List Mgmt. 2022 Draft and Trade Hypotheticals: Kinnear & Dalrymple - we march to no drum but our own!

[Ticky009]

 

[LukeParkerno1]

With the best will in the world those available to us are unlikely to be upgrades on what we have.
Sheldrick might develop and I’d like to see Gulden spend more time there. I fear for Roberts who looks one paced to me,

I haven't seen enough of Roberts to be honest but he was a late pick so expectations are low anyway.

Wouldn't be against one at 17, but I have my two I'm hoping for at 14 (either one suits me)- Hotton or Allen not sure Allen will be there though

 

[Bloods86]

The blokes that went after him sure would have been handy, especially the tall that went to West Coast.

I’m fine taking Barnett, he’s the one that is worth it. It’s the other ones personally I have an issue, they aren’t first round talents. These late firsts are like mid to late second rounders in a normal draft. Why do you recon clubs want picks next year (and it’s not just us wanting them)

Yeah, well you can't always predict injuries. It's just revisionist to say that we reached, and we shouldn't have.

 

[Bloods86]

I haven't seen enough of Roberts to be honest but he was a late pick so expectations are low anyway.

Wouldn't be against one at 17, but I have my two I'm hoping for at 14 (either one suits me)- Hotton or Allen not sure Allen will be there though

Why are expectations automatically low for picks in the 30s, 40s etc? It's where we do some of our best work. Rowbottom was 25, Warner 39, Parker 40. That's 3/4 of a midfield that got to a grand final, with 2 of them being 21 and 22 years old.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Yeah, well you can't always predict injuries. It's just revisionist to say that we reached, and we shouldn't have.

It was a reach, whether it was a small or large one that's your decision. Were better talents on the board, said it at the time, understood the type though.

If you keep going above the range it's a losing process. It's why you may disagree but going best available is always the best philosophy in mid to late first rounders. Barnett would fit that anyway so you'd get your tall player fix. Just wouldn't go near the others you listed at 17.

 

[Bloods86]

It certainly didn’t help - but he had a full couple of years post injury to break into the side & couldn’t do it.

I think that we did cop a bust with Ling.

Fortunately, we’ll never draft a bust ever again.

Nah, you could clearly see that his speed and agility were ruined post injury. He could no longer play the position we picked him for.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Why are expectations automatically low for picks in the 30s, 40s etc? It's where we do some of our best work. Rowbottom was 25, Warner 39, Parker 40. That's 3/4 of a midfield that got to a grand final, with 2 of them being 21 and 22 years old.

They are always lower, you sort of want your prime selections to be the cream. We've been lucky, but it's not a model I love. Would much rather the other way round

 

[Bloods86]

It was a reach, whether it was a small or large one that's your decision. Were better talents on the board, said it at the time, understood the type though.

If you keep going above the range it's a losing process. It's why you may disagree but going best available is always the best philosophy in mid to late first rounders. Barnett would fit that anyway so you'd get your tall player fix. Just wouldn't go near the others you listed at 17.

It was a very small reach, if any, according to your own definition of what is a reach (vs draft "experts" rankings and predictions).

You're on record as advocating for a bit of a risk with our first pick, as opposed to "vanilla" types. It seems odd then, that you would be opposed to taking a bit of a risk on types of players that we need a heck of a lot more, with later picks.

 

[Bloods86]

They did which is why I’m for getting a genuine bull mid it’s the type we lack in depth.

There was 1 cm in total between the two midfields. But a couple of decades worth of experience and gym time, which isn't going to be solved at the draft.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

It was a very small reach, if any, according to your own definition of what is a reach (vs draft "experts" rankings and predictions).

You're on record as advocating for a bit of a risk with our first pick, as opposed to "vanilla" types. It seems odd then, that you would be opposed to taking a bit of a risk on types of players that we need a heck of a lot more, with later picks.

There are "riskier" types that would be still best available. Old Hotton is around the range, George if we decide to gamble a bit (I wouldn't go George). Allen was my preference but feel he's going earlier. Hustwaite an option here too. All these Id rather haha any taels listed that are not Barnett. Barnett is the exception, he's rated there, so it's fine to take the tall who is a needs selection.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

There was 1 cm in total between the two midfields. But a couple of decades worth of experience and gym time, which isn't going to be solved at the draft.

