Review 2018 Trade Period

[Arr0w]

Over paid for two injury prone players but we over paid because they were contracted. I get that.

But injury prone they are and always will be, seems to be a SOS pattern.

B-

Always?

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

The aim of every trade period should be to make us a better side, and closer to a flag with list improvements.. so a clear tick to SOS and the team.. still missing Shiel, especially to those cheating karnts hurts so can only be a B-

 

[maxyblue]

If it’s true that at some point we had an undertaking from the AFL we’d be getting 1st round priority pick then it’s not hard to imagine how differently things may have panned out for us ...

perhaps an in principle agreement had already been struck with AFC to use that pick for McGovern ... perhaps a 2018 2nd for Setterfield ...

perhaps our trading strategy had to be reconstructed on the fly after the AFL’s BS assistance package which seemed to have been a GCS initiative.

SOS had to play the hand he was dealt and did OK, didn’t clean up but walked away with a good story to tell

I’ve given us a B+ at worst ... which could easily become an A if Setterfield gets on the park ... no pressure Mr Russell

 

[djw1952]

Need to add a future 3rd coming back in.

Difficult to score the period, considering we may add some handy DFA, such as Fasolo

Assessment for me, will be when the list is finalised as a whole, with both ins & outs

Fasolo is not a DFA he is just a free agent and has already signed as far as I heard............

 

[Arr0w]

Fasolo is not a DFA he is just a free agent and has already signed as far as I heard............

Yes, I know, I should have said......the likes of a Fasolo

 

[DangerousD]

In: Mitch McGovern, Alex Fasolo, Will Setterfield, Nic Newman

Out: Picks 26, 28, 2019 fourth-round pick, 2019 fifth-round pick

2018 draft picks: 1, 69, 71, 77
2019 draft picks: 1, 37, 43, 91 (based on this year's ladder positions)

We picked up some really handy player, but a lack of pick depth across the next two drafts is slightly concerning.

Unless anything changes next trade period, we'll have 2 drafts in a row without a second round DP.

Nonetheless, I'm very happy with this trade period. Some very handy acquisitions and we've kept pick 1.

Score: B+

How do you score it?

I score a B or a B+ but i think you need to include Krueger and Mcadam, we did pre list them and on trade them. If they turn out to be guns, what we received for them will come in to question.

 

[reg_lower91]

 

[DangerousD]

Gave up 3x second rounders, 1x fifth rounder, and the half-arsed, token, bullshit "assistance package" from the AFL.

Im not picking on you for quoting you so much today but you raise some interesting discussions.

The assistance package which we received that you call token and half arsed, i think is pretty dismissive. Mcadam according to some draft watchers was rated as a 2nd round pick, yet we traded him and a 5th (i know you don't rate it) for a 3rd. We also traded Krueger to the Cats for a 3rd rounder which i thought was good business.

In 12-24 months time we will be able to really judge this package and SOS for that matter as well. If Mcadam and Krueger come out and play really good football and end up good players, then the package could have been beneficial. In my opinion it seems SOS didn't care much for it which is slightly annoying seeing what clubs picked up from the state leagues the year before.

In a supposedly strong draft (super draft 9 months ago) that the best we could get for a state league player was 43 was a little underwhelming.

 

[fnm_just a man]

Setterfield, to me, does not sound like a player who is questioning whether his body will return to full fitness and/or whether it can stand up to the rigours of AFL football. I think that’s important. I’m super confident he’ll return to full fitness, which means he is a huge chance to turn into a gun. Not worried at all. For those doubting ability, check the highlights video on CFC website.

Not sure how anyone can rate our trade period anything below A. We won 2 games ... 2 games!! Yet still attracted 2 players whom I consider will be absolute jets for us and 2 who could easily be best 22 in a premiership team... I like all of them ... while also adding either Sam Walsh or 2-3 players in the top 10 ...

At this stage, we don’t need to be concerned about second-rounders. We’ve got the players. Highly likely we grab a gun next offseason and we’re well and truly set.

Edit: turning next year’s first into a mature-aged quality midfielder was all that prevented it being A+ imo.

On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[SurreyBlue]

(Krueger and McAdam don’t count as they were never ours)

Incorrect. They were our players. The AFL gave them to us. We chose to trade them.
Experts are saying McAdam would have gone late 2nd round.....hmmmm

 

[DIG]

I rate the period as a success. Why?. Because after the worst season since Fitzroy's last, we didn't lose any required players(of which there are about 20 odd). An enormous effort in itself.

To add to that we actually attracted 2 quality talents and 2 speculative 26yo's that are better than Mullet and O'Shea.

We also had a smooth, impressive transition into our future leadership and we nabbed the league's most elite holistic conditioner.

