Rumour GFC 2023 Player Trading, Drafting FA, Rumours and Wish lists Pt1

[cats_09]

As we are now getting into the season and we are starting to get a bit more serious with discussion, seems a suitable time to post the following as it's repeatedly shown itself to be a value reference tool in trade & draft discussion

And as per normal, thanks to Lore for putting this together - always a fantastic reference tool



And yes this post is now stickied - makes it easy to keep track of (can easily reverse this though if needed)

 

[Mr Meow]

Don’t think anyone has made that claim. They “can” but the doubt is should they if picking a best 23

I've definitely seen people say they can't fit in the side. As in, it's not possible. Not that it's not one of their preferred set ups.

 

[Johnny Cattery]

The Moneyball thing is often used description. I have used it myself. Id say the origin of the term probably was more about adding players to a side for a cheap wage. Perhaps cheap trade as well as the players were almost unwanted. The adage of ..get on base... seemed to be the defining criteria , and going past good looking players with good looking girlfriends etc.

Id say in afl , the concept is a little different. For a start , a club can not just shuffle unloved players. It amazes me that a guy in baseball could be traded while on the field playing for the side. They also have a very different TPP arrangement. The point was made that Yankees and "A's" had a huge disparity in TPP. No salary cap like in our system. How can a club that pays less compete? The disparity in afl is probably draft picks rather than players wage.

We place a high value on the cost of the trade, as is shown in the linked article below. But is a moneyball player a way to add a backup. Maybe. The cost is negligble but Id say Smith is as Moneyball as you could get. Become a best22 player. No draft cost.

Was Ceglar Moenyball?

Thats what I think happens if you bring in a Sweet type. Mostly they sit in the VFL. They back up your preferred option. If there is no doubt Conway will be our best ruck options next year, and will play most of the games..then a Sweet type might be worth consideration. My concern is what happened to Fort. Once the MC consider their output and still prefer to ruck Blitz than bring them in. Is Sweet and Hayes the type that Chris Scott has shown he likes. Id say not, so we may as well add another kid to develop. Someone althletic and becomes a tallish midfielder.

......

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/afl-rich-100-the-secret-list-manager-reveals-how-to-build-a-premiership-contender-in-todays-changing-afl-landscape/news-story/fba28bb8ece667f0ad3a29152d92a66b

4. Free agents are worth the money.

Free-Agents who are in form at the right time will definitely get paid a premium, because a club can get them without needing to part with anything in a trade.

It’s having your cake (keeping your early draft picks) and eating it too (securing a gun senior player).

Richmond parted with a future first-round pick (currently top 10 in a hot draft) and a second-round pick to secure Jacob Hopper last year.


Richmond paid up to get Jacob Hopper a year before free agency. Picture: Getty Images
If they had waited one year, they would’ve got him for nothing!

Of this year’s remaining crop of free agents, there are a couple who are having great years and have boosted their value.

Mason Redman and Harry Himmelberg are performing at a really high level (All Australian 40 squad) and will attract big dollars and long contracts.

Redman is a half-back but could command $700k+ while Himmelberg is a key position player who can play both ends, so will be looking at a contract of $800k+ for 5 years.

This would trigger first-round compensation, which would be a consideration for GWS.

Darcy Parish is playing well and is a genuine midfielder, so will attract a long-term deal, but not at outrageous money.

He’s got a very good coach and a more stable environment, so expect him to stay.

Ben McKay has played some good games, but has only played 62 times in nearly eight years and averages 9.5 possessions and one contested mark per game.

A long-term deal at good money feels high risk for him.

St Kilda’s Jade Gresham is one whose value has probably fallen in recent years.

There is a lack of durability and while he’s a great contest player, he is not a bona fide midfielder.

Ross Lyon playing him mainly forward hasn’t helped this.

He’s a $550-$600k max contract player.

Tom Doedee was in great form and rolled the dice as a free-agent, but has sadly done an ACL.

I’m sure Adelaide will honour the original deal they had for him, but it would be understandable if other clubs interest cooled and with it, the possibility of a big pay-day.

I don't see that the Parish of now is a stellar get. i know there are people who think he would transform our midfield, and the Parish of 2021 would have, but it's 2023 and I honestly can't see what we would get from him, late next year, that we won't get from Bruhn. And if Matheson does damage culture, and someone at his level who declares himself Brisbane's "barometer" actually could, then yes, I would say no to Parish.

