Welcome to Demonland - Picks 18 & 19

[Lucifers Hero 39,732]

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

The strategy might also reflect Goodwin's and/or the club's concern that unless the club does well this year, there might not be a "next year" for the current football department. Just like politics, the needs for short-term decisions might interfere with the greater good. I hope that's not the case, but it's a possibility that shouldn't be ignored. 

I wondered about that strategy.  And like you I hope such shortsightedness is not the case.

fwiw, if we are relying on 3 or 4 newly drafted 18 year olds (in practice 2nd round picks) to succeed in 2021, it is starting to feel all a bit too desperate. 

The chances of them getting games (even if we happen to swap some picks for one higher) I reckon this years draftees will come in less developed for not having played much in 2020 so will need a bit more development and time especially those from Victoria.  New draftees won't materially affect 2021 results.

imv we either have the list to succeed already or we won't succeed. 

[drdrake 3,163]

If you look at our list the biggest need is for versatile Mids.  What I read in most Mock Drafts there seem to be a number of these that will be available in the Top 35 of the draft.  All I know is the players we draft will have similar profiles speed, good Kick can play inside/outside Mid, also can push forward or back of Half Back(one or the other).

I can't see us taking any talls

[Lucifers Hero 39,732]

It would be fair to assume we traded out our 2021, 1st round pick to help get high up the order this year. 

I have a theory about our pick swapping and what now look like limited options to get into the top 10 - 12 (which go out to 14 - 16 after affiliated picks). 

My theory is that we (and few other clubs) did not expect so much draft power in a few hands:  Ess and GWS.

I doubt anyone would have predicted that Ess would end up with 6, 7 and 8, thinking that one of them would have gone for Dunkley.  Or prediced that GWS would prise picks 13, 15 and 20 from Geelong (to add to their pick 10).  Even fewer would have predicted both outcomes.

Ess and GWS will dictate the draft order of the top 20 picks. 

If my theory is correct we have been snookered by circumstances.  Maybe we swapped our 2021, 1st too early.  It would come in mighty handy for pick swaps in the coming weeks. 

That power Ess and GWS hold and that lots of clubs are vying for the high draft picks they will be very  'expensive' and we may just not have the currency to go further up the order.

Edited November 27, 2020 by Lucifer's Hero

[Axis of Bob 11,785]

2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

While we have been successful trading picks to go up the draft order we haven't got as high as we would like in the last two years.  I recall mention on DL that we tried to trade up in 2018 to get Zac Butters and in 2019 to get Mitch Georgiades but we didn't get high enough (or able to split a high pick).  I guess that is the risk of regularly trading out future 1st round picks and then miss targetted players.   

I wonder who we really want this year?  Hopefully we can get him.

 

I'm not sure about the bolded part. Last year we successfully traded up to get Pickett. We asked about trading up on draft night to get Georgiades (a future fourth rounder), but we didn't have any draft assets so it wasn't really a serious bid.  In 2018 we didn't trade our future first round pick at all (which is lucky, because it turned out to be Jackson in 2019) so, whilst we probably liked Butters, we were obviously not that serious about trading our future first (along with a second rounder or two) to select him. 

[Axis of Bob 11,785]

35 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

It would be fair to assume we traded out our 2021, 1st round pick to help get high up the order this year. 

 

I'm not sure that's a correct assumption. I see it more as being that the club saw 2021 picks as being overvalued by the market, and 2020 picks as being undervalued by the market. As a result we have sold our expensive 2021 pick for some bargain 2020 picks. I think it's a value trade, most of all. 

[Adam The God 30,218]

3 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

The strategy might also reflect Goodwin's and/or the club's concern that unless the club does well this year, there might not be a "next year" for the current football department. Just like politics, the needs for short-term decisions might interfere with the greater good. I hope that's not the case, but it's a possibility that shouldn't be ignored. 

I don't really buy this angle. We're looking at picking kids. If we're resting our hopes on 3 or 4 new kids coming into the team and radically changing it ala Port a few years ago, I don't believe that's a sound strategy. Way too much of a lotto. 

I think we have our eye on 2 or 3 we think might slide to our picks and we're happy enough with our position in 2020 that a few interesting kids could slip. 2021, we simply do the same thing again and trade in. It's a credit strategy and I like it. 

[old55 23,541]

It totally defies logic to suggest that the 2021 draft pool is known to be better than 2020 draft pool.

