List Mgmt. Carlton's 2019 Draft Thread

[windows1]

No Robertson love? He’s my pick of the mids at or around 9.

Look I am happy to say I have no interest in him at all. Many others do. Just not my type of player.

 

[windows1]

I think we should be very encouraged about the idea Melbourne may trade down. Why? Well I don’t see someone trading UP to 8 so they can bid on Henry/do a deal with Freo to trade back down. Freo aren’t going to give 11 and 22 to get 8 on its own. Melb have nothing else useful to give back. I’d say someone else (Cats/Port etc) are more likely. Which I still think places us well for a trade with Freo. Give them 43 and late picks. Get their 22. Swap 10/11.

Take Bergman.

 

[Jeremias]

If the Cats are coming hard for 9 I’d package it up with 43 and our future 2nd.

Get their first three picks this year.

Take Stephens, Bergman/Williams and Philp.

Take Honey with our next pick in the 50s.

And I’ll personally build a SOS statue out the front of Princes Park.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

I think we should be very encouraged about the idea Melbourne may trade down. Why? Well I don’t see someone trading UP to 8 so they can bid on Henry/do a deal with Freo to trade back down. Freo aren’t going to give 11 and 22 to get 8 on its own. Melb have nothing else useful to give back. I’d say someone else (Cats/Port etc) are more likely. Which I still think places us well for a trade with Freo. Give them 43 and late picks. Get their 22. Swap 10/11.

Take Bergman.

Melbourne gave up future first, 26 & 50 to get 8. Why they want to sell it now?

Dees cough up three picks for Roos' prized No.8 selection

Melbourne could pounce on livewire small forward Cody Weightman at this year's NAB AFL Draft after landing pick No.8 in a trade with North Melbourne

m.afl.com.au

 

[swuzzlebubble]

Expecting 22 from Freo in return for not bidding on Henry seems unrealistic.

Future first and 9, 43, 57 for 7, 22 and future third (tied to Pies).

Helps Freo re Henry. No-one is bidding at 8 or earlier. So they still get 2x hits.
If we're not taking Robertson, they probably still get him.
Matching for Henry later with 43+

7 for us is better than 9 with an extra two to choose from. I'm concerned who goes at 8.
22 handy for a value selection.

Downgrade next year's first worth it.

 

[rog1995]

Geelong coming for pick 9 according to Port.

Goodbye Kemp

All for swapping pick 9 for say pick 14 and 24. The first two rounds are really even with great depth.

 

[Revenant1995]

I'm appreciating much of the discussion here regarding pick 9, and whether to trade or keep. But when it comes to trading of pick, plus FS and Acadamies etc, and trading of future picks, there is a question I still have.

Let's say that next year Tom Papley is still very much in our sights, available, and the trade will happen. And let's say it will require a first round pick. If, for example, we did a pick swap this year that involved next year's future first, could we still use 2021 future first for Papley? Also, what could this mean in relation to list management, given some significant retirements in the next couple of years?

I still like the idea of keeping pick 9, and selecting best available who meets our needs. But I am also getting the idea why pick trades may also be a possibility. But I am trying to get my head around what we need to be aware of with pick swaps, and possible future needs, etc...

 

[swuzzlebubble]

Who knows what will happen next year but yes 2021 picks can be used then. We may even have a player or two needing opportunity elsewhere.
But how much of what we do this year should be influenced by what might happen next year. We were supposed to get someone this year.

Should we take Serong knowing we might get Papley?
Should we take Kemp knowing we might get Wines?

 

[Blue__Balls]

This isn't bad. Perhaps more likely than 9 for 10 and 22.
I wonder though if 9 & future first for 7 & 22 might be even more of a win-win?

Swuz, what are you smoking?

9 and a future ~10 for 7 and 22? Not a win/win at all, Freo clearly come out ahead on the picks. It also doesn't help them with Henry, because Melbourne could make a bid at 8 and they'd lose 9 anyway. And even then, they've still upgraded 22 to a future mid first rounder. And all we get is our first pick ahead of Freo and Melbourne, who are likely after different players to us regardless, at the cost of losing our first rounder next year (which will have been earmarked for a senior player acquisition) for Pick 22.

There is nothing good in that deal for Carlton at all.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Melbourne gave up future first, 26 & 50 to get 8. Why they want to sell it now?

Dees cough up three picks for Roos' prized No.8 selection

Melbourne could pounce on livewire small forward Cody Weightman at this year's NAB AFL Draft after landing pick No.8 in a trade with North Melbourne

m.afl.com.au

Reckon they secured 8 with the hopes it would get them Jackson (who was rated around the Pick 10-12 mark in most conversations). Stands to reason that interest in Jackson ramped up, Melbourne are now committed to using Pick 3 on him, and there are enough similar types later in the first round that splitting 8 for a couple of those guys makes sense.

 

[windows1]

Melbourne gave up future first, 26 & 50 to get 8. Why they want to sell it now?

Dees cough up three picks for Roos' prized No.8 selection

Melbourne could pounce on livewire small forward Cody Weightman at this year's NAB AFL Draft after landing pick No.8 in a trade with North Melbourne

m.afl.com.au

They want to be high in THIS draft. I’m not proposing they fall much. 8 down to an early teens pick and an early 20. They aren’t on record as saying they did their futures work and don’t rate next year, particularly due to the compromised draft.

 

[The Grover]

If Adelaide take McAsey at pick 6, does that mean Geelong won't be trying to trade up for our pick 9

Then our best chance of trading pick 9 is with Freo?

 

[Blue__Balls]

If Adelaide take McAsey at pick 6, does that mean Geelong won't be trying to trade up for our pick 9

Then our best chance of trading pick 9 is with Freo?

