Draft Watcher Knightmare's 2018 AFL Draft Almanac

[Knightmare]

Also while I'm here, it's probably timely to announce I'll be back for ESPN again this year and planning on producing content over the coming weeks - stay tuned.

 

[briztoon]

Where our views differ I suspect is in the ease with which good players can be had. You've got veterans who are undervalued each year getting delisted or forced into retirement too soon + our valuations on what we feel picks in the top 4 are worth by contrast to picks outside the top 10 which can be great but is ultimately hit or miss if you go through the selections.

I'd take pick 3 and a state leaguer later on ahead of picks 12 and 19 most years. It would have to be a flat top end or have someone sliding I'd rate around 3 to not want to go that route.

You can get good players as rookies if you have a good eye and look to the state leagues. You can also get good unwanted talent on the trade table/free agency. I could go fully into a strategy around maximisation of A-graders but then get the likes of Jarryd Lyons (delisted free agent), Daniel Menzel (delisted free agent), Aaron Hall (late pick), Tom Scully (late pick). Then the likes of Brendon Goddard and Michael Barlow are prematurely forced into retirement (and usually there are a lot more of those veterans who are asked to hang up the boots too soon).

If you look at drafts in hindsight, there have been countless state leaguers/mature agers who have proven worthy of top 20 picks. Was Tom Stewart worth a top 20 pick in hindsight? What about Tim Kelly? If you go through the past five drafts, or at least in doing that myself, each year there are a solid roughly five I'd include inside that top 20. So I can't on that basis dismiss that possibility if they're that good, unless you can get them later which for the most part you can.

On Collingwood. They didn't do a lot to their list in the 2017 offseason. They made what is looking like a bad trade for Sam Murray but drafted well with Jaidyn Stephenson and Brody Mihocek successes and Flynn Appleby looking like a possible role player. What was the most pronounced change for them was their movement from being a short kicking team that moves it slowly to a team that look on the game and moved it quicker in 2018.

I can't say I agree with you or AFL.com on a midfield rating of 9th for Adelaide. Sloane, Gibbs and the Crouch brothers are all excellent. Without going through names and just thinking top of mind, Sloane a best 15 mid in the game, Gibbs top 30, M.Crouch top 40 and B.Crouch is an excellent 4th midfielder. Laird is a best 40 mid when he goes through there. I wouldn't be calling them one paced. Seedsman's outside run is superb. Greenwood has some serious ball winning power. Collingwood and Geelong are the only two midfields top of mind I'd say are stronger than Adelaide's, probably GWS' also, maybe Richmond's and Melbourne's. But Adelaide I have in the conversation with those clubs on how good their midfield is and I'd need a fair bit of time to order that top group in a way I'd be satisfied with doing.

On Carlton. if you look at their list. They don't really have that many blue chip players. It's really just Cripps. Then if he was healthy Docherty if he was to regain his 2017 form would be the other. Charlie Curnow is really good. But Carlton need a lot more star power than they have. Much of it could form from their up and coming youth. They have a lot of good young talent coming through. But it's not there yet.

Conceptually the list strategy I'm seeing at the moment that would have me tearing my hair out is Gold Coast's. It's the recruitment of unwanted AFL players who are worse than a number of state leaguers who aren't on AFL lists. I've liked a lot of their drafting over the years, but their trading and then lack of veterans added, lack of quality players from other lists (Weller isn't quality and certainly wasn't worth what was paid). Use those early picks to get stars (and they got Lukosius/Rankine as they should have). But then they needed to go out and get that Scully, get a Hannebery or similar and keep guys who can play - Lyons/Hall. You can't just let talent go for nothing (voluntarily) and not go get something yourself. You need to keep your talent and go get more each offseason to improve your list.

Paul Hasleby was fine. Sub-optimal as with almost every pick in hindsight. Fizzled out early but his first 10 seasons was very good. 200+ games with very good production isn't a result where you'd look at it as a bad result.

With pick 3 = Rankine, Dow, McCluggage, Mills and Brayshaw these past five years. That could be five A-graders. I like the early picks again this year and I feel there are players of that quality who could be had with that selection again this year. There is a top 4 at this stage this year I feel good about on around that level.

I wouldn't be bringing up Jarryd Lyons as an example as a delisted free agent, because, while technically he was, Lyon was only delisted because there were two agreements in place.

Lyon was contracted for 2019 to Gold Coast, but looked like spending most of 2019 in the reserves as he did not feature in Stewie Dews plans. Dew was critical of Lyons inability to spread from the contest and lack of defensive running.

Gold Coast weren't willing to delist Lyons because he was still contracted for 2019 on pretty big coin.

Brisbane went to Lyons after the trade period ended, offering a 3 year deal, at less money per year, but more over the life of the contract. Brisbane also has Jarryd's younger brother on our list who may (or may not) be delisted at the end of the season.

So Lyons asked Gold Coast to be delisted, willing to forego the final year of his contract, knowing he was walking straight in to Brisbane.


So Lyons wasn't a delisted free agent to be had by just any team.

 

[Knightmare]

I wouldn't be bringing up Jarryd Lyons as an example as a delisted free agent, because, while technically he was, Lyon was only delisted because there were two agreements in place.

Lyon was contracted for 2019 to Gold Coast, but looked like spending most of 2019 in the reserves as he did not feature in Stewie Dews plans. Dew was critical of Lyons inability to spread from the contest and lack of defensive running.

Gold Coast weren't willing to delist Lyons because he was still contracted for 2019 on pretty big coin.

Brisbane went to Lyons after the trade period ended, offering a 3 year deal, at less money per year, but more over the life of the contract. Brisbane also has Jarryd's younger brother on our list who may (or may not) be delisted at the end of the season.

So Lyons asked Gold Coast to be delisted, willing to forego the final year of his contract, knowing he was walking straight in to Brisbane.


So Lyons wasn't a delisted free agent to be had by just any team.

Lyons was delisted and picked up as a delisted free agent by Brisbane. Had any other club wanted him, they could have traded for him before the eventual delisting.

With Hall only playing the 6 games, Lyons was outright Gold Coast's best midfielder. It's still to me the most staggering offseason decision, though Hall and Scully are up there.

Lack of spread and defensive running has been raised, but he's such an incredible stoppage player that it negates these minor flaws which on a more capable team wouldn't look so bad.

Brisbane have found an incredible replacement for Beams at no cost at all in Lyons, even before the addition of Neale.

 

[briztoon]

Lyons was delisted and picked up as a delisted free agent by Brisbane. Had any other club wanted him, they could have traded for him before the eventual delisting.

With Hall only playing the 6 games, Lyons was outright Gold Coast's best midfielder. It's still to me the most staggering offseason decision, though Hall and Scully are up there.

Lack of spread and defensive running has been raised, but he's such an incredible stoppage player that it negates these minor flaws which on a more capable team wouldn't look so bad.

Brisbane have found an incredible replacement for Beams at no cost at all in Lyons, even before the addition of Neale.

As I mentioned above, there were extenuating circumstances to Lyons being delisted.

Lyons was only delisted by Gold Coast because he asked to be delisted and forego his final contract year. That's because he already had an agreement in place with Brisbane before requesting to be delisted.

No agreement with Brisbane, and Lyons doesn't ask to be delisted and is not a delisted free agent this summer. And instead plays out 2019 in the Suns NEAFL team.


This has been verified by both Noble and Lyons in interviews and on the Lions podcast.


That's why I said using Jarryd Lyons is a poor example, because he was not a true delisted pickup in the context of your discussion. Even on the Brisbane Lions BF board, it was reported that Jarryd Lyons was coming to Brisbane two days before the Sun delisted him.

 

[Jirik13]

Just adding a couple of fact on Lyons.

Lyons was on the market during trade period according to Suns list manager Cameron. There was no interest from teams again according to Cameron.

Lyons was told at his exit interview that his spot in best 22 is not guaranteed. Players like Brodie, Bowes, Fiorini, Ainsworth could be possibly ahead of him.

I can only speculate that Lyons had a deal with Lyons but because Lions were busy with Neale, Beams deals nothing happened during trade period. After the trade period Lyons did ask to be released.

 

[Jirik13]

Lyons was delisted and picked up as a delisted free agent by Brisbane. Had any other club wanted him, they could have traded for him before the eventual delisting.

With Hall only playing the 6 games, Lyons was outright Gold Coast's best midfielder. It's still to me the most staggering offseason decision, though Hall and Scully are up there.

Lack of spread and defensive running has been raised, but he's such an incredible stoppage player that it negates these minor flaws which on a more capable team wouldn't look so bad.

Brisbane have found an incredible replacement for Beams at no cost at all in Lyons, even before the addition of Neale.

Regarding your view on Lyons, Hall I have to really chuckle. You seem to forget that it's not all about talent or numbers. Dew wants everybody on the same page, play for a team, play his role, hunt, pressure. Lyons is ok and will be handy on Lions team but Hall was the most selfish, lazy and often sulking player on Suns list. Just watch him against Freo last year to see real Hall. It does not work if a player just watches opposition running around him while his mates are trying heart out to defend, pressure.

