Phantom Drafts Thread 2022

[Colm 2,183]

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Wonder if Harry Lemmey may come under some consideration for our pick 13?

199cm goal kicking key forward from West Adelaide who at the start of the year he was tipped to be a top 10 prospect.

Has played at senior level, reserves and under18's where he's had impact in all three grades

Showed his versatility (which our recruiters love) this year by playing down back at times and doing quiet well at times with his marking and foot skills.

Given that he hasn’t really been mentioned in any of the phantoms or in the top 30 prospects, if we were keen on him would we not be better to trade up from pick 37 into somewhere in the 20s and grab him or another key position.

Grab a good midfielder if one slides to us with pick 13 if not grab a good lockdown/ rebounding defender to cover the loss of Hunt and a replacement for the pig. 
I’m keen on us getting a good defender with a strong body that will be ready to play next season. Could also allow Bowey to play further up the field. 

[dazzledavey36 55,335]

12 minutes ago, Colm said:

Given that he hasn’t really been mentioned in any of the phantoms or in the top 30 prospects, if we were keen on him would we not be better to trade up from pick 37 into somewhere in the 20s and grab him or another key position.

Grab a good midfielder if one slides to us with pick 13 if not grab a good lockdown/ rebounding defender to cover the loss of Hunt and a replacement for the pig. 
I’m keen on us getting a good defender with a strong body that will be ready to play next season. Could also allow Bowey to play further up the field. 

Yeah maybe.

I just don't rate Jefferson all that highly at all. Yet all information seem to lead us to taking him of available. 

[Colm 2,183]

From what I have read Jefferson is going to take years to develop. I think we need to draft a player that can have an impact in the next year or two with at least one of our picks, preferably 13. 

[ChaserJ 5,157]

2 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Wonder if Harry Lemmey may come under some consideration for our pick 13?

199cm goal kicking key forward from West Adelaide who at the start of the year he was tipped to be a top 10 prospect.

Has played at senior level, reserves and under18's where he's had impact in all three grades

Showed his versatility (which our recruiters love) this year by playing down back at times and doing quiet well at times with his marking and foot skills.

Question marks raised about his competitiveness combined with inconsistent performance has seen something of a fall from grace for Lemmey. Some of that is down to Covid & an injury niggle at the wrong time, but he’s unlikely to be inside 30 now. At some point he’ll be too good to leave on the shelf.

[dazzledavey36 55,335]

1 hour ago, Colm said:

From what I have read Jefferson is going to take years to develop. I think we need to draft a player that can have an impact in the next year or two with at least one of our picks, preferably 13. 

One of the reason why I'm not keen on Jefferson as well. Even at under 18's level he was still getting pushed put of the way too easily in contests.

34 minutes ago, ChaserJ said:

Question marks raised about his competitiveness combined with inconsistent performance has seen something of a fall from grace for Lemmey. Some of that is down to Covid & an injury niggle at the wrong time, but he’s unlikely to be inside 30 now. At some point he’ll be too good to leave on the shelf.

Yeah rightio. This makes sense now. 

I remember reading a big write up at the start of the year how he was going to be the number 1 key forward in this year's draft well before Cadman was ever discussed.

Some fall from grace.

[dazzledavey36 55,335]

Cal Twomey October rankings.

 

[Colm 2,183]

Given where Cal has Alwyn Davey Jnr at 17. Essendon's pick 22 could be available. 

[dazzledavey36 55,335]

19 minutes ago, Colm said:

Given where Cal has Alwyn Davey Jnr at 17. Essendon's pick 22 could be available. 

Future 2nd and our pick 37 for 22?

[Colm 2,183]

34 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Future 2nd and our pick 37 for 22?

Yeah maybe. Or future 2nd for GWS pick 31 and then 31&37 for 22. 

[Slartibartfast 17,625]

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Future 2nd and our pick 37 for 22?

What is your objective Dazzle?  Is there a player you are particularly targeting or is it just "let's get an earlier pick and hope there is someone there we like"?

I don't understand the desire to get earlier picks.  Post the finals I read post after post lamenting that we didn't give many of the players at Casey a go in the seniors.  These players didn't play in the final game against Brisbane - Bowey, JJ, JVR, TMac, Laurie, Howes, Turner and Chandler.  All would have expectations of making a genuine claim for regular senior footy next year.  This doesn't include JSmith, Tomlinson and Dunstan nor Hunter (Grundy for Jackson is like for like) or Schache.

We have good senior depth and some good young players coming through who need a career path and we need to find out who can and who can't play.  My view is we don't need anymore "fair average quality" talent (a pick in the 20's) and if we are going to be successful in the long term we need elite talent to come up under Oliver, Petracca etc.