Moneyball comes from the book by Michael Lewis (a fantastic read; film is also pretty good). It's about using stats, not your guts, to judge a player's value, sk you can identify players on other teams and other leagues who have been drastically undervalued. So if we talk about a moneyball player, it should come with a stat that shows them as being outstanding in a way that no-one has noticed. (Part of the cult value is that it grew out of fans' analysis of stats, so that there was a point where high-end nerds who knew more about teams than the players and managers did, statistically speaking. Now clubs have pivoted to high-level data analysis, it's much less likely to happen.)

For example, a club might prioritise something like pressure acts, identify players who were good at that but otherwise not at all high profile, and be able to get them for a lower trade value. In particular, as Lewis uses it, those players identified as high value through a particular statistical measure might also have an obvious defect, like being overweight, that makes other clubs think "yeah, no way" - as he puts it, "young men who fail the simple test of looking good in a uniform". Contrastingly, as it's used on Bigfooty, it seems to just mean cheap, which misses the point of how the Oakland As could actually win everything with their "cheap" players.

There is a great Simpsons episode that satirises the strategy, with Lisa, now manager of Bart's baseball team, sitting at her laptop calling plays according to stats.

 

[catempire]

I don't see that the Parish of now is a stellar get. i know there are people who think he would transform our midfield, and the Parish of 2021 would have, but it's 2023 and I honestly can't see what we would get from him, late next year, that we won't get from Bruhn. And if Matheson does damage culture, and someone at his level who declares himself Brisbane's "barometer" actually could, then yes, I would say no to Parish.

Moneyball comes from the book by Michael Lewis (a fantastic read; film is also pretty good). It's about using stats, not your guts, to judge a player's value, sk you can identify players on other teams and other leagues who have been drastically undervalued. So if we talk about a moneyball player, it should come with a stat that shows them as being outstanding in a way that no-one has noticed. (Part of the cult value is that it grew out of fans' analysis of stats, so that there was a point where high-end nerds who knew more about teams than the players and managers did, statistically speaking. Now clubs have pivoted to high-level data analysis, it's much less likely to happen.)

For example, a club might prioritise something like pressure acts, identify players who were good at that but otherwise not at all high profile, and be able to get them for a lower trade value. In particular, as Lewis uses it, those players identified as high value through a particular statistical measure might also have an obvious defect, like being overweight, that makes other clubs think "yeah, no way" - as he puts it, "young men who fail the simple test of looking good in a uniform". Contrastingly, as it's used on Bigfooty, it seems to just mean cheap, which misses the point of how the Oakland As could actually win everything with their "cheap" players.

There is a great Simpsons episode that satirises the strategy, with Lisa, now manager of Bart's baseball team, sitting at her laptop calling plays according to stats.

I don’t disagree with your description of moneyball but I do think Geelong has had great success with its strategy - whether it is moneyball or something else - which involves getting quality players as cheaply as possible. That has meant exploiting free agency, the Cat B rookie options, Irish recruits and local Geelong talent (including VFL stocks). They have been willing to trade for it were necessary.

It hasn’t required some particular overlooked or undervalued trait, ala moneyball. So maybe it’s not the best comparison.

So I would say Parish is right in Geelong’s wheelhouse not necessarily to transform the midfield but to be a piece of the puzzle that fits Geelong’s usual MO.

 

[Sire of Claude]

I see Sam Flanders was named among the best and got 27 disposals. I mention him from time to time but others are not keen. If he maintains his current form he won't be on the table anyway.

We could get a clearer picture of our requirements had not Clark and Willis been injured.

 

[moond0g]

The theory behind doedee would be really only if you think sav is leaving and then hes a free FA replacement. I suppose we could be planning to use him as a smaller defender to replace bews (who is ooc next year and near the end) but thats a role doedee has never really played he mostly plays on talls.

Even if Sav is leaving, is there a need for him with SDK, Kolo and JHenry? (along with Stewart, Zuthrie who are similar heights)

He just doesn't seem to fill a need at all for me. And while a good player, certainly not a great player. So I don't really understand being linked to him.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

If Sav leaves I'd quite happily swap him for Dylan Williams.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

If Sav leaves I'd quite happily swap him for Dylan Williams.