You will probably not change your view on Hall but presenting Hall as a best player on Suns team is just crazy.

By the way I would not be surprised if Miles has the same numbers in 2019 as Lyons had. I also predict that if Fiorini stays healthy he will be more valuable than Lyons. And yes if I am Dew I for sure would play Bowes, Brodie and Ainsworth ahead of Lyons. All A talent vs B player. If injury free, we should see a lot more from these players in their 3rd year.

 

[Knightmare]

Regarding your view on Lyons, Hall I have to really chuckle. You seem to forget that it's not all about talent or numbers. Dew wants everybody on the same page, play for a team, play his role, hunt, pressure. Lyons is ok and will be handy on Lions team but Hall was the most selfish, lazy and often sulking player on Suns list. Just watch him against Freo last year to see real Hall. It does not work if a player just watches opposition running around him while his mates are trying heart out to defend, pressure.

You will probably not change your view on Hall but presenting Hall as a best player on Suns team is just crazy.

By the way I would not be surprised if Miles has the same numbers in 20190 as Lyons had. I also predict that if Fiorini stays healthy he will be more valuable than Lyons. And yes if I am Dew I for sure would play Bowes, Brodie and Ainsworth ahead of Lyons. All A talent vs B player. No guarantee, but we should see a lot more from these players in their 3rd year.

What Dew isn't taking into account is that different personal bring different things to a playing group.

Lyons firstly is a clear top 10 stoppage players in the game. Centre clearance differential has always been radically different with him in there v out there and it's the first thing you'd notice when Gold Coast played and it was the same story with Adelaide, their centre clearance differential was best with him in there as with at Gold Coast. He's someone you select and utilise with that knowledge front of mind.

Aaron Hall for the past two seasons has been deemed by Champion Data to be elite and it shouldn't surprise people who watch him. He racks it up and generates drive at speed like no one else in the competition. He generates a lot of scoring opportunities and is involved in a lot of scoring chains through that speed with which he gets it forward.

Good coaches put their let their players play to their strengths and be them and create a game plan that suits the personnel. Dew is failing on both accounts.

Fail to do that, as is the case with Gold Coast and they don't have any stars left. Jarrod Witts is probably Gold Coast's best remaining player and there are a number of teams he wouldn't get a game for every week and he's only a middle of the road player by position as probably a top 10 ruckman but clearly outside the top 5 at his position.

Losing Hall and Saad in successive years has sapped Gold Coast completely of any drive they once had. Without Lyons, their midfield is the worst in the competition and the worst we've seen since Essendon had all the players missing due to the ASADA suspensions and there is a case Gold Coast's midfield is worse than that even.

Without offence. You're not getting anywhere. The ball isn't getting forward with speed and scoring will dry up. More correct would be keeping those guys, letting them be who they are, and surrounding them with others who are capable in the areas the likes of Hall and Lyons aren't as strong in.

Fiorini doesn't have the stoppage game of Lyons. He's a very different player. Ainsworth needs to be used more forward than midfield. Brodie should improve further this year after strong finish to 2018, Bowes needs to come good.

On Miles, he's an extremely high production player and could have higher disposal numbers than Lyons if used regularly, but he's at the same time not the elite stoppage specialist Lyons is nor as good of a ball user with Lyons' usage and movement of the ball much better than that of Miles.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

Given Lyons has now been let go from two sides after struggling to lock down a senior position. and the best offer Hall attracted was seemingly North's late pick, why do you think the industry as a whole rates them so differently from you?

 

[Knightmare]

Given Lyons has now been let go from two sides after struggling to lock down a senior position. and the best offer Hall attracted was seemingly North's late pick, why do you think the industry as a whole rates them so differently from you?

The clubs will be the best ones to answer that.

My feel is there is too great of a focus within the industry on a players flaws with not enough regard going towards a players strengths.

Just as North forced Brent Harvey into retirement despite no player in the AFL being ahead of him in both disposals and goals that final season and no club made a serious offer to convince him - and it's not like he had lost his running or kicking - he was still exceptionally fast and one of the best kicks in the competition. Talent ID even on the most established and recognised of people of high character as the Harvey example demonstrates don't seem always to be identified correctly. He could easily have played another two seasons and still shone.

We see it with players being forced into retirement early - others being traded for peanuts wrongly and others in the state leagues not earning the opportunities they should.

That's not to say talent ID isn't improving. The top part of the draft year on year feels more and more solid and it feels increasingly outside of that first round it's harder every year to get as much value. But as with anything there is still a ways to go and that recognition of a players strengths and letting them be them I find to be a major separator with the best clubs and those that struggle. And with those rebuilding situations you see really good players get traded/cut and then they'll find homes elsewhere and get recognition for being able to play. How about all those Carlton forwards that the club traded/let go? There was a point where those ex Blue forwards on other lists had a greater combined number of goals kicked than Carlton's whole team. That sort of thing happens when you don't recognise talent and let everyone go including established players and guys with well defined strengths as a lot of those guys had.

Why clubs aren't clambering over themselves to get Lyons/Hall/Scully. It was a shock to me that there weren't aggressive bids to get them. Even Daniel Menzel needed to find a home as a delisted free agent. With Lyons/Hall/Menzel it felt like there was an incredible underrating based on what they don't have - and with clubs not appreciating those areas they each do to a best or near best in competition standard - that's opportunities missed. And at the end of the day if you get those guys and find diversity of talent with different guys bringing different things to the table, you can blend that and build an incredible team and do it without bottoming out. Hawthorn have done this better than any with savvy finds from other team lists and it's a component to why they've been the most successful club these past 10 seasons. And particularly from a coaching perspective, Clarkson has consistently impressed me in his analysis of the games of his players and would put them in positions, even positions they're not accustomed to playing based on their strengths to maximise their games.

 

[Richo83]

Where our views differ I suspect is in the ease with which good players can be had. You've got veterans who are undervalued each year getting delisted or forced into retirement too soon

Generally, if a player, especially an older player is spat out by the system, there's a reason for it. Many teams, my side included, have tried going down the re-tread route, only for it to fail. Now, there are good mature agers to be picked up, but like Kelly or Harry Taylor, they generally go in the first two rounds.

+ our valuations on what we feel picks in the top 4 are worth by contrast to picks outside the top 10 which can be great but is ultimately hit or miss if you go through the selections.

Well let's look at whether pick 3 is worth more than picks 12 and 19 by looking at the players picked at 3 versus 12, and 19.

2010: Day v Cook and Isaac Smith
2011: Tyson v Docherty and Kavanagh
2012: Plowman v Jaksch and Kennedy
2013: Billings v Lennon and Acres
2014: Brayshaw v Ellis and Boekhurst
2015: Mills v Charlie Curnow and Burton
2016: McCluggage v Simpkin and English
2017: Dow v Fogarty and Powell

As we can see, the result isn't very far each way. Brayshaw, Mills, McCluggage and Dow look like likely types, but so do Fogarty, Simpkin, Curnow and Burton.

I think having multiple picks also allows Carlton to fill multiple holes on their list, and given they're one of the worst teams in the league, that's important. Again, teams need to be good from first to the 22nd player, and it's impossible to fill your team with priority picks unless you're GWS.

I'd take pick 3 and a state leaguer later on ahead of picks 12 and 19 most years. It would have to be a flat top end or have someone sliding I'd rate around 3 to not want to go that route.

That's not the equation though; if Carlton want to pick a state leaguer later they can. The equation is 3 v 12 and 19 (as a guess). And I'd argue giving Carlton more picks gives them more of a chance to pick up a state leaguer anyway, given most top ten picks are kids.

You can get good players as rookies if you have a good eye and look to the state leagues. You can also get good unwanted talent on the trade table/free agency. I could go fully into a strategy around maximisation of A-graders but then get the likes of Jarryd Lyons (delisted free agent), Daniel Menzel (delisted free agent), Aaron Hall (late pick), Tom Scully (late pick). Then the likes of Brendon Goddard and Michael Barlow are prematurely forced into retirement (and usually there are a lot more of those veterans who are asked to hang up the boots too soon).

Menzel doesn't know how to put on defensive pressure. In a bad team he'd be even worse, given he'd be purely reliant on midfield delivery. Same goes for Hall who is an inconsistent player who often only runs one way. Scully is injured really badly and Goddard saps the energy out of the room and would probably be too harsh on a fairly young and crap playing group. Barlow isn't moving the needle much. Lyons is the one who could have been picked up, but Carlton aren't alone in wanting to stock up in their midfield.

The other problem with these players is they'd soak up cap space where they should be really focusing on either kids or guns.

If you look at drafts in hindsight, there have been countless state leaguers/mature agers who have proven worthy of top 20 picks. Was Tom Stewart worth a top 20 pick in hindsight? What about Tim Kelly? If you go through the past five drafts, or at least in doing that myself, each year there are a solid roughly five I'd include inside that top 20. So I can't on that basis dismiss that possibility if they're that good, unless you can get them later which for the most part you can.

Do Carlton draft a state leaguer with the pick they've given up though? For them, it's either another kid or two other kids or maybe a state leaguer with their second pick. I get your point that state leaguers can be drafted later, but I'm not sure getting in more picks stops them from doing that. IMO none of the picks Carlton traded for or away were going to be used on state leaguers and would have been used on teenagers.

