Draft Profile Liam Stocker

[Chocoholic]

That seems a very reasonable statement based on my reading of the article. I don’t think it’s completely accurate, but I would be confident that of clubs that had picks inside the top 20 Carlton was the only one that had him inside the top 15-20 for varying reasons. Who knows where Hawthorn, Sydney, North, Collingwood, Melbourne and Essendon rated him.

I also don’t see any reason to disagree with it? I mean if you back SOS in it’s a nothing statement. Personally I think SOS is a rubbish list manager so I find it interesting.

I know this is quite old, but I gotta feeling the Blues plans would have been well known. List managers talk. If any other club wanted him that badly, the Blues would have lost him.

 

[PostPaolo]

Stocker's doing fine for mine. Pick 19 debuted ahead of half the players selected above him and hasn't looked out of place at AFL level. Has a bit of mongrel about him.

Obviously forever he'll be linked to this trade and as such wish all the criticism especially at this point in his career should be at the list manager who made this trade happen rather than the teenager going about his football in the right way from what I've seen, he'd have just as much expectations as Walsh who went pick 1 if not greater with all being said about him.

 

[Chocoholic]

Well out of that draft, I would put the following players as the top 15.
Walsh
Rozee
Rankine
Stack
Jack Ross
Lukosuis
Bailey Smith
Butters
Duursma
Max King
Nick Blakey
Hately
Mathew Parker
Mardy Hore
Ben King
Jye Caldwell
Tarryn Thomas
Jordan Clarke
Riley Collier-dawkins
Thats 19 better in that draft imo.

I know hindsight is key here but minus a few changes this is still pretty accurate. Clark should go up a little but in my bias opinion. Ross was a bargain steal, along with Stack.

 

[Mofra]

I'd like to see the kid make it and play a lot of football simply because of the crap position he's been put into by virtue of the trade.
Weird how sometimes you just see an opposition player and want them to make it. Matt Guelfi is another, great story of persistence.

 

[Milanista28]

I'd like to see the kid make it and play a lot of football simply because of the crap position he's been put into by virtue of the trade.
Weird how sometimes you just see an opposition player and want them to make it. Matt Guelfi is another, great story of persistence.

Yep, Stocker has done nothing wrong but he has heaps of people wishing him failure because of hate for Carlton.

 

[branedotorg]

I'd like to see the kid make it and play a lot of football simply because of the crap position he's been put into by virtue of the trade.
Weird how sometimes you just see an opposition player and want them to make it. Matt Guelfi is another, great story of persistence.

COUNTERPOINT: Matt Guelfi's hair, it really triggers me.

 

[captain cotch 9]

Stocker's doing fine for mine. Pick 19 debuted ahead of half the players selected above him and hasn't looked out of place at AFL level. Has a bit of mongrel about him.

Obviously forever he'll be linked to this trade and as such wish all the criticism especially at this point in his career should be at the list manager who made this trade happen rather than the teenager going about his football in the right way from what I've seen, he'd have just as much expectations as Walsh who went pick 1 if not greater with all being said about him.

He is playing for one of the worst teams in history. Of course he would be debuting early...

 

[dlb99]

Yep, Stocker has done nothing wrong but he has heaps of people wishing him failure because of hate for Carlton.

Stocker has a certain attitude, I can assure everyone of that.
Immediately made his presence felt at the club, not meek, nor mild.
External factors will not have any effect.

 

[Marcel Proust]

big win by carlton today. congratulations

 

[SickQwon]

More importantly,

1 Goal, 20 Disposals, 3 marks, 4 tackles in a dominating performance in the reserves today. Building nicely.

 

[The Edukator]

Trade looking very good for Carlton. SOS doesn't get enough credit.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Trade looking very good for Carlton. SOS doesn't get enough credit.

Yep. And it’s seems only just now Adelaide fans are coming around to the fact this season it’s a pretty even and average draft past the top 2, whilst last year is looking like the best crop in a long time.

Win-win at this stage, and will be for 5 years yet.

 

[La Dispute]

Anderson would have been a great pickup for Adelaide - he’s exactly what they need.

Pending a priority pick for Gold Coast, and possibly an early bid for Green, they could be looking at pick 4-5.

Maybe they go for Ash?

 

[SickQwon]

Pick 3 for pick 8 and Liam Stocker

Honestly, this trade looks fair to me. Both teams would be really happy with the outcome. Win win.

 

[KnaveyBlue]

Neat dual-sided player, but lots of genuine mongrel. It's an odd combo but I think it will work long term. Still needs to build his tank.

We'll try and trade pick 8 for a mid or small fwd, but I'm worried there won't be many bites given this draft.

 

[Blue__Balls]

With this thread coming back into circulation, might just put to bed the "rated at 6" discussion.

Carlton didn't rate Stocker as the overall 6th best player in the draft. He was, however, sixth on their list of viable and preferred players.

