The AFL draft is kind of strange compared to North American sports where the draft is a show.
Their drafts can be bigger events because fans have a pre-existing relationship with most of the players throughout their college careers.
Footy doesn’t have that.
We get Paranormal Activity style shaky camera work of prospects demolishing other blokes with very little frame of reference.
For those of us who aren’t getting to 100 TAC cup games, we think in archetypes and comparisons.
In this piece, therefore, I’m going to name three players that I wouldn’t want my team’s draftee to be compared to.
The game would be particularly dull if I was saying that I’d prefer the player I drafted not be compared to Will Setterfield or some other mediocre player.
“Got a bit of the Will Setterfields about him”
Instead, we’re going to go with good players that are either undesirable archetypes or play in a way that is only sustainable because of their unique brilliance.
The best example of this in modern sport is comparing a quarterback prospect to Patrick Mahomes. Mahomes is uniquely freaky. Only he can pull of his blend of arm elasticity and strength, escapability, and improvisation skills.
If a draft prospect is compared to him, it probably just means he tried too many things in college and if he tries them in the NFL he will fail quickly. Zach Wilson springs to mind. Caleb Williams, in this coming draft, is another one that’s compared to Mahomes.
We’ll see how that works out.
So, first I’ll identify the player that you don’t want your draftee to be compared to, then I’ll give a player of a similar ilk who is a more hope inducing comparison.
This doesn’t necessarily mean that the comparison will be the better player, of course.
Just that the sort of player is more repeatable.
(1) Cyril Rioli
Cyril is one of not many AFL players that are referred to on a one name basis only.
There’s Cyril, Buddy, Plugger and not terribly many more.
Surely, therefore, it’s a good thing to be compared to Cyril? Wrong.
Why?
Well before we get to that, pay attention to every comparison that is made around draft time. Most of the world doesn’t see colour, but draft analysts do. Every indigenous player will inevitably be compared to another indigenous player.
Only in footy could Shaun Burgoyne and Alwyn Davey be compared as players.
Footy media does not adhere to the Daryl Morey rule of only cross-racial comparisons.
Anyway, moving on.
Why is being compared to Cyril a bad thing?
It probably just means that the prospect doesn’t get enough of the ball.
Cyril averaged 15 disposals and 1.5 goals a game.
His career high for disposals in a game was 29.
The reason he was so good was because of how effective he was in those rare times that he got the ball.
The Rioli high-wire act is impossible for most normal people to pull off.
Nobody else, realistically, can do it.
It’s the Daniel Day-Lewis/Jared Leto principle.
Daniel Day-Lewis can get away with being as method as he is because of the results he gets.
Daniel Day-Lewis – has a bit of the Cyril Rioli’s about him.
Jared Leto gets a lot less leeway for sending severed ears to castmates because he is such a mediocre actor.
If you draft someone who is compared to Rioli, it probably just means he’s a pretty good ball user who drifts out of games.
Comparison you’d rather:
Turbocharged Luke Breust.
(2) Zach Merrett
Zach Merrett is a gun.
Four time best and fairest, albeit at a crap club, and three-time All-Australian.
He gets plenty of the ball and is a reasonable user of it.
Why is he a bad comparison?
It probably just means you drafted an undersized, outside midfielder with limited penetration in his kicking.
Merrett is good because he is able to get involved in scoring chains (20th in the AFL for score involvements) and is a voluminous, if not punishing, tacker (17th in total tackles).
But Merrett is not a contested ball winner and perception does not match reality with his tackling.
Merrett is, mostly correctly, perceived as a small outside player (42nd in contested ball) who can’t go forward and doesn’t kick goals. That’s not the way the game is headed, especially in midfield.
It’s more likely you end up with a Lachie Hunter type than a Zach Merrett level player.
Comparison you’d rather:
Lachie Neale.
(3) Mark Blicavs
Mark Blicavs is probably the most obvious one on this list.
Blicavs is a freak athlete. Truly rare in the AFL.
The fact that he has been so successful in the AFL after having played very little footy before becoming an AFL footballer was only possible because he is such a superlative athlete who is also smart enough to pick up the nuances of the game quickly.
There are so few of those stories.
Most pure athletes who attempt to enter the AFL just can’t do it. They can’t grasp the game or work out how the ball bounces. Look at Israel Folau.
Blicavs is different.
He is a rare genuine utility because his size, speed, tank, and footy IQ is underrated. Most prospects that would be compared to Blicavs would be players who are pretty good, but not as good, aerobic and anaerobic athletes who haven’t played any footy and don’t have an obvious position.
Chances are you’re getting a Nik Cox type, more than a Mark Blicavs type. That’s Margot Robbie v the girl that looks vaguely like Margot Robbie in Sex Education.
Betting on athleticism, generally, is smart.
But Blicavs is an exception, not a rule.
Comparison you’d rather:
Slightly slimmer Esava Ratugolea
Like what you read from our hard-hitting columnist?
Follow @Guywholikessport on Twitter or check out his FULL BLOG HERE