I take the opposite view to those wanting to trade up the board.  If there is someone we really like at 13 then use it but if not, then we should trade it out for a future 1st.  That would leave us with 3 firsts next year (and our future first) and two seconds.  That is an astoundingly good position to be in and would allow you to 1) trade up for earlier picks in a very good draft, 2) attract and be able to satisfy a club for an elite talent , 3) just take 5 picks in the top 35 of a very good draft.

We don't need to trade up for the sake of trading up.  If there is a specific target then fine, if not we should play the long game.

[Deemania since 56 6,716]

On 10/24/2022 at 11:46 AM, Dockett 32 said:

I hope we are trying to find a big strong, brave, strong marking CHF like say J Brown , Carey or N. Riewoldt. Jefferson doesn’t strike me as that type at all.

Agree.

[Little Goffy 14,639]

Interesting that Twomey has Barnett in the late 20s, and Keeler doesn't even break in.

Seems a lot of other phantom drafts have one or the other, or feature both in that late 20s to early 30s range.

If we are looking to add a ruckman who can play forward while 'waiting their turn' to go full-time in the ruck, either or both of them fit the bill.

So I'm wondering... do we test our luck and do a pick swap 13 and 37 for West Coast's 20 and 26?

[old55 23,687]

1 hour ago, Slartibartfast said:

What is your objective Dazzle?  Is there a player you are particularly targeting or is it just "let's get an earlier pick and hope there is someone there we like"?

I don't understand the desire to get earlier picks.  Post the finals I read post after post lamenting that we didn't give many of the players at Casey a go in the seniors.  These players didn't play in the final game against Brisbane - Bowey, JJ, JVR, TMac, Laurie, Howes, Turner and Chandler.  All would have expectations of making a genuine claim for regular senior footy next year.  This doesn't include JSmith, Tomlinson and Dunstan nor Hunter (Grundy for Jackson is like for like) or Schache.

We have good senior depth and some good young players coming through who need a career path and we need to find out who can and who can't play.  My view is we don't need anymore "fair average quality" talent (a pick in the 20's) and if we are going to be successful in the long term we need elite talent to come up under Oliver, Petracca etc.

I take the opposite view to those wanting to trade up the board.  If there is someone we really like at 13 then use it but if not, then we should trade it out for a future 1st.  That would leave us with 3 firsts next year (and our future first) and two seconds.  That is an astoundingly good position to be in and would allow you to 1) trade up for earlier picks in a very good draft, 2) attract and be able to satisfy a club for an elite talent , 3) just take 5 picks in the top 35 of a very good draft.

We don't need to trade up for the sake of trading up.  If there is a specific target then fine, if not we should play the long game.

I agree with that @Slartibartfast the trade up would have to be for a specific player we target.  It's possible that there may be an elite role player (this isn't necessarily an oxymoron) early in the second round.  I'm thinking particularly of a Hibberd replacement for example, who is not going to go at the very pointy end but does exactly what is needed for a role.

I'm thinking about Hibberd himself at PSD #4 or say Dylan Grimes at PSD #2, recruiters are smarter now and I think they might have gone earlier these days.

[Mach5 4,768]

In my limited knowledge of this years crop, I can only get excited about Ginbey, Allen, Hollands, Hewett or Phillipou, aside from the sure-thing top 5 or so. Not sure which would be available at our pick, if any.

I expect in 5 years time I’ll look back & shake my head at this.

[Clintosaurus 7,861]

9 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Future 2nd and our pick 37 for 22?

Brayden George with 22?

[spirit of norm smith 16,588]

12 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

One of the reason why I'm not keen on Jefferson as well. Even at under 18's level he was still getting pushed put of the way too easily in contests.

Yeah rightio. This makes sense now. 

I agree DD36. I think he’s definitely in the frame for our first pick though I certainly prefer others. Hollands. Phillipou.  Maybe a slider could be there.  
 

Whilst I do think we should hold the 2023 2x 1st rd and 2x 2nd rd picks, due to the outlook on class of ‘23, it might be tempting to package up one of the future 2nd rd picks with 2022 pick 37 to get a low 20s pick this year ( then look at Binns, Kruzewski or George with that pick depending on what type of player we grab at “13”.
. @Colm. I did like your idea … Freo future 2nd to GWS pick 31 … and then MFC give 31&37 for bombers pick 22. 

[adonski 12,427]

I'd take the punt on Jefferson unless there's a slider considered way too good to pass up 

Edited October 27, 2022 by adonski

[Whispering_Jack 30,656]

11 hours ago, Slartibartfast said:

What is your objective Dazzle?  Is there a player you are particularly targeting or is it just "let's get an earlier pick and hope there is someone there we like"?

I don't understand the desire to get earlier picks.  Post the finals I read post after post lamenting that we didn't give many of the players at Casey a go in the seniors.  These players didn't play in the final game against Brisbane - Bowey, JJ, JVR, TMac, Laurie, Howes, Turner and Chandler.  All would have expectations of making a genuine claim for regular senior footy next year.  This doesn't include JSmith, Tomlinson and Dunstan nor Hunter (Grundy for Jackson is like for like) or Schache.

