Analysis 2017 List Management Discussion

[Blue_Fusion]

We're not trading Murphy. Stop this nonsense.

We can get Kelly through a variety of methods, SOS is unpredictable.

Giving up pick #3 isn't something I'd want us to do but if we do then it will be for good reason.

 

[Canyouhearthedrums]

So Murphy who is our club captain, Melbourne born and bred, settled in melbourne and has a contract with the club is potentially on thetrade table because he is 30 and may, and I repeat may not be part of our next premiership.

Do you think Collingwood are having the same discussion about Pendlebury. Same age, captain but unlikely to be part of the Pies next flag. I know Pendles is a better player than Murph but this talk about trading our captain just seems a bit far fetched to me and if true I think will do more damage to the playing group then what we get in return.

Pies think they are closer to a flag than us. They may well be having the conversation in 12 months time.

I get the emotional attachment and reticence, I really do. And those against it may ultimately be proved correct.

However, for me, it's a question of what's best for the club in the long term. We are AT LEAST 2 seasons from being a top 4-6 type side. In 2020 season Murphy will be 32-33. Even if he's still in his prime, he'll only hold that for 1-2 years more max. So are we better with an aging Murphy for 1-2 or getting Kelly (hypothetically) for him now? I want long term sustainability and trust the club to deliver it. I also make no apologies for being a bit clinical about it. This club has been run on ego and emotion for far too long and its never done us any good. I care about the club, not the players, as harsh as that sounds. And Murph, as much as I love him, doesn't hold a position where he's untouchable. Whether he would want to move is an entirely different question of course.

And trading a Murphy or Gibbs for Kelly is preferably to losing a top 3 pick this year.

 

[Pafloyul]

Out of curiosity - why not?

In the last two drafts we've picked up 11 players. 7 of them are now genuine senior players already (Weitering, Curnow, SOS, Cuningham, SPS, Fisher, Williamson), and of the other four (McKay, Macreadie, Kerr and Polson) three are talls who will require a bit longer to develop, but all four are highly rated internally and will likely be afforded more senior opportunities sooner rather than later (Macreadie and Polson have in fact already debuted).

9-11 AFL-quality draftees in two years has got to be almost unheard of outside the expansion clubs.

Add to that we've recruited Marchbank, Plowman and Pickett who are young and highly talented (Pickett likely to feature again when he gets his fitness base back up post- last year's injury). We've also apparently turned Jones into a defensive monster, Kreuzer is showing the form of his career and should be capable of continuing it for at least 3 years, Casboult has remembered how to kick and Byrne is just returning from an ACL lay-off.

If we've exceeded our own expectations in terms of rebuilding through the draft, why shouldn't we be open to trading out two first rounders and a senior player like Gibbs to secure two extremely talented young mids who will play 10-12 years of excellent footy?

Marchbank, Jones, Plowman
Docherty, Weitering, Byrne
Williamson, Hopper, SPS
Kreuzer, Cripps, Kelly
Cuningham, Casboult, Curnow
Murphy, McKay, Silvagni
Fisher, Pickett, Curnow, Simpson, Macreadie, Sumner, Kerr, Polson, Lamb, Thomas, Graham, Smedts, ASOS, etc.

OUT: Pick 3, Gibbs (on-trade pick to GWS) and a future pick (likely 5-10, possibly later)
IN: Kelly (23yo, Brownlow contention, former Pick 2), Hopper (20yo, former Pick 7, but rated higher by many) and whatever else we can scrounge out of Adelaide (Wigg, second rounder etc.) and GWS (I still reckon Himmelberg would be easily gettable as steak-knives)

Also, consider that we may have our eye on some free agents in the coming years as well. Throw Tom Lynch in at the end of 2018, and Dylan Shiel at the end of 2019...you see where this is going, yeah?

The more I look at our drafting in the last two years, the less I'm convinced we absolutely have to go for another big draft haul, especially if the quality of this draft is being questioned a bit.

