Rumour GFC 2025 Player Trading, Drafting FA, Rumours and Wish lists Pt 2

[CatToTheFuture]

It's a fair point

However, I would add that even if making that differentiation, mediums don't get extra development time compared to smalls in the VFL. If you're not a key position player, you're expected to play well in the VFL pretty much from the get-go.

I don't think it helps that medium marking targets aren't really a position you absolutely need. You can just play an extra small forward or even an extra winger/mid there. Clubs aren't forced to develop them.

 

[iameviljez]

I don't think it helps that medium marking targets aren't really a position you absolutely need. You can just play an extra small forward or even an extra winger/mid there. Clubs aren't forced to develop them.

Yep - and that it's very difficult for small players to make the grade in defence for this reason.

Teams like Collingwood (Mihocek, arguably Ash Johnson) have done reasonably well out of medium-sized marking targets, as did the Dogs in 2016 (Stringer, Tory Dickson, Liam Picken), but honestly, there is no real substitute for the Big Bastards.

Even in our heyday, our only "medium" sized forward was SJ, but Chappy was a much better contested mark than he.

 

[Lana]

Spot on.

We're lucky to have defied gravity for so long. But the odds are increasingly stacked against us.

The Draft is slim pickings where we finish. With all the exposure, finding hidden draft-gems is becoming arduous (even for Wellsy/Mack). Trading is overinflated now (long contracts ceding control to holding clubs, huge amounts, longer contracts etc..). Sanity will prevail and there will be a downward correction. Until then we should sit this one out (especially the cancerous deals). Being financially solvent will be our edge.

We skated to where the puck would be, by picking up talented mature-agers from the lower comps. Now everyone fishes there.

To continue..
1) Chancing our luck in the bottom reaches of the Draft. Competitors credit our Recruiting (Draft/Trades) but our Development is equally a core strength (h/t Nigel Lappin).
2) Being a Destination Club (i.e. player- & young-family- friendly). Got to be in it, to win it.
3) Wring more out of current players. Many (not all) to stay at the peak of their powers until their mid-30s. Will Blitz be our first 40 year old player?
4) Being the Club-of-choice for Talent from other sports (incl. overseas). Especially 'em Irish lads. Maybe we start re-skilling them there while they are still playing amateur Gaelic football.

To explore.. (i.e. fishing where the others may not)
5) Being more cut-throat in delisting mis-hires (e.g. Phoenix), long-term injureds etc.. Pains me to say this.
6) Jack-up suitable recent retirees/delistees from other clubs for one last hurrah. (we have form, with Isaac Smith, Martin etc.)
7) New sporting pathways (revisit poaching Rugby players?)
8) Take more risks. Say a JUH instead of the costly Curnow?
9) Market is too illiquid. Push for earlier UFA (6 instead of 8).

Thoughts? Suggestions? Be gentle!

I think our biggest weakness is also a source of strength, our limited access to early pick players can be a double edge sword. Sure we end with a weaker starting point, but we end up playing a lot less for near equavalent performance.
Performance and cost doesn't scale well, you can get a player who is 5% better yet costs 40-50% more cash. The end result of this is your opponent gets a few better players at the top end and carries more replacement level players at the bottom end. Draft success in one time period correlates strongly with draft failure adjacent, clubs end up with more talent the opportunity(the old draft 3 get 1 long term afl player). I think our success, especially this year is our ability to minimise this wastage.

I've been playing around with individual game performance vs acquisition costs (I wish I could include salary), at least for season 2025, competition wide, within positions, so far I've found a weak relationship between increased cost and increased performance. Acquisition costs tend to be a better predictor of what kind of player is more than their quality. KPF and inside mids go much earlier than other positions. So while on the one hand they compete against themselves or the other hands given a cheaper player break into the postion they hold their own.

What this means for us is if there is such a fundimental misunderstanding to what generates efficient on field value around the competition, being forced away from an incorrect orthodoxy can't be a negative.

 

[Reg Hickey]

I think our biggest weakness is also a source of strength, our limited access to early pick players can be a double edge sword. Sure we end with a weaker starting point, but we end up playing a lot less for near equavalent performance.
Performance and cost doesn't scale well, you can get a player who is 5% better yet costs 40-50% more cash. The end result of this is your opponent gets a few better players at the top end and carries more replacement level players at the bottom end. Draft success in one time period correlates strongly with draft failure adjacent, clubs end up with more talent the opportunity(the old draft 3 get 1 long term afl player). I think our success, especially this year is our ability to minimise this wastage.

