Draft Profile Liam Stocker

[HARKER]

You would not trade down if you rated Kemp in the top 5. Pump the brakes.

I'm telling you what I know and I had placed that advice on our board months before the draft.

SOS rated Kemp where I said, but that could have changed late in the piece, as SOS was leaving post draft.
Lots of clubs rated Kemp high. The just didn't like him coming off the ACL.....and why wouldn't you trade down if you knew what was ahead of you.
Risky and maybe even too risky, but it worked. Didn't it?
Martin for nothing worked in the end also. No secret that SOS was a risk taker.

Back on Stocker - At this stage I see him as a definite starter for us next year.

 

[briztoon]

Are there any actual CFC interviews or articles where they mention CFC rated Stocker as the 6th best talent in the 2018 draft?

If Carlton’s recruiters genuinely rated Stocker as the 6th best over all talent, then there should be questions asked about their ability to genuinely assess talent.

Or their in ability to seperate a bias in regards to club needs versus actual talent available.

I will accept clubs drawing lines through academy and father son tied players. Or players who represent a significant flight risk. Or players that have a medical condition.

But that only potentially rules out three players drafted ahead of Stocker.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

There is draft night footage where they discuss Stocker being "rated at six". 6th of what is never specified.




6th non-club-tied non-tall seems plausible, and would slot him in at 11 once you add Lukosius, the Kings, Blakey and Thomas. I doubt many eyebrows would've been raised had a club picked him around there.

 

[Davo-27]

There is draft night footage where they discuss Stocker being "rated at six". 6th of what is never specified.




6th non-club-tied non-tall seems plausible, and would slot him in at 11 once you add Lukosius, the Kings, Blakey and Thomas. I doubt many eyebrows would've been raised had a club picked him around there.

i would say watching that footage that they rated Stocker 6th overall, not 6th best inside mid or 6th best for their club, a couple of times they say we rate him at 6 ect in a general context with a tinge of excitement in their voices, almost like they believe they had inside information or something, also at the end David King was talking about what happened and said, Carlton probably rated him inside the top dozen and made the move they deemed was the right move and the Carlton blokes then call him a genius, in saying that anyone calling David King a genius is clutching at straws imo, but all the evidence is pointing to them believing he was the 6th best kid, now in a draft pool with as many elite talents as was in the 2018 draft pool, rating a kid inside the top 6 that the majority didnt rate in the elite grouping was a huge call.

"if the kid is there that we rate at 6" "those left foot kicks at Ballarat, you cant, it doesnt show ya what the wind was like that day, like it was horrific conditions wasnt it -directed to SOS" (making excuses for poor disposal as they watch highlights of Stocker), "his left is almost better than his right" Judd chimes in, "well he is technically better on his left than he is on his right, guides the ball better on his opposite, pulls the trigger" "he plays more at Sandringham in the midfield, because Bailey Smith is at school all the time, he's the, he's the brute, isnt he?"

that conversation was interesting and shows some of their reasoning...

 

[briztoon]

There is draft night footage where they discuss Stocker being "rated at six". 6th of what is never specified.




6th non-club-tied non-tall seems plausible, and would slot him in at 11 once you add Lukosius, the Kings, Blakey and Thomas. I doubt many eyebrows would've been raised had a club picked him around there.

I would have raised my eyebrows had he been drafted ahead of Xavier Duursma.

i would say watching that footage that they rated Stocker 6th overall, not 6th best inside mid or 6th best for their club, a couple of times they say we rate him at 6 ect in a general context with a tinge of excitement in their voices, almost like they believe they had inside information or something, also at the end David King was talking about what happened and said, Carlton probably rated him inside the top dozen and made the move they deemed was the right move and the Carlton blokes then call him a genius, in saying that anyone calling David King a genius is clutching at straws imo, but all the evidence is pointing to them believing he was the 6th best kid, now in a draft pool with as many elite talents as was in the 2018 draft pool, rating a kid inside the top 6 that the majority didnt rate in the elite grouping was a huge call.

