Geelong Eyeing Our Picks

[No10 466]

5 hours ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

That’s essentially the old Academy/Father-Son bidding system. Now the AFL use a Draft Value Index which assigns a relative points value for each pick. Because Green is one of GWS’s Academy Players, they will get a discount so their pick 6 will beat our pick 3 and they’ll pick him up. If they trade 6 for 14 and 17, pick 14 alone wouldn’t be enough to trump our bid. I’m not sure on the value of each pick pick but 14 and 17 combined may not be enough to beat our bid.

Right - so only trading up can give them two top 20 picks. Top 5 in fact.

I agree there’s a solid reason trading to 8. Seems more likely p3 will trade... and for some reason I can’t get that excited about Young.

[old55 23,860]

7 hours ago, No10 said:

Let’s say Kemp at 8 could be an option. But what happens if we bid on Green at 3?

GWS have 6. What are the rules for them to do this trade to Geelong: p6 for 14&17. I understand they get Green with 14 and later picks, then still have 17.

They’re not going to do nothing and waste 6 if they can do the split. Or am I misunderstanding the system?

GWS get 20% discount on the bid pick points.  They have to use their next highest picks in order.

They would get Green and 43 as change from 14 and 17 on a bid at pick 3.

[Demon Dynasty 17,165]

On 11/16/2019 at 3:27 AM, Pennant St Dee said:

No Im with you DD

3 & 8 Jackson/Young & Robertson/Kemp looks good

3, 14 & 17 Jackson/Young, Robertson/Weightman/Bergman & Sharp also looks good

I could be wrong but vm doubt the likes of Young or Roberston will slide to 14.

Even Weightman is more likely at about 12 but might still be there at 14/17, who knows.

Bergman and Sharp yes.  Sharp late teens and Bergman probably a tad later around mid 20s.

There's a couple of young fellas as small forward options that haven't been spoken about much that would also be worth looking at if we end up splitting pick 8 and somehow end up with say a pick in the 30s to 40s range  (assuming we missed getting Taylor & Pickett for some reason).  Both were very impressive in the u18 Nats.  Rosas probably more handy as a goal sneak than Ace.  Both very raw (especially Ace) and a WIP but worth considering.  Please note i am suggesting these purely on needs and assuming we missed both of Pickett and Taylor for whatever reason, certainly not 'the best available' as is often mentioned/preferred.

https://afl.draftcentral.com.au/player/malcolm-rosas/

https://draftprospects.prod.afl/prospect/1005986

http://www.looppng.com/sport/png-footballer-nominated-rising-star-award-84316

 

Edited November 17, 2019 by Rusty Nails

[Mach5 4,768]

I’d say more likely, if Geelong really do want pick 8, they give us 14 & 17, then we take Weightman & Pickett.

If those players are gone, I think we’ll end up with a “slider” who no one thought would be available at that stage, similar to Stocker last year.

[Pennant St Dee 13,452]

2 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

I could be wrong but vm doubt the likes of Young or Roberston will slide to 14.

Even Weightman is more likely at about 12 but might still be there at 14/17, who knows.

Bergman and Sharp yes.  Sharp late teens and Bergman probably a tad later around mid 20s.

There's a couple of young fellas as small forward options that haven't been spoken about much that would also be worth looking at if we end up splitting pick 8 and somehow end up with say a pick in the 30s to 40s range  (assuming we missed getting Taylor & Pickett for some reason).  Both were very impressive in the u18 Nats.  Rosas probably more handy as a goal sneak than Ace.  Both very raw (especially Ace) and a WIP but worth considering.  Please note i am suggesting these purely on needs and assuming we missed both of Pickett and Taylor for whatever reason, certainly not 'the best available' as is often mentioned/preferred.

https://afl.draftcentral.com.au/player/malcolm-rosas/

https://draftprospects.prod.afl/prospect/1005986

http://www.looppng.com/sport/png-footballer-nominated-rising-star-award-84316

 

I'm saying Young or Jackson at 3, that's why I have them together in both scenarios 

Robertson could go anywhere from 7 to 15. If Freo get a shot at Jackson with their first pick they will take him all depends on them having to make a bid on Henry before pick 10. If they do then they won't be able to get Robertson and I think he could slide to Hawks or Geelong

[Demon trucker 1,800]

On 11/16/2019 at 12:10 AM, Pulp Fritschon said:

I don’t like it but invariably where there is smoke there is fire. Oliver came from the clouds but the media were all over that. Same here.  

Maybe in this the time of live trading it is all smoke.  Who knows. Doesn’t make sense to me. Seems like a massive gamble. We will soon know 

The biggest difference between Jackson and Oliver was Oliver won the best player in the tac cup, and roos said he was the best player in the draft, I dought anyone feels like the same about this Jackson, I reckon it's fake news and a ruse to trick Fremantle to offer picks 10 and 22 for 8, with a promise that we not pick him with pick 3. The guy will still be there at 8. This Jackson smells a bit like Courtney Johns all hype and no results

[Demon Disciple 12,536]

Geelong can eye our picks right up to the moment we call our player's come draft night. That's as close as i'd let them get.

