List Mgmt. Carlton's 2019 Draft Thread

[Sector 7G]

Stephens reminds me of 1AW. We will be able to find a spot somewhere for him. Pace is one thing we lack and he has got it.

 

[Eiffel 65]

Heard on the MMM this morning, Melbourne likely to pick Jackson at 3 and Pickett at 10 (!)...

Might make things interesting for us if we did trade down with Port/Geelong etc. That's one more player gone that may see Kemp/Serong
/Stephens/other slip out of the top 10.

If Melbourne take Pickett at 10, that could open the door for us to trade down to pick 12 with Port and still get one of Kemp or Serong.

 

[Jeremias]

The part i don't understand is why we would be after another winger in Stephens? Yes he looks fantastic but he would take 3-4 years to hit the output we need. Last year we played Walsh, Setterfield, LOB on the wing with Fisher being drafted as a winger and SPS and Gibbons also having the skills to play the wing. It just doesn't strike me as a position we need further recruits for as the reality is it would just force out someone we've already drafted and invested a high pick in over the past few years. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

My thoughts are that you are pigeonholing players into positions, but it is never that simple.

Walsh, Setterfield, LOB, Fisher can all play on a wing, but may be best utilised elsewhere, as they continue to mature.

SPS I don't see as someone who should be out on a wing. For mine he is a centre square mid, who can also play off half back.

As for Gibbons, I don't think we should put any consideration to passing on a prospect we rate highly, because he is at the club.

Stephens is not just a wing. I think in time he can become a very effective centre square midfielder.

 

[ABigOlDoofus]

For those saying that they don't want to draft Stephens because we don't need another wing, although he'll start his career there, his "final form" for lack of a better term will be something close to Josh Kelly, an outside mid that starts in the centre square. His outside running and disposal will always be his main strength, but he has shown he is a brilliant user on the inside too, all he needs to do is bulk up a bit and he's right to go.

 

[Eiffel 65]

Heard on the MMM this morning, Melbourne likely to pick Jackson at 3 and Pickett at 10 (!)...

Might make things interesting for us if we did trade down with Port/Geelong etc. That's one more player gone that may see Kemp/Serong
/Stephens/other slip out of the top 10.

That could also see Weightman slide to late in the first round/early second round.

Bulldogs appear to be leaning towards Bergman, Geelong like Worrell and Sam De Koning, Port like Stephens and Day.

Could open up the prospect of a similar trade to last year to grab Weightman late in the first round.

Example:
Out: 2020 1st
In: 2020 1st (GFC) and Pick 17 (2019)

If we're really after a small forward, that's the way I'd go if it plays out like that on draft night.

 

[ferrisb]

Stephens reminds me of 1AW. We will be able to find a spot somewhere for him. Pace is one thing we lack and he has got it.

1AW was quite 'aerial'. A super leap and strong hands. Plus deceptively tall for a running player. So he was an overhead threat. Not in the same league as Fyfe, but sort of that unusual match-up.

Stephens has the same kind of dash, running power and kicking. Maybe a 'ground' version of 1AW?

 

[smashbox gill]

For those saying that they don't want to draft Stephens because we don't need another wing, although he'll start his career there, his "final form" for lack of a better term will be something close to Josh Kelly, an outside mid that starts in the centre square. His outside running and disposal will always be his main strength, but he has shown he is a brilliant user on the inside too, all he needs to do is bulk up a bit and he's right to go.

For every Josh Kelly there are multiple James Aish’s

 

[Eiffel 65]

For every Josh Kelly there are multiple James Aish’s

Every running player in the draft gets compared to either Kelly or Gaff.

Sometimes the media get carried away with player comparisons.

 

[smashbox gill]

Every running player in the draft gets compared to either Kelly or Gaff.

Sometimes the media get carried away with player comparisons.

Correct every running player is the next Gaff or Kelly, however most end up James Aish

For every big bodied bid is the next Bontempelli or Fyfe, however most end up Kyle Langford or Jayden Laverde

 

[Pafloyul]

I'm of the 'what we lose on the swings, we gain on the roundabout' mindset so I don't agree with the 'list balance' approach, I think it's fraught with danger. I think we've had better results simply splurging on players we've thought had the tools to make it at AFL level, without pressure. Cripps is the only glaring exception. 2015 and way back in 2002, for wildly different reasons, were years where we just got to loosen up a bit and pick players with a bit of 'upside', it seemed to go alright within the context of what we had to work with.

 

[Doro]

I'm of the 'what we lose on the swings, we gain on the roundabout' mindset so I don't agree with the 'list balance' approach, I think it's fraught with danger. I think we've had better results simply splurging on players we've thought had the tools to make it at AFL level, without pressure. Cripps is the only glaring exception. 2015 and way back in 2002, for wildly different reasons, were years where we just got to loosen up a bit and pick players with a bit of 'upside', it seemed to go alright within the context of what we had to work with.

