List Mgmt. Carlton's 2018 Draft Thread (cont. in Part 2)

[Pafloyul]

I’d be more inclined to take Walsh at #1, and look to trade a future first for one of the GC picks, then likely trade that down to Adelaide.

I don't get it. I don't understand why pick 1 is sacred but beyond that we help out an Adelaide club. Surely we'd be eying off more than one pick at the top end of this draft then taking a couple of father/sons late. Do people think one of the King brothers can't be fitted into the side and/or that Lukosius and Rankine are homeward bound before they've even kicked a ball in anger? The quality is at the very top, beyond that it's hard to predict what we'll get. At any rate, I certainly don't want to be drafting more players in the Nick Graham mold at best with late picks, I'd hoped we'd left that behind.

 

[Stamos]

I don't get it. I don't understand why pick 1 is sacred but beyond that we help out an Adelaide club. Surely we'd be eying off more than one pick at the top end of this draft then taking a couple of father/sons late.

It’s not so much that #1 is sacred, as compared to how Walsh is rated and our list balance and needs.

With the top end talent that we’ve brought in over the last 3 drafts (9 first round picks), we’re after quality, rather than quantity. And without being an expert on this year’s crop, there are legitimate concerns on how Luko and Rankine develop into AFL footballers, and the Kings don’t fit our list.

As for trading back in with a future, hypothetical (admittedly best case):

GC don’t want Luko or Rankine, so they can get their second preference (not including Walsh already gone at #1) with #6). They’ve still got #24 and #29, so they might prefer a high first next year to what would be their 4th/5th/6th choice this year. So they trade #2 (best case) for our 1st.

And we open the bidding. Say we don’t want those 2 SAs. Port might bid 5 & 10, or Adelaide 8 & 13. Rather than helping the SA clubs, we’re helping ourselves. We use the higher of the picks, then auction the second for a future 1st, so we’re back into the 1st round next year (and Clubs would certainly look at that for #10 or #13 this year) and maybe a little extra, say upgrading #69 & #71.

So this is best case scenario, but that would be the reasoning. And who knows, GCS might be up for it.

 

[Jimmae]

With the top end talent that we’ve brought in over the last 3 drafts (9 first round picks), we’re after quality, rather than quantity. And without being an expert on this year’s crop, there are legitimate concerns on how Luko and Rankine develop into AFL footballers, and the Kings don’t fit our list.

The concern is what position they will wind up playing at AFL level, not the possibility of them not being AFL-capable.

Lukosius - medium forward vs CHF
Rankine - goal-kicking half forward vs midfielder/forward.

 

[Stamos]

The concern is what position they will wind up playing at AFL level, not the possibility of them not being AFL-capable.

Lukosius - medium forward vs CHF
Rankine - goal-kicking half forward vs midfielder/forward.

Well, there’s been concerns expressed (well founded or not) over Lukosius’ physicality and how it relates, and over Rankine’s professionalism. It’s not just over their positions

 

[HARKER]

Now with the trade period over, I don't see us trading out the first.
If Gold Coast wanted it, it may have done so with letting go of a player and pick, but don't think they'll do it with picks alone.

Can't see us buying into any deals that Adelaide or Port may front up with, either.
Reckon SOS will get his man and his son, which won't be a bad outcome at all.

 

[RoyalParade]

At least I'll save heaps of time this year, not going through all the phantom draft threads!!

 

[Blubagger71]

It’s not so much that #1 is sacred, as compared to how Walsh is rated and our list balance and needs.

With the top end talent that we’ve brought in over the last 3 drafts (9 first round picks), we’re after quality, rather than quantity. And without being an expert on this year’s crop, there are legitimate concerns on how Luko and Rankine develop into AFL footballers, and the Kings don’t fit our list.

As for trading back in with a future, hypothetical (admittedly best case):

GC don’t want Luko or Rankine, so they can get their second preference (not including Walsh already gone at #1) with #6). They’ve still got #24 and #29, so they might prefer a high first next year to what would be their 4th/5th/6th choice this year. So they trade #2 (best case) for our 1st.

And we open the bidding. Say we don’t want those 2 SAs. Port might bid 5 & 10, or Adelaide 8 & 13. Rather than helping the SA clubs, we’re helping ourselves. We use the higher of the picks, then auction the second for a future 1st, so we’re back into the 1st round next year (and Clubs would certainly look at that for #10 or #13 this year) and maybe a little extra, say upgrading #69 & #71.

