Player Watch Lachie Schultz

[stormskye]

I want to see him celebrate to the crowd and have all the Hawks get around him when he lays his first tackle in Brown and Gold. What round do you think it'll be?

I hope he tries to tackle quaynor

 

[Copeland]

I suspect we likely would have drafted a player in the same mould as Lachie Schultz with the first rounder we traded, and unless we finish bottom four this year, which I personally think is unlikely, then getting a player of Schultz’s quality would’ve been good return from that pick. He’ll probably play at least 100 games in the black and white.

It’s along those lines that I don’t reckon us losing our first rounder this year is the absolute end of the world, as some have made out. I do think we should hang onto our draft stocks now from this point out, but Schultz was actually decent list management still, IMO.

That remains to be seen. Do you really think we would take a small forward with a top ten pick who cant improve us immediately?

 

[windchimes]

That remains to be seen. Do you really think we would take a small forward with a top ten pick who cant improve us immediately?

Why do you assume we’ll have a top 10 pick?

Personally I suspect we’ll come good (to whatever extent that may be) and then if you factor in F/S and NGA picks it’s highly unlikely the pick will go in the top 10, and therefore improbable we were going to draft the next JUH or Serong with it.

I think it’s highly likely the pick will be in the teens and if Dekka still had it under his belt he’d draft another Di-Mattia, HH or Beau type in that selection range. Schultz is much more of a sure thing to improve us in the next five years than a something teen-th draft pick, but time will tell. That said, we should start looking to retain our first round picks from this point out.

 

[Spiral_Out]

Top 5-10% of hardest position in the league... Wow!

Out of interest, how do you rate Hill and Elliott?

You clearly don't watch enough footy.


Here are some numbers to help you understand what elite numbers look like vs Hill/Elliott and just how good Schultz was in 2023, I've put them in a rough order:



Greene - 24 Games | 426 Touches | 60 Tackles | 66 Goals 35 Behinds

Cameron - 26 Games | 257 Touches | 76 Tackles | 59 Goals 27 Behinds

Bolton - 23 Games | 500 Touches | 70 Tackles | 31 Goals 29 Behinds

Schultz - 23 Games | 365 Touches | 95 Tackles | 33 Goals 19 Behinds

Pickett - 23 Games | 265 Touches | 93 Tackles | 37 Goals 30 Behinds

Rankine - 20 Games | 318 Touches | 64 Tackles | 36 Goals 27 Behinds

Elliott - 24 Games | 271 Touches | 70 Tackles | 39 Goals 28 Behinds

Papley - 23 Games | 344 Touches | 42 Tackles | 37 Goals 24 Behinds

Compared to Hill

Hill - 24 Games | 247 Touches | 56 Tackles | 33 Goals 14 Behinds




Breust in his day was elite, his numbers were better than Hill in 2023, Weightman is similar numbers to Hill, Stengle had an elite year in 2022, had a down year in 2023 but his numbers were still comparable to Hill from his 19 games.


So in answer to your question, these numbers are roughly how I would rate Elliott and Hill vs Schultz and the rest, Elliott and Schultz very similar yet different players, one can jump and mark better but the other can hunt and snap better, while Hill is not on their level, he is still young (even though Bolton, Rankine, Weightman, Pickett and Stengle are still young) he needs more size imo but that's where Schultz and McCreery compliment him.

Hill is still outside that top tier bracket of small forwards, had a lucky GF with things going his way and the team was up and about, but when things aren't flowing, as you can see from the first 3 games, players like Hill can go missing while the elite of his position, Greene, Cameron, Bolton, Schultz/Elliott, they find a way to inject themselves into the contest because they are bigger bodied, through experience and sheer f****** will.

 

[gouki88]

"What we agreed to"? Mate I have no idea what you're trying to agree to as you keep moving the goal posts. You went from rating Schultz as a top 15% small forward to taking issue at comparing him against medium forwards that mark and hybrid forwards that can do everything to then having to include a massive list of "medium forwards" to rank him against to now stating you're only looking at the last 2 seasons even though half that list was only drafted in the last 2 seasons

At this point I get it. You're just too embarrassed to admit you can't back up your top 15% elite claim and your fragile ego can't handle it so I'll save you from further embarrassment and stop calling you out.

