Is there a thread for 'questions already asked and answered 15 times?'. Including this one?

How does father-son and academy selection work once you're through to the rookie draft?

And what happens if a bid comes in at technically zero value - pick 55 or later?

And is the value calculated according to when the pick is taken or when it is officially recorded - for example if over a dozen picks are burned in the 20s and 30s, does pick 37 get valued at its rank number or at the late 20s range it is actually taken?

Such a simple, elegant system they set up.

Does Sharpe have good lateral movement, evasiveness ? Is he a good ball user atleast? I see he dominated a lot of games but think about how many draftees come in and dominate VFL but aren't suited to AFL ....

1 minute ago, Melonmonster said:

Does Sharpe have good lateral movement, evasiveness ? Is he a good ball user atleast? I see he dominated a lot of games but think about how many draftees come in and dominate VFL but aren't suited to AFL ....

IMPROVEMENTS:

- Kicking
- Outside game
- Speed

36 minutes ago, adonski said:

IMPROVEMENTS:

- Kicking
- Outside game
- Speed

Sounds like the boy would fit right in then 👍

Just now, RedLegs23 said:

Sounds like the boy would fit right in then 👍

It would be really weird to boot out Clazz and trade Trac as while King is spruiking quicker ball movement to then bring in someone like Sharp

5 hours ago, demoncat said:

FINALLY a mock draft that recognises we need a small forward

Sharp and Dovaston is the best outcome for us I’ve seen so far in one of these

That's a big rap on Sharp.

All phantom drafts that don't have us down for Dovaston + Oskar (not to be confused with Xavier) Taylor are WRONG

Last year I was really sold on Langford and would have been really disappointed if we had missed out on him and SONS and W_J sold me on Xavier Lindsey, I’m not really picking up any vibes on 7 & 8 (11 - 12)after the 4 F/S, Academy boys. Thank goodness we have JT sifting through the remnants but I must say teams picking up so much early quality is really starting to annoy me.

2 hours ago, Gator said:

I know you're a self-appointed expert, but I was wondering how many times you've seen these guys play live ?

You’re the fun at parties guy aren’t you

11 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

You’re the fun at parties guy aren’t you

If you didn't make such definitive declarations on players and their abilities, or lack thereof, I wouldn't bother quizzing you.

But you do. Every time.

28 minutes ago, DeeZone said:

Last year I was really sold on Langford and would have been really disappointed if we had missed out on him and SONS and W_J sold me on Xavier Lindsey, I’m not really picking up any vibes on 7 & 8 (11 - 12)after the 4 F/S, Academy boys. Thank goodness we have JT sifting through the remnants but I must say teams picking up so much early quality is really starting to annoy me.

Agreed.

I think if we end up with two of Grlj, Dovaston, Lindsey, Sharp or Greeves we walk away okay.

34 minutes ago, adonski said:

All phantom drafts that don't have us down for Dovaston + Oskar (not to be confused with Xavier) Taylor are WRONG

I've warmed so much to Dovaston I'll be [censored] if we don't draft him.

It's not that I necessarily think he's elite - I've seen better highlight packages in my day - it's that I feel he will bring what we need, what Kingy wants, and in an area of the ground we're lacking.

Just now, Mouseymoo said:

I've warmed so much to Dovaston I'll be [censored] if we don't draft him.

It's not that I necessarily think he's elite - I've seen better highlight packages in my day - it's that I feel he will bring what we need, what Kingy wants, and in an area of the ground we're lacking.

Agreed

1 hour ago, adonski said:

It would be really weird to boot out Clazz and trade Trac as while King is spruiking quicker ball movement to then bring in someone like Sharp

Clazz and Trac weren't traded because of what's happening on-field.

1 minute ago, bing181 said:

Clazz and Trac weren't traded because of what's happening on-field.

Fair enough, but I think Sharp not necessarily fitting King's ideal style still stands

4 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

Is there a thread for 'questions already asked and answered 15 times?'. Including this one?

How does father-son and academy selection work once you're through to the rookie draft?

And what happens if a bid comes in at technically zero value - pick 55 or later?

And is the value calculated according to when the pick is taken or when it is officially recorded - for example if over a dozen picks are burned in the 20s and 30s, does pick 37 get valued at its rank number or at the late 20s range it is actually taken?

Such a simple, elegant system they set up.

I’ll take a stab from what I’ve seen and believe I understand.

