If we get pick one, two or whatever it will still be a lottery. One of the pillars of the AFL's belief system is that the draft is an equalising force, while the salary cap keeps a lid on the powerful clubs. In theory the draft should be an equaliser but is it? Ignoring the expansion clubs excessive draft gouging of recent years if you look at drafts in the early to mid 2000's, the bottom clubs didn't always get the best talent. Selwood, Rioli, Darling , Dangerfield, Shuey, Fyfe, Rich, the list goes on.

My point is the AFL lives on the concept the draft order provides more than enough equalisation in talent. I say no because it is still a lottery in the top 20 odd picks, it seems. I think the lower sides just need access to a greater number of first and second round picks. Forget priorities, just talk an extra pick say mid round 1 and an extra early 2nd rounder if you have failed to win 4 games for the last xxx years for Gods sake!!! Is this asking too much?

I think it just shows, that there is often little separating players in the draft, especially at the early stages.

The deigned "number 1" pick may only be 2% better than pick 3, if you have some magical "talent worth counter".

Sometimes you might have 5% difference between picks 1 & 10, or picks 5 & 20.

In the end it's a raffle, and all the kids drafted early should have what it takes.

But you never really know until you get them in the system and see how they flourish.

But, as rpfc pointed out, you're talking about priority picks still.

And I'd be all for a priority pick at the end of the 1st round.

It's odds-on to provide as much value as a top 5 pick, and it's about getting that 2nd bite at the cherry.

Roos understood that, and it's why he traded pick 2 for Tyson & Salem.

I believe Luke Shuey was an end-of-1st-round priority pick.

Just gotta use it well.

With 18 players on the field, one player can only have so much influence. (Gary Ablett Jnr only racks up around 10% of GCS total SuperCoach points, which is an indicator of his value.) And given how difficult it is to postulate how 18 year old boys will develop, this means the draft is an extremely ineffective tool in evening up the competition.

The AFL should restrict the first round of the draft to only teams that miss the eight and then go in reverse ladder order for round 2. I would also be in favour of a weighted lottery for the first round.

This change is particularly necessary in a world of Free Agency.

While believing in always drafting best available, I would be trying to boost our midfield again at the end of the year. The game has changed and top midfielders are of much more value than good KPP these days. Look at who are the top players today (Ablett, Selwood, Watson, Dangerfield, Pendlebury and Mitchell) and compare that to yesteryear when it would have been Dunstall, Brereton, Carey, Kernahan and Lockett. Given our pick is likely to be very early again and much of the top end talent is KPPs, I would be in favour of trading down our pick(s) again.

I also think underage KPPs often look better draft prospects than they actually are because underage games are more open and there are more one-on-one marking contests.

While believing in always drafting best available, I would be trying to boost our midfield again at the end of the year. The game has changed and top midfielders are of much more value than good KPP these days. Look at who are the top players today (Ablett, Selwood, Watson, Dangerfield, Pendlebury and Mitchell) and compare that to yesteryear when it would have been Dunstall, Brereton, Carey, Kernahan and Lockett. Given our pick is likely to be very early again and much of the top end talent is KPPs, I would be in favour of trading down our pick(s) again.

I also think underage KPPs often look better draft prospects than they actually are because underage games are more open and there are more one-on-one marking contests.

We've lost Clark, Hogan is a mystery, Jamar is nearing the end, Spencer is not AFL standard, Gawn is another mystery... No way do we pick midfielders over KPPs if they are best available (Peter Wright).

With 18 players on the field, one player can only have so much influence. (Gary Ablett Jnr only racks up around 10% of GCS total SuperCoach points, which is an indicator of his value.) And given how difficult it is to postulate how 18 year old boys will develop, this means the draft is an extremely ineffective tool in evening up the competition.

The AFL should restrict the first round of the draft to only teams that miss the eight and then go in reverse ladder order for round 2. I would also be in favour of a weighted lottery for the first round.

This change is particularly necessary in a world of Free Agency.

Agree completely and have thought about this idea for a while trying to contemplate equalization strategies. Doubt it would ever happen but i would like to see this-

First 20 picks for teams who miss the 8.

So each team who misses the 8 gets two top twenty picks. 2^nd round- top 8 chooses two picks, after this a snake order is implemented for the rest

18th- 1,11, 37, 72, 73, 108

17^th-2,12, 38,71, 74, 107

16^th-3,13, 39,70,75, 106

15^th-4,14,40,69,76, 105

14^th-5,15,41,68,77, 104

13^th-6,16,42,67,78, 103

12^th-7,17,43,66,79, 102

11^th-8,18,44,65,80, 101

10^th- 9,19,45, 64,81, 100

9^th- 10,20,46, 63, 82, 99

8^th- 21,29,47,62, 83, 98

7^th- 22,30,48,61,84, 97

6^th-23,31,49,60,85, 96

5^th-24,32,50,59, 86, 95

4^th-25,33,51,58,87, 94

3^rd-26,34,52,57, 88, 93

2^nd-27,35,53, 56, 89, 92

1^st- 28,36,54, 55, 90, 91

We've lost Clark, Hogan is a mystery, Jamar is nearing the end, Spencer is not AFL standard, Gawn is another mystery... No way do we pick midfielders over KPPs if they are best available (Peter Wright).

I agree that we need to target a ruckman, but we would be better off trading for one.

I agree that we need to target a ruckman, but we would be better off trading for one.

Wright is the likely number 1 pick and is a true ruck/forward swingman type. He's a big unit who's ready to play straight up. Can't pass him up! Would give us a decent succession with Jamar and Spencer doing the job while Gawn develops, then Gawn becoming the senior ruck while Wright develops and they share the role.

Wright is the likely number 1 pick and is a true ruck/forward swingman type. He's a big unit who's ready to play straight up. Can't pass him up! Would give us a decent succession with Jamar and Spencer doing the job while Gawn develops, then Gawn becoming the senior ruck while Wright develops and they share the role.

1. We may not have pick 1.

2. Ruckmen/hit outs are highly overrated.

3. A good ruckman can be acquired in other ways or later in the draft. (Think of Mumford, Grundy, Cox, Sandilands, Jacobs, Maric, McIntosh, Hale, McEvoy, Pyke etc)

4. The press has reduced the impact of KPFs in the AFL, as they must push up the ground to defend and so they don't lead up at the ball as they do in underage footy.

5. Hogan will come good eventually.

Considering there are so many highly rated talls available, and look to go early in the draft, coupled with few comparable quality mids, what would you choose then?

I'm leaning towards Goddard personally.

Versatile, professional, same mentality as his cousin.

1. We may not have pick 1.

2. Ruckmen/hit outs are highly overrated.

3. A good ruckman can be acquired in other ways or later in the draft. (Think of Mumford, Grundy, Cox, Sandilands, Jacobs, Maric, McIntosh, Hale, McEvoy, Pyke etc)

4. The press has reduced the impact of KPFs in the AFL, as they must push up the ground to defend and so they don't lead up at the ball as they do in underage footy.

5. Hogan will come good eventually.

1. I know that. You will notice I said we take best available.

2. Agree to a point. But a good ruckman will help us with our extremely poor rate of clearances, and a ruckman that can truly play forward is gold.

3. Any type of good player MIGHT be acquired later in the draft or by other means. As I've said, Wright is a TRUE forward/ruck.

4. Read up about Wright, he's very mobile for a big man.

5. How do you know that? Misson doesn't even know that, hence "indefinitely". Then he may even go home next year anyway.

From the AFL site:

"Wright is a 203cm forward/ruckman who has outstanding goalkicking skills, can mark well on the lead, and likes to roam up the ground where he has rucked at different stages."

Edited April 30, 201411 yr by stuie

Considering there are so many highly rated talls available, and look to go early in the draft, coupled with few comparable quality mids, what would you choose then?

We should look to split the pick(s) like we did last year. Goddard might actually develop into a tall mid like his cousin.

He might develop into exactly what we hope for with Watts.

What we need is to put "leadership" and "potential" at the bottom of the list and "Able to play the game" and "Can hit a moving target" right at the top. It's a bit of a reversal on what we've done the last few years, but I think it could pay off.

you want bennell back?

Considering there are so many highly rated talls available, and look to go early in the draft, coupled with few comparable quality mids, what would you choose then?

I'm leaning towards Goddard personally.

Versatile, professional, same mentality as his cousin.

Like the look of McCartin myself, if we end up with a couple of early picks him and Goddard would be good choices.

A lot will depend on Frawley and a PP pick.

Wright is the likely number 1 pick and is a true ruck/forward swingman type. He's a big unit who's ready to play straight up. Can't pass him up! Would give us a decent succession with Jamar and Spencer doing the job while Gawn develops, then Gawn becoming the senior ruck while Wright develops and they share the role.