On a separate note, Cody Weightman looked pretty good today with a gamebreaking 6 goals. I look forward to Schultz playing way better for us given he's obviously on another tier. You should probably go on the Main Board and remind everyone that Shultz is elite whilst Weightman shouldn't even be discussed on the same level as him.

You might want to slow down and read posts before firing off replies. It's made difficult by all of your posts being so disagreeable for so many I suppose.

What 'we agreed to' was the trade... quite obviously so, given it was the same sentence. Reading comprehension strikes again.

I've already given you my list. 7 small forwards categorically better than Schultz, another handful in the conversation for the next spots.

I am quite glad that people like you, who seemingly judge players in their entirety based off one game, have no voice in our front office. Why would I give a s**t what people on the main board think? Is that supposed to be some genuine marketplace of ideas? Come off it

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

The difference between Schultz and all of those players is their hamstrings, every single player you mentioned previously had issues with their hamstrings before joining us.

Every. Single. One.

Treloar played 90 something games with us and would have played well over 100 if he wasn't a greedy grub like Grundy.
We gave up 2 first round picks and got a second round back for Treloar.....

Schultz has literally never even had an injury, touch wood.

He will play until he's 32ish, 6 seasons @ average of 20 games = 120 games

He's in the top 5-10% of the hardest position in the league and will play 100 games, if that's not worth what we gave up then wtf is, people think you can give up picks in the 30's for someone like Schultz who is in their prime? lol

Do you think it was the player asking for money or the club offering it? Or Treloar's manager acting independently in his client's interest? If Treloar hadn't been put on big money would he have walked to another club rather than declare his only wish was to play with Collingwood? Was he given the chance to cut back his salary and stay or was the money awarded untouchable? The circumstances of the time elude me.

 

[Ugene41]

You might want to slow down and read posts before firing off replies. It's made difficult by all of your posts being so disagreeable for so many I suppose.

What 'we agreed to' was the trade... quite obviously so, given it was the same sentence. Reading comprehension strikes again.

I've already given you my list. 7 small forwards categorically better than Schultz, another handful in the conversation for the next spots.

I am quite glad that people like you, who seemingly judge players in their entirety based off one game, have no voice in our front office. Why would I give a s**t what people on the main board think? Is that supposed to be some genuine marketplace of ideas? Come off it

LOL the irony of accusing me of judging players off one game after taking issue that I was using career averages in my previous post.

If you slowed down to read, you might have noticed I never said Weightman was better because of that one game. I just said I'm looking forward to Schultz delivering much better games for us in the future given he's on another level as a forward than Weightman.

But you know what, it's clear my opinions on Schultz are wrong given you and Spiral's insistence that he's an elite top 8-10 small forward in the competition. I've been critical of the trade cost so far but not of Schultz as he's been playing his role like I expected, providing some pressure and chipping in with a goal or two. But you've now made me realise how underwhelming his performances have been given he's an elite foward. He needs to be a matchwinner and our main main in the forwardline given we have no other forwards that can be rated top 10 in the competition, especially with Elliott on his last legs.

I'll be sure to judge his performances accordingly in the future.

 

[jathanas]

Why do you assume we’ll have a top 10 pick?

Personally I suspect we’ll come good (to whatever extent that may be) and then if you factor in F/S and NGA picks it’s highly unlikely the pick will go in the top 10, and therefore improbable we were going to draft the next JUH or Serong with it.

I think it’s highly likely the pick will be in the teens and if Dekka still had it under his belt he’d draft another Di-Mattia, HH or Beau type in that selection range. Schultz is much more of a sure thing to improve us in the next five years than a something teen-th draft pick, but time will tell. That said, we should start looking to retain our first round picks from this point out.

I agree that our first round pick in '25 is very unlikely to be in the top 10. This should not be stated as fact, it's a stretch to propose this 3 rounds in.

 

[Roverjg]

Do you think it was the player asking for money or the club offering it? Or Treloar's manager acting independently in his client's interest? If Treloar hadn't been put on big money would he have walked to another club rather than declare his only wish was to play with Collingwood? Was he given the chance to cut back his salary and stay or was the money awarded untouchable? The circumstances of the time elude me.

