Rumour GFC 2018 Player Trading, Drafting, FA, Rumours, and Wish lists - PT3

[BORIS332]

Which you rather Daniels or Miers.
For me it’s a easy decision I would take Daniels.

By a long, long way.

 

[year of the cat]

By a long, long way.

Yep, Daniels for me too.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Yep, Daniels for me too.

Miers for me but i do like daniels as a late pick.

 

[year of the cat]

Miers for me but i do like daniels as a late pick.

I have a feeling that Miers lack of acceleration may be an issue when he gets to AFL. Clearly a smart footballer though.

Daniels looks similarly smart but with an excellent first few steps. Very evasive and a great finisher (as is Miers btw). Like his stoppage work too.

 

[year of the cat]

Pure_Ownage - can you detail how the bidding for both Naish and Ballenden may work next Friday? When does a bid for either mean that they are having to use their next pick on their respective player?

i.e. If the Bulldogs bid for Naish then am I correct in assuming that Richmond's pick 17 will just be effectively swapped with the Bulldog's pick 16 assuming they match? You'd think that a club will put a bid in for him relatively early to force their hand wouldn't you?

 

[Johnny Cattery]

Hayball in particular though, has not even looked close. The rookie we take in the draft could've been a Max Rooke or Blicavs or Dean Cox.. you get my drift. Even to Rookie a Drew Petrie style ala West Coast makes more sense.

Take your point, not least because that was my feeling about Cowan - we lost multiple opportunities to try other players, and I think one of the specialist draft watchers commented that Wells has made his reputation not just on who he picks after the second round but on his preparedness to move on players who are not likely to make a contribution in a premiership-winning team (albeit it's hard to pick that - Simpkin a good example). Looking at who we have let go, there aren't many mistakes in there.

Hard with Hayball though in that, given his (lack of) background, it was always going to be a two- or three-year wait - and I think I remember Wells saying the only thing he has learned is that you don't learn anything about a player until about five years on the list. Which is sobering.

 

[ShaunWDT]

Im of a different mindset ..we must always have one hand on tomorrows list. The same mindset had us listing Hmac and Clark etc. There is less risk in this one.

We just traded for a 34 year old, we are going all in for a flag.

 

[manboob]

We just traded for a 34 year old, we are going all in for a flag.

Well kinda - we basically swapped Motlop for Ablett which is a win.

 

[GeelongFTW]

Paddy and sloane preparing together...

 

[Shai]

Bolding accidental sorry

Just being an ass, all good

Well kinda - we basically swapped Motlop for Ablett which is a win.

Question for you & yours, how many of our supporters have slammed Mots in the last 3 years..?

Getting Gaz back is a win for me in more than 1 way as a Cats fan.

 

[David the Cat]

Miers for me but i do like daniels as a late pick.

I was hot for Miers being selected....but his lack of pace worries me.

Daniels (out of those two at least) for me. I have Coleman-Jones at 35 on my guess.....

 

[CatRiot]

Daniels is very small, only 170cm. Success rate is quite low for players that short. I'd only use Pick 58 or later for him.

On Moto G (5) using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Pure_Ownage - can you detail how the bidding for both Naish and Ballenden may work next Friday? When does a bid for either mean that they are having to use their next pick on their respective player?

i.e. If the Bulldogs bid for Naish then am I correct in assuming that Richmond's pick 17 will just be effectively swapped with the Bulldog's pick 16 assuming they match? You'd think that a club will put a bid in for him relatively early to force their hand wouldn't you?

The bidding system is like this:
Every pick has a points value, what pick the player is bid on the club matching gets a 20 % discount and has to provide the rest of the points. They have to use their next pick after the bid they can't choose to use later picks. If the pick used is worth more points than needed to match the club gets a residual pick given back in the 50s/60s/70s.

So Naish is bid at 16 worth 1067 (Richmond gets 213 points discount thus 853 points required to match). Richmond matches with 17 (1025 points) and gets given back pick 58 (172 points) (every other club with a pick after 58 has their pick pushed back one slot).

Because you have to use your next pick after where the player is bid you can't completely manipulate it to your advantage but what you can do is if you expect your player to be bid mid range say 20-35 you can try and trade up your first rounders as high as possible so they are live picks prior to bids, trade out your mid range 20-50 picks but keep a few up your sleeve in the 50-65 range which means if your player is bid after 20 your earlier selections are still live and then you match a bid of say 25 or 30 with some picks in the 50s or 60s. You can see both Richmond and Brisbane are trying to set up for this with Richmond trading into 17 20 25 and then 53 and 55 and Brisbane having 15 18 and then some 3rd rounders. I think we will try similar next year which is why we were happy to trade out the 2nd rounder for Ablett providing we could trade in later 3rd/4th rounders which we did because the club would be hoping Brownless isn't bid too early but say in the 20-30 range in which case there is no practical difference between matching that bid with a 2nd rounder or with 2 or 3 3rd/4th rounders. The club probably felt having a 1st rounder 2 3rd rounders and 2 4th rounders (all of which we now have) would produce about the same outcome bid wise as having the first and 2nd rounder.

In terms of Brisbane their recruiter today on radio was saying they hoped to get mids at 15 and 18 and then academy talls (Ballenden and Payne) with later picks so I would say that means he thinks Richmond won't bid on him (I wouldn't be surprised if Richmond and Brisbane have done a deal not to bid on each other's players but you would never prove that) and obviously GC are unlikely to bid on someone else's academy player so they probably feel Ballenden will get to the 20s before a bid which is what they would be hoping (whether we bid at 22 I don't know). Naish is probably more likely to be bid early purely because some teams Sydney and WB for example have a need for that type if outside mid. But Richmond are clearly hoping he isn't bid until 25-30 based on their trading strategy. I think it's possible clubs may bid to force another's hand (for example Sydney clearly bid on Bowes last year to force GC's hand as they didn't themselves need mids of his type) but unlikely as if a player slides who they rate higher on their rankings list they will go with that guy instead.

