E25's Phantom Draft

[Axis of Bob 11,898]

In response to Jay Clark's phantom draft, E25 has promised us his own phantom draft. He has promised to include his reasoning too.

So I thought that I'd create a thread so that we can all discuss his draft and explanations.

[John Crow Batty 8,880]

What definition of "phantom" will be in the terms of reference?

[e25 5]

I appreciate the effort of starting the thread for me, that's great.

I have one in the works, but it's not ready to post and I've just come out ofthe dentist, a bit groggy.

Maybe later tonight or tomorrow I'll post it.

Only doing the 1st round though.

[old55 23,833]

I appreciate the effort of starting the thread for me, that's great.

I have one in the works, but it's not ready to post and I've just come out ofthe dentist, a bit groggy.

Maybe later tonight or tomorrow I'll post it.

Only doing the 1st round though.

Please also post your top 25 saves from burning orphanages

[e25 5]

Please also post your top 25 saves from burning orphanages

No, I build those.

The kids are saved from arbitrary burning buildings in between my cancer research.

[Weekends at Bernie's 64]

Please go to melbourne's 2nd rnd pick 32 (E25) Thanks

[e25 5]

Ok, I will, but I'll get it horribly wrong.

[Summer Blease 0]

No, I build those.

The kids are saved from arbitrary burning buildings in between my cancer research.

Hurry up with that cure please.

[e25 5]

Ok, maybe that's something I shouldn't be making light of.

[jayceebee31 768]

Ok, maybe that's something I shouldn't be making light of.

Hurry up can't wait- I am so interested in this.And hope your mouth is better.

[e25 5]

Bugger.

The Hun has cottonned on to Horlin-Smith so I won't look clever for having him late in my Phantom.

That was my ace up my sleeve.

[Sir Why You Little 37,296]

Bugger.

The Hun has cottonned on to Horlin-Smith so I won't look clever for having him late in my Phantom.

That was my ace up my sleeve.

Do all the good players have to go the Gold Cost in your draft 25??? I am hating that team already.

[Mad_Melbourne 877]

lol this is getting some hype, how it shows the gooods...

[Summer Blease 0]

Give us a little taste E. Who do you have at #12?

[H_T 3,049]

Please also post your top 25 saves from burning orphanages

Yeah, er 25 will be good. E25 - you can call it E's.. 25 ..ok that's enough from me.

old55, can we expect a top 55 from you ? That will cover all 4 picks !

And hurry up already the draft is upon us !

Make sure their all best available, won't you.

[Deemolition Man 0]

Yeah, er 25 will be good. E25 - you can call it E's.. 25 ..ok that's enough from me.

old55, can we expect a top 55 from you ? That will cover all 4 picks !

And hurry up already the draft is upon us !

Make sure their all best available, won't you.

At least with your strong thoughts on "Best Available" through all the first round picks you wont have to think of needs for any clubs. And can just list them purely in order of talent as a player. Should make it slightly more straight forward.

[old55 23,833]

old55, can we expect a top 55 from you ? That will cover all 4 picks !

And hurry up already the draft is upon us !

Make sure their all best available, won't you.

Nope sorry I freely admit I have no idea about draft talent.

I've never seen an U18 player kick a ball and even if I did there's no guarantee I'd be able to sort the wheat from the chaff.

I think it takes a special skill.

I do like to look at the patterns and theory of drafting though.

Barry has 2 years of picks history now, I think he's on record saying you can't solve all your problems in one draft.

2008: Watts, Blease, Strauss, Bennell, Jetta, Bail, Jurrah, McKenzie, Healey

2009: Scully, Trengove, Gysberts, Tapscott, Gawn, Fitzpatrick

I'd like one more year of data to draw any conclusions about his persuasions.

On the evidence so far I wouldn't be backing a tall at 12.

There's Watts and Jurrah there in the 190-196 KP range and they were special cases.

Fascinating [© Wilson] to see what happens.