On Collingwood. They didn't do a lot to their list in the 2017 offseason. They made what is looking like a bad trade for Sam Murray but drafted well with Jaidyn Stephenson and Brody Mihocek successes and Flynn Appleby looking like a possible role player. What was the most pronounced change for them was their movement from being a short kicking team that moves it slowly to a team that look on the game and moved it quicker in 2018.

And that was partly driven by a change in players at Buckley's disposal. Sure, he changed things around, but he also developed a forwardline with height and speed, something he lacked before.

I can't say I agree with you or AFL.com on a midfield rating of 9th for Adelaide. Sloane, Gibbs and the Crouch brothers are all excellent. Without going through names and just thinking top of mind, Sloane a best 15 mid in the game, Gibbs top 30, M.Crouch top 40 and B.Crouch is an excellent 4th midfielder. Laird is a best 40 mid when he goes through there. I wouldn't be calling them one paced. Seedsman's outside run is superb. Greenwood has some serious ball winning power. Collingwood and Geelong are the only two midfields top of mind I'd say are stronger than Adelaide's, probably GWS' also, maybe Richmond's and Melbourne's. But Adelaide I have in the conversation with those clubs on how good their midfield is and I'd need a fair bit of time to order that top group in a way I'd be satisfied with doing.

Jacobs is aging and declining. The Crouch brothers and Sloane are too similar IMO. IMO, Collingwood, Melbourne, Geelong, Richmond, GWS are all better The eagles have Shuey, Gaff and Yeo as their stars, I'd take them above the crows' midfielders. So at best IMO, they're seventh.

On Carlton. if you look at their list. They don't really have that many blue chip players. It's really just Cripps. Then if he was healthy Docherty if he was to regain his 2017 form would be the other. Charlie Curnow is really good. But Carlton need a lot more star power than they have. Much of it could form from their up and coming youth. They have a lot of good young talent coming through. But it's not there yet.

They've got Cripps, Dow, Walsh, Curnow and Docherty, who are either stars or young. After a while you've got to start backing in your guys and start filling in the rest.

Conceptually the list strategy I'm seeing at the moment that would have me tearing my hair out is Gold Coast's. It's the recruitment of unwanted AFL players who are worse than a number of state leaguers who aren't on AFL lists. I've liked a lot of their drafting over the years, but their trading and then lack of veterans added, lack of quality players from other lists (Weller isn't quality and certainly wasn't worth what was paid). Use those early picks to get stars (and they got Lukosius/Rankine as they should have). But then they needed to go out and get that Scully, get a Hannebery or similar and keep guys who can play - Lyons/Hall. You can't just let talent go for nothing (voluntarily) and not go get something yourself. You need to keep your talent and go get more each offseason to improve your list.

I mostly agree. The sun's issue is that they don't have any confidence in player retention. That makes their list management scattershot and confused. Weller was overpaid for because they knew he would stay. They can't play hardball 100% all of the time like Victorian teams can because they lack leverage.

But some decisions I kinda get. Hall is a flake who runs one way. Miles will improve them on and off the field. I have a feeling that guys like Scully and Hannebery didn't want to go to the suns at all. That's their problem, they leak a lot of players to well-managed clubs and struggle to attract players to fill the void. That's partly self-inflicted, but the AFL is partly to blame for not giving them as much support as they gave to the new golden child in Sydney.

Paul Hasleby was fine. Sub-optimal as with almost every pick in hindsight. Fizzled out early but his first 10 seasons was very good. 200+ games with very good production isn't a result where you'd look at it as a bad result.

With pick 3 = Rankine, Dow, McCluggage, Mills and Brayshaw these past five years. That could be five A-graders. I like the early picks again this year and I feel there are players of that quality who could be had with that selection again this year. There is a top 4 at this stage this year I feel good about on around that level.

Sure, but let's not forget some of the guys picked in the tens who have become stars. Not to mention guys picked around where I think Carlton will specifically draft from.

 

[Richo83]

Given Lyons has now been let go from two sides after struggling to lock down a senior position. and the best offer Hall attracted was seemingly North's late pick, why do you think the industry as a whole rates them so differently from you?

I think there's something about Lyons that the public have been shielded from. As for Hall, I kinda get it, he's a skinny flanker who doesn't kick that many goals and I'm guessing the staff want the club to be built on toughness and working both ways. Hall isn't really that.

 

[Richo83]

I don't know Lyons as a player that well, but winning clearances is generally not a very good determinant on whether a team will win a game. AFL coaches are often looking at what kinds of stats correlate to victory, and focusing on players who do those things well. I suspect the suns staff looked at Lyons and thought his spread and lack of tackling out-factored his clearances. I'm not saying they're right, just that that's the mindset.

As for Hall, yes, champion data loves him. Champion data also rated Sinclair as elite in 2018, just because they say someone's elite doesn't make it true. CD also loves Rich, who is often a dumb defender and often is unwilling to do team things. I think there's a danger in focusing too much on stats of mature players on bad teams. If these players were truly elite then they'd probably be able to drag their team up the ladder. But they don't, indicating that... they're not.

 

[Richo83]

Miles averaged 4.84 clearances per game in 2016, after averaging 5.87 in 2015. He played six games since. Not all teams care that much about clearances, especially as there's only around 60-80 clearances per game anyway.

 

[Knightmare]

Generally, if a player, especially an older player is spat out by the system, there's a reason for it. Many teams, my side included, have tried going down the re-tread route, only for it to fail. Now, there are good mature agers to be picked up, but like Kelly or Harry Taylor, they generally go in the first two rounds.



Well let's look at whether pick 3 is worth more than picks 12 and 19 by looking at the players picked at 3 versus 12, and 19.

2010: Day v Cook and Isaac Smith
2011: Tyson v Docherty and Kavanagh
2012: Plowman v Jaksch and Kennedy
2013: Billings v Lennon and Acres
2014: Brayshaw v Ellis and Boekhurst
2015: Mills v Charlie Curnow and Burton
2016: McCluggage v Simpkin and English
2017: Dow v Fogarty and Powell

As we can see, the result isn't very far each way. Brayshaw, Mills, McCluggage and Dow look like likely types, but so do Fogarty, Simpkin, Curnow and Burton.

I think having multiple picks also allows Carlton to fill multiple holes on their list, and given they're one of the worst teams in the league, that's important. Again, teams need to be good from first to the 22nd player, and it's impossible to fill your team with priority picks unless you're GWS.



That's not the equation though; if Carlton want to pick a state leaguer later they can. The equation is 3 v 12 and 19 (as a guess). And I'd argue giving Carlton more picks gives them more of a chance to pick up a state leaguer anyway, given most top ten picks are kids.



Menzel doesn't know how to put on defensive pressure. In a bad team he'd be even worse, given he'd be purely reliant on midfield delivery. Same goes for Hall who is an inconsistent player who often only runs one way. Scully is injured really badly and Goddard saps the energy out of the room and would probably be too harsh on a fairly young and crap playing group. Barlow isn't moving the needle much. Lyons is the one who could have been picked up, but Carlton aren't alone in wanting to stock up in their midfield.

The other problem with these players is they'd soak up cap space where they should be really focusing on either kids or guns.



Do Carlton draft a state leaguer with the pick they've given up though? For them, it's either another kid or two other kids or maybe a state leaguer with their second pick. I get your point that state leaguers can be drafted later, but I'm not sure getting in more picks stops them from doing that. IMO none of the picks Carlton traded for or away were going to be used on state leaguers and would have been used on teenagers.



And that was partly driven by a change in players at Buckley's disposal. Sure, he changed things around, but he also developed a forwardline with height and speed, something he lacked before.



Jacobs is aging and declining. The Crouch brothers and Sloane are too similar IMO. IMO, Collingwood, Melbourne, Geelong, Richmond, GWS are all better The eagles have Shuey, Gaff and Yeo as their stars, I'd take them above the crows' midfielders. So at best IMO, they're seventh.



They've got Cripps, Dow, Walsh, Curnow and Docherty, who are either stars or young. After a while you've got to start backing in your guys and start filling in the rest.



I mostly agree. The sun's issue is that they don't have any confidence in player retention. That makes their list management scattershot and confused. Weller was overpaid for because they knew he would stay. They can't play hardball 100% all of the time like Victorian teams can because they lack leverage.

But some decisions I kinda get. Hall is a flake who runs one way. Miles will improve them on and off the field. I have a feeling that guys like Scully and Hannebery didn't want to go to the suns at all. That's their problem, they leak a lot of players to well-managed clubs and struggle to attract players to fill the void. That's partly self-inflicted, but the AFL is partly to blame for not giving them as much support as they gave to the new golden child in Sydney.



Sure, but let's not forget some of the guys picked in the tens who have become stars. Not to mention guys picked around where I think Carlton will specifically draft from.

