18 hours ago, Adam The God said:

Wasn't sure where to put this, but it seems appropriate enough here. Mods, please feel free to move if need be.

https://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/1932890/inside-the-draft-room-access

Some great access. I'd prefer it was visual, but I'd suggest this is coming at some point down the track.

The most interesting thing of note is this bit:

"8:04pm  

Lamb’s phone rings, it’s a short call. A pick trade is floated by another club, which Lamb shuts down. That’s not part of the Dees’ plan tonight.    

The draft rolls on. "

I wonder which club it was and what they offered.

It was Adelaide who were desperate to get Sharp, they apparently went back to Essendon after us

B-

That's also what we got last time we drafted a Pickett.

I'm not even kidding. Our 2019 Jackson, Pickett, Rivers was rated a 'B-' draft.

To get an 'A' you need to pull of amazing hauls like Carlton's 2019 of Kemp, Philip and Ramsay.

It is all lining up for a 2028 peak, just as the gypsy woman said.

Maybe I'm the only one thinking this, but the feel I got with all our selections (except maybe White jnr) is that our draftees are no choir boys. There's a hard edge to them with a determined resolve. If this is the new dawn under Kingy, then I like what I see... I'm getting a 'Sydney bloods culture' vibe with this new crop coming through. Very exciting times ahead.

23 minutes ago, Where Demons Dare said:

Maybe I'm the only one thinking this, but the feel I got with all our selections (except maybe White jnr) is that our draftees are no choir boys. There's a hard edge to them with a determined resolve. If this is the new dawn under Kingy, then I like what I see... I'm getting a 'Sydney bloods culture' vibe with this new crop coming through. Very exciting times ahead.

I think King wants players who express themselves with playing. That’s been the Geelong way. And the Hawks way. And there’s certainly been some Swans (more recently than the Roos era) who fit that bill too.

I also think the cultural clean out might’ve been to make sure we’re bringing young guys with a bit of spunk in to the right place. Room for them to make their own mistakes but not be led astray.

4 hours ago, Willmoy1947 said:

One would think the blokes who do have a reasonable idea of who can play are the blokes week in and week out who go to the main games for the leagues. Do the films do the editing. Check each one for quality and continuity, and do it every week, all week.

Yes, but an article about the draft would just one of many a journo would write each year. Recruiters just have to spend probably hundreds of hours doing their research and establishing relationships with potential draftees. No journo would spend more than a few hours doing their research, and no family would spend extra hours also meeting with random journos.

2 hours ago, Little Goffy said:

B-

That's also what we got last time we drafted a Pickett.

I'm not even kidding. Our 2019 Jackson, Pickett, Rivers was rated a 'B-' draft.

To get an 'A' you need to pull of amazing hauls like Carlton's 2019 of Kemp, Philip and Ramsay.

It is all lining up for a 2028 peak, just as the gypsy woman said.

Never forget the news cycle is 24/7 now. These days I even seem to hear when some dude who was in a set of ads decades ago has died (or maybe for some okay racehorse dying .) It's a new world.

10 hours ago, Go Ds said:

Yep, and it's funny how each club has multiple professionals with years of combined recruiting experience, every imaginable measurement and meaningful conversations with the candidates to make decisions which could be the difference of a threepeat vs barely reaching finals for years . BUT their painstaking efforts get reduced to a quick write-up by some twenty-something , who also does articles on netball and soccer and barely has 1% of the info or insight the recruiters had. Somehow we're to believe said journo knows better than the experts - take this as a given(!!!)

What you mean these nerds earning 100k for a job I would've done for a slab of their name sake.

https://share.google/1ErHHoOGdxZ8sE6je

Edited Saturday at 11:044 days by shakeandbake

Any analysis of the of the draft on its own is senseless. What would make for much better analysis is an holistic analysis of list changes through trades, free agency, drafting (including the rookie draft) and other additions/subtractions.

One teams "poor" draft might be as a consequence of having used up draft capital through trading.

The Onley selection has tied things together well for years draft(s)

All selections, even the two rookies are good athletes with speed which is needed

Next years first rounders to be spent on the best available mid & tall and we're cookin!

2 hours ago, adonski said:

The Onley selection has tied things together well for years draft(s)

All selections, even the two rookies are good athletes with speed which is needed

Next years first rounders to be spent on the best available mid & tall and we're cookin!

* Next year's first to be spent on Humphrey.

I fixed your little grammatical error there old chap.

How you can realistically rate a draft until the draftees have played 50-100 games, or alternatively been delisted, is beyond me.

Am I correct in believing that Tairon Ah-mu went undrafted?

if so, a lot of sooking from several posters on here for an ultimately not AFL quality player (even in a supposed shallow draft).

On 22/11/2025 at 17:45, BDA said:

An A for Essendon. Historically their drafting has been terrible so very gutsy giving them an A

Yep.

The Dons generally have generally pulled the right levers on draft day and impress at the time, they probably had some As in those as well. It doesn't mean anything.

Draft gradings are a cheap trick. You do your grades at the time, get the clicks and then everyone forgets about it and reputations are unscathed. Does anyone remember off the top of their head the grades they gave Collingwood in the 2022 draft? Unlikely.

On ESPN in 2022, Essendon got an A grade for Elijah Tsatas (16 games), Lewis Hayes ( 1 game, ACL), Alwyn Davey Jnr (delisted) and Jayden Davey (delisted).

Melbourne got an E for Matthew Jefferson and Jed Adams.

Assessing how well each team did in the draft is a waste of time because no one knows which players will be good until they've played a decent amount of games. Even with high picks you still don't know. Everyone said Brisbane did well getting Josh Schache at pick two.

Edited 22 hours ago22 hr by lorn

Never understand these ratings immediately after draft, who is to know who was a fail and who is a steal at this point, seem purely going off some fantasy draft order vs the reality and calling any sliders a win and marking anyone down who took a player earlier than they expected

Shows how much they know