The 2023 AFL Draft Thread

[Demonsterative 3,021]

9 minutes ago, Demonland said:

Is this your first Draft? 😜

Remind me next year not to watch this [censored] again… 🤪 Ablett and Shifter are too much. 

[Clintosaurus 7,926]

Welcome Kynan

[DeeSpencer 26,273]

1 hour ago, Little Goffy said:

Seems strange to pass when there's players we want, but there's so many notice-board-out-the-back-of-the-kitchen shenanigans in the draft system these days who can tell?

List spots, list spots, list spots.

We made the call to not attempt to wind up or push out Tomlinson, BBB and T Mc. Gave Schache another year because we need a prime age tall to cover for the old boys. And we rolled the dice on Billings (and to an extent Shane McAdam).

Otherwise there's very little fat on our main list.

We'll open up plenty of picks next year (I hope anyway) in a deeper draft.

[dee-tox 4,835]

7 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

 

unbelievable

thought these 3 youngsters would be drafted by now

Arie Schoenmaker 

Archie Roberts 

George Stevens 

definitely top 35 in my opinion 

With Schoenmaker, maybe  club imposed sanction of 10 weeks impacted AFL clubs thinking?

[dees189227 12,453]

So no one drafted the 50 year old that nominated for the draft? He'd be disappointed 

Seems Geelong weren't tempted 

Edited November 21, 2023 by dees189227

[spirit of norm smith 16,615]

3 hours ago, dee-tox said:

With Schoenmaker, maybe  club imposed sanction of 10 weeks impacted AFL clubs thinking?

@dee-tox you may be right.His quality stands out and saints did well as a pick 62 selection.  At that point to get such a top 30 slider is a good punt imv

[kryton101 411]

Almost all done with the swooping, nabbing, plucking, snaring and pouncing for another year.

 

 

[DeeMee 923]

Does anyone know where you can watch a replay of the 2 draft nights. Wouldn’t mind watching some of those highlights on Slo Mo.

[layzie 34,334]

1 hour ago, DeeMee said:

Does anyone know where you can watch a replay of the 2 draft nights. Wouldn’t mind watching some of those highlights on Slo Mo.

Yeah hopefully a collector's edition DVD is in the works.

[seventyfour 1,220]

How many list spots do we have left after we pick up Brown and Hore today, plus moving Melksham to the rookie list? I don't think we'll have any?

Quietly hoping we could pick up Van Rooyen's younger brother as a project, but I don't think there's room.

 

 

[chook fowler 19,694]

2 hours ago, DeeMee said:

Does anyone know where you can watch a replay of the 2 draft nights. Wouldn’t mind watching some of those highlights on Slo Mo.

i thought the broadcast was in slo mo

[TRIGON 4,792]

2 hours ago, DeeMee said:

Does anyone know where you can watch a replay of the 2 draft nights. Wouldn’t mind watching some of those highlights on Slo Mo.

Stop mucking about @DeeMee, get yourself cryogenically frozen.

[JTR 2,884]

Only team we were better than was GWS!  🤣

https://www.espn.com.au/afl/story/_/id/38953036/2023-afl-draft-every-pick-team-graded

[poita 3,908]

34 minutes ago, JTR said:

Only team we were better than was GWS!  🤣

Considering we started the trade period with two first round picks and a second round pick, its hardly a bumper crop of recruits.

[adonski 12,907]

Freo offered a future 1st to GWS, Melb, and Sydney targeting Curtin then Thostrup but were knocked back according to the West 

[buck_nekkid 6,068]

2 hours ago, JTR said:

Only team we were better than was GWS!  🤣

https://www.espn.com.au/afl/story/_/id/38953036/2023-afl-draft-every-pick-team-graded

OF COURSE WE GET A POOR GRADE.  And of course Collingwood get a top mark.  Kick us whilst we are down - we got exactly who we wanted, and didnt pull any ‘surprises’. If that is a C- then good enough for me.  We wont know for a few year who is any good or is a bust.  

[Gawndy the Great 9,011]

3 hours ago, JTR said:

Only team we were better than was GWS!  🤣

https://www.espn.com.au/afl/story/_/id/38953036/2023-afl-draft-every-pick-team-graded

Firstly who gives a flying f what this guy thinks. But to give Collingwood an A! [censored] he must be vying for the MRO position.

[Dee Viney Intervention 1,972]

21 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

Firstly who gives a flying f what this guy thinks. But to give Collingwood an A! [censored] he must be vying for the MRO position.

Written by a bloke called Jasper, I rest my case. Sincere apologies to anyone reading this called Jasper……. Your parents have a lot to answer for. 

[Axis of Bob 11,898]

4 hours ago, JTR said:

Only team we were better than was GWS!  🤣

https://www.espn.com.au/afl/story/_/id/38953036/2023-afl-draft-every-pick-team-graded

I have some sympathy for Jasper. ESPN would have required him to do a rating grade for the draft (it's very much part of their brand) and there really isn't any way that you can rate a draft immediately afterwards without knowing where everybody rated each player. ESPN has put him in a really terrible position in order to generate clicks. The only way that you can rate it is by doing so against your own ratings, which is what he's done. He rated Curtin highly, so when we passed on him we picked a player he didn't rate as highly (Windsor at 19), whilst Adelaide got Curtin which means he'd rate our draft result lower and theirs higher. The ratings are just for clicks and to generate arguments, so I wouldn't hold against the author. 