We've done well in the last two years and now you want it to stop? You are throwing out next year's first rounder as well in what is considered at this stage to be a much stronger draft. Trading out two high draft picks and Gibbs is a miscalculation. If we go after Kelly then Hopper can go jump unless we can pull off a swifty.

 

[StandByyourMan]

Pies think they are closer to a flag than us. They may well be having the conversation in 12 months time.

I get the emotional attachment and reticence, I really do. And those against it may ultimately be proved correct.

However, for me, it's a question of what's best for the club in the long term. We are AT LEAST 2 seasons from being a top 4-6 type side. In 2020 season Murphy will be 32-33. Even if he's still in his prime, he'll only hold that for 1-2 years more max. So are we better with an aging Murphy for 1-2 or getting Kelly (hypothetically) for him now? I want long term sustainability and trust the club to deliver it. I also make no apologies for being a bit clinical about it. This club has been run on ego and emotion for far too long and its never done us any good. I care about the club, not the players, as harsh as that sounds. And Murph, as much as I love him, doesn't hold a position where he's untouchable. Whether he would want to move is an entirely different question of course.

And trading a Murphy or Gibbs for Kelly is preferably to losing a top 3 pick this year.

This is all sound logic BUT it should/would/could only ever happen if Murphy was willing to do it. AND it would be the ultimate sacrifice for the future of our club (arguably)

 

[Canyouhearthedrums]

This is all sound logic BUT it should/would/could only ever happen if Murphy was willing to do it. AND it would be the ultimate sacrifice for the future of our club (arguably)

Sure. And I'd hate to see him leave in shitty circumstances

 

[Love the Drake]

Talk of Murphy and kruezer being traded is ludicrous....unless they request a trade.

The Gibbs talk is realistic as he may still be looking to be traded. Should get Adelaide's first pick plus a 2nd/3rd round selection. IF he wants to stay...fantastic, he adds a lot to the group.

The Casboult talk is realistic because his manager has said he will test the waters. Depending on the offer we could be compensated an early 3rd round selection.

Leaves us with a lot of options to offer for Kelly and/or hopper. Remembering we can't give up future picks due to forecast very strong draft.

 

[DangerousD]

NEWSFLASH: If we trade out our 2018 1st rounder for a player/pick this year then we can trade our 2019 1st rounder for a pick in the 2018 1st round.

 

[Jeremias]

Remembering we can't give up future picks due to forecast very strong draft.

Of course we can.

If we believe what we'd be getting now for those picks is better than what we may get with them down the track, then we'd be silly to hold onto the picks just because it's reportedly a strong draft.

 

[Love the Drake]

NEWSFLASH: If we trade out our 2018 1st rounder for a player/pick this year then we can trade our 2019 1st rounder for a pick in the 2018 1st round.

NEWSFLASH: All clubs are aware of the strong 2018 draft so it is highly unlikely they would give up a 2018 1st rounder for a 2019 1st rounder.

 

[Love the Drake]

Of course we can.

If we believe what we'd be getting now for those picks is better than what we may get with them down the track, then we'd be silly to hold onto the picks just because it's reportedly a strong draft.

Disagree strongly with this..but I guess anything is possible.

 

[Cripps17]

Depending on final positions, I wonder if Saints would trade their 2018 1st round pick and ~#9 for our #2/3 this year.

We use Saints 2018 1st for Hopper while maintaining 2x top 10 picks. If the Saints fancy their prospects next year and we like someone in that range, could be beneficial for both clubs.

 

[Iamcarlton]

Pies think they are closer to a flag than us. They may well be having the conversation in 12 months time.

I get the emotional attachment and reticence, I really do. And those against it may ultimately be proved correct.