If 2020 players are under-exposed because of Covid then that goes double for 2021 candidates.

There may be eligible players undrafted in 2020 because of lack of exposure but there are ample opportunities to list any bolters during the 2021 season ahead of the 2021 draft.

Yes, when we get to the 2021 draft there will be more certainty about the candidates than there is in 2020, but it could easily be that it's certain it's a worse draft than 2020.

Edited November 27, 2020 by Pollyanna

[buck_nekkid 5,856]

11 minutes ago, Pollyanna said:

It totally defies logic to suggest that the 2021 draft pool is known to be better than 2020 draft pool.

If 2020 players are under-exposed because of Covid then that goes double for 2021 candidates.

There may be eligible players undrafted in 2020 because of lack of exposure but there are ample opportunities to list any bolters during the 2021 season ahead of the 2021 draft.

Yes, when we get to the 2021 draft there will be more certainty about the candidates than there is in 2020, but it could easily be that it's certain it's a worse draft than 2020.

Don’t think we are looking for a tall, and we won’t have enough points to grab a top flight one anyway.  Looking at the phantom drafts, I reckon there are about 6 kids that any two would be great pickups for us (wingers and small forward types), so 18 and 19 is a great hand.  Who knows this year- might get a lot of value with some quality kids slipping with all the lack of exposure.

it won’t take much to get back in round 1 next year if a name player leaves.  Otherwise I think the whole points thing changes with the restrictions on top 20 picks for academy picks.  We simply get a 12 month development head start on a kid this year.

 

[deanox 9,912]

5 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

trades-analysis

"Melbourne (38) was one of the rare teams trying to trade into this year’s draft, rather than trading into 2021 for bid-matching or pure talent purposes.

Simon Goodwin’s team clearly feels there’s talent to be gained this year, sending out all four of their future picks, including being the only team to trade away their 2021 first-round pick.

In the process they landed selections 18 and 19, along with 28 and 50, which will either allow them to again package up picks to move even higher, or simply take four quality kids.

There’s a risk to this, because the 2020 draft crop is as unknown a group as we’ve had in recent years - given the inability of most to play under-18s footy this year - but if they trust their recruiters, this could be a defining month for the Demons".

Do we know something other clubs don't? 

Certainly JT is one to trust as he has runs on the board.  But, given the talent in next years draft (as signalled by clubs wanting to trade into 2021) are we playing 'russian roulette' trying to cherry pick this year's talents with picks that will be mid 20's plus or mid to late teens (if we can engineer a trade up for such a pick).

While we have been successful trading picks to go up the draft order we haven't got as high as we would like in the last two years.  I recall mention on DL that we tried to trade up in 2018 to get Zac Butters and in 2019 to get Mitch Georgiades but we didn't get high enough (or able to split a high pick).  I guess that is the risk of regularly trading out future 1st round picks and then miss targetted players.   

I wonder who we really want this year?  Hopefully we can get him.

 

 

4 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

The strategy might also reflect Goodwin's and/or the club's concern that unless the club does well this year, there might not be a "next year" for the current football department. Just like politics, the needs for short-term decisions might interfere with the greater good. I hope that's not the case, but it's a possibility that shouldn't be ignored. 

If they were going short term then they would have traded all the picks for players. That we are taking the picks to the draft now and not in 2021 is a medium term strategy not short term strategy.

 

I am calling Occam's Razor here: the club rate our list as quite good and think we have underperformed. They are betting that we will rise up the ladder and our picks will be worth less in the future.

Pick 18 and 19 this year is arguably better than just pick 15 or 16 next. We swapped our 2nd, 3rd and 4th next year for other clubs as well. Brisbane's 2nd, Dogs 3rd and Norths 4th. I reckon we are betting that will be a collective win.

 

[deanox 9,912]

Also why not read direct quotes:

 

"The best way to look at it is we’re bringing our First Round pick forward a year, as we did last year when we were able to secure Kozzy Pickett.

"We believe that there is more of a variety of player in this year's draft (compared to next year) which suit the type of players we need on our list.

"We think there is an opportunity this year, with the lack of footy that has been played by the Victorians, that clubs lists could potentially be more different than usual.

“There’s definitely the potential that players we rate very highly in this draft could still be available with our three picks.” 

[Mach5 4,767]

On 11/27/2020 at 8:31 AM, Lucifer's Hero said:

trades-analysis

"Melbourne (38) was one of the rare teams trying to trade into this year’s draft, rather than trading into 2021 for bid-matching or pure talent purposes.