I don't agree with you that good mature agers have to go in the first round. Tom Stewart? Sam Menegola? Anthony Tipungwuti? Adam Saad? Kane Lambert? Rory Lobb? Neville Jetta?
Overages in Charlie Cameron, Tom Langdon, Tom Phillips, Toby Nankervis, Jack Steele, Jack Sinclair.

These are guys all top of mind who have provided tremendous value outside the first round 2013-2017 to give a recent sample. And all those guys are clear top 30 players and most of them are clear top 20 players from their drafts. There are a lot of them and they're all clear best 22 players on any AFL team.

Of those years you go through only 2010/2011/2015 would I not take pick 3. That's only once from 2012-2017. And that's before adding in a mature ager who may/may not better than one of those others selected which supports the point I previously made. By using up an additional list position with the two picks between 10-20, you're getting one less other player which might mean one less mature ager, or one less of another type of player depending on best available.

I agree at the end of the day that you want to maximise the quality of your best 22. You have a better best 22 than the other team. You're generally winning. But when you're a good team, you can actually have a really good best 30. And with mature agers and finding underutilised talent on other lists for cheap as a lot of was available this past offseason, I'd prioritise getting star power. Do I want Chris Judd? Or do I want Brent Reilly and Jason Gram? Give me Chris Judd every day of the week. You're not getting Judd at 3, that's a one in every 10 year pick, but Reilly and Gram are excellent choices at 12/19 also relative to the average player selected there. But absolutely give me at star. Give me the best, best 10 in the game, and with smart recruiting you can fill out those other spots if you get your Jarryd Lyons, Aaron Hall's, Tom Scully's and Daniel Menzel's. And as late/rookie picks give me my Sam Collins/Mitch Grigg/Jye Bolton/Marty Hore/Mitch Maguire/Jon Marsh/Haiden Schloithe/Ben Cavarra/Marlion Pickett/Michael Gibbons/Callum Wilkie/Will Hayes/Nick Hind/Brett Bewley types to fill those remaining list needs with all those guys able to fill list holes depending on need and I'm set.

What needs to be noted with Menzel and not enough have paid attention to this. He's almost always on the opposite side of the fwd 50m from the action - by design. That's how Geelong have set up the last few years with him in the side. And as a result, he's nowhere near the ball (by design) unless it's coming to him. So his defensive flaws have been gravely overstated. What should be noted with Menzel is that he's the only general forward in the competition to average 2+ goals per game each of the past two seasons. He's also an elite kick - both on goal and setting up teammates i50. So he's a big time asset I'd want in my best 22 on any team. Like with Lyons/Hall/Scully, Menzel is someone I consider another outright on the field starter on any team.

Scully is professional and won't be ready for the start of 2019 but when he's back, he'll be in shape and effective.

Barlow is a component to a midfield and still an able ball winner/accumulator.

Goddard is a winner and expects winning. He's temperamental, but he makes teams better. Brings versatility to the table, but at this age/stage I want him as a ball user out of defence and I'd want him barking instructions as he knows the game and can get guys in the right positions.

Lyons/Hall my opinions are well known on.

On Carlton. If I had the first pick I would have kept it to take Lukosius and I would not have made the trade for Stocker. I would also have been open to a trade with Port Adelaide though for picks 5 + 18 which I would have used for Bailey Smith (in my view a better mid than Walsh) and Riley Collier Dawkins who I would have used pick 18 on. I consider that combination better than Walsh/Stocker and it doesn't require giving up the 2019 first. But as happens, Carlton's talent ID was different to my own here, and that's going to happen as my draft board is my own and each club will have their own individual draft boards which will look different to the next.

I'd take Adelaide's midfield to West Coast's. West Coast's I look at as having less star power, less depth and being even slower. And neither midfield is quick or has a lot of x-factor. But Adelaide's in each of those areas comes out favourably for mine.
Sloane/Gibbs/M.Crouch/B.Crouch/Laird/Seedsman with Jacobs through the ruck. They're the guys who make any team better through that area.
Gaff/Yeo/Shuey/Redden with Naitanui through the ruck are the only guys from West Coast I'd give that credit to.
Sloane is the best of that group. Sloane/Gibbs/Crouch/Crouch inside is better than Yeo/Shuey/Redden. Gaff is better than Seedsman on the outside as the better endurance runner/accumulator but Seedsman shouldn't be slept on as a seriously fast outside type who provides substantial drive and makes that midfield plenty fast. I also find from a ball movement perspective it makes Adelaide's midfield look quick, as we saw in 2017 with how quickly and easily they moved it which isn't a characteristic I'd credit West Coast for with their strength more coming from their superiority in their KPP stocks, defence and defensive structures.
As for the ruck situation, Naitanui is better than Jacobs when healthy, but he has rarely been and Jacobs is better than Hickey/Vardy.

On Weller. Gold Coast flat out should not have traded for him. He's an ok but not great AFL footballer. If I'm to do a re-do of the 2014 draft. He's not a best 20 player available in that draft let alone the second best. Spending pick 2 remains laughable, irrespective of how many players have left and whether Weller wants to play his whole career for Gold Coast. Adam Saad who went as a rookie in that same trade and Gold Coast traded in that same offseason as they traded for Weller as a point of comparison was traded for a 2018 second round pick to Essendon. Saad is a much better player than Weller (much better kick, better 1v1, provides arguably better drive with his run) and they moved so far down the draft just to downgrade? Saad did request a trade, but Gold Coast gave up pick 2 for a guy who is worse than several of the mature agers taken that year. It's crazy stuff.

 

[Knightmare]

I don't know Lyons as a player that well, but winning clearances is generally not a very good determinant on whether a team will win a game. AFL coaches are often looking at what kinds of stats correlate to victory, and focusing on players who do those things well. I suspect the suns staff looked at Lyons and thought his spread and lack of tackling out-factored his clearances. I'm not saying they're right, just that that's the mindset.

As for Hall, yes, champion data loves him. Champion data also rated Sinclair as elite in 2018, just because they say someone's elite doesn't make it true. CD also loves Rich, who is often a dumb defender and often is unwilling to do team things. I think there's a danger in focusing too much on stats of mature players on bad teams. If these players were truly elite then they'd probably be able to drag their team up the ladder. But they don't, indicating that... they're not.

Rich I like in defence personally. Obviously you get all the offence, elite kicking and scoring that starts from his boot. But he's an elite ground ball winner by position. Wins his 1v1s. He's really good there.

Sinclair is another where if you watch him, he's an effective footballer. I wouldn't go as far as saying he was the best wingman in the game in 2017 as Champion Data said, but he's a very well rounded player who pressures like crazy, can win it win it's his turn, has some speed and uses it well. Could find more of it but he's a really good footballer.

I find with Champion Data they overlook a lot of guys I'd consider elite - not rating contested ball winning as highly as I do as they're more about loose ball winning - and I agree that's an even more useful metric and should be publicly available on all players. But there isn't a guy Champion Data would come out saying is elite where I'd say - nuh, that guy is a scrub. They point out a lot of players who are gravely underappreciated and have a lot more game than they're given credit for.

 

[briztoon]

Cha

I don't agree with you that good mature agers have to go in the first round. Tom Stewart? Sam Menegola? Anthony Tipungwuti? Adam Saad? Kane Lambert? Rory Lobb? Neville Jetta?
Overages in Charlie Cameron, Tom Langdon, Tom Phillips, Toby Nankervis, Jack Steele, Jack Sinclair.

These are guys all top of mind who have provided tremendous value outside the first round 2013-2017 to give a recent sample. And all those guys are clear top 30 players and most of them are clear top 20 players from their drafts. There are a lot of them and they're all clear best 22 players on any AFL team.

Of those years you go through only 2010/2011/2015 would I not take pick 3. That's only once from 2012-2017. And that's before adding in a mature ager who may/may not better than one of those others selected which supports the point I previously made. By using up an additional list position with the two picks between 10-20, you're getting one less other player which might mean one less mature ager, or one less of another type of player depending on best available.

I agree at the end of the day that you want to maximise the quality of your best 22. You have a better best 22 than the other team. You're generally winning. But when you're a good team, you can actually have a really good best 30. And with mature agers and finding underutilised talent on other lists for cheap as a lot of was available this past offseason, I'd prioritise getting star power. Do I want Chris Judd? Or do I want Brent Reilly and Jason Gram? Give me Chris Judd every day of the week. You're not getting Judd at 3, that's a one in every 10 year pick, but Reilly and Gram are excellent choices at 12/19 also relative to the average player selected there. But absolutely give me at star. Give me the best, best 10 in the game, and with smart recruiting you can fill out those other spots if you get your Jarryd Lyons, Aaron Hall's, Tom Scully's and Daniel Menzel's. And as late/rookie picks give me my Sam Collins/Mitch Grigg/Jye Bolton/Marty Hore/Mitch Maguire/Jon Marsh/Haiden Schloithe/Ben Cavarra/Marlion Pickett/Michael Gibbons/Callum Wilkie/Will Hayes/Nick Hind/Brett Bewley types to fill those remaining list needs with all those guys able to fill list holes depending on need and I'm set.