However, for me, it's a question of what's best for the club in the long term. We are AT LEAST 2 seasons from being a top 4-6 type side. In 2020 season Murphy will be 32-33. Even if he's still in his prime, he'll only hold that for 1-2 years more max. So are we better with an aging Murphy for 1-2 or getting Kelly (hypothetically) for him now? I want long term sustainability and trust the club to deliver it. I also make no apologies for being a bit clinical about it. This club has been run on ego and emotion for far too long and its never done us any good. I care about the club, not the players, as harsh as that sounds. And Murph, as much as I love him, doesn't hold a position where he's untouchable. Whether he would want to move is an entirely different question of course.

And trading a Murphy or Gibbs for Kelly is preferably to losing a top 3 pick this year.

No offense intended but if you think the pies would willingly trade Pendlebury or even consider willingly trading him then you are completely delusional my friend
Sometimes there are times when you just dont go there even in football ....

 

[DangerousD]

NEWSFLASH: All clubs are aware of the strong 2018 draft so it is highly unlikely they would give up a 2018 1st rounder for a 2019 1st rounder.

This time last year, everyone was banging on about Worpel and this years draft (2017) being strong.
And
If all the clubs are so aware of 2018 being very strong then 2018 picks will be at a premium come draft time this year.

BTW i am not in favour of trading out these picks for speculative players but if Kelly wants to be a blue and SOS wants him, then i am open to trading out this years 1st and next, depending what we get get back. After all if the draft is so deep then 2nd rounders will also be very valuable.

 

[Jeremias]

Disagree strongly with this..

I know...but why?

There is a great fear that what we give up will develop into a superstar, but with everything considered, I think that fear is somewhat irrational.

I think it makes perfect sense for us to be open to parting with our 2018 first if we're confident that what we're bringing in will be better than what we're parting with.

I am a firm believer in the benefits of bringing a young talented group through together and - without going full Melbourne - getting plenty of games into them as a collective, giving them ample time to develop alongside one another.

We've done exceptionally well on that front in 2015 and 2016, so why shouldn't we be open to continuing that at the end of the year?

2015 - Plowman, Weitering, C Curnow, Cuningham, SOS...and McKay
2016 - Marchbank, SPS, Fisher, Williamson...with Pickett, Polson, Macreadie, Kerr and Lebois developing

It may well be that not every single one of the above players develops as we hope they may, but that's a terrific group of young talent to have brought in over a 2 year period.

If we can leverage our 2018 pick to bring another 3-4 talented young footballers through the door at the end of this year, then I don't see why we shouldn't look very seriously at doing so.

 

[DangerousD]

Depending on final positions, I wonder if Saints would trade their 2018 1st round pick and ~#9 for our #2/3 this year.

We use Saints 2018 1st for Hopper while maintaining 2x top 10 picks. If the Saints fancy their prospects next year and we like someone in that range, could be beneficial for both clubs.

You think The Saints would want to trade out 2 top 10 draft picks for 1 pick? Thats a 6-7 pick upgrade for the price of potentially a top 10 pick. Bit of a stretch.

 

[OldCarltonKnows]

Makes very good sense for the right deal.
Hopper and Kelly for Gibbs, Murphy, our first, with something coming back, is a win on many fronts

And the likelihood of this trade scenario happening is 1/100000....

 

[Cripps17]

You think The Saints would want to trade out 2 top 10 draft picks for 1 pick? Thats a 6-7 pick upgrade for the price of potentially a top 10 pick. Bit of a stretch.

No, I'm suggesting the trade for them is say #9 and #13 for #3. The lure of going to the draft this year with #2 and #3 with a rise up the ladder next year could have them considering it.

 

[Blue__Balls]

We've done well in the last two years and now you want it to stop? You are throwing out next year's first rounder as well in what is considered at this stage to be a much stronger draft. Trading out two high draft picks and Gibbs is a miscalculation. If we go after Kelly then Hopper can go jump unless we can pull off a swifty.

