List Mgmt. 2020 Draft and Trade Hypotheticals

[RobbieK]

Correct, every draftee is an unknown, so you take the one closest to a certainty.

I agree with that, but that is a lot different to what you said.

 

[Dan87]

Defender isn't a dirty word. Many of the people writing off taking a defender were pretty much going nuts over a broken down Brodie Kemp last year. Who was a CHB/utility that could be a mid one day.

DGB is in the same mould but with a definite position down back. Took a nice grab on the weekend too.

Do we need SEN to say he might be a mid one day to consider him?

 

[Kapers]

I agree with that, but that is a lot different to what you said.

I don't think he was being extreme, you can lose with a trade as well, even for a known quantity. We could get dusty for a 5th rounder and if he gets an acl and never gets to play again it would be a loss.

I think your worrying about semantics if you take Ceaser88 saying that 2 draftees are can't lose scenario at face value. He's been one of the most vocal about the fact that we should look to trade rather than bring in more youth, so he isn't even pro draft. All he was saying is that out of the possible drafts the ones with the least chance of being a bust are these 2, which is entirely fair.

Just don't like it when people wilfully misinterpret others posts for no real reason.

 

[caesar88]

I agree with that, but that is a lot different to what you said.

How so? If we've taken the kid most likely to be a gun, then even if he doesn't become a gun we can still walk away from the draft knowing we made the right call. (aka not losing.)

 

[Kapers]

Defender isn't a dirty word. Many of the people writing off taking a defender were pretty much going nuts over a broken down Brodie Kemp last year. Who was a CHB/utility that could be a mid one day.

DGB is in the same mould but with a definite position down back. Took a nice grab on the weekend too.

Do we need SEN to say he might be a mid one day to consider him?

I think it's more his role. We don't want an intercepter. We probably have too many intercepters, or the way we play allows for interceptions. We don't need to draft for an intercepter, we need to draft for a lock down defender, if we want a defender.

 

[caesar88]

Defender isn't a dirty word. Many of the people writing off taking a defender were pretty much going nuts over a broken down Brodie Kemp last year. Who was a CHB/utility that could be a mid one day.

DGB is in the same mould but with a definite position down back. Took a nice grab on the weekend too.

Do we need SEN to say he might be a mid one day to consider him?

Nothing against defenders at all. But the drafting system is f'd where flashy intercept defenders and rebounding defenders get all the love, while defenders who can actually defend one on one contests are considered 'meh'. Brock Smith last year was an example of this.

FWIW I was in favour of Kemp last year based on what I'd seen of him in the midfield, so I never considered him to be anything other than a midfield prospect despite what the pundits were saying.

 

[RobbieK]

How so? If we've taken the kid most likely to be a gun, then even if he doesn't become a gun we can still walk away from the draft knowing we made the right call. (aka not losing.)

So... Say we pick Hollands. Before he gets on the field for us he does his knee again. He never really recovers and is delisted by the time he is 22.

Would you still say we didn't lose because you rated him as more likely than others to become a gun? Even though he never became one and others we could have selected did?

I doubt it.

Not losing means getting output from a player worthy of pick 2 or 3. That isn't a certainty with any player.

 

[Dan87]

I think it's more his role. We don't want an intercepter. We probably have too many intercepters, or the way we play allows for interceptions. We don't need to draft for an intercepter, we need to draft for a lock down defender, if we want a defender.

All defenders are measured by their ability to intercept. It's usually a positive.

If you watch him play, he nullifys 1 on 1 contests on the regular and he plays 1 on 1. Saying he can't defend sounds completely disingenuous and not based on fact.

 

[caesar88]

So... Say we pick Hollands. Before he gets on the field for us he does his knee again. He never really recovers and is delisted by the time he is 22.

Would you still say we didn't lose because you rated him as more likely than others to become a gun? Even though he never became one and others we could have selected did?

I doubt it.

Not losing means getting output from a player worthy of pick 2 or 3. That isn't a certainty with any player.

I would still say we didn't lose, because we gave ourselves the best chance at landing the best player possible. If he was injured and never amounted to much, then so be it. Would not fault the logic of the decision at all.

Losing would be Adelaide taking Chayce Jones in a superdraft at pick 9.

 

[Kapers]

So... Say we pick Hollands. Before he gets on the field for us he does his knee again. He never really recovers and is delisted by the time he is 22.