I've been playing around with individual game performance vs acquisition costs (I wish I could include salary), at least for season 2025, competition wide, within positions, so far I've found a weak relationship between increased cost and increased performance. Acquisition costs tend to be a better predictor of what kind of player is more than their quality. KPF and inside mids go much earlier than other positions. So while on the one hand they compete against themselves or the other hands given a cheaper player break into the postion they hold their own.

What this means for us is if there is such a fundimental misunderstanding to what generates efficient on field value around the competition, being forced away from an incorrect orthodoxy can't be a negative.

Fascinating point. I've never thought of it this way, but it makes a lot of sense when you think about it.

One purely anecdotal observation I'd make is that it seems you need SOME absolutely top end talent. I can't think of a team that has won a flag, well, ever, without at least a couple of players who would be considered top 20-30 in the entire comp.

For us right now Jezza, Smith and Holmes are probably the three that many would consider top 20-30 players in the comp. Two of them we traded in, and we are probably paying less for all three than other clubs may have been willing to, which would suggest that the trade/contract negotiation and "destination club" factors also play a significant role.

 

[cats_09]

We have zero chance of trading for Curnow or Butters under contract. Not even worth discussing.

But that's where all the fun is - surely we can send Clark, Clohesy & Stevens to Port for Butters

 

[standupand]

I can't think of a team that has won a flag, well, ever, without at least a couple of players who would be considered top 20-30 in the entire comp.

West Coast's 2018 team, maybe? They had J.Kennedy. Gaff and Natainui didn't play. Not sure many others would be considered top 30.

 

[cats_09]

Like I know the Cats dont need another old KPF. But he's Charlie Curnow. Guys a freak. Why wouldn't you take him?

The cost to do so

This isn't even about his salary, but about the trade cost

Carlton fans on socials proposed the starting point of the trade as being Holmes & SDK - does anyone really think Mackie would entertain that in a trade discussion, or more likely that he'd walk away laughing

 

[dudusmaximus]

Fascinating point. I've never thought of it this way, but it makes a lot of sense when you think about it.

One purely anecdotal observation I'd make is that it seems you need SOME absolutely top end talent. I can't think of a team that has won a flag, well, ever, without at least a couple of players who would be considered top 20-30 in the entire comp.

For us right now Jezza, Smith and Holmes are probably the three that many would consider top 20-30 players in the comp. Two of them we traded in, and we are probably paying less for all three than other clubs may have been willing to, which would suggest that the trade/contract negotiation and "destination club" factors also play a significant role.

Good one. Like "Anchor Clients" for a Business, a successful team needs a core of "Anchor Players" who are stars.

 

[standupand]

I think our biggest weakness is also a source of strength, our limited access to early pick players can be a double edge sword. Sure we end with a weaker starting point, but we end up playing a lot less for near equavalent performance.
Performance and cost doesn't scale well, you can get a player who is 5% better yet costs 40-50% more cash. The end result of this is your opponent gets a few better players at the top end and carries more replacement level players at the bottom end. Draft success in one time period correlates strongly with draft failure adjacent, clubs end up with more talent the opportunity(the old draft 3 get 1 long term afl player). I think our success, especially this year is our ability to minimise this wastage.

I've been playing around with individual game performance vs acquisition costs (I wish I could include salary), at least for season 2025, competition wide, within positions, so far I've found a weak relationship between increased cost and increased performance. Acquisition costs tend to be a better predictor of what kind of player is more than their quality. KPF and inside mids go much earlier than other positions. So while on the one hand they compete against themselves or the other hands given a cheaper player break into the postion they hold their own.

What this means for us is if there is such a fundimental misunderstanding to what generates efficient on field value around the competition, being forced away from an incorrect orthodoxy can't be a negative.

Don't share this knowledge with St Kilda.

 

[dudusmaximus]

I've been playing around with individual game performance vs acquisition costs (I wish I could include salary), at least for season 2025, competition wide, within positions, so far I've found a weak relationship between increased cost and increased performance. Acquisition costs tend to be a better predictor of what kind of player is more than their quality.

As always, an excellent analysis. How much is the System and Context factored in when comparing players between different teams? A player coming from a strong system like ours vs. someone from a rabble. A lone star KPF vs. one of many in another team?

 

[moond0g]

Pass on Curnow.