You're aware he's a delisted free agent right? You'd be giving Sav away free of charge

 

[Gunf]

I love looking through a few threads like this across different boards for a few reasons

1. See the difference in what people think different players are worth (TDK worth as an example)
2. A shit ton of them trying to figure out how they can get pick 1 from WC

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

You're aware he's a delisted free agent right? You'd be giving Sav away free of charge

Indeed he is. As is stands, If Sav leaves we're not going to get what he's worth Is to Geelong.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Indeed he is. As is stands, If Sav leaves we're not going to get what he's worth Is to Geelong.

He's worth more than TDK on both current output and upside, but a trade that gets TDK in the door directly or indirectly might be the best we can hope for.

Dylan Williams though can sign with whoever he wants.

 

[Lana]

I don't see that the Parish of now is a stellar get. i know there are people who think he would transform our midfield, and the Parish of 2021 would have, but it's 2023 and I honestly can't see what we would get from him, late next year, that we won't get from Bruhn. And if Matheson does damage culture, and someone at his level who declares himself Brisbane's "barometer" actually could, then yes, I would say no to Parish.

Moneyball comes from the book by Michael Lewis (a fantastic read; film is also pretty good). It's about using stats, not your guts, to judge a player's value, sk you can identify players on other teams and other leagues who have been drastically undervalued. So if we talk about a moneyball player, it should come with a stat that shows them as being outstanding in a way that no-one has noticed. (Part of the cult value is that it grew out of fans' analysis of stats, so that there was a point where high-end nerds who knew more about teams than the players and managers did, statistically speaking. Now clubs have pivoted to high-level data analysis, it's much less likely to happen.)

For example, a club might prioritise something like pressure acts, identify players who were good at that but otherwise not at all high profile, and be able to get them for a lower trade value. In particular, as Lewis uses it, those players identified as high value through a particular statistical measure might also have an obvious defect, like being overweight, that makes other clubs think "yeah, no way" - as he puts it, "young men who fail the simple test of looking good in a uniform". Contrastingly, as it's used on Bigfooty, it seems to just mean cheap, which misses the point of how the Oakland As could actually win everything with their "cheap" players.

There is a great Simpsons episode that satirises the strategy, with Lisa, now manager of Bart's baseball team, sitting at her laptop calling plays according to stats.

In baseball they really had only one limitation, money.

In the AFL rules are a lot more restrictive, the salary cap floor is 95% of the cap. While there are some shenanigans with being able to bank up to 10% of the cap and front loading and back loading contracts that allows a team to really target a couple of seasons. But for the most part (well at least relative to sports without effective salary caps) there is little wage variation between the team that finished 18th and the team that finishes 1st. This really has a cooling affect on player movement. But what it really does is it takes money out of the equation when recruiting players. It's just taking money out of a pool you had to spend most of it anyway. Draft picks end up being a more scarce resource than money even though they are so speculative.

Moneyball was about identifying a better way to link winning to money using a statistical measure and then finding cost efficient players, defect or not.

Given that Baseball is a closed sport, it is easy to distil the game to a number. AFL is open sport so that is a lot hard to interpret an individual's performance statistically in isolation, did the defender get 22 touches as he was influential or was his midfield smashed so the ball barely left their back 3rd. Now you can create a model that uses a basket of statistics, location data etc, which might be better than nothing. Last year my favoured model had Andrew Brayshaw at 10% below average by position, he came 4th in the Brownlow , teacher's pet.

I think the better part of the question is what is cost efficient in the AFL. Some are intuitive, Tim Kelly year 1 and 2, super efficient, no development games required, fixed wage, great output. From 3rd year onwards, not so much. Can a player on a 800k p.a. wage be cost efficient? Well compared to what.

Parish is 26 next year, was drafted at pick 3, has played 140 games, sans a major injury is likely to play around 100 more, he averages 32 disposal a game , 8.5 clearances, we don't have anyone pulling close to those raw numbers if you want a measure. Though information asymmetry is always a plus, it doesn't have to be some secret sauce or obscure stat. I'm glad you have high hopes for Bruhn but I think you're underrating Parish.

