Mac Andrew

[durango 1,976]

Why would recruiters tell an outsider like Twomey their thoughts regarding the selections they want, if you have the 1st selection like St Kilda did in 2014 St Kilda did not tell them until the evening of the Draft.

[DeeSpencer 23,058]

2 hours ago, durango said:

Why would recruiters tell an outsider like Twomey their thoughts regarding the selections they want, if you have the 1st selection like St Kilda did in 2014 St Kilda did not tell them until the evening of the Draft.

I'm not saying they straight up tell him. He's a journalist, he uses his contacts of recruiters, parents, players, player managers, club staff to get an outline of who is interested in who. Plus he's attending a lot of the same games and can see which clubs are watching players closely.

Take the example of Mac and the link to GWS. He might see a GWS recruiter at one of Mac's games. Then he might interview Mac and ask him which clubs have spoken to him the most. Then he might speak to Mac's manager who tells him the Giants have been asking a lot about him. If that happens enough times for teams with the top picks then you can get a sense of which players have the most interest.

Then the final piece is the horse trading that goes on closer to the draft. Someone from the Giants might ring Twomey and see if he's got any info on who Sydney will take with pick 12, and in return might give up a bit about their players with pick 13. I doubt it's that specific but there's certain a lot of using the media around draft time to get information and spread disinformation.

[Elwood 3184 1,263]

Late in the draft period the media guys usually get the top ten pretty close and then it veers away from there. Logical really because the top five or so usually stand out and the next five aren’t that far behind. It’s after then that the discrepancies occur. Often this happens with players who are difficult to categorize. Mac Andrew is one of those players because he’s so different to the usual draft prospects that we see. Have we ever seen such a raw project player feature so high in draft calculations before?

[manny100 1,001]

On 10/11/2021 at 1:56 PM, DeeSpencer said:

If we thought Mac would fall outside 20 I reckon we would’ve kept more list spots open to allow us to do a bit more shuffling. 

Nothings ever a lock but Twomey’s late September form guide had him at 8.

Quick looks at his 2018, 19 and 20 October updates show his top 10 guys go pretty much to plan with about the latest a guy falls out to being 15 or so.

He also had Luke Jackson at 14 but was hearing rumours of top 10. Maybe he’s overreacting now with Mac but I sense he’s not.

The draft picture becomes even clearer after the trade period but if Mac stays in the top 10 range at that stage then Twomey probably has serious mail.

I agree, Twomey has been uncannily accurate for years. His job entails talking to footy people almost 24/7. He has his contacts at each club.

He will firm up his top 10 not long before the draft.

History says players like Mac slip but after seeing the Gawn/Jackson combo clubs may rate the super athletic talls as  new flavour of the month.

I think we will go best available as rated by JT and his team at 17. Whether its Mac? We would know more about him than other clubs. 

 

Edited October 12, 2021 by manny100

[Pink Freud 325]

1 hour ago, manny100 said:

I agree, Twomey has been uncannily accurate for years. His job entails talking to footy people almost 24/7. He has his contacts at each club.

He will firm up his top 10 not long before the draft.

History says players like Mac slip but after seeing the Gawn/Jackson combo clubs may rate the super athletic talls as  new flavour of the month.

I think we will go best available as rated by JT and his team at 17. Whether its Mac? We would know more about him than other clubs. 

Judge for yourself as to whether Cal Twomey is really all that accurate. 

Cal Twomey's 2020 Phantom Draft: Top 30, late picks, your club's whispers

Like this year, he followed Knightmare in highly ranking an NGA. Last year it was Reef McInnes who a number of pundits touted well within the top 10 but who drifted out to 23 on the night before Collingwood matched a bid on him.

Our pick 17 is going to end up at around 20. If we keep that pick then you would think it wouldn’t make much sense to take him at that point when you could have a free hit at someone else and take Mac by matching the bid at 21.

[manny100 1,001]

15 minutes ago, Pink Freud said:

Judge for yourself as to whether Cal Twomey is really all that accurate. 

Cal Twomey's 2020 Phantom Draft: Top 30, late picks, your club's whispers

Like this year, he followed Knightmare in highly ranking an NGA. Last year it was Reef McInnes who a number of pundits touted well within the top 10 but who drifted out to 23 on the night before Collingwood matched a bid on him.

Our pick 17 is going to end up at around 20. If we keep that pick then you would think it wouldn’t make much sense to take him at that point when you could have a free hit at someone else and take Mac by matching the bid at 21.

