Draft Profile Liam Stocker

[La Dispute]

Well what are his major issues? Enlighten me?

At junior level? Average production and universally seen as a forward flanker only.

You can’t use how good a player he is now to disregard the player he was as a junior. Clearly he had areas to work on which Fremantle thought they could improve - same as Stocker.

 

[Ambrosia]

There is no Buddy or Martin, floating around next year

How can you know this? Look at the development curve of Degoey and Dangerfield for example .

 

[Marcel Proust]

To the Blues fans whos post i cannot now find; that said they were pretty sure the Tigers would have taken Stocker ahead of RCD if available, may I ask what you are basing this on? Cheers

How can you know this? Look at the development curve of Degoey and Dangerfield for example .

even on draft day Dusty and Buddy were overlooked 2 and 4 times

 

[Arr0w]

How can you know this? Look at the development curve of Degoey and Dangerfield for example .

Many of those guys were already presenting themselves prior to going into the last year of junior football. Of course there will always be the likes of an Oliver or a Bont, but they are rare and not too often to multiple players come hard from nowhere in the same draft

IMHO, next year is shaping up similar to 2016

 

[newblueo]

It's not hard to see why he wasn't rated he missed the under 18 championship and was a overeager. Heck st kilda got the best under 16 player for a pick in the 30s. .

Still feel he won't make it and is in the chris masten mould which I guess isn't that bad

 

[Bicks]

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.

Crows do/did NOT want another average paced inside mid that lacks versatility with questionable endurance even if he is a decent kick, hence the selection of the far more versatile inside/outside mid Chayce Jones who is a quite a bit quicker, already has elite endurance and can play multiple positions. All of Adelaide's picks Chayce Jones, Ned McHenry, Will Hamill and Lachlan Sholl right through to the rookie drafting of Jordan Butts have one thing in common....All are running machines......and all are very versatile. Looks pretty obvious to me Pyke's game plan going forward is going to involve a lot of running and repeat efforts, areas where Stocker still has big ????'s

 

[Marcel Proust]

You have literally no idea whether any of them thought about picking Stocker.

We know Port didn't have Stocker in their top 18. Due to, at this pick he was available and then took Xavier Duursma...

 

[Jeremias]

We know Port didn't have Stocker in their top 18. Due to, at this pick he was available and then took Xavier Duursma...

I don't know how this complete failure in logic continues to be put forward.

You have no idea where Port Adelaide rated Stocker, all that selection tells you is they rated Duursma higher than him.

For all you know, they may have rated Duursma at 9 and Stocker at 13.

 

[La Dispute]

It's not hard to see why he wasn't rated he missed the under 18 championship and was a overeager. Heck st kilda got the best under 16 player for a pick in the 30s. .

Still feel he won't make it and is in the chris masten mould which I guess isn't that bad

His foot skills are far better than Chris Masten’s, and he’s far more inside.

Masten is more an outside accumulator who gets confused for an inside mid because he’s got a big body, but 75% of his possessions are uncontested.

Stocker has far more upside, it’s just a matter of development.

 

[La Dispute]

Crows do/did NOT want another average paced inside mid that lacks versatility with questionable endurance even if he is a decent kick, hence the selection of the far more versatile inside/outside mid Chayce Jones who is a quite a bit quicker, already has elite endurance and can play multiple positions. All of Adelaide's picks Chayce Jones, Ned McHenry, Will Hamill and Lachlan Sholl right through to the rookie drafting of Jordan Butts have one thing in common....All are running machines......and all are very versatile. Looks pretty obvious to me Pyke's game plan going forward is going to involve a lot of running and repeat efforts, areas where Stocker still has big ????'s

Yep, that’s a good point. The Crows have a great set of inside mids and just need some extra pace on the outside, and versatile mids who can pinch hit forward or even rotate through half-back. I could see Jones replacing Seedsman in that position in the future.

Port also prioritised outside run, and North was always going to take Thomas. A lot of the first round was down to personal preference and needs-based picks.

Carlton needed more meat and potatoes footballers who will be surefire long-term contributors in our midfield (who still have a decent amount of upside). Hence Walsh and Stocker.

I would have been happy with Rankine and RCD who likely have more natural talent than our first selections, but understandably we took the conservative route. Almost a far cry from SOS’ days at GWS reaching for players he perceived to have bigger ceilings. Although to be fair Ahern and Marchbank I’d argue are both going to be very good players in their own right, albeit now at different clubs.

 

[LemmingMaster]

We know Port didn't have Stocker in their top 18. Due to, at this pick he was available and then took Xavier Duursma...

I am finding it interesting that no matter how many times and different ways people explain your failed logic, you still proceed.

Port could have had Duursma 8th on their draft board and Stocker 9th for all we know.
They may not have rated McHenry, Clark, Hately, Jones..... We will never know the internal rankings of most clubs.

 

[Robertio]

We know Port didn't have Stocker in their top 18. Due to, at this pick he was available and then took Xavier Duursma...

You still here? I dont care if no other club rated Stocker in the top 20. We did and we got him, he will become a good player and we will never hear from you again.

