List Mgmt. Mature Age prospects 2018

[Kwality]

Grave overlooktion (sic) 78, Matt Priddis, debuted for Subi 2003, overlooked in 3 national drafts, listed in the 2006 rookie draft, AFL debut 2006.

 

[Gethelred]

In terms of comparative output at a given level of competition, Wingard's efforts are literally double that of McAdam's, so McAdam would need to find another gear in a professional program to validate that move. It's more likely that Adelaide will experiment with him given Betts' age and McGovern leaving.

Grigg on the other hand, is a poor man's Chapman.

I don't know you, but I'd take that!

Chapman was better than handy for the cats, and we could do with a bloke who just footballs.

 

[Jimmae]

I don't know you, but I'd take that!

Chapman was better than handy for the cats, and we could do with a bloke who just footballs.

Would you believe I actually meant Nathan Jones, though it almost still applies.

He's not as quick as either one.

 

[Gethelred]

Would you believe I actually meant Nathan Jones, though it almost still applies.

He's not as quick as either one.

From what I've seen - which, granted, isn't much: youtube videos - his kicking is substantially better than Nathan Jones, but his inside work could be considered to be similar.

Looks fast enough over 5 metres to satisfy me. We need mids to get clear, to handpass to the Lochie's, the Williamsons, the Murphies, the Fishes of the world, and the only way that happens ATM is if Cripps gets one off, SPS is having a bloody good day, or Kennedy gets a run at it.

Paul Chapman was always a favorite of mine. Wasn't fast, wasn't over tall or strong, just knew where it would be sooner than everyone else and had as sure a set of hands as you'd find, whether on the mark or kicking for goal. If Grigg can get himself to AFL levels of fitness/athleticism, I'd be stoked to get him over, but it'd need to be established that he's willing to put in the work required to make a go of it first.

As for others asserting that 'he could be another Kerridge', he's smoother at obtaining the ball, and is a thumping good kick off his left foot. Completely different players, with completely different prospects.

 

[Jimmae]

From what I've seen - which, granted, isn't much: youtube videos - his kicking is substantially better than Nathan Jones, but his inside work could be considered to be similar.

Looks fast enough over 5 metres to satisfy me. We need mids to get clear, to handpass to the Lochie's, the Williamsons, the Murphies, the Fishes of the world, and the only way that happens ATM is if Cripps gets one off, SPS is having a bloody good day, or Kennedy gets a run at it.

Paul Chapman was always a favorite of mine. Wasn't fast, wasn't over tall or strong, just knew where it would be sooner than everyone else and had as sure a set of hands as you'd find, whether on the mark or kicking for goal. If Grigg can get himself to AFL levels of fitness/athleticism, I'd be stoked to get him over, but it'd need to be established that he's willing to put in the work required to make a go of it first.

As for others asserting that 'he could be another Kerridge', he's smoother at obtaining the ball, and is a thumping good kick off his left foot. Completely different players, with completely different prospects.

Whether we modify our tactics away from forward pressure, zoning and rapid counter attack, to more of a midfield swarm, the key point is that we need more players who can run both ways at the elite level.

Grigg is no such player, nor is Jones. Both have gotten shown up in this aspect in any game of importance.

Edit: autocorrect

 

[Gethelred]

Whether we modify or tactics away from forward pressure, zoning and rapid counter attack, to more of midfield swarm, the key point is that we need more players who can run both ways at the elite level.

Grigg is no such player, nor is Jones. Both have gotten down up in this aspect in any game of importance.

Started to write a response detailing why I thought Grigg was a good pickup, then realised I was trying to convince myself ahead of anything you're saying.

Ultimately, I suppose I'm just making a good thing of the allotment apportioned to us by the AFL, because while I value seconds in this draft I really don't see these mature age picks as being very valuable. Grigg's not worth pick 30, nor is McAdams, and if we think we're going to be able to trade them bundled with a second for something we want - other than McGovern, for whom we hold his nomination and the fact that he doesn't want to return to the city of Adelaide let alone the club - we're going to be sorely disappointed.

