List Mgmt. 2019 Draft and Trade Hypotheticals Thread - Part II

[RUNVS]

This is an interesting concept, do we go for a short term need, a mid that makes an impact, or do we see that we have a few mids coming in next year and later in this year's (supposedly this draft is full of decent mids, though that's may be hearsay) draft and choose the best kick, which never goes amiss.

I think, if we look in 5 years time a Young will have proven to be a better player for our team. This doesn't mean he's the best option for our list right now, but may be in the future.

Personally, good kicks create a team more than good ball winners, and Young gives us what we need there.

On that note, serong would still be my choice, gotta bring in the guys that want to be here, and good workers create a team more than good kicks.

Stoddart and Ling were supposed to be excellent kicks and look how much of an impact they have made.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Stoddart and Ling were supposed to be excellent kicks and look how much of an impact they have made.

Agreed that’s why I’m nervous taking a defender with our highest pick. There’s some decent defenders in the second round.

 

[BloodySwan]

Stoddart and Ling were supposed to be excellent kicks and look how much of an impact they have made.

Should rate draft picks off of their career, not their first 2 seasons

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Should rate draft picks off of their career, not their first 2 seasons

They aren’t looking good. Players need to be more than a good kick

 

[Wolfgang West]

If we go 2 picks Without 1 being a mid (at least) there better be reasons why.

Why ? What are You going to do ? Call The Police ?

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Why ? What are You going to do ? Call The Police ?

We need mids- if we don’t take 3 out of 4 that are I’d have questions, and no Ling reaches please

 

[BloodySwan]

They aren’t looking good. Players need to be more than a good kick

Stoddart is doing fine, not sure you're knock on him while Ling has been injured - fail to see what that's got to do with him being a good kick

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Stoddart is doing fine, not sure you're knock on him while Ling has been injured - fail to see what that's got to do with him being a good kick

Reaching for players is an issue though

 

[TheMase]

Reaching for players is an issue though

Rowbottom looks like a good call...

 

[BloodySwan]

Reaching for players is an issue though

Stoddart was projected as a player in the mid 20s and we got him with pick 53. Don't see how that's reaching

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Rowbottom looks like a good call...

Rowbottom was fine it’s the other one.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Stoddart was projected as a player in the mid 20s and we got him with pick 53. Don't see how that's reaching

That’s value, it’s when you go the other way that’s the issue especially when better players were there

 

[TheMase]

Rowbottom was fine it’s the other one.

The one who hasn’t really been able to get his body together and get any continuity?

Rowbottom was as much a reach to expected draft position as Ling... from what I’ve read anyway...

 

[LukeParkerno1]

The one who hasn’t really been able to get his body together and get any continuity?

Rowbottom was as much a reach to expected draft position as Ling... from what I’ve read anyway...

Ling was a massive reach injuries aside it still looks that way. Almost certainly Rowbottom was thought to be a solid second rounder and was taken in that range.

 

[Olian]

Why ? What are You going to do ? Call The Police ?

Request a trade back to Essendon?

 

[TheMase]

Ling was a massive reach injuries aside it still looks that way. Almost certainly Rowbottom was thought to be a solid second rounder and was taken in that range.

A couple I read had him in the 40s...

Ling was 5-6 above the start of his expected range (20-30).

Swans obviously didn’t consider him a reach. I hope they are proven right.

 

[brad cooper]

Ling was a massive reach injuries aside it still looks that way. Almost certainly Rowbottom was thought to be a solid second rounder and was taken in that range.

how was he a massive reach when he was predicted as a late first rounder and we took him at 14?

btw stoddard was ranked 21 in twomeys phantom draft of that year, does that then make him a steal?

 

[mtooler]

Has anybody mentioned Devon Robertson yet? He is Darren Glass' nephew. Not only that he took out the Larke Medal as Best Player of the Championships. He was captain of WA who won the Championships. Seen as a very good leader even at this early stage. He is 188cm inside mid. There is a thought his disposal is sometimes scrappy but you don't win the Larke Medal dishing up tripe.

