Player Watch Lachie Schultz

[ElliottsMaggies]

It's getting to the stage where it's not worth trying to explain things to some people. Sometimes you can take the boy out of the 80's but you can't take the 80's out of the boy

These people are the stalkers after their partner wants to break up.

Seriously, they need to get the eff over it.

We've all moved on.

 

[Pistol Night]

It's getting to the stage where it's not worth trying to explain things to some people. Sometimes you can take the boy out of the 80's but you can't take the 80's out of the boy

 

[manicpie]

View attachment 1991210

That's just turned me off chasing Bailey Smith

 

[sam_e]

Richards was s**t under your metric. In a game where we absolutely dominated he played forward and only kicked 1 goal. Schultz is going at more than that even including games we were s**t.

it's probably not unreasonable for that 'attacking' metric" (kicking goals) to include GL and GAs.

and, in that 1-game, which we did absolutely dominate, JR scored 1 and directly assisted in 3. whilst Shooter goes at 1.1 goals p/game and 0.25 assists p/game in his Collingwood tenure (0.5 p/g career-wise).

on the defensive side of things, JR also out-performed Shooter (accumulating 6 tackles vs LS Coll average of 4) with 1%'ers even at 1 a piece.

it's likely JR's averages may pull back as he plays more games and better opposition but I'll be interested to see where Shooter's numbers land (both attacking & defensive) over the next 20-40 games, in comparison to say HH and/or JR.

will he outperform either of those two ..possibly. will he significantly out-perform either of those two, i'm not so sure.

and if 'no' is the answer, then it's a reasonable question to ask why we handed over 34 + a 1st rounder (over-paid? + opportunity cost?) when in all likelihood we had depth in that position that could have filled the role at the same /similar level of output, in the same timeframe (ie. this year and into the future)

ps: i hope Shooter wins the Coleman. the discussion is around the relative merits of what the club chose to pay, what they believed they were getting in return and how they valued other existing /'viable' options at the time. and if he wins the Coleman, there will be only one answer

 

[SchuPie]

We played a side with 2 key forwards in the GF and we won. We played Carlton two weeks ago and they have 2 of the best key forwards and we beat them. Shift your mind into modern football and understand that unless the whole side is performing their role, chances are you lose. What gun 18yo would we get in this year's draft. How long do you want to wait for him to develop. If you want a young KF in this year's draft he would have to be a top 8 pick minimum and you'll be waiting 3 years until he will actually become any good, even then, he would be speculative. We are in the window now, Schultz is the perfect choice to help keep us in the window. Modern football is all about role players, systems and processes and ours are magnificent

I agree in a way Manic, but what if we didn’t use the pick to draft but instead used it to bundle it up to grab a young KPP? Or Smith or Holmes or???
It takes that option away.
What if we had somehow used the 2nd we traded last year and bundled it to help us move up for Reid or Morris.
Therefore you could make an argument it may cost us Morris and Smith…a low bow to draw perhaps

Anyway, it’s done. Let’s hope we win the flag regardless of who plays and how well they play.

 

[sr36]

I agree in a way Manic, but what if we didn’t use the pick to draft but instead used it to bundle it up to grab a young KPP? Or Smith or Holmes or???
It takes that option away.
What if we had somehow used the 2nd we traded last year and bundled it to help us move up for Reid or Morris.
Therefore you could make an argument it may cost us Morris and Smith…a low bow to draw perhaps

Anyway, it’s done. Let’s hope we win the flag regardless of who plays and how well they play.

You'd never do anything if you were worried that something better may come along.

Is Schultz likely to give us more than the average pick 18 or whatever it becomes and the difference between Bytel and whoever we would have taken at pick 39 last year? If the answer is yes, it's a gain from trade particularly as we get the value immediately when we are in the window.

 

[FromTheBoundaryLine]

 

[manicpie]

I agree in a way Manic, but what if we didn’t use the pick to draft but instead used it to bundle it up to grab a young KPP? Or Smith or Holmes or???
It takes that option away.
What if we had somehow used the 2nd we traded last year and bundled it to help us move up for Reid or Morris.
Therefore you could make an argument it may cost us Morris and Smith…a low bow to draw perhaps

Anyway, it’s done. Let’s hope we win the flag regardless of who plays and how well they play.

We could've taken Morris with our first instead of Harry. I would have done that but I'm slowly learning that I am simply an amateur at predicting why we chose one player over another . These days I'm more concerned about picking players that the club knows will play a role that they picked him for, plus, having McStay might have had something to do with it

 

[manicpie]

View attachment 1991231

It's getting to the stage where not even Einstein can explain modern football to some

 

[SchuPie]

You'd never do anything if you were worried that something better may come along.