[Demon Dynasty 17,165]

2 hours ago, Pennant St Dee said:

I'm saying Young or Jackson at 3, that's why I have them together in both scenarios 

Robertson could go anywhere from 7 to 15. If Freo get a shot at Jackson with their first pick they will take him all depends on them having to make a bid on Henry before pick 10. If they do then they won't be able to get Robertson and I think he could slide to Hawks or Geelong

Would love to get Henry with 3.  Is there any chance Freo pass if we bid and instead use 7 on Jackson and also keep 10 for say Roberston?

[dazzledavey36 56,334]

30 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

Would love to get Henry with 3.  Is there any chance Freo pass if we bid and instead use 7 on Jackson and also keep 10 for say Roberston?

Pick 3 is far too high for Henry.

[ding 5,126]

I havent invested much energy at all on researching the draft this year. Far too many times in the past have i got super excited about our draft pick based on what has been said about them in the run-up to the draft, only to be super disappointed a year or so later when they didnt match the hype.... or even come close.

What has interested me reading the Draft threads this year has been the evolution of how people are talking about it.

Plenty said early on that 1 and 2 were were almost certain to be fantastic players, but then the draft fell off a cliff.

Now there are almost as many posters happy for us to trade DOWN the draft order, as we "can still get what we want" (Paraphrasing)

I will stick with Young and Kemp at 3 & 8, but i have no idea about their likely quality so i cant even explain why. I do like the idea of Youngs kicking quality, but a certain J.Strauss once had me just as excited. Laser boot someone called him at the time. That went well.

I will be feeling all warm and fuzzy draft night no matter who we pick, but absolutely nobody can be sure how well we drafted, and we wont know for a year or 3 regardless of who gets picked on the night.

Im happy for North to "win the draft" again, as long as our players turn out better in the long run.

[MyFavouriteMartian 572]

On 11/15/2019 at 7:30 PM, TheoX said:

"Melbourne is expected to call out West Australian ruckman Luke Jackson’s name with Pick 3"

[censored] hope not.

Lets hope Freo have the sense to offer us 7 & 10 for p3.  Otherwise they will not get NicNats replacement back from us.

 

With us getting Langdon and Tomlinson, we have strengthened our midfield aerial strength, and our midfield run.  This covers off the loss of T McDonald's midfield run and marking, beyond the 50. 

I think they are rebuilding TMcDonald to play more a power forward role.  Which he was poor at this year.

 

I wouldn't want to be in Preuss's boots in 2020.   I would be playing him to get him up to speed as a ruckman in his own right, ready to trade at end of season to the Suns, for a player or decent pick, in return.

The Suns will be just about ready for a powerful physical ruckman, for 2021 season.

 

[old55 23,860]

8 hours ago, MyFavouriteMartian said:

 

The Suns will be just about ready for a powerful physical ruckman, for 2021 season.

 

Jarrod Witts?

[Demon Dynasty 17,165]

13 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Pick 3 is far too high for Henry.

In an outright sense possibly DD.  On a needs basis (for us) though, i think he very much is in terms of top 10 from the u18s anyway.

Whether that's 3, 7, 8 or 10 etc who knows but personally i feel he will go inside the top 10.

There's plenty of talent no doubt but i can't think of anyone else who is significantly better who fits the bill (for us...and no doubt a few others) in terms of a smallish athletic outside runner who can play wing / HF with the class/finish/commitment and tricks of this bloke.

I agree he may not go at 3 but that's only because we might not bid on him with 3 and the Dockers get a free shot with their pick 7 (or lower if they split down).

He is obviously 95% Dockers bound regardless so yes, if they split 7 they might only need to use 10 to get him which obviously isn't pick 3.

[drysdale demon 4,837]

8 hours ago, MyFavouriteMartian said:

I think they are rebuilding TMcDonald to play more a power forward role.  Which he was poor at this year.

 

I wouldn't want to be in Preuss's boots in 2020.   I would be playing him to get him up to speed as a ruckman in his own right, ready to trade at end of season to the Suns, for a player or decent pick, in return.

The Suns will be just about ready for a powerful physical ruckman, for 2021 season.

No they are not, he  plays at his best when moving.

Preuss will not be traded, he is at least insurance on the list, I expect him to improve significantly over the next couple of years'

[Nasher 33,686]

On 11/15/2019 at 7:57 PM, The Lobster Effect said:

 

What that shows is how dumb it is when people equate the value of a draft pick by players who have been taken in that position in the past. Going off that graph, if you had pick 4, you'd trade it for pick 5 as you have a higher likelihood of getting a good long term player.

[MyFavouriteMartian 572]

4 hours ago, drysdale demon said:

No they are not, he  plays at his best when moving.

