Analysis 2017 List Management Discussion

[Blue_Fusion]

Did you read the post you quoted?

None of the hypothetical trades had Hopper on his own being swapped for a first round pick.

Quality over quantity imo.

If we can get a shot at a player we believe will be elite at pick #3 then Hopper plus change doesn't make up for missing out.

Bit like trading #5 for Marchbank, Stewart and Pickett last year. In the end we got Marchbank for the right price. If we are really keen on Hopper then it's a 3 way trade with Gibbs + our 3rd to Crows with their 1st going to GWS and the Crows 2nd and Hopper coming to us or we stay away imo. Can't keep feeding GWS with top 3 draft picks...

 

[Jeremias]

Neither of them are worth a first round pick on their own or as a combo !!

Yes, they are.

Hopper and Whitfield are both jets with long careers ahead of them. If we can get a 1st round pick + one of them for a future 1st, I reckon we'd be crazy not to do it.

 

[Jeremias]

Quality over quantity imo.

Sure, but we're not talking about bringing in someone of average quality.

Hopper is a terrific young footballer who is probably being played a little out of position at the moment, given the strength of GWS' midfield. He was widely regarded as one of the best in the 2015 draft pool, and at 20 years of age you'd expect him to have a long career ahead of him.

Whitfield is probably a little unheralded given the quality around him also. He's probably not projecting to become a superstar but rather an outstanding footballer out on the wing, who has already played a fair bit of very good football. He's obviously had a minor blip recently, but at 22/23 you'd expect he too has a long future ahead of him.

If we can get a shot at a player we believe will be elite at pick #3 then Hopper plus change doesn't make up for missing out.

A first round pick isn't 'change'.

Bit like trading #5 for Marchbank, Stewart and Pickett last year. In the end we got Marchbank for the right price. If we are really keen on Hopper then it's a 3 way trade with Gibbs + our 3rd to Crows with their 1st going to GWS and the Crows 2nd and Hopper coming to us or we stay away imo. Can't keep feeding GWS with top 3 draft picks...

It may not eventuate, but trading our 2018 first makes a lot of sense to me right now.

If it allows us to bring in say Hopper + another first round pick this year, I think that's a great result.

For the record I don't want to trade our first this year, but we shouldn't completely rule it out if we benefit for doing so.

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

Quality over quantity imo.

If we can get a shot at a player we believe will be elite at pick #3 then Hopper plus change doesn't make up for missing out.

Bit like trading #5 for Marchbank, Stewart and Pickett last year. In the end we got Marchbank for the right price. If we are really keen on Hopper then it's a 3 way trade with Gibbs + our 3rd to Crows with their 1st going to GWS and the Crows 2nd and Hopper coming to us or we stay away imo. Can't keep feeding GWS with top 3 draft picks...

Why not? Why shut down what appears to be a good relationship between clubs with a good avenue for players in deals that help both clubs out?

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

Looking at the age profile of our midfield, we really should target early 20's players if we can.

CBF looking up actual stats but obviously Murphy, Gibbs & E Curnow are all late 20's.
Then it drops away pretty much to Cripps who is 22.
Then drops away again to the recent draftees like SPS, Fisher & Cuningham who are teenagers.

Not including Thomas, Palmer, Kerridge, Boek, Graham & Smedts since they aren't locks to be long term midfield players yet.

We need more elite talent around Crippa's age so they can build together and to help share the workload straight away.

Hopper fits that bill - Plus he's a bigger bodied inside/outside mid which we need since Murphy, SPS, Polson & Fisher are all small physically.

Pretty certain Barass70 said 20 - 25 years is the age profile we are looking at FWIW.

 

[Jeremias]

Why not? Why shut down what appears to be a good relationship between clubs with a good avenue for players in deals that help both clubs out?

Yep.

As long as we benefit from the trade, it shouldn't really matter who it's with.

 

[Pafloyul]

Isnt that the same for anyone we draft this year? We are buying unproven potential with our picks. The only difference being is that one of them ( Hopper ) has already two years in the AFL system and should we bring him in will be heading into his third AFL preseason as opposed to a 17/ 18 year old kid in his first AFL preseason. I know which way Id be going right now.

Yeah, pick the best available.

 

[Coops93]

A poster on TC, who had the early mail on Marchbank, says expect the club to go after Adam Saad from GC. Apparently wants to come home and family are Carlton supporters and one of the reasons why the club did not trade Gibbs last year as we wanted a pick for this years trade period.

Hope we get his brother as well.

His sister said that Mohammad Saad is the better of the two

 

[Pafloyul]

Mystery box!

That's the wrong way of looking at it. The earlier the draft pick, the less of a mystery it is. The idea that the known is always better than the unknown is just as moronic as the idea that a first draft pick will always be a star. We should be trying for optimum requirements rather than minimum ones.

 

[Kuttez87]

Agree on going hard after Hopper, think he would be the perfect get for us. Apologies if it has been touched on before, but just wanted an opinion on going after a James Siciliy type..? Hybrid forward with good hands, young, can kick well and obviously has ties with Bolts. Personally think it would be worthwhile at the right price

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

I'm really pleased that you wrote that.