I think we are better off targeting specific types as the list build progresses. Have a grouping off similar types at a certain pick and take the best fit there.

 

[windows1]

You're one of those swivel windows that rotates 360 degrees, aren't you?

More of a free falling Art Deco window that will break your fingers if you’re not careful....

 

[GT619]

Correct every running player is the next Gaff or Kelly, however most end up James Aish

For every big bodied bid is the next Bontempelli or Fyfe, however most end up Kyle Langford or Jayden Laverde

most end up like ferrisb

 

[Sheephead]

I’d love the club to look at Sam Philp with our 3rd rounder if it and he are still there. Lightning quick mid.

Injured players are a solid investment if you ask me. Kemp at 9, or trade down and take Williams and C Stephens, then Philp. Some serious prospects.

 

[Bamboo Harvester]

By this time next week, if we have Kemp and Martin in the ODNB, I'll be absolutely rapt.

Haven't hidden the fact that I'd also love to get Riccardi or Sokol with a later pick...not sure if we need another 18yo project player on our list at this time.

Webb would also be a good get as a rookie...injuries have cruelled him, and the woofers likely wouldn't have let him go it they didn't bat so deep in the mid. If Jacky Russell can get his body right, he could be a pretty handy asset.

 

[The Bighouse]

Which potential draftees have we been linked to?
- Kemp, Ash, Serong, D.Stephens (Henry)
- C.Stephens, Schoenberg, Worrell
- Cahill
- Sokol
- Rowles

 

[Stickitupthem]

I know I keep saying this but given there's only a few more days to go, I'll run it one more time:

We keep pick #9 and we're likely to take the player we're in love with most and the one which may showcase the recruiters' selection as being a good one.
We trade pick #9 and it may actually force us to consider needs more than simply trying to secure the best talent.

It's easy for me to say that and I understand why recruiters would shy away from it because it is risky, but why not back yourself in and especially so given our young talent pool is already quite deep, but a couple of huge gaps are still present?
I don't think it would be a difficult sell at all for SOS to tell Liddle of his intentions. Reckon the board would sign off pretty quickly as well.

Kemp or the best small forward and the best medium sized forward?
For me Kemp may prove to be the better talent but does he alone make our team better than for two 'needs' types we're craving for?

 

[Stickitupthem]

I’ve been following the BF site for a few years and have thoroughly enjoyed all the varying opinions over the years
Not being an expert just a 53 year old
Passionate supporter
I believe Harker is correct in that we need to finally target the players that we need to fill the many gaps in our side not the best talent available
How we do this is in the masters hands nothing better than waking up and reading posts whilst sitting in bed on a lazy Sunday morning
GO Bluebloods

 

[GapInIkonPark]

Part of our list needs is replacing Simpson, Murphy, EdCurnow, Betts and Kreuzer.
Young or Ash would help for Simpson and one of D Stephens, Robertson and Kemp would help for Murphy. I am not sold on Serong.

IMO needs should come at later picks than our first. Someone like Cahill as a small forward.

 

[AT97]

Herald suns phantom

has us taking Serong

No Cookies | Herald Sun

No Cookies

www.heraldsun.com.au

 

[HARKER]

I’ve been following the BF site for a few years and have thoroughly enjoyed all the varying opinions over the years
Not being an expert just a 53 year old
Passionate supporter
I believe Harker is correct in that we need to finally target the players that we need to fill the many gaps in our side not the best talent available
How we do this is in the masters hands nothing better than waking up and reading posts whilst sitting in bed on a lazy Sunday morning
GO Bluebloods

The build was set out with a clear method. We went for talls early whether by good fortune or good design in 2015
2016 and 2017 had as going best available and they happened to be mids. No problem.
We targeted types at trade that we wanted/needed at the club. Marchbank, Kennedy, Pickett, McGovern, whilst moving on the older players in Henderson, Tuohy, Gibbs... Perfect sense.
2018 had us take the best player/fit in Walsh at the draft and we walked back into it and attained Stocker. Two more mids that made for important fits.

We worked long and hard to get Coniglio & Papley to the club and almost had both.
Almost isn't good enough, but some things were out of our hands, unfortunately.
Both would have made us immediately better and not just by a little way but by plenty, as they would have filled huge gaps.

We never know what our best team may look like next year let alone two or three years down the track, but just for now and taking out the oldies and dropping in players that would still be around in three years time.;

Docherty Jones Plowman
Marchbank Weitering SPS

De Koning Cripps Walsh
Newnes Setterfield Dow

Martin CCurnow Cuningham
McGovern McKay Fisher

Stocker JSilvagni Williamson Gibbons

EMG: O'Brien Cottrell Kennedy Macreadie BSilvagni Pittonet Newman

So when you look at it that way and without projecting injuries, trading out players, form consideration etc. What stands out?