 

[manboob]

Daniels is very small, only 170cm. Success rate is quite low for players that short. I'd only use Pick 58 or later for him.

Stay well away.

 

[CatRiot]

Stay well away.

I mean he is very quick, agile and has good footy brains, but he will be against small defenders around 179-185cm; they'll likely be too strong at the contest; best chances of him making it is if he can play loose all the time and get away from his opponent most of the time, but this is becoming increasingly harder the way the game is now played mainly in the contest rather than open play. Prefer players over 177, and no smaller than 175.

 

[OzeSparky]

I mean he is very quick, agile and has good footy brains, but he will be against small defenders around 179-185cm; they'll likely be too strong at the contest; best chances of him making it is if he can play loose all the time and get away from his opponent most of the time, but this is becoming increasingly harder the way the game is now played mainly in the contest rather than open play. Prefer players over 177, and no smaller than 175.

I like him. He wins his own ball in close which is a big plus for someone so small, and the he is quick and 3rd he has great kicking skills, So i would take the risk on his size as he really is a great little player.

 

[Turbocat]

We just traded for a 34 year old, we are going all in for a flag.

A 34 year old ablett ... is one out the box. He will be without a doubt in our best side. He is not so much a list clogger as other older players , and we have chosen to bring him back in..in at least in some part due to the story.

 

[Landgraft]

A 34 year old ablett ... is one out the box. He will be without a doubt in our best side. He is not so much a list clogger as other older players , and we have chosen to bring him back in..in at least in some part due to the story.

And at least in some part due to the commercial possibilities that his name unlocks.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Sam who?....no experience, untried, seriously we need a power forward who can deliver.
Sam Dobson l don't think so.

You mean like every player who has nominated for the draft?

 

[year of the cat]

The bidding system is like this:
Every pick has a points value, what pick the player is bid on the club matching gets a 20 % discount and has to provide the rest of the points. They have to use their next pick after the bid they can't choose to use later picks. If the pick used is worth more points than needed to match the club gets a residual pick given back in the 50s/60s/70s.

So Naish is bid at 16 worth 1067 (Richmond gets 213 points discount thus 853 points required to match). Richmond matches with 17 (1025 points) and gets given back pick 58 (172 points) (every other club with a pick after 58 has their pick pushed back one slot).

Because you have to use your next pick after where the player is bid you can't completely manipulate it to your advantage but what you can do is if you expect your player to be bid mid range say 20-35 you can try and trade up your first rounders as high as possible so they are live picks prior to bids, trade out your mid range 20-50 picks but keep a few up your sleeve in the 50-65 range which means if your player is bid after 20 your earlier selections are still live and then you match a bid of say 25 or 30 with some picks in the 50s or 60s. You can see both Richmond and Brisbane are trying to set up for this with Richmond trading into 17 20 25 and then 53 and 55 and Brisbane having 15 18 and then some 3rd rounders. I think we will try similar next year which is why we were happy to trade out the 2nd rounder for Ablett providing we could trade in later 3rd/4th rounders which we did because the club would be hoping Brownless isn't bid too early but say in the 20-30 range in which case there is no practical difference between matching that bid with a 2nd rounder or with 2 or 3 3rd/4th rounders. The club probably felt having a 1st rounder 2 3rd rounders and 2 4th rounders (all of which we now have) would produce about the same outcome bid wise as having the first and 2nd rounder.

In terms of Brisbane their recruiter today on radio was saying they hoped to get mids at 15 and 18 and then academy talls (Ballenden and Payne) with later picks so I would say that means he thinks Richmond won't bid on him (I wouldn't be surprised if Richmond and Brisbane have done a deal not to bid on each other's players but you would never prove that) and obviously GC are unlikely to bid on someone else's academy player so they probably feel Ballenden will get to the 20s before a bid which is what they would be hoping (whether we bid at 22 I don't know). Naish is probably more likely to be bid early purely because some teams Sydney and WB for example have a need for that type if outside mid. But Richmond are clearly hoping he isn't bid until 25-30 based on their trading strategy. I think it's possible clubs may bid to force another's hand (for example Sydney clearly bid on Bowes last year to force GC's hand as they didn't themselves need mids of his type) but unlikely as if a player slides who they rate higher on their rankings list they will go with that guy instead.

Thanks. Exceptionally well explained.

 

[year of the cat]

Stay well away.

Any reason?

 

[calder_daddy]

You mean like every player who has nominated for the draft?

Was reading through 2016 draft selections thread last night and had a laugh at the outrage of the selections.
I’ll quote you with “Geelong have lost the plot”
Just after we took Parfitt and Stewart.

In wells we trust

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Was reading through 2016 draft selections thread last night and had a laugh at the outrage of the selections.
I’ll quote you with “Geelong have lost the plot”
Just after we took Parfitt and Stewart.

In wells we trust

I'm pretty sure I said that after we selected Stewart earlier than I thought was warranted. I have since admitted - and quite early on as catempire can testify - how wrong I was.

 

[calder_daddy]

I'm pretty sure I said that after we selected Stewart earlier than I thought was warranted. I have since admitted - and quite early on as catempire can testify - how wrong I was.

All good, I was just having a laugh.
Me personally I wanted Battle and Kerr
But am more excited now about Sav

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

All good, I was just having a laugh.
Me personally I wanted Battle and Kerr
But am more excited now about Sav

It's not the first time I've been wrong and it certainly won't be the last either.

We've done well with Parfitt and Stewart so hopefully Wells and co strike gold again this time around. And I won't make the same mistake this year.