Rumour GFC 2016 Player Trading, Drafting, FA, Rumours, and Wish lists.

[Turbocat]

That's a lot of guys not getting opportunities at AFL level.

Who knows where we are in 10 years time.. 26 or 28 players all playing game day.. as long as we still have rotation caps , perhaps who knows? I can see the players union liking that... and just like the sub..they basically dont want to be playing VFL. Once you have done your time and are ready to go..they want to play big game,big crowd footy.
Some smart people on here have put forward good arguments against the mid season trade idea... but id say it will happen due to things like this ..players and clubs need to be able to make adjustments when thing change but more than that..if a player is sitting in the VFL they will want to play. It was in years ago, did it cause a comp melt down?To long ago for me to stipulate really..but listen to that Podcast on SEN Malthouse was a midseason traded player. Much more complex comp now.. so I hope they do careful study on it in other comps around the country and world before introducing it.

 

[Bobby_]

No thanks to Troy. Too much of a risk attached with similar knees to his brother.
Unless we do get rid of regularly injured blokes (Smedts, Vardy, Cowan, Delaney) then you could afford to have another one of those types on the list but we are better off going for someone like Brandon Matera who is still young enough to make an impact at another club such as ours

 

[vinum coupe]

A quick look at TM's highlights package wouldn't be too dissimilar to Dan's. Has the potential to be as good IMO. Maybe a second kick up the arse and a reunion with his brother could do the trick.

I just spent an hour listening to the Chris Scott coaches box thing.
Coincidentally Troy came up.

Different player to dan. Troy is a ground ball player. Dan isn't a KPF but plays like one.
I know which one I'd take with that description.

 

[Turbocat]

That's garbage. I have all the context and I never said he endorsed it. Clearly he would rather not have it than have it but the quotes I gave suggest he is pragmatic, not vehemently opposed.

I included the reason he said he didn't like it - he didn't want a non-competitor becoming one through this mechanism. Otherwise he was open to the idea and could see why it was being discussed.

Rohan Connelly was the one vehemently against it.

Usually like him but I thought some of the comments were very simplistic. I sort of like CS approach although id say id be more positive than he. Would we call it a concerned pragmatism? .. I don't like it but I will not be against investigating it.
Its seems to me a lot of noise is about the idea of the big name coming in.. as in the podcast Cloke to Hawks... that we will see big names moving everywhere. And perhaps only to the benefit of top sides. Where as Id say it actually might open it up to non name sides that are performing well. Start of season for instance.. Hawk would have a big jump on most clubs as a destination... yet right now a Crows for instance , who may have struggled to get a player (what will they be like post PD?) or Dogs.. in the finals but have had a bad run of injuries. One must remember that if the origin club doesn't like the deal..its not going to happen so probably more for a player traded now than at years end.

 

[Lana]

Who knows where we are in 10 years time.. 26 or 28 players all playing game day.. as long as we still have rotation caps , perhaps who knows? I can see the players union liking that... and just like the sub..they basically dont want to be playing VFL. Once you have done your time and are ready to go..they want to play big game,big crowd footy.
Some smart people on here have put forward good arguments against the mid season trade idea... but id say it will happen due to things like this ..players and clubs need to be able to make adjustments when thing change but more than that..if a player is sitting in the VFL they will want to play. It was in years ago, did it cause a comp melt down?To long ago for me to stipulate really..but listen to that Podcast on SEN Malthouse was a midseason traded player. Much more complex comp now.. so I hope they do careful study on it in other comps around the country and world before introducing it.

Given the limited talent pool it doesn't seem like a good fit to me for the AFL as it is in other competitions. And having more than 22 players in a team seems like a step back.

IMO most of the issues with the Rookie list can be fixed by
1) Raising the base pay of Rookie listed player (and all draftees in general)
2) Removing the requirement to promote player to the primary list in order to play them at AFL level

There is no reason why a club should run out of any type of player the lists are already 44 player strong. Teams could easily fill their Rookie list with short term mature talent to fill up any potential holes in the list but teams chose to pick up the 120th 18 year old instead.

 

[Willo_]

I just spent an hour listening to the Chris Scott coaches box thing.
Coincidentally Troy came up.