A Cripps type sure would help who is built like a bull and was when drafted too. Yeah he's put on muscle but he wasn't a twig when drafted

 

[Bloods86]

A Cripps type sure would help who is built like a bull and was when drafted too. Yeah he's put on muscle but he wasn't a twig when drafted

Yeah, cool, let's just draft us a Cripps...

Feel like you're deliberately missing the points being raised, but ok.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

Looking at this rumour going around that you're open to trading out of the first round of this draft

Would F1 and 29 for 14+17 get it done? Bit of a risk with us finishing higher but if you guys dont rate this draft and next years meant to be a superdraft may be something ur team would be okay with. From all the talk from Carlton we are very interested in loading up in the first 25 or so picks this year

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Looking at this rumour going around that you're open to trading out of the first round of this draft

Would F1 and 29 for 14+17 get it done? Bit of a risk with us finishing higher but if you guys dont rate this draft and next years meant to be a superdraft may be something ur team would be okay with. From all the talk from Carlton we are very interested in loading up in the first 25 or so picks

Think we keep one of the picks in the teens but I like it. It isn't far off though I actually don't mind that deal. There are some players in the 30's that would be just as good.

 

[Bloods86]

Looking at this rumour going around that you're open to trading out of the first round of this draft

Would F1 and 29 for 14+17 get it done? Bit of a risk with us finishing higher but if you guys dont rate this draft and next years meant to be a superdraft may be something ur team would be okay with. From all the talk from Carlton we are very interested in loading up in the first 25 or so picks

I think we'd be as dumb as bricks to do that trade. Don't think there's any talk of us trading out both our 1st rounders?

Personally, I think trading out either of our 1st rounders to next year is dumb, I'd be questioning the credibility of our list management team if we did it.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Yeah, cool, let's just draft us a Cripps...

Feel like you're deliberately missing the points being raised, but ok.

He went pick 13, it's not as far fetched as you think. I know draftees won't come in and do it next year but Parker isn't any spring chicken himself. Not against a small.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I think we'd be as dumb as bricks to do that trade. Don't think there's any talk of us trading out both our 1st rounders?

Personally, I think trading out either of our 1st rounders to next year is dumb, I'd be questioning the credibility of our list management team if we did it.

Hey you might get your prized tall at 29, isn't that what you desperately want? It's not a horrible trade though seems we are getting short changed.

 

[Bloods86]

He went pick 13, it's not as far fetched as you think. I know draftees won't come in and do it next year but Parker isn't any spring chicken himself. Not against a small.

I'm fine with drafting an inside mid, if we draft a mid, it should be an inside mid. I've said before that we'll need to replace Parker (or depth as the next in for whoever might replace Parker). Hustwaite and Allan are (aside from Ginbey) my preferences, but not necessarily because of their height/potential size, rather the traits they bring. It's superficial to look at the grand final and say that we got smacked in the middle because we just didn't have a bull.

 

[Bloods86]

Hey you might get your prized tall at 29, isn't that what you desperately want? It's not a horrible trade though seems we are getting short changed.

OK, so we've established another rule of yours. Happy to get short changed, as long as we're getting picks in the next years draft as opposed to the current one.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I'm fine with drafting an inside mid, if we draft a mid, it should be an inside mid. I've said before that we'll need to replace Parker (or depth as the next in for whoever might replace Parker). Hustwaite and Allan are (aside from Ginbey) my preferences, but not necessarily because of their height/potential size, rather the traits they bring. It's superficial to look at the grand final and say that we got smacked in the middle because we just didn't have a bull.

If Gibney lasted we'd have been all over him. He's the one I feel we were trying to trade up for. Unfortunately I'm realistic he won't be there not with WCE needing mids badly. I'd be happy with Hustwaite or Allen. I really like Hotton too. Love Jacob Konstanty any of those 4 at 14 I'm happy .

 

[LukeParkerno1]

OK, so we've established another rule of yours. Happy to get short changed, as long as we're getting picks in the next years draft as opposed to the current one.