Is Schultz likely to give us more than the average pick 18 or whatever it becomes and the difference between Bytel and whoever we would have taken at pick 39 last year? If the answer is yes, it's a gain from trade particularly as we get the value immediately when we are in the window.

We’ll end up going round and round in circles
I don’t know how to respond to this anymore

• I want Schultz but don’t agree w cost / paying future first - but it’s done and I hope he is the guy that kicks the winning goal…I’ll always think we could and should have traded him in for less
• you make decisions so that you can use your picks in different ways - ie trading up / trading out
• yes I’ll be furious if it costs us Smith or another jet in this years trade period but nothing can be done so we back Schultz in

Again, it’s not on Schultz and what he brings to the team / his value to us

 

[gerryg400]

View attachment 1991210

Is that a selfie PN?

 

[sr36]

We’ll end up going round and round in circles
I don’t know how to respond to this anymore

• I want Schultz but don’t agree w cost / paying future first - but it’s done and I hope he is the guy that kicks the winning goal…I’ll always think we could and should have traded him in for less
• you make decisions so that you can use your picks in different ways - ie trading up / trading out
• yes I’ll be furious if it costs us Smith or another jet in this years trade period but nothing can be done so we back Schultz in

Again, it’s not on Schultz and what he brings to the team / his value to us

To me draft picks are liquid recruiting capital. The value from the picks used to draft Allan and HDM could also have been traded to give us options in future drafts.

2022, 2023, 2024 firsts have been used on Allan, HDM and Schultz. I'm pretty confident that Schultz won't be the worst use of those 3. Fair chance he'll be the best of the 3.

I don't get why what you get for trading a pick is judged so differently to what you get for using that pick in the draft.

 

[mocamagic]

I think Schultz will kick 2 or 3

 

[Abdul_The_Bull]

Just like there's data and meta data, there's the value of the pick in the draft and then there's the value of the pick in dealing wiht the club. I suspect, particularly now rather than in recent years, that the Pies are using draft picks to build 'capital' as a reasonable club to deal with. This is a long-term strategy that will position the Pies well in coming years. I envision a time when we truly become a destination club and there will have been built a perception that we are reasonable to deal with so deals WILL get done. I remember all too well the lost opportunities Collingwood have had in the past in being unable to secure talent.... Tony Locket, Spider Everett, Johnathon Brown, Nick Reivoldt, Jeremy Cameron

5

Jeremy Cameron

Age

31

Ht

196cm

Wt

94kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.5

3star

K

9.0

3star

HB

3.4

3star

M

5.4

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

2.6

5star

D

10.0

3star

K

7.1

3star

HB

2.9

2star

M

4.6

4star

T

2.0

3star

G

1.9

5star

D

8.2

2star

K

5.0

2star

HB

3.2

3star

M

4.6

5star

T

2.4

4star

G

2.0

5star

, Tom Lynch, etc., etc. etc.

 

[SchuPie]

I don't think we're coming at it from vastly different aspects

2022, 2023, 2024 firsts have been used on Allan, HDM and Schultz. I'm pretty confident that Schultz won't be the worst use of those 3. Fair chance he'll be the best of the 3.

Agree. But that's not really my point - I'm see the pick as having value in the flexibility it provides.

I don't get why what you get for trading a pick is judged so differently to what you get for using that pick in the draft.

Because I see it as trading a value we don't know about (ie pick 2!) - a future pick has both unknown value in terms of placement in draft and unknown value in what it may assist wit n trading up or trading in.
As such, there's only certain players I'd give up future first for.

Just my opinion, I can't stand the speculation "it's only pick..."

It's clear that every one has a different opinion / view / perspective...call it what you will.

I think he's a great acquisition.

My beef is with the value of the trade, what it says we're willing to give up (how could we possibly give less for Smith if we paid 1st/2nd for Schultz.)

I'm probably wrong.

I'll stay out of Schultz thread and try to only comment on non-Schultz posts in Drafts/Trade thread.

 

[sr36]

Because I see it as trading a value we don't know about (ie pick 2!) - a future pick has both unknown value in terms of placement in draft and unknown value in what it may assist wit n trading up or trading in.
As such, there's only certain players I'd give up future first for.

Yeah they get traded for expected value which can change considerably, but it can go in both directions. Our 2022 and 2023 picks would have been more valuable as future firsts than they were when they became current year's first. Admittedly probably not the case with the Schultz pick which is unlikely to drop in value due to us being rated highly. It could only increase significantly if we have a shit year.

I'm glad that 2021 hasn't scared us off trading future firsts. As I don't think caution wins in an 18 team comp. You need to take some risks that pay off on and off field That trade was always a shocker. I'm convinced it was about marketing and not improving our list.