[greenwaves 498]

On 22/11/2023 at 11:03, JTR said:

Only team we were better than was GWS!  🤣

https://www.espn.com.au/afl/story/_/id/38953036/2023-afl-draft-every-pick-team-graded

Fox gave us a B.   Said "This is the ultimate drafting for the present"

[Lord Travis 10,793]

53 minutes ago, greenwaves said:

Fox gave us a B.   Said "This is the ultimate drafting for the present"

There's a running theme in the footy media that we drafted based on needs not best talent. That's despite the fact GWS were set to take Windsor at the very next pick, and when we got him first they actually traded down as they didn't rate the other options after him. That says he was rated highly by multiple clubs that based on talent, not our specific needs.

But no worries footy media, keep spouting the factually incorrect statements about drafting for needs not best talent. 

Mindless lying scum.

[DistrACTION Jackson 10,203]

10 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

There's a running theme in the footy media that we drafted based on needs not best talent. That's despite the fact GWS were set to take Windsor at the very next pick, and when we got him first they actually traded down as they didn't rate the other options after him. That says he was rated highly by multiple clubs that based on talent, not our specific needs.

But no worries footy media, keep spouting the factually incorrect statements about drafting for needs not best talent. 

Mindless lying scum.

I think if we were genuienly drafting for needs, we probably would've gone for Caddy as key forwards was our main issue last year. Though I'm not too concerned with this, given JVR will be a year older and Petty is expected to play forward, with TMac and Brown both hoping to get back to a better fitness base.

Windsor will probably start behind Langdon and Hunter, as would be expected of a young player but long term I think he could end up a very similar player to Isaac Smith. Tholstrup could be anything also and in the mould of a De Goey/Trac/Martin type player, however again he will start behind guys like McAdam, ANB and Sparrow and have to force his way into the side. So the idea we drafted for needs is ridiculous.

The issue with the media is they rank the players mainly off statistics, whereas the AFL recruiters would also be looking at how the players fit into the modern AFL side. The way footy is played at AFL level is so different to juniors, with a much greater emphasis on defence and they would be aware that some players who dominate juniors may not easily fit into the AFL system.

[DeeSpencer 26,273]

1 hour ago, Lord Travis said:

There's a running theme in the footy media that we drafted based on needs not best talent. That's despite the fact GWS were set to take Windsor at the very next pick, and when we got him first they actually traded down as they didn't rate the other options after him. That says he was rated highly by multiple clubs that based on talent, not our specific needs.

But no worries footy media, keep spouting the factually incorrect statements about drafting for needs not best talent. 

Mindless lying scum.

I mean, GWS were probably taking Windsor for need too!

But if we had taken Curtin, Caddy or O’Sullivan it would’ve been labelled as for need as well!

I do wonder if we had stayed at 14, which became 18 and taken Darcy Wilson, Charlie Edwards or Harry DeMattia and added the 2nd and 3rd rounders to our offer to Hawthorn could we have got them over the line to do 4 for 6?

But I’d be even more nervous if we had taken Wizard Watson and whilst Sanders is a safe and solid option he might not be a big difference maker. 

At the end of the day we were the first side to move away from the elite junior performers or the quality talls (and Curtin fits both categories). If it wasn’t JT I think there’d be more questions asked.

[Diamond_Jim 12,687]

Interesting to see the Eagles complaining about the way the academies work:

West Coast want a “discussion” on the AFL’s controversial next generation academies, admitting to frustration at losing Lance Collard to St Kilda in the national draft.

The NGA system was a big talking point around the national draft on Monday and Tuesday nights. Gold Coast, as one of the four northern clubs, were able to recruit four of their academy players in the first round and it is tipped to be a bumper crop for the Suns.

But under AFL rules, the other 14 clubs could not stop rival clubs poaching their NGA players if they were nominated inside the first 40 selections. So Collard, a highly rated Eagles academy prospect, was snapped up by St Kilda at pick 28.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/nov/22/afl-draft-2023-club-next-generation-academy-rules

[Deespicable 2,886]

On 22/11/2023 at 13:46, buck_nekkid said:

OF COURSE WE GET A POOR GRADE.  And of course Collingwood get a top mark.  Kick us whilst we are down - we got exactly who we wanted, and didnt pull any ‘surprises’. If that is a C- then good enough for me.  We wont know for a few year who is any good or is a bust.  

While I agree with you that any suggestion the Pies were worthy of an A when they picked up two later order players who are both regarded as quick movers is a massive suck up to Pies job. They were probably a B, given they gave away their first pick for Schultz who if you have seen him, is a very classy player and will play round 1, unlike many other draft picks. 

But as to what we did, it is hard to get excited.

Windsor and Tholstrup are both quick players and so is Kynan Brown, so we made sure our ageing side is replenished with youthful speed - that's a big tick.

But we completely blundered the trade swapping game - clearly we are missing Josh Mahoney's input here and we all should be querying the role Tim Lamb had in those pick swaps and overall list management.

The first decision to offload picks 14, 22 and 33 to advance up the order and get pick 11 should go down as one of our worst efforts in history. Clearly we thought by having pick 5 and 11 we could get Harley Reid, but it proved a flawed philosophy. Whilst i am quite happy with Tholstrup, we almost certainly could have got him for pick 14 anyway as only Collingwood seemed aware of his talents and their picks was much later. And even if we'd lost out and some club snaffled him at pick 12 and 13, we could have got Leake from Tas and the jury is still out as to which of him and Tholstrup is better.

Then our list manager mucked up how many players we needed on our list (kept Schache, T-Mac and Brown) and that meant we had to offload pick 42 just before the draft for a bag of peanuts.

Stupid is as stupid does.