But to me the most important part is that he is a free agent. Getting a player via free agency is asymmetrical opportunity, the team that gets to use FA has access to an advantage that can't be taken by anyone else, the talent pool is limited. To me that alone makes him cost effective. Richmond paid pick 12 and 19 for an extra year of Taranto. Is this year of Taranto worth the DVI of pick 4.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I see Sam Flanders was named among the best and got 27 disposals. I mention him from time to time but others are not keen. If he maintains his current form he won't be on the table anyway.

We could get a clearer picture of our requirements had not Clark and Willis been injured.

Gold coast have been dumb at letting the wrong players go before. I rate flanders and would enquire.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

If Sav leaves I'd quite happily swap him for Dylan Williams.

Williams is a free agent so no need.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

In baseball they really had only one limitation, money.

In the AFL rules are a lot more restrictive, the salary cap floor is 95% of the cap. While there are some shenanigans with being able to bank up to 10% of the cap and front loading and back loading contracts that allows a team to really target a couple of seasons. But for the most part (well at least relative to sports without effective salary caps) there is little wage variation between the team that finished 18th and the team that finishes 1st. This really has a cooling affect on player movement. But what it really does is it takes money out of the equation when recruiting players. It's just taking money out of a pool you had to spend most of it anyway. Draft picks end up being a more scarce resource than money even though they are so speculative.

Moneyball was about identifying a better way to link winning to money using a statistical measure and then finding cost efficient players, defect or not.

Given that Baseball is a closed sport, it is easy to distil the game to a number. AFL is open sport so that is a lot hard to interpret an individual's performance statistically in isolation, did the defender get 22 touches as he was influential or was his midfield smashed so the ball barely left their back 3rd. Now you can create a model that uses a basket of statistics, location data etc, which might be better than nothing. Last year my favoured model had Andrew Brayshaw at 10% below average by position, he came 4th in the Brownlow , teacher's pet.

I think the better part of the question is what is cost efficient in the AFL. Some are intuitive, Tim Kelly year 1 and 2, super efficient, no development games required, fixed wage, great output. From 3rd year onwards, not so much. Can a player on a 800k p.a. wage be cost efficient? Well compared to what.

Parish is 26 next year, was drafted at pick 3, has played 140 games, sans a major injury is likely to play around 100 more, he averages 32 disposal a game , 8.5 clearances, we don't have anyone pulling close to those raw numbers if you want a measure. Though information asymmetry is always a plus, it doesn't have to be some secret sauce or obscure stat. I'm glad you have high hopes for Bruhn but I think you're underrating Parish.

But to me the most important part is that he is a free agent. Getting a player via free agency is asymmetrical opportunity, the team that gets to use FA has access to an advantage that can't be taken by anyone else, the talent pool is limited. To me that alone makes him cost effective. Richmond paid pick 12 and 19 for an extra year of Taranto. Is this year of Taranto worth the DVI of pick 4.

I agree with all that 100 %.

But we wont get parish for free ess will match and force a trade-hence the equation changes.

 

[Lana]

I agree with all that 100 %.

But we wont get parish for free ess will match and force a trade-hence the equation changes.

Our immediate draft hand is weak enough that if they don’t grab their own free agency. They might just let him walk.

Our first rounder is near immovable. Our future 1st rounder would be perceived to lose value if we trade in an A grade mid as a top up.

I’d do something like trade out our future 2nd or 3rd early in the trade period. To make a prospective Parish trade less attractive. For us to move on a future 1st we’d have to also bring back in a future 2nd.

 

[tielgaz]

OOC. I'd be surprised if we got a pick in the 20's. I think that's wishful thinking.

Why? They offered us a pick in the early twenties last year and he has improved out of sight since then.

 

[tielgaz]

O’Connor is another often mentioned as a potential omission but, like Kolo, I don’t think he has played VFL since he first arrived at the club.

I can’t squeeze Jack into this forward six:

HF: Close Cameron Miers
F: Rohan Hawkins Stengle

There are Four players on the bench they just rotate back six easy.

 

[tielgaz]

Serious question, are we in Harley Reid's ear already?

Country boy, Cats tragic...Eagles have all but locked up the number 1 pick and are historically inept.

If he did a 'Horne-Francis' so to speak, he'd be at the Cats by October 2024.

Part of me says it's wishful thinking...part of me says it's a distinct possibility.

What are we going to give to West Coast for that to happen. They still haven’t recovered from the Kelly trade.

 

[tielgaz]

If we could get Parish by accepting Mathieson I'd say YES. Parish is a gun. I imagine it's very unlikely however.