Good point. If Mac is still there at 17 might well take a punt on a bid after 20 that can be matched. Or if expected F/Sons are taken early then we slip back a couple anyway - close to 20..

Edited October 12, 2021 by manny100

[DeeSpencer 23,058]

2 hours ago, Pink Freud said:

Judge for yourself as to whether Cal Twomey is really all that accurate. 

Cal Twomey's 2020 Phantom Draft: Top 30, late picks, your club's whispers

Like this year, he followed Knightmare in highly ranking an NGA. Last year it was Reef McInnes who a number of pundits touted well within the top 10 but who drifted out to 23 on the night before Collingwood matched a bid on him.

Our pick 17 is going to end up at around 20. If we keep that pick then you would think it wouldn’t make much sense to take him at that point when you could have a free hit at someone else and take Mac by matching the bid at 21.

McInnes was 19th in Twomey's October form guide. That's very accurate to where he end up going.

Bids are very tricky to place because a lot can depend on other factors. Adelaide might've been very close to pulling the trigger at 11. 

But after that GWS had 3 picks between 11 and 18 and traded with the Pies for their future first, probably with part of that deal being a guarantee they wouldn't bid. Collingwood themselves had 2 picks. And Lachie Jones went to Port. That's 6 of the 11 picks taken care of. Add in us not being interested with our 2 picks and that's 8 of 11 spots in the drop.

Mac being unrestricted in the top 20 makes him less dependent on which specific clubs have certain picks.

 

[Pink Freud 325]

3 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

McInnes was 19th in Twomey's October form guide. That's very accurate to where he end up going.

Bids are very tricky to place because a lot can depend on other factors. Adelaide might've been very close to pulling the trigger at 11. 

But after that GWS had 3 picks between 11 and 18 and traded with the Pies for their future first, probably with part of that deal being a guarantee they wouldn't bid. Collingwood themselves had 2 picks. And Lachie Jones went to Port. That's 6 of the 11 picks taken care of. Add in us not being interested with our 2 picks and that's 8 of 11 spots in the drop.

Mac being unrestricted in the top 20 makes him less dependent on which specific clubs have certain picks.

 

You do realise that Twomey’s phantom draft was issued on the eve of the draft in December and not two months earlier in October. This negates the argument you’ve been previously making. 

Twomey got this and a number of other selections wrong even on draft day. 

The rule about the restrictions is only relevant to what Melbourne can do in 2021. Other clubs could freely bid on McInnes in 2020 just as they can on Andrew in 2021.
 

 

[Whispering_Jack 27,918]

Some interesting points here. There was certainly a lot of early interest last year in McInnes and much of it was generated on the draft boards by the likes of people like Knightmare who knows people within the trade and had him as high as #5 in his power ratings and in his top 10 for most of the year. In the final analysis however, the club recruiters are the professionals who decide their clubs’ picks and their livelihoods and reputations often depend on making good decisions. The example Dee Spencer gave above of the deal done between GWS and Collingwood turned out a brilliant one for the Giants because they ended up with pick 2 in this year’s draft. It wasn’t too bad for Collingwood either because they received two round one selections and reduced the number of options for other clubs to pick their NGA player. Still, there were other clubs that could have jumped in to get McInness but it didn’t happen.

It would be ironic if GWS used that pick to take Melbourne’s NGA this year. I don’t think it will pan out that way despite what “experts” like Matt Rendell is hearing.

[Freddy Fuschia 660]

Still think there’s a lot of ducks and drakes going on to put people off the scent. Especially so in these times of Covid when clubs have less to spend on recruiting staff and can’t get around the country like they used to be able to do. I wouldn’t be surprised if there were a few smokeys picked up in this draft.

[Demonstone 19,050]

4 minutes ago, Freddy Fuschia said:

I wouldn’t be surprised if there were a few smokeys picked up in this draft.

Reefer McInnes was drafted last year, wasn't he?

[DeeSpencer 23,058]

5 hours ago, Pink Freud said:

You do realise that Twomey’s phantom draft was issued on the eve of the draft in December and not two months earlier in October. This negates the argument you’ve been previously making. 

Twomey got this and a number of other selections wrong even on draft day. 

The rule about the restrictions is only relevant to what Melbourne can do in 2021. Other clubs could freely bid on McInnes in 2020 just as they can on Andrew in 2021.
 

 

My argument was simply that no one in his top 10’s from his October power rankings has made it outside 20 in the last 3 drafts, with most going top 10 and only a small number falling to 15 or so.

His 19th ranked player went 23.

I said nothing about his phantom drafts that by nature are going to have players all over the place as clubs play ducks and drakes.

