List Mgmt. Carlton's 2020 Draft Thread

[Jeremias]

You wouldn't be alone there. Knightmare reckons both could potentially go late or undrafted.

So if we draft them in the 30s or 40s you'll be disappointed because Knightmare reckons both could go late?

Do I really need to tell you why that's a ridiculous way of looking at things?

Rowe has absolutely no defensive side to his game and Wehr will still need a couple of preseasons in the gym to be fully ready. I get that we're looking for mature age prospects but these guys still need a lot of development, which is why other clubs don't appear to have a strong interest inside the first two rounds. If we took them, I wouldn't expect either to play senior football for us next year, which kind of defeats the purpose of taking mature age prospects to begin with.

How much have you seen of both?

Maybe another club pulls the trigger on them early, however, it doesn't sound that way based on the media coverage.

You're continuously making assumptions here, why stop now?

 

[The Greek Freak]

It's not out of the question that next years second comes into play, should we be desperate for someone that's 'slipped' to the 20-25 range.
I'm not keen on using that currency, but if a must have-have is there and the trade opportunity presents, then it's possible.

Can't see a situation where flipping the first would get through, though.

Think there is a very realistic chance we have something up our sleeve for draft night. Won't be at all surprised to see us trade back into the first round.

 

[Blugazi]

Can see us trading our future second for a late first.

 

[The Greek Freak]

We always seem to rate the draft a little differently to everyone else so I'm not sure there's any point getting excited about any one player as "our guy".

That said, knowing the way we work I think there's a fair chance we trade our first two picks for an earlier pick and select Wehr.

Won't need to trade up for Wehr, he'd make it to the 40's or 50's

 

[The Greek Freak]

Can see us trading our future second for a late first.

Future second and 38 for a pick round 15-20 sounds about right to me. Probably gets some interest too.

 

[gandaal]

Won't need to trade up for Wehr, he'd make it to the 40's or 50's

When has that ever stopped us?

 

[The Greek Freak]

When has that ever stopped us?

Good point, but don't think we're as silly as we might have been in times previous. Guess tomorrow night will tell the tale

 

[ferrisb]

Kids can keep growing up to the age of 22

I'm almost 40 and haven't had my growth spurt yet.....

 

[ferrisb]

What happened to Ben Kelly?

Played 2019 as an over ager. 200cm, with elite speed. Has played CHB, ruck and a little up forward.

Was all the rage at one point last year, talk of a possible mid-season pick but went undrafted.

I guess clubs decided he wasn't good enough for AFL level, but if he is serviceable then he would be cheap, young cover for Weiters/Jones AND for TDK/Pitto. AND provide some forwardline 'break-in-case-of-emergency' cover. Kind of like a baby Casboult....

 

[The Greek Freak]

Have a feeling we may try and move up and snare Zach Reid. Don't see it happening without moving a future first though as he's likely around that pick 10 range.

 

[Weiterbot23]

It's actually more common than you think

Kids can keep growing up to the age of 22

Or in my case stop at 15 leaving me with ruckmen agility at only 184cm.

 

[Stamos]

That's why I think we should have next years second at the ready.
GWS may be happy to move on their current #20, if nothing particularly excites them after having already taken 3 players and still with the #26 in hand.

Anything can play out but if there is something there we have to have, then go and get it........if we can.

Hmmm, there'd need to be a pretty compelling player (especially for what has happened with underage footy in 2020), for us to use so much of our future currency.
Only having a 1st and a 4th next year would limit our flexibility in acquiring targets, so we would want to be very keen on a player this year to do that. I'd be surprised (less so if it is both our 2020 2nds to move up, but not sure who would want to do that trade with us).

 

[zeeCFC]

Have we really heard any actual reports of us being into Rowe?

I have read Wehr and Poulter and though they don't fill the most pressing gaps in the list (KPP) - they would still be good additions that could have a decent impact (moreso Wehr than Poulter).

Between Martin and Fish with a resting mid, we are still looking good for small forwards.

 

[AndyLucimitis]

Future second and 38 for a pick round 15-20 sounds about right to me. Probably gets some interest too.

Boring - if that was SOS that would be at least three separate trades

 

[Stamos]

Talks light up about top-five pick swap between North and Hawks

Rival clubs suggest Hawthorn and North Melbourne have discussed a potential draft night trade involving their respective top five picks.

www.theage.com.au

 

[Stiffler's Dad]

I thought I'd read somewhere that Ford had dropped in calculations. Don't recall why.

But then, you'd be more across this than I would.

I wouldn't take Ford because he's got an alloy head. Would probably blow a gasket every other week.

 

[swuzzlebubble]

Can see us trading our future second for a late first.

Twomey mentioned Richmond might trade out 17
Also Melbourne with 28

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Have a feeling we may try and move up and snare Zach Reid. Don't see it happening without moving a future first though as he's likely around that pick 10 range.

Nik Cox more likely to slide into our trading range but both Essendon and GWS would be crazy not to snap up one each.

 

[Coona Blues]

The entire lead up to this draft smacks of misdirection. I am putting more stock in to the Teague interview than most of the scuttlebutt I have heard.