So this is best case scenario, but that would be the reasoning. And who knows, GCS might be up for it.

Like everything you have to say here. We are still in the first round next year though.

 

[TerryWallet]

I think we will keep Pick 1 most likely.

I see the most likely alternative to that is exchanging Pick 1 for GC Pick 3 & 6. Would we do that? Maybe, or maybe not. I think we probably would. Would GC do that? Maybe, or maybe not. I think they probably could.

On the overhyped point system Pick 1 is 3000 points and Pick 3 & 6 is roughly 3900 points. So 3 & 6 technically outweights Pick 1.

Now for the real world. For Gold Coast, retention is a major issue and developing a culture and standards in their startover is a real issue. While no-one is a certainty, i think everyone would regard Walsh as the standout top end pick with regard to what GC would want to address in those key points. I think he would be far and away their No1 want this draft. Would they trade 3 & 6 for him? I think they just might. That would leave them with Pick 1 & 2 instead of 2, 3 & 6. They could either keep that hand of 1&2 or turn 2 into 5 &10 from Port and go with 1, 5 and 10.

So i think it works for them. Now what about us?

I am assuming Walsh is also our fairly strong preference as the final piece in our potential elite young midfield core. But with a gap between Pick 1 and 70, would we prefer 2 picks(3 & 6) instead of 1? Would we prefer Walsh or say Rankine/Luko and Smith?

Tough call, but i think that deal could suit both parties.

For me, these are our most likely options.

Keep Pick 1 for Walsh.

or

Trade Pick 1 for 3 & 6. I see us and GC maybe both benefiting from such a trade.



*and in saying all that, i acknowledge there are other possibilities as well.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Now with the trade period over, I don't see us trading out the first.
If Gold Coast wanted it, it may have done so with letting go of a player and pick, but don't think they'll do it with picks alone.

Can't see us buying into any deals that Adelaide or Port may front up with, either.
Reckon SOS will get his man and his son, which won't be a bad outcome at all.

No rush for GC, with live pick trading on the cards.

They can sit tight and see who is available at 6 - if they see someone they want, the draft them, if not, they can offer it up for a future first or some later first round picks (if they have a few players in the next tier that they think they can bundle up).

1. Carlton - Walsh
2. GC - M King
3. GC - B. King
4. StK - Smith
5. PA - Lukosius
6. GC. ????

Reckon they'd love Smith, less so the SA boys.

If St Kilda select Smith, GC might look to trade Pick 6 away for our future first (with a pick swap in our favour).
If St Kilda opt for Lukosius, PA probably grab Rankine, leaving Smith available at pick 6.

That's how I see it panning out, anyway.

 

[Zlatan]

I don't believe for a minute that the top 6 picks will stay as they are.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

No rush for GC, with live pick trading on the cards.

They can sit tight and see who is available at 6 - if they see someone they want, the draft them, if not, they can offer it up for a future first or some later first round picks (if they have a few players in the next tier that they think they can bundle up).

1. Carlton - Walsh
2. GC - M King
3. GC - B. King
4. StK - Smith
5. PA - Lukosius
6. GC. ????

Reckon they'd love Smith, less so the SA boys.

If St Kilda select Smith, GC might look to trade Pick 6 away for our future first (with a pick swap in our favour).
If St Kilda opt for Lukosius, PA probably grab Rankine, leaving Smith available at pick 6.

That's how I see it panning out, anyway.

They are in a perfect position imo.
Walsh is off the board
So they could pretty much go Smith, M King. Saints take JL and Port Rankine and they get B King at 6.
The perfect blend. May replacement, Lynch replacement and Smith into the midfield but more importantly it's probably best for retention.

If they go purely for talent than probably JL, Rankine and one of KingsX2, Smith or Rozee. More risky but lots more upside.

With their list makeup they really can't lose and shouldn't really be worrying about Pick 1 unless they end up with 1,2 and 3.

 

[Gavstar]

I don't believe for a minute that the top 6 picks will stay as they are.

Be interesting to see GC, Snort, GWS and Adelaide all have 3 picks in first round in the "Super" draft.

If Gold Coast aren't planning to take SA kids they can make out like bandits without losing anything.

 

[The Smoking Gun]

No rush for GC, with live pick trading on the cards.

They can sit tight and see who is available at 6 - if they see someone they want, the draft them, if not, they can offer it up for a future first or some later first round picks (if they have a few players in the next tier that they think they can bundle up).