There's significant risk attached, particularly at the price he would cost. Plus Cameron just won the Coleman by plenty and Neale's second half of the season exceeded expectations by a fair way. I know the opportunity to recruit elite key forwards doesn't come around every day. So you have to jump when given the opportunity to a degree. But I'm pretty comfortable with what we've got for the next couple of years. Go target someone in 27 or 28

 

[Baudolino]

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/free-agent-sam-draper-to-leave-essendon-for-either-brisbane-or-adelaide/news-story/f1780686c6926d9d41ced278659f1b6c

Herald Sun reporting that St Kilda, Hawthorn and Collingwood are all trying to poach Zack Merrett.

I'm surprised we're not being linked tbh.

 

[Lana]

As always, an excellent analysis. How much is the System and Context factored in when comparing players between different teams? A player coming from a strong system like ours vs. someone from a rabble. A lone star KPF vs. one of many in another team?

Great question, there isn't really a good solution to account for this, the publicly available data just isn't there. However for some positions being in the losing team can be somewhat advantagious individually for example as a rebounding defender or a KPD, who sees a lot more of the ball when you lose the I50s by 20, then if they won it by 20.

Obivously being in a winning team strongly correlates with individual performance.

The underling model for performance is heaily impacts by **** up above expected **** ups. The opportunities not gained by team circumstances is really hard to account for.

 

[Lana]

Don't share this knowledge with St Kilda.

It is funny that their moves are in a way an attempt to move away from the draft, their problem is that while we added Smith to a midfield containing Holmes and **** all else, Danger to a midfield that had Selwood and Caddy?, and replaced Sav with Cameron, they're bringing a ruckmen who is barely better than what they already got. Effecitvely tripling their cash spend on a position for a mere 5% boost.

 

[Mr Meow]

One purely anecdotal observation I'd make is that it seems you need SOME absolutely top end talent. I can't think of a team that has won a flag, well, ever, without at least a couple of players who would be considered top 20-30 in the entire comp.

Are we talking about on the list, or on grand final day?

Adelaide's '97-'98 grand final sides without Modra, plus one of them was without Ricciuto (for the whole finals series). You had McLeod obviously. Top 20/30 after that, I'm not sure. Some contenders but not locks.

2005 Sydney: Hall a lock, Goodes probably although not in his very best seasons.

2012 Sydney: Josh Kennedy. Any others? Lots of good players but clear top 20/30 I'm not sure.

Collingwood 2023: the Daicos brothers (Josh had a great year but was probably borderline), then a lot of good players rather than superstars.

 

[iameviljez]

Pass on Curnow.

There's significant risk attached, particularly at the price he would cost. Plus Cameron just won the Coleman by plenty and Neale's second half of the season exceeded expectations by a fair way. I know the opportunity to recruit elite key forwards doesn't come around every day. So you have to jump when given the opportunity to a degree. But I'm pretty comfortable with what we've got for the next couple of years. Go target someone in 27 or 28

Cameron will be 33 in April, and key forwards are just so, so hard to find.

After Podsiadly fell away across 2013, we kept looking and looking for that second key forward to partner Hawkins. Walker, Vardy, Brown, Clark, Jenkins, Kersten, Stanley, Harry Taylor, Ratugolea... nothing stuck until we finally got JC in 2021.

 

[GlenMiddlemissed]

Cameron will be 33 in April, and key forwards are just so, so hard to find.

After Podsiadly fell away across 2013, we kept looking and looking for that second key forward to partner Hawkins. Walker, Vardy, Brown, Clark, Jenkins, Kersten, Stanley, Harry Taylor, Ratugolea... nothing stuck until we finally got JC in 2021.

I'd be waiting to see how Molier develops next year. He only played a handful of games at the end of this year in the VFL, but rarely have I seen someone who just looks 'right' so early. No guarantee ofc, but a really exciting prospect as a KPF.

 

[moond0g]

Cameron will be 33 in April, and key forwards are just so, so hard to find.

After Podsiadly fell away across 2013, we kept looking and looking for that second key forward to partner Hawkins. Walker, Vardy, Brown, Clark, Jenkins, Kersten, Stanley, Harry Taylor, Ratugolea... nothing stuck until we finally got JC in 2021.

I appreciate that. And for that exact reason I can absolutely understand people being pro Curnow.

But I think Neale's emergence in the second half of the season changes things a bit. 29 goals in his past 11 games is seriously good going. Plus Curnow will himself be 29 by round 1 next year with a much bigger injury history than Cameron.