[rpfc 28,895]

And to think I put in a simple sledge in the Jay Clarke thread and it's grown to this. You have a lot to answer for Bob (I made the sledge - you provided the thread)!!

And to think I thought it might put E in his box but instead he's just lapping up the attention.

E25 I must admit to missing most of your 5000 odd posts and I'm not aware of your creds. Can you fill us in on your footy background in between solving the middle east crisis, the global financial crisis and finding a cure to the common cold.

Actually, if you've done one thing, it's fill in the void that post season provides. Thanks.

I'm hanging out for your draft - gosh I hope Hannabal at least gives us a critique and Whispering Jack provides some of his undeniable humour and insight. A few reminiscences would be first class too, Jack. Perhaps you could build them around a sci-fi background.

Oh, and Old, I reckon your phantom draft would be as interesting as any, more informed than most and with fewer spelling errors as you seem to have a rare insight into footy that even HT has picked up on. I reckon he'd love to have lunch with you.......

Wow - it's fun being on Demonland isn't it!!

All we need is H..........

My sarcasm meter just exploded...

[sylvinator 96]

2008: Watts, Blease, Strauss, Bennell, Jetta, Bail, Jurrah, McKenzie, Healey

2009: Scully, Trengove, Gysberts, Tapscott, Gawn, Fitzpatrick

I think it's actually quite incredible how the recruiters go about their business. The Melbourne recruiters know 99% of what is going to go down on draft day before it happens. They know all the info their is to know about all players. Very rarely will a player be picked up that they don't expect. We also target in on the boys we want and invariably get them. Though it is worth noting that the last 2 drafts we relatively easy for us, with such high draft picks.

In 2008: The pick- who we wanted- who we got

- Pick 1- Jack Watts- Jack Watts

- Pick 17- Sam Blease, Lewis Johnston, or (if those 2 were gone) James Strauss- Sam Blease

- pick 19- James Strauss- James Strauss

- pick 35- Jamie Redden or Jamie Bennel- Jamie Bennel

- pick 51- Luke Rounds, Neville Jetta (or Michael Walters)- Neville Jetta

- pick 64- Rohan Bail- Rohan Bail

Also... although not much skill to it, we obviously got who we were targeting pick 1 PSD (Jurrah) and pick 1 rookie (McKenzie)

Essentially, in the National draft, we got 5 out of the 6 boys we were really targeting, only missing out of Redden, who went pick 25 (10 places higher than our pick 35), but got Bennel regardless who is a beauty!

SOURCE: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/breakfast-with-the-star-makers/story-e6frf9mf-1111118183298

In 2009: The pick- who we wanted- who we got

- pick 1- Tom Scully- Tom Scully

- pick 2- Jack Trengove- Jack Trengove

- pick 11- Melksham, Gysberts or Lucas- Gysberts

- pick 18- Tapscott or Max Gawn- Tapscott

- pick 34- Jack Fitzpatrick- Max Gawn

- Pick 50- Troy Taylor- Jack Fitzpatrick

Essentially we got all the players we were targeting pre-draft, except who Melksham (who went 1 pick earlier than us), but I rate Gysberts better anyways, and Troy Taylor (we rated Fitzpatrick higher and didn't think he'd still be there at 50). Taylor is missing this pre-season because he's gone home bc he can't handle the stress on the afl environment... bullet dodged there.

SOURCE- the MFC 'draft event'. We were actually told 30 minutes before the draft, who we were going to take, and it worked out 99% right. We were told it was going to be out of Melksham, Gysberts or Lucas at pick 11. When Essendon took Melksham, Gysberts was the obvious choice (Lucas went 1 pick after to Carlton). We were then told at pick 18 we were hoping Tapscott would slide, but if not Gawn would be our man. We couldn't believe our luck with Tapscott. We were then told pick 34 was set aside for Jack Fitzpatrick, however when Gawn was still available at 34, we had to take him, and then luckily Fitzpatrick was there again at 50.