1. Carlton - Walsh
2. GC - M King
3. GC - B. King
4. StK - Smith
5. PA - Lukosius
6. GC. ????

Reckon they'd love Smith, less so the SA boys.

If St Kilda select Smith, GC might look to trade Pick 6 away for our future first (with a pick swap in our favour).
If St Kilda opt for Lukosius, PA probably grab Rankine, leaving Smith available at pick 6.

That's how I see it panning out, anyway.

Lukosius is like Smith, Walsh & the Kings, the ultimate professional. I don't see him as a flight risk at all. All he wants to do is play footy and he will have been well prepared for a life interstate.

I think we will keep Pick 1 most likely.

I see the most likely alternative to that is exchanging Pick 1 for GC Pick 3 & 6. Would we do that? Maybe, or maybe not. I think we probably would. Would GC do that? Maybe, or maybe not. I think they probably could.

On the overhyped point system Pick 1 is 3000 points and Pick 3 & 6 is roughly 3900 points. So 3 & 6 technically outweights Pick 1.

Now for the real world. For Gold Coast, retention is a major issue and developing a culture and standards in their startover is a real issue. While no-one is a certainty, i think everyone would regard Walsh as the standout top end pick with regard to what GC would want to address in those key points. I think he would be far and away their No1 want this draft. Would they trade 3 & 6 for him? I think they just might. That would leave them with Pick 1 & 2 instead of 2, 3 & 6. They could either keep that hand of 1&2 or turn 2 into 5 &10 from Port and go with 1, 5 and 10.

So i think it works for them. Now what about us?

I am assuming Walsh is also our fairly strong preference as the final piece in our potential elite young midfield core. But with a gap between Pick 1 and 70, would we prefer 2 picks(3 & 6) instead of 1? Would we prefer Walsh or say Rankine/Luko and Smith?

Tough call, but i think that deal could suit both parties.

For me, these are our most likely options.

Keep Pick 1 for Walsh.

or

Trade Pick 1 for 3 & 6. I see us and GC maybe both benefiting from such a trade.



*and in saying all that, i acknowledge there are other possibilities as well.

I won't lie as I'd love to snaffle Picks 3 & 6, but I doubt it'll happen. I think the Suns did the smart thing in getting rid of May given the amount of negative noise he's been spouting since the end of the season. Forcing him to stay another year only makes a polluted environment that much more toxic and hamstrings the clubs' stated aim of rebuilding the joint from the ground up.

Reckon if I'm Gold Coast then I'm snaffling my new spine with Lukosius, Max King & Ben King with those 3 picks. They'll never get a better opportunity than that. They can pick up a couple of very solid midfielders with their early/mid 2nds to go with Swallow, Miller, Brodie, Bowes, Ainsworth, Weller, Lyons & Scheer. Picks 24 & 29 (or whatever they've got) isn't anything to turn your nose up at in this particular draft.

As tempting as Walsh may be, the KPPs are nowhere near as strong next year and they'll be in the driver's seat for someone like Matt Rowell next year who is every bit the professional that Smith and Walsh are.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Lukosius is like Smith, Walsh & the Kings, the ultimate professional. I don't see him as a flight risk at all. All he wants to do is play footy and he will have been well prepared for a life interstate.


I won't lie as I'd love to snaffle Picks 3 & 6, but I doubt it'll happen. I think the Suns did the smart thing in getting rid of May given the amount of negative noise he's been spouting since the end of the season. Forcing him to stay another year only makes a polluted environment that much more toxic and hamstrings the clubs' stated aim of rebuilding the joint from the ground up.

Reckon if I'm Gold Coast then I'm snaffling my new spine with Lukosius, Max King & Ben King with those 3 picks. They'll never get a better opportunity than that. They can pick up a couple of very solid midfielders with their early/mid 2nds to go with Swallow, Miller, Brodie, Bowes, Ainsworth, Weller, Lyons & Scheer. Picks 24 & 29 (or whatever they've got) isn't anything to turn your nose up at in this particular draft.

As tempting as Walsh may be, the KPPs are nowhere near as strong next year and they'll be in the driver's seat for someone like Matt Rowell next year who is every bit the professional that Smith and Walsh are.

The tricky thing for GC is what they do around a Lukosius selection.