Well the current draft is just not that good, I hate it myself as it goes against everything I believe in. However I trust the recruiters it's clear they don't rate it, and they are paid good money I trust their judgement on this. Take 1, flip 1 to next year. Happy enough.

 

[Bloods86]

Well the current draft is just not that good, I hate it myself as it goes against everything I believe in. However I trust the recruiters it's clear they don't rate it, and they are paid good money I trust their judgement on this. Take 1, flip 1 to next year. Happy enough.

There's value in every draft. We got Parker at 40 in what turned out to be a mediocre draft. I don't buy the cliches about "next year is a superdraft, way better than this year", because I don't think it turns out to be true very often.

Recruiters should just do their jobs and get the best / most needed players each year with the picks they have, especially given our circumstances (flag window with impending gaps in the list). Trying to be nostradamus and take a punt on next year is fine if we're in a rebuild and no urgency to fix up gaps.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

There's value in every draft. We got Parker at 40 in what turned out to be a mediocre draft. I don't buy the cliches about "next year is a superdraft, way better than this year", because I don't think it turns out to be true very often.

Recruiters should just do their jobs and get the best / most needed players each year with the picks they have, especially given our circumstances (flag window with impending gaps in the list). Trying to be nostradamus and take a punt on next year is fine if we're in a rebuild and no urgency to fix up gaps.

There may be more value next year not every draft is even for every Parker there’s 20 that’s not. Getting an extra asset next year I don’t mind

 

[Bloods86]

There may be more value next year not every draft is even for every Parker there’s 20 that’s not. Getting an extra asset next year I don’t mind

Yeah well, I just don't want to base our drafting on "may be more value next year", when we've got a host of ruck/KPP types finishing up in 1-2 years, with much of the backup either unproven, questionable, or with 1 year left on deals.

 

[Caj]

Ling wasn't a reach. I've said it before, there were "expert" draft rankings that had him going in the mid to late teens, where we picked him (at 14), others by early 20s. If you paid attention, you'd also know that injuries ruined his career, so we have no idea if pick 14 was too early anyway. If you base your philosophy on the draft "experts" rankings, I mean that's fair enough, most of us don't have inside knowledge, then he wasn't a reach.

Sheldrick on the other hand, was a reach by that measure, and you, like many others didn't bat an eyelid because he was a midfielder.

Ling was a reach, very few had him ranked in the teens, some had him in the 30's, to take him at 14 was a reach whether you like it or not. Any of the 3 selected directly after him (Richards, Higgins, Starcevich) were universally rated and would comfortably be in our best 22

Sheldrick is in the same boat, I'm not writing him off by any means, but I'm yet to be convinced it was some kind of genius selection

 

[Callipygian]

Looking at this rumour going around that you're open to trading out of the first round of this draft

Would F1 and 29 for 14+17 get it done? Bit of a risk with us finishing higher but if you guys dont rate this draft and next years meant to be a superdraft may be something ur team would be okay with. From all the talk from Carlton we are very interested in loading up in the first 25 or so picks this year

Absolutely not! I wouldn't even do your F1 for our pick 14 - let alone trading down from 17 to 29 as well! I would consider trading out our pick 17 for your future first.

For the same reason I'm not surprised Essendon wouldn't want to swap their pick 4 for our picks 14 & 17 - might look reasonable on paper (we'd be giving up more DVI points) but it's just not enough. It seems even Hawthorn aren't interested in that kind of a deal. That's the way it is. You pay a substantial premium to move up (or forward). It's the same reason clubs needing to match Academy bids can always sell their first rounders for a handsome DVI profit.

I'm definitely open to trading a first rounder back or forward for the right deal. Just don't expect us to bend over.

Anyone trading up or forward or driving a pick swap always has to pay overs. A fairer option would be your picks 10 & 29 for our picks 14 & 17. I would do that if a player I was really keen on were still available at pick 10. How would you feel about that deal? To be clear a player we rated really highly would have to be available (e.g. Humphrey) which is unlikely - but it can happen as we saw with you guys paying for Stocker or Gold Coast for Sharp.