If we were to risk getting him like we did Garlett last year (spending a pick you'd usually skip on him, taking him at pick 78 in the draft) that'd be one thing. Trying to sell the idea that he's worth more than that on the open market's another thing entirely.

 

[Jimmae]

Started to write a response detailing why I thought Grigg was a good pickup, then realised I was trying to convince myself ahead of anything you're saying.

Ultimately, I suppose I'm just making a good thing of the allotment apportioned to us by the AFL, because while I value seconds in this draft I really don't see these mature age picks as being very valuable. Grigg's not worth pick 30, nor is McAdams, and if we think we're going to be able to trade them bundled with a second for something we want - other than McGovern, for whom we hold his nomination and the fact that he doesn't want to return to the city of Adelaide let alone the club - we're going to be sorely disappointed.

If we were to risk getting him like we did Garlett last year (spending a pick you'd usually skip on him, taking him at pick 78 in the draft) that'd be one thing. Trying to sell the idea that he's worth more than that on the open market's another thing entirely.

McAdam is worth more than Grigg, and although we've been cut off from some kids, we haven't been cut off from all available 19 year olds running around in the state leagues or the U18s.

 

[Gethelred]

McAdam is worth more than Grigg, and although we've been cut off from some kids, we haven't been cut off from all available 19 year olds running around in the state leagues or the U18s.

I have confidence that, between SOS, Agresta, and Brodie that we have sufficient scouting to locate likely sorts. Just, it grates that the AFL response to the worst year we've had in 100 is about the same as providing us with a late second and an early third.

And getting in a 19 year old I'd think defeats the purpose of approaching mature agers anyway.

 

[Jimmae]

And getting in a 19 year old I'd think defeats the purpose of approaching mature agers anyway.

I don't care, I just want to maximise talent and output for our list.

There's a very good chance these concessions are worth two mid-second rounders to us.

 

[Kwality]

I don't care, I just want to maximise talent and output for our list.

There's a very good chance these concessions are worth two mid-second rounders to us.

This is a chance to pick up a ready made footballer for season 2019, pick up the kids for 2021 & beyond from the draft is my take, each to his own.

https://thewest.com.au/sport/subiaco-football-club/scouting-expert-says-subiaco-gun-josh-deluca-pickof-wafl-bunch-ng-b88975568z

.. the chief executive of Pro Scout International, identified Deluca as the pick of the mature State league talent around the country.

The 22-year-old starred for unbeaten Subiaco this year after three seasons at Fremantle, where he played four matches for the Dockers and won two flags with Peel.

 

[HARKER]

I don't care, I just want to maximise talent and output for our list.

There's a very good chance these concessions are worth two mid-second rounders to us.

Apparently GC are keen on Corbett & Collins, which makes sense from a needs perspective.
Can we sell one of those players off to GC for one of their later second rounders?
Maybe if things work out we can bundle McAdam and a second rounder for McGovern and keep the two second rounders we have.

I still don't know how this mature age thing works.
Is there bidding involved or simply who gets who?

Or maybe we actually take on the players we select and make good of them. There's a novel idea.

 

[ferrisb]

Apparently GC are keen on Corbett & Collins, which makes sense from a needs perspective.
Can we sell one of those players off to GC for one of their later second rounders?

Logistically it's possible, but I just can't see GC being made to pay for players they are supposed to be able to access for free as part of an assistance package.

 

[HARKER]

Logistically it's possible, but I just can't see GC being made to pay for players they are supposed to be able to access for free as part of an assistance package.

Like I said, I don't know how things work here, but if for instance Collins and Corbett were courted and happy to go to Carlton, how are GC going to get their hands on them, other than by way of trade? (Would be pretty lousy thing to work this way though)

So, is it to be a draft of sorts situation in these guys or simply a treatment similar to Free Agents?
Can GC just offer more and get the players they want? It must be written up somewhere how this is to work.

 

[Jimmae]

Apparently GC are keen on Corbett & Collins, which makes sense from a needs perspective.
Can we sell one of those players off to GC for one of their later second rounders?
Maybe if things work out we can bundle McAdam and a second rounder for McGovern and keep the two second rounders we have.