 

[Arr0w]

Crows do/did NOT want another average paced inside mid that lacks versatility with questionable endurance even if he is a decent kick, hence the selection of the far more versatile inside/outside mid Chayce Jones who is a quite a bit quicker, already has elite endurance and can play multiple positions. All of Adelaide's picks Chayce Jones, Ned McHenry, Will Hamill and Lachlan Sholl right through to the rookie drafting of Jordan Butts have one thing in common....All are running machines......and all are very versatile. Looks pretty obvious to me Pyke's game plan going forward is going to involve a lot of running and repeat efforts, areas where Stocker still has big ????'s

I agree, think your club is stacked for inside mids, Crouch x 2, Sloane, Greenwood, even Knight (rate the kid) and Wilson if he comes on. Nice spread of age too

What I was surprised about, perhaps rather than trading that pick with us, Williams may have been a good selection for you?

 

[newblueo]

His foot skills are far better than Chris Masten’s, and he’s far more inside.

Masten is more an outside accumulator who gets confused for an inside mid because he’s got a big body, but 75% of his possessions are uncontested.

Stocker has far more upside, it’s just a matter of development.

Disagree chris has now became that outside runner but before that he was a inside bull. A poor one yes!. Having seen a stack of liam I rate him a deadset chris masten 2.0 that can kick better.

Again that's not a bad thing. But the upside is small imo.

 

[La Dispute]

Disagree chris has now became that outside runner but before that he was a inside bull. A poor one yes!. Having seen a stack of liam I rate him a deadset chris masten 2.0 that can kick better.

Again that's not a bad thing. But the upside is small imo.

You’re completely making this up.

There hasn’t been a year where Masten’s constested possessions have exceeded his uncontested possessions and in most seasons his U/P have doubled or even tripled his C/D.

If I had to pick one player that is stylistically similar to Stocker it would be Jacob Hopper.

I’m all for player comparisons, but Masten is ludicrously far off.

Edit: Stocker averaged 22 possessions per game, 13 contested.

 

[newblueo]

You’re completely making this up.

There hasn’t been a year where Masten’s constested possessions have exceeded his uncontested possessions and in most seasons his U/P have doubled or even tripled his C/D.

I’m all for player comparisons, but this one is ludicrously far off.

If I had to pick one player that is stylistically similar to Stocker it would be Jacob Hopper.

Not making it up at all. Think you missed the point and link I'm making.masten was great at under 18 level a real bull but not at afl level just like Liam imo..

For what it's worth suns had him ranked 17 on their list of players.

 

[La Dispute]

Not making it up at all. Think you missed the point and link I'm making.masten was great at under 18 level a real bull but not at afl level just like Liam imo..

For what it's worth suns had him ranked 17 on their list of players.

Yeh/nah

Played predominantly as an outside midfielder, and his strengths were his link-up work and his fitness-base (Stocker's endurance is an area of improvement). Wins clearances (although not many despite the number of contests he attends) through pouncing on a loose ball rather than beelining the contest - despite the average midfielder being shorter back in 2006-2007. His kicking is also noticeably flaky, whereas it's a strength for Stocker.

So no, your comparison holds zero weight, and is basically just a subtle attempt to undermine Stocker by comparing him to an average AFL player, and subsequently projecting his AFL form on that flimsy connection.

 

[Rich01]

Stocker projects as a solid 2nd tier inside mid. Won’t get a heap of the ball but is strong inside winning the contested ball. Doesn’t have a burst of speed and queries on defensive running but the latter can be rectified.

With commitment, could be a solid second string midfielder that plays 150-200 games for the Blues. A decent pick at 19.

 

[Monkey King]

I don't know how this complete failure in logic continues to be put forward.

You have no idea where Port Adelaide rated Stocker, all that selection tells you is they rated Duursma higher than him ... For all you know, they may have rated Duursma at 9 and Stocker at 13.

It has surprised me how many posters genuinely struggle to understand what this data can and cannot tell them, even after it is explained to them.

 

[Jeremias]

It has surprised me how many posters genuinely struggle to understand what this data can and cannot tell them, even after it is explained to them.

Sometimes I wonder how 'genuine' the struggle really is.

It is a very simple concept.

 

[Monkey King]

Sometimes I wonder how 'genuine' the struggle really is.

It is a very simple concept.

I think it’s pretty genuine. I really do think there’s a few who just can’t think critically about it.

 

[Marcel Proust]

I don't know how this complete failure in logic continues to be put forward.

You have no idea where Port Adelaide rated Stocker, all that selection tells you is they rated Duursma higher than him.

For all you know, they may have rated Duursma at 9 and Stocker at 13.

Technically you are correct, fair play.

It has surprised me how many posters genuinely struggle to understand what this data can and cannot tell them, even after it is explained to them.

What data?

 

[Monkey King]

What data?

The order in which draftees are chosen is data.

 

[Marcel Proust]

The order in which draftees are chosen is data.

True. Jeremias however speculating Port, Pies, Geelong, Adelaide, Freo secretly had Stocker very high in their draft board and choose to not take him is not data its clutching at straws. Indeed there is a possibility but its a long shot at best.

 

[Jeremias]

True. Jeremias however speculating Port, Pies, Geelong, Adelaide, Freo secretly had Stocker very high in their draft board and choose to not take him is not data its clutching at straws. Indeed there is a possibility but its a long shot at best.

Clutching at straws?

Asking for a little logic to be applied when posting is not “clutching at straws”.

Not once have I suggested any of those clubs had Stocker rated highly.

It is amazing you still can’t process the logic involved here. It’s a very simple concept.