Same was said of FRASER & KRUEZAR, no thankyou trade the pick for two quality mids & target ruckman not getting regular game in their sides the same way other clubs have managed to get hold of Jolly, Mumford, Hale & Jacobs. Cox & Sandilands came via the Rookie draft and I do not want to take another chance on WRIGHT

Edited April 30, 201411 yr by Pennant St Dee

While believing in always drafting best available, I would be trying to boost our midfield again at the end of the year. The game has changed and top midfielders are of much more value than good KPP these days. Look at who are the top players today (Ablett, Selwood, Watson, Dangerfield, Pendlebury and Mitchell) and compare that to yesteryear when it would have been Dunstall, Brereton, Carey, Kernahan and Lockett. Given our pick is likely to be very early again and much of the top end talent is KPPs, I would be in favour of trading down our pick(s) again.

I also think underage KPPs often look better draft prospects than they actually are because underage games are more open and there are more one-on-one marking contests.

I agree with this if you have a good midfield it will make who ever in your forward line look better we could have Lockett in his prime playing for us but if we only get the ball in the forward 50 half a dozen times a game he ain't gonna kick much goal. Trade our first round pick like the Tyson deal last year maybe nath freeman and collingwoods first pick for our first pick. I wud love to get a gws mid eg shiel but I don't think they will be interested in the kpf predicted to go 1 or 2

I'm at the point now where I just don't care about the draft anymore in reference to the number of our first round pick.

Look through any draft and you can see the best player being obtained from any number in the top 10, sometimes in the 20's or even 30's.

It also takes years for a player to break out and show their full "potential", sometimes they never get there.

So really I don't care if we have pick 1, 2 or 3, I will happily see it traded again for another Tyson and Salem. Taking that punt on a pick 1 might get us another Watts, Gibbs or Kruezer all of which have underperformed, or alternatively yes a Murphy or Deledio but it's still a flip of a coin and no certainty for success - just over exaggerated media hype that takes years to determine if the pick comes to fruition.

All I ask is that the recruiting department makes well calculated and smart decisions by stacking the odds in their favour (e.g. 2 quality players with high "potential" like Tyson and Salem for 1 with high "potential" player being Kelly). I also ask they rank the players based on talent and output not entirely athletic "potential" (NOTEI love draftees that win a lot of the contested possession as they are more likely to succeed). For years clubs have let players slide because they may consider them a bit too much of a "plodder" like Luke Dunstan, or lack that physical frame like Nathan Fyfe, or will never have a big enough tank to play AFL football like Tom Rockliff - all of which killed their final U18 year. I hope they STOP drafting "smoky's" at relatively important picks like they did last year on Jayden Hunt. Nothing against him but he could have been obtained with our second Rookie pick, using his pick on say an Eli Templeton who was rated quite highly by a range of clubs.

Not only do I want the club to get their first pick "right" (there is a greater probability of doing this), I think it is equally if not more important to get those later picks "right" and those that are usually correct are selections of those players that slide due to physical traits like JKH's height or a presumed lack of fitness like T. Rockliff and S. Mitchell that produced highly (excellent stats) during their U18 years.

Same was said of FRASER & KRUEZAR, no thankyou trade the pick for two quality mids & target ruckman not getting regular game in their sides the same way other clubs have managed to get hold of Jolly, Mumford, Hale & Jacobs. Cox & Sandilands came via the Rookie draft and I do not want to take another chance on WRIGHT

I'm not so fussed with Wright but I would like to pick up another KPP at least, particularly if Frawley goes. If we were to give up an early pick it would need to be for real quality though. It will be a bit different to the Tyson/Kelly trade as this time a KPP will be up for grabs and that is worth a lot to a club like Carlton, Adelaide, St Kilda, Brisbane(although they will be at the pointy end anyway), Footscray and maybe Collingwood. Would these clubs give up Sloane or Beams for a KPP chance.

I'm 100% with you on picking up a ruckman and chances are it will be one of the guys in WA, be very surprised if the club is not all over this.

Edited April 30, 201411 yr by rjay

Same was said of FRASER & KRUEZAR, no thankyou trade the pick for two quality mids & target ruckman not getting regular game in their sides the same way other clubs have managed to get hold of Jolly, Mumford, Hale & Jacobs. Cox & Sandilands came via the Rookie draft and I do not want to take another chance on WRIGHT

We need a big forward and a good ruck, Wright is both of those things. Plenty of mids who were drafted turned out no good either, terrible logic. Tell me who this great ruck is who isn't getting a regular game somewhere and will take over from Jamar/Spencer? Name some.