Preuss will not be traded, he is at least insurance on the list, I expect him to improve significantly over the next couple of years'

Yes, I know that, but moving on Hogan has left the spot open, & Tom Mc is our most experienced tall who marks the ball.

His high half forward role has been filled by Tomlinson, that's why we recruited him specifically.  They have almost the same skill-sets, endurance, strong overhead, running power. 

How do you know that Toms foot won't allow him to cover so many miles, anymore?

 

Langdon coming onboard fills our needs of midfield running power, with some speed.  Eliminating the Immediate need for Young.  Stephens would be more than enough acquisition.

And Ash has the step/weave through traffic, we need.  

Maybe a Weightman, might also add some step to our list.

Edited November 18, 2019 by MyFavouriteMartian

[SFebes 4,884]

Haven't read the thread but the big factor for me is, IF this year was just a one off we'd be mad not to swoop on top end talent/A graders....we may not be back down this far again for a while. Future picks don't do it for me. Just a thought.

[Grimes Times 1,278]

21 hours ago, don't make me angry said:

The biggest difference between Jackson and Oliver was Oliver won the best player in the tac cup, and roos said he was the best player in the draft, I dought anyone feels like the same about this Jackson, I reckon it's fake news and a ruse to trick Fremantle to offer picks 10 and 22 for 8, with a promise that we not pick him with pick 3. The guy will still be there at 8. This Jackson smells a bit like Courtney Johns all hype and no results

The biggest difference between Jackson and Oliver is that Oliver didn't even get picked to play in the nationals while Jackson was runner up on the Larke medal.

[Demon3 2,541]

With Port now having picks 12, 16 & 18 i wonder if they will try to get inside teh top 10, i think they will. Our Pick 8 is becoming very valuable. Could pick 8 become 12 & 16.. better that 14 & 17, albeit just.

[DeeSpencer 26,675]

2 hours ago, Demon3 said:

With Port now having picks 12, 16 & 18 i wonder if they will try to get inside teh top 10, i think they will. Our Pick 8 is becoming very valuable. Could pick 8 become 12 & 16.. better that 14 & 17, albeit just.

Could be helpful for a trade, could be unhelpful if we do the Cats deal for 17 and they take Kossie Pickett at 16!

[JakovichScissorKick 771]

 

Port just made Geelongs hand a lot weaker...I love that.

[Demons1858 1,823]

8 hours ago, Nasher said:

What that shows is how dumb it is when people equate the value of a draft pick by players who have been taken in that position in the past. Going off that graph, if you had pick 4, you'd trade it for pick 5 as you have a higher likelihood of getting a good long term player.

Nasher, the reason you get such variability is because its such a small sample size. If you drew a linear line to best fit the graph it would show a downward trend. The quality of picks after 7 drops significantly. l would also treat pick 13 is an outlier and ignore it. To increase the sample size you could bundle picks 1 to 3, 4 to 7 and 7 plus. A chart with those 3 data points would show the decline in games by picks alot more clearly

Edited November 18, 2019 by Demons1858

[Demons1858 1,823]

This chart shows the drop in games better. Player quality flat lines around pick 8 to 20. So there may be some merit in the argument that we trade pick 8 out for 2 picks between say 10 and 20. The argument against this would be that by all reports this draft pool is deeper so pick 8 may be better than the historical average

Edited November 18, 2019 by Demons1858

[Lampers 563]

On 11/18/2019 at 10:19 PM, Demons1858 said:

This chart shows the drop in games better. Player quality flat lines around pick 8 to 20. So there may be some merit in the argument that we trade pick 8 out for 2 picks between say 10 and 20. The argument against this would be that by all reports this draft pool is deeper so pick 8 may be better than the historical average

This is interesting, but I think a more revealing analysis would be the percentage of games played (discounting games missed due to injury) as unless this graph is for completed careers (in which case it’s quite old data from when drafting was less sophisticated) it can only be a work in progress graph.

Say what you want about McCartin’s ability, but his concussion issues aren’t something that mean anything for future #1 picks. Polak being reached for early as a WA player by Freo, then getting hit by a tram. Those factors shouldn’t influence future #4 pick success likelihood. Our own Luke Molan basically never getting on the park doesn’t mean #9 is cursed, ditto Morabito.

Add to this that I’m positive very early draft picks get more chances than later ones for senior games to both appease fans and sell some hope, and in an attempt to justify their high selection. There was lots I liked about Watts, but I’m sure if he was pick 13 or 35 he would’ve played 20-30 fewer games than he did for Melbourne.

One other factor is obviously the earliest picks also go to the weakest teams in general, meaning there is less competition for senior games. GCS and GWS would have skewed some of this data as pretty much the only players they could play in their first few years or existence were extremely high draft selections.

Brownlow votes per game available for selection would be a (flawed) independent measure of chance of getting a really top line player. Or for more recent players the coaches votes per game available for selection would be another way to do it.

80 odd Neale Daniher games vs. 150 odd James Walker or Byron Schammer games...