mock draft 2015

[jays]

to early to tell

[gringo]

Interesting to see who backs up their performance from the carnival at TAC level. Looks like Mathieson and Balic were both BOG in their respective games.
Mathieson, for mine, is the one not getting the degree of attention he probably deserves but he's two time AA. He's class.
Would really love to see something of Curnow before the combine.

I like the way Balic moves, he looks like he glides over the ground. Mathison would be higher but I think the knock on him was disposal so probably not someone we need.

[plugger66]

Interesting to see who backs up their performance from the carnival at TAC level. Looks like Mathieson and Balic were both BOG in their respective games.
Mathieson, for mine, is the one not getting the degree of attention he probably deserves but he's two time AA. He's class.
Would really love to see something of Curnow before the combine.

I like the way Balic moves, he looks like he glides over the ground. Mathison would be higher but I think the knock on him was disposal so probably not someone we need.

Balic is certainly the best player at Sandy and by a long way. I like how he plays but im biased because the only games I ever read or watch are Sandy games.

[Old Mate]

Interesting to see who backs up their performance from the carnival at TAC level. Looks like Mathieson and Balic were both BOG in their respective games.
Mathieson, for mine, is the one not getting the degree of attention he probably deserves but he's two time AA. He's class.
Would really love to see something of Curnow before the combine.

I like the way Balic moves, he looks like he glides over the ground. Mathison would be higher but I think the knock on him was disposal so probably not someone we need.

Balic is certainly the best player at Sandy and by a long way. I like how he plays but im biased because the only games I ever read or watch are Sandy games.

What style of player would you compare him to plug?

[plugger66]

Interesting to see who backs up their performance from the carnival at TAC level. Looks like Mathieson and Balic were both BOG in their respective games.
Mathieson, for mine, is the one not getting the degree of attention he probably deserves but he's two time AA. He's class.
Would really love to see something of Curnow before the combine.

I like the way Balic moves, he looks like he glides over the ground. Mathison would be higher but I think the knock on him was disposal so probably not someone we need.

Balic is certainly the best player at Sandy and by a long way. I like how he plays but im biased because the only games I ever read or watch are Sandy games.

What style of player would you compare him to plug?

At our club maybe the closest is Armo but maybe a little more outside. And maybe a little more pace than Armo had when first drafted. Only seen him maybe 8 times so hard to judge especially when I wasn't looking for him last year. Looking more at the Ormond boys at Sandy.

[Old Mate]

Interesting to see who backs up their performance from the carnival at TAC level. Looks like Mathieson and Balic were both BOG in their respective games.
Mathieson, for mine, is the one not getting the degree of attention he probably deserves but he's two time AA. He's class.
Would really love to see something of Curnow before the combine.

I like the way Balic moves, he looks like he glides over the ground. Mathison would be higher but I think the knock on him was disposal so probably not someone we need.

Balic is certainly the best player at Sandy and by a long way. I like how he plays but im biased because the only games I ever read or watch are Sandy games.

What style of player would you compare him to plug?

At our club maybe the closest is Armo but maybe a little more outside. And maybe a little more pace than Armo had when first drafted. Only seen him maybe 8 times so hard to judge especially when I wasn't looking for him last year. Looking more at the Ormond boys at Sandy.

Cheers. Can't say I've heard that comparison but you would have a fair idea seeing him in the flesh a number of times. Was he playing midfield or forward?

[plugger66]

Cheers. Can't say I've heard that comparison but you would have a fair idea seeing him in the flesh a number of times. Was he playing midfield or forward?

Well I couldnt think of anyone else at our club because he isn't fast like Jack and he isn't slow like Ross. Last year in the games I saw him he was mainly as a forward and this year he was their main mid.

[Old Mate]

Cheers. Can't say I've heard that comparison but you would have a fair idea seeing him in the flesh a number of times. Was he playing midfield or forward?

Well I couldnt think of anyone else at our club because he isn't fast like Jack and he isn't slow like Ross. Last year in the games I saw him he was mainly as a forward and this year he was their main mid.

I've never seen him live just on TV. I thought he moved like Dyson Heppell. Looks a beauty for sure.

[plugger66]

Cheers. Can't say I've heard that comparison but you would have a fair idea seeing him in the flesh a number of times. Was he playing midfield or forward?

Well I couldnt think of anyone else at our club because he isn't fast like Jack and he isn't slow like Ross. Last year in the games I saw him he was mainly as a forward and this year he was their main mid.

I've never seen him live just on TV. I thought he moved like Dyson Heppell. Looks a beauty for sure.

Fair comparison I suppose. Looks slow but isn't. A bit of david Rhys jones about him. He is a hard runner and a pretty good mark.