 

[Jelly Bean]

We’ll end up going round and round in circles
I don’t know how to respond to this anymore

• I want Schultz but don’t agree w cost / paying future first - but it’s done and I hope he is the guy that kicks the winning goal…I’ll always think we could and should have traded him in for less
• you make decisions so that you can use your picks in different ways - ie trading up / trading out
• yes I’ll be furious if it costs us Smith or another jet in this years trade period but nothing can be done so we back Schultz in

Again, it’s not on Schultz and what he brings to the team / his value to us

The thing I'm conscious of is that if we didn't get Schultz this year and convinced him to stay one more year at Freo, we'd be able to get him this year as a UFA.

That was leverage that we didn't seem to use.

 

[sr36]

The thing I'm conscious of is that if we didn't get Schultz this year and convinced him to stay one more year at Freo, we'd be able to get him this year as a UFA.

That was leverage that we didn't seem to use.

If he went UFA, one less year of Schultz. No certainty that he ends up at us and almost certainly a higher salary if he does.

I actually don't think we can really judge trades anymore other than whether the bloke is a good fit that will make a team better.

Just as a salary dump means that you pay less, a lower salary should mean you're willing to pay more. Without knowing a key part of the recruiting - the salary, how can you judge it. And then even if you knew the salary, how the hell do you value cap space against draft picks. It's too complicated.

 

[manicpie]

If he went UFA, one less year of Schultz. No certainty that he ends up at us and almost certainly a higher salary if he does.

I actually don't think we can really judge trades anymore other than whether the bloke is a good fit that will make a team better.

Just as a salary dump means that you pay less, a lower salary should mean you're willing to pay more. Without knowing a key part of the recruiting - the salary, how can you judge it. And then even if you knew the salary, how the hell do you value cap space against draft picks. It's too complicated.

It's time to bring out the cane, these students just refuse to learn

 

[Kappa]

The thing I'm conscious of is that if we didn't get Schultz this year and convinced him to stay one more year at Freo, we'd be able to get him this year as a UFA.

That was leverage that we didn't seem to use.

Going back to 2023, 2024 seemed like the last year of our premiership window with a heavily aging list. If we told him to wait then missed out on the premiership by a small amount...

 

[sr36]

It's time to bring out the cane, these students just refuse to learn

The reality is we can't value any of it. Imagine trying to take AFL trades into a maths class.

This is the equation

Schultz= S
S has a value that is unknown and disagreed upon.
Schultz's salary = Y
Y is unknown and we don't know how much it matters.
Future first = x
X is unknown pick number that will be used to pick up an unknown player that might be a spud or go alright.

Does S(Y)=X

Is the player whose value is disagreed upon with an unknown salary where we don't know how much the salary matters equal to the unknown pick that is valued against an unknown player.

Solve.

 

[manicpie]

The reality is we can't value any of it. Imagine trying to take AFL trades into a maths class.

This is the equation

Schultz= S
S has a value that is unknown and disagreed upon.
Schultz's salary = Y
Y is unknown and we don't know how much it matters.
Future first = x
X is unknown pick number that will be used to pick up an unknown player that might be a spud or go alright.

Does S(Y)=X

Is the player whose value is disagreed upon with an unknown salary where we don't know how much the salary matters equal to the unknown pick that is valued against an unknown player.

Solve.

You lost me at going into class. Science was my favourite because the room had windows that opened and I was renowned for jumping out that window and not come back till the truancy officers found me a couple of weeks later

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

Can’t use goals kicked as a metric to judge a forward? Wait, what?!?!?!

Not the way people use it today.
Take AJ last year…kicked 3, including 2 from the goal square and 1 joe the goose….he gets dropped and people call it harsh “because he kicked 3”.

Thinking about it, I’d be much more of a fan of using the “expected” stat as a +\~ for goals kicked.

e.g. kick one that’s expected is 0. Miss expected is -1. Kick unexpected =+1. Miss unexpected is 0

Obviously have to tweak for “in play” (I assume they maybe do that already)….but for me that would give a far better indication of goals kicked as a contributing factor and a way to value goals kicked.

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

The reality is we can't value any of it. Imagine trying to take AFL trades into a maths class.

This is the equation

Schultz= S
S has a value that is unknown and disagreed upon.
Schultz's salary = Y
Y is unknown and we don't know how much it matters.
Future first = x
X is unknown pick number that will be used to pick up an unknown player that might be a spud or go alright.

Does S(Y)=X

Is the player whose value is disagreed upon with an unknown salary where we don't know how much the salary matters equal to the unknown pick that is valued against an unknown player.

Solve.

Pfft… easy.
S(Y) = X
Future first (Schultz) = win.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

The thing I'm conscious of is that if we didn't get Schultz this year and convinced him to stay one more year at Freo, we'd be able to get him this year as a UFA.

That was leverage that we didn't seem to use.

Aye, but we were trying to maximize our window with Pendlebury, Howe, Sidebottom and Mitchell still at the club.

And cap space is also valuable.