Mason Redman would look good in Geelong colours too.

I note Sam Flander is back in the Firsts though plenty here don't rate him.

Meanwhile Dempsey is getting leather poisoning in the VFL, though whether he has the build to play AFL mid is a question.

Dempsey hasn’t had any impact when playing in the ones, early days however.

 

[catempire]

There are Four players on the bench they just rotate back six easy.

We have 7 without Ratugolea, 8 if you count Duncan/O’Connor.

Bews, De Koning, Tuohy, Stewart, J Henry, Kolo, Z.Guthrie, Duncan/O’Connor

 

[Mr Meow]

We have 7 without Ratugolea, 8 if you count Duncan/O’Connor.

Bews, De Koning, Tuohy, Stewart, J Henry, Kolo, Z.Guthrie, Duncan/O’Connor

8 defenders is classic Scotty. If he can justify 9, you bet he will try it.

CS: "4 of them are utilities anyway, CatUmpire my old friend )"

 

[CatToTheFuture]

There are Four players on the bench they just rotate back six easy.

You can't rotate your KPDs off the bench for a whole game. You'll burn up your rotations and your mids will be fried by half time.

 

[Johnny Cattery]

In baseball they really had only one limitation, money.

In the AFL rules are a lot more restrictive, the salary cap floor is 95% of the cap. While there are some shenanigans with being able to bank up to 10% of the cap and front loading and back loading contracts that allows a team to really target a couple of seasons. But for the most part (well at least relative to sports without effective salary caps) there is little wage variation between the team that finished 18th and the team that finishes 1st. This really has a cooling affect on player movement. But what it really does is it takes money out of the equation when recruiting players. It's just taking money out of a pool you had to spend most of it anyway. Draft picks end up being a more scarce resource than money even though they are so speculative.

Moneyball was about identifying a better way to link winning to money using a statistical measure and then finding cost efficient players, defect or not.

Given that Baseball is a closed sport, it is easy to distil the game to a number. AFL is open sport so that is a lot hard to interpret an individual's performance statistically in isolation, did the defender get 22 touches as he was influential or was his midfield smashed so the ball barely left their back 3rd. Now you can create a model that uses a basket of statistics, location data etc, which might be better than nothing. Last year my favoured model had Andrew Brayshaw at 10% below average by position, he came 4th in the Brownlow , teacher's pet.

I think the better part of the question is what is cost efficient in the AFL. Some are intuitive, Tim Kelly year 1 and 2, super efficient, no development games required, fixed wage, great output. From 3rd year onwards, not so much. Can a player on a 800k p.a. wage be cost efficient? Well compared to what.

Parish is 26 next year, was drafted at pick 3, has played 140 games, sans a major injury is likely to play around 100 more, he averages 32 disposal a game , 8.5 clearances, we don't have anyone pulling close to those raw numbers if you want a measure. Though information asymmetry is always a plus, it doesn't have to be some secret sauce or obscure stat. I'm glad you have high hopes for Bruhn but I think you're underrating Parish.

But to me the most important part is that he is a free agent. Getting a player via free agency is asymmetrical opportunity, the team that gets to use FA has access to an advantage that can't be taken by anyone else, the talent pool is limited. To me that alone makes him cost effective. Richmond paid pick 12 and 19 for an extra year of Taranto. Is this year of Taranto worth the DVI of pick 4.

Wonderful post!

 

[Shadow89]

Talk on the main board that Ash has parked talks and there may be a stalemate on worth.

What would peeps here be happy to give up? For mine, our current Pick 10 would be about right, for a former Pick 4 who hasn't quite hit the pre-draft hype, but has huge upside with elite delivery by foot and speed, is a country boy, and can play multiple positions.

Jhye Clark 13, Pure_Ownage, Turbocat - curious as to your thoughts?

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Talk on the main board that Ash has parked talks and there may be a stalemate on worth.

What would peeps here be happy to give up? For mine, our current Pick 10 would be about right, for a former Pick 4 who hasn't quite hit the pre-draft hype, but has huge upside with elite delivery by foot and speed, is a country boy, and can play multiple positions.

Jhye Clark 13, Pure_Ownage, Turbocat - curious as to your thoughts?

Throw them our first for him the second Blues ask for our first for TDK