List Mgmt. Carlton's 2019 Draft Thread

[Jeremias]

So Liam Henry is now talked about. What are the chances we actually get him at 9?

Not very high. I expect Fremantle to match any bid in that range.

 

[windows1]

Or the other option is:

Carlton Out: 9 & 43
Trading with Fremantle
Carlton In: 10 & 22

Seems like a logical trade if Henry gets to our pick and we intend to bid on him.

We upgrade early into the second round and Freo secure another top 10 player before the bid for Henry. Sounds like a win win to me.

Interesting proposition for Freo isn’t it? They trade up BEFORE we bid or trade down AFTER we bid.

So they either get say Kemp and Henry (by trading up) OR

Henry Taylor and Rivers (if they traded down).

 

[windows1]

Oh I got to that by:

Trading 10 with 15 and 20 from GC. 15 would roughly get them Henry (due to points). They’d keep 22 and they’d have 20. Hence use on players like Rivers and Taylor.

 

[bmaurizio]

It's absurd how skinny Fyfe was in his draft year.

Now you look at him and he's a beast.

Hmmmm, I guess I've also put on a lot of weight since I was 18....

But Fyfe’s basic physique height, structure was evident , not a lightweight shorter type at all.
Building a stronger durable physique is possible, but one must be endowed with the basics.

 

[HARKER]

Matt Balmers Top 25

No surprises here. Feel the same way about #3 & #4 being Young and Serong.
Seems a little safe but I guess that's he way he sees it to be.

 

[smashbox gill]

I see it playing out like this.

GWS offer Pick 6 & 2020 1st to Melb for Pick 3. They may reject as they get the best kid outside the top 2 and the drop to 6 may make them miss out on the kid they want. I don’t think they bid on Green, they have enough inside mids and the risk of GWS not matching might be to big.

GWS then offer the same deal to Adelaide, this time it’s accepted if Adelaide don’t have interest in Jackson which doubt they do with Riley Obrien just starting to show his worth. They see this as getting an extra 1st round pick (which they need to replenish their list) for only 1 spot down in the draft as they have no intention of drafting Jackson.

GWS then take Jackson.
Sydney bid Green Pick 5. GWS March. Sydney. Take whoever.

Adelaide use Pick 6. They may want to take Stephens the Adelaide boy so it might not be that much of an issue with them.

So doubt we trade our pick as Jackson most likely gone early

 

[TerryWallet]

I see it playing out like this.

GWS offer Pick 6 & 2020 1st to Melb for Pick 3. They may reject as they get the best kid outside the top 2 and the drop to 6 may make them miss out on the kid they want. I don’t think they bid on Green, they have enough inside mids and the risk of GWS not matching might be to big.

GWS then offer the same deal to Adelaide, this time it’s accepted if Adelaide don’t have interest in Jackson which doubt they do with Riley Obrien just starting to show his worth. They see this as getting an extra 1st round pick (which they need to replenish their list) for only 1 spot down in the draft as they have no intention of drafting Jackson.

GWS then take Jackson.
Sydney bid Green Pick 5. GWS March. Sydney. Take whoever.

Adelaide use Pick 6. They may want to take Stephens the Adelaide boy so it might not be that much of an issue with them.

So doubt we trade our pick as Jackson most likely gone early

I sorta agree with this but it is risky hoping Melb don't bid. They have a history of doing so with the same LM. Also it would be interesting where getting a pick before Green and then matching Green at 5 leaves them points wise next year. They just haven't got many picks this year and as yet next year to pay for the bid. Jimmae could you do a points calc when you get the time where this would leave then pick/pointswise next year.

 

[smashbox gill]

I sorta agree with this but it is risky hoping Melb don't bid. They have a history of doing so with the same LM. Also it would be interesting where getting a pick before Green and then matching Green at 5 leaves them points wise next year. They just haven't got many picks this year and as yet next year to pay for the bid. Jimmae could you do a points calc when you get the time where this would leave then pick/pointswise next year.

They lose their first round pick in this trade scenario so doubt they would care to much about dropping down further next year to make up the deficit.

This is obviously if Melb don’t bid. GWS have also come out and said they may let green go if a bid comes to early. This could happen seeing as they have a lot of similar types on their list and need a ruckman.

