List Mgmt. 2013 DRAFT

[Salaryman]

If he speaks on behalf of 17 other supporter bases, yes.

Wasn't a comparative analysis

 

[thylacine60]

Hope we can get a slider. Any of Freeman, Scharenberg, Lennon or Bontempelli sound good to me.

Foot issues just demonstrate this kids one dimensional game and attitude. If he hasn't learnt to run on his hands by now = do not want.

 

[Stig O'Hara]

Honestly cannot remember a draft year, apart from the obvious Number One pick, where the next godknows how many, could be pulled from a hat.

 

[thylacine60]

Every year, shirley.

 

[mikeythemoocow]

Honestly cannot remember a draft year, apart from the obvious Number One pick, where the next godknows how many, could be pulled from a hat.

Its been said that this is a week draft, maybe it might end up like the 2003 draft with only a handfull of players actually any good and most delisted within 4 years

 

[thylacine60]

Let's at least draft a quality potential delistee.

 

[Stig O'Hara]

Every year, shirley.

No doubt we'll trot out the old we couldn't believe we got this kid at 13 line.

 

[thylacine60]

"How he was still there at 13..."

 

[thylacine60]

Way to spoil the atmos, Harks.

 

[etsal1]

Callum Twomey ‏@AFL_CalTwomey 8 Nov Fair few clubs like Zak Jones. Should be a top-20 pick. Geelong, Fremantle, Richmond among those who could consider the tough half-back.

GWS Boyd
GWS Kelly
St.K Billings
WBD Scharenberg
GCS Kolodashnij
Coll Aish
Bris Salem
Melb Lennon
Coll Bontompelli
WCE Sheed
Rich Jones
Carl Dunstan/Acres/Freeman/Dumont/Cripps

Don't believe in sliders, but I'm looking forward to getting our best of the rest. Harder to predict our man with Rogers being the head honcho for just one draft. Should be an interesting night with our second and third picks a fair way back.

Jones going to Richmond would mean we don't need to rely on McCarthy going top 10 for a 'slider' (for lack of a better word) to be available like Freeman.

 

[Stig O'Hara]

When's the last time we used that line anyway?

Around 12 months ago.

2 Nov 2012 ... Rated by some as the second-best player in the draft, "Menzel to me was actually pick two and it was hard to split him for pickone," Carlton recruiting chief Shane Rogers said.

 

[etsal1]

Have a feeling we'll save that for the #39 this time around.

When's the last time we used that line anyway? I think it was for Robinson in '08 and to be fair, Robbo was quite a slide in that year.

I'm pretty sure something similar was said of Graham last year. Rightly so though

 

[mikeythemoocow]

We need to toughen up. Anyone in this draft got neck tatts or anyone shown some willingness to perhaps get a face tatt?

 

[Silvagnis]

If he speaks on behalf of 17 other supporter bases, yes.

Speak about the one that...

Wanted Yarran flailed because he didn't win the GF sprint.
Watson delisted before getting attached to Thorp.
Jeered Kreuzer, Henderson, Collins, Rowe and others.

No better than Walls accusing someone like Kreuzer of ducking his head in a game.

 

[thylacine60]

You said it's typical of the Carlton supporter base to down-talk their own and support outsiders (paraphrasing). Do you really think you are unique in trashing Thorp and supporting current team members? Just don't get why you get so put out by other people's opinions - particularly when there is bullshit and conjecture spread liberally across both sides of the argument.

 

[The Flying Doormat]

 

[mikeythemoocow]

You said it's typical of the Carlton supporter base to down-talk their own and support outsiders (paraphrasing). Do you really think you are unique in trashing Thorp and supporting current team members? Just don't get why you get so put out by other people's opinions - particularly when there is bullshit and conjecture spread liberally across both sides of the argument.

Its because he's right. Ignore is your friend.

 

[thylacine60]

I wouldn't ignore TG as he is too good a poster with regard to vids, news links, player info and the odd laugh. He's a lot less scary than he used to be. His opinions are usually well researched and presented but my beef is his constant put-downs of the humble dissenter.

 

[Azul]

I think it was for Robinson in '08 and to be fair, Robbo was quite a slide in that year.

Perhaps in the minds of phantom drafters but the talent pool was fairly strong - most of the players taken before Mitch are still on afl lists.

