Mega Thread Delist/Trade/Draft Super-mega-ultrathread

[pantskyle]

You think it's just a coincidence that we declare Brown available for a top 10 pick only and GWS saying all but pick 1 is on the trade table?

 

[JackJako27]

Has anyone seen his leg break? If you don't want to, don't google images his name. Just about had me gagging.

FWIW though if we absolutely had to give up Brown, I'd be very please if we ended up with Stringer.

Wet paint: do not touch

 

[larrikin]

You think it's just a coincidence that we declare Brown available for a top 10 pick only and GWS saying all but pick 1 is on the trade table?

Where did we declare he was available for a top 10 pick?

 

[pantskyle]

Where did we declare he was available for a top 10 pick?

Didn't Vozzo say that the other day?

Maybe I'm wrong.......I thought I read that on this thread.

 

[ausbacker]

Where did we declare he was available for a top 10 pick?

I should hope not. As an opposing football manager, I'd still be laughing if that were the demand. That said, Brown's worth will be determined by what a club us prepared to pay for him.

 

[larrikin]

Didn't Vozzo say that the other day?

Maybe I'm wrong.......I thought I read that on this thread.

I think someone was quoting one of those BS Twitter feeds

 

[mattyc75]

I still don't get why we didn't rookie Nelson last year. Players who were rated early, but fall down the draft order due to sickness/injury or discipline issues are the guys we should be targeting with our rookie picks. High risk, high reward.

would have thought he wasnt high risk/high reward at all.the exact opposite,he would have been a safe pick

 

[swannies]

would have thought he wasnt high risk/high reward at all.the exact opposite,he would have been a safe pick

Yep, that's exactly right and for a few years we seem to have gone away from the safe pick, possibly because we were criticised for being too vanilla, not sure, but everyone was looking for the next big thing at pick 70 odd.
On Nelson, didn't realise he was that quick and I think that was a bit of a perception of him, that he was a slowish (Priddis mould) midfielder. But he sure racks up getting the ball and runs all day, so was equally surprised that he was overlooked. Doubt he'll get through to the rookie draft this year, but who knows, maybe the AFL recruiters are still looking for sexy?

 

[mattyc75]

Yep, that's exactly right and for a few years we seem to have gone away from the safe pick, possibly because we were criticised for being too vanilla, not sure, but everyone was looking for the next big thing at pick 70 odd.
On Nelson, didn't realise he was that quick and I think that was a bit of a perception of him, that he was a slowish (Priddis mould) midfielder. But he sure racks up getting the ball and runs all day, so was equally surprised that he was overlooked. Doubt he'll get through to the rookie draft this year, but who knows, maybe the AFL recruiters are still looking for sexy?

i really wish we had rookied him last year.papertalk must have shown som,ething the recruiters had seen but for him to be delisted after 1 season is a slap in the face of nelson.i probably would use the rookie list a bit differently ,maybe the odd roughie but also use it for ready made,maybe experienced players who are ready to step up when needed.its all well and good to have players based purely on potential but wouldnt it be better to have someone with some runs on the board and who is a known talent

 

[pantskyle]

I think someone was quoting one of those BS Twitter feeds

What was I thinking using BF as my source.

 

[joeyavalanche]

You would think so.
I would give him a list spot ahead of Dalziell.

in theory how would this work before drafting?....

we have dalziell on our senior list but is purely there for backup.
nelson we feel could slide to our possible #57 but we could also be well off the pace in this thinking.

do west coast speak to the other clubs and ask if they have an interest in a particular player and then calculate how late he might slide,
then be able to make a decision to cut someone like a dalziell?
or is it all purely guessing?

i know clubs do chat in trade week about how players are going etc and its usually a simple yes/no when a club enquires about a player.

but for a draft smokey like Nelson,
by asking clubs if they are interested and obviously we are, does it not set off some alarm bells for other clubs to go back and look at him again when a diligent club like us might be keen on drafting him.

how does this all work in the AFL system?

 

[greennick]

would have thought he wasnt high risk/high reward at all.the exact opposite,he would have been a safe pick

Yeah, when I posted that, I thought that doesn't seem right. What I meant was people that may have one thing that could stop them from making it (ie injury), but will be guns if they get over that. So, there is a high chance they won't make it if that one risk factor plays out as many expect.

In this case we think it was his size. Though there may have been another issue that isn't public knowledge I guess.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Yep, that's exactly right and for a few years we seem to have gone away from the safe pick, possibly because we were criticised for being too vanilla, not sure, but everyone was looking for the next big thing at pick 70 odd.
On Nelson, didn't realise he was that quick and I think that was a bit of a perception of him, that he was a slowish (Priddis mould) midfielder. But he sure racks up getting the ball and runs all day, so was equally surprised that he was overlooked. Doubt he'll get through to the rookie draft this year, but who knows, maybe the AFL recruiters are still looking for sexy?