We have good senior depth and some good young players coming through who need a career path and we need to find out who can and who can't play.  My view is we don't need anymore "fair average quality" talent (a pick in the 20's) and if we are going to be successful in the long term we need elite talent to come up under Oliver, Petracca etc.

I take the opposite view to those wanting to trade up the board.  If there is someone we really like at 13 then use it but if not, then we should trade it out for a future 1st.  That would leave us with 3 firsts next year (and our future first) and two seconds.  That is an astoundingly good position to be in and would allow you to 1) trade up for earlier picks in a very good draft, 2) attract and be able to satisfy a club for an elite talent , 3) just take 5 picks in the top 35 of a very good draft.

We don't need to trade up for the sake of trading up.  If there is a specific target then fine, if not we should play the long game.

I’m with you on not having to trade up in this draft in the absence of some special circumstances but I’m not sure about  trading out pick 13 for a future first round pick.

We are under an obligation to use three selections in the draft (currently our first three are 13, 37 and 90), albeit that we can upgrade rookies with our selections if we choose to do so. As it stands at the moment, we’ve signaled that #90 will be used to upgrade Kade Chandler to the primary list so if we trade 13 for a future first as you suggest, we would either place ourselves in a position of needing to upgrade another rookie or using our last pick on a very late selection - and it’s possible that neither option would suit. 

I think we either stick with our existing selections or do something creative such as the example I suggested elsewhere and Little Goffy did above - swap 13 and 37 for West Coast's 20 and 26 to possibly give us a preferable outcome. Of course, the good thing with the club these days are that there are less leaks so that we don’t know about the thinking of our recruiters.

[Nascent 9,283]

We should be able to charge a fair premium for pick 13 that would see us receive a 2nd rounder this year on top of a future first.

An example might be West Coast keen on adding 13 to go with 8 and 12 which might see them take 3 of Ginbey, Busslinger, Allen, Hewett if they stick with WA talent. 

Eagles don't usually stay down the bottom for long and having 11 home games should see them avoid bottom 4 and perhaps more willing to trade out futures.

Pick 13 out for West Coast future 1st and pick 20 or 26 would be a great option if we don't have a player we are particularly keen on available at our first selection.

Don't think they'll go for it though.

Edited October 27, 2022 by Nascent

[Elwood 3184 1,338]

4 minutes ago, Nascent said:

We should be able to charge a fair premium for pick 13 that would see us receive a 2nd rounder this year on top of a future first.

An example might be West Coast keen on adding 13 to go with 8 and 12 which might see them take 3 of Ginbey, Busslinger, Allen, Hewett if they stick with WA talent. 

Eagles don't usually stay down the bottom for long and having 11 home games should see them avoid bottom 4 and perhaps more willing to trade out futures.

Pick 13 out for West Coast future 1st and pick 20 or 26 would be a great option if we don't have a player we are particularly keen on available at our first selection.

Don't think they'll go for it though.

I think that’s a stretch but 13 & 37 for 20 & 26 is almost a perfect match in terms of points.

[Nascent 9,283]

3 minutes ago, Elwood 3184 said:

I think that’s a stretch but 13 & 37 for 20 & 26 is almost a perfect match in terms of points.

Not sure if it's that much of a stretch. We gave up a future first as well as 26 and 50 for pick 8 that eventually ended at 12. 

This year GWS received 15 for 21 and a future 2nd.

We also used a 2nd round pick and 2 x 3rd round picks to move up 6 spots.

You have to pay a bit to move up.

If we don't get a future first out of it, 13 on its own should net us 20 and 26 without 37 being involved. We can then potentially flip 37 for a future 2nd or 3rd round pick next year.

[Nascent 9,283]

Cal Twomey's Phantom Form Guide extra: The 10 next best - https://www.afl.com.au/news/860996

 

[Mach5 4,768]

It seems everyone is trying to move up the order, because this draft is so shallow. Probably related to covid & the age these kids were being a key formative year in their development.

I’d be open to going “early” on Darcy Jones or the GWS kid Barnett if there’s not a decent “slider” on offer

[DeeSpencer 26,081]

I’d put this down as more of a rumour than strong mail but the latest I’ve heard is:

- We have identified a target early in the draft. We’d absolutely love them to fall to 13 but given thats unlikely we’ll attempt to trade up for them.

- But, as it stands it’s more likely we can’t get them and then we’ll trade down the order as it’s a pretty even crop later in the first round.

No mail on how much we’d be willing to trade to get up the order but I’d expect we’d pay market value to get to a pick 6-9 range. Have to imagine a future first is involved 

Not sure how far we’d go backwards either, I think we’d want to stay top 25. 

Edited October 28, 2022 by DeeSpencer

[Mach5 4,768]

If the above was correct, I think it’d have to be either Phillipou or Ginbey.