We can definitely sleep easy at night that Barry Prendergast knows exactly where each and every players is going to go, and has his boys with big X's on their backs.

Even in retrospect every one of his calls were pretty spot on. Perhaps the only 2 changes to make, where retrospect helps, perhaps they should have trusted their guts and taken Redden at 19, instead of Strauss, also they were tossing up between Jetta and Walters, in retrospect I think Walters might have been the better call. But that's really being technical.

[Axis of Bob 11,898]

Peanuts,

E25 has been aggressively attacking other posts without giving very much reasoning in return. He's just been loud, without actually saying anything. In the old adage 'put up or shut up', he's been doing very little of either. So when you asked him to give a phantom draft, then I thought I'd make it more difficult for him to wriggle out of.

He's inoffensive enough, but eventually someone had to call him on his lack of content.

I'm just trying to help him become a more considered poster that adds new thought to the forum.

[old55 23,833]

SOURCE- the MFC 'draft event'. We were actually told 30 minutes before the draft, who we were going to take, and it worked out 99% right. We were told it was going to be out of Melksham, Gysberts or Lucas at pick 11. When Essendon took Melksham, Gysberts was the obvious choice (Lucas went 1 pick after to Carlton). We were then told at pick 18 we were hoping Tapscott would slide, but if not Gawn would be our man. We couldn't believe our luck with Tapscott. We were then told pick 34 was set aside for Jack Fitzpatrick, however when Gawn was still available at 34, we had to take him, and then luckily Fitzpatrick was there again at 50.

It's a good post Sylvinator. The thing that stands out to me is how drafters opinions divide later on in the draft - we got Gawn (rated earlier than 18) at 34 and Fitzpatrick (rated earlier than 34) at 50. That just shows how valuable this year's picka at 32, 49 and 52 can be - again we could get access to players we rate in the top 20-30. It show why trading out Kyle Cheney for an extra earlier pick and making the hard decisions on Junior, PJ and TMac can pay off more than the seem to on the surface.

[Theo 276]

I think it's actually quite incredible how the recruiters go about their business. The Melbourne recruiters know 99% of what is going to go down on draft day before it happens. They know all the info their is to know about all players. Very rarely will a player be picked up that they don't expect. We also target in on the boys we want and invariably get them. Though it is worth noting that the last 2 drafts we relatively easy for us, with such high draft picks.

In 2008: The pick- who we wanted- who we got

- Pick 1- Jack Watts- Jack Watts

- Pick 17- Sam Blease, Lewis Johnston, or (if those 2 were gone) James Strauss- Sam Blease

- pick 19- James Strauss- James Strauss

- pick 35- Jamie Redden or Jamie Bennel- Jamie Bennel

- pick 51- Luke Rounds, Neville Jetta (or Michael Walters)- Neville Jetta

- pick 64- Rohan Bail- Rohan Bail

Also... although not much skill to it, we obviously got who we were targeting pick 1 PSD (Jurrah) and pick 1 rookie (McKenzie)

Essentially, in the National draft, we got 5 out of the 6 boys we were really targeting, only missing out of Redden, who went pick 25 (10 places higher than our pick 35), but got Bennel regardless who is a beauty!

SOURCE: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/breakfast-with-the-star-makers/story-e6frf9mf-1111118183298

In 2009: The pick- who we wanted- who we got

- pick 1- Tom Scully- Tom Scully

- pick 2- Jack Trengove- Jack Trengove

- pick 11- Melksham, Gysberts or Lucas- Gysberts

- pick 18- Tapscott or Max Gawn- Tapscott

- pick 34- Jack Fitzpatrick- Max Gawn

- Pick 50- Troy Taylor- Jack Fitzpatrick

Essentially we got all the players we were targeting pre-draft, except who Melksham (who went 1 pick earlier than us), but I rate Gysberts better anyways, and Troy Taylor (we rated Fitzpatrick higher and didn't think he'd still be there at 50). Taylor is missing this pre-season because he's gone home bc he can't handle the stress on the afl environment... bullet dodged there.