 

[windows1]

I sorta agree with this but it is risky hoping Melb don't bid. They have a history of doing so with the same LM. Also it would be interesting where getting a pick before Green and then matching Green at 5 leaves them points wise next year. They just haven't got many picks this year and as yet next year to pay for the bid. Jimmae could you do a points calc when you get the time where this would leave then pick/pointswise next year.

Wiped out I reckon (channeling my inner Jermias.....was gonna say something more than that but...)

GWS have 6, 40 and 59 this year. 2338 of value this year. Not sure about next year? Presume it’s standard picks (I’ll go check if they have a future traded). Let’s assume they finish 4th. With the GC gifted pick 11, 4th will give them picks 16, 34 and 52 next year. 1067. 542. 246.

Ok so that’s their ‘assets’. In any ‘trade up’ world that 16 is gone to another club. As is 6. So whoever they get above 6 is costing them 6 and 16. Leaves them with 40 and 59 from this year, and 34 and 52 next. 587 this year. 788 next.

A bid at 4 by Adelaide will cost 2034 less the 20 percent discount = 1627.

So unless they have a future first I don’t know about then they just can’t do it can they???

 

[smashbox gill]

Wiped out I reckon (channeling my inner Jermias.....was gonna say something more than that but...)

GWS have 6, 40 and 59 this year. 2338 of value this year. Not sure about next year? Presume it’s standard picks (I’ll go check if they have a future traded). Let’s assume they finish 4th. With the GC gifted pick 11, 4th will give them picks 16, 34 and 52 next year. 1067. 542. 246.

Ok so that’s their ‘assets’. In any ‘trade up’ world that 16 is gone to another club. As is 6. So whoever they get above 6 is costing them 6 and 16. Leaves them with 40 and 59 from this year, and 34 and 52 next. 587 this year. 788 next.

A bid at 4 by Adelaide will cost 2034 less the 20 percent discount = 1627.

So unless they have a future first I don’t know about then they just can’t do it can they???

They may be forced to trade someone to get the picks needed ie) caldwell

 

[windows1]

They may be forced to trade someone to get the picks needed ie) caldwell

They’ll have to. But he will be worth a Setters deal next year. Second and third.

And they will still have no points or picks for anything next year. They have more academy players next year. So what did they achieve by trading up? Do all that so they can get....Young??? Be wiped out this year and next so they can can get Young?

Nah don’t buy it. I must be missing somehting.

Jeremias save me!!! I’m sorry for saying I hated you! I don’t. I really don’t! Help me!

 

[TerryWallet]

I've said for a while now that i think they traded up to 6 to nab ONE of Green or Jackson, but not both. 6 gives them either.

I think their order is Jackson then Green. If it wasn't, then they could have stuck with 12 and 18 just to match Green with more points. This way they get a good crack at Jackson and if not they still get Green comfortably but suffer a smallish points hit than they would otherwise have.

 

[Jeremias]

Jeremias save me!!! I’m sorry for saying I hated you! I don’t. I really don’t! Help me!

I’m not sure one man can help you to the extent you need...

But I’m here and I’ll try regardless. What’s up?

 

[windows1]

I've said for a while now that i think they traded up to 6 to nab ONE of Green or Jackson, but not both. 6 gives them either.

I think their order is Jackson then Green. If it wasn't, then they could have stuck with 12 and 18 just to match Green with more points. This way they get a good crack at Jackson and if not they still get Green comfortably but suffer a smallish points hit than they would otherwise have.

You know what? I apologise. I suspect I arrogantly disagreed with you. But you’re right.

Extending your view:

Plan A: 6 gives them a swing at Jackson. If Green gets to Swans and Jackson is here they will let Swans have him.
Plan B: If Jackson gone bet they trade back down. Say with Cats. 14 and 17. A bid by Swans would require 1500 to match. 14 goes on Green. 17 goes down to 28 for the points.

So Plan A: Jackson.
Plan B: Green matched and keep 28.

They’re happy either way. They’re not trading up. It’s a disaster.

 

[windows1]

I’m not sure one man can help you to the extent you need...

But I’m here and I’ll try regardless. What’s up?

You bastard. But you’re right.

Anyway....please solve the riddle of the GWS plan taking into account points picks etc!

 

[Jimmae]

I sorta agree with this but it is risky hoping Melb don't bid. They have a history of doing so with the same LM. Also it would be interesting where getting a pick before Green and then matching Green at 5 leaves them points wise next year. They just haven't got many picks this year and as yet next year to pay for the bid. Jimmae could you do a points calc when you get the time where this would leave then pick/pointswise next year.