On multiple occasions the club went to Treloar and asked him if they could alter his payments (reduce yearly payments but extend his contract to accommodate other players). By doing so Treloar's contract became too big over 5 years for the club to accommodate because they gad done the same to several others and by doing so we wouldbe in breach of the salary cap. This was on the club not Treloar who only tried to help the club

On SM-N975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[jathanas]

On multiple occasions the club went to Treloar and asked him if they could alter his payments (reduce yearly payments but extend his contract to accommodate other players). By doing so Treloar's contract became too big over 5 years for the club to accommodate because they gad done the same to several others and by doing so we wouldbe in breach of the salary cap. This was on the club not Treloar who only tried to help the club

On SM-N975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Correct, Treloar is a good egg.

Not a proud moment for any club when good people have to be offloaded due to bad financial management.

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

Correct, Treloar is a good egg.

Not a proud moment for any club when good people have to be offloaded due to bad financial management.

Nah the offloading was fine.
Its a professional environment.
Treloar still got his contract.
Its now a common thing to do.

Its the risk a player takes by accepting a large contract.

The way we went about it was the horrendous part.
Compared to the way we did the same thing with Grundy......

 

[Roverjg]

Nah the offloading was fine.
Its a professional environment.
Treloar still got his contract.
Its now a common thing to do.

Its the risk a player takes by accepting a large contract.

The way we went about it was the horrendous part.
Compared to the way we did the same thing with Grundy......

I was happy for him to be traded. However not the manner in which it was done. It was acknowledged by some players that Buckley lost them as a result of the club's handling of it and possibly in part contributed to the train wreck of 2021

On SM-N975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[sam_e]

Nah the offloading was fine.
Its a professional environment.
Treloar still got his contract.
Its now a common thing to do.

Its the risk a player takes by accepting a large contract.

The way we went about it was the horrendous part.
Compared to the way we did the same thing with Grundy......

The point is, Treloar could have refused to restructure the contract /payments he already had with us and the club may very well breached the salary cap. He didn’t, he acquiesced more than once.

The other point is, he could have refused to go to the Dogs given he had years to run on his contract. It took some less than transparent /honest discussions by the then coach, to destroy trust & uproot him.

Lots of clubs move players on, none are quite as inept in their management of the cap and/or panic handling of players as a consequence.

 

[SchuPie]

general Qs

• Was he coming home no matter what at end of 2023 (traded or not)?
• was there a risk of another team taking him (would Freo have accepted a lower offer from another team?)
• if he was coming home no matter what, wouldn’t Freo have accepted whatever they could get?
• if he was prepared to stay if a trade couldn’t be facilitated, would it not have been more prudent to grab him as FA at the end of 2024?
• did we feel we couldn’t win flag without him in 2024?

Edit: genuinely asking - I don’t know the answers

 

[loki04]

The point is, Treloar could have refused to restructure the contract /payments he already had with us and the club may very well breached the salary cap. He didn’t, he acquiesced more than once.

The other point is, he could have refused to go to the Dogs given he had years to run on his contract. It took some less than transparent /honest discussions by the then coach, to destroy trust & uproot him.

Lots of clubs move players on, none are quite as inept in their management of the cap and/or panic handling of players as a consequence.

Which Buckley was directed to do from above.

 

[Gone Critical]

First round players do play early. The actual “first” round players that everyone associates with a first round pick. They are those selected in the top 10. Outside that, the talent drops off a cliff and they take longer, if at all. Generally, there are exceptions obviously. Which is why I don’t believe in this “first round pick” hype. Especially with academy, fs, NGA, diluting it even more

The truth of it is good players play early. This is a super strong rule and its applies almost as strongly to good talls as well. Best way I find to check this out is to scroll through Draft Guru https://www.draftguru.com.au/ and look at the last 10 drafts from say 2021 and check out the players you rate and look when they played.

No 1 pick is clearly the best pick, but top 5 super strong. top 10 strong also but it doesn't drop off a cliff there. 11-20 is clearly better than what comes after that but there isnt much difference between picks ibn the 20's , 30's and 40's. That makes sense becasue ability is a pyramid and the top kids are just better but then it gets harder to separate.

However if a late pick turns out to be good they also play early. There is just less of them.

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

general Qs

• Was he coming home no matter what at end of 2023 (traded or not)?
• was there a risk of another team taking him (would Freo have accepted a lower offer from another team?)
• if he was coming home no matter what, wouldn’t Freo have accepted whatever they could get?
• if he was prepared to stay if a trade couldn’t be facilitated, would it not have been more prudent to grab him as FA at the end of 2024?
• did we feel we couldn’t win flag without him in 2024?