Simon Goodwin’s team clearly feels there’s talent to be gained this year, sending out all four of their future picks, including being the only team to trade away their 2021 first-round pick.

In the process they landed selections 18 and 19, along with 28 and 50, which will either allow them to again package up picks to move even higher, or simply take four quality kids.

There’s a risk to this, because the 2020 draft crop is as unknown a group as we’ve had in recent years - given the inability of most to play under-18s footy this year - but if they trust their recruiters, this could be a defining month for the Demons".

Do we know something other clubs don't? 

Certainly JT is one to trust as he has runs on the board.  But, given the talent in next years draft (as signalled by clubs wanting to trade into 2021) are we playing 'russian roulette' trying to cherry pick this year's talents with picks that will be mid 20's plus or mid to late teens (if we can engineer a trade up for such a pick).

While we have been successful trading picks to go up the draft order [b]we haven't got as high as we would like in the last two years.  I recall mention on DL that we tried to trade up in 2018 to get Zac Butters and in 2019 to get Mitch Georgiades but we didn't get high enough (or able to split a high pick).  I guess that is the risk of regularly trading out future 1st round picks and then miss targetted players. [/b]   

I wonder who we really want this year?  Hopefully we can get him.

 

 

There’ll always be someone you miss out on. Georgiades was in contention for our 3rd pick (well, not really but we hoped so). We managed to nab Rivers who we obviously rated and knew he had more scope to improve, having missed preseason with glandular.

[Mach5 4,767]

On 11/27/2020 at 1:50 PM, deanox said:

Also why not read direct quotes:

 

"The best way to look at it is we’re bringing our First Round pick forward a year, as we did last year when we were able to secure Kozzy Pickett.

"We believe that there is more of a variety of player in this year's draft (compared to next year) which suit the type of players we need on our list.

"We think there is an opportunity this year, with the lack of footy that has been played by the Victorians, that clubs lists could potentially be more different than usual.

“There’s definitely the potential that players we rate very highly in this draft could still be available with our three picks.” 

 

Also sounds like we’ve got an eye on moving pick 50 to move up the order.

Edited November 29, 2020 by Mach5

[Lucifers Hero 39,732]

1 hour ago, Mach5 said:

 

There’ll always be someone you miss out on. Georgiades was in contention for our 3rd pick (well, not really but we hoped so). We managed to nab Rivers who we obviously rated and knew he had more scope to improve, having missed preseason with glandular.

iirc Port made a pick swap to jump up the order and get him at #18 and everyone was surprised they took him so  high.  But who knows they may have had word that others were ready to pounce. 

I'm also really happy with Rivers. 

We have Benny Brown now which imv gives us a better balanced fwd line in age and experience than taking Georgiades last year.  With TMc going backwards it would have been hard work developing Weideman and Georgiades over the next few years.

Edited November 29, 2020 by Lucifer's Hero

[Lucifers Hero 39,732]

5 minutes ago, Mach5 said:

 

Also sounds like we’ve got an eye on moving pick 50 to move up the order.

Any ideas how that might happen? As I see it, we can't trade a 2021 pick (without trading others in) so it would mean using 50 with one of 18, 19 or 28.  As you explained so well earlier pick 50 may well come in to somewhere in the low 40's.

Which pick do you think we might give up with 50?

[Nascent 9,212]

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Any ideas how that might happen? As I see it, we can't trade a 2021 pick (without trading others in) so it would mean using 50 with one of 18, 19 or 28.  As you explained so well earlier pick 50 may well come in to somewhere in the low 40's.

Which pick do you think we might give up with 50?

To be honest unless you're in the know then it's going to be a painful exercise trying to predict what could happen.

I thought 50 and 28 might get us into hawthorn's pick at 24 if downie hasn't been bid on. But I'm not sure if that benefits us greatly unless we've got mail that a team is going to pinch a player we fancy.

And you're correct that we can't trade any future picks because we don't have a 2021 first, however I don't think its that improbable to trade in a future first. For example, Collingwoods pick 14 and future first for 18 and 19. In theory we can trade-in any teams future first next year, it just requires some complex dealing to get it done. By that I mean that as we still have a future 2nd, 3rd and 4th, any club that is missing a future pick in those rounds and in theory "forbidden" from trading their first can be balanced out with us replacing that missing pick.

