2023 List Management

[Thunder Shaker]

Gettable has done a phantom draft.

1: Harley Reid (West Coast)
2: Jed Walter (bid matched by Gold Coast)
3: Dan Curtin (North Melbourne)
4: Colby McKercher (North Melbourne)
5: Zane Duursma (Hawthorn)
6: Nick Watson (Western Bulldogs)
7: Ethan Reid (bid matched by Gold Coast)
8: Connor O'Sullivan (Melbourne)
9: Nate Caddy (GWS Giants)
10: Ryley Sanders (Geelong)
11: Caleb Windsor (Essendon)
12: James Leake (Adelaide)
13: Darcy Wilson (Melbourne)
14: Jordan Croft (bid matched by Western Bulldogs)
15: Riley Hardeman (Sydney)
16: Jake Rogers (bid matched by Gold Coast)
17: Koltyn Tholstrup (St Kilda)
18: Will McCabe (bid matched by Hawthorn)
19: Harry DeMattia (Adelaide)
20: Will Green (North Melbourne)

[wolftone57]

Are the last two interstate rookie success stories?

Hamish McLean 2019 debut and
Paps 2016 debut

If so geese we have been fairly barren in turning interstate rookies into Snr players the last 8 seasons.

Two only that currently feature in our squad?

Two only really surprises me over the last 8 seasons.

You forgot Amartey & Wicks

[wolftone57]

Gettable has done a phantom draft.

1: Harley Reid (West Coast)
2: Jed Walter (bid matched by Gold Coast)
3: Dan Curtin (North Melbourne)
4: Colby McKercher (North Melbourne)
5: Zane Duursma (Hawthorn)
6: Nick Watson (Western Bulldogs)
7: Ethan Reid (bid matched by Gold Coast)
8: Connor O'Sullivan (Melbourne)
9: Nate Caddy (GWS Giants)
10: Ryley Sanders (Geelong)
11: Caleb Windsor (Essendon)
12: James Leake (Adelaide)
13: Darcy Wilson (Melbourne)
14: Jordan Croft (bid matched by Western Bulldogs)
15: Riley Hardeman (Sydney)
16: Jake Rogers (bid matched by Gold Coast)
17: Koltyn Tholstrup (St Kilda)
18: Will McCabe (bid matched by Hawthorn)
19: Harry DeMattia (Adelaide)
20: Will Green (North Melbourne)

I don't see the need for another mid sized rebound defender

[Ruck'n'Roll]

I hope they get rid of the sub, it is @@@@e. Either go back to 22 or just make a 23rd player.

The AFL says the sub rule was introduced to help with injury, but as it exists it's nor very good at that.

I'd like the AFL to simply allow a team to activate any one of their four currant emergencies on game day.
If you lose a ruck at the first bounce, then you activate the the ruck emergency - help avoid mismatches.
If you lose your fullback before half time, activate the KPP emrgency - as above.
If nothing happens all game, then you can activate whichever emergency has a bit of zing.

[Auntie.Gerald]

A total of 27 selections could be made in the opening round, with up to two father-son selections and as many as three Academy bids anticipated to be made in the opening round.

BTW Reid is a gun but how good is Ryley Sanders also

I have gone back through and looked at the hi lights of the top25 and I ended up watching Ryley Sanders videos a few times.

I cant help but think how much our selection panel would love to get their hands on Ryley Sanders. I am going out on a limb but i think he could be one of the most important inside mid pick ups for some time. Currently Cal in his phantom draft has him at pick7 and we have pick 12.

Would we give up a one of our future first round picks with our pick 12 this year to get closer to securing Ryley Sanders........would anyone let us get up to say pick5ish to have a serious chance at him?

Or is it simply NOT going to happen given that North Melb rate him massively and they have picks 2 and 3 anyway? Even though North have no priority access to him despite their lobbying the AFL

Melbourne might be our only possibility to trade with after looking at the clubs with the picks from 4th to 11th

any thoughts on the Colonel ?

I think he one of the first inside mids i have seen for a while that I would say without doubt he will be a 10 year AFL player

PLAN A - Ryley Sanders (a pro already)
PLAN B - Connor Sullivan (198cm and did a 6min 11 sec 2km time trial > amazing !!!)
PLAN C - Harry DeMattia (would make our mid rotation seriously dangerous and could easily get a go on the wing in his first year)

[Thunder Shaker]

I don't see the need for another mid sized rebound defender

Nor do I. Selecting Hardeman when Murphy was still available was a curious choice. Sydney's defence has been undersized for years and selecting Hardeman does not help with that. Sydney needs key defenders, not half-backs.