Backline has coverage but we'd want Macreadie so start stepping up. Another year in the NB's and it could be all over.
Midfield looks promising, albeit it's still a little young. Not sure whether we need another young mid though unless he's special or unique
Tall forward stocks aren't deep but the types we have are right.

What's missing?:
Ruck could be a real issue even if TDK does come along. Pittonet isn't the answer.
Are those small/medium sized players really going to become the types we've craved and are they going to kick goals for us? They're not are they and I fear for players being played out of their natural positions and in particular the little fish out of water.

Question for me would be: Do we know where we are with our young talent?
If we do then we have to start filling gaps even if it has to be in the draft. (We just saw that expecting it to happen via trade, is fraught with danger)
If we don't know where we are and what our future team may look like then just keep stockpiling talent (any talent) because you don't trust what you've built.

Having said all that it may simply not be possible to get what you need at the draft either, but if you're not looking at for it, you won't find it.

BTW: Welcome

 

[Stickitupthem]

The build was set out with a clear method. We went for talls early whether by good fortune or good design in 2015
2016 and 2017 had as going best available and they happened to be mids. No problem.
We targeted types at trade that we wanted/needed at the club. Marchbank, Kennedy, Pickett, McGovern, whilst moving on the older players in Henderson, Tuohy, Gibbs... Perfect sense.
2018 had us take the best player/fit in Walsh at the draft and we walked back into it and attained Stocker. Two more mids that made for important fits.

We worked long and hard to get Coniglio & Papley to the club and almost had both.
Almost isn't good enough, but some things were out of our hands, unfortunately.
Both would have made us immediately better and not just by a little way but by plenty, as they would have filled huge gaps.

We never know what our best team may look like next year let alone two or three years down the track, but just for now and taking out the oldies and dropping in players that would still be around in three years time.;

Docherty Jones Plowman
Marchbank Weitering SPS

De Koning Cripps Walsh
Newnes Setterfield Dow

Martin CCurnow Cuningham
McGovern McKay Fisher

Stocker JSilvagni Williamson Gibbons

EMG: O'Brien Cottrell Kennedy Macreadie BSilvagni Pittonet Newman

So when you look at it that way and without projecting injuries, trading out players, form consideration etc. What stands out?

Backline has coverage but we'd want Macreadie so start stepping up. Another year in the NB's and it could be all over.
Midfield looks promising, albeit it's still a little young. Not sure whether we need another young mid though unless he's special or unique
Tall forward stocks aren't deep but the types we have are right.

What's missing?:
Ruck could be a real issue even if TDK does come along. Pittonet isn't the answer.
Are those small/medium sized players really going to become the types we've craved and are they going to kick goals for us? They're not are they and I fear for players being played out of their natural positions and in particular the little fish out of water.

Question for me would be: Do we know where we are with our young talent?
If we do then we have to start filling gaps even if it has to be in the draft. (We just saw that expecting it to happen via trade, is fraught with danger)
If we don't know where we are and what our future team may look like then just keep stockpiling talent (any talent) because you don't trust what you've built.

Having said all that it may simply not be possible to get what you need at the draft either, but if you're not looking at for it, you won't find it.

BTW: Welcome

I agree 100% with your comments
Let’s fill the holes in our list which I believe are small forward , ruck and midfield in that order .
Let’s draft what’s required not best available
I believe under Teague that players feel their worth and are valued and empowered to play to their strengths in there positions not out of position
Eddy will be a great onfield coach you can’t underestimate that value while we have him playing great thinking by Teague
Picking up a Pickett , Henry or Serong etc could turn out to be the best fit for us and help us reap the rewards
Playing safe us over
Let’s be brave

 

[Arr0w]

Filling short term needs through the draft, especially 1st rounder 18 year olds? No thanks

You don't pass up a chance to draft a future Fyfe, Rance, etc

Take best available, trade for needs

 

[ABigOlDoofus]

Filling short term needs through the draft, especially 1st rounder 18 year olds? No thanks

You don't pass up a chance to draft a future Fyfe, Rance, etc

Take best available, trade for needs

Or draft for needs with your later picks to fill the gaps. Would much rather take someone like Cahill with our pick in the 40's than take a small forward like Weightman, Pickett and maybe even Serong with 9.

 

[HARKER]

Filling short term needs through the draft, especially 1st rounder 18 year olds? No thanks
You don't pass up a chance to draft a future Fyfe, Rance, etc
Take best available, trade for needs

Short term needs? How do you mean short term?
If you've found a player you want, that's who you take and if he's good enough he spends the next 12 years on your list.

Trade for needs? That worked well for us this year.
Maybe we can put all our eggs in the Whitfield and Papley (again) basket next year. There always...always...has to be more than one way to skin a cat.

You're going to see more and more off it Arrow, so best get used to it and it's always funny to me how clubs so often end up with types they need.
What would you say if Melbourne did take Jackson & Pickett with their first two picks? They took best available?

A chance to draft Fyfe or Rance... a chance?
Why isn't Pickett a chance to become a Betts or Rioli?