[stjay]

Cheers. Can't say I've heard that comparison but you would have a fair idea seeing him in the flesh a number of times. Was he playing midfield or forward?

Well I couldnt think of anyone else at our club because he isn't fast like Jack and he isn't slow like Ross. Last year in the games I saw him he was mainly as a forward and this year he was their main mid.

I've never seen him live just on TV. I thought he moved like Dyson Heppell. Looks a beauty for sure.

Of the footage I've seen he is Pendles-esque in the way he tries to work through traffic and has great vision which is no surprise coz of the basketball background (there's youtube bball clips of him). Becoz of that he over-uses the handball (check out his k:h ratio) which is probably the reason why so many talk about his "upside" potential. He is defintely not as clean by foot.
Could be a cracker although has a bit to work on.

[stjay]

Interesting to see who backs up their performance from the carnival at TAC level. Looks like Mathieson and Balic were both BOG in their respective games.
Mathieson, for mine, is the one not getting the degree of attention he probably deserves but he's two time AA. He's class.
Would really love to see something of Curnow before the combine.

I like the way Balic moves, he looks like he glides over the ground. Mathison would be higher but I think the knock on him was disposal so probably not someone we need.

Had not heard that about Mathieson. He went at 70% efficiency rate for the carnival which was considered pretty good given he is an inside type.

[Old Mate]

I've noticed the Pendles comparisons getting around a bit with Balic. He does have that laconic look about him and just like plugger said he looks slow but he isn't. His disposal doesn't look too bad at all, if I had to criticise his kicking it would be that it lacks hurt factor. He tends to chip it around a bit. Plugger could probably clarify that point.

Mathieson I've seen a lot more of and I think his disposal efficiency is misleading. He's definitely a messy kick. Whenever I've seen him he tends to bang it on the boot. He kicks a few mongrels for sure. I've read he's been working on his kicking as he realises it's a weakness. He can get the ball tho he's a competitive beast.

[Con Gorozidis]

Yeah if a club calls them Swans & GWS will need to match with points less a 20% discount.
Struggle to see us winning many more this year so we're definitely in the hunt for the kid.
Might get interesting if any of the top 5 picks get traded.

OK thanks. I was not aware of the exact rule for 'Academy' players.
How are the points calculated?
Just say the Swans have pick 17 and say Melbourne say they want Mills at pick 4. What happens?

[Old Mate]

Yeah if a club calls them Swans & GWS will need to match with points less a 20% discount.
Struggle to see us winning many more this year so we're definitely in the hunt for the kid.
Might get interesting if any of the top 5 picks get traded.

OK thanks. I was not aware of the exact rule for 'Academy' players.
How are the points calculated?
Just say the Swans have pick 17 and say Melbourne say they want Mills at pick 4. What happens?

Have a look at the points table : http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20 ... edback.pdf

If the Swans matched the bid their pick 17 would be upgraded to pick 4 however they would need to match the points with a 20% discount applied. This would mean not only are they using pick 17 (which is obviously worth a lot less than 4) but also other picks.

Pick 4 = 2034 - 20% = 1628

Pick 17 = 1025
Pick 35 = 522
Pick 53 = 233
Total = 1780

1780 - 1628 = 152 (in the positive)

Pick 53 (233 - 152 = 81 = pick 66)

So....pick 17 and pick 35 go to the very back of the draft....and pick 53 becomes pick 66....

Clear as mud?

[stjay]

Yeah if a club calls them Swans & GWS will need to match with points less a 20% discount.
Struggle to see us winning many more this year so we're definitely in the hunt for the kid.
Might get interesting if any of the top 5 picks get traded.

OK thanks. I was not aware of the exact rule for 'Academy' players.
How are the points calculated?
Just say the Swans have pick 17 and say Melbourne say they want Mills at pick 4. What happens?

Have a look at the points table : http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20 ... edback.pdf

If the Swans matched the bid their pick 17 would be upgraded to pick 4 however they would need to match the points with a 20% discount applied. This would mean not only are they using pick 17 (which is obviously worth a lot less than 4) but also other picks.

Pick 4 = 2034 - 20% = 1628

Pick 17 = 1025
Pick 35 = 522
Pick 53 = 233
Total = 1780

1780 - 1628 = 152 (in the positive)

Pick 53 (233 - 152 = 81 = pick 66)

So....pick 17 and pick 35 go to the very back of the draft....and pick 53 becomes pick 66....

Clear as mud?

Pretty costly huh?
You'd want to make sure you get it right.
Hey OM, What are thoughts on Josh Dunkley?
Sanderson gave him a big wrap - ability and leadership.
I haven't seen much of him but the game I did see he was pretty solid after coming back from injury.