[707]

Swans are one club that never leaks ahead of the draft, even Twomey has little idea who we are drafting until the selection is made. In KB we trust

Can I point out that 20% discount does not apply from pick 19 onwards, a flat 197 point discount is applied which is more generous than 20%.

Also, our pick 45 might only come in one spot but 55 is likely to end up pick 48 after bid matching in the first round.

[Thunder Shaker]

Also, our pick 45 might only come in one spot but 55 is likely to end up pick 48 after bid matching in the first round.

Gold Coast's picks before pick 55: 24, 26, 27, 32, 36, 38 (likely to match bids on three players in the first round)
Hawthorn's picks before pick 55: (4), 44, 47, 49 (likely to match bid on one player in the first round)
Western Bulldog's picks before pick 55: (5), 48, 50, 52, 53 (likely to match bid on one player in the first round)

I don't get the logic of pick 45 moving up only one spot, considering Gold Coast holds six earlier point-bearing picks that will get used up in bid matching.

[707]

Gold Coast's picks before pick 55: 24, 26, 27, 32, 36, 38 (likely to match bids on three players in the first round)
Hawthorn's picks before pick 55: (4), 44, 47, 49 (likely to match bid on one player in the first round)
Western Bulldog's picks before pick 55: (5), 48, 50, 52, 53 (likely to match bid on one player in the first round)

I don't get the logic of pick 45 moving up only one spot, considering Gold Coast holds six earlier point-bearing picks that will get used up in bid matching.

It's the fact that every matching bid creates an extra first round pick and where the burnt off bid matching picks are placed in relation to our picks. Any picks used to match from 56 out do not help our picks.

Simply put, if picks remain the same for us and the three matching teams, our picks get pushed out by newly created picks by five places, so become pick 50 and 60, seven picks are burnt before our current pick 45 so it becomes pick 43, thirteen picks are burnt before our current pick 55 so it becomes pick 47. Whoever currently holds pick 63 could see it become pick 53.

The nitty gritty is - Gold Coast create three new picks when bids (Walter, Reid, Rogers) are matched but burn six picks in the 20's and 30's so nett movement for our picks is in three.

Dogs create a new pick to match Croft so out one for both our picks but Dogs burn pick 48 and three early 50's picks so nett movement is out one for pick 45, in three for pick 55

Hawks create a new pick to match McCabe so out one for both picks but burn 44 and two late 40's picks when matching so nett movement is nil for pick 45, in two for pick 55

Final nett movement is therefore in two for pick 45, in eight for pick 55 but it may not even be as good as that if Gold Coasts Graham gets a bid before our picks, and that's a possibility.

So all the talk about all picks marching up the chart is not correct, 45 hardly any, 55 nice movement. Except when talking 60's/70's plus picks that will benefit most

We have enough points this year to match Cleary from about pick 24/25 and it's highly doubtful it will come that early given the first round will be 27 picks. So we are ok, it's just where our residual pick ends up lying and whether we want to use it at the ND (get in before the 10 RD selections before our pick) but give a two year contract, rather than the RD where we have pick 11 but hand out a one year contract

[rb4x]

Hi 707

Please explain the process of creating extra new picks in the first round when a pick is used for matching. I do not believe that happens.

[707]

Hi 707

Please explain the process of creating extra new picks in the first round when a pick is used for matching. I do not believe that happens.

Norf currently hold pick 2, they bid on Jed Walter, Gold Coast match, Pick 2 now belongs to Gold Coast with Jed Walter is the selection at pick 2.

Norf don't have pick 2 any more, their pick 2 has become pick 3, basically every other pick in the draft has moved out one place, repeat five times.

In this draft highly likely there will be five matches in the first round creating five extra selections in the first round so the first round goes from 22 selections 1-22 to 27 selections 1-27.

West Coast that held pick 23 before the draft started now holds pick 28 because five extra selections were created by matching bids.

[Thunder Shaker]

It's the fact that every matching bid creates an extra first round pick and where the burnt off bid matching picks are placed in relation to our picks. Any picks used to match from 56 out do not help our picks.

Thank you for your explanation. It is important to consider the creation of the new picks, which is something that I have previously overlooked.

[rb4x]

Yes I understand the extra picks coming into the first round but they are not new picks. They are second round picks that move up into the first round through the matching process. They are not created out of thin air.

[BRS328]

Wolf
The only reason you would consider it is if he is a like for like with Dane Rampe who will most likely be gone in 2 years.

[Thunder Shaker]

Yes I understand the extra picks coming into the first round but they are not new picks. They are second round picks that move up into the first round through the matching process. They are not created out of thin air.

The exact mechanism is not important. It's the effect that matters, as long as the mechanism of pick matching is understood.