List Mgmt. Carlton's 2018 Draft Thread II

[HereComesJuddy]

http://www.espn.com.au/afl/story/_/...phen-silvagni-trade-shows-blues-backing-build

Incase people are looking for this article

 

[The Flying Doormat]

You’re boiling it all down to sos. One person can set any price in a market if they are willing to over pay. In this case multiple clubs kept overlooking stocker. Carlton’s assessment is at odds with a number of clubs. It is more complicated than this because clubs have particular needs and maybe some clubs overlooked him because of this. But pick 8 to pick 20 is a big gap where a number of clubs chose someone else first.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Agree with all of that. I'm happy that the recruiting team have identified a player that fills an immediate need and were rating as a top 10. We'll never know in reality where Stocker would have been selected by SOS if we had another top 10 pick. For now, his market value is #19, and like anyone who's snapped up a perceived bargain, I'm enjoying the moment, even more so given we still have a first round pick next year.

 

[Aphrodite]

 

[Wily trout]

What we did was perfectly fine in principle, but did we take the player we really needed?
That's not a slight on Stocker as he may end up a wonderful player but at the expense of.....Kennedy?
Does it matter if we took the three best players in the draft if they all happened to be full-backs? I think it matters.

Again, the principle of the trade was sound, but did we take the player we deemed to be best, or the player we needed most?
We'll never know but have to 'trust' that next year starts to fill the gaps that this draft hasn't covered up for us.

I think both. We took the player we thought best available and to fill a need. I don't mind a systematic approach towards fixing the midfield for both structure and depth. There was probably a plan A , B and C. I reckon Stocker still on the table so late innacted plan B. I know there are still holes across all zones, and there will be a bit of unwarranted pressure on Stocker, but if we get ten to twelve years out of Stocker, and he comes on pretty quickly, then this will be looked on as a really good trade/ draft scenario, long after next years picks are done and dusted.

 

[HARKER]

It's definitely fine to question whether we could've done better. But I'll ask again, who are the players you wanted us to take instead? And if you're not sure, then perhaps look into who else was available.

Sorry, I didn't get to you quick enough.

I talk about types and there's a very good reason for this, as when our balance is out of whack at the NB's the whole development cycle suffers.
It was of little surprise to me that the less CFC-listed players the NB's had at the end of the year, the better the performances came about.
Why? Could it have been squad balance? It looked possible for that to be the case to me. The right amount of talls that can play in their right positions, the right amount of smalls who can run and carry the ball....etc etc.
The argument may well be that quality trumps all, but I don't see it exactly the same way. Balance is required. (I'm taking away game-plan out of this)

Last year I wanted mids for our late picks and rookie spots and we got three defenders when we didn't need them. We know how that worked out.
Who should have we taken? I can't put names to players and you may see that as a fail, but let me put forward some types; A speedy lock-down defender and a couple of small-medium players who can kick goals. (maybe we got one in Finbar.)

I guess we could ask SOS why we didn't find them, and he may reply with a "they weren't there'
I'd then use Davids line out of Prometheus: "Try Harder"

 

[zeeCFC]

Watch us get Caldwell in two years.

Blues fan. Giants player (for now)

Great mates with Dow/Walsh/LOB/Schumacher

Murphy was apparently consoling him on the bench during a junior footy match this year when he did his hammy again.

MOST IMPORTANTLY - Matt Bain is his manager...

 

[murphster]

This is the thing I'm leading to; You cannot afford to be 'hopeful' and then for not being confident, double-up on the same types. You have to be sure.

We do not have a system devoid of player limits and without a salary cap. You have to be very clear in what you're doing and the blend of types you're bringing into the club. You can't put all your resources into one end of the ground and ignore the other, one type of player and not the other.
I know, I know. SOS knows more than me and is he's considered all this. Sure, they've likely covered all the bases and have all the answers, but we can only comment on what we see and not on what we don't see.

The big trick may yet be unmasked next year and the applause will duly arrive.
In my case, I was very happy with the trade period even though we didn't get Shiel and if had have, would have we taken Stocker? I don't know, but those last few picks have just left me a little............so what.

Could have we done better? If nothing else, it's at least worthy of a little friendly chat.