He has all the attributes we need in a mid. He is strong, illusive, fast with his hands, supports his teammates. He is the consummate team player. He knows how to inspire players to big things. He has a natural footy brain Think Luke Hodge

On ANE-LX2J using BigFooty.com mobile app

Yeah he's looking like going 7th-10th.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

how was he a massive reach when he was predicted as a late first rounder and we took him at 14?

btw stoddard was ranked 21 in twomeys phantom draft of that year, does that then make him a steal?

I'd be shocked if Ling was ever predicted a late first- even on the coverage they stated that it was an absolute reach. Trust my judgement too (I sort of have to), and pretty sure I had him in the late 30's, and that was being generous at the time. My biggest issue with it at the time came down to value, could have traded out 14, and got him in the mid 20's, plus banked an extra selection somewhere.

Stoddart was a nice value pick, and at the range well worth it.

Everything does come back to value. By all means have a list but don't overpay, you can always trade back if a player will be there 10 spots later.

 

[RobbieK]

I'd be shocked if Ling was ever predicted a late first- even on the coverage they stated that it was an absolute reach. Trust my judgement too (I sort of have to), and pretty sure I had him in the late 30's, and that was being generous at the time. My biggest issue with it at the time came down to value, could have traded out 14, and got him in the mid 20's, plus banked an extra selection somewhere.

Stoddart was a nice value pick, and at the range well worth it.

Everything does come back to value. By all means have a list but don't overpay, you can always trade back if a player will be there 10 spots later.

On Ling:

Knightmare's mock draft in November 2017 had him at 22 (https://www.espn.com/afl/story/_/id/21381638/knightmare-november-phantom-draft-first-three-rounds)
Twomey had him 23 (https://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-11-22/callum-twomeys-2017-phantom-draft)
Fox Sports had him at 22 (https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/af...t/news-story/fb03f7cc10948dcf2f465211f3e85446)
The Footyology one had him at 22 too (https://footyology.com.au/bede-briscombs-afl-mock-draft-where-the-best-may-end-up/)

So, to say he was some crazy reach out of nowhere isn't really on the mark. He was expected by many to go in the early 20s and we picked him in the mid teens.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Each to their own, that’s still close to 10 spots lower to what we took him, so again, personally that’s not value that’s overpaying. Now if he turns out to be an A grade talent you’d tip your hat to the recruiters, but until that time I stand by my statement that we overpaid and we could have traded down and banked an extra 3rd or something.

Drafting is all about value and playing the system. We shouldn’t be worried about trading down if a target is going to be there a few spots lower.

 

[Kummerspeck]

So, to say he was some crazy reach out of nowhere isn't really on the mark.

The Venn diagram of people who bitch relentlessly about every aspect of the club and people who make massive claims without being able to back it up is essentially a circle.

 

[bungee]

The Venn diagram of people who bitch relentlessly about every aspect of the club and people who make massive claims without being able to back it up is essentially a circle.

Classic. Might take this as my signature

 

[bungee]

When I find myself despairing over our draft picks, many who have struggled to reach our aspirations for them, I look to how other clubs have fared. Rarely are their draftees much better and often they are much worse. Drafting, it seems, is an imprecise science, infallible in retrospect and best assessed in hindsight.

 

[bungee]

Analysing our drafts over the last 16 years, based purely on the number of games played since being drafted*, turns up some surprising results.

The good news is our last 10 years have seen a big improvement since the dismal years of 2003-2008. Our top picks over those 6 years played a total of 102 games or an average of just 17 games over their entire careers. Worse still, taking away Jared Moore's 68 and Veszpremi's 23 games leaves just 11 games in total between four of our first picks.

Over 16 years a quarter of our first picks have played one or fewer games but on average our first picks managed a slightly more respectable 50 games. Perhaps surprisingly, we do better with our 2nd picks with an average of 56 games each. Even more surprisingly, there's not that much difference between our first picks (50 average) and our last picks (43 average).

Perhaps the Swans' old strategy of trading early picks for players made sense. Short of our priority picks it would seem that a monkey with a dart board could do just as well when it comes to draft picks.

*The number of games played is probably a reasonable indicator of a player's utility, especially for earlier recruits where it wraps up both ability and durability. For more recent recruits it's biased more towards a player's readiness to step up to senior AFL.