old55

The Andrew discussion is relevant with the changes coming to draft points and associated rules next year.

The evidence will be there after this year’s draft with Andrew's unavailability to us book ended by JUH to the Dogs and Kako to Essendon. I nominate you to prosecute our case Red.

I've seen this elsewhere as the reason Carlton take FOS, that has to be the dumbest reason ever put forward for a draft selection.

You're off by a year, Andrew and JVR were in the 2021 draft not the 2020 draft and we traded our F1 from 2022 to get the JVR pick. Maybe we could have held off in the trade period, used our later 2021 picks to match Andrew and then try to trade back into the first round for JVR with our 22 F1 on draft night. But it would have been very tricky. I'm on record saying we got dudded by the temporary rule change and we should be pursuing the AFL for draft compensation. Hell, they should love us, we've kept the game in the news and on the back page of the HS for two off seasons.

JVR wasn't NGA or F/S. If we'd matched on Andrew we wouldn't have been able to draft JVR.

His ranking is not a phantom so why is he being "a coward" not to call it that? I gave you a solid reason why his rankings will have changed.

Should have been the other way around.

Cal will have been talking to pro recruiters ahead of his phantom draft and they will have pointed out the strengths and weaknesses of draftees that may be news to him. That will likely have influenced his rankings. He is always clear that his rankings are separate from his phantom. They're two different things.

I doubt it. If North take Tauru as many have suggested then Richmond will have access to one of the "top 5" open draft mids at 6.

The conventional wisdom is that Adelaide take Draper but Gettable said Adelaide is trying to trade into North's 2 from 4. That must mean they want the same player as Carlton. Maybe that is Draper, but the common view has been that Carlton traded up for O'Sullivan, so maybe it's him. That trade, on draft night, probably looks something like 2 + F2 for 4 + F1 since neither team has many other 2024 draft assets. Whatever, that trade almost certainly signals North takes Tauru as predicted, at 4. The flow on effect of that is we get to choose from 2 of the top 5 mids (excluding Ashcroft) - Draper, Lalor, Langford, O'Sullivan and Smith at pick 5.

Downtrade 9 for 15 and 16 with GWS if the players we really rate at 9 are gone and there's a talent cliff that runs beyond 16 to the next one. Downtrade 9 for 12 and 26 with WC if we believe the player we rate at 9 will still be there at 12. They're both perfectly reasonable strategies. Very keen to hear an argument against them.

It's an opinion business.

Thanks but that'll be news to WC, Richmond, Sydney and even Hawthorn. Chat GPT - close but no cigar!

ABC draft ranking, it's not a phantom draft. Not too many surprises or new information https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-11-06/2024-afl-draft-rankings-top-30-ashcroft-draper-smith/104562052

26, 29 and 30 could be too late if Dodson is any good

Smith himself said on Gettable that he models his game on Butters. He also said that in the second half of the season he concentrated on metres gained after his coach Rob Harding pointed out he was not impacting with his possessions. He can win the ball at will, that's an under-rated skill, and as he said it's very difficult to teach.

So we should be drafting for need at 5 and 9?

Very good results for Chandler Sparrow and especially Tholstrup in his first year. Expected for Lingers and the Adelaide player.

Cal Twomey has Armstrong at 10 in his October form guide and Ashcroft at one which places Armstrong as 9th best available player.

Interesting that Armstrong wasn't in Cal's 13 top 10 possibles.

Might have improved his draft analysis from a low base.

I think there's a couple of possible pick trade scenarios I can imagine for us. We might rate 9 though the mid teens on a par and trade 9 for say 15 and 16 with GWS if they really rated someone at 9. That would give us 5, 15 and 16 in the draft. We might really fancy someone who won't make it to 5 and trade up to 2 with North who would likely be happy to do so. To do that we probably need to make the above trade with GWS and then 5 and 16 to North for 2. That would give us 2 and 15 in the draft. But I'm hoping we're happy with who is going to be available at 5 and 9 and sit there. It's a sweet spot to be. And we can take a "smokey" late as suggested by Tim Lamb during the trade period.

Good point well made!

The only incentive for Richmond to make that trade is because they want the same player we want at 5 and the same player we want at 9 (they also have 10). Maybe they do, but if so, we'd never make that trade and give up the players we want just to get pick 24. Richmond are picking straight after us, we're not trading with them.

He's asking you who is "best available" from Gawn, Petracca and Hogan. Put them in order. We'll see if everyone agrees.