I understand where you are coming from Harks and to some extent I agree with you, for example I think we keep ignoring that small forward position which we need desperately and instead are counting on our mids to cover for it, which Collingwood have done with some success, however I do think we have done a good job covering most other positions and think our midfield balance is actually pretty good now, Stocker has good burst speed away from the contest where Kennedy, at least so far, hasn’t shown that burst speed and is more like Cripps in the sense that he can play inside mid or resting forward, where as Stocker is more versatile in where he can play. I think the mids we have now compliment each other pretty well, whether any of them can play a De’Goey, Hoskin Elliot role down forward is still an unknown, I think SPS and Fisher could play Hf as they are both beautiful kicks going inside 50 and hitting up leading forwards but neither is great overhead, I think Setterfield could play a Hoskin Elliot style high forward role very well as he is good overhead and kicks goals. I guess we will have to wait and see what happens next year and who is assigned to what roles. As far as our late picks go as you stated earlier there are player limits so we can only take so many, although there is still one spot left on the list whether we have a plan for the SSP period or we save it to mid year is unknown at this stage. SOS might pull a rabbit out of the hat on Dec 1st and really finish strong.

 

[IronMan29]

I wouldn't worry in the slighest. SOS will pick a player suited to what our team needs at Adelaide's pick and do a better job then Adelaide and Reid will do with our pick.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Robertio]

Jimmae, i've been having a think about this new in-trade trade system. I think SOS and Lloyd had a deeper understanding of how it works than others did because they had been over in the States studying it and no doubt asking those who have been through it their thoughts.

For instance with the Stocker pick, No19 is actually not No19 when you can actually put a face to it. Under the old system, if we rated Stocker at say 10 on our board and we traded to get 10(like we did with LOB) then it would be seen as a Pick 10 and Stocker seen as a Pick 10. For us he is a Pick 10 so this is a win for us. It can also be a win for Adelaide if all their picks they had marked on their board were already gone and they defer their value to next years draft.

Also on the Finbar example, it can pay to identify a roughie with a low pick every 2nd year because once again you can defer value to every 2nd year. For example , if you identify a roughie like Finbar you can confidently predict that you can keep trading down adding future low picks as you go. As you mentioned we added a future 4th and a 5th trading down because we knew Finbar wasn't being taken by anyone else. So for that Pick 70 odd we used on Finbar, we actually get Finbar and 2 sliders next year.

I hope this makes sense on paper. It does in my head.

I loved it. Our recruiting team were one step ahead throughout the draft.

 

[Nori]

The market value for Stocker this year was around pick 20. Pick 8 is only Carlton’s assessment, not the market. He doesn’t suddenly become pick 8 because that’s what we want to believe to make ourselves feel better. I’m not saying you ignore your own rating but market value and what you personally think it’s worth are both relevant.

Ultimately time will tell where he sits in this draft and whether we overpaid, but definitely not a no brainer.

Regarding stockers form in first year, it’s not that it’s going to define how good he is but it will alter perception of the deal. Right now stocker could be anything in our minds. After his first year we will see him in a more practical light and the reality of the deal will be more evident.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

That’s all true if it was outside opinions that mattered, but all that really matters is what the club and it’s supported think.

So market value is irrelevant.

 

[Michael Jezz]

Time will tell whether knightmare or the overwhelming majority of recruiters got it right re Walsh I suppose.

Knightmare does not rate SOS's list build.
He thinks we have too many talls, when our first 2 picks in the last 3 drafts have been smalls.

 

[Michael Jezz]

The critics have their opinion that we should have picked Rankine and RDC but they miss the point, that Carlton picked for need and that was mids, especially those that can hit up a forward(Stocker). This is driven by our requirement to move up the ladder now. Our admin and coaching staff will not last winning 5 games a season Rankine receiving no supply in the forward line or RDC developing in the seconds, is not going to get us the there quick enough.

 

[BlueView]

Loved it all except for the Rookies, there was a waft of recruiting for Careers rather than the long term benefit of the club

Eddie Betts
Sauce
Ed Curnow
Tuohey
Jamison
Carazzo

We’ve had some decent success there

 

[gandaal]

He bags us every year. Literally every year.

Once players are selected his Collingwood goggles are put on.

I remember when Broomhead went from a talent he rated in the 30s to top 3 in his draft year after one season because he had a good preseason.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

Sorry, I didn't get to you quick enough.

