is the slider/over-rated player.

On the flip side, it could juts be under-rated by most recruiters (that's the type I'd prefer to get!)

True but nit-picky. Yes, in essence any player who is picked up later than what the 'experts' predict (read guess) has been over- or mis-rated.

But the point of this thread was pretty clear, and all you've done is modify the description.

FWIW, I'm hoping Rohan is the slider/over-rated player.

IMHO I could see Rohan perfectly suited to our style of play ... he would be a both needs & best available pick assuming he is the best available on the table at the time.

Many are calling for a tall-tall ... I'm suggesting we would be better suited to a fast finishing tall. Based solely on the prospects the best tall-talls are gone.

In the not too distant future I could see us construct a forward line of

FF Rohan Jurah Small ie Maric or Wonna

HF Bate Watts Blease

What would that give us ... Pace - Yes, Finishing skills - Yes, tough to match up - Yes, Good defensive skills because of pace - yes

So the expectation would be more to finish the opportunities than to create them.

Just a possible option.

On the flip side, it could juts be under-rated by most recruiters (that's the type I'd prefer to get!)

That's the truth, but we're not going to know that for 3-5 years.

'Shifter' Sheehan names his top 30

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tab...06/default.aspx

Interesting to see Dylan Grimes mentioned.

Panos for mine, relative to some people thinking we should take him with pick 11 or 18.

Rubbish - he will go around pick 40 and deservedly so.

Any money he is gone by pick 20, he will be a gun forward for whatever team he goes to.