Would you still say we didn't lose because you rated him as more likely than others to become a gun? Even though he never became one and others we could have selected did?

I doubt it.

Not losing means getting output from a player worthy of pick 2 or 3. That isn't a certainty with any player.

Why are you focusing on semantics?

Ceaser88 gave his barometer, make the best decision at the time. IMO, that's as good as it's going to get.

Having a, 'will definitely be a player worthy of pick 2/3', as a barometer is rediculous, you can only make decisions on what you info you have now.

All defenders are measured by their ability to intercept. It's usually a positive.

If you watch him play, he nullifys 1 on 1 contests on the regular and he plays 1 on 1. Saying he can't defend sounds completely disingenuous and not based on fact.

Honestly, fair enough.

I was just talking about what I've heard/read here. I don't know much.

Thanks for the up dates

 

[eDPS]

Defender isn't a dirty word. Many of the people writing off taking a defender were pretty much going nuts over a broken down Brodie Kemp last year. Who was a CHB/utility that could be a mid one day.

DGB is in the same mould but with a definite position down back. Took a nice grab on the weekend too.

Do we need SEN to say he might be a mid one day to consider him?

In fairness he does have some nice traits that could make him a nice tall mid

And sorry for the correction but Kemp only played key defence at champs. He always played as a midfielder/forward playing for Bendigo.

 

[caesar88]

Why are you focusing on semantics?

Ceaser88 gave his barometer, make the best decision at the time. IMO, that's as good as it's going to get.

Having a, 'will definitely be a player worthy of pick 2/3', as a barometer is rediculous, you can only make decisions on what you info you have now.

Honestly, fair enough.

I was just talking about what I've heard/read here. I don't know much.

Thanks for the up dates

I wouldn't listen to anything you hear/read on here, it's like the blind leading the deaf.

 

[Membling]

Round up of rucks that are likely gettable:

Archie Smith (25)
Lloyd Meek (22)
Kieran Briggs (20)
Braydon Pruess (25)
Tom Campbell (27)
Peter Ladhams (22)
Callum Coleman Jones (21)

Out of those, Campbell, Pruess and Ladhams would be the go to for instant 1st ruck start up.

Personally would want Meek. 203cm, 111kg ruck. Was dominating in WAFL and looks a likely type

 

[caesar88]

Round up of rucks that are likely gettable:

Archie Smith (25)
Lloyd Meek (22)
Kieran Briggs (20)
Braydon Pruess (25)
Tom Campbell (27)
Peter Ladhams (22)
Callum Coleman Jones (21)

Out of those, Campbell, Pruess and Ladhams would be the go to for instant 1st ruck start up.

Personally would want Meek. 203cm, 111kg ruck. Was dominating in WAFL and looks a likely type

I really rated Briggs in his draft year (as far as rucks go) and I reckon he would be perfect for our side. He's from GWS though which means he's off limits... apparently.

 

[Dubai Quacker]

I think it's more his role. We don't want an intercepter. We probably have too many intercepters, or the way we play allows for interceptions. We don't need to draft for an intercepter, we need to draft for a lock down defender, if we want a defender.

Like Gould?

 

[Dubai Quacker]

Round up of rucks that are likely gettable:

Archie Smith (25)
Lloyd Meek (22)
Kieran Briggs (20)
Braydon Pruess (25)
Tom Campbell (27)
Peter Ladhams (22)
Callum Coleman Jones (21)

Out of those, Campbell, Pruess and Ladhams would be the go to for instant 1st ruck start up.

Personally would want Meek. 203cm, 111kg ruck. Was dominating in WAFL and looks a likely type

Ladhams please.

Could be achieved by trading Papley to Carlton and on-trading their 1st to Port.

We’d get some change from the transaction, perhaps Ladhams + Port’s (late) 2nd rounder, which would help secure Gulden.

 

[Arrr]

I think we got a real defence issue.

We got a lot of developing mids, wingers, forwards, and flankers, but where are our backs?

Only one is Ling right now, Lloyd is better up the ground, Rampe can't carry it forever, Brand is out for another 4 weeks, COR can't hold up our back line, Melican is struggling, Fox is improving (but no world beater), Aliir is in a form slump, Dawson is needed for his attacking, and Cunningham has been solid.
Gould is proving a bit of a let down, although I'll back him to get his fitness to par next year.
We talk a lot about our mids, but I think Grundy, Smith, and McVeigh have hurt us more than we realise.
We need to trade in some backs, or see massive improvements in Melican, Gould, Ling and to see Brand play for me to be comfortable with our backs.