This current obsession from our supporters to trade first round picks (both current & future) is so short-sighted its bordering on being delusional. When you add in the other obsession that also dominates discussions being the chasing of high-end highly paid players from others clubs and you really have to question what our supporters are wanting to achieve and when they expect to achieve it by ??

I understand that people have differing opinions and they are fully entitled to that but there is way too much "corner cutting" with most of these obsessive ideas.

What will throwing a couple of million at Fyfe & Martin right now achieve ??

Sure we'll be a better team with them but will it be enough to rocket us into finals contention or more importantly a Top 4 position ??

Sadly, the answer is "no' and the reason for that is that you have to look at the remainder of the players in the team. We have an exciting group of 18-20yo players who are still learning their craft, the downside is that they are prone to form fluctuations & bouts of onfield brain-fades due to their age & lack of experience at the top level. This will improve dramatically over a few years with more game-time but it is something that cannot be ignored.

Not having that strong experience & bodies around Fyfe & Martin makes spending the money on them virtually superfluous, they are terrific players but they need backup and cannot do it all for the young guys.

The answer, as you have clearly pointed out, is very simple for us right now. Keep going back to the draft this year and every year going forward and pick up young elite talent.

There are no shortcuts or quick-fixes to success these days, thankfully, our club has finally got their head around that fact and are working hard and in line with a strategic plan which will deliver success down the track.

First round picks are 'gold' in this business so the concept of trading them seems like "Fools Gold" to me.

The only singular formula to success is a unicorn
You just need to take the best options as they present
As the very sensible Mr Harker says if we rate somebody better than our pick choices why wouldn't you do it?
There is no correct philosophy to doing this except common sense!
Some of the reasoning by people here is a giggle

 

[HARKER]

As of today we have picks:
2017: #3, #39, #57
2018: #7, #25, #43, #61 (guessing, but maybe this is the way other clubs may see us fall)
Was going to discuss possible ins and outs, but way too much guessing required.

SOS will not likely want to let go of 2017's 1st. unless something too good to be true fronts up. e.g. Hopper & Lobb (won't happen, I know but something like this will be the angle)
The 2018 first may though be waved about to land Hopper and maybe a lazy second rounder coming back to us.....maybe.

We really don't have too much currency that we can afford to let go, but one name that may pop up is Harry McKay (my opinion only)
Kreuzer & Casboult as UFA's? Too hard to put anything to that right now.
We'll leave Gibbs out of things just for now until signals show up. Murphy though?

 

[F_therest]

Quality over quantity imo.

If we can get a shot at a player we believe will be elite at pick #3 then Hopper plus change doesn't make up for missing out.

Bit like trading #5 for Marchbank, Stewart and Pickett last year. In the end we got Marchbank for the right price. If we are really keen on Hopper then it's a 3 way trade with Gibbs + our 3rd to Crows with their 1st going to GWS and the Crows 2nd and Hopper coming to us or we stay away imo. Can't keep feeding GWS with top 3 draft picks...

To your first paragraph, obviously if SOS thinks the player we can get in the draft at #3 is better than Hopper then we keep the pick.

We are arguing that if they aren't or are equal to Hopper, then we should do the trade since there will be a benefit.

I'm seeing those advocating for taking our picks to the draft just wanting to do so for the sake of it because they think it's 'the right thing to do' without looking at any other factors.

The others, like me, are arguing to keep our options open and be willing to trade it if we get a good deal, which is the correct way to approach it.

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

That's the wrong way of looking at it. The earlier the draft pick, the less of a mystery it is. The idea that the known is always better than the unknown is just as moronic as the idea that a first draft pick will always be a star. We should be trying for optimum requirements rather than minimum ones.

Actually there is always mystery in a draft!
For instance why would you take what you have if it's rated there and need something else?
Is it common sense to reach back to gain what you want in the draft?

For instance if the type of player we're looking for is around ten in the draft.. And we have pick three.. What would be the point in taking pick ten best rated with pick three.. Assuming pick three can land you better in a trade?

 

[GoBlues!]

As of today we have picks:
2017: #3, #39, #57
2018: #7, #25, #43, #61 (guessing, but maybe this is the way other clubs may see us fall)
Was going to discuss possible ins and outs, but way too much guessing required.

SOS will not likely want to let go of 2017's 1st. unless something too good to be true fronts up. e.g. Hopper & Lobb (won't happen, I know but something like this will be the angle)
The 2018 first may though be waved about to land Hopper and maybe a lazy second rounder coming back to us.....maybe.

We really don't have too much currency that we can afford to let go, but one name that may pop up is Harry McKay (my opinion only)
Kreuzer & Casboult as UFA's? Too hard to put anything to that right now.
We'll leave Gibbs out of things just for now until signals show up. Murphy though?

Harks, how does Ben Silvagni affect the 2018 picks if other clubs bid on him?