All in all a mighty impressive effort albeit we missed our prime target by a whisker. The fact that we only missed him by a whisker is also impressive in itself.

So yeah, an impressive fortnight all in all.

Post sums it up perfectly.

- After such a shit season we had no trade currency to work with aside from draft picks.

- Gov and Setters both had futures at their own clubs but wanted to join us anyway.

- Newman and Fasolo fill needs. We didn’t load up on O’Shea, Shaw types (although those past recruits at least never cost us anything to be fair)

List continues to strengthen each year. This is such a good draft so will be interesting to see if we turn 1 into something else or not.

 

[Donstuie]

Incorrect. They were our players. The AFL gave them to us. We chose to trade them.
Experts are saying McAdam would have gone late 2nd round.....hmmmm

My point was they were never on our list and therefore didn’t decide to leave.

 

[El Topo]

In 12-24 months time we will be able to really judge this package and SOS for that matter as well. If Mcadam and Krueger come out and play really good football and end up good players, then the package could have been beneficial. In my opinion it seems SOS didn't care much for it which is slightly annoying seeing what clubs picked up from the state leagues the year before.

Others have mentioned this, but the mature talent pool has been depleted over the past few years. This type of assistance last year would have seen us land Tim Kelly, but there's no point in SOS sacrificing 2018 trade currency on a Mitch Grigg when he'll likely be available in the rookie draft.

 

[Blue and Blue]

Well I think we score an A because of our situation and circumstance.
Technically a B+ but after the season we had it goes up a notch.
The pseudo priority picks were quickly used up and in the right way as far as I am concerned. None of the available players including McAdam is better than those we have brought in. Those two picks was like heading to the casino and getting two free ten dollar chips. Nothing more.SOS bet them and won.
McGovern will be very good. I expect us to be saying how did SOS pull that off in two years time.
Setterfield we already know he can be a star.
Fasolo is some badly needed cream in front of goal. We havent had that since the year before Eddie left.
Newman seems to me to be like Touhy but without the stuffups so we did well there also.

Also factor in that the last of our deadwood from the past decade is gone. And the flawed though hopeful Irish experiment has been curtailed.
To me thats what the 66 game rebuild was intended to do. Now we can shape a winning team from scratch.
Well Done SOS and Go Blues.

 

[DangerousD]

Others have mentioned this, but the mature talent pool has been depleted over the past few years. This type of assistance last year would have seen us land Tim Kelly, but there's no point in SOS sacrificing 2018 trade currency on a Mitch Grigg when he'll likely be available in the rookie draft.

I know every year is different, I just hope SOS and the club did their due diligence and didn’t just use the two priority guys as an after thought.

 

[Sector 7G]

In a supposedly strong draft (super draft 9 months ago) that the best we could get for a state league player was 43 was a little underwhelming.

A strong draft means that the there are more good players in the u18s coming through, which makes the State league players less valuable. A week draft would have meant we got more interest/better picks for the State Leaguers. For those saying McAdam should have gone for a second rounder , he kicked 30 goals in the SANFL. Ryan kicked 70 in the WAFL and went 26 in a weaker draft. Big difference in the prospective value.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Im not picking on you for quoting you so much today but you raise some interesting discussions.

The assistance package which we received that you call token and half arsed, i think is pretty dismissive. Mcadam according to some draft watchers was rated as a 2nd round pick, yet we traded him and a 5th (i know you don't rate it) for a 3rd. We also traded Krueger to the Cats for a 3rd rounder which i thought was good business.

In 12-24 months time we will be able to really judge this package and SOS for that matter as well. If Mcadam and Krueger come out and play really good football and end up good players, then the package could have been beneficial. In my opinion it seems SOS didn't care much for it which is slightly annoying seeing what clubs picked up from the state leagues the year before.

In a supposedly strong draft (super draft 9 months ago) that the best we could get for a state league player was 43 was a little underwhelming.

Here's the thing about the "assistance package".

The value of those players dropped as soon as we selected them.

Maybe in an open draft, McAdam would have been worth a late second (still hold some doubt about this). But the minute he was selected by Carlton, he has complete say over where he can be traded, like any other player. So if he says (and he did) "I want to play for Adelaide" then his value is at whatever Adelaide are willing to part with. The alternative for us is that we've signed a player who doesn't want to play for us, and we have to hope that he's professional enough to put in 12 months good work.

I don't really care much for where the pundits value McAdam or Kreuger - it's all guesswork anyway. What I know for certain is that allowing us to list them, then trade them, immediately diminishes their value because there is no longer an open market.

I see us as having turned a state league player that we didn't want, and who didn't want to play for us, into an upgrade on a pick that we most likely wouldn't have used as it was. It's not much, but then if the AFL had really wanted to help us they'd have just gone with an end-of-first-round PP under the same formula that Brisbane got theirs a few years back.