I disagree entirely that the bid system only changes things for us. If you know you won’t get a player then you can trade your right to bid as part of a trade. It’s likely GWS did that with Coll. Mac is a selection inside the top 20, not a bid, teams are far less likely to let him slide. 

[Pinball Wizard 272]

Could someone please clarify exactly what a club would get if it selects Mac Andrew in the draft?

What I’m reading is that they would be picking up a developing ruckman who won’t be ready to go for a few years but could fill a key position role in the meantime. Is that it?

[Demons11 6,404]

On 10/11/2021 at 11:10 AM, durango said:

Why would recruiters tell an outsider like Twomey their thoughts regarding the selections they want, if you have the 1st selection like St Kilda did in 2014 St Kilda did not tell them until the evening of the Draft.

Twomey speaks to lots of recruiters and has a very good relationship with them.  They would absolutely give him details on the draft. 

[buck_nekkid 5,458]

Be nice if clubs looking at Mac decided on Alleer instead - as a more mature option.  Could clear the path for a later bid by us…

[Stiff Arm 4,410]

On 10/19/2021 at 8:12 AM, buck_nekkid said:

Be nice if clubs looking at Mac decided on Alleer instead - as a more mature option.  Could clear the path for a later bid by us…

How so?

Mac is a ruck/forward while Alleer is an intercept defender

Edited October 19, 2021 by Stiff Arm

[DistrACTION Jackson 6,388]

The thing I don't really understand, in the past a player with similar attributes to Mac would be seen as a riskier pick and likely fall in the 20-40 range.

He has shown some great skills and attributes in his highlights reel, but that's the thing, it is only highlights.

In 6 NAB league games Mac has the following averages:

12.7 disposals 

2.7 marks

1.7 tackles

1.5 inside 50s

12.7 hitouts

0.3 goals

In comparison in the 2019 colts season Luke Jackson had the following from 8 games:

18.6 disposals

3.1 marks

2.3 tackles

Inside 50s - unknown

32.6 hitouts

1 goal

There's a fairly large difference between the two and they are saying Mac is a top 10 pick.

I'm definitely not saying he will be a dud, I'm just pointing out that I think if he goes inside the top 10 it will be a reach from a club and probably due to panic that because of what Jackson has done teams want to rush out to find a ruck/forward.

Edited October 20, 2021 by Action Jackson

[Freddy Fuschia 660]

29 minutes ago, Action Jackson said:

The thing I don't really understand, in the past a player with similar attributes to Mac would be seen as a riskier pick and likely fall in the 20-40 range.

He has shown some great skills and attributes in his highlights reel, but that's the thing, it is only highlights.

In 6 NAB league games Mac has the following averages:

12.7 disposals 

2.7 marks

1.7 tackles

1.5 inside 50s

12.7 hitouts

0.3 goals

In comparison in the 2019 colts season Luke Jackson had the following from 8 games:

18.6 disposals

3.1 marks

2.3 tackles

Inside 50s - unknown

32.6 hitouts

1 goal

There's a fairly large difference between the two and they are saying Mac is a top 10 pick.

I'm definitely not saying he will be a dud, I'm just pointing out that I think if he goes inside the top 10 it will be a reach from a club and probably due to panic that because of what Jackson has done teams want to rush out to find a ruck/forward.

Welcome to the world of the sceptics AJ. 

When Melbourne drafted Luke Jackson with pick three in the 2019 National Draft, there was some criticism about us picking a ruckman that early. Even elite young ruckmen take time to develop, sometimes years, we were told and it was always a risk to project too far into the future.

I don’t think it’s panic that’s causing all the excitement and hype about Andrew. Perhaps, it’s the shortage of ruckmen available - demand and supply lifting his price?

[spirit of norm smith 12,834]

It will be interesting to see if Mac is available at the Dees pick.  I think it’s highly unlikely.  If he was available, I’d think we would grab him. It’s a shame the NGA rules changed and we are the club to be impacted. 

But hey who cares, we are Premiers! 🏆

( screw them 🤣)

[Pink Freud 325]

This is what a top ten ruck prospect looks like going into the draft.

[Fat Tony 4,350]

2 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

It will be interesting to see if Mac is available at the Dees pick.  I think it’s highly unlikely.  If he was available, I’d think we would grab him. It’s a shame the NGA rules changed and we are the club to be impacted. 

But hey who cares, we are Premiers! 🏆

( screw them 🤣)

I highly doubt we would take him at pick 17->19. If he is still there we will hope he slides an extra pick to pick 21 and we get him for a discount.