"if the kid is there that we rate at 6" "those left foot kicks at Ballarat, you cant, it doesnt show ya what the wind was like that day, like it was horrific conditions wasnt it -directed to SOS" (making excuses for poor disposal as they watch highlights of Stocker), "his left is almost better than his right" Judd chimes in, "well he is technically better on his left than he is on his right, guides the ball better on his opposite, pulls the trigger" "he plays more at Sandringham in the midfield, because Bailey Smith is at school all the time, he's the, he's the brute, isnt he?"

that conversation was interesting and shows some of their reasoning...

I’ll admit I’m a numpty just sitting at home on my couch, watching the U18 Champs and TAC cup finals on tele, no scouting experience or ability to judge talent, so my opinion means diddly squat...

But if Carlton’s recruiters rated Stocker 6th best over all, Carlton need new recruiters.

 

[HARKER]

I’ll admit I’m a numpty just sitting at home on my couch, watching the U18 Champs and TAC cup finals on tele, no scouting experience or ability to judge talent, so my opinion means diddly squat...
But if Carlton’s recruiters rated Stocker 6th best over all, Carlton need new recruiters.

It's a little high on face value, but only time will truly tell and not some consensus view based on.........what exactly?

I can't compare him to every other player right now on the back of one season, but Stocker is the brute mentioned in that video.

Did have some issues fitting into what was required early on but seems to have learned his lessons. Let's see where things sit in August.

 

[La Dispute]

You would not trade down if you rated Kemp in the top 5. Pump the brakes.

Of course we could. We guessed correctly that he would slide due to other teams wanting different players.

On talent alone he was in the best few prospects in the draft. He was always going to slide due to injury, but never should have slid that far.

 

[briztoon]

Of course we could. We guessed correctly that he would slide due to other teams wanting different players.

On talent alone he was in the best few prospects in the draft. He was always going to slide due to injury, but never should have slid that far.

Max King is possibly the only example from recent drafts where a player hasn’t slid after doing an ACL.

It’s genuinely hard to project where Kemp may have gone had he not had his injury.

Coming in to the year he was firmly in the top 5 discussion.

But he really had a roller coaster type season before injury. A large part of that was due to being played in multiple positions.

Had he played primarily as a mid who rested forward, and consistently performed as he did for Vic C in the last two games of the U18 Champs, he probably would have been a top 3 lock.

I would like to believe, without injury, Kemp wouldn’t have made it past Sydney’s first selection.

 

[Thetrader15]

Are there any actual CFC interviews or articles where they mention CFC rated Stocker as the 6th best talent in the 2018 draft?

If Carlton’s recruiters genuinely rated Stocker as the 6th best over all talent, then there should be questions asked about their ability to genuinely assess talent.

Or their in ability to seperate a bias in regards to club needs versus actual talent available.

I will accept clubs drawing lines through academy and father son tied players. Or players who represent a significant flight risk. Or players that have a medical condition.

But that only potentially rules out three players drafted ahead of Stocker.

If they did think he was 6th best and after taking Walsh at 1, who of the following was Stocker rated higher than?

Ben King
Max King
Luko
Rankine
Rozee

 

[HARKER]

If they did think he was 6th best and after taking Walsh at 1, who of the following was Stocker rated higher than?

Ben King
Max King
Luko
Rankine
Rozee

Walsh
Lukosius
Rankine
Max King
Caldwell

Bit of a miss on Rozee, especially given we could have used genuine goal-kickers.

 

[Thetrader15]

Walsh
Lukosius
Rankine
Max King
Caldwell

Bit of a miss on Rozee, especially given we could have used genuine goal-kickers.

Ben King another miss.

I'd have had Walsh at 6 if it was me, but what do I know

 

[HARKER]

Ben King another miss.
I'd have had Walsh at 6 if it was me, but what do I know

As much as Luke Darcy who voted for Rozee?
People will be surprised to see just how much growth is left in Walsh.

Ben King? There were a lot of very good players in that draft and we can keep on going by naming Smith, Jones, Duursma, Butters etc.
You don't always need the best ones but the right ones. We'll see how that plays out in time.

