4 hours ago, demoncat said:

I’d be taking Sharp before Farrow or Nairn that’s for sure

Yes we’ve got Viney and Steele but he would compliment Langford, Lindsay, Windsor, Rivers, Kozzy etc beautifully long term

I think Essendon just take him at 5 or 6 anyway so it’s probably a moot point, but I also can’t understand people’s hesitation with him

Langford and Sharp are a poor fit. Hard to have more than 1 one pacer on ball these days.

24 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Langford and Sharp are a poor fit. Hard to have more than 1 one pacer on ball these days.

I don’t see a great deal of pace between W. Ashcroft, Neale, McLuggage and Dunkley?

Pace on ball is a myth. Pace on the outside is a reality.

1 hour ago, Dannyz said:

I don’t see a great deal of pace between W. Ashcroft, Neale, McLuggage and Dunkley?

Pace on ball is a myth. Pace on the outside is a reality.

Whilst they might not be express pace McCluggage and Ashcroft are 2 of the best at exploding out the front of stoppages. And Brisbane often add Bailey on ball or up at stoppages.

Neale and Dunkley I’ll give you but Brisbane maximise their value/minimise their disadvantages by Neale dominating in close and Dunkley locking down on the oppositions best mid.

If we do draft Sharp I’d try to utilise him just as the Lions do Dunkley. As a defensive mid at stoppages and stretching opponents in space with good work rate and overhead marking.

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

Langford and Sharp are a poor fit. Hard to have more than 1 one pacer on ball these days.

They'll play different roles at AFL level. Sharp will likely be a dedicated inside ball winner who rests forward ala Cripps. Langford is a balanced midfielder who can play wing, half forward, deep forward or where ever he's needed. I view him as a Bont type. When they're flanked by guys like Kozzie, Windsor, Rivers, Lindsey etc I don't think it's an issue, but more a strength. Imagine Sharp feeding guys like Kozzie and Windsor bursting away from stoppages or feeding out to Langford and Lindsey to use their kicking skills. It's enticing.

The whole "modern game" thing is overdone by the media too. Finals and premierships come down to clearances and contested ball. Fact. Look at the most recent grand final as an example. The Cats actually won the turnover game. Disposal efficiency was even. inside 50s were close. The key stat that determined the game was Brisbane spanking them in clearances. Clearances just determined a premiership, yet people go on about the "modern game" and speed and inside ball winners not being relevant anymore. Look at the Brownlow winners for the last years:
Rowell
Cripps
Neale
Cripps
Wines
Neale

What do they all have in common? They're all inside ball winners, and they're all impacting matches more than others.

Sharp has leadership capabilities too. He's a safe a bet to be a good AFL player as there is in this draft, and as much potential as any other draftee to be elite.

1 hour ago, Dannyz said:

I don’t see a great deal of pace between W. Ashcroft, Neale, McLuggage and Dunkley?

Pace on ball is a myth. Pace on the outside is a reality.

100%.

5 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Neale and Dunkley I’ll give you but Brisbane maximise their value/minimise their disadvantages by Neale dominating in close and Dunkley locking down on the oppositions best mid.

Someone recently - maybe even a Melbourne player after the Gabba win - described Neale as having the fastest feet in the game. He may not be quick, but he's no plodder.

16 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

They'll play different roles at AFL level. Sharp will likely be a dedicated inside ball winner who rests forward ala Cripps. Langford is a balanced midfielder who can play wing, half forward, deep forward or where ever he's needed. I view him as a Bont type. When they're flanked by guys like Kozzie, Windsor, Rivers, Lindsey etc I don't think it's an issue, but more a strength. Imagine Sharp feeding guys like Kozzie and Windsor bursting away from stoppages or feeding out to Langford and Lindsey to use their kicking skills. It's enticing.