[Teflon]

just give me best pick please.....all about choice and not stuffing it up from there..

[Con Gorozidis]

Yeah if a club calls them Swans & GWS will need to match with points less a 20% discount.
Struggle to see us winning many more this year so we're definitely in the hunt for the kid.
Might get interesting if any of the top 5 picks get traded.

OK thanks. I was not aware of the exact rule for 'Academy' players.
How are the points calculated?
Just say the Swans have pick 17 and say Melbourne say they want Mills at pick 4. What happens?

Have a look at the points table : http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20 ... edback.pdf

If the Swans matched the bid their pick 17 would be upgraded to pick 4 however they would need to match the points with a 20% discount applied. This would mean not only are they using pick 17 (which is obviously worth a lot less than 4) but also other picks.

Pick 4 = 2034 - 20% = 1628

Pick 17 = 1025
Pick 35 = 522
Pick 53 = 233
Total = 1780

1780 - 1628 = 152 (in the positive)

Pick 53 (233 - 152 = 81 = pick 66)

So....pick 17 and pick 35 go to the very back of the draft....and pick 53 becomes pick 66....

Clear as mud?

Pretty costly huh?
You'd want to make sure you get it right.
Hey OM, What are thoughts on Josh Dunkley?
Sanderson gave him a big wrap - ability and leadership.
I haven't seen much of him but the game I did see he was pretty solid after coming back from injury.

Thanks StJay. I appreciate that. It is an interesting system. I have seen it described before how the point system was developed. It is data driven and based on the probable outcome at each pick. Pretty interesting. But it actually seems quite fair to me because it takes out the horse trading and the games of bluff. In that example if Mills is highly rated enough to go pick 4 then the Swans need to give up a lot (with a discount to encourage NSW players). Take out the discount and just say, ok the Swans get first access to NSW players subject to the same points system and the Swans simply cannot get him at all. Not a bad system really.

[Bunk_Moreland]

just give me best pick please.....all about choice and not stuffing it up from there..

dont worry too much Teffers

we will have pick 4-7

Scenario works like this


1-3 Probs Schache, Weitering, Francis. This seems to be the consensus

4-8 in no particular order except Parish then Mathesion, Balic, Tucker, Dunkley

if we have 4 we will take Parish, any one of the others up to 8.

Club likes Parish, then Mathesion

However if any of 1-3 are available we may take one of those

Also if Kennedy or Mills are about, we may take one of those.

Also heard we are shaking loose some underplayed franchise players from up north

Strong murmourings that Lachie Weller want to get out of Freo ASAP and big bro' has been in his ear....

Really,its not what we do with our first pick, it is nailing our second and third as we have been doing that will even out our team in the long run. Players like Newnes, Bruce, Lonie, Sinclair, DMac, Goddard etc, will be excellent players for the Saints. All have been relatively late picks.

Relax and enjoy one or two more wins as we will be stocking up on some real potential.

[Old Mate]

I hate quoting in this forum it makes s*** difficult to read.

Dunkley is a primarily an inside midfielder. He's pretty vanilla in that there's not a lot of substance with his style. He's not quick. He's fairly sloppy with his ball use. But saying that he would be regarded as the best contested midfielder in the draft and a safe bet to transition into a dominant contested midfielder at the top level. He's also a decent mark and can go forward and take a grab. One on one whether on the ground or in the air he's very good. A nice safe bet. I wouldn't be disappointed if we drafted him. Likely he doesn't nominate as a father son.

Mills is every bit worth what Sydney will give up for him. Remember they are getting a 20% discount. Bargain. At this time last year he was seen as the clear best in the draft. Just does everything to a very high level. True inside/outside mid. Skills good. He's quick. Wins the footy. Could impact the scoreboard a bit more. If he has an AFL career anything like his junior career he'll be a star.

[Bunk_Moreland]

Hopper not Kennedy sorry

Curnow is also a chance

A shitload to chose from and all are top ranked.

[stjay]

Yeah if a club calls them Swans & GWS will need to match with points less a 20% discount.
Struggle to see us winning many more this year so we're definitely in the hunt for the kid.
Might get interesting if any of the top 5 picks get traded.

OK thanks. I was not aware of the exact rule for 'Academy' players.
How are the points calculated?
Just say the Swans have pick 17 and say Melbourne say they want Mills at pick 4. What happens?

Have a look at the points table : http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20 ... edback.pdf

If the Swans matched the bid their pick 17 would be upgraded to pick 4 however they would need to match the points with a 20% discount applied. This would mean not only are they using pick 17 (which is obviously worth a lot less than 4) but also other picks.

