7 minutes ago, Colm said:

Not sure I agree with this logic. Take O'Sullivan for example. He’s rated as pick 10 on most boards. But he will be gone well before that pick comes round as it will push out to 13/14. 

But those picks pushing out the numbers are already "earmarked" for Academy or Father/Son and can be selected at any time with the points or eligibility. The other selections are still available in total just pushed back one in the system for every pick made from these choices. 
 

1 minute ago, old55 said:

He was never going to be a "freebie". North wanted the rules bent so they could match a bid before 40. They still would have had to pay the points with the discount.

I'm pleased the AFL didn't allow this.

Yes, sensible decision in the end. But being able to match a player that was never a member of their academy until the last minute under special AFL permission with points would have been the definition of freebie to me.

I'm annoyed with the North assistance, plus the prospect of pick 3 for an average, perennially injured KPD and them scabbing for more still. They have a bad case of hand out syndrome. 

1 minute ago, Left Foot Snap said:

Yes, sensible decision in the end. But being able to match a player that was never a member of their academy until the last minute under special AFL permission with points would have been the definition of freebie to me.

I'm annoyed with the North assistance, plus the prospect of pick 3 for an average, perennially injured KPD and them scabbing for more still. They have a bad case of hand out syndrome. 

I think there's a legitimate case for Sanders to be part of North's Academy. He said on Gettable that they have helped foster his development and he has had his Aboriginality confirmed. 

He is now actually confirmed as North Academy but they cannot match before 40.

13 minutes ago, old55 said:

Yes but @drdrake point is O'Sullivan is actually 8th best player in the available pool because Walters and Read aren't available.

Still see my argument above that the earlier the pick the less detrimental effect this has.

 

5 minutes ago, 58er said:

But those picks pushing out the numbers are already "earmarked" for Academy or Father/Son and can be selected at any time with the points or eligibility. The other selections are still available in total just pushed back one in the system for every pick made from these choices. 
 

Same same but different I guess in that whatever way you look at it we won’t get O’Sullivan with pick 10 weather  your logic is because he’s the 8th best talent available or because the pick becomes pick 13. Either way we don’t get him with that pick. 

Given we seem to be getting linked with more first round picks rather than players even though we have a few leaving.Am I the only one starting to wonder if we are trying to get a strong enough hand of first round picks to satisfy WC for pick 1?!

1 minute ago, Colm said:

 

Same same but different I guess in that whatever way you look at it we won’t get O’Sullivan with pick 10 weather  your logic is because he’s the 8th best talent available or because the pick becomes pick 13. Either way we don’t get him with that pick. 

You're actually arguing for abolishing Academy, F/S and FA compensation.  That's a legitimate position to hold.

I'm OK with them but I understand your point.

42 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

Clubs looking at Shaun Mannagh, who kicked six goals and had 27 possessions for Werribee in the loss to Gold Coast in the VFL Grand Final.

The former Ovens and Murray league star is 26 and in his 21 games this year he averaged 25 possessions and 1.9 goals a game, including four goals and 40 possessions against Southport and seven goals from 25 possessions against Sandringham.

Clubs believe he could play as a pressuring forward who wins his own ball at AFL level.

Yeah baby.

12 minutes ago, old55 said:

You're actually arguing for abolishing Academy, F/S and FA compensation.  That's a legitimate position to hold.

I'm OK with them but I understand your point.

I’m actually not. My point is a very simple one and probably more directed at at poster who was saying we should pick O’Sullivan at pick 10 should we get it. He won’t be there at that pick whatever way you look at it. 

3 minutes ago, Colm said:

I’m actually not. My point is a very simple one and probably more directed at at poster who was saying we should pick O’Sullivan at pick 10 should we get it. He won’t be there at that pick whatever way you look at it. 

He won't be there because Academy and FA Compensation picks will intervene. 

26 minutes ago, old55 said:

He won't be there because Academy and FA Compensation picks will intervene. 

He won't be there as I reckon North will take him with the McKay compensation pick 3.

The hard part with all this pick swap we need to know what clubs will get next year in relation to Father Sons and NGA picks.  Such a massive advantage bulldogs have been massive winners in recent years, now Brisbane not only get NGA priority but also father Son which gives them another Ashcroft next season.

Sydney and Brisbane should have limits on NGA as they have access to FS where as GCS and GWS don't as yet

Edited September 28, 20232 yr by drdrake

If we end up having 5, 10 & 13 it will be interesting to see if JT and Tim Lamb rate McKercher or Duursma in the same way they rated Clarry in 2015. If they do we may see a play of offering picks 5 & 10 to North for pick 2 or 3 and change. I wouldn't be against that.

If we do keep 5, 10 & 13 I would like us to take O'Sullivan at 5 and then the two best available mids at 10 & 13. O'Sullivan looks a key position talent too good to pass up. Top shelf bookends are so hard to find/recruit. I'd pick him out of that likely combination of Sanders/Caddy/Watson/O'Sullivan available at pick 5. 

Edited September 29, 20232 yr by BaliDemon

I mentioned this previously, but I would be very happy if we choose two or even three players from the following list of young talent.