It's certainly a gamble passing up on an opportunity like this. But it's a gamble I'd be pretty content taking.

 

[FootyLad0]

I’d rather invest in Polkinghorne and Mollier long term as key forward options than overpaying for anyone.

Forward is not a position of need. Jez’s play style means he won’t be banged up long term and Shannon has a long career ahead of him.

 

[goyoucatters]

Don't share this knowledge with St Kilda.

That's cute. Using the words 'knowledge' and 'St Kilda' in the same sentence.

#iseewhatyoudidthere
#ohtheironing

 

[iameviljez]

I appreciate that. And for that exact reason I can absolutely understand people being pro Curnow.

But I think Neale's emergence in the second half of the season changes things a bit. 29 goals in his past 11 games is seriously good going. Plus Curnow will himself be 29 by round 1 next year with a much bigger injury history than Cameron.

It's certainly a gamble passing up on an opportunity like this. But it's a gamble I'd be pretty content taking.

It certainly makes us less desperate than we would have otherwise been.

 

[BigCat1]

Things I’ll never understand

Re Curnow - Pass. He’d cost way too much…..go back and re read the Cameron thread when GWS matched the free agency bid. Half the board was melting down saying walk away immediately Geelong.

Re Curnow - Pass - We have Mollier, Polkinghorn and Whiltshire at home. I just assume that these ppl started watching footy recently.

When a player easily in the top 20 of the league wants to come to your club you run. When he’s a Key Position Forward you sprint.

 

[Schmuck]

Things I’ll never understand

Re Curnow - Pass. He’d cost way too much…..go back and re read the Cameron thread when GWS matched the free agency bid. Half the board was melting down saying walk away immediately Geelong.

Re Curnow - Pass - We have Mollier, Polkinghorn and Whiltshire at home. I just assume that these ppl started watching footy recently.

When a player easily in the top 20 of the league wants to come to your club you run. When he’s a Key Position Forward you sprint.

I’m optimistic with Molier and Polkinghorne but Wiltshire is very unlikely to be on our list in a months time.

 

[Kobe Gryant]

Re Curnow - Pass. He’d cost way too much…..go back and re read the Cameron thread when GWS matched the free agency bid. Half the board was melting down saying walk away immediately Geelong.

The Cameron comparison gets thrown around like it proves something, but it really doesn’t.

In 2020 we were a 32-year-old Hawkins or bust, had nothing but a soccer goalkeeper convert in Sav developing, and were absolutely desperate for a KPF.

We got Cameron for a steal. Anyone could see that deal made sense. It was three teens picks for Cameron and two seconds in the most compromised draft in history to that point.

If that was the proposed deal for Curnow, you'd have a lot more people on board, but it won't be.

Re Curnow - Pass - We have Mollier, Polkinghorn and Whiltshire at home. I just assume that these ppl started watching footy recently.

Nice strawman. That's not what people are saying.

What they're saying is we're already the highest scoring side in the comp with a forward line that bats deep. That's their point.

They're just adding on that we've got two talented kids who in all likelihood won't get a look in for years as a result, to further prove how ridiculous it would be to sell the farm for Curnow at his age.

Compared to 2020, we have Stengle, Close, Mannagh, Martin, Dempsey, a far more advanced Miers, a 23-year-old Neale kicking 41 goals in his first full season of footy, Dangerfield playing forward, and to top it all off, Henry rotting in the VFL after kicking 78 in two years.

That is not a hole that needs filling, that is a logjam. Comparing that level of depth in all age groups to the must have nature of the Cameron deal is farcical.

That's where Molier and Polk come in. With that depth, we can afford to have these kids develop and take their time at VFL level and in the gym, like Neale before them.

When a player easily in the top 20 of the league wants to come to your club you run. When he’s a Key Position Forward you sprint.

Sounds good.

Let's blow up our tight knit young core, potentially moving on one of Neale, Dempsey, or O’Sullivan and a haul of picks, for a contracted soon to be 29-year-old with a dodgy medical history?

If the best justification is “he’s a top 20 player so you sprint,” then maybe it is time to stop pretending this is anything like the Cameron deal. It's not.

Context matters, the list needs matter, the way the side plays football matters. Unless of course you only started watching footy about five minutes ago.

 

[Johanpetro]

Anyone who says yes we should go and get Curnow should need to add what they would trade for him in a deal. Because we have nothing. And we won’t be trading any established players for him