2023 PRE Phantom Draft | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

2023 PRE Phantom Draft

North need a ruck, Xerri looks support class and Goldy has departed the scene, with that in mind I'm looking at Edwards, Goad & Green. I actually think this area is probably one of the clear strengths of the draft. I'm having some trouble splitting them to be honest, Edwards looks the best contested mark in that batch, Goad has some terrific upside and comes with some elite athletic specs, fastest sprint time 2.92 sec/20m and decent edurance. He's probably the best at ground level but still a bit of a work in progress & doesn't seem to possess the same aerial traits as Edwards. Then there's Green who looks the most natural tap ruckman of the lot. In the end I'm going for Edwards as I believe intercept ability is probably the most important feature to consider when sizing up these players. To be honest, I'm not entirely sold he becomes the best ruck in this murky area of the draft but I think North need to take the plunge with a top 20 pick.

North select Mitch Edwards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
GWS have decided they need another developing ruckman to eventually support Kieren Briggs after the loss of Matt Flynn. GWS select Will Green.
 
mrposhman said:
GC need 970 points to match.

They use 62 (123), 67 (69), 68 (59 and 72 (19) and take a deficit of 700 points into the 1st round 2024.

This is why their will continue to trade their picks.
Click to expand...
So does that mean they can't match on Graham? Or will they just go bigger deficit into '24? Is there a deficit limit? Do they get the discount on the deficit? (assume they do) And I also assume the deficit comes out of junk picks?

If there's no deficit limit, get the discount, and use junk '24 picks, they will just match any bid on graham? And pay for any paper 'deficit' next year by selling a couple of fringe players for junk picks, or with 'steak knives' late picks etc. ie, there is no disincentives to match, only incentives.
 
tigersnake said:
So does that mean they can't match on Graham? Or will they just go bigger deficit into '24? Is there a deficit limit? Do they get the discount on the deficit? (assume they do) And I also assume the deficit comes out of junk picks?
Click to expand...

They will be able to match on Graham. The picks they don't get back. Ie. their 1st bid. They gained 1 pick (Pick 1), used 4 and then gained an extra pick for the surplus. The remaining 2 picks get put to the back of the draft list. As the final draft list will only have the number of available list spots within the number of picks, these will be pushed back to the back of the draft and will slowly move up gaining them more points. Each bid they make, extra picks get added to the back of the draft and because there won't be 70 list spots available, they will constantly replenish.

I haven't been as sophisticated as the actual draft, so I started with 85 "live" picks. In reality the "deficit" on Rogers will be lower than I said, but as they still use more picks than they gain by matching, they add more picks to the back of the draft.

It creates a circular effect so essentially there will always be a pick with at least some value that can be used to match. The whole system is such a rort its actually ridiculous.

If they do take a deficit, it comes off their 1st pick within the round of the player that was bid on. Ie. if for example Graham is bid on in the 2nd round and they take a 400 point deficit into 2024 then that reduces their 1st pick in the 2nd round by 400 points. If they trade it, I don't know what happens, I assume it comes off their next available pick, so again a rort. If you expect a bid in the 2nd round, and you will have a deficit, make sure you trade your 2nd for next year out of the draft as I assume it then slips back to your 3rd round pick.

Rorts, rorts and more rorts. Scott Morrison would be very impressed with the system the AFL have created.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 2 users
At pick 21 North will roll the dice on bad boy Arie Schoenmaker, a 10 week suspension for buying beer on a training camp a slight red light but with question marks pertaining to all players from 20+ I think it's an ok gamble. Schoenmaker's kicking is AFL quality, his contested game could do with some work but you would hope he can lift the professionalism once in the AFL system. With Ziebell hanging up the boots I'd give Schoenmaker the kick out duties and would attempt to turn him into a rebounding weapon.

Pick 21. Arie Schoenmaker
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
mrposhman said:
The whole system is such a rort its actually ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I always thought it was, but this has exposed it as a rort beyond belief. First rights to a player, or two, fair enough I suppose, but you should still have to actually give something up.
 
tigersnake said:
I always thought it was, but this has exposed it as a rort beyond belief. First rights to a player, or two, fair enough I suppose, but you should still have to actually give something up.
Click to expand...

Correct, and I probably haven't even done the rort as much justice as it should get.

If we just look at the 1st 2 bids for Walter and Read. GC's gain the 2 1sts, but they give up 7 picks to get the 2 players. By my calcs and by value they get back picks 42 and 67 (they'll have given up picks 24, 26, 27, 32, 36 and 38 I think. The first of those 2 surplus picks is also swallowed up.

But assuming there are only 50 live picks in the draft, this means that when that Pick 67 is added back, it immediately jumps to pick 51 (a gain of 190 points). They also gain 3 picks at the "back of the draft" but these would essentially then be picks 52, 53 and 54, accumulating more value of 699 points.

Actually the more I look into this, they won't need to trade for anymore points and won't take a deficit into next year.

Essentially giving up picks 24, 26, 27, 32, 36, 38, 66 and 71 to get 2 top 10 picks, another 1st and most probably a 2nd rounder.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
mrposhman said:
Correct, and I probably haven't even done the rort as much justice as it should get.

If we just look at the 1st 2 bids for Walter and Read. GC's gain the 2 1sts, but they give up 7 picks to get the 2 players. By my calcs and by value they get back picks 42 and 67 (they'll have given up picks 24, 26, 27, 32, 36 and 38 I think. The first of those 2 surplus picks is also swallowed up.

But assuming there are only 50 live picks in the draft, this means that when that Pick 67 is added back, it immediately jumps to pick 51 (a gain of 190 points). They also gain 3 picks at the "back of the draft" but these would essentially then be picks 52, 53 and 54, accumulating more value of 699 points.

Actually the more I look into this, they won't need to trade for anymore points and won't take a deficit into next year.

Essentially giving up picks 24, 26, 27, 32, 36, 38, 66 and 71 to get 2 top 10 picks, another 1st and most probably a 2nd rounder.
Click to expand...
Yeah its just another of many layers to this rorty layer cake, 59 picks last year, word is the same this year, maybe a bit less, any pick over 60 is effectively worth 0. Nil, nada, nothing, FA, a donut etc.

Hard to stomach all these picks for North too, remembering how they got them and already having Sheezel and Wardlaw.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Pick 22. I'm torn between a number of players here, nothing really jumping out at me so I'll bring some speed to the table and plump for Riley Hardeman.
 
Pick 23. Collingwood will take Ashton Moir, I think this is a perfect fit, I think he needs a club with experience at dealing with sub standard professionalism. Could be an inferior version of Kayne Pettifer, let;s just wait and see but no one in this draft class has the same dual sided kicking ability as Moir. Could easily end up as a top 10 talent.
 
toothless said:
I like how you paired the 2 Tassie and 3 WA boys together @bullus_hit
Click to expand...
It's always a good policy, particularly with Tassie looking to raid the coffers over the next few years. WA players don't usually whine like SA players but there can be some pull factors as we've seen with Luke Jackson and Tim Kelly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Crows take Harry DeMattia . His kicking is suspect but he has speed. At worst I think he can be a transitioned into a killer defensive forward.

But I don't like this draft at all. Picking this early and yuck. I almost took Harvey Johnstone here but it felt too early.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
You must log in or register to reply here.
< 2014 Hindsight Draft | PRE 2014 Phantom Draft >
Official PRE merch now on Redbubble!
Top Bottom