Luko + King + King = too tall
Luko + King + Smith = eliminates King retention strategy
Luko + Rankine + ??? = supposed increased flight risk with Rankine

King + King + Smith seems to be a better option for them. Gives them more flexibility for trades if any want to jump ship, rather than the smug SA clubs lowballing them. Gives them brotherly bookends and a dynamic midfielder who should be able to slot in early next year.

 

[TerryWallet]

Lukosius is like Smith, Walsh & the Kings, the ultimate professional. I don't see him as a flight risk at all. All he wants to do is play footy and he will have been well prepared for a life interstate.


I won't lie as I'd love to snaffle Picks 3 & 6, but I doubt it'll happen. I think the Suns did the smart thing in getting rid of May given the amount of negative noise he's been spouting since the end of the season. Forcing him to stay another year only makes a polluted environment that much more toxic and hamstrings the clubs' stated aim of rebuilding the joint from the ground up.

Reckon if I'm Gold Coast then I'm snaffling my new spine with Lukosius, Max King & Ben King with those 3 picks. They'll never get a better opportunity than that. They can pick up a couple of very solid midfielders with their early/mid 2nds to go with Swallow, Miller, Brodie, Bowes, Ainsworth, Weller, Lyons & Scheer. Picks 24 & 29 (or whatever they've got) isn't anything to turn your nose up at in this particular draft.

As tempting as Walsh may be, the KPPs are nowhere near as strong next year and they'll be in the driver's seat for someone like Matt Rowell next year who is every bit the professional that Smith and Walsh are.

Yeah, there is merit in that.

I just can't see them taking Luko and the Kings though. Does the theory work? Yes. But can GC take that extreme longterm view while their midfield stinks? I don't think so.

Look, it is hard to figure out the best option for GC. As i've said elsewhere before, it seems like danger lurks around every corner for them no matter what decision they make.

To me, i just think that in their resetting of the club based about building a culture(there's that dreaded word again, but hey, it's real lol) that Walsh would be their clear target. At best they would be hoping he is a Selwood/Cotchin type player and leader. Or at least a Sloane/McVeigh type player/leader. After the disaster of Scotty Clayton, Craig Cameron and Stuey Dew are really emphasing the importance of building a Club through character.

I acknowledge that the others are all professional too, i just think Walsh would be their strong priority and then go from there. The wraps on him for ability, character, leader, future standard setter would be hard for them to ignore. Walsh and Luko would probably do me if i was them, over Luko, Rozee and someone else at 6.

But i'm me, they are them, and SOS is SOS. So over to the real decision makers.

 

[RoyalParade]

I think we will keep Pick 1 most likely.

I see the most likely alternative to that is exchanging Pick 1 for GC Pick 3 & 6. Would we do that? Maybe, or maybe not. I think we probably would. Would GC do that? Maybe, or maybe not. I think they probably could.

On the overhyped point system Pick 1 is 3000 points and Pick 3 & 6 is roughly 3900 points. So 3 & 6 technically outweights Pick 1.

Now for the real world. For Gold Coast, retention is a major issue and developing a culture and standards in their startover is a real issue. While no-one is a certainty, i think everyone would regard Walsh as the standout top end pick with regard to what GC would want to address in those key points. I think he would be far and away their No1 want this draft. Would they trade 3 & 6 for him? I think they just might. That would leave them with Pick 1 & 2 instead of 2, 3 & 6. They could either keep that hand of 1&2 or turn 2 into 5 &10 from Port and go with 1, 5 and 10.

So i think it works for them. Now what about us?

I am assuming Walsh is also our fairly strong preference as the final piece in our potential elite young midfield core. But with a gap between Pick 1 and 70, would we prefer 2 picks(3 & 6) instead of 1? Would we prefer Walsh or say Rankine/Luko and Smith?

Tough call, but i think that deal could suit both parties.

For me, these are our most likely options.

Keep Pick 1 for Walsh.

or

Trade Pick 1 for 3 & 6. I see us and GC maybe both benefiting from such a trade.



*and in saying all that, i acknowledge there are other possibilities as well.

I like your thinking.

Reports are that SOS is keen on one of the kings (max?) And would love to snaffle him in this draft.

Therefore your scenario of 1 for 3 and 6 could be on the cards. Would we also ask for a swap of lions first next year which they hold, for our Adel 3rd next year?

I was thinking about scenarios for our future 1st, but I think that is out of play now. All clubs with decent picks this year would want to use them this year. Our future 1st only worked for a player.

So, let's say we do the 1 for 3, 6.

Is it - 3 for smith, 6 for king?