I don't need to run the maths to know that if they didn't have a first round pick available for points in either draft, it'd clean out their remaining draft points across the two drafts, and then some.

I suspect they feel pick 6 is sufficient to dodge a Green bid, and for the most part I agree: he's a big body with some neat tricks, but he's a budget Cripps. People forget how much explosiveness Cripps showed as a junior despite clearly running around with awful conditioning.



I'm happy to put Rowell, Anderson, Young and Jackson as clearly ahead of him when it comes to the right combination of potential, production and efficiency, which IMO makes Sydney the only real wild card as it's hard to see Adelaide skipping over Stephens.

 

[TerryWallet]

I don't need to run the maths to know that if they didn't have a first round pick available for points in either draft, it'd clean out their remaining draft points across the two drafts, and then some.

I suspect they feel pick 6 is sufficient to dodge a Green bid, and for the most part I agree: he's a big body with some neat tricks, but he's a budget Cripps. People forget how much explosiveness Cripps showed as a junior despite clearly running around with awful conditioning.

I agree on Green personally. I think by grabbing 6 they've given themselves enough options that they are happy with.

 

[Jimmae]

I agree on Green personally. I think by grabbing 6 they've given themselves enough options that they are happy with.

Yup, added in some extra detail at the bottom of the post to point out how I only see Sydney as the real danger, and I personally think they'll get too enamoured with Ash, Flanders, Kemp, Jackson and Robertson to consider a bid.

 

[AT97]

I don't need to run the maths to know that if they didn't have a first round pick available for points in either draft, it'd clean out their remaining draft points across the two drafts, and then some.

I suspect they feel pick 6 is sufficient to dodge a Green bid, and for the most part I agree: he's a big body with some neat tricks, but he's a budget Cripps. People forget how much explosiveness Cripps showed as a junior despite clearly running around with awful conditioning.



I'm happy to put Rowell, Anderson, Young and Jackson as clearly ahead of him when it comes to the right combination of potential, production and efficiency, which IMO makes Sydney the only real wild card as it's hard to see Adelaide skipping over Stephens.

you‘d think if there was certainly from recruiters he was going to be Cripps in a couple years there would be no question GCS would take him at 1.

 

[windows1]

Regardless of player order doesn’t seem like anyone can see GWS selling the farm to move up to 3-5.

 

[Blue__Balls]

I don't need to run the maths to know that if they didn't have a first round pick available for points in either draft, it'd clean out their remaining draft points across the two drafts, and then some.

I suspect they feel pick 6 is sufficient to dodge a Green bid, and for the most part I agree: he's a big body with some neat tricks, but he's a budget Cripps. People forget how much explosiveness Cripps showed as a junior despite clearly running around with awful conditioning.



I'm happy to put Rowell, Anderson, Young and Jackson as clearly ahead of him when it comes to the right combination of potential, production and efficiency, which IMO makes Sydney the only real wild card as it's hard to see Adelaide skipping over Stephens.

It's intriguing, isn't it. "Plays like Cripps" definitely implies he should be a premium player, but what's set Crippa apart from everyone else is his competitive drive, and I'm not entirely sure Green has it to the same degree (not many do).

Makes you wonder how much the "player comparison" stuff can lead phantom drafters astray.

 

[HARKER]

So Geelong offered #14 and a pick in the 30s for #9.
Well that was never going to go far.

If other clubs are seeing this as a way to get our pick, there will be no trading it out.
I liked the idea of it and saw it as a means to an end I thought may play out, but unless some 'magic' drops on draft night, I don't see it now.

Off to the draft we go with a top ten pick.

 

[Jimmae]

Regardless of player order doesn’t seem like anyone can see GWS selling the farm to move up to 3-5.

They already sold off their draft value to get to 6. Would need a pick swap to go further without tanking their list strategy, especially if they're going to stall the development of several top 30 draftees like they have been for years now.

 

[Jeremias]

You bastard. But you’re right.

Anyway....please solve the riddle of the GWS plan taking into account points picks etc!

Not my forte. Jimmae is your man for points questions.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

Yup, added in some extra detail at the bottom of the post to point out how I only see Sydney as the real danger, and I personally think they'll get too enamoured with Ash, Flanders, Kemp, Jackson and Robertson to consider a bid.

But if Sydney don't bid, surely GWS will take someone at 6 and then match for Green later. And the points get easier pretty quick.