If Adelaide take McAsey at 6 (probably 7) I think we sit on our hands and see who is available come Pick 10 (assuming GWS match a bid after 4).

1-7 - Rowell, Anderson, Jackson, Young, Green, Flanders, McAsey.

Leaves Stephens, Robertson, Kemp, Serong and Ash as the likely next group, and only Freo and Melbourne with picks before ours.

Could see GC trying to get that pick from us, but 16 and 21 don't tempt me a whole lot. Would rather send out later picks to Freo for 23 and use the top 10 pick ourselves. If we turned 10 into 16 and 21, with our list size, I don't think we'd end up using our last two picks anyway.

16, 21 and 44 vs. 10, 22 and 71.

 

[Revenant1995]

Who knows what will happen next year but yes 2021 picks can be used then. We may even have a player or two needing opportunity elsewhere.
But how much of what we do this year should be influenced by what might happen next year. We were supposed to get someone this year.

Should we take Serong knowing we might get Papley?
Should we take Kemp knowing we might get Wines?

Thanks. Those last two questions are sort of my questions, plus, if we do a pick swap this year that involves a future pick, how would this affect our ability to get players like Wines or Papley?

 

[Bamboo Harvester]

Thanks. Those last two questions are sort of my questions, plus, if we do a pick swap this year that involves a future pick, how would this affect our ability to get players like Wines or Papley?

I guess if we were to entertain a trade this year that involved future picks, it would only be a 2nd/3rd round pick....that leaves us to trade our 1st in 2020 if a Papley/Wines did become available.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

Thanks. Those last two questions are sort of my questions, plus, if we do a pick swap this year that involves a future pick, how would this affect our ability to get players like Wines or Papley?

They'll both be contracted so it will heavily depend on the stance of their clubs. But where there's a will, there's a way.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

Swuz, what are you smoking?

9 and a future ~10 for 7 and 22? Not a win/win at all, Freo clearly come out ahead on the picks. It also doesn't help them with Henry, because Melbourne could make a bid at 8 and they'd lose 9 anyway. And even then, they've still upgraded 22 to a future mid first rounder. And all we get is our first pick ahead of Freo and Melbourne, who are likely after different players to us regardless, at the cost of losing our first rounder next year (which will have been earmarked for a senior player acquisition) for Pick 22.

There is nothing good in that deal for Carlton at all.

Apart from all that you don't mind it then?

 

[Blue__Balls]

Apart from all that you don't mind it?

Apart from every single part of it, yeah, it's fine

 

[HARKER]

Should we take Serong knowing we might get Papley?
Should we take Kemp knowing we might get Wines?

I don't think any club can play that game and one word in particular you put forward highlights why not; 'might'

After missing on three targets via the trade/FA period, we have every right to be a little more gun shy next time around.
You have to use the draft with needs playing a part. How much of a part would it play? Every situation is different and there's no absolute one way or another.

 

[smashbox gill]

I feel it in my bones that sos has something in the works. He wants to go out with a bang.

 

[HARKER]

I feel it in my bones that sos has something in the works. He wants to go out with a bang.

Maybe he can't do whatever he wants and whenever he wants to do it.

Putting up next years first is a gamble as it may effectively take us out of being serious players at the trade table next year.
This wouldn't be something SOS could simply pull out of the hat without approval. I'm not sure how I'd feel should we let it go.

 

[Stamos]

Maybe he can't do whatever he wants and whenever he wants to do it.

Putting up next years first is a gamble as it may effectively take us out of being serious players at the trade table next year.
This wouldn't be something SOS could simply pull out of the hat without approval. I'm not sure how I'd feel should we let it go.

I don't know how it would even work trade wise (ie our future 1st).

And given what we know about numerous clubs wanting #9, perhaps our future 2nd could be involved, but our future 1st doesn't make sense.

eg, #9 + 2020 2nd for #14 + #17
(although #43 would be better for us than future 2nd, I'd suggest. Gives us a points advantage of #46).

 

[HARKER]

I don't know how it would even work trade wise (ie our future 1st).
And given what we know about numerous clubs wanting #9, perhaps our future 2nd could be involved, but our future 1st doesn't make sense.
eg, #9 + 2020 2nd for #14 + #17
(although #43 would be better for us than future 2nd, I'd suggest. Gives us a points advantage of #46).

I can't see us trading out the 2020 first either and not because there may not be players we'd sooner take this year, but it would leave us with little currency to trade with the following year. i.e No real quality players are going to be let to go for one future pick alone.
We can always trade out young players but 2020 still seems just a little early to be moving on young stock with genuine currency.

If there was though a 'must have' that floats around the #15 mark, we may well be tempted.........although I'd still sooner we didn't

 

[Stamos]

I can't see us trading out the 2020 first either and not because there may not be players we'd sooner take this year, but it would leave us with little currency to trade with the following year. i.e No real quality players are going to be let to go for one future pick alone.
We can always trade out young players but 2020 still seems just a little early to be moving on young stock with genuine currency.

If there was though a 'must have' that floats around the #15 mark, we may well be tempted.........although I'd still sooner we didn't

This, but also that clubs with those late 1st round picks seem to want to be moving up, rather than out in this years draft.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

I don't think any club can play that game and one word in particular you put forward highlights why not; 'might'

After missing on three targets via the trade/FA period, we have every right to be a little more gun shy next time around.
You have to use the draft with needs playing a part. How much of a part would it play? Every situation is different and there's no absolute one way or another.

No argument from me.
My examples were corollary to the argument that we should not trade future picks now because we *might* need them for trades next year.
I think we do the best we can now and worry about next year then