An example of this could be Carlton, who have traded out a 2021 3rd round pick. Perhaps after trading out pick 8 this year to essendon they may want to buy back into the first round. At the moment they can't trade out a 2021 first, however, we could trade them our future third along with pick 19 for their future first. So many different permutations with different clubs that it hurts my brain to work them out. Then we have other clubs dealing amongst themselves both up to and on draft night that it makes putting hypothetical like I've just done somewhat redundant.

Then there's the question of holding list spots over for the mid year draft next year (is that a rookie or senior list spot btw?)

Finally, we may be happy to take 18, 19 and 28 to the draft and flip the remaining pick 50 or whatever it ends up being for a future pick. Likewise 18, 19 or 28 may be moved on for a future pick. 

Looking forward to the day when players can be traded on draft night just to complicate things further.

[spirit of norm smith 16,438]

On 11/21/2020 at 5:46 PM, spirit of norm smith said:

Still reckon JT’s list has in order 

Finlay Macrae

Jack Carroll

Archie Perkins

Nik Cox

Brayden Cook

* Errol Gulden (bid)

Caleb Poulter

Isiah Winder

Bailey Laurie

Zavier Maher

Eddie Ford

 If we can snag 3 of these ten players with our 18,19,28 , we’d have done very well. 
 

Agree that we’d be a chance to also bid on Blake Coleman or Brandon Walker if all the above were gone by pick 28.  Nick Stevens I’d probably next best option. 

 

To assist our noble friend @640md.  Here’s the listing of likely players with our picks 18,19,28.  Just my opinion based on 2019 games watched and bits and pieces from 2020. Also hoping we go for pace and run and youngsters with good skills already.   Baldwin is another youngster as a key forward who excelled at under 16s but, two knee recos later, he’s a punt by anyone.  Hope this helps.  Supported by @gawndog and @goodoil who have done excellent phantoms. 

[640MD 3,374]

Thanks   but  "noble" ??

 

I will read up on all these guys

[Lucifers Hero 39,732]

17 hours ago, Nascent said:

To be honest unless you're in the know then it's going to be a painful exercise trying to predict what could happen.

I thought 50 and 28 might get us into hawthorn's pick at 24 if downie hasn't been bid on. But I'm not sure if that benefits us greatly unless we've got mail that a team is going to pinch a player we fancy.

And you're correct that we can't trade any future picks because we don't have a 2021 first, however I don't think its that improbable to trade in a future first. For example, Collingwoods pick 14 and future first for 18 and 19. In theory we can trade-in any teams future first next year, it just requires some complex dealing to get it done. By that I mean that as we still have a future 2nd, 3rd and 4th, any club that is missing a future pick in those rounds and in theory "forbidden" from trading their first can be balanced out with us replacing that missing pick.

An example of this could be Carlton, who have traded out a 2021 3rd round pick. Perhaps after trading out pick 8 this year to essendon they may want to buy back into the first round. At the moment they can't trade out a 2021 first, however, we could trade them our future third along with pick 19 for their future first. So many different permutations with different clubs that it hurts my brain to work them out. Then we have other clubs dealing amongst themselves both up to and on draft night that it makes putting hypothetical like I've just done somewhat redundant.

Then there's the question of holding list spots over for the mid year draft next year (is that a rookie or senior list spot btw?)

Finally, we may be happy to take 18, 19 and 28 to the draft and flip the remaining pick 50 or whatever it ends up being for a future pick. Likewise 18, 19 or 28 may be moved on for a future pick. 

Looking forward to the day when players can be traded on draft night just to complicate things further.

Yes so many options!  The AFL must love how 'pick trading' has mushroomed into a fan and media sport in its own right.  More click bait. 

Re your question:  ...holding list spots over for the mid year draft next year (is that a rookie or senior list spot btw?)  Mid season drafts require vacant rookie list spots.  But there is no reason a club can't promote an existing rookie to the senior list, if there is a senior list spot vacant.  If there isn't a senior list spot a senior player could be put on the LTI list or one could retire to create such a spot.

Mahoney said he would keep a list spot open so we will be able to take one or two players in the PSSP (also for rookies) or mid season drafts.

Edited November 29, 2020 by Lucifer's Hero

[DeeSpencer 25,673]

On 11/27/2020 at 1:47 PM, deanox said:

 

If they were going short term then they would have traded all the picks for players. That we are taking the picks to the draft now and not in 2021 is a medium term strategy not short term strategy.