The whole "modern game" thing is overdone by the media too. Finals and premierships come down to clearances and contested ball. Fact. Look at the most recent grand final as an example. The Cats actually won the turnover game. Disposal efficiency was even. inside 50s were close. The key stat that determined the game was Brisbane spanking them in clearances. Clearances just determined a premiership, yet people go on about the "modern game" and speed and inside ball winners not being relevant anymore. Look at the Brownlow winners for the last years:
Rowell
Cripps
Neale
Cripps
Wines
Neale

What do they all have in common? They're all inside ball winners, and they're all impacting matches more than others.

Sharp has leadership capabilities too. He's a safe a bet to be a good AFL player as there is in this draft, and as much potential as any other draftee to be elite.

100%.

100% agree

But I would also say that you need your inside ball winners to be at least decent kicks

Neale and Dunkley won’t be hitting lace out passes but they’re both able to kick to advantage and are good decision makers

Neale especially is so good with his hand balling in close to set up the outside runners that he doesn’t need to be the one delivering inside 50 all the time

Contrast that to Trac, Clarry and Viney over the past few years who consistently missed kicks and caused turnovers going inside 50

I think unfortunately we had clearance dominant mids who just couldn’t hit the side of a barn which massively impacted our scoring potential

And FWIW I don’t think Sharp fits into this category - in fact his kicking seems pretty solid for his role

Edited 13 hours ago13 hr by demoncat

37 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

They'll play different roles at AFL level. Sharp will likely be a dedicated inside ball winner

My issue is this, I don’t see Sharp as a Rowell, Neale, Libba, Viney, Serong level inside presence.

Obviously he’ll be good inside. But I think his rugged look makes him appear like a gun inside player but he’s actually more similar to a Langford.

44 minutes ago, demoncat said:

100% agree

But I would also say that you need your inside ball winners to be at least decent kicks

Neale and Dunkley won’t be hitting lace out passes but they’re both able to kick to advantage and are good decision makers

Neale especially is so good with his hand balling in close to set up the outside runners that he doesn’t need to be the one delivering inside 50 all the time

Contrast that to Trac, Clarry and Viney over the past few years who consistently missed kicks and caused turnovers going inside 50

I think unfortunately we had clearance dominant mids who just couldn’t hit the side of a barn which massively impacted our scoring potential

And FWIW I don’t think Sharp fits into this category - in fact his kicking seems pretty solid for his role

Agreed. On your bolded points, Sharps hand balling in close is good and sets up team mates too. He is the best inside ball winner in this draft and made a lot of the other draftees look soft and hopeless. He's also a decent kick like the others you noted above. He always moves the ball on quickly and usually kicks to a lead or space rather than blindly bombing long. It's why I'm so hopeful he'll slide to our pick, as other than not being blessed with foot speed, he's a well rounded as you can get for this type of midfielder that will never go out of style.

23 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

My issue is this, I don’t see Sharp as a Rowell, Neale, Libba, Viney, Serong level inside presence.

Obviously he’ll be good inside. But I think his rugged look makes him appear like a gun inside player but he’s actually more similar to a Langford.

That's fair also. I see him as more of an inside presence than most of those, but he lacks the foot speed on burst to some of them like Rowell. I think he's more than capable inside even considering his rugged appearance 😆 Everyone sees it differently I guess, which is all part of the fun!

Will be interesting to see where he lands tomorrow night. I assumed he'd go as high as pick 2, so am shocked we're a chance to get him.

Farrow is another one we're apparently keen on who could go anywhere. He's got attributes I like too and clearly has interest from other clubs around our mark.

2 hours ago, Dannyz said:

I don’t see a great deal of pace between W. Ashcroft, Neale, McLuggage and Dunkley?

Pace on ball is a myth. Pace on the outside is a reality.

Well spoken. Ie Greg Williams, a famous dawdler from the past. If you do happen to be a bit slow opening the jam jar, a set of beady eyes and bullet hand passing are essentials ..