Different player to dan. Troy is a ground ball player. Dan isn't a KPF but plays like one.
I know which one I'd take with that description.

Off topic... but how good is that coaches box on a Friday night, fantastic insight and access to the coaches.
I just listened to it myself

 

[Turbocat]

I've always thought Troy was a complete ****** / figjam.
That was kind of backed up by dan suggesting the move to the crows might straighten him out (or words to that effect)

Then he turns up to Adelaide lacking fitness that their standard demands and he can't get out of the sanfl.
Huge, huge pass in my opinion.


And.....he is nowhere near a talented as dan. Not in the same postcode.

You must know he better than I .. listening to Malthouse on him..he didn't mention mental issues..he just kept going on about injuries. Now this may be a cover for his and Car ineptitude on fitness. Id agree if he has attitude problems that he will struggle at better clubs.

 

[Turbocat]

I just spent an hour listening to the Chris Scott coaches box thing.
Coincidentally Troy came up.

Different player to dan. Troy is a ground ball player. Dan isn't a KPF but plays like one.
I know which one I'd take with that description.

I did too.. funny how CS described him one way..then Malthouse jumped in.. Troy could do that too... type comment. I think the description was around types.. ground HFF type player compared to KPP type.. Dan is very strong..oh Troy is strong too.

 

[Baudolino]

I did too.. funny how CS described him one way..then Malthouse jumped in.. Troy could do that too... type comment. I think the description was around types.. ground HFF type player compared to KPP type.. Dan is very strong..oh Troy is strong too.

From what I've seen of Troy, I'd be more inclined to go along with Malthouse's appraisal than Chris Scott's. But, admittedly, I don't know Troy's game as well as Dan's, so I could be wrong.

 

[Turbocat]

Given the limited talent pool it doesn't seem like a good fit to me for the AFL as it is in other competitions. And having more than 22 players in a team seems like a step back.

IMO most of the issues with the Rookie list can be fixed by
1) Raising the base pay of Rookie listed player (and all draftees in general)
2) Removing the requirement to promote player to the primary list in order to play them at AFL level

There is no reason why a club should run out of any type of player the lists are already 44 player strong. Teams could easily fill their Rookie list with short term mature talent to fill up any potential holes in the list but teams chose to pick up the 120th 18 year old instead.

Who knows..maybe ..is 22 a step back from 20? Id rather have more players in the main group than seeing players miss altogether..which was the main intention of restricting list size..Prevent hoarding of players..distribute the wealth. The list size consequence is what you have described..you lose depth.
I remember the 80's ..yes before the cap.. Carlton had that many good players in their 2's. , not ideal in todays mindset.

I agree and have for ages..the Rookie list was wrong. Didn't like it. Everyone on one list is a better idea imo.

 

[Baudolino]

Here's what the BigFooty phantom draft writers had to say about Troy before he was drafted:

#11 Carlton- Troy Menzel (SA – Mid/Fwd)
Height: 187cm, Weight: 77kg, DOB: 22/09/1994
Recruited from: Central District
Style: Steve Johnson
Player comparison:
Range: 2-12
Profile: Troy is the younger brother of Cat Daniel Menzel and is every bit as talented if not more so with greater midfield capabilities but like his brother has similarly had his injury troubles and concerning is that despite his tender age he has had LARS which may/may not concern clubs but knowing how many have had knee injuries post LARS (most frequently to the other knee) I do have injury concerns. On talent Menzel is every bit a top 10 quality prospect and will no doubt get drafted high as a result. Troy has probably played more through the midfield than his brother but as a forward is equally adept and dominant at u18 level. Troy is a highly productive midfielder/forward who stand out because of his awareness and decision making under pressure, is one of those players who is always composed and uses the footy well. Skill level excellent by both hand and foot. Athletically Troy is excellent with his combination of speed, agility and endurance which is very exciting. Even with this athleticism Troy doesn’t rely on it and is a really natural footballer rather than a pure athlete and because of this I see a strong future ahead of him at AFL level. Has also like Daniel showed great ability forward of centre and can hit the scoreboard as he showed during the u18 champs, great finisher around goal and like his brother is an excellent marking target. I suggest this is where he will start his career and with some luck hopefully he can work his way into a midfield rotation.