 

I am calling Occam's Razor here: the club rate our list as quite good and think we have underperformed. They are betting that we will rise up the ladder and our picks will be worth less in the future.

Pick 18 and 19 this year is arguably better than just pick 15 or 16 next. We swapped our 2nd, 3rd and 4th next year for other clubs as well. Brisbane's 2nd, Dogs 3rd and Norths 4th. I reckon we are betting that will be a collective win.

 

The Dogs 3rd and North 4th were more about making sure we had the right picks to allow trading the first than betting on results there IMO. The Lions second will very likely be a downgrade from our own but that's part of the deal that saw us turn 1 first in to two. 

The risk concerns me. A potentially very high pick for 2 muddling picks in the most compromised draft of all time is a risk. As is targeting players in the draft.

Brisbane needed a small forward, they traded a first rounder for Charlie Cameron who they knew was a gun. We traded for Kozzie, who we certainly like but is just a kid.

The good news is that we should have 3 picks and so we shouldn't target them all, which I guess is similar to last year. Target 1 pick in the right range for Kozzie, take the best available elsewhere. That's hopefully what we are doing this year. Get the balance right between being confident we'll get at least 1 kid who matches the needs whilst keeping a best available focus. Drafting for need as well as trading a future pick, that's a recipe for trouble.

[IvanBartul13 2,564]

18 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

To assist our noble friend @640md.  Here’s the listing of likely players with our picks 18,19,28.  Just my opinion based on 2019 games watched and bits and pieces from 2020. Also hoping we go for pace and run and youngsters with good skills already.   Baldwin is another youngster as a key forward who excelled at under 16s but, two knee recos later, he’s a punt by anyone.  Hope this helps.  Supported by @gawndog and @goodoil who have done excellent phantoms. 

No I don't support this, I have only four players on that list as chances of being a Dee and Baldwin I have as no chance, Many AFL clubs don't have him on their draft board.

[deanox 9,912]

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

The Dogs 3rd and North 4th were more about making sure we had the right picks to allow trading the first than betting on results there IMO. The Lions second will very likely be a downgrade from our own but that's part of the deal that saw us turn 1 first in to two. 

The risk concerns me. A potentially very high pick for 2 muddling picks in the most compromised draft of all time is a risk. As is targeting players in the draft.

Brisbane needed a small forward, they traded a first rounder for Charlie Cameron who they knew was a gun. We traded for Kozzie, who we certainly like but is just a kid.

The good news is that we should have 3 picks and so we shouldn't target them all, which I guess is similar to last year. Target 1 pick in the right range for Kozzie, take the best available elsewhere. That's hopefully what we are doing this year. Get the balance right between being confident we'll get at least 1 kid who matches the needs whilst keeping a best available focus. Drafting for need as well as trading a future pick, that's a recipe for trouble.

In Mahoney's words, it's a calculated risk.

It is clear they think we are underperformed, which means they think it was 15+ next year for 18 and 19 this year. And that our 2nd will be around 33, within 1 or 2 of the lions, so close to break even.

If they though we were performing on par with no scope for improvement we would be looking at trading out 10 and 28 is, and if they thought we were over performing it would be even worse. So they obviously think the risk is justified.

It was clear they expected the same thing in the Kosi trade, so makes sense they still do, given they have recruited an A grade KPF and backed the coach in with additional support.

 

Regardless of what we might think, it's clear that is their strategy.

[spirit of norm smith 16,438]

3 hours ago, goodoil said:

No I don't support this, I have only four players on that list as chances of being a Dee and Baldwin I have as no chance, Many AFL clubs don't have him on their draft board.

Sorry @goodoil to clarify the reference was around youngsters with pace and skill, particularly for picks 18,19. Carroll and Bowey were your two nominated phantom choices.  It’s the type of player I was drawing reference upon for @640MD. 
 

Perhaps I should have referenced Baldwin as a separate paragraph.  He’d be a risk but someone will draft him imv. not particularly us.  

[skills32 229]

On 11/21/2020 at 3:36 AM, Watts the matter said:

In what way? He hardly won a contested ball the whole video. I saw Spargo myself.

Just the way he moves.

[Males 578]

[JTR 2,846]

On 11/12/2020 at 6:32 PM, Demonland said:

 

Just to add some extra sugar to the story, last nights win ensured we got maximum value out of this trade.

Two first rounders in last draft (Bowey & Laurie) for our first round this year + 25

😎