I talk about types and there's a very good reason for this, as when our balance is out of whack at the NB's the whole development cycle suffers.
It was of little surprise to me that the less CFC-listed players the NB's had at the end of the year, the better the performances came about.
Why? Could it have been squad balance? It looked possible for that to be the case to me. The right amount of talls that can play in their right positions, the right amount of smalls who can run and carry the ball....etc etc.
The argument may well be that quality trumps all, but I don't see it exactly the same way. Balance is required. (I'm taking away game-plan out of this)

Last year I wanted mids for our late picks and rookie spots and we got three defenders when we didn't need them. We know how that worked out.
Who should have we taken? I can't put names to players and you may see that as a fail, but let me put forward some types; A speedy lock-down defender and a couple of small-medium players who can kick goals. (maybe we got one in Finbar.)

I guess we could ask SOS why we didn't find them, and he may reply with a "they weren't there'
I'd then use Davids line out of Prometheus: "Try Harder"

I don't see it as a fail. Just think it's a lot easier to say we should've gone for this type and that type then it is to actually put some names to it.

I do understand where you're coming from though, last year was a disaster and you feel we may have made the same mistake again. Hopefully we don't have the major injury issues next year as we did this year.

 

[VainGlorious]

Yeah, this is astonishing. Based on watching his highlights he looks like one of the classiest players in the pool. Must be some serious issues to not be picked.

Concerns of the Dayle Garlett variety?

 

[VainGlorious]

The market value for Stocker this year was around pick 20. Pick 8 is only Carlton’s assessment, not the market. He doesn’t suddenly become pick 8 because that’s what we want to believe to make ourselves feel better. I’m not saying you ignore your own rating but market value and what you personally think it’s worth are both relevant.

Ultimately time will tell where he sits in this draft and whether we overpaid, but definitely not a no brainer.

Regarding stockers form in first year, it’s not that it’s going to define how good he is but it will alter perception of the deal. Right now stocker could be anything in our minds. After his first year we will see him in a more practical light and the reality of the deal will be more evident.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Good post.

I’ll believe that he was rated in the top 8 to make me feel better about it and I’ll like it.

 

[CFC_#17]

Knightmare does not rate SOS's list build.
He thinks we have too many talls, when our first 2 picks in the last 3 drafts have been smalls.

I used to not mind Knightmare, but this year he really overrates his opion as being the only correct one. “Blues have too many talls, should have picked Lukosius at pick 1 fullstop”.

 

[VainGlorious]

I may have myself on ignore - would explain a few things........

Ignorance is bliss

 

[Sector 7G]

I used to not mind Knightmare, but this year he really overrates his opion as being the only correct one. “Blues have too many talls, should have picked Lukosius at pick 1 fullstop”.

"The 2018 AFL Draft was defined by an all-time crop of top end talent, and highlighted by the fact that each of the first four players taken at pick No. 1 and nobody would have batted an eyelid."

Carlton take Walsh and get a D

 

[murphster]

I wonder if Northern Blues will look to sign Sunny Brazier from Knights as he is an NGA player for us and apparently played some decent games during the year. 190cm forward in case anyone was wondering. Anyone heard anything about it or him?

 

[BLUEALLTHRU]

"The 2018 AFL Draft was defined by an all-time crop of top end talent, and highlighted by the fact that each of the first four players taken at pick No. 1 and nobody would have batted an eyelid."

Carlton take Walsh and get a D

Carlton can't win a raffle holding all the tickets.

 

[SkyhorseTamer]

I used to not mind Knightmare, but this year he really overrates his opion as being the only correct one. “Blues have too many talls, should have picked Lukosius at pick 1 fullstop”.

Just a tad contradictory that. Isn’t it. Think you’ve hit the nail on the head with his attitude.

 

[katmanblue]

It’s a joke isn’t it, but that’s alright when we are done and start winning flags how stupid are there ratings going to look then. Would challenge anyone to do better than what SOS and the boys have done over the last4 years+.

We really need to start to keep these articles and bring them up when we start winning.

Should be a thread for it.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[gandaal]

So this is the second time that we have recruited someone from the same school as a Silvagni recruit.

Jack and Cunningham

Ben and Finbar

I'm not sure what it means but it's interesting.