While I was surprised he did not mention a project ruck, it is not unthinkable that they have decided to back the two youngsters with Levi's back up. Was interesting that he stated Harry as being a genuine candidate for ruck minutes. Smacks a little of think tank summary, with list reductions it is feasible we will wait to add a back up. (Perhaps why Moore was rethink to train on list)

His first mentioned need was for KPD developing depth followed by small forward and "always" looking to add midfield depth. Talk of Wehr just doesn't make sense, Poulter as a prime target also hard to fathom as unlikely to reach our pick. Durdin is feasible as fills the small forward/midfield description, however probably lacking the x-factor of a Winder. Unless we are targeting a smokey KPP, it suggests we will want to trade up to have a chance at Reid or Cox, however that might be impossible.

I have stated a couple of times in the lead up, and will reiterate, I am intrigued. We pride ourselves on being proactive, so a bold move will not surprise. This conservative old fella would not be aggravated by us maintaining our picks and taking best fit available, (small forward/ruck) but see it less likely. 1 more sleep.

 

[HARKER]

The entire lead up to this draft smacks of misdirection. I am putting more stock in to the Teague interview than most of the scuttlebutt I have heard.

While I was surprised he did not mention a project ruck, it is not unthinkable that they have decided to back the two youngsters with Levi's back up. Was interesting that he stated Harry as being a genuine candidate for ruck minutes. Smacks a little of think tank summary, with list reductions it is feasible we will wait to add a back up. (Perhaps why Moore was rethink to train on list)

His first mentioned need was for KPD developing depth followed by small forward and "always" looking to add midfield depth. Talk of Wehr just doesn't make sense, Poulter as a prime target also hard to fathom as unlikely to reach our pick. Durdin is feasible as fills the small forward/midfield description, however probably lacking the x-factor of a Winder. Unless we are targeting a smokey KPP, it suggests we will want to trade up to have a chance at Reid or Cox, however that might be impossible.

I have stated a couple of times in the lead up, and will reiterate, I am intrigued. We pride ourselves on being proactive, so a bold move will not surprise. This conservative old fella would not be aggravated by us maintaining our fit and taking best fit available, (small forward/ruck) but see it less likely. 1 more sleep.

We may take Walsh if he's there late, but the rucks we have are already very young. 21 yo TDK and 24 yo Pittonet.
In the normal course of things you'd say that both these guys still have some way to get to their best. Adding a project ruck.....? I don't know.
I just doesn't seem to be the way we'd go.......but we'll see.

I just wish we could get our hands on Nick Cox.....although the earring takes off 5% value

 

[La Dispute]

Think live trading will be more prevalent this year, with what I'm assuming is a much larger range of projections for draftees. There will always be guys that slip though, but I'm hoping some seriously highly touted players manage to either make their way to our first pick or we live trade back into the first round for a particular prospect.

I don't think Richmond will trade out if there's a gun in the mix either.

 

[Jeremias]

I can't get my head around taking a young ruck in the draft. Just don't see a need for it this year at all.

Pittonet and TDK will serve us well next year with Casboult as backup. We've not seen it yet but perhaps Harry might also be in line for some relief duties from time to time.

If we really think we need extra cover in that position then an experienced ruck is the way to go.

 

[Coona Blues]

We may take Walsh if he's there late, but the rucks we have are already very young. 21 yo TDK and 24 yo Pittonet.
In the normal course of things you'd say that both these guys still have some way to get to their best. Adding a project ruck.....? I don't know.
I just doesn't seem to be the way we'd go.......but we'll see.

I just wish we could get our hands on Nick Cox.....although the earring takes off 5% value

I have learned in recent times not to look at the number when assessing "youth". We are of similar vintage so you will understand my assertion that the majority of kids developed quicker in bygone years. The odd kid is totally focussed (ala Walsh) these days and combine work ethic and the benefits of sports science advances to maximise their performance. I have "issues" with the myriad of slow burn kids like Dow that take multiple years in a professional
environment to get close to their potential. I/we grew up with every daylight hour spent kicking in the park, the school yard, the street, wherever we could while today's kids spend many or most of those hours on entertainment technology or social media. Key position/rucks aside, I struggle to comprehend how so many are not ready to go in their first year or two.

TDK seems a year of "seasoning" short of assuming the mantle week in week out, however Pitto is at break out stage. A combination of the two with a degree of alternation in tandem with Levi (or Harry) will be adequate, if not ideal. As I have said before, at very least post Levi we will need another ruck. I prescribe to the develop your own school rather than the journeyman back up or middle of the road trade in types. No secret, I want young Henry, but can understand a
line of thinking to pass him over. (still pushing the Josh Cripps post ACL gamble bandwagon. Seems impractical, but must have suitors to nominate for the draft)

 

[Arr0w]

If it was me, I would target a KPF/ruck, a KPD, a crumbing forward with scope to play up the ground

Then, add a mature age KPD/swingman, Marsh fits that bill

 

[Coona Blues]

If it was me, I would target a KPF/ruck, a KPD, a crumbing forward with scope to play up the ground

Then, add a mature age KPD/swingman, Marsh fits that bill

Thinking progressive clubs will find it hard not to leave a spot for a mid year draft window given the likelihood of some hidden gems following the season's non event.