39 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

The whole "modern game" thing is overdone by the media too. Finals and premierships come down to clearances and contested ball. Fact. Look at the most recent grand final as an example. The Cats actually won the turnover game. Disposal efficiency was even. inside 50s were close. The key stat that determined the game was Brisbane spanking them in clearances. Clearances just determined a premiership, yet people go on about the "modern game" and speed and inside ball winners not being relevant anymore. Look at the Brownlow winners for the last years:
Rowell
Cripps
Neale
Cripps
Wines
Neale

What do they all have in common? They're all inside ball winners, and they're all impacting matches more than others.

That's all well and good, but a couple of things:

• These are the best inside midfielders in the game. It's like saying that we should pick Schubert at pick 10 because the past 6 Coleman winners were Cameron, Hogan, Curnow, Curnow, McKay and Hawkins. If you think a player is a genuine superstar then you pick him.

• Brownlow medals are won by high possession winners. You select an inside midfielder to win high possession numbers. That's their job.

• Imagine a team where all of those Brownlow winners were playing in the same team. How many extra clearances is Wines going to win in a midfield of Rowell, Cripps and Neale? How many extra clearances is Cripps going to win if he's playing with Rowell and Neale? And how well will a midfield with all 4 of them defend a turnover? The Bulldogs tried this approach when they brought in a surplus of attacking midfield players to an already super strong midfield. It got them a midfield of Bontempelli, Liberatore, Treloar, Macrae, Dunkley and even Wallis. Everyone asked how anyone could beat a midfield that strong .... before they conceded 16 goals to 3 in the GF to lose by 74 points. The reason is that they had all their resources in one area but they were all fighting for the same football. Macrae was shipped out for peanuts. Dunkley left. Wallis was delisted. They cannibalised each other's football.

Winning contested possession is important but it isn't the only thing. You only have finite resources and you work out where to allocate them. If you think Sharp is Matt Rowell then you'd pick him ... or more likely he'd already be well gone by our pick. If you think he's Jobe Watson then you pick him. If you think he's Ben Hobbs then you don't. If you think he's Jye Caldwell then you've got a more difficult decision to make whether you think it's worth using a good pick on a player of that type that needs to take up a valuable spot in the midfield in order to be effective. Or you could take an equivalent talent, like Mason Redman, who doesn't take anyone's valuable position would only add to a team and contribute to winning.

It's a difficult decision. There are just some positions on the field where you can only have a small number of players before the returns on them drop off. The Bulldogs could only put 3 of them in the middle when we went bang, bang, bang. We couldn't play two AA ruckmen in the same team. The situation is different for each team. But if they think Sharp is Matt Rowell or Lachie Neale, then they'll pick him and send Viney or Steele to Casey.

Edited 12 hours ago12 hr by Axis of Bob

2 hours ago, demoncat said:

100% agree

Contrast that to Trac, Clarry and Viney over the past few years who consistently missed kicks and caused turnovers going inside 50

I think unfortunately we had clearance dominant mids who just couldn’t hit the side of a barn which massively impacted our scoring potential

And there you have it.

Cal drops his late mail the morning the draft usually correct?

1 minute ago, Ted Lasso said:

Cal drops his late mail the morning the draft usually correct?

Tonight

2 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

They'll play different roles at AFL level. Sharp will likely be a dedicated inside ball winner who rests forward ala Cripps. Langford is a balanced midfielder who can play wing, half forward, deep forward or where ever he's needed. I view him as a Bont type. When they're flanked by guys like Kozzie, Windsor, Rivers, Lindsey etc I don't think it's an issue, but more a strength. Imagine Sharp feeding guys like Kozzie and Windsor bursting away from stoppages or feeding out to Langford and Lindsey to use their kicking skills. It's enticing.

The whole "modern game" thing is overdone by the media too. Finals and premierships come down to clearances and contested ball. Fact. Look at the most recent grand final as an example. The Cats actually won the turnover game. Disposal efficiency was even. inside 50s were close. The key stat that determined the game was Brisbane spanking them in clearances. Clearances just determined a premiership, yet people go on about the "modern game" and speed and inside ball winners not being relevant anymore. Look at the Brownlow winners for the last years:
Rowell
Cripps
Neale
Cripps
Wines
Neale

What do they all have in common? They're all inside ball winners, and they're all impacting matches more than others.