Once they hit the later stages of the draft and rookie draft the club does not have to match the bid but has the option to, provided they have list space.

In this years case, we have the option to list 5 players to the primary list so can match bids late. However, we have a preference to rookie list White and Sinnema. So any club placing a bid on them that late is just ruffling feathers.

After every bid, the draft order is shuffled up or down as required and the picks are assigned their new value.

An example of the bid system:

WCE bid for Zeke uwland at pick 2 (value 2481)

-10% discount (2233) GC use picks 15 (973) and 18 (836) and their pick 24 (424 remaining of the 621 value) slides down the draft order.

So at this stage our picks 7 becomes 8, 8 becomes 9 and 37 becomes 35.

WCE can use what now be pick 3 to bid again but any matching would now only require 2178 points.

Also, it’s my understanding that the remaining points on gc pick 24 are where that pick slides to: 621-424=197, which falls to pick 43.

Edited yesterday at 09:061 day by The end is nigh
Forgot to carry the 1

I reckon that if we trade up we’ll possibly throw in a future first (GCS pick) so we can get a high first plus a pick that could get us Dovistan (otherwise Pickett).

If we just go with 7 & 8, then there’s every chance we’ll grab Dovistan with 8.

As you can tell, I’m absolute dog [censored] when it comes to this sort of thing 🤣

42 minutes ago, hardtack said:

I reckon that if we trade up we’ll possibly throw in a future first (GCS pick) so we can get a high first plus a pick that could get us Dovistan (otherwise Pickett).

If we just go with 7 & 8, then there’s every chance we’ll grab Dovistan with 8.

As you can tell, I’m absolute dog [censored] when it comes to this sort of thing 🤣

I've posted similar with complete confidence so we can be dog 💩 at this together 🤷

Harvey's going to bring those pick 6 numbers back towards the norm

Edited yesterday at 10:481 day by shakeandbake

8 hours ago, Mouseymoo said:

I've warmed so much to Dovaston I'll be [censored] if we don't draft him.

It's not that I necessarily think he's elite - I've seen better highlight packages in my day - it's that I feel he will bring what we need, what Kingy wants, and in an area of the ground we're lacking.

the reason i can see us passing on dove or not reaching for him is if we think someone like talor byrne could provide a similar output, or if pickett got to us in the 30s, that pick is going to wildly swing around on the night, will come in as points are chewed up and then go out as bids push people back could land anywhere

I dont think we’ll take Sharp being we have Langford in the bank. I am all for us getting the Dove after initially not seeing it. However the more I watch the more I noted he does not fumble and rarely goes to ground. Couple that with his agility and 20m results and he ticks a lot of attributes for a role we need.

If these are the options at our pick I would prefer the Dove plus Farrow or a slide back that nabs one of Oskar Taylor or Hibbins Hargreaves if we are confident we can make it happen.

Lindsay seems to be sliding down the order in these phantom drafts. Is the knock on him he just doesn’t get enough of it?

1 hour ago, The Jackson FIX said:

Lindsay seems to be sliding down the order in these phantom drafts. Is the knock on him he just doesn’t get enough of it?

Couldn’t make the transition to midfield this year, so appears limited to a half back rebounder role. Struggles with contest. Great kick but very outside. Limits his scope compared to others as he’ll have less time to get those nice kicks off and be under more physical pressure.

4 hours ago, Lil_red_fire_engine said:

I dont think we’ll take Sharp being we have Langford in the bank.

I can see a world where we would want him since Langford is less of a midfield extractor and more of a contest winning forward runner. It's like having Bontempelli and Liberatore in the same midfield, with one of them being the in and under and the other being more of a big roaming playmaker. Sharp also looks like he could play a good defensive inside midfielder (like Steele or Viney) which is still valuable in any midfield (like Dunkley or Atkins). I don't think you'd want many more of that type but I can see why you'd take him if you believed in his ability.

The other side of it is that it relatively easy to pick up those types. Langford is the hard on to get but there are often hard, inside bulls available both in the draft and from other clubs. You can find a player being squeezed out of another midfield and offer them a role in your midfield (like Steele) because a midfield can only take so many of that type. It the same as with ruckmen, so you can just pick off the frustrated ones with the lure of opportunity.

https://youtu.be/Iv2nTWXkwcw?si=_boD4pkxeWTx_b0g

Has us taking Dyson Sharp and Josh Lindsay