Delisted 13. Liam Stocker

[HARKER]

My favourite sporting program is Offsiders where, although abbreviated in nature, discusses the why and how, not just what happened and attack those who don’t produce the “right” statistics or outcomes. I find outlandish commentary by experts like Cornes to be repugnant and good soldiers like Daisy are forced to compete with these identities for brand approval and screen time.

Good call and this is what comes about.
You may have your own style, but somehow that get can get manipulated into what the station/network require.
The reason football broadcasting is so poor may be partly due to the quality of the presenters but more so for the style being forced on, by the producers.

It's also a lot harder these days though to keep up with 18 teams, 800 odd players and to know what all are doing at all times. It's tough.
As much as people don't like him, I enjoy listening to Wallace (not the voice but the content) because at least he nestles into his one strength (arguable, I know) being List Management and speaks with at least some background knowledge and understanding.

Cornes? Terrible in every way and simply an indictment on the station that offers him the opportunity to open his mouth.

 

[BlueTang]

Good call and this is what comes about.
You may have your own style, but somehow that get can get manipulated into what the station/network require.
The reason football broadcasting is so poor may be partly due to the quality of the presenters but more so for the style being forced on, by the producers.

It's also a lot harder these days though to keep up with 18 teams, 800 odd players and to know what all are doing at all times. It's tough.
As much as people don't like him, I enjoy listening to Wallace (not the voice but the content) because at least he nestles into his one strength (arguable, I know) being List Management and speaks with at least some background knowledge and understanding.

Cornes? Terrible in every way and simply an indictment on the station that offers him the opportunity to open his mouth.

Agree with both of you, except I don’t mind Cornes. He gets lots of things wrong, but he acknowledges that, least he is attempting to actually put the heat on some issues/players

 

[90N90S]

Kid has a chip on his shoulder and that is good for us and for him, will help motivate him. Love this by SOS a gamble but a good gamble, wants to play round 1 and hope he has a big preseason.

 

[Gethelred]

End of this video the reporters bring up how the guys are missing schoolies. Right at the very end Stocker throws back "As if you'd choose schoolies over this!"

This guy. This ****in' guy. Genuinely impressing me as a young man so far and is quickly becoming my favourite pick of the last few years!

Exactly! He's determined, absolutely focused on becoming the best player he could be.

It's also worth noting that, by selecting Stocker in the way we did, there is almost more focus - and pressure - on him as there is on Sam Walsh as no.1. There is precious little chance that Sam will undergo the kind of fire most no.1 picks get, because he's never going to cop it in the same way, not with Liam right next to him, the risky trade and the first round 1 future pick. They'll both cop the attention.

It's good, in that it encourages Liam to prove the doubters wrong - something that seems to stick with him, given a few things he's said in interviews - and it provides a bit of shadow for Sam to step into, instead of constantly feeling the pressure.

 

[Gethelred]

Agree with both of you, except I don’t mind Cornes. He gets lots of things wrong, but he acknowledges that, least he is attempting to actually put the heat on some issues/players

?

I've never, ever seen Cornes acknowledge that he got something wrong. I've never seen him do much more than troll the living shit out of any given supporter base, and I've never seen him go beyond that in his pursuit of a headline. The bloke is what happens when you provide a person of scant intelligence but sufficient profile with a journalistic position and a mandate to be controversial. He does what he thinks a journalist's job is - to obtain readers/listeners - in the most facile of ways, and he is a disgrace to pretty much every single forum that offers him a position.

Mind, he has time to change and improve - most don't start out the way they finish - but he's as bad as those that photoshop images of estranged celebrities together for the covers of Women's Day IMO.

 

[passmark]

Looks to me like they'd made up their mind based on
-Stocker rated better than pick 8 in a very strong draft.
-that 2018 was the last year for taking top end immature talent.
-although immature he's not underdeveloped physically apart from tank. So ready in 2020.
-there is an expectation internally of a finish better than bottom 4.
-mature targets in 2019 may not require 2019's first round.

 

[Monkey King]

End of this video the reporters bring up how the guys are missing schoolies. Right at the very end Stocker throws back "As if you'd choose schoolies over this!"

This guy. This ****in' guy. Genuinely impressing me as a young man so far and is quickly becoming my favourite pick of the last few years!

And at about the 2 minute mark of that video a fly landed on his nose and he let it crawl around for a good 7 seconds before having to blow it off. Bloody professional!

 

[ShanDog]

And at about the 2 minute mark of that video a fly landed on his nose and he let it crawl around for a good 7 seconds before having to blow it off. Bloody professional!

I saw that - it was annoying the crap out of me. Was screaming internally "**** it off FFS!"

 

[Monkey King]

I saw that - it was annoying the crap out of me. Was screaming internally "**** it off FFS!"

And the lad remained cool as a cucumber

 

[ferrisb]

Yep - Cripps is an impressive specimen thats for sure. When you do functions & see them up close, they are massive. But as a midfielder, man he’s an impressive site.

I went to the season opener a couple of years back.

I got introduced to Kreuzer on one side and Cam Wood on the other.