● Zane Duursma

● Colby McKercher

● Nate Caddy

● Nick Watson

● Ryley Sanders

● Connor O'Sullivan

● Darcy Wilson

● Ollie Murphy

● George Stevens

For those interested, you can find information about them via the link here: https://central.rookieme.com/afl/power-rankings/afl-draft-power-rankings-september-2023/

Amazing that people are unhappy with the Academy advantages the AFL is gifting to GC but still consider it's worthwhile for us to draft McKercher or Sanders.  You just know the AFL is going to put rules in place to make sure they get to the inaugural Tasmanian team, it fits the pattern.

31 minutes ago, old55 said:

Amazing that people are unhappy with the Academy advantages the AFL is gifting to GC but still consider it's worthwhile for us to draft McKercher or Sanders.  You just know the AFL is going to put rules in place to make sure they get to the inaugural Tasmanian team, it fits the pattern.

First rounders now get automatic three year initial contracts. Gives kids more time now to really settle in, form strong friendship bonds and so on. If McKercher or Sanders sign a further extension during that time then it pretty much wards off Tassy completely. I wouldn’t let that situation cloud our drafting in 2023. 

Edited September 29, 20232 yr by BaliDemon

On 9/20/2023 at 10:11 PM, whatwhat say what said:

we would've killed for that kinda compo when we were propping up the table

Particularly at a time when GC and GWS had pillaged all of the good talent

1 hour ago, old55 said:

Amazing that people are unhappy with the Academy advantages the AFL is gifting to GC but still consider it's worthwhile for us to draft McKercher or Sanders.  You just know the AFL is going to put rules in place to make sure they get to the inaugural Tasmanian team, it fits the pattern.

Imo I would avoid Tasmanians.

Its just too dangerous.

46 minutes ago, BaliDemon said:

First rounders now get automatic three year initial contracts. Gives kids more time now to really settle in, form strong friendship bonds and so on. If McKercher or Sanders sign a further extension during that time then it pretty much wards off Tassy completely. I wouldn’t let that situation cloud our drafting in 2023. 

If they signed an extension that took the beyond the inaugural Tassie year their managers should be shot.  

Yep, we're already seeing the lengths the AFL will go to make North viable.

We've seen the extraordinary draft, trade and list management concessions handed to the expansion clubs.

That is absolutely the blueprint for the Tassie team too.

We will and should be incredibly wary of Tasmanian prospects. 

Edited September 29, 20232 yr by Binmans PA

5 hours ago, samcantstandya said:

We end up with 3 potential guns, A Sanders/Watson etc.. at 5, O'Connor at 10 and a slider at 13. Plus Brown F/S with a later pick. Then recruit rookies like Orlando Turner & maybe Riak Andrews NGA, plus Jacob's bro Sam as a developing tall

Tell me more, Samcant!

5 hours ago, Fat Tony said:

Clubs looking at Shaun Mannagh, who kicked six goals and had 27 possessions for Werribee in the loss to Gold Coast in the VFL Grand Final.

The former Ovens and Murray league star is 26 and in his 21 games this year he averaged 25 possessions and 1.9 goals a game, including four goals and 40 possessions against Southport and seven goals from 25 possessions against Sandringham.

Clubs believe he could play as a pressuring forward who wins his own ball at AFL level.

Sounds like a gift from heaven.

Get him.

49 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

Yep, we're already seeing the lengths the AFL will go to make North viable.

We've seen the extraordinary draft, trade and list management concessions handed to the expansion clubs.

That is absolutely the blueprint for the Tassie team too.

We will and should be incredibly wary of Tasmanian prospects. 

So should we have been ‘wary’ of Luke Jackson because of the go home factor? No, we were bold, drafted him and he was pivotal in our premiership success as a result. Okay, he went home but we’re getting adequate compensation for him three years later. 

A strong club backs itself in and takes the best available kid. A weak club worries about what everyone else is doing and compromises its card hand as a result. 

Edited September 29, 20232 yr by BaliDemon

6 minutes ago, BaliDemon said:

So should we have been ‘wary’ of Luke Jackson because of the go home factor? No, we were bold, drafted him and he was pivotal in our premiership success as a result. Okay, he went home but we’re getting adequate compensation for him three years later. 

A strong club backs itself in and takes the best available kid. A weak club worries about what everyone else is doing and compromises its card hand as a result. 

No... the WA clubs don't and won't have trade and list management concessions. The Tassie team will.

You completely missed the point here. LJ is not at all an apt comparison to Tasmanian prospects. 

Edited September 29, 20232 yr by Binmans PA

6 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

No... the WA clubs don't and won't have trade and list management concessions. The Tassie team will.

You completely missed the point here. LJ is not at all an apt comparison to Tasmanian prospects. 

No, you completely missed the point. 

54 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

No... the WA clubs don't and won't have trade and list management concessions. The Tassie team will.

You completely missed the point here. LJ is not at all an apt comparison to Tasmanian prospects. 

48 minutes ago, BaliDemon said:

No, you completely missed the point. 

Unlike MFC 2023.

Except when they missed that, too...

Our draft and trade targets need to be blokes that can hit targets, human or the DA's one.

(Yeah, I know it's actually 'behinds' but you get my point...)

Edited September 29, 20232 yr by Timothy Reddan-A'Blew

9 hours ago, drdrake said:

He won't be there as I reckon North will take him with the McKay compensation pick 3.

 

I think you could be right...