SOURCE- the MFC 'draft event'. We were actually told 30 minutes before the draft, who we were going to take, and it worked out 99% right. We were told it was going to be out of Melksham, Gysberts or Lucas at pick 11. When Essendon took Melksham, Gysberts was the obvious choice (Lucas went 1 pick after to Carlton). We were then told at pick 18 we were hoping Tapscott would slide, but if not Gawn would be our man. We couldn't believe our luck with Tapscott. We were then told pick 34 was set aside for Jack Fitzpatrick, however when Gawn was still available at 34, we had to take him, and then luckily Fitzpatrick was there again at 50.

We can definitely sleep easy at night that Barry Prendergast knows exactly where each and every players is going to go, and has his boys with big X's on their backs.

Even in retrospect every one of his calls were pretty spot on. Perhaps the only 2 changes to make, where retrospect helps, perhaps they should have trusted their guts and taken Redden at 19, instead of Strauss, also they were tossing up between Jetta and Walters, in retrospect I think Walters might have been the better call. But that's really being technical.

I believe the only mistake BP has made so far was the non-selection of Lewis Jetta in 2008. He was told by Neville jetta's mother that Lewis was by far the best Jetta. We could have at least done some last minute homework and taken him as a rookie instead of Rhys Healey.

[Axis of Bob 11,898]

It's very hard to do a phantom draft. Even when I watched a bit of junior footy, there is no way that you could ever see enough (unless you had access to all the videos) to be able to put them in a decent order. And then that's assuming that all clubs think the same way that you do. And you also don't have access to a player's mental ability or his background, or how he'd fit into a side personally. And separating different players (as old55 showed in his 'Best Available' thread) is nigh on impossible. It involves a whole lot of 'gut feel' rather than anything when you get to that level. Usually you can put players into categories with a bunch of other players and then it comes down to gut feel and how you think a player will fit into a team's style of play. I did a couple in my younger days and they were awful.

There are a few guys at each club who spend an entire year trying to put together a 'phantom draft', and then an actual draft where the phantom goes out the window. These guys know a hell of a lot more about footy than you or I.

So it's very easy to pot someone for doing a phantom draft. It's all guesswork because nobody knows. Even the best ones on BigFooty will have holes all through them. Look at the efforts of the past and you will see how accurate they are.

Matt Burgan would do a good one each year, and it wasn't because he knew all about the players, but rather because he spoke to recruiters .... who DID know all about the players. It's funny, though, because every single year he'd name players than nobody knew of (like Harry Taylor), and have a different order to the groupthink phantoms across the internet, and the entire online football community would scream that he had no idea and that the BigFooty drafts were far more accurate. And I didn't usually hear too many apologies afterwards when he was right, either.

[titan_uranus 25,174]

I think what everyone needs to realise (if they don't already) is that doing a phantom draft is like picking the lottery numbers. You get it right, people think you're some sort of psychic and you feel good about yourself.

But getting it wrong doesn't make you stupid. There are a lot of kids out there, and 17 different teams with 17 different recruitment ideas.

Having said that, there's only one person I listen to when it comes to this stuff, Emma Quayle. I don't care what anyone else says, whether they get it horribly wrong, or bang on the money.

[sylvinator 96]

Having said that, there's only one person I listen to when it comes to this stuff, Emma Quayle. I don't care what anyone else says, whether they get it horribly wrong, or bang on the money.

I think what you mean to say, it that you'll only listen to the actual recruiters, or the journalists who get their information from the recruiters. There is nothing particularly special about Emma Quayle, she doesn't watch an enourmous amount of underage footy, she gets almost 100% of her information from club recruiters. That makes her worth listening to, but no more than our own Matt Burgan or any other journalists who speak to recruiters.