The AFL, quite cleverly (be design or accident), implemented a support package that inherently benefited Gold Coast far more than us. We don't have an issue with player retention. We lack mature senior bodies, but more specifically, AFL-quality ones. The assistance we needed was something to directly aid us in bringing in an established player from another club - ie. a reasonable draft pick. Gold Coast can't keep players, and are struggling to attract good ones. The best outcome for them is additional access to mature players who've been previously overlooked - the kind of players who will be grateful to be given an opportunity at senior level. And the more the merrier, as for every 3 they get, 2 will probably want to leave in a few years anyway.

We got token assistance that held minimal value to us given our specific needs, but it was dressed up by the AFL and media as being useful because we lack mature players. Now people in AFL-land are crying foul that we went against the spirit of the assistance package by trading the players away. This is despite the AFL clearly stating that the players could be on-traded - most likely because we demanded that flexibility after being told our "assistance" was going to be access to players we didn't really want.

That's my take on it all anyway. We extracted what little value we could from an assistance package that was designed to do less for us than it did for the Suns.

 

[Stamos]

That's my take on it all anyway. We extracted what little value we could from an assistance package that was designed to do less for us than it did for the Suns.

Yeah, the assistance we got helped the two trades go through, and we ended up with an extra future 3rd rounder. So it's not nothing, it did assist, but it wasn't much. Certainly less than what Brisbane got 2 years ago, and a lot less than what the AFL told us we'd get, before changing their mind.

If they did give us #12, it gets McGovern done straight up.
Maybe we get Setterfield done for a second rounder this year, or at worst a 2nd and a future 3rd, or our 2 2nds and the Giants 2nd back.
Whichever combination, we'd have a better hand in this draft and next year's draft, and it would have been a lot more beneficial.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Yeah, the assistance we got helped the two trades go through, and we ended up with an extra future 3rd rounder. So it's not nothing, it did assist, but it wasn't much. Certainly less than what Brisbane got 2 years ago, and a lot less than what the AFL told us we'd get, before changing their mind.

If they did give us #12, it gets McGovern done straight up.
Maybe we get Setterfield done for a second rounder this year, or at worst a 2nd and a future 3rd, or our 2 2nds and the Giants 2nd back.
Whichever combination, we'd have a better hand in this draft and next year's draft, and it would have been a lot more beneficial.

I sould also add - I'm not as upset about the lack of compo as I may sound.

I completely understand that the AFL would view our current predicament as being a result of strategic decisions made by our club, while the Suns are a club with genuine retention issues resulting in reduced competitiveness. So I appreciate that they need more assistance than we do.

I'd actually have preferred the AFL to come out and say that, to be honest. Give GC a couple of mature age selections, and tell us to continue on our merry way as the rebuild is going to plan so far. Obviously I wouldn't say no to assistance, it just annoys me when we get access to players we don't really want or need, specific permissions to on-trade them, and then criticism for on-trading them to assist with bringing in the mature players we actually want/need.

 

[Stamos]

Yeah, if we actually added 2 mature age players to our list, we would have had to forgo Fasolo or Newman purely to draft the minimum 3 players.

 

[BoltonsBlues]

Dont underestimate our last 3 picks. What sos did to get williamson kerr mcreadie to our list was magic even when we did look like loosers. And we got garlett late in the draft last year so i wont be suprised all our draftees being acute picks and playing a role in 2019 and beyond

 

[thylacine60]

Is the AFL trade period bigger than the game?

"Many Carlton fans – indeed, most I know – are more interested in Mitch McGovern's arrival and what the No. 1 draft pick (Sam Walsh probably) might become than any of the miserable games they endured this year."

 

[GapInIkonPark]

The aim of every trade period should be to make us a better side, and closer to a flag with list improvements.. so a clear tick to SOS and the team.. still missing Shiel, especially to those cheating karnts hurts so can only be a B-

I agree ItsAllAboutMe

Compare the pair ...

Wright - Fasolo. On Wright’s 2018 form, about even or a slight win.
Rowe - McGovern. Win.
Byrne - Newman. Given Byrne’s injury history, Even.
O’Shea - Setterfield. Win.

While it would be nice to have second and third round picks, I am backing the players we select at 1, 69, 71 and 77 to be upgrades on Graham, Kerridge, Lamb and Mullett.

Walsh and the younger Hickmott will add pace and endurance. Very handy to get our run going with a fit Williamson, Murphy, O’Brien, Fisher, SPS, Pickett, Garlett to break the lines.

 

[katmanblue]

We done stuff and got tings. Gave some bits and got done good.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[thylacine60]

professor and founder of the bf department of linguistics seems a long title, k-blue - what can we call you for short?