Edit: genuinely asking - I don’t know the answers

He wanted to come home and i have no idea if he would have waited.
But plenty of clubs would have jumped in if we didn't get him to nominate us. Hence why Freo were p1ssed.

You can't have a strategy which is based around value of the transaction.
The transaction is what it is.
The value as we put on him would have been in the 12-20 range.
Which as a club you have to back in that we would finish top 8 this year and thus the price was probably fair.
The sweetener wasn't of any value to us, so we threw it in to make sure it got done.

how would this look?
We convince him to come to us....then what, we back out because the cost is more than we want?

Hill was off to Dons until they valued picks over the player.
Papely was off to Blues until they valued picks over the player.

I'd much prefer we get a known qty that gives us 5+ years (starting immediately) as opposed to taking a pick that more than likely will take up a list spot for 2+ years......and may not actually be a long term player.

Lachie will get better and better for us and by the end of the year the current cynicism will be gone. Well, mostly gone!

 

[SchuPie]

He wanted to come home and i have no idea if he would have waited.
But plenty of clubs would have jumped in if we didn't get him to nominate us. Hence why Freo were p1ssed.

You can't have a strategy which is based around value of the transaction.
The transaction is what it is.
The value as we put on him would have been in the 12-20 range.
Which as a club you have to back in that we would finish top 8 this year and thus the price was probably fair.
The sweetener wasn't of any value to us, so we threw it in to make sure it got done.

how would this look?
We convince him to come to us....then what, we back out because the cost is more than we want?

Hill was off to Dons until they valued picks over the player.
Papely was off to Blues until they valued picks over the player.

I'd much prefer we get a known qty that gives us 5+ years (starting immediately) as opposed to taking a pick that more than likely will take up a list spot for 2+ years......and may not actually be a long term player.

Lachie will get better and better for us and by the end of the year the current cynicism will be gone. Well, mostly gone!

Thanks for the response - really good points

The only issue I have is that clubs still have to let players know there’s a point at which they can’t proceed w the trade, even though they have convinced them to come.
But - clubs need to be upfront w the player they are trading for. There are times we should back out of the origin club refuses to trade unless ( value x).
Mind you, same as if a player wants out of our club - just bc Geelong traded out their picks doesn’t mean we should accept pick 26.

 

[Geek]

Sorry, just gotta take it back a couple of pages now.

Jake Stringer

25

Jake Stringer

Age

30

Ht

192cm

Wt

92kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.9

3star

K

8.5

3star

HB

4.4

3star

M

3.3

3star

T

2.5

4star

G

1.8

5star

D

8.5

2star

K

7.0

3star

HB

1.5

1star

M

2.8

3star

T

3.8

4star

G

2.5

5star

D

7.2

2star

K

4.8

2star

HB

2.4

3star

M

2.6

3star

T

1.4

4star

G

1.4

5star

is considered a small forward over here? He's 192cms and 92kgs.

 

[unplugged]

What odds can I get him at for the 2024 Norm Smith???

 

[sr36]

Sorry, just gotta take it back a couple of pages now.

Jake Stringer is considered a small forward over here? He's 192cms and 92kgs.

I reckon 92kgs might have been a few years ago. The bloke is a monster.

 

[sr36]

What odds can I get him at for the 2024 Norm Smith???

It won't come down, but it might go up after the weekend - I'd hold off a bit.

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

Thanks for the response - really good points

The only issue I have is that clubs still have to let players know there’s a point at which they can’t proceed w the trade, even though they have convinced them to come.
But - clubs need to be upfront w the player they are trading for. There are times we should back out of the origin club refuses to trade unless ( value x).
Mind you, same as if a player wants out of our club - just bc Geelong traded out their picks doesn’t mean we should accept pick 26.

Absolutely there is a limit.
No doubt that conversation would be had between the club and player manager.
But that limit would vary year on year based on plenty of factors.
The same picks are not worth the same each year.

Clearly Lachie fell within what we were prepared to pay.
I’m very bullish that it will turn out to be a fair deal. Just need more than 3 games to let that play out!

Henry is an interesting point and probably best to not derail this thread!!

 

[stormskye]

Old TheGreatGrundy dealing with Schultz

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

Old TheGreatGrundy dealing with Schultz

View attachment 1939397

'Old' as opposed to 'new' or just plain old?