[deejammin' 2,065]

22 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

I highly doubt we would take him at pick 17->19. If he is still there we will hope he slides an extra pick to pick 21 and we get him for a discount.

I’m not so sure about that, if he slides to pick 21(23) and Freo bid on him it will cost us all three of our picks 37, 49 and 57 (94 is worthless) giving us worthless picks back in the last round which we could use to upgrade Jordan and Chandler, we then would be extremely unlikely have enough picks to bid for Woey even if he goes in the 60s. 
So the choice would most likely be (I acknowledge we could manoeuvre with pick trades but right now): 

Draft Andrew at 17, draft another two players at 37 and 49 and use 57 to bid on Woey upgrade Jordan with 94 and if we are planning to find another worthless late pick to upgrade Chandler.

OR

Take a player at pick 17, burn 37, 49 and 57 bidding for Andrew and then use late picks to upgrade Jordan and Chandler missing out on Woey.

The question is, is taking a player at 17 and hoping to bid on Andrew worth more than 3 other players, including Woewodin who it is rumoured we have made a commitment to?

If Andrew is there at 17(19) I think we will take him. It’s also possible we only intend on drafting three players in which case pick 57 won’t be used.

Edited October 20, 2021 by deejammin'

[spirit of norm smith 12,834]

19 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

I highly doubt we would take him at pick 17->19. If he is still there we will hope he slides an extra pick to pick 21 and we get him for a discount.

Yes it’s a Russian Roulette situation.  I wouldn’t be so sure that Lions would pass him by.  They have pick “18” after us and would likely try to pick Mac if he was available. Just my view.  

[4_Kent_Watts 846]

3 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

It will be interesting to see if Mac is available at the Dees pick.  I think it’s highly unlikely.  If he was available, I’d think we would grab him. It’s a shame the NGA rules changed and we are the club to be impacted. 

But hey who cares, we are Premiers! 🏆

( screw them 🤣)

Me being the DF that I am in relation to these things, cant we not select him then when someone does can't we then match their bid and then get him anyway. Sorry if I don't make sense, Friday's come early for me on this lovely Wednesday. 

[DeeSpencer 23,058]

55 minutes ago, deejammin' said:

I’m not so sure about that, if he slides to pick 21(23) and Freo bid on him it will cost us all three of our picks 37, 49 and 57 (94 is worthless) giving us worthless picks back in the last round which we could use to upgrade Jordan and Chandler, we then would be extremely unlikely have enough picks to bid for Woey even if he goes in the 60s. 
So the choice would most likely be (I acknowledge we could manoeuvre with pick trades but right now): 

Draft Andrew at 17, draft another two players at 37 and 49 and use 57 to bid on Woey upgrade Jordan with 94 and if we are planning to find another worthless late pick to upgrade Chandler.

OR

Take a player at pick 17, burn 37, 49 and 57 bidding for Andrew and then use late picks to upgrade Jordan and Chandler missing out on Woey.

The question is, is taking a player at 17 and hoping to bid on Andrew worth more than 3 other players, including Woewodin who it is rumoured we have made a commitment to?

If Andrew is there at 17(19) I think we will take him. It’s also possible we only intend on drafting three players in which case pick 57 won’t be used.

He'll go top 18, but we'd either take someone else or swap picks with the club at pick 20 in a lopsided deal on the proviso that they didn't take him. Only if they refused to deal that pick 20 and we rated Mac as our highest on our board would we take him.

We'd take a player at 19 and make sure we get 2 highly rated players any day of the week rather than worrying about late picks.

If we had to match pick 21 for Mac, it costs us about pick 28's value of 677 points. We can do that with 37 and 49, because 37 might be about the same and 49 will be around 40 after the Daicos/Darcy picks are all used up, that's about 900 points. We'd end up matching the bid and getting back a pick in the 50's that along with our other pick in the 50's should easily be fine to match Woey.

We'd end up with 2 top 20 picks and Woey which is probably the clubs aim anyway.

They won't be able to get up to 20 but I'm expecting the club tries to trade up their picks as is so we end up with 2 highly rated players and Woey. 3 picks in the top 40 odd and Woey as a rookie would be even better but there seems to be enough buzz about him going in the back half of the draft.

Upgrading rookies doesn't require picks these days, that's why the AFL stopped listing endless amounts of picks. Players can also spend a 4th year on the rookie list. Chandler and Jordon are fine, there's no issue of them staying on lists.

 

 

 

Edited October 20, 2021 by DeeSpencer