What needs to be noted with Menzel and not enough have paid attention to this. He's almost always on the opposite side of the fwd 50m from the action - by design. That's how Geelong have set up the last few years with him in the side. And as a result, he's nowhere near the ball (by design) unless it's coming to him. So his defensive flaws have been gravely overstated. What should be noted with Menzel is that he's the only general forward in the competition to average 2+ goals per game each of the past two seasons. He's also an elite kick - both on goal and setting up teammates i50. So he's a big time asset I'd want in my best 22 on any team. Like with Lyons/Hall/Scully, Menzel is someone I consider another outright on the field starter on any team.

Scully is professional and won't be ready for the start of 2019 but when he's back, he'll be in shape and effective.

Barlow is a component to a midfield and still an able ball winner/accumulator.

Goddard is a winner and expects winning. He's temperamental, but he makes teams better. Brings versatility to the table, but at this age/stage I want him as a ball user out of defence and I'd want him barking instructions as he knows the game and can get guys in the right positions.

Lyons/Hall my opinions are well known on.

On Carlton. If I had the first pick I would have kept it to take Lukosius and I would not have made the trade for Stocker. I would also have been open to a trade with Port Adelaide though for picks 5 + 18 which I would have used for Bailey Smith (in my view a better mid than Walsh) and Riley Collier Dawkins who I would have used pick 18 on. I consider that combination better than Walsh/Stocker and it doesn't require giving up the 2019 first. But as happens, Carlton's talent ID was different to my own here, and that's going to happen as my draft board is my own and each club will have their own individual draft boards which will look different to the next.

I'd take Adelaide's midfield to West Coast's. West Coast's I look at as having less star power, less depth and being even slower. And neither midfield is quick or has a lot of x-factor. But Adelaide's in each of those areas comes out favourably for mine.
Sloane/Gibbs/M.Crouch/B.Crouch/Laird/Seedsman with Jacobs through the ruck. They're the guys who make any team better through that area.
Gaff/Yeo/Shuey/Redden with Naitanui through the ruck are the only guys from West Coast I'd give that credit to.
Sloane is the best of that group. Sloane/Gibbs/Crouch/Crouch inside is better than Yeo/Shuey/Redden. Gaff is better than Seedsman on the outside as the better endurance runner/accumulator but Seedsman shouldn't be slept on as a seriously fast outside type who provides substantial drive and makes that midfield plenty fast. I also find from a ball movement perspective it makes Adelaide's midfield look quick, as we saw in 2017 with how quickly and easily they moved it which isn't a characteristic I'd credit West Coast for with their strength more coming from their superiority in their KPP stocks, defence and defensive structures.
As for the ruck situation, Naitanui is better than Jacobs when healthy, but he has rarely been and Jacobs is better than Hickey/Vardy.

On Weller. Gold Coast flat out should not have traded for him. He's an ok but not great AFL footballer. If I'm to do a re-do of the 2014 draft. He's not a best 20 player available in that draft let alone the second best. Spending pick 2 remains laughable, irrespective of how many players have left and whether Weller wants to play his whole career for Gold Coast. Adam Saad who went as a rookie in that same trade and Gold Coast traded in that same offseason as they traded for Weller as a point of comparison was traded for a 2018 second round pick to Essendon. Saad is a much better player than Weller (much better kick, better 1v1, provides arguably better drive with his run) and they moved so far down the draft just to downgrade? Saad did request a trade, but Gold Coast gave up pick 2 for a guy who is worse than several of the mature agers taken that year. It's crazy stuff.

Charlie Cameron wasn’t a mature age draft pick. He was drafted as a 19 year old over ager in 2013 after playing for W.A. in the under 18 champs that year. And that’s after only playing organised footy for the first time in 2012.

 

[goBlue]

I don't agree with you that good mature agers have to go in the first round. Tom Stewart? Sam Menegola? Anthony Tipungwuti? Adam Saad? Kane Lambert? Rory Lobb? Neville Jetta?
Overages in Charlie Cameron, Tom Langdon, Tom Phillips, Toby Nankervis, Jack Steele, Jack Sinclair.

These are guys all top of mind who have provided tremendous value outside the first round 2013-2017 to give a recent sample. And all those guys are clear top 30 players and most of them are clear top 20 players from their drafts. There are a lot of them and they're all clear best 22 players on any AFL team.

Of those years you go through only 2010/2011/2015 would I not take pick 3. That's only once from 2012-2017. And that's before adding in a mature ager who may/may not better than one of those others selected which supports the point I previously made. By using up an additional list position with the two picks between 10-20, you're getting one less other player which might mean one less mature ager, or one less of another type of player depending on best available.

I agree at the end of the day that you want to maximise the quality of your best 22. You have a better best 22 than the other team. You're generally winning. But when you're a good team, you can actually have a really good best 30. And with mature agers and finding underutilised talent on other lists for cheap as a lot of was available this past offseason, I'd prioritise getting star power. Do I want Chris Judd? Or do I want Brent Reilly and Jason Gram? Give me Chris Judd every day of the week. You're not getting Judd at 3, that's a one in every 10 year pick, but Reilly and Gram are excellent choices at 12/19 also relative to the average player selected there. But absolutely give me at star. Give me the best, best 10 in the game, and with smart recruiting you can fill out those other spots if you get your Jarryd Lyons, Aaron Hall's, Tom Scully's and Daniel Menzel's. And as late/rookie picks give me my Sam Collins/Mitch Grigg/Jye Bolton/Marty Hore/Mitch Maguire/Jon Marsh/Haiden Schloithe/Ben Cavarra/Marlion Pickett/Michael Gibbons/Callum Wilkie/Will Hayes/Nick Hind/Brett Bewley types to fill those remaining list needs with all those guys able to fill list holes depending on need and I'm set.

What needs to be noted with Menzel and not enough have paid attention to this. He's almost always on the opposite side of the fwd 50m from the action - by design. That's how Geelong have set up the last few years with him in the side. And as a result, he's nowhere near the ball (by design) unless it's coming to him. So his defensive flaws have been gravely overstated. What should be noted with Menzel is that he's the only general forward in the competition to average 2+ goals per game each of the past two seasons. He's also an elite kick - both on goal and setting up teammates i50. So he's a big time asset I'd want in my best 22 on any team. Like with Lyons/Hall/Scully, Menzel is someone I consider another outright on the field starter on any team.

Scully is professional and won't be ready for the start of 2019 but when he's back, he'll be in shape and effective.

Barlow is a component to a midfield and still an able ball winner/accumulator.

Goddard is a winner and expects winning. He's temperamental, but he makes teams better. Brings versatility to the table, but at this age/stage I want him as a ball user out of defence and I'd want him barking instructions as he knows the game and can get guys in the right positions.

Lyons/Hall my opinions are well known on.

On Carlton. If I had the first pick I would have kept it to take Lukosius and I would not have made the trade for Stocker. I would also have been open to a trade with Port Adelaide though for picks 5 + 18 which I would have used for Bailey Smith (in my view a better mid than Walsh) and Riley Collier Dawkins who I would have used pick 18 on. I consider that combination better than Walsh/Stocker and it doesn't require giving up the 2019 first. But as happens, Carlton's talent ID was different to my own here, and that's going to happen as my draft board is my own and each club will have their own individual draft boards which will look different to the next.

I'd take Adelaide's midfield to West Coast's. West Coast's I look at as having less star power, less depth and being even slower. And neither midfield is quick or has a lot of x-factor. But Adelaide's in each of those areas comes out favourably for mine.
Sloane/Gibbs/M.Crouch/B.Crouch/Laird/Seedsman with Jacobs through the ruck. They're the guys who make any team better through that area.
Gaff/Yeo/Shuey/Redden with Naitanui through the ruck are the only guys from West Coast I'd give that credit to.
Sloane is the best of that group. Sloane/Gibbs/Crouch/Crouch inside is better than Yeo/Shuey/Redden. Gaff is better than Seedsman on the outside as the better endurance runner/accumulator but Seedsman shouldn't be slept on as a seriously fast outside type who provides substantial drive and makes that midfield plenty fast. I also find from a ball movement perspective it makes Adelaide's midfield look quick, as we saw in 2017 with how quickly and easily they moved it which isn't a characteristic I'd credit West Coast for with their strength more coming from their superiority in their KPP stocks, defence and defensive structures.
As for the ruck situation, Naitanui is better than Jacobs when healthy, but he has rarely been and Jacobs is better than Hickey/Vardy.

On Weller. Gold Coast flat out should not have traded for him. He's an ok but not great AFL footballer. If I'm to do a re-do of the 2014 draft. He's not a best 20 player available in that draft let alone the second best. Spending pick 2 remains laughable, irrespective of how many players have left and whether Weller wants to play his whole career for Gold Coast. Adam Saad who went as a rookie in that same trade and Gold Coast traded in that same offseason as they traded for Weller as a point of comparison was traded for a 2018 second round pick to Essendon. Saad is a much better player than Weller (much better kick, better 1v1, provides arguably better drive with his run) and they moved so far down the draft just to downgrade? Saad did request a trade, but Gold Coast gave up pick 2 for a guy who is worse than several of the mature agers taken that year. It's crazy stuff.