Sharp has leadership capabilities too. He's a safe a bet to be a good AFL player as there is in this draft, and as much potential as any other draftee to be elite.

100%.

Not to argue with your point, as you still always need a competent midfield but if we are looking at GF, of the last 15 GFs, the premiership team has won the clearances 8 times.

For these games, the 'stat' that best correlates with winning is marks inside 50 (10.5/15). Again, not to downplay your point but if there was one stat I could win in any game, it would be marks inside 50. Its the stat most correlated with winning percentage.

The upshot is, statistically speaking, what you do with it is a bit more important than getting it (which has been our problem for a number of years)..

33 minutes ago, Jjrogan said:

For these games, the 'stat' that best correlates with winning is marks inside 50 (10.5/15). Again, not to downplay your point but if there was one stat I could win in any game, it would be marks inside 50. Its the stat most correlated with winning percentage.

Thats more of an outcome based stat that one that shows how games are won. Because it gives no insight in how marks inside 50 are generated.

If you purely wanted marks you’d just play 6 key forwards but it seems like pressure smalls generate turnovers that lead to marks. Where as tall forwards most important job in finals is to take on the Harris Andrews types and stop them marking everything.

Winning the ball will always be vital in finals. But there’s a lot of stats now that show the game is heavily transition based, and that’s seemingly where the league wants it to go too.

So I’d always be drafting for guys who win their own pill I’d also be putting a lot of weight in guys who excel at transition footy.

43 minutes ago, Jjrogan said:

Not to argue with your point, as you still always need a competent midfield but if we are looking at GF, of the last 15 GFs, the premiership team has won the clearances 8 times.

For these games, the 'stat' that best correlates with winning is marks inside 50 (10.5/15). Again, not to downplay your point but if there was one stat I could win in any game, it would be marks inside 50. Its the stat most correlated with winning percentage.

The upshot is, statistically speaking, what you do with it is a bit more important than getting it (which has been our problem for a number of years)..

Might be a good correlation but targeting the marks inside 50 stat is useless in terms of setting strategic direction. I’m confident ‘goals’ has an even better correlation to winning gfs.

Pretty easy to understand why having more marks inside 50 is likely to mean you have more shots at goal under no pressure which then means you’ll be likely to win. The hard part is setting a direction which increases your chances of generating good scoring opportunities.

Cal's late mail still has us with Farrow and Nairn

LATE MAIL PHANTOM DRAFT

Pick 1 – West Coast: Willem Duursma
Pick 2 – Gold Coast: Zeke Uwland (matching West Coast's bid)
Pick 3 – Carlton: Harry Dean (matching West Coast's bid)
Pick 4 – West Coast: Cooper Duff Tytler
Pick 5 – Gold Coast: Dylan Patterson (matching Richmond's bid)
Pick 6 – Brisbane: Daniel Annable (matching Richmond's bid)
Pick 7 – Richmond: Sam Cumming
Pick 8 – Richmond: Sullivan Robey
Pick 9 – Essendon: Xavier Taylor
Pick 10 – Essendon: Dyson Sharp 
Pick 11 – Melbourne: Jacob Farrow
Pick 12 – Melbourne: Cam Nairn
Pick 13 – Essendon: Lachy Dovaston
Pick 14 – Hawthorn: Sam Grlj
Pick 15 – North Melbourne: Latrelle Pickett
Pick 16 – Sydney: Harry Kyle (matching GWS's bid)
Pick 17 – Greater Western Sydney: Oskar Taylor
Pick 18 – Gold Coast: Jai Murray (matching West Coast's bid)
Pick 19 – West Coast: Beau Addinsall
Pick 20 – Western Bulldogs: Josh Lindsay
Pick 21 – Adelaide: Mitch Marsh
Pick 22 – Carlton: Jack Ison (matching Geelong's bid)
Pick 23 – Geelong: Blake Thredgold
Pick 24 – West Coast: Tylah Williams (matching Fremantle's bid)
Pick 25 – Essendon: Adam Sweid (matching Fremantle's bid)
Pick 26 – Fremantle: Aidan Schubert
Pick 27 – Hawthorn: Liam Hetherton
Pick 28 – North Melbourne: Harley Barker
Pick 29 – Sydney: Lachie Carmichael (matching Western Bulldogs' bid)
Pick 30 – Western Bulldogs: Louis Emmett