Matt Korcheck was also hovering nearby.

It felt like they were casting for a remake of 3 men and a baby...

 

[Eiffel 65]

Really like this selection

 

[Aphrodite]

http://www.carltonfc.com.au/news/2018-11-27/big-ambitions-for-walsh-stocker

 

[ctacp]

I went to the season opener a couple of years back.

I got introduced to Kreuzer on one side and Cam Wood on the other.

Matt Korcheck was also hovering nearby.

It felt like they were casting for a remake of 3 men and a baby...

Yeah thats the one i found out you were there after the event ! Do you still do it ? My wife called korcheck Superman! But yeah, even the small guys are big. You wanna come as a guest on my table next season ?

 

[ctacp]

http://www.carltonfc.com.au/news/2018-11-27/big-ambitions-for-walsh-stocker

Geez someone will need to give Stocker the extra large stick to keep the girls at bay.. those teenage girls are gonna be pretty keen on him.

 

[smashbox gill]

The latest article on AFL website says we had Stocker number 6 on our draft list.

Very interesting.. Walsh, Rankine, Luko, M. King, B.King.. Stocker?

 

[PrinceCharles]

The latest article on AFL website says we had Stocker number 6 on our draft list.

Very interesting.. Walsh, Rankine, Luko, M. King, B.King.. Stocker?

Apparently one or both King's weren't there.

 

[smashbox gill]

Apparently one or both King's weren't there.

I think most likely Ben King.. as SOS apparently would have taken Max King at 1 if he did not do his ACL.

It’s so interesting reading that article, that stocker may have slipped to pick 25ish had we not picked him, yet he had him at 6.

 

[passmark]

The latest article on AFL website says we had Stocker number 6 on our draft list.

Very interesting.. Walsh, Rankine, Luko, M. King, B.King.. Stocker?

Would that suggest our list had an emphasis on need rather than best available?

 

[HARKER]

Would that suggest our list had an emphasis on need rather than best available?

Every team does it and there's more examples of that in the article, alone.

Sure teams pick best available but that's best available on their sheet after they've selected players they'd want at the club based on a variety of reasons and not simply on exposed form or latent talent. It's odd how this is not yet clear to some people.

 

[passmark]

Every team does it and there's more examples of that in the article, alone.

Sure teams pick best available but that's best available on their sheet after they've selected players they'd want at the club based on a variety of reasons and not simply on exposed form or latent talent. It's odd how this is not yet clear to some people.

I suppose it's because they often say we will take the best available.

Odd people listening to what they say huh.

 

[HARKER]

I suppose it's because they often say we will take the best available.

Odd people listening to what they say huh.

You have to follow the evidence, though.
Evidence often shows up that clubs side with taking the players/types they need most.

If Carlton for instance decide that Stocker was the #6 for us, did that simply come about that Stocker was rated as the best player at that pick or the best player for Carlton at that pick (Rogers used to say this, so what does it mean?)....there is a difference.
Of course when an absolute star presents, you may choose to side with the talent, but nevertheless clubs often 'get' exactly what they require.

 

[passmark]

You have to follow the evidence, though.
Evidence often shows up that clubs side with taking the players/types they need most.
Of course when an absolute star presents, you may choose to side with the talent, but nevertheless clubs often 'get' exactly what they require.

I still think the emphasis on talent v need can change.

It's why SOS took mCreadie to the surprise of Bolts in that first draft. He wasn't considered an absolute star but obviously SOS thought he was a very good prospect.

 

[HARKER]

I still think the emphasis on talent v need can change.

It's why SOS took mCreadie to the surprise of Bolts in that first draft. He wasn't considered an absolute star but obviously SOS thought he was a very good prospect.

Absolutely as if you're rating someone far and away better than at your next pick, you'd be crazy not to take them, although......

If we didn't need that KPD, should have we taken him regardless?
Macreadie was taken at #47 and Willie Rioli was taken at pick #52. Macreadie is still likely to be playing seconds yet Rioli would ave slotted straight into our best team given the need, right from the get go.

That's just an example and I'm in no way saying that Macreadie shouldn't have been bid upon, as we didn't know Jones would have popped out of nowhere.
That pick was sound given the knowledge that Rowe wouldn't be around for too much longer, but......Willie?

 

[passmark]

Absolutely as if you're rating someone far and away better than at your next pick, you'd be crazy not to take them, although......

If we didn't need that KPD, should have we taken him regardless?
Macreadie was taken at #47 and Willie Rioli was taken at pick #52. Macreadie is still likely to be playing seconds yet Rioli would ave slotted straight into our best team given the need, right from the get go.

That's just an example and I'm in no way saying that Macreadie shouldn't have been bid upon, as we didn't know Jones would have popped out of nowhere.
That pick was sound given the knowledge that Rowe wouldn't be around for too much longer, but......Willie?

Who knows .
Not sure if we'd have taken Willie.

He's going ok now but he had to lose 16 kegs to get drafted as a mature age and he was still a pudding.

Turned out well for West coast but theyre a good team.

 

[passmark]

So the question still remains how much of our rating him at 6 was based on our needs?