Lukosius seems like a great prospect, but with our forward line already filled up it would be poor list management to draft him. We have C Curno, Mckay, Mcgovern, J SOS and Kerr all fighting for similar spots. I believe taking a midfielder was the best option for Carlton, and Walsh was the best prospect so im happy with how it all played out. I'm not too sure about Stocker didnt really see much of him, however his kicking skills seem to be amazing from contests and i love people who can kick under pressure.

 

[Knightmare]

Cha
Charlie Cameron wasn’t a mature age draft pick. He was drafted as a 19 year old over ager in 2013 after playing for W.A. in the under 18 champs that year. And that’s after only playing organised footy for the first time in 2012.

I listed Cameron as an overager. The context I bring Cameron and other overagers up is they're incredibly relevant in the same way as other mature agers in that there are drafts past they could have been had.

Lukosius seems like a great prospect, but with our forward line already filled up it would be poor list management to draft him. We have C Curno, Mckay, Mcgovern, J SOS and Kerr all fighting for similar spots. I believe taking a midfielder was the best option for Carlton, and Walsh was the best prospect so im happy with how it all played out. I'm not too sure about Stocker didnt really see much of him, however his kicking skills seem to be amazing from contests and i love people who can kick under pressure.

Lukosius is the best prospect I've seen in my 10 years following the u18s. He's Nick Riewoldt with a sweeter kick. He's special.

He's someone Carlton could have taken and cut half of the other KPPs.

Build with Lukosius/Curnow/McKay/Weitering/Marchbank/Plowman/McGovern. Cut all the other KPPs. It's a position where you want those spots filled with the cream, but cut the fat. KPPs who can't play are list cloggers and those positions need to be filled up with ballers with the capacity to earn best 22 positions in other spots to improve your team.

Walsh and Stocker can both play. Walsh has the endurance - finds plenty of it inside/outside he'll be terrific and probably the best first year player while Stocker can really win it and as you say can kick and actually moves pretty well. From my position, it's just a case of picking Walsh is suboptimal when Lukosius/Rankine/Smith are all available and better and trading for Stocker is suboptimal when there are some excellent top end guys in this years draft and had I had that pick Riley Collier-Dawkins rather than Stocker is that special player. For more context on why I talk about Walsh and Stocker as good players but not the right choices. Lukosius best in 10 years, Rankine best in three, Smith the best midfielder in the last three years. Collier-Dawkins has an awful lot of Bontempelli to him and while not dominant like that can be terrific in his own right.

Other than taking Lukoisus. I would have considered trading pick 1 and 2019 first round pick for picks 2, 3 and 6 = Lukosius/Rankine/Smith if that was on the table so that I can get those I consider the three best in the pool and extremely special players. But there is no scenario I'm passing up Lukosius.

It's like if you get Pavlich. You have KPPs? Play him through the midfield. You draft Nick Riewoldt. You've got key forwards? Put him on a wing or forward flank.

Lukosius can play anywhere. KPP. 3rd tall. Flanker. Wing. You can fit him in and he doesn't make you too tall as he's an elite runner who actually creates space for the talls and gives them best in draft level delivery by foot to make them better. He'd be on my shortlist if you asked me - any player in the AFL you can have - who you got? I'm taking Brodie Grundy, but I'm not sure Lukosius isn't that second guy if I'm to make such a list.

 

[goBlue]

I listed Cameron as an overager. The context I bring Cameron and other overagers up is they're incredibly relevant in the same way as other mature agers in that there are drafts past they could have been had.



Lukosius is the best prospect I've seen in my 10 years following the u18s. He's Nick Riewoldt with a sweeter kick. He's special.

He's someone Carlton could have taken and cut half of the other KPPs.

Build with Lukosius/Curnow/McKay/Weitering/Marchbank/Plowman/McGovern. Cut all the other KPPs. It's a position where you want those spots filled with the cream, but cut the fat. KPPs who can't play are list cloggers and those positions need to be filled up with ballers with the capacity to earn best 22 positions in other spots to improve your team.

Walsh and Stocker can both play. Walsh has the endurance - finds plenty of it inside/outside he'll be terrific and probably the best first year player while Stocker can really win it and as you say can kick and actually moves pretty well. From my position, it's just a case of picking Walsh is suboptimal when Lukosius/Rankine/Smith are all available and better and trading for Stocker is suboptimal when there are some excellent top end guys in this years draft and had I had that pick Riley Collier-Dawkins rather than Stocker is that special player. For more context on why I talk about Walsh and Stocker as good players but not the right choices. Lukosius best in 10 years, Rankine best in three, Smith the best midfielder in the last three years. Collier-Dawkins has an awful lot of Bontempelli to him and while not dominant like that can be terrific in his own right.

Other than taking Lukoisus. I would have considered trading pick 1 and 2019 first round pick for picks 2, 3 and 6 = Lukosius/Rankine/Smith if that was on the table so that I can get those I consider the three best in the pool and extremely special players. But there is no scenario I'm passing up Lukosius.

It's like if you get Pavlich. You have KPPs? Play him through the midfield. You draft Nick Riewoldt. You've got key forwards? Put him on a wing or forward flank.

Lukosius can play anywhere. KPP. 3rd tall. Flanker. Wing. You can fit him in and he doesn't make you too tall as he's an elite runner who actually creates space for the talls and gives them best in draft level delivery by foot to make them better. He'd be on my shortlist if you asked me - any player in the AFL you can have - who you got? I'm taking Brodie Grundy, but I'm not sure Lukosius isn't that second guy if I'm to make such a list.

I understand he is one of the best prospects in a long time. However what is Carlton lacking....
Midfielders! not talls. We have to show loyalty in our guys, we cant just replace Mcgovern with Lukosius.

Also, with Lukosius we would have to wait 3-5 years for development and to overtake some of the guys who are playing in his position. He isnt as strong as the other guys, he will just get pushed over. Mids take less time and as Walsh already has a huge tank it with lesson the developing time.

In addition, we probably chose against Collier-Dawkins due to trading in Setterfield who has a way higher ceiling and is probably closer to bontempelli than collier dawkins. Setterfield is that tall 191 midfielder who can break games open, why do we need another?

I love the look of Rankine, does he have the work ethic though. We'll find out.
Smith seems to only have a football life. Where other 18 yr olds aren't really putting 100% into getting drafted he did. Everything from his diet to training hours a day. Whereas, Walsh and Stocker's talent is still untapped and can improve significantly.

Im not gonna lie Lukosius looks incredible but its not what Carlton needs.

 

[Knightmare]

I understand he is one of the best prospects in a long time. However what is Carlton lacking....
Midfielders! not talls. We have to show loyalty in our guys, we cant just replace Mcgovern with Lukosius.

Also, with Lukosius we would have to wait 3-5 years for development and to overtake some of the guys who are playing in his position. He isnt as strong as the other guys, he will just get pushed over. Mids take less time and as Walsh already has a huge tank it with lesson the developing time.

In addition, we probably chose against Collier-Dawkins due to trading in Setterfield who has a way higher ceiling and is probably closer to bontempelli than collier dawkins. Setterfield is that tall 191 midfielder who can break games open, why do we need another?

I love the look of Rankine, does he have the work ethic though. We'll find out.
Smith seems to only have a football life. Where other 18 yr olds aren't really putting 100% into getting drafted he did. Everything from his diet to training hours a day. Whereas, Walsh and Stocker's talent is still untapped and can improve significantly.

Im not gonna lie Lukosius looks incredible but its not what Carlton needs.

If a club has a positional need. Trade/free agency is the period to fill those needs. Skip out on a McGovern and get Jarryd Lyons/Aaron Hall/Tom Scully.

It's like if you go back to the 2000 AFL Draft. Nick Riewoldt is in the draft and Alan Didak is seen as the best midfielder. Who are you take? I'm going Nick Riewoldt every day - even if my squad is stacked with KPPs. And knowing that, I'm making trades around that planning.

On Lukosius, he can play this year. On debut in 2017 in the SANFL League finals he kicked four goals and he's been playing at the level all through 2018. Put him either end, on a flank, wing. He's good to go. As with other KPPs, it will probably take until roughly his fourth year to enter his prime, but that's hardly problematic with the best KPPs able to last into their mid 30s anyway.

Setterfield is fantastic and I liked that trade by Carlton. Injuries permitting he can be a player. I'm not sure given his injury history (including juniors before the AFL) that I would bet on Setterfield over Collier-Dawkins. If Setterfield never gets hurt again, I'd go that way, but with that element of uncertainty around that, I'll go the guy who is more likely to be available and as a result higher probability to develop.

On Smith, I don't look at his upside as being nearly maxed out or even limited. I evaluate upside based on rate of improvement or lack of improvement. If at 15/16 you're the same guy at 18/19, it's unlikely much is going to change. If you're improving year-on-year, the probability is further improvement is to come. And all the guys we're talking about are improving so they're all set to continue to improve injuries permitting and development programs, leadership groups and coaching doing their jobs at their respective clubs. From an attribute standpoint I consider Smith favourable to Walsh as a better stoppage player/contested ball winner but also a much more explosive runner and better kick. He's the professional of the draft who wants it most, so he probably puts in the most work. But with that combination of attributes, I look at his scope to grow as more favourable to that of Walsh.