Its been a long time since our back 6 were the biggest worry, but I don't see the same potential for growth that we can see in our midfield/forward line.

I agree that our defense is the biggest issue. When I look at our young players in midfield and attack you can see multiple players who can fill roles and contribute.

When I look at our defense I see a few key players in Rampe, Mills, and Lloyd. Of those only Rampe is really a key defender. We have a glut of players who can play off half back and either provide some run or be a distributer. Who do we actually have that can convincingly match up on the best attacking players in the comp from Greene, C. Cameron, and Walters to Riewolt, J. Cameron, Kennedy, and Hawkins?

We haven't seen much of Brand. Fox has been improving but isn't there yet. Melican hasn't regained his early career form. Maibaum I have no idea.

So what are our options? Realistically we need someone now. If Rampe goes down injured we can't cover him like we have with other players. Buddy is out, Papley steps up. Kennedy goes down, Rowbottom steps up. We need to sign a ready made key defender IMO more than any other position. It's the only place we can't cover.

 

[Kapers]

Like Gould?

I didnt realise you would've taken Gould with pick 2.

Im talking about our need for a defender. Let's not get GB because we need a defender, get him because he's the best available.

 

[Kapers]

I agree that our defense is the biggest issue. When I look at our young players in midfield and attack you can see multiple players who can fill roles and contribute.

When I look at our defense I see a few key players in Rampe, Mills, and Lloyd. Of those only Rampe is really a key defender. We have a glut of players who can play off half back and either provide some run or be a distributer. Who do we actually have that can convincingly match up on the best attacking players in the comp from Greene, C. Cameron, and Walters to Riewolt, J. Cameron, Kennedy, and Hawkins?

We haven't seen much of Brand. Fox has been improving but isn't there yet. Melican hasn't regained his early career form. Maibaum I have no idea.

So what are our options? Realistically we need someone now. If Rampe goes down injured we can't cover him like we have with other players. Buddy is out, Papley steps up. Kennedy goes down, Rowbottom steps up. We need to sign a ready made key defender IMO more than any other position. It's the only place we can't cover.

Honestly, we lost 6 in a row during 2017 because we lost Rampe.

Probably our most important player right now.

 

[caesar88]

Honestly, we lost 6 in a row during 2017 because we lost Rampe.

Probably our most important player right now.

Probably??? He is the best player in our side by the time it takes Angus Young to finish a solo in concert.

 

[Membling]

I really rated Briggs in his draft year (as far as rucks go) and I reckon he would be perfect for our side. He's from GWS though which means he's off limits... apparently.

Same, may be a bit young for what we are looking for but definitely an option

Ladhams please.

Could be achieved by trading Papley to Carlton and on-trading their 1st to Port.

We’d get some change from the transaction, perhaps Ladhams + Port’s (late) 2nd rounder, which would help secure Gulden.

Do not like the Papley scenario but would be about the right price.

22-25yo age bracket is ideal to bring in a ruck. Physically ready but not established as best 22

 

[Superstar swan]

We are getting two gun smaller with the academy picks, imo we should take the ff from W.A. (name escapes me) with our first pick.

 

[scaryness]

I really rated Briggs in his draft year (as far as rucks go) and I reckon he would be perfect for our side. He's from GWS though which means he's off limits... apparently.

Qnother Nank/Mummy type

Bash and crash

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Ladhams please.

Could be achieved by trading Papley to Carlton and on-trading their 1st to Port.

We’d get some change from the transaction, perhaps Ladhams + Port’s (late) 2nd rounder, which would help secure Gulden.

Way overs, I get we need a ruck, but can we not pay the farm for one!

 

[Dubai Quacker]

Way overs, I get we need a ruck, but can we not pay the farm for one!

I wouldn’t be too upset if we traded say Pick 10 (which is about where I’d expect Carlton’s first to fall) for Ladhams + Pick 34.

A promising 22 y.o ruck that fills an urgent need is, in my view, worth the points differential - as we’d get Pick 2, Campbell, Gulden and Ladhams, plus a steak knives pick.

Of course, this all assumes the club decides to trade Papley.