I still don't know how this mature age thing works.
Is there bidding involved or simply who gets who?

Or maybe we actually take on the players we select and make good of them. There's a novel idea.

The only reason we'd be selling off a pre-selection to the GC is if they've already expended theirs, which means the only way we'd get value is if someone had been holding out for a better offer from another club.

No bidding, just a sign and trade period.

 

[Dramoth]

until the pre-requisites change..........again

Next year after GC17 win the wooden spoon, the AFL will announce they are giving the Sucks a beginning of round 1 PP!

 

[Dramoth]

Plus if we are looking at K.Collins as a DFA and/or H.Goddard as a rookie I don't see him as a target for us

Got it the wrong way round, we’re apparently looking at Goddard as a DFA and Collins, K as a rookie selection.

 

[Gavstar]

So if GC want access to 5 mature players (prior to draft), we could trade 2 to them for say pick 18?

 

[CJMB]

So if GC want access to 5 mature players (prior to draft), we could trade 2 to them for say pick 18?

Sounds like they're already going to get their hands on Miles, Townsend and someone else (who's name slips me) from the Tigers. Reckon they'll be trying to land a few other fringe players from other clubs who might be pushed out due to TPP pressure. How many state leaguers can you really carry on a list of ~45?

Even so, reckon 18 is way too much. Maybe you could get 26 or 29 from them.

 

[Keyza]

McAdam is worth more than Grigg, and although we've been cut off from some kids, we haven't been cut off from all available 19 year olds running around in the state leagues or the U18s.

The eldest Hickmott boy would fall under this category.

 

[Mezzoculo]

Sounds like they're already going to get their hands on Miles, Townsend and someone else (who's name slips me) from the Tigers.

Corey Ellis

 

[DangerousD]

This whole situation is very interesting and I wonder if we will choose players we think we can trade or will opposition clubs pick them for us.

Eg: Fremantle want player A, and ask Carlton to take him in exchange for X

Hawthorn want player B, and ask us to take him in exchange for Y

And so on.

We then take the best option. I don’t see us picking anyone that we don’t know we can on trade or we don’t think will be best 22.

 

[Jimmae]

The eldest Hickmott boy would fall under this category.

Yes, but he's probably not even going to get drafted.

This whole situation is very interesting and I wonder if we will choose players we think we can trade or will opposition clubs pick them for us.

Eg: Fremantle want player A, and ask Carlton to take him in exchange for X

Hawthorn want player B, and ask us to take him in exchange for Y

And so on.

We then take the best option. I don’t see us picking anyone that we don’t know we can on trade or we don’t think will be best 22.

Of course we'd get to pick... if no one's offering up a worthwhile trade, we'll just grab a player.

 

[Robbo's my hero]

http://m.afl.com.au/news/2018-10-03/suns-set-to-nab-vfl-star-under-new-rule

Josh Corbett looks like signing with the Suns.

 

[HARKER]

http://m.afl.com.au/news/2018-10-03/suns-set-to-nab-vfl-star-under-new-rule

Josh Corbett looks like signing with the Suns.

Yeah, I'm still confused how the whole process works and I'm clearly not alone given this was in the body of the story:

"Although the AFL rules surrounding Carlton's and Gold Coast's access to top state league players remain vague, it is understood the bottom two teams from this season will be able to recruit, or on-trade, the state league players without giving up a draft pick."

Anyone have a real handle on the whole process?
What if we wanted Corbett also? Get into a bidding war? That can't be it, can it?

 

[Robbo's my hero]

I think it’s about convincing a player that you want to come and play with you or finding out a player’s preference (club) and making sure he ends up where he wants to play. Doesn’t get that guarantee if he nominates for the draft. We trade to club of choice for a draft pick.

So it’s up to the clubs to figure out the best plan. Recruit or trade.

Imagine if this happened last year and we traded Kelly to Geeling for pick.

It’s not a new idea. I think GWS and/or Suns did this in the beginning. Prelisted players and received draft picks.