In the champs last year every recruiter should have been able to tell he was quicker than most of the players on the park.

Too much emphasis is placed on the championships where good sides make average players look the goods and bad sides bring good players down a notch.

 

[swannies]

In the champs last year every recruiter should have been able to tell he was quicker than most of the players on the park.

Too much emphasis is placed on the championships where good sides make average players look the goods and bad sides bring good players down a notch.

Wise words indeed, young padawan. Which I happen to agree with. I only watched one champ game and Nelson was among our best, in a beaten side IIRC. I have even been able to put my Cardies bias aside and still like the kid.

 

[billyboy 21]

I thought I read somewhere that he loves moto x and told recruiters he wouldnt stop riding.

 

[new breed]

Junior Motorcross State Champion , few years ago , so maybe not totally footy focused

 

[greennick]

i really wish we had rookied him last year.papertalk must have shown som,ething the recruiters had seen but for him to be delisted after 1 season is a slap in the face of nelson.i probably would use the rookie list a bit differently ,maybe the odd roughie but also use it for ready made,maybe experienced players who are ready to step up when needed.its all well and good to have players based purely on potential but wouldnt it be better to have someone with some runs on the board and who is a known talent

Like I tried explaining above. I wouldn't use it for ready made players, but guys with a question mark over one area of their game, such as fitness, size, commitment, etc. Guys that will be brilliant if they get over that, but will bust if they can't.

 

[eaglenut]

Like I tried explaining above. I wouldn't use it for ready made players, but guys with a question mark over one area of their game, such as fitness, size, commitment, etc. Guys that will be brilliant if they get over that, but will bust if they can't.

totally agree greenick, if it comes off he would be better than drafting a rodan or surjan. And if it goes bust well he won't be the 1st or last player that doesn't make it.Would rather take that risk.

 

[swannies]

I thought I read somewhere that he loves moto x and told recruiters he wouldnt stop riding.

No different to the risk of taking a Papertalk or Mascoulis, IMHO, just couldn't get my head around why someone didn't.

 

[kane249]

No different to the risk of taking a Papertalk or Mascoulis, IMHO, just couldn't get my head around why someone didn't.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing

 

[swannies]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing

Not necessarily

18 clubs passed on Nelson. Was invited to the National Combine last year, only got an invite from 3 clubs this year, there's a reason clubs aren't taken by him.

I think you're looking too deeply, but in any case, surely he's worth a shot?

 

[swannies]

No, the clubs look deeply, they do their homework, in pain staking detail, recruiting teams upward of 10 blokes per club in some cases. You're telling me 150 recruiters, who looked at him last year and decided he wasn't worth a rookie pick, didn't know something outside his agility and beep test?

I'm just reading between the lines.

I might just be telling you that.
But seriously, what I am saying is, most Rookie listed players don't make it, so why not put him on a rookie list? We had 2 that didn't last the season.

 

[ausbacker]

Like I tried explaining above. I wouldn't use it for ready made players, but guys with a question mark over one area of their game, such as fitness, size, commitment, etc. Guys that will be brilliant if they get over that, but will bust if they can't.

totally agree greenick, if it comes off he would be better than drafting a rodan or surjan. And if it goes bust well he won't be the 1st or last player that doesn't make it.Would rather take that risk.

It's difficult to say what is better, but taking a flier on a player has merit for a developing side and/or a team that considers itself in the premiership window. Conversely, acquiring veteran players is equally applicable. Both strategies service different needs at different stages of development.

It's personal preference and not much else.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

I actually think it's because we have taken a little more risk with our picks than we would have a few years ago, where we were notorious in taking the safe pick, now we don't so much. Just my interpretation on what has been happening, but certainly not enough to worry me.

Definitely enough to worry me Swannies.

We are fighting to keep our first pick from 2006. From the 07 draft only Masten and Scooter are still with us. From 08 we have lost Swift and Jones and have been lucky to retain Smith. From 09 Stevens has left and Weedon looks unlikely to make it.

We seem to get it very right or very wrong.

 

[swannies]

Definitely enough to worry me Swannies.

We are fighting to keep our first pick from 2006. From the 07 draft only Masten and Scooter are still with us. From 08 we have lost Swift and Jones and have been lucky to retain Smith. From 09 Stevens has left and Weedon looks unlikely to make it.

We seem to get it very right or very wrong.

Yes, it seems a new era in WC recruiting, but I wonder if they have "learnt" their lesson or are going to continue to run and gun? Don't mind punts in the rookie draft, that's what it's for, except those that are blindingly obvious and we seem to be missing a couple of those calls.