Pick 4 = 2034 - 20% = 1628

Pick 17 = 1025
Pick 35 = 522
Pick 53 = 233
Total = 1780

1780 - 1628 = 152 (in the positive)

Pick 53 (233 - 152 = 81 = pick 66)

So....pick 17 and pick 35 go to the very back of the draft....and pick 53 becomes pick 66....

Clear as mud?

Pretty costly huh?
You'd want to make sure you get it right.
Hey OM, What are thoughts on Josh Dunkley?
Sanderson gave him a big wrap - ability and leadership.
I haven't seen much of him but the game I did see he was pretty solid after coming back from injury.

Thanks StJay. I appreciate that. It is an interesting system. I have seen it described before how the point system was developed. It is data driven and based on the probable outcome at each pick. Pretty interesting. But it actually seems quite fair to me because it takes out the horse trading and the games of bluff. In that example if Mills is highly rated enough to go pick 4 then the Swans need to give up a lot (with a discount to encourage NSW players). Take out the discount and just say, ok the Swans get first access to NSW players subject to the same points system and the Swans simply cannot get him at all. Not a bad system really.

Love to take the credit but OM did the numbers. Agree with you though it is a much fairer system. The recruiters will certainly be earning their keep come draft night

[Con Gorozidis]

Yeah if a club calls them Swans & GWS will need to match with points less a 20% discount.
Struggle to see us winning many more this year so we're definitely in the hunt for the kid.
Might get interesting if any of the top 5 picks get traded.

OK thanks. I was not aware of the exact rule for 'Academy' players.
How are the points calculated?
Just say the Swans have pick 17 and say Melbourne say they want Mills at pick 4. What happens?

Have a look at the points table : http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20 ... edback.pdf

If the Swans matched the bid their pick 17 would be upgraded to pick 4 however they would need to match the points with a 20% discount applied. This would mean not only are they using pick 17 (which is obviously worth a lot less than 4) but also other picks.

Pick 4 = 2034 - 20% = 1628

Pick 17 = 1025
Pick 35 = 522
Pick 53 = 233
Total = 1780

1780 - 1628 = 152 (in the positive)

Pick 53 (233 - 152 = 81 = pick 66)

So....pick 17 and pick 35 go to the very back of the draft....and pick 53 becomes pick 66....

Clear as mud?

Pretty costly huh?
You'd want to make sure you get it right.
Hey OM, What are thoughts on Josh Dunkley?
Sanderson gave him a big wrap - ability and leadership.
I haven't seen much of him but the game I did see he was pretty solid after coming back from injury.

Thanks StJay. I appreciate that. It is an interesting system. I have seen it described before how the point system was developed. It is data driven and based on the probable outcome at each pick. Pretty interesting. But it actually seems quite fair to me because it takes out the horse trading and the games of bluff. In that example if Mills is highly rated enough to go pick 4 then the Swans need to give up a lot (with a discount to encourage NSW players). Take out the discount and just say, ok the Swans get first access to NSW players subject to the same points system and the Swans simply cannot get him at all. Not a bad system really.

Love to take the credit but OM did the numbers. Agree with you though it is a much fairer system. The recruiters will certainly be earning their keep come draft night

Cheers old mate.

[Teflon]

just give me best pick please.....all about choice and not stuffing it up from there..

dont worry too much Teffers

we will have pick 4-7

Scenario works like this


1-3 Probs Schache, Weitering, Francis. This seems to be the consensus

4-8 in no particular order except Parish then Mathesion, Balic, Tucker, Dunkley

if we have 4 we will take Parish, any one of the others up to 8.

Club likes Parish, then Mathesion

However if any of 1-3 are available we may take one of those

Also if Kennedy or Mills are about, we may take one of those.

Also heard we are shaking loose some underplayed franchise players from up north

Strong murmourings that Lachie Weller want to get out of Freo ASAP and big bro' has been in his ear....

Really,its not what we do with our first pick, it is nailing our second and third as we have been doing that will even out our team in the long run. Players like Newnes, Bruce, Lonie, Sinclair, DMac, Goddard etc, will be excellent players for the Saints. All have been relatively late picks.

Relax and enjoy one or two more wins as we will be stocking up on some real potential.

Like it Bunk
Agree later picks also worth gold and great to hear we are shaking some underplayed franchise players....they've got talent galore up there....this is a very high reward strategy...

[Die Hard 7]

Would be looking at Parish for 1st pick, Partington, Keays or Collins for our second and Rice, Lovell and Hagan for our later.
Also regarding trades I would be looking at Coniglio from GWS and Thompson the full back from GC

[crippsy]

Don't want Parish to small..

The kid can play though