 

[ianh]

Looking at the depth chart of the various clubs set out in The Age club by club guide to the draft

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/clubbyclub-guide-to-the-2013-afl-draft-20131115-2xm5h.html

and averaging them out across the clubs, we get (rounding up because we have less than full lists at the moment)

KPF Av 4.56 (11.88 %) round up to 5 Carlton 4 (10.81%) 9.01% below average
KPD Av 5.56 (14.48 %) round up to 6 Carlton 4 (10.81%) 25.35% below average
mid or small fwd Av 4.72 (12.29 %) round up to 5 Carlton 4 (10.81%) 12.04% below average
mid or small def Av 6.33 (16.49 %) round up to 7 Carlton 7 (18.92%) 14.74% above average
midfielders Av 13.89 (36.18 %) round up to 14 Carlton 16 (43.24%) 11.95% above average
Rucks Av 3.33 ( 8.67 %) round up to 4 Carlton 2 (5.41%) 37.60% below average
TOTAL ROUNDED UP 41 Carlton 37 (100%)

Interestingly, this may suggest our perceived lack of midfielders and small defenders is more a matter of quality than numbers, as they are the 2 areas in which we are above the norm. We are below average everywhere else, from Rucks the worst (37.6%) to Key Forwards the least (9.01%). With rucks this appears clearly a numbers issue purely, as both our ruckman have shown themselves AFL quality, The 2 areas where we are glaringly below average are rucks and key defenders (and in the case of the latter that is despite counting both McInnes and White as key defenders which is in my view borderline). That suggests that if we were trying to address our list balance issues in this years national and rookie drafts we need at least 1 if not 2 ruckmen, a key forward (so perhaps a KF/Ruck type to address both these deficiencies), a key defender, a mid/small forward and a mid. The problem with that, of course is that we acknowledge a need for more quality mids, which tends to dictate the idea that we take a mid with our first pick as that should be a quality player.

This does not included either of the Irishmen as The Age article didn't include them, Byrne appears to be in the running defender mould and Sheehan perhaps a forward type. If we place them on this roles that will tend to address the relatively slight deficiency in the mid/small forward category and bolster the mid/small defender category which is already adequately stocked numbers wise, so we could tend to leave those 2 areas alone at the draft.

So, then if we grab a mid first pick and don't look for mid/small forwards or defenders at all, we are then looking for (in order of need by the numbers) a ruck, a key defender and a key forward.

Assume we did that, the numbers would then look like this

KPF Av 4.56 (11.88 %) round up to 5 Carlton 4 below average
KPD Av 5.56 (14.48 %) round up to 6 Carlton 5 below average
mid or small fwd Av 4.72 (12.29 %) round up to 5 Carlton 5 average
mid or small def Av 6.33 (16.49 %) round up to 7 Carlton 8 above average
midfielders Av 13.89 (36.18 %) round up to 14 Carlton 17 above average
Rucks Av 3.33 ( 8.67 %) round up to 4 Carlton 3 below average
TOTAL 43

That would suggest then that we need to look at the 2 remaining rookie draft spots to secure someone for each of our areas which are still below average - ie in order ruck, KPF and KPD. That leaves us one player short, so at least one of the players drafted whether in the national or rookie draft would need to be a hybrid ie either ruck/KPF, ruck/KPD or KPF/KPD (ie swingman).

Fortunately, in this draft there are a number of hybrid forward-ruck types (eg Apeness, Brown, Conlon) as well as swingmen and even 1 or 2 key defenders with ruck background (eg Jack Leslie) which tends to suggest as long as we don't leave it too late we should be able to grab one of these hybrid types at some stage. So if we do that and effectively add 3 roles with 2 picks then the depth chart looks like this:

KPF Av 4.56 (11.88 %) round up to 5 Carlton 5 about average
KPD Av 5.56 (14.48 %) round up to 6 Carlton 6 about average
mid or small fwd Av 4.72 (12.29 %) round up to 5 Carlton 5 about average
mid or small def Av 6.33 (16.49 %) round up to 7 Carlton 8 above average
midfielders Av 13.89 (36.18 %) round up to 14 Carlton 17 above average
Rucks Av 3.33 ( 8.67 %) round up to 4 Carlton 4 about average
TOTAL 46 (only 45 players but 1 allocated dual roles)

Such a position would leave us covered at least numerically speaking pretty well covered in all areas (obviously you can't be above average in 2 areas and average in all other areas, the reality is we are a bit bellow average elsewhere on KPF, KPD and mid/small fwds but by less than half a player, and marginally above average re rucks).