8. Brisbane - Troy Menzel (186cm midfielder - Central Districts)

By now, everyone knows about Troy Menzel and his knees. And it is those knees which will effectively decide where he gets picked on draft day. Because fully fit, he would be a top 5 selection without a second thought. He is arguably one of the most talented players on offer, both up forward and in the midfield. He showed what he could do up forward in the first two weeks of the U18 Championships, when he kicked 15 goals in two of the best games the Championships have seen. And he continued that form back in the SANFL, being a regular goal scorer for Central Districts in the league side. His kicking is absolutely top notch, as is general feel of the game. I tend to think he will largely be a forward at AFL level, but one who can have stints in the midfield. He'll play a similar level to Steve Johnson and Alan Didak, and who wouldn't take them in the first round? He can turn a game in a matter of minutes. But the issue is of course his body. He was hampered by a groin injury in the middle of the season, and obviously has his knee history. Personally, I'm not too concerned about the LARS surgery. Troy says it has been holding up well, so who am I judge considering I'm not a surgeon. The minor setback a few weeks ago may well stop some teams from taking him, but he'll be a bargain pick for a finals team. AFL Comparison: Steve Johnson.

Troy Menzel
DOB: 22/09/94 Ht: 187 Wt: 77

Those who have seen a lot of Menzel love him and rate his potential through the roof. That potential comes with a massive risk given he had LARS surgery to repair his knee previously. LARS has fallen out of favour especially with younger athletes because it seems to greatly increase the chances of it happening again. Also if you have had LARS chances are strong that you would be unable to have a conventional operation if the injury reoccurred. Menzel tweaked his knee in the Central Districts finals loss and whilst it appears as though it was nothing serious it does drive home the major concerns with him. Troy is also the brother of Daniel who has also been beset with injury problems throughout his AFL career to date. So there is every chance that Troy could end up a player who never reaches his full potential because of injury issues. If I was picking for a team in the first round that sort of risk scares the bejezus out of me. For that reason I think he goes to one of the two teams with multiple first round picks and squads good enough to take the risk on him – GWS and Collingwood. Gold Coast at 12 is also a possibility.

Menzel stepped into the medium forward spot vacated by Mayes and he started with a bang against Tasmanian and the NT kicking 15 goals 1 behind in those games. He then suffered a hamstring injury (could be a theme for his career) and missed the rest of the Champs. He came back after the Champs though and finished the year strongly for Central Districts in the SANFL which would have reassured the recruiters to some degree (at least until he had another tweak).

Comparisons are regularly made to Steve Johnson and Alan Didak and if you watch him play you can definitely see them as being warranted. Menzel is a mobile medium forward with great goal sense who seems to read the game just that much better and quicker than those around him. He knows what is going to happen before it does and he adjusts whilst before others have a chance to react. He can get up the field and win it in the midfield although like Johnson and Didak I see him doing this on a spot rather than full time basis. He is most dangerous as a goal scorer and the team that picks him up would not want to inhibit that by playing him too far back.

He has very nice hands overhead and is an excellent contested mark for his size. He is not a big leaper for the ball but rather judges the ball in the air exceptionally well and cleverly uses his body to nudge and make room for himself to mark. For someone his size he is surprisingly good from behind having an array of tricks that allow him to protect the drop zone or keep the man from influencing the contest.

Speaking of tricks he is a proponent of many of the dark arts of ball control around goal. He knows where the goals are and how to get the ball there. That can be by a banana, an around the corner kick, bouncing it along the ground or via a set shot. Whichever way he does it he is very good at finding the middle gap between the sticks. He is a left footer with pretty good but not textbook technique. On his set shot he has a bit of a high release but he kicks down the line of the ball very well. His technique is nowhere near similar but he has that sort of Saad directness of his kick for goal. On the run he is also a dead eye dick and I would probably put him behind only Mayes in this regard from this draft class. He has good feel on his field kicks and excellent vision. Going into 50 he leads his forwards excellently and puts it where they can get it and the opposition can’t. I would say he is up there with the best kicks into 50 in this draft.