Happy to turn Gibbs into Hopper and leave it at that, personally. Just highlighting that our unprecedented success at the draft in the last couple of years may allow us to move up the timeline. The master plan would absolutely have assumed that at least 4 of our draftees not make the cut - SOS would be backing himself to pick well, but he'd allow for expected churn. So if it turns out we've absolutely smoked two drafts in a row, we may have achieved in two years what he thought would take three.

If that's the case I think going hard at trading for some absolute top shelf young players is reasonable.

Gibbs, Pick 3 and our 2018 first become Kelly, Hopper, Himmelberg and Wigg. We hit the draft with a few late picks for a young ruck, outside leaning mid and a rookie upgrade of one of our small forwards. In 2018 we get BenSOS at a reduced price and make a strong play for Lynch. In 2019 we have all our picks and grab Shiel.

 

[DangerousD]

Purpose of the Draft: To obtain a good player with every pick, that will benefit your club long term.

So if we were to give up a 2017 and 2018 1st round pick and a 2017 2nd round pick to secure J. Kelly and J. Hopper then we would have secured 1 superstar player and a potential superstar/very good player. We will have lost out on the 2nd rounder, the same as picking up a player who for whatever reason, doesn't come on. We have drafted fantastically the last few years with the law of averages suggesting we will get it wrong in the next year or two.

That is a success rate of 66.6% which is historically higher than all clubs recruiting strike rate.

 

[DangerousD]

No, I'm suggesting the trade for them is say #9 and #13 for #3. The lure of going to the draft this year with #2 and #3 with a rise up the ladder next year could have them considering it.

I can see your point but i feel they will see it as too big a risk considering their 1st pick next year could easily be top 10 if they fail to land a Fyfe, Kelly, Hopper and Riewoldt or Montagna retire or drop off.

I wouldn't mind a scenario where we gave up our 1st this year for theirs or the Hawks pick this season and their future 2nd rounder.

But who knows, the Giants gave up a lot last year to get to pick 2.

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

Why so willing to pay such a high price?

Pick 3 and Murphy, who is our captain and best player is WAY overs...even if Murphy is turning 30.

Murphy's midfield knowledge and leadership is still required to help develop our younger mids.

Actually it's not paying overs but it gives the distinct impression that it is overs..
Overs is two guns in their prime
This is neither

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

So Murphy who is our club captain, Melbourne born and bred, settled in melbourne and has a contract with the club is potentially on thetrade table because he is 30 and may, and I repeat may not be part of our next premiership.

Do you think Collingwood are having the same discussion about Pendlebury. Same age, captain but unlikely to be part of the Pies next flag. I know Pendles is a better player than Murph but this talk about trading our captain just seems a bit far fetched to me and if true I think will do more damage to the playing group then what we get in return.

No..I would put him on the trade table because I want to improve
In case you have not been paying attention we've won a few bottom placings even with Murphy on our list.
It's not about Murphy it's about a list

 

[Cripps17]

I can see your point but i feel they will see it as too big a risk considering their 1st pick next year could easily be top 10 if they fail to land a Fyfe, Kelly, Hopper and Riewoldt or Montagna retire or drop off.

Yeah true, even for the picks I've suggested I can't decide if it's a good deal or not.

 

[TheHeatleyStand]

Whoever we trade for, we can't go into the draft with no first and second round pick and no first next year. We need to get back into the draft and if that means we trade a couple of our older player then so be it, it's better than trading Cripps.

Actually all you're attempting to do is build a list
How you do it whether it's trades or draft or both is a horses for courses puzzle
There is no right answer
There is no right answer

Tell me what the draft who do you want this year?

 

[blueboy25]

No..I would put him on the trade table because I want to improve
In case you have not been paying attention we've won a few bottom placings even with Murphy on our list.
It's not about Murphy it's about a list

Yeah I have been paying attention and building a list is not just names on a piece of paper.

You need to be a club that makes players feel welcome and required and not just chucked out because of their date of birth. You want to attract good players but if you are chucking out your long serving captain who is still performing at a very high level because he may not be around in 4 years time for a potential draft pick then I think that is bad management.