Edited April 30, 201411 yr by stuie

We need a big forward and a good ruck, Wright is both of those things. Plenty of mids who were drafted turned out no good either, terrible logic. Tell me who this great ruck is who isn't getting a regular game somewhere and will take over from Jamar/Spencer? Name some.

'stuie', ''Pennant has named a few on another thread. I agree with him on this, I really like the look of Sinclair at the Eagles. Very athletic and can go forward. there is also Clark and Griffen at Freo.

http:///forums/index.php?/topic/36291-players-to-target-at-the-end-of-the-year/page-6

http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/36291-players-to-target-at-the-end-of-the-year/page-6

Edited April 30, 201411 yr by rjay

I'm at the point now where I just don't care about the draft anymore in reference to the number of our first round pick.

Look through any draft and you can see the best player being obtained from any number in the top 10, sometimes in the 20's or even 30's.

It also takes years for a player to break out and show their full "potential", sometimes they never get there.

So really I don't care if we have pick 1, 2 or 3, I will happily see it traded again for another Tyson and Salem. Taking that punt on a pick 1 might get us another Watts, Gibbs or Kruezer all of which have underperformed, or alternatively yes a Murphy or Deledio but it's still a flip of a coin and no certainty for success - just over exaggerated media hype that takes years to determine if the pick comes to fruition.

All I ask is that the recruiting department makes well calculated and smart decisions by stacking the odds in their favour (e.g. 2 quality players with high "potential" like Tyson and Salem for 1 with high "potential" player being Kelly). I also ask they rank the players based on talent and output not entirely athletic "potential" (NOTEI love draftees that win a lot of the contested possession as they are more likely to succeed). For years clubs have let players slide because they may consider them a bit too much of a "plodder" like Luke Dunstan, or lack that physical frame like Nathan Fyfe, or will never have a big enough tank to play AFL football like Tom Rockliff - all of which killed their final U18 year. I hope they STOP drafting "smoky's" at relatively important picks like they did last year on Jayden Hunt. Nothing against him but he could have been obtained with our second Rookie pick, using his pick on say an Eli Templeton who was rated quite highly by a range of clubs.

Not only do I want the club to get their first pick "right" (there is a greater probability of doing this), I think it is equally if not more important to get those later picks "right" and those that are usually correct are selections of those players that slide due to physical traits like JKH's height or a presumed lack of fitness like T. Rockliff and S. Mitchell that produced highly (excellent stats) during their U18 years.

Says who?

Hunt may not have been on your list, but by the sounds of it a few clubs had monitored him.

You're not to know where another team may have picked him, or that no other team was interested.

Just because it wasn't all over the AFL website, doesn't mean he must a longshot project.

And you're going very early on him.

In regards to Templeton, I heard a number of clubs put a line through him due to attitude.

NB. Fyfe was a smoky, in a similar vein.

Says who?

Hunt may not have been on your list, but by the sounds of it a few clubs had monitored him.

You're not to know where another team may have picked him, or that no other team was interested.

Just because it wasn't all over the AFL website, doesn't mean he must a longshot project.

And you're going very early on him.

In regards to Templeton, I heard a number of clubs put a line through him due to attitude.

I'm not as impressed by Templeton as some are so far, but boy haven't we heard that line before?

I'd have loved if we forgot about the attitude for a second when we were considering Dustin Martin, or Jack Darling.

'stuie', ''Pennant has named a few on another thread. I agree with him on this, I really like the look of Sinclair at the Eagles. Very athletic and can go forward. there is also Clark and Griffen at Freo.

http:///forums/index.php?/topic/36291-players-to-target-at-the-end-of-the-year/page-6

http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/36291-players-to-target-at-the-end-of-the-year/page-6

I really don't think any of those guys are a big enough step up from what we have.

I'm not as impressed by Templeton as some are so far, but boy haven't we heard that line before?

I'd have loved if we forgot about the attitude for a second when we were considering Dustin Martin, or Jack Darling.

I don't think that necessarily means attitude as in having a bad temper, or likes to bully the opposition, or is arrogant.

Maybe he drops his bundle when things don't go his way?

Maybe he doesn't follow coaches instructions when he disagrees?

Maybe he has issues with his work ethic?

It could mean anything.

Having said that, I'm bloody glad we don't have Dustin Martin. We don't need to be babysitting anyone.

He'll be an impediment to any progress Richmond might make.

Darling had a lot of bad press, but not much more.

A lot of clubs got spooked, and probably feel very stupid about it now.