 

[Marcel Proust]

walsh wont get much better than the current model imo

already very elite runner

 

[gandaal]

Walsh
Lukosius
Rankine
Max King
Caldwell

Bit of a miss on Rozee, especially given we could have used genuine goal-kickers.

I'm not sure that's true. Weren't we showing Luko and Rozee around the club a week or two before the draft?

If I were to guess our list would've went something like this:
Walsh
Luko
Rozee
Rankine
Caldwell
Stocker

And its not as crazy as it sounds. When we have McKay, Curnow, McGovern, and Casboult on the list why recruit another key forward? We had other list priorities.

 

[La Dispute]

walsh wont get much better than the current model imo

already very elite runner

Rubbish, he will add size, improve the contested side of his game (which is already strong given his light frame), improve his running patterns, tighten up his decision-making and end up a similar player stylistically to Tom Mitchell or Jack Macrae.

There’s still a (Sydney) stack of improvement in him.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

and end up a similar player stylistically to Tom Mitchell or Jack Macrae.

Two players not even vaguely alike.

 

[La Dispute]

Two players not even vaguely alike.

They are both huge accumulators with strong contested games.

Actually very similar.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

They accumulate contested footy in completely different ways.

 

[HARKER]

I'm not sure that's true. Weren't we showing Luko and Rozee around the club a week or two before the draft?

If I were to guess our list would've went something like this:
Walsh
Luko
Rozee
Rankine
Caldwell
Stocker

And its not as crazy as it sounds. When we have McKay, Curnow, McGovern, and Casboult on the list why recruit another key forward? We had other list priorities.

I wouldn't be 100% sure even if SOS himself told me, but I have this from a very good source.
It was Max King who SOS liked most though and it's likely the ACL that allowed him to drop to the Saints.

Stocker at #6 did surprise me, but having watched him closely, I can see why he was rated as high as he was by the CFC.
There were a couple of things to get in check though and this seems to now have come about through the course of last year.

 

[HARKER]

walsh wont get much better than the current model imo

already very elite runner

He's taller than last year.
He's stronger than last year.

At training he even looks quicker by way of body and by way of mind. You'll see.

 

[briztoon]

As much as Luke Darcy who voted for Rozee?
People will be surprised to see just how much growth is left in Walsh.

Ben King? There were a lot of very good players in that draft and we can keep on going by naming Smith, Jones, Duursma, Butters etc.
You don't always need the best ones but the right ones. We'll see how that plays out in time.

I'm not sure that's true. Weren't we showing Luko and Rozee around the club a week or two before the draft?

If I were to guess our list would've went something like this:
Walsh
Luko
Rozee
Rankine
Caldwell
Stocker

And its not as crazy as it sounds. When we have McKay, Curnow, McGovern, and Casboult on the list why recruit another key forward? We had other list priorities.

And this goes back to my original question and comment.

Did Carlton genuinely rate Stocker as the 6th best talent in the draft, or 6th best talent on a list needs basis, or 6th best inside/balanced mid in the draft?

I can believe 6th best mid in the draft if you rate;
Walsh
Smith
Caldwell
Duursma
Either Jackson Hately or Tarryn Thomas ahead of Stocker.

I struggle the believe 6th best talent, excluding KPP’s in regards to list needs.

There’s also a scenario where they end up overrating Stocker, as they believe he’ll be available at a pick at the back end of the first round, and he moves up their draft board as a consequence, but this phenomenon is covered much better in the Lystics AFL podcast, than I could explain here.

 

[HARKER]

And this goes back to my original question and comment.

Did Carlton genuinely rate Stocker as the 6th best talent in the draft, or 6th best talent on a list needs basis, or 6th best inside/balanced mid in the draft?

I can believe 6th best mid in the draft if you rate;
Walsh
Smith
Caldwell
Duursma
Either Jackson Hately or Tarryn Thomas ahead of Stocker.

I struggle the believe 6th best talent, excluding KPP’s in regards to list needs.

There’s also a scenario where they end up overrating Stocker, as they believe he’ll be available at a pick at the back end of the first round, and he moves up their draft board as a consequence, but this phenomenon is covered much better in the Lystics AFL podcast, than I could explain here.