 

[briztoon]

I listed Cameron as an overager. The context I bring Cameron and other overagers up is they're incredibly relevant in the same way as other mature agers in that there are drafts past they could have been had.

I relation to your discussion, I don’t believe there’s any comparison between a Charlie Cameron, compared to a Will Kelly or any of the other mature age recruites that have 3 or 4 or more years in the VFL or WAFL, etc.

Just on Brisbane’s list of recent draftees, may as well include Cedric Cox and Noah Answerth as mature age recruits because they were drafted as 19 year olds, when it’s clear neither are considered as a mature age recruit by the club.

Same with Charlie Cameron, he was drafted as project 19 year old with one year of senior school footy experience and a year of WAFL experience.

That’s why Cameron played the U18 Champs as a 19 year old over ager, so recruiters could get a better look at him in context of where his development was compared to his physical gifts.

Which is also why he went in the rookie draft.

 

[Richo83]

I don't agree with you that good mature agers have to go in the first round. Tom Stewart? Sam Menegola? Anthony Tipungwuti? Adam Saad? Kane Lambert? Rory Lobb? Neville Jetta?
Overages in Charlie Cameron, Tom Langdon, Tom Phillips, Toby Nankervis, Jack Steele, Jack Sinclair.

I didn't mean no good overager goes late, obviously the rookie draft is full of them. My point is Carlton's draft strategy allows them an extra pick of elite talent in the first round, they can pick state leagers later.

Here's the difference between the two possible routes:

1. They keep the pick, they pick up a gun midfielder

2. They trade the pick, draft Stocker who will be a useful midfield rotation and use the likely low to mid tens pick to fill another hole in their list, like say drafting a decent medium forward or a ruckman.

They'd then use the later picks to draft mature agers and kids anyway. You seem to be suggesting that Carlton should stockpile early picks and then keep picks in the later rounds for... what I'm guessing is mature agers. The reason why Carlton didn't draft Lambert (a rookie selection) is because they picked another rookie, not because of a trade.

Trading in that pick likely doesn't mean their capacity to pick state leaguers and mature agers is diminished, in reality, it means they have to delist one extra (not hard to find a Carlton player who needs delisting) and they pick Stocker and say another midfielder in the tens.

Of those years you go through only 2010/2011/2015 would I not take pick 3. That's only once from 2012-2017. And that's before adding in a mature ager who may/may not better than one of those others selected which supports the point I previously made. By using up an additional list position with the two picks between 10-20, you're getting one less other player which might mean one less mature ager, or one less of another type of player depending on best available.

Again, why can't they add a mature ager later? Plus, you seem to argue that the state leaguer will be a good pick. The state leager pick will be later (and they've kept their later picks anyway) or be a free agent, which tend to be scraps anyway.

I'd take Acres over Billings. Acres actually has a midfield game, whereas Billings hasn't developed much since his school years. He's exciting, he has x-factor, he's sexy. He's also really inconsistent and struggles under any pressure.

I agree at the end of the day that you want to maximise the quality of your best 22. You have a better best 22 than the other team. You're generally winning. But when you're a good team, you can actually have a really good best 30. And with mature agers and finding underutilised talent on other lists for cheap as a lot of was available this past offseason, I'd prioritise getting star power. Do I want Chris Judd? Or do I want Brent Reilly and Jason Gram? Give me Chris Judd every day of the week. You're not getting Judd at 3, that's a one in every 10 year pick, but Reilly and Gram are excellent choices at 12/19 also relative to the average player selected there. But absolutely give me at star. Give me the best, best 10 in the game, and with smart recruiting you can fill out those other spots if you get your Jarryd Lyons, Aaron Hall's, Tom Scully's and Daniel Menzel's. And as late/rookie picks give me my Sam Collins/Mitch Grigg/Jye Bolton/Marty Hore/Mitch Maguire/Jon Marsh/Haiden Schloithe/Ben Cavarra/Marlion Pickett/Michael Gibbons/Callum Wilkie/Will Hayes/Nick Hind/Brett Bewley types to fill those remaining list needs with all those guys able to fill list holes depending on need and I'm set.

IMO they're not fair comparisons, Judd is arguably among the best three players in the past 20 years.

I think the other problem is you're just looking at pick value maximisation. Carlton know however that they need a group of kids coming through to support the star picks and ensure they're not wasted by having a team full of early picks and duds.

What needs to be noted with Menzel and not enough have paid attention to this. He's almost always on the opposite side of thgre fwd 50m from the action - by design. That's how Geelong have set up the last few years with him in the side. And as a result, he's nowhere near the ball (by design) unless it's coming to him. So his defensive flaws have been gravely overstated. What should be noted with Menzel is that he's the only general forward in the competition to average 2+ goals per game each of the past two seasons. He's also an elite kick - both on goal and setting up teammates i50. So he's a big time asset I'd want in my best 22 on any team. Like with Lyons/Hall/Scully, Menzel is someone I consider another outright on the field starter on any team.

Great, so Menzel stays away from the ball a lot, how is he supposed to get the footy in a team which has one of the poorest forward transitions in the league? He needs to be fed the ball, which wont happen in a bad side.

Scully is professional and won't be ready for the start of 2019 but when he's back, he'll be in shape and effective.

Barlow is a component to a midfield and still an able ball winner/accumulator.

Goddard is a winner and expects winning. He's temperamental, but he makes teams better. Brings versatility to the table, but at this age/stage I want him as a ball user out of defence and I'd want him barking instructions as he knows the game and can get guys in the right positions.

Lyons/Hall my opinions are well known on.[/QUOTE]

Scully is maybe a missed opportunity, but I suspect a lot of teams were worried about his injury history. Barlow at this stage is a journeyman who would be taking a spot of a kid. Goddard has a habit of trying too much and not putting in effort then going off at everyone else. Eh.

On Carlton. If I had the first pick I would have kept it to take Lukosius and I would not have made the trade for Stocker. I would also have been open to a trade with Port Adelaide though for picks 5 + 18 which I would have used for Bailey Smith (in my view a better mid than Walsh) and Riley Collier Dawkins who I would have used pick 18 on. I consider that combination better than Walsh/Stocker and it doesn't require giving up the 2019 first. But as happens, Carlton's talent ID was different to my own here, and that's going to happen as my draft board is my own and each club will have their own individual draft boards which will look different to the next.

I think the fact that you would have liked a Port trade down shows that you're against Carlton's trade not because of the strategy but because of the kids picked and passed up on. Which I get, but we need to wait until we see how these kids will play.

I'd take Adelaide's midfield to West Coast's. West Coast's I look at as having less star power, less depth and being even slower. And neither midfield is quick or has a lot of x-factor. But Adelaide's in each of those areas comes out favourably for mine.
Sloane/Gibbs/M.Crouch/B.Crouch/Laird/Seedsman with Jacobs through the ruck. They're the guys who make any team better through that area.
Gaff/Yeo/Shuey/Redden with Naitanui through the ruck are the only guys from West Coast I'd give that credit to.
Sloane is the best of that group. Sloane/Gibbs/Crouch/Crouch inside is better than Yeo/Shuey/Redden. Gaff is better than Seedsman on the outside as the better endurance runner/accumulator but Seedsman shouldn't be slept on as a seriously fast outside type who provides substantial drive and makes that midfield plenty fast. I also find from a ball movement perspective it makes Adelaide's midfield look quick, as we saw in 2017 with how quickly and easily they moved it which isn't a characteristic I'd credit West Coast for with their strength more coming from their superiority in their KPP stocks, defence and defensive structures.
As for the ruck situation, Naitanui is better than Jacobs when healthy, but he has rarely been and Jacobs is better than Hickey/Vardy.

You're sleeping on Hutchings who improved on this season as well as Sheed, making them a better contested ball team.

Rich I like in defence personally. Obviously you get all the offence, elite kicking and scoring that starts from his boot. But he's an elite ground ball winner by position. Wins his 1v1s. He's really good there.

And yet he didn't finish in the top ten of the lions' best and fairest. This is the problem with champion data, it recognises the offensive aspect of the game and ignores the defensive aspect which isn't as well measured by stats as it involves positioning and providing help which aren't statistically measured or provided. I've also noticed that AFL player ratings doesn't rate him very highly.

Sinclair is another where if you watch him, he's an effective footballer. I wouldn't go as far as saying he was the best wingman in the game in 2017 as Champion Data said, but he's a very well rounded player who pressures like crazy, can win it win it's his turn, has some speed and uses it well. Could find more of it but he's a really good footballer.

I find with Champion Data they overlook a lot of guys I'd consider elite - not rating contested ball winning as highly as I do as they're more about loose ball winning - and I agree that's an even more useful metric and should be publicly available on all players. But there isn't a guy Champion Data would come out saying is elite where I'd say - nuh, that guy is a scrub. They point out a lot of players who are gravely underappreciated and have a lot more game than they're given credit for.

