- Jul 14, 2005
- 18,723
- 29,560
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Chelsea FC
- Banned
- #551
Not one game has been played next season, and it’s not just Stocker for next years first.
You’re adding zero to this thread.
Not one game has been played next season, and it’s not just Stocker for next years first.
You’re adding zero to this thread.
Ian Dunross
Premiership Player
- Mar 18, 2013
- 4,718
- 6,992
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Other Teams
- Glenelg Tigers
I'll stand corrected if the Blues don't give up a top 4 pick
- Jul 14, 2005
- 18,723
- 29,560
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Chelsea FC
- Banned
- #553
No ones going to pull you up one way or another
Just some opportunistic shitposting
Ian Dunross
Premiership Player
- Mar 18, 2013
- 4,718
- 6,992
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
- Other Teams
- Glenelg Tigers
What else is Bigfooty for
Jeremias, take everything a bit more personally why don't you. Not everyone agrees with the decisions your club makes so you can stop pushing this agenda that Stocker is worth a top 10 pick. There were 3 clubs who had the opportunity to take him and passed twice, meaning nobody else rated him inside the top 10. Nobody else was going to downgrade their future first by 10+ picks just to get him.
Jeremias
Moderator
- Sep 26, 2004
- 46,216
- 62,614
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Moderator
- #556
Haven't taken anything personally, have simply suggested we don't know exactly where any other club rated Stocker, despite what some are suggesting. If you or anyone has any actual proof to the contrary please feel free to put it forward.
You have no idea whether any other club rated him in their top 10, so let's not pretend otherwise, although that was not the original discussion.
I have not said anywhere Stocker is worth a top 10 pick. Talk about pushing an agenda.
This is a massive logic fail. So because 3 clubs may not have rated a player (however unlikely it is still possible they rated Stocker the 3rd best in the draft) then no one rated him.
The thing is we don't know where clubs rated Stocker on the back of a couple of picks. It is also possible that 17 clubs didn't rate him in the top 50 and only Carlton rated him.
Improbable as it may be, Jeremias is right, you simply can't know for sure without seeing their draft boards.
The clubs who passed on him three times might conceivably be as bad at rating talent as Carlton and have had him 4th after the three players they did pick.
The clubs who passed on him three times might conceivably be as bad at rating talent as Carlton and have had him 4th after the three players they did pick.
Efa.This is a massive logic fail. So because 3 clubs may not have rated a player inside the top 10 (however unlikely it is still possible they rated Stocker the 3rd best in the draft) then no one rated him.
The thing is we don't know where clubs rated Stocker on the back of a couple of picks. It is also possible that 17 clubs didn't rate him in the top 50 and only Carlton rated him.
Point still stands. We don't know where other teams rated him, only that Carlton claim to have rated him there and given the ballsy trade they made I think it is fair to say that this isn't the usual post draft recruiter saying we rated him in the top ten and were shocked he was still available.
Im taking the opinions of other clubs over Carltons. The Suns, Giants, Crows and Power all had multiple cracks before Stockers pick and all didn't hesitate to not pick him. Its ridiculous for Carlton supporters to suggest hes a top 10 talent with literally nothing to go on except what there club feeds them. It's like me saying we rated Sturt and Valente inside the top 10 so we got 2 x top 10 picks. Can you not see how stupid that logic is? Stocker according to the draft and many mock drafts was never a top 10 pick chance.
I know at least 4 clubs who didn't rate him...
Be that as it may, I can't conclusively prove it to be wrong. That's the nature of evidence (and its lack).
Jeremias
Moderator
- Sep 26, 2004
- 46,216
- 62,614
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Moderator
- #564
You have literally no idea whether any of them thought about picking Stocker.
If we are not to believe the club, who should we believe? You?
Right, so we should rubbish the club because mock drafts say we reached for him?
You really don't need to say anything further. That's about as dumb as it gets, yet you still have the cheek to claim other peoples logic is stupid?
No you don't, and saying it over and over doesn't make it so.
All you or I know is that they rated the player they selected at that pick, higher than they did Stocker.