So therefore, in order to try and achieve a balanced list by the end of the national and rookie drafts we need to look at our available picks being used on 1 mid, 2 rucks, 2KPF, 2KPD - but as we have only 6 free picks at least 1 of the rucks, KPF or KPD needs to be a hybrid type.

This of course runs counter to the mantra of grabbing mids, which would tend to leave us with a list under supplied for taller players, however given this year is supposed be be light on for talls and next year is supposed to be strong on talls perhaps that is a position that is tenable with a view to redressing the imbalance somewhat next year. Alternatively, if we picked up more than 1 hybrid tall type that would give room for more mids - eg if we picked up a mid first up, then a ruck/fwd (eg Brown), then a ruck/def (eg Leslie) then a swingman then you could look at a couple of mids with the remaining picks - of course if you felt the talls you liked would still be around later you could grab the mids first, but given the mid oriented nature of this cohort it would appear more likely there will still be draftable mids at the tail end of the rookie draft rather than decent hybrid types (though it must be said there seems always to be some project rucks left on the shelf every year).

The other consideration that strikes at me is the age profile of our list. Whilst we have a number of mid types coming towards the end of their careers so is Waite and rucks and KP tend to take more time to come on. A ready to go KF/Ru and a ready to go KD with decent size would be a godsend. With that in mind I'd like to see a draft strategy that went

13 - best available, presumably a mid (only KP player worth considering given Boyd will be gone would be McCarthy who may well be gone also, but even if there I'd be inclined to go mid)

39 - depending on how the stocks of hybrids are going I'd be inclined to go with a KF/ru here. Apeness will probably be gone but hopefully one of Brown or Conlon will be available. Conlon is an injury risk but it's not like where risking a high pick going bust .

51 - again depending on what we have picked and what is still in stock in good numbers I'd think of a mature or reasonably ready to go KD here - hopefully Tippett or Sully are still around.

Rest of the ND is upgrades (Curnow and Bell)

Rookie draft

Again depending on how the numbers fall we might need a ruck, a key position player at either end or a key position utility. Someone like Tippet or Sully might still be around, there will be some rucks and key possie players but probably more project types or a retread (eg McCulloch) and there will be plenty of mids worth rookie spot if we fill up on talls before our last pick/s.

I suspect we will instead go heavy on mids and leave it to next year, but personally I'd like to see us getting some height at each end of the ground and in the middle to give us at least some cover if not someone worthy of a spot in the best 22, a better balanced list and possibly some cover for when we lose Waite and maybe Jammo over the next few years.

My dream draft?

13 - gun mid depending who falls, I'd love Lennon or Salem but fear both will be gone
39 - Apeness/Brown/Conlon in that order, hopefull one will be left.
51 - Tippett/Sully in that order

Rookies
1st - Leslie if he's still around. Else a tall who can handle multiple roles - Aliir, Toohey, Fort (the smaller) - there's a few options
2nd/3rd - mid with pace and disposal, prefer bigger body, but if the best around are smaller types so be it.

Anyways that's my thoughts on the matter. I started out this post simply meaning to look at the way our depth chart stacks up compared to the average, it has morphed in the writing to a bit o a rant on why we should look tall unless we are prepared to handle an unbalanced list for another year. What do you guys think?

 

[ESKIE]

Horrid

 

[Salaryman]

I wouldn't ignore TG as he is too good a poster with regard to vids, news links, player info and the odd laugh. He's a lot less scary than he used to be. His opinions are usually well researched and presented but my beef is his constant put-downs of the humble dissenter.

 

[JuddgementDay]

Who would be the most accurate predictor of the draft order? Emma Q?

 

[Cringle]

Would be happy if we land Conlon with pick 51. Is there a chance?

 

[BlackGoanna]

Good analysis. The ruck situation isnt that bad however. We have 2 genuine rucks+ 2 ruck/ fwds in rowe and cabouldt. I would only look at a rookie here.

The other consideration is that list management is evolving. MM wants a list heavy with midfield talent.. some clubs are pushing away from the small defender/ forward types and selecting players who are multipositional.

Glaringly, and without the need for the numbers it is obvious we lack key position talent at both ends. We simply have not brought enough in through recent drafts and trading. It is a numbers game with key position players. We have gone to drafts and completely drafted mids.

We have done incredibly well on later picks and rookies talls. Eg. Fev, Jamo, Casboult, Rowe, White... we just havent brought in enough consistently.



Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk