List Mgmt. 2017 draft thread

[Azzleberry]

What happened to the Swans KPD from last year who didn't take their deal and then ended up delisted?

Handy backline backup as a rookie?

 

[THE THIN MAN]

What happened to the Swans KPD from last year who didn't take their deal and then ended up delisted?

Handy backline backup as a rookie?

ANALYSIS: Where did it all go wrong for Xavier Richards?
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-12-02/analysis-where-did-it-all-go-wrong-for-xavier-richards

 

[GoTigers2015]

Noah Balta - sounds exactly what we need

 

[Cotchy9]

Noah Balta - sounds exactly what we need

Just read that. Sounds to me like he has as much potential as anyone in the draft. A big man that can play anywhere with his athletic traits is mighty exciting. He's now the number 1 man I want at our pick

 

[BKM78]

We bank Naish until he is bid on.
Our prospects would be ranked but that ranking stays live and dynamic during the draft in correlation to our picks and Naish's position as the selections progress.
We will always be given the option of Naish. But not any other player in the draft. Going early on Naish is out of the question.
I would have loved to get Balta but don't reckon we get within a whisper. I don't mind Allen, outside of him maybe we just go with best talent available?

 

[BKM78]

Noah Balta - sounds exactly what we need

Really exciting kid.
Knigtmare has him in the top 10 though I think.

 

[fargothegreat]

Noah Balta - sounds exactly what we need

Noah could be the Balta of the draft

 

[_RT_]

You must be thick. Why would you give up a 20% discount by drafting Naish before you were forced to. Dumb post. Makes absolutely no sense. We could miss out on a player we hoped to draft if the club did what you've said. Thankfully none of our recruiting staff has half a brain like yourself.

Think what you are saying here. You are advocating that we should or may pay more than we would be required to.

Naish only gets a 20% discount if he is bid on before 17, after that it is fixed at 197 points.

Hopefully the following explains my point of view better.

As I've explained I rate Naish around 15-20, if when 17 rolls around the players available on our list are all midfielder/flanker types, including Naish, rather than draft one of them I would take Naish and look at adding 2 KPPs with 20 & 25 which addresses our list needs more than adding another couple of midfielder/flanker types will.

On our list now we have Bolton Stengle Graham Rioli C.Ellis Menadue Castagna Butler Markov Short & Lennon who are all 22 or younger and are midfielder/flanker types. At the same time Garthwaite Chol(r) and Soldo are our young KPP stocks. We desperately need some quality KPP talent to be added to the list to develop as the next wave coming through.

The only player I would take ahead of Naish at 17 would be a KPP that we rated above Naish that slid through to 17. For example if Brander who many rated as a contender for pick 1 early on was to be there then we take him. If Sam Hayes who is rated a top 10 prospect was to be available we take him.

Just to further confuse/irritate people if either of those players were available at 17 I'd take them and then give serious consideration to letting Naish go altogether if it meant we could get 3 top 25 rated KPPs in the draft.

 

[Stengle26]

Naish only gets a 20% discount if he is bid on before 17, after that it is fixed at 197 points.

Hopefully the following explains my point of view better.

As I've explained I rate Naish around 15-20, if when 17 rolls around the players available on our list are all midfielder/flanker types, including Naish, rather than draft one of them I would take Naish and look at adding 2 KPPs with 20 & 25 which addresses our list needs more than adding another couple of midfielder/flanker types will.

On our list now we have Bolton Stengle Graham Rioli C.Ellis Menadue Castagna Butler Markov Short & Lennon who are all 22 or younger and are midfielder/flanker types. At the same time Garthwaite Chol(r) and Soldo are our young KPP stocks. We desperately need some quality KPP talent to be added to the list to develop as the next wave coming through.

The only player I would take ahead of Naish at 17 would be a KPP that we rated above Naish that slid through to 17. For example if Brander who many rated as a contender for pick 1 early on was to be there then we take him. If Sam Hayes who is rated a top 10 prospect was to be available we take him.

Just to further confuse/irritate people if either of those players were available at 17 I'd take them and then give serious consideration to letting Naish go altogether if it meant we could get 3 top 25 rated KPPs in the draft.

Still doesn't get it lol mate stop writing in this thread you just look stupid.

Not the coldest beer in the fridge this one!

 

[Accepted 04]

We should look at the Ruck from Gold Coasts acedemy. Dominated this year and his stats are great for a man of his size


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[_RT_]

Still doesn't get it lol mate stop writing in this thread you just look stupid.

Not the coldest beer in the fridge this one!

Everyone screamed all year that we needed to play another tall to support Jack and Nank or we wouldn't go far in the finals, Hardwick and co went against the grain and won the flag. Going against the grain doesn't always make you stupid, sometimes it can put you ahead of the curve and has others playing catch up

 

[Wacky Tiger]

Everyone screamed all year that we needed to play another tall to support Jack and Nank or we wouldn't go far in the finals, Hardwick and co went against the grain and won the flag. Going against the grain doesn't always make you stupid, sometimes it can put you ahead of the curve and has others playing catch up

Cool story bro. Still makes no sense to select Naish at 17 if no bit is forthcoming beforehand

 

[parmy2balmey]

 

[GoTigers2015]

Naish only gets a 20% discount if he is bid on before 17, after that it is fixed at 197 points.

Hopefully the following explains my point of view better.

As I've explained I rate Naish around 15-20, if when 17 rolls around the players available on our list are all midfielder/flanker types, including Naish, rather than draft one of them I would take Naish and look at adding 2 KPPs with 20 & 25 which addresses our list needs more than adding another couple of midfielder/flanker types will.

On our list now we have Bolton Stengle Graham Rioli C.Ellis Menadue Castagna Butler Markov Short & Lennon who are all 22 or younger and are midfielder/flanker types. At the same time Garthwaite Chol(r) and Soldo are our young KPP stocks. We desperately need some quality KPP talent to be added to the list to develop as the next wave coming through.

The only player I would take ahead of Naish at 17 would be a KPP that we rated above Naish that slid through to 17. For example if Brander who many rated as a contender for pick 1 early on was to be there then we take him. If Sam Hayes who is rated a top 10 prospect was to be available we take him.

Just to further confuse/irritate people if either of those players were available at 17 I'd take them and then give serious consideration to letting Naish go altogether if it meant we could get 3 top 25 rated KPPs in the draft.

It is simply not logical to pick a player we are guaranteed to get until as late as possible. That way will get the players we rate the highest at each of the earlier picks plus match for Naish when required. Use 17, 20 and 25 then match Naish with the 2 third rounders is the dream scenario.

 

[Richo83]

Stop respoding to RT the club knows the drsft game, everything will be fine.

 

[Lsta062]

What if we don't have a KPP that we rank around the 17 mark available, should we then reach for one who we might rank 23rd on our list just so we can say we got Naish on the cheap. That is what I'm trying to convey, quite poorly admittedly.

Let's look at this in theory (Excuse the bolding and underlining if not preferred. I do it so that I myself can follow what I have written).

Just say in this scenario that the actual best player is taken with the pick 1 on draft night, the 2nd-best with pick 2, the 3rd-best with pick 3 and so on. If Naish is the best available (so 17th-best in the draft) by the time we get to pick 17, then instead of taking him with pick 17, we take the 2nd-best available with pick 17 (so the 18th-best player in this scenario) instead of letting the team with pick 18 take him. Then we wait until Naish is bid on. If he is bid on between picks 17-20, then we match with 20. You'd then have taken the 17th and 18th-best with picks 17 and 20 rather than the 17th and 20th-best players with those picks if we were to take Naish at pick 17.

If he continues to slide past pick 20, then you take the 21st-best player in the draft with pick 20 and then match with a later pick. So then, you'd have 17th (Naish), 18th and the 21st-best players rather than having the 17th, 20th and 25th-best players if you pick up Naish at 17th.

If Naish is ranked higher than that (let's just say 14th), then we don't pick him up until we need to match, giving us the opportunity t pick up the best available at our respective picks.

 

[_RT_]

Cool story bro. Still makes no sense to select Naish at 17 if no bit is forthcoming beforehand

It is simply not logical to pick a player we are guaranteed to get until as late as possible. That way will get the players we rate the highest at each of the earlier picks plus match for Naish when required. Use 17, 20 and 25 then match Naish with the 2 third rounders is the dream scenario.

Never said it was logical to do it. Also Balme has come out and said that we're not guaranteed to get him. If we rate players higher than him at the stage that he is bid on we won't necessarily match it just because of the father son link.

Let's look at this in theory (Excuse the bolding and underlining if not preferred. I do it so that I myself can follow what I have written).

Just say in this scenario that the actual best player is taken with the pick 1 on draft night, the 2nd-best with pick 2, the 3rd-best with pick 3 and so on. If Naish is the best available (so 17th-best in the draft) by the time we get to pick 17, then instead of taking him with pick 17, we take the 2nd-best available with pick 17 (so the 18th-best player in this scenario) instead of letting the team with pick 18 take him. Then we wait until Naish is bid on. If he is bid on between picks 17-20, then we match with 20. You'd then have taken the 17th and 18th-best with picks 17 and 20 rather than the 17th and 20th-best players with those picks if we were to take Naish at pick 17.

If he continues to slide past pick 20, then you take the 21st-best player in the draft with pick 20 and then match with a later pick. So then, you'd have 17th (Naish), 18th and the 21st-best players rather than having the 17th, 20th and 25th-best players if you pick up Naish at 17th.

If Naish is ranked higher than that (let's just say 14th), then we don't pick him up until we need to match, giving us the opportunity t pick up the best available at our respective picks.

As I asked repeatedly, which nobody has answered, what if the 6-8 players available on our list are all midfielder/flanker types why take them when we need KPP talent to be added to the list to balance the list out, just so we can then add Naish who is the same type of player with 20 or 25 just so we can say hey we got him for a discount?

To me that is illogical especially when our list is crying out for some young KPP talent to be added. To me it makes sense to get Naish locked away early and leave ourselves with 2 picks to then focus on adding KPPs to the list. I don't want to see us add 2 midfielder/flanker types in Naish and another kid and get just one KPP from our picks. I want us to add 2 top 25 rated KPPs to our list and give us the chance to start developing the next generation of talls.

 

[RockJobster0312]

As I asked repeatedly, which nobody has answered, what if the 6-8 players available on our list are all midfielder/flanker types why take them when we need KPP talent to be added to the list to balance the list out, just so we can then add Naish who is the same type of player with 20 or 25 just so we can say hey we got him for a discount?

To me that is illogical especially when our list is crying out for some young KPP talent to be added. To me it makes sense to get Naish locked away early and leave ourselves with 2 picks to then focus on adding KPPs to the list. I don't want to see us add 2 midfielder/flanker types in Naish and another kid and get just one KPP from our picks. I want us to add 2 top 25 rated KPPs to our list and give us the chance to start developing the next generation of talls.

Conversely, what if there are no KPP players on our list at that point? Similar to my gripe with those who were up in arms in not getting Schache, what you are talking about is drafting a player for the sake of it.

No doubt we are thin on KPP talent. But saying let’s get one or two KPPs regardless of who they are doesn’t make sense. If they are not talented enough, why draft them? If they aren’t going to play it makes no sense. See Gold Coast and Hawthorn games this year.

You take the best available player IMO. If that’s a KPP so be it. If it’s a midfielder or flanker so be it. Select players who can play, not who are a certain position.

With Naish it’s a free hit. Keep taking the players you rate until you have to match a bid. I’d rather have three talented players that can contribute to a successful AFL team than Naish + 2x KPP of the latter two aren’t any good.

 

[Frustrated Tiger]

Any chance we chuck Wellingham a one-year contract for depth to cover Broady potentially missing 2018?

Why? Where's Broady going???

 

[Lsta062]

As I asked repeatedly, which nobody has answered, what if the 6-8 players available on our list are all midfielder/flanker types why take them when we need KPP talent to be added to the list to balance the list out, just so we can then add Naish who is the same type of player with 20 or 25 just so we can say hey we got him for a discount?

To me that is illogical especially when our list is crying out for some young KPP talent to be added. To me it makes sense to get Naish locked away early and leave ourselves with 2 picks to then focus on adding KPPs to the list. I don't want to see us add 2 midfielder/flanker types in Naish and another kid and get just one KPP from our picks. I want us to add 2 top 25 rated KPPs to our list and give us the chance to start developing the next generation of talls.

Draftees are usually project players, so you draft best available. Some may play a position that we don't need now, but they may become a need in the future.

In ~2015 our KPF stocks looked solid and promising. Two years later it is bare.

 

[docko911]

So let me get this straight

RT wants to take him at 17 instead of X player who could get taken at 18 or 19, and 18 or 19 could also not bid on Naish which means once again we could use 20 on a player that would get picked up between 21-24 and in the unlikely event no one bids on Naish before 25 we get 3 good picks and Naish with 53 and 55....

If you’re a salesman RT let me know where you work I wouldn’t mind striking a bargain with you.

 

[GoTigers2015]

One Phantom Draft picking Balta at pick 6 (Pies), Allen at pick 17 and Constable at pick 20 (Tigers).

 

[poppa pump]

RT MATE, GET OF THE WHISKEY ,ITS A BIT EARLY, WHICH PILE DO YOU THINK HAS MORE MONEY,WELL I WANT TO USE THE SMALLER PILE TO PAY FOR NAISH,GET OF THE BOOZE .

 

[_RT_]

So let me get this straight

RT wants to take him at 17 instead of X player who could get taken at 18 or 19, and 18 or 19 could also not bid on Naish which means once again we could use 20 on a player that would get picked up between 21-24 and in the unlikely event no one bids on Naish before 25 we get 3 good picks and Naish with 53 and 55....

If you’re a salesman RT let me know where you work I wouldn’t mind striking a bargain with you.

Not sure how many more times I have to say it.

If we get to 17 and the next 6-8 players on our list are midfielder/flanker types I'd take Naish and keep 20 and 25 to go after the KPPs we rate in the 20s.

If a KPP we rate above 17 gets to 17 theen you take them and look at Naish or a KPP then.

 

[Stitch]

To clear things; currently, depending on what happens with our OOC players, we can take 5 live picks into the draft (17, 20, 25, 53, 55). A bid before pick 25 will need to be matched with either 17, 20 or 25. If a bid is made after pick 25 for Naish we will need at least 756 points in order to match the bid. We receive a discount of 197 points after the 1st round so that means we will need at least 559 points based from purely our live picks alone. Picks 53 + 55 will net us a total of only 440 points, .

440 (Picks 53 + 55) + 197 (Discount) = 637 points (quick maths!)

This is the equivalent to Pick 30 and 119 points shy of Pick 26 (756 points). Should West Coast (26), GWS (27,28) or Melbourne (29) bid on Naish we will be required to go into a points deficit in the second round of 2018.

For Example.
West Coast bid at Pick 26. We match with Picks 53 + 55. We fall 119 points short, and so we are moved back 119 points in the second round of the 2018 draft (no more than 3 spots depending on where we finish)