Let me Re-phrase that, I know 4 clubs who didn't rate Stocker as high as Carlton. Also if you do a little digging, you will find that Richmond also weren't very keen on him, had a few words to him about his lack of defensive running and he ended up in the perfect spot to prove them wrong. Just as I don't "know where other clubs rated Stocker" I know nobody rated him high enough to bother using a top 10 pick on him which says to me that Carlton rated him higher than anybody else did.
You can't argue that his slide down the draft order has to be for a valid reason? Could be injury, could be endurance could actually be his lack of defensive running? Who knows? He won the morrish medal and is a good user of the football apparently as well as being able to rack it up. So i just don't see how he is that good yet so many clubs overlooked him. The Crows sure could use another player like that for example.
BluesRule
Premiership Player
- Dec 16, 2013
- 3,724
- 4,216
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Same thing could be said about Nat Fyfe, clearly not rated very highly in the draft ... must be no good ... HANG ON A MINUTE ...
Where a player is picked doesn't tell you how a player is rated by clubs. Jarrad Grant was picked at 5 by the Bulldogs when some teams had him in the 20s. Doesn't even tell you where the Bulldogs ranked him as they could have had him a 1 knowing Clayton and his comments after the draft.
The digging on Stocker and Richmond is on the back of a Jonny Ralph article stating they asked him a couple of probing questions on lack of defensive running. Classic interviewing ploy and a criticism that could be leveled at most underage midfielders. Prior to that the word was Tigers and Hawks (and were looking to trade up to get him) were keen on him.
His example is spot on. It’s not a literal example, it’s an illustrative one. Change the club, change the players, change the picks, the principle remains the same. Jye Caldwell wasn’t drafted top 10, but it’s entirely possible that he was still rated top 10 by every single club who overlooked him.
- Mar 28, 2018
- 10,491
- 8,454
- AFL Club
- GWS
Poor defensive running wouldn't be fatal I dont think. It could certainly be endurance related but whatever it is it can be worked on. An attitude a player doesn't want to work defensively would be, but that's unlikely. Things like courage, willingness to work hard and drive are pretty much a given for kids considered in the draft I think.
The recruiters use more complex data sets, psych testing and background interviews of junior coaches and teamates.
Aiden Bonar's debut was delayed last year and his defensive work wasn't good initially in the NEAFL. It may have been fitness with injury issues in his draft year. When he did debut his defensive work was generally impressive, for example.
So true, perhaps Sloane, Parker, Ben Brown, Neale, Walters, McDonald, Stratton, Walker, Zac Williams etc etc
Interesting I heard from a good source the Dockers had him rated at 5 that year.
If we're being honest, I'd suggest Carlton rating him at 6 would be the highest rating from any club.
Walsh, Rankine, Lukosius would be hard to remove from the top 6. That only leaves two more players.
I could imagine a few clubs may have him top 10, but Carlton certainly feels on the much higher end of rankings.
Walsh, Rankine, Lukosius would be hard to remove from the top 6. That only leaves two more players.
I could imagine a few clubs may have him top 10, but Carlton certainly feels on the much higher end of rankings.
It was a very even group from 8-20. For example Big Footy Benchmark Knightmare had RCD at 9 and he went 20. Pretty much anyone from that group could have been in any order without it being a real shock.
Classic example of where people are focused on the points values of players (which is assessed on an average draft not a potential superdraft) rather than the difference in actual ability and potential of the players, which is small in this part of the draft this year, or so it seems at the moment.
From the video the Carlton recruiter clearly had fallen in love with his burst from the stoppage and kicking with both feet on a windy day. Looked good on his highlights video.
It was interesting listening to the Saints talk about RCD and where he may fit in another years draft. They gave him a range of 8-15 with his raw upside.
Well what are his major issues? Enlighten me? If he turns out as good as Nat Fyfe you will all be back here slinging goo everywhere telling us how it was the greatest trade of all time. I'm just stating the fact that he was picked at pick 19 and little evidence suggests he was ever going much earlier than that. 12-15 sure, I just don't see many scenarios where he would have gone before that. Like a Carlton supporter earlier posted, it is very wishful thinking to suggest you would have taken him at 6 with Bailey Smith or Ben King on the board.
