Tom Lee cost us pick 61

[plugger66]

I don't care about points. It cost us pick 12. We also got a couple of other picks in return. Anytime you give up a first rounder its a huge punt.

what does this comment even mean??

Points are determined on the basis of facts, i.e. the value of certain picks on average over the entire history of the draft.

Now, obviously, the goal of our club is to recruit at a rate that is better than average, so we would hope to pay less than a player is worth, as often as possible.

With Lee, we seem to have paid pick 61, on average. He is probably worth around pick 60-rookie, i.e. speculative...

Now I agree with you Plugger that we hope some picks in that range work out ... and it seems that Lee will not.

But just claiming that he is "a first rounder" is just ignoring the knowledge that comes from deep analysis of previous drafts...

And as someone wrote above, the pick 61 estimate did not include the fact that it was a compromised draft.

So, if you want to ignore detailed analysis, fine. I am glad you are not on our recruiting team, who will hopefully use that knowledge appropriately and who hopefully recruit above average generally, notwithstanding a particular case of Tom Lee

Points are fact in the opinion of the AFL. Yesterday they weren't fact. Today they somehow are. It is quite simple. We gave up pick 12 for Lee but also got some other picks in return. Now they have decided we got Lee at around pick 61. I don't buy it. And im glad im not our recruiting man either because I don't know any of the young kids. Unlike some here I don't buy that getting 3 later picks is as good as an earlier pick. if that's how it work then would you really give up pick 12 for 4 picks in the 40's. I certainly wouldn't ever. Champions will win the flag for you. You have much more hope at pick 12 than even 4 picks in the 40's. GOPS will help but you need your stars. Yep pick 12 that year would have probably struggled but that is probably more good luck than knowledge

I think recruiters know very well when it's a strong draft year. The 2013 draft was outstanding and has netted more potential champions than any I can remember. Last year was apparently not very strong at the front end but ran deep so you could still get quality at the second round. Of course pick 12 is better than 2 picks in the 40s but if the pool from 10 to 30 is all pretty even it's not as clear cut the swapping out picks for later ones. The BWS and GC compose had messed up the true order of the draft anyway so even pick 12 was a down graded pick compared to a normal year.

To use your example if they were that certain about the draft we would never stuff up a pick. And wasn't 2012 a normal draft year anyway?

[70s sainter]

It was prob worth the gamble back then trying to turnover a heap of players and create pretty much a whole new list.
Now we have a decent list we need to top it up with some cream , so I can see us using our round one pick , then maybe combining our round 2&3 picks to get a better quality pick.
It's all about quality now not quantity.
Combine pick 20 and 38 to get a pick 14 or 15.