 

[The Smoking Gun]

The tricky thing for GC is what they do around a Lukosius selection.

Luko + King + King = too tall
Luko + King + Smith = eliminates King retention strategy
Luko + Rankine + ??? = supposed increased flight risk with Rankine

King + King + Smith seems to be a better option for them. Gives them more flexibility for trades if any want to jump ship, rather than the smug SA clubs lowballing them. Gives them brotherly bookends and a dynamic midfielder who should be able to slot in early next year.

Get 3 years into those kids and they'll be infinitely better than Wright or Day. I still don't see Luko as a flight risk. Rankine definitely, Rozee maybe, but Luko no.
The worst that can happen to them down the track is maybe, and I mean maybe, that they have to trade one out. They'll always get two 1st Rounders for a developed King, Luko or Wright.

Yeah, there is merit in that.

I just can't see them taking Luko and the Kings though. Does the theory work? Yes. But can GC take that extreme longterm view while their midfield stinks? I don't think so.

Look, it is hard to figure out the best option for GC. As i've said elsewhere before, it seems like danger lurks around every corner for them no matter what decision they make.

To me, i just think that in their resetting of the club based about building a culture(there's that dreaded word again, but hey, it's real lol) that Walsh would be their clear target. At best they would be hoping he is a Selwood/Cotchin type player and leader. Or at least a Sloane/McVeigh type player/leader. After the disaster of Scotty Clayton, Craig Cameron and Stuey Dew are really emphasing the importance of building a Club through character.

I acknowledge that the others are all professional too, i just think Walsh would be their strong priority and then go from there. The wraps on him for ability, character, leader, future standard setter would be hard for them to ignore. Walsh and Luko would probably do me if i was them, over Luko, Rozee and someone else at 6.

But i'm me, they are them, and SOS is SOS. So over to the real decision makers.

There hasn't been such a strong bunch of quality talls in a draft like this that I can remember. If you're going to go through the pain of a rebuild then do it properly otherwise you're just going to have keep revisiting it again and again. They're basically where we were at the end of 2015. They simply cannot afford to **** it up a second time.

Craig Cameron and Stuey Dew are really emphasing the importance of building a Club through character.

This is so very true........and I think you'd struggle to find 3 KPPs of better quality and character than Lukosius and the Kings.

 

[Omega Blue]

No need to be concerned with picks 69 and 71, they will likely be in the 50s when you consider north Melbournes, collingwoods and Sydney's academy picks that will be chewed up for points, for Blakey, quaynor and Thomas.

 

[Stamos]

No need to be concerned with picks 69 and 71, they will likely be in the 50s when you consider north Melbournes, collingwoods and Sydney's academy picks that will be chewed up for points, for Blakey, quaynor and Thomas.

Maybe not 50s, but they will certainly move up the order.
Hopefully the bids come early.

 

[DangerousD]

No need to be concerned with picks 69 and 71, they will likely be in the 50s when you consider north Melbournes, collingwoods and Sydney's academy picks that will be chewed up for points, for Blakey, quaynor and Thomas.

Good point, don’t North have like 5 picks in the 40s?

 

[Blue__Balls]

Good point, don’t North have like 5 picks in the 40s?

North Melbourne: 42, 47, 48, 49, 55, 58 - to be used on Thomas and Scott.
Sydney: 26, 33, 38, 39, 40 - to be used on Blakey.
Collingwood: 41, 44, 51, 57 - to be used on Quaynor & Kelly.
Bulldogs: 27, 32, 45 - to be used on West.

I've got a draft points calculator spreadsheet on a USB at home, might nut out some likely scenarios based on probably bids.

Good chance that 4 of North's picks drop below ours, 3 of Sydney's, 2 of Collingwood's, and 1 of WB's.

Could see our late picks shuffle up 10 spots.

 

[Red Bull]

I think we will keep Pick 1 most likely.

I see the most likely alternative to that is exchanging Pick 1 for GC Pick 3 & 6. Would we do that? Maybe, or maybe not. I think we probably would. Would GC do that? Maybe, or maybe not. I think they probably could.

On the overhyped point system Pick 1 is 3000 points and Pick 3 & 6 is roughly 3900 points. So 3 & 6 technically outweights Pick 1.