Edited 10 hours ago10 hr by adonski

4 minutes ago, adonski said:

Cal's late mail still has us with Farrow and Nairn

LATE MAIL PHANTOM DRAFT

Pick 1 – West Coast: Willem Duursma
Pick 2 – Gold Coast: Zeke Uwland (matching West Coast's bid)
Pick 3 – Carlton: Harry Dean (matching West Coast's bid)
Pick 4 – West Coast: Cooper Duff Tytler
Pick 5 – Gold Coast: Dylan Patterson (matching Richmond's bid)
Pick 6 – Brisbane: Daniel Annable (matching Richmond's bid)
Pick 7 – Richmond: Sam Cumming
Pick 8 – Richmond: Sullivan Robey
Pick 9 – Essendon: Xavier Taylor
Pick 10 – Essendon: Dyson Sharp 
Pick 11 – Melbourne: Jacob Farrow
Pick 12 – Melbourne: Cam Nairn
Pick 13 – Essendon: Lachy Dovaston
Pick 14 – Hawthorn: Sam Grlj
Pick 15 – North Melbourne: Latrelle Pickett
Pick 16 – Sydney: Harry Kyle (matching GWS's bid)
Pick 17 – Greater Western Sydney: Oskar Taylor
Pick 18 – Gold Coast: Jai Murray (matching West Coast's bid)
Pick 19 – West Coast: Beau Addinsall
Pick 20 – Western Bulldogs: Josh Lindsay
Pick 21 – Adelaide: Mitch Marsh
Pick 22 – Carlton: Jack Ison (matching Geelong's bid)
Pick 23 – Geelong: Blake Thredgold
Pick 24 – West Coast: Tylah Williams (matching Fremantle's bid)
Pick 25 – Essendon: Adam Sweid (matching Fremantle's bid)
Pick 26 – Fremantle: Aidan Schubert
Pick 27 – Hawthorn: Liam Hetherton
Pick 28 – North Melbourne: Harley Barker
Pick 29 – Sydney: Lachie Carmichael (matching Western Bulldogs' bid)
Pick 30 – Western Bulldogs: Louis Emmett

didnt change a single thing.. interesting

2 minutes ago, gawnbeatsnerds said:

didnt change a single thing.. interesting

Schubert seems such a weird pick for Freo

Would prefer Dovaston than Farrow when it comes to what position they play. Being a VIC boy also puts him higher for me.

1 minute ago, Demongirl35 said:

Would prefer Dovaston than Farrow when it comes to what position they play. Being a VIC boy also puts him higher for me.

I see this phantom draft and I see Dovaston and Grlj the selections immediately after ours. I feel queasy.

This is somewhat comforting from Cal in his late mail re the Sharp conundrum:

Cumming, Robey, Taylor and Farrow are all in the Bombers' mix for their pair of picks, as well as Dyson Sharp, who could be available at their third pick but the Bombers would run the risk of the Demons snapping him up or trading the pick to a suitor like Adelaide if they do that. Essendon will be waiting to see who the Tigers grab as they remain keen on the same batch of players.  

Glad to see it spelled out that we would threaten to trade the pick to others keen on Sharp (Adelaide/Pies). First time I've seen Cal mention any possibility that we would consider Sharp when he mentions we might be 'snapping him up' if they don't get him with their first two picks but I think thats just a throwaway line.

I will be stoked with Farrow he looks like he could be a gun.

Welp Farrow and Nairn it is

I’d like to say I’ve always been a massive fan of both

Edited 10 hours ago10 hr by demoncat