Sinclair doesn't kick any goals, doesn't get much of the ball or put it into 50 that much. I don't think CD calls scrubs stars, but I think it obsesses over some stats without looking at the bigger picture. A wingman needs to be more influential on the game than Sinclair, who had eight games of 20 disposals or less last year. And it often ignores defensive efforts.

 

[Christou2Kouta]

I think the main points of contention come down to the fact that SOS and team clearly rated Walsh and Stocker higher than you did, which determined that their draft strategy would differ from you.

We’ll find out in due course whether they made the right call but there’s no doubt you were clear with your opinions from the outset and can justifiably say “I told you so” in the event it goes pear shaped for Carlton.

In the meantime, it’s been pleasing to read how impressive Walsh has been in the preseason so far and he should no doubt be favourite for the rising star award. It’s also encouraging to see how Stocker has been able to make improvements with his endurance thanks to a customized training plan from Russell. When he gets up to speed I’m sure he’ll make a positive impact too.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Knightmare]

I didn't mean no good overager goes late, obviously the rookie draft is full of them. My point is Carlton's draft strategy allows them an extra pick of elite talent in the first round, they can pick state leagers later.

Here's the difference between the two possible routes:

1. They keep the pick, they pick up a gun midfielder

2. They trade the pick, draft Stocker who will be a useful midfield rotation and use the likely low to mid tens pick to fill another hole in their list, like say drafting a decent medium forward or a ruckman.

They'd then use the later picks to draft mature agers and kids anyway. You seem to be suggesting that Carlton should stockpile early picks and then keep picks in the later rounds for... what I'm guessing is mature agers. The reason why Carlton didn't draft Lambert (a rookie selection) is because they picked another rookie, not because of a trade.

Trading in that pick likely doesn't mean their capacity to pick state leaguers and mature agers is diminished, in reality, it means they have to delist one extra (not hard to find a Carlton player who needs delisting) and they pick Stocker and say another midfielder in the tens.



Again, why can't they add a mature ager later? Plus, you seem to argue that the state leaguer will be a good pick. The state leager pick will be later (and they've kept their later picks anyway) or be a free agent, which tend to be scraps anyway.

I'd take Acres over Billings. Acres actually has a midfield game, whereas Billings hasn't developed much since his school years. He's exciting, he has x-factor, he's sexy. He's also really inconsistent and struggles under any pressure.



IMO they're not fair comparisons, Judd is arguably among the best three players in the past 20 years.

I think the other problem is you're just looking at pick value maximisation. Carlton know however that they need a group of kids coming through to support the star picks and ensure they're not wasted by having a team full of early picks and duds.



Great, so Menzel stays away from the ball a lot, how is he supposed to get the footy in a team which has one of the poorest forward transitions in the league? He needs to be fed the ball, which wont happen in a bad side.



Scully is maybe a missed opportunity, but I suspect a lot of teams were worried about his injury history. Barlow at this stage is a journeyman who would be taking a spot of a kid. Goddard has a habit of trying too much and not putting in effort then going off at everyone else. Eh.



I think the fact that you would have liked a Port trade down shows that you're against Carlton's trade not because of the strategy but because of the kids picked and passed up on. Which I get, but we need to wait until we see how these kids will play.



You're sleeping on Hutchings who improved on this season as well as Sheed, making them a better contested ball team.



And yet he didn't finish in the top ten of the lions' best and fairest. This is the problem with champion data, it recognises the offensive aspect of the game and ignores the defensive aspect which isn't as well measured by stats as it involves positioning and providing help which aren't statistically measured or provided. I've also noticed that AFL player ratings doesn't rate him very highly.



Sinclair doesn't kick any goals, doesn't get much of the ball or put it into 50 that much. I don't think CD calls scrubs stars, but I think it obsesses over some stats without looking at the bigger picture. A wingman needs to be more influential on the game than Sinclair, who had eight games of 20 disposals or less last year. And it often ignores defensive efforts.

Outside the top 10. You're not getting sure things. 11-20. There might only be 2 in that range who are great players, and another 2-3 good players you'd want. But then you'll have another 3 who don't make it at all and another 2 who are there for a short while but don't become fixtures in a team. That's the dynamic of the range.

That's not saying top 3 there aren't misses. But the probability is greater more years than not with 2012 the exception - though that year the clubs with the top picks weren't paying attention with Grundy/Wines/Macrae/Stringer clearly better than O'Rourke/Plowman.

In the draft you want picks in the points of relative value. Top 3. Top 7. Top 11. Top 20. We had those brackets in last years draft and then from there it's pretty open. And generally of more value is a top 3 pick by comparison to two picks outside the top 10.

If it's me picking last year. It's Lukosius or bust. The best outcome would have been moving Carlton's pick 1, pick 66 and 2019 first pick for picks 2/3/6 = Lukosius/Rankine/Smith. They're not missing out on midfielders doing that and it's maximising the quality you're getting in the door. Carlton actually have pretty decent numbers of midfielders with a lot of good young ones so I reject the notion Walsh or Stocker were needs. General forwards/general defenders are where they're relatively more deficient.
Having a midfield group including Smith - adding to Dow/Murphy/SPS/O'Brien/Kennedy/Cripps/Docherty/Fisher/Curnow/Setterfield. That's a plenty deep group with more than enough quality, even if an O'Brien doesn't make it or a Setterfield can't get healthy. It's just a group that need more time developing together.

I've got Billings comfortably ahead of Acres. He's unquestionably achieved a lot more to date. Acres had his first good season this year and it was injury interrupted. Billings needs to improve his contested ball winning and reliability in front of goal, but his ball use is much better while Acres' ball use needs to improve further. If I'm doing a re-do of that draft. Acres is appropriate for selection somewhere 15-25, Billings 5-15 to give some broad ranges for a rough feel. And I was Acres' biggest fan going into that draft but as you see them play for 5 years at AFL level evaluations have to evolve and move past that point of what you thought of them when drafted and Acres' skills both by hand and foot still leave something to be desired.

The role Menzel played for Geelong is the role he was asked to play - rather than what he would view as his ideal role. His manager in a piece some time ago following the delisting went into depth about this and was spot on. There is huge value in any 2 goal per game forward who is one of the best kicks in the game both on goal and i50.

Hutchings and Sheed are low level components at this stage who can play at AFL level but aren't walkup starters on every team. Hutchings can tag and find some footy but is vanilla, doesn't kick goals and is low impact per possession. Sheed had a great last month to the season but should be embarrassed by his tackle numbers (33 in 18 games as a midfielder is worse than any other mid I can think of top of mind) and needs to increase his scoreboard impact. Sheed I wager still has more growth in him, but he needs to continue to improve as one of West Coast's few midfielders with the scope to do so.

Champion Data rate Sinclair on the back of his defensive efforts - rating him largely for his pressure in combination with his by position capability to win his own ball - ball use going forward then speed. He's mostly well rounded. I agree he would be better if he found more of the ball and kicked more goals. But I look at him as a very effective player still. Certainly a clear top 10 player on St Kilda's list by my estimations. Wouldn't be far off top 5. Though the list is fairly baron at the moment outside of their better roughly 10.

I think the main points of contention come down to the fact that SOS and team clearly rated Walsh and Stocker higher than you did, which determined that their draft strategy would differ from you.

We’ll find out in due course whether they made the right call but there’s no doubt you were clear with your opinions from the outset and can justifiably say “I told you so” in the event it goes pear shaped for Carlton.

In the meantime, it’s been pleasing to read how impressive Walsh has been in the preseason so far and he should no doubt be favourite for the rising star award. It’s also encouraging to see how Stocker has been able to make improvements with his endurance thanks to a customized training plan from Russell. When he gets up to speed I’m sure he’ll make a positive impact too.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Absolutely methodology comes down to player evaluation and with Carlton's evaluation of talent, that determined their decision making as with any club. And it's going to be the same with any club where I'll look at almost every selection and say - no, I liked this guy more there. And if you're doing your own talent ID that is what should be happening.

As for the rising star. I see it being pretty open. If Bailey Smith had an uninterrupted preseason, I feel like he would have had a stronger first season a better midfielder than Walsh but with the interruption Walsh may have the better first season. Rankine/Setterfield/D.Fogarty/LDU/Bonar/Lukosius I can see all also contending of those that come to me top of mind with a lot of variables going into how well each of them perform this season. It's pretty open, but Walsh should poll well and have a strong first season. I don't think anyone is questioning that.

 

[Cleric]

As I mentioned above, there were extenuating circumstances to Lyons being delisted.

Lyons was only delisted by Gold Coast because he asked to be delisted and forego his final contract year. That's because he already had an agreement in place with Brisbane before requesting to be delisted.

No agreement with Brisbane, and Lyons doesn't ask to be delisted and is not a delisted free agent this summer. And instead plays out 2019 in the Suns NEAFL team.


This has been verified by both Noble and Lyons in interviews and on the Lions podcast.


That's why I said using Jarryd Lyons is a poor example, because he was not a true delisted pickup in the context of your discussion. Even on the Brisbane Lions BF board, it was reported that Jarryd Lyons was coming to Brisbane two days before the Sun delisted him.

Lyons wasnt delisted due to lack of spread. It was a conflict with Dew. He wasnt the only player to leave due to Dew.