Having drafted/recruited talls early in the rebuild (Weitering, Marchbank, McKay, Curnow, McGovern, Silvagni x2, Macreadie, Kerr, De Koning) the focus had clearly shifted to smaller players. There were also a number of Academy players in the first round who we may have bid on, if we had mid appropriate picks, but with Pick 1 and then nothing we would have likely just crossed off our list entirely.

King
King
Thomas
Blakey
Quaynor
Lukosius (is a tall, but speculation he could be a tall winger...maybe on our list, maybe not - I'll leave him in)

Remaining players:
Walsh (1)
Lukosius (?)
Rankine
Rozee
Smith
Jones
Caldwell
Butters
Hately
Clark
McHenry
Sturt
Duursma


We started chasing a trade to secure Stocker while GWS were still deliberating over their Hately pick, we can surmise everyone from Hately down was rated after Stocker on our list. Not super surprising, don't think we'd have been looking at half back flankers like Clark and Duursma (this is pre Docherty's second ACL) or a medium marking forward like Sturt. Had a need for a small forward, but I don't think rating Stocker abover McHenry is a stretch.

Remaining players:
Walsh (1)
Lukosius (?)
Rankine
Rozee
Smith
Jones
Caldwell
Butters
Stocker

Can probably bounce Butters down the list for Carlton, we've got a number of small (read: undersized) mids already (Fisher, SPS, Murphy etc.).
Jones as well, for the same reasoning as Clark and Duursma above.

Remaining players:
Walsh (1)
Lukosius (?)
Rankine
Rozee
Smith
Caldwell
Stocker

Based on that, you'd assume Carlton either didn't have Lukosius on their list of preferred players (possible, but unlikely), or simply rated Stocker higher than one of Smith or Caldwell as a midfield option. Smith looks a handy player but a bit of a tool (Stocker very mature for his age), while Caldwell was coming off an injury-affected season. If I had to guess, I'd say we may have nudged Smith down our list a couple of spots based on attitude and professionalism (not to say he lacks either full stop, just that both are noted strengths of Stocker).

Remaining players:
Walsh (1)
Lukosius (2)
Rankine (3)
Rozee (4)
Caldwell (5)
Stocker (6)

Not necessarily how everyone would see it - but following the breadcrumbs you can certainly see the approach. Definitely matches up with the theoretical order of priorities in building a list - start with the players who take longest to develop (talls), then the mids, then the peripheral roles. Ergo - focus on smalls and immediate impact players this year.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

(Rankine)

 

[Blue__Balls]

(Rankine)

Good spot - serves me for trusting my copy/paste. Will update now.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

Also forgot Smith in your final post-Rankine list. I think it's definitely plausible they rated Stocker as "6th-best non-academy inside midfielder". In a strange world where an elite tall, flanker or academy prospect are available though they would no doubt find a use for them, so all it really does is make the "we rate him 6th" call a little less bemusing.

 

[Davo-27]

this whole "we rated him 6th" comment was what they said, but they didnt move on him until Duursma was gone correct? so if you look past all the lies and BS that comes with AFL football media relations ect and you want the truth, they rated him best after Duursma, that would be my guess on the situation, the 6th comment was more to sell it to the Carlton Faithful i would guess and give the young man confidence that the club who recruited him wanted him.

i personally doubt he thought Stocker was the 6th best overall, like the other poster said, they probably were going after mids and so discounted talls and def/forws, if i wereto take a guess, they had 6 mids they were keen on, the first 5 got picked prior to pick 19 and so they scrambled to secure the last mid they wanted.

 

[SickQwon]

Also forgot Smith in your final post-Rankine list. I think it's definitely plausible they rated Stocker as "6th-best non-academy inside midfielder". In a strange world where an elite tall, flanker or academy prospect are available though they would no doubt find a use for them, so all it really does is make the "we rate him 6th" call a little less bemusing.

Carlton weren't chasing talls. Stocker was selected based on needs. 6th best inside midfielder to help Cripps is correct.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

Carlton weren't chasing talls.

Nonetheless, if Lukosius or a King somehow falls into your lap at a comparatively-later pick you take them regardless.

this whole "we rated him 6th" comment was what they said, but they didnt move on him until Duursma was gone correct?

Because Adelaide wanted Duursma I think, so wouldn't let the pick go while he was on the board.

 

[SickQwon]

Nonetheless, if Lukosius or a King somehow falls into your lap at a comparatively-later pick you take them regardless.

100%

 

[briztoon]

Nonetheless, if Lukosius or a King somehow falls into your lap at a comparatively-later pick you take them regardless.

Because Adelaide wanted Duursma I think, so wouldn't let the pick go while he was on the board.

Brisbane wanted Duursma as well. There were rumours we tried to trade for Ports pick to select Duursma ourselves, but they weren't interested as they wanted Duursma as well.

 

[Marcel Proust]

Looks pretty handy outcome four Adelaide at this moment in time.

pick 4 [Carlton original draft pick] -> pick 6 and a future first rounder, with many people predicting the implosion of gws.

Well done Crows, might be a start of a new dawn with all the changes at the club?