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

To your first paragraph, obviously if SOS thinks the player we can get in the draft at #3 is better than Hopper then we keep the pick.

We are arguing that if they aren't or are equal to Hopper, then we should do the trade since there will be a benefit.

I'm seeing those advocating for taking our picks to the draft just wanting to do so for the sake of it because they think it's 'the right thing to do' without looking at any other factors.

The others, like me, are arguing to keep our options open and be willing to trade it if we get a good deal, which is the correct way to approach it.

Agreed. I don't know why some are deadest against being open to something other than going to the draft if it is in our best interests to do so.

 

[Arr0w]

From an uninformed viewpoint I would trade our first and third round picks but I don't expect GWS to entertain such a trade should they lose Kelly.

I agree with you, I don't think they would entertain that deal at all, whether they lose Kelly or not.

You would need a minimum, 2 x first round picks as a starting point, even for GWS to be vaguely interested

 

[HARKER]

Harks, how does Ben Silvagni affect the 2018 picks if other clubs bid on him?

I don't know other than for the fact I've brought up his name on plenty of occasions.
If he is to be deemed a top ten player, we can afford not be put in a position we're forced to take him with our first.

Brought up this case in point before, as clubs have taken players a little earlier than they may have wanted in the normal course of events.
i.e. Luke McDonald in 2013. You have to work the system for the best result. Had have North their time again, they may have moved things around.


Cut a long story short: If Ben at this stage is seen to be an elite talent, we hide him as much as we can and we remove ourselves from a situation we're forced to use a premium pick on him......so, don't have that pick and use points for the collect.

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

Harks, how does Ben Silvagni affect the 2018 picks if other clubs bid on him?

Considering Ben Silvagni hasn't even play TAC level yet, and with his draft still 18 months away he really shouldn't be a consideration as far as trading our 2018 first round pick goes. BSOS is a cross that bridge when we come to it situation, considering at this point we don't know how good, bad or average he will be in 18 months time. I'm not really sure how he can be rated a high draft pick yet.

 

[HARKER]

Considering Ben Silvagni hasn't even play TAC level yet, and with his draft still 18 months away he really shouldn't be a consideration as far as trading our 2018 first round pick goes. BSOS is a cross that bridge when we come to it situation, considering at this point we don't know how good, bad or average he will be in 18 months time. I'm not really sure how he can be rated a high draft pick yet.

I don't quite agree with this to the endth degree.
The talent is in front of your nose and to not be able to recognize it one year out?.......you're not looking hard enough.

This all seems somewhat difficult right now but when the draft age is bumped up to 19, all teams best be onto it, given you can already trade future picks.
What happens when we can trade two years in advance? You cannot just wait and see as you'll be left miles behind.

 

[Arr0w]

I don't quite agree with this to the endth degree.
The talent is in front of your nose and to not be able to recognize it one year out?.......you're not looking hard enough.

This all seems somewhat difficult right now but when the draft age is bumped up to 19, all teams best be onto it, given you can already trade future picks.
What happens when we can trade two years in advance? You cannot just wait and see as you'll be left miles behind.

I agree you have to be mindful of the planning, although unlike the McDonald draft year, with the current points system, it does make it easier to obtain Father/Son selections

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

I don't quite agree with this to the endth degree.
The talent is in front of your nose and to not be able to recognize it one year out?.......you're not looking hard enough.

This all seems somewhat difficult right now but when the draft age is bumped up to 19, all teams best be onto it, given you can already trade future picks.
What happens when we can trade two years in advance? You cannot just wait and see as you'll be left miles behind.

I guess my point is I'm not beholden to keeping the 2018 draft pick for BSOS. If he is as good as has been spoken about even if we do put the 2018 pick up for trade we always have the option of trading back in with our 2019 first rounder. Its not the end of the world if we trade out our 2018 1st rounder and losing our minds about it 18 months before his draft is just silly IMO. We have options if we use it this year is all I'm saying.

 

[HARKER]

I agree you have to be mindful of the planning, although unlike the McDonald draft year, with the current points system, it does make it easier to obtain Father/Son selections

The 20% points discount is enticing, but what if you miss on the talent for points sake?
Cripps @ #13 or McDonald @ #8, because FS?

Given the current system, North may have moved off that #8, to advantage.

 

[DirkDiggler]

I agree with you, I don't think they would entertain that deal at all, whether they lose Kelly or not.

You would need a minimum, 2 x first round picks as a starting point, even for GWS to be vaguely interested

It depends on what you have in mind. Sure we can trade pick 3 and 39 into two late first round picks

 

[Arr0w]

The 20% points discount is enticing, but what if you miss on the talent for points sake?
Cripps @ #13 or McDonald @ #8, because FS?

Given the current system, North may have moved off that #8, to advantage.

Agreed, but you could also see in in a different way, maybe something like what GWS did last year.

Let say we end up with pick 4 next year. We use that on the best footballer. Someone then could potentially bid 14 for BSOS, we could use points from later picks. Of course we have to plan, but it is easier now, to plan for these situations