Now for the real world. For Gold Coast, retention is a major issue and developing a culture and standards in their startover is a real issue. While no-one is a certainty, i think everyone would regard Walsh as the standout top end pick with regard to what GC would want to address in those key points. I think he would be far and away their No1 want this draft. Would they trade 3 & 6 for him? I think they just might. That would leave them with Pick 1 & 2 instead of 2, 3 & 6. They could either keep that hand of 1&2 or turn 2 into 5 &10 from Port and go with 1, 5 and 10.

So i think it works for them. Now what about us?

I am assuming Walsh is also our fairly strong preference as the final piece in our potential elite young midfield core. But with a gap between Pick 1 and 70, would we prefer 2 picks(3 & 6) instead of 1? Would we prefer Walsh or say Rankine/Luko and Smith?

Tough call, but i think that deal could suit both parties.

For me, these are our most likely options.

Keep Pick 1 for Walsh.

or

Trade Pick 1 for 3 & 6. I see us and GC maybe both benefiting from such a trade.



*and in saying all that, i acknowledge there are other possibilities as well.

Cant fault this assesment.
Can only see one deal being acceptable to Carlton for pick 1 and it just might suit GC too for the reasons you've laid out.
Pick 1 for picks 3&6.

1.G.C. : Walsh
2.G.C. : Lukosious
3.Carl : Rankine
4.St.K : M.King
5.Port : Rozee
6.Carl : Smith
7.Foot : B.King

Would be very difficult to give up Walsh and we may well not , however , 2 shots in the top 6 could likely see us pick up the sublimly talented small forward we desperately need and pad out our growing midfield depth with the 2nd best rated young mid in the country.
If forced to make a decision , id do the trade.

 

[Faz 2000]

I see no compelling reason for GC to trade with us to move up to 1. However, if it's to move one pick out of this year's early firsts to next year to spread out their drafting a bit there could be legs in it.

If something around our 2019 first for GC's #3 could be done (maybe for a small consideration in their favour), it might be able to work for both teams. GC would get to double dip in both first rounds (luxury!).

Walsh AND Rankine or Smith would be a phenomenal draft for us this year and we wouldn't care we were out of next year's first round. GC could potentially still hit both Kings, or Lukosius and something else.

Would have to think more likely is the SA clubs wrangle something with GC, but that's a scenario that could potentially hold advantages for both Carlton and Gold Coast, primarily because you can be pretty damn confident our 2019 first is gonna be a primo pick.

 

[DIG]

Man how much must those top prospects be hoping like hell Carlton picks them at 1 with those 2 suns picks right after us.

 

[The Dominator7]

The Smoking Gun TerryWallet LemmingMaster (plus anyone else who's had a good look)

The top end of the draft has been done to death. I love this time of the year and you guys provide great input to this thread, who are some realistic late draft/rookie options that you like?? Please (if you feel inclined) also give some comments to the ones I've raised.

Pick 1 options

• Sam Walsh for me if we keep it, Equally as happy if we traded it for picks and got Bailey Smith and Chayce Jones (gonna bang this drum all the way to the draft - I love him plus he's a Tassie boy).

Late Draft & Rookie options

• Fisher (just like his NB play and think he deserves another crack at AFL level)
• Mitch Maguire (I know it's NEAFL so hard to tell, but is it just me or does he scream Zorko??)
• Mitch Podhajski (19yo in the TAC, overlooked last year, may go earlier but a bit of the Bailey Banfield type pick for me)
• F/S (I reckon we'll take both as rookies but not fussed about either TBH)
  • BSOS - showed bits but not enough for me
  • Hickmott - tested well but not sure he can football like his slower, shorter brother. Combine Liam's grunt and pill gathering with Wil's athleticism and you might have a fair player tho.

• CAT B:
  • Penrith - yes for me, especially as we have a gap at lock down small defender, has his "rabbit in the headlights" kicking/decision making by foot improved enough?
  • Brazier and Wild (really interested to know if anyone seen much of these guys this year. Sunny B was a bull from memory)

DFA options - this will change as more list lodgements happen, but as it stands I'd discuss

• One of Kieran Collins or Hugh Goddard and invite the other one to play with NB with a rookie carrot - pondering if Russell might be able to unlock something with these guys, sort of feel they were discarded a bit early as KPD's
• Josh Williams from Kangas - would love to know WTF happened here, serious wheels and talent, is he the Kangas reverse Scrimshaw after bidding early on him from GC Academy?? Anyone know??
• Mitch Hibberd - great runner, good size, paper body to date. Why would Kangas delist one of their talented youth, maybe I've answered my own question, body might struggle and they seem to be pretty good medical wise.

Cheers all !!