Athletically he is a bit of a mixed bag. I don’t think he is a big jump nor does he have high top end speed. In NFL parlance he is quick but not fast. He is very agile though and makes good use of his elusiveness during games. He is a swerver rather than a stepper through traffic. His endurance is solid but needs some work to get it up to AFL standards. He is not a particularly solid guy but his body control and strength in the contest belie that and as he bulks up I think he could be a real handful even for AFL guys bigger than he is.

Overall this is a very smart footballer who without the injury concerns should be right at the pointy end of this draft. As it is I would have him falling somewhere in the middle to late first rounds and the team who gets him will be praying for his hugely risky knee to turn out like Selwood’s hugely risky knee

Troy Menzel
Central Districts
187cm / 77kg / ‘94
Love watching this kid play and fans will become a fan favourite. Learnt a long time ago with Joel Selwood and Chris Judd that you don’t write players off because you are worried about past injuries. Reports are this kid has coped well and structurally his knees are fine. That aside this kid is a top 5 prospect and is every bit the Nat Fyfe type player in the making. Huge amount of x factor and has genuine positional scope. Reads the play as well as anyone, his agility and evasiveness are terrific and his ball use is elite. Top 3 player in the draft for mine. Macrae is a chance here as well but I would think he is the best on the table at this point. Stringer, Wines or Macrae?

 

[Turbocat]

From what I've seen of Troy, I'd be more inclined to go along with Malthouse's appraisal than Chris Scott's. But, admittedly, I don't know Troy's game as well as Dan's, so I could be wrong.

I have seen little of him.. but to me he reminds me a typical left footed HFF , Dan to me almost looks like a smallish FF. I think he has SJ to him where as Troy ..not sure if he has that footy "nous". Care to name a left foot HFF , cant think of one top of the head. He has talent , and being LF.. he could go to Hawks and become a star..that would be ironic.

 

[CatsDoItBetter]

And all the club treasurers just had heart attacks.

That's true but the Vfl standard should be lifted or even better a reserves comp is put back in place it would mean a whole lot of say the Geelong Vfl listed players could be on the list. And I think some other players Geelong has delisted recently might still be on the list. There are a lot of players every year that get lost to the afl system it'd probably mean they'd stay. Instead of the players missing out on games at afl level it presents an opportunity for players to still have that chance. The salary cap is going to increase soon and it'd have to be adjusted to fit more players in.

 

[Lana]

Who knows..maybe ..is 22 a step back from 20? Id rather have more players in the main group than seeing players miss altogether..which was the main intention of restricting list size..Prevent hoarding of players..distribute the wealth. The list size consequence is what you have described..you lose depth.
I remember the 80's ..yes before the cap.. Carlton had that many good players in their 2's. , not ideal in todays mindset.

The issue I have with it is as you add more players you start having players who barely get on the ground. With 4 on the bench you have players who get a couple of players who get around 65% gametime. With 10 guys on the bench you'll probably have 3 to 4 guys that don't even get on the ground.

I agree and have for ages..the Rookie list was wrong. Didn't like it. Everyone on one list is a better idea imo.

I like the idea of the Rookie list it's just that clubs use it very poorly.

 

[Turbocat]

The issue I have with it is as you add more players you start having players who barely get on the ground. With 4 on the bench you have players who get a couple of players who get around 65% gametime. With 10 guys on the bench you'll probably have 3 to 4 guys that don't even get on the ground.



I like the idea of the Rookie list it's just that clubs use it very poorly.

They all seem to get on the ground Preseason. Yes it may become tactical in use of players.


Now I think they all use it use the lists..cause there is more than 1 , OK.. the rookie draft is almost the main draft continued.. most if not all of them need time because they are less ready.. yet we put a time limit on them.???? Special list like CatB ..fine but a player like Ruggles should just have been P144 or whatever. Give them a 1 year contract if need be , but allow player the ability to play if they show their worth.

 

[Baudolino]

I like the idea of the Rookie list it's just that clubs use it very poorly.

I'd be curious to know the percentage of rookie-listed players who end up playing more than 50+ AFL games, and how that compares to the percentage of fourth round and above National Draft selections who do likewise. You'd expect the National Draft selections to have the advantage over rookie selections, but anyone over the 60-ish pick mark is long odds to make it, so it would be interesting to see an analysis of the data on that one.

 

[Lana]

They all seem to get on the ground Preseason. Yes it may become tactical in use of players.


Now I think they all use it use the lists..cause there is more than 1 , OK.. the rookie draft is almost the main draft continued.. most if not all of them need time because they are less ready.. yet we put a time limit on them.???? Special list like CatB ..fine but a player like Ruggles should just have been P144 or whatever. Give them a 1 year contract if need be , but allow player the ability to play if they show their worth.

Which was my second dot point.

 

[Lana]

I'd be curious to know the percentage of rookie-listed players who end up playing more than 50+ AFL games, and how that compares to the percentage of fourth round and above National Draft selections who do likewise. You'd expect the National Draft selections to have the advantage over rookie selections, but anyone over the 60-ish pick mark is long odds to make it, so it would be interesting to see an analysis of the data on that one.

There isn't much of difference when you get past pick 60 and compare in to the first 30 in the rookie draft for the % passing 50 games.

Numbers are % that exceeded the category.

National draft 1997 to 2002*


Rookie draft 1997 to 2002*


Numbers

National 1997-2002



Rookie 1997-2002

 

[Baudolino]

Numbers are % that exceeded the category.

National draft 1997 to 2002*
View attachment 260268

Rookie draft 1997 to 2002*
View attachment 260269

Thanks!

Unless I'm reading this wrong, you'd have to say based on the data that the games output of rookie picks 1-30 has exceeded statistical expectations (for players drafted between 1997 and 2002, at least).

 

[Lana]

Thanks!

Unless I'm reading this wrong, you'd have to say based on the data the rookie picks 1-30 have exceeded statistical expectations.

The way I see it is that after the first 50 or so picks there is a large drop in talent in a short number of picks, after that drop off, you have a section of the draft pool where the decrease in talent relative to the number of picks becomes quite small, until around half way through the Rookie draft.

 

[CatsDoItBetter]

Off topic... but how good is that coaches box on a Friday night, fantastic insight and access to the coaches.
I just listened to it myself

Is it abc? Is there a podcast?

 

[Boxhead_31]

I think when they traded Walker they were implicity deciding to keep Vardy for at least another couple of years but I do get why Vardy might want to go.

All I was saying is that if he was to be traded we would trade in another ruck even if it was just a cheap backup, I can't see that when we are in premiership contention and given the ruck issues we have had the past few years that we would go into a full year with only 2 specialist rucks on the list.

Tom Nicholls? We've had a good result with a disgruntled Gold Coast ruckman.

 

[Baudolino]

Is it abc? Is there a podcast?

SEN. Go to the audio section of their website.

 

[Pivo]

Given the limited talent pool it doesn't seem like a good fit to me for the AFL as it is in other competitions. And having more than 22 players in a team seems like a step back.

IMO most of the issues with the Rookie list can be fixed by
1) Raising the base pay of Rookie listed player (and all draftees in general)
2) Removing the requirement to promote player to the primary list in order to play them at AFL level

There is no reason why a club should run out of any type of player the lists are already 44 player strong. Teams could easily fill their Rookie list with short term mature talent to fill up any potential holes in the list but teams chose to pick up the 120th 18 year old instead.

Agree with this. Scrapping the Rookie list (which is now significantly different from its original intent) is something I've been saying for a few years now.

The list number seems about right for the time being but there is a problem with talent being spread too thin at the moment (which is why the Northern Academies are necessary as they will start filling the well back up over the next 4-5 years)

Rather than a mid-season trade period perhaps look to the NBA (which uses 10 day contacts) and allow clubs to sign players from the state comps or U18s to 1, 2 or 3 game/week contracts (the game or time frame is important to prevent sides "stashing" players from other sides). Recently retired players like Kelly and Stokes would be good candidates for these types of short-term contracts I think.

Clubs losing their player(s) will need to be compensated in some way (and that might be a major snag as any state league side that is in the middle of the cut and thrust of their own competition won't be happy about losing a key player in-season - prickly since some AFL sides operate "reserves" teams in local comps and if they took players from other clubs it could be seen as a way of disadvantaging the strong state league sides in those respective competitions) but short term contracts for players could be a better option than a mid-season trade period.

 

[Turbocat]

Is it abc? Is there a podcast?

listen to this on Audioboo