It was the sixth best player for Carlton and that can mean different things to different clubs.
Clubs don't necessarily care for talent alone, if they don't rate the character and the application to become the best they can be.
Was McCasey the sixth best talent in 2019? Pickett? Weightman?

Pointed it out here before that Carlton recruiters called Stocker a brute and that was evident to me in his first Northern Blues game for the club.
I also don't think Stocker will amount to being seen as the sixth best talent from the draft, but he may yet be the right player for the club.

From the first game I saw, Stocker reminded me of Hodge. He's unlikely to be anywhere as good, but think Hodge.

 

[briztoon]

It was the sixth best player for Carlton and that can mean different things to different clubs.
Clubs don't necessarily care for talent alone, if they don't rate the character and the application to become the best they can be.
Was McCasey the sixth best talent in 2019? Pickett? Weightman?

Pointed it out here before that Carlton recruiters called Stocker a brute and that was evident to me in his first Northern Blues game for the club.
I also don't think Stocker will amount to being seen as the sixth best talent from the draft, but he may yet be the right player for the club.

From the first game I saw, Stocker reminded me of Hodge. He's unlikely to be anywhere as good, but think Hodge.

You only have to go back one page where we had this discussion already, and GUMBLETRON put up the Carlton draft night video of SOS talking about Stocker, and Davo-27 commenting that it certainly appears that SOS is saying 6th best over all.

Honestly I have no problem if Stocker was list fit draft selection.

Teams make such picks in the top 10, even though clubs always say they draft best talent available.

I’d point to Adelaide drafting McAsey ahead of Hayden Young as an example of that.

My problem lies in the thought process that occurred before the trade and perceived value of the trade at the time of the trade.

I’ve discussed this in the Stocker thread here, and in the trade thread on the trade page.

I believe the trade was a mistake at the time. And it’s only for the fact that Kemp did his ACL that the draft worked out for Carlton as it did.

Had Kemp not done his ACL, and had a second half of the season akin to Bontempelli in his draft year, then Kemp doesn’t slide past Sydney at 5. Adelaide get their preferred draft target of Stephens at 6. McAsey slides past Fremantle, possibly to Hawthorn.

What does Carlton do at pick 11 then? Still trade out with McAsey and Flanders on the board?

There’s no other Kemp like player available.

The trade looks completely different in such a scenario.

And the only difference is Kemp’s ACL.

 

[HARKER]

You only have to go back one page where we had this discussion already, and GUMBLETRON put up the Carlton draft night video of SOS talking about Stocker, and Davo-27 commenting that it certainly appears that SOS is saying 6th best over all.

Honestly I have no problem if Stocker was list fit draft selection.

Teams make such picks in the top 10, even though clubs always say they draft best talent available.

I’d point to Adelaide drafting McAsey ahead of Hayden Young as an example of that.

My problem lies in the thought process that occurred before the trade and perceived value of the trade at the time of the trade.

I’ve discussed this in the Stocker thread on the draft page.

I believe the trade was a mistake at the time. And it’s only for the fact that Kemp did his ACL that the draft worked out for Carlton as it did.

Had Kemp not done his ACL, and had a second half of the season akin to Bontempelli in his draft year, then Kemp doesn’t slide past Sydney at 5. Adelaide get their preferred draft target of Stephens at 6. McAsey slides past Fremantle, possibly to Hawthorn.

What does Carlton do at pick 11 then? Still trade out with McAsey and Flanders on the board?

There’s no other Kemp like player available.

The trade looks completely different in such a scenario.

And the only difference is Kemp’s ACL.

I was simply pointing out that there isn't a consensus on who are the best players in drafts and that every club views things a little differently.......no matter what recruiters say on the night, as no recruiter nor List Manager is going to conclude with' "We didn't take the best talent available"

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

I find it impossible to imagine us actually rating him 6th overall. Mainly because he was extremely top age, a man child and not dominant in an incredibly talented draft year. 6th in terms of players we were actually looking for I can imagine.

I’m a huge fan of him and as posted earlier he reminds me a lot of a poor mans Luke Hodge. He could be absolutely huge for us.