List Mgmt. Organic vs Implanted Growth

[Only Forwards]

This year Martin and Kelly.

Next year Scott and Thomas add in Ahern as basically a new draftee.

These are all highly rated talents.

If we take the draft path this year, we should f*** Brad off. Going that route and potentially committing to multiple years of low finishes creates a window of exit for him.

 

[The Maestro]

The Club will be banking on both and quite frankly that's what needs to happen for us to win the premiership.

I think the club will see Kelly as a kickstarter to our rebuild and from there draft in quality young talent to target our needs. The club has always stated the importance of going to the draft and hanging onto our top draft picks but I think this season will be an exception especially with Taryn Thomas and a couple of potential father sons along the way.

Sent from my CPH1607 using Tapatalk

 

[Reagan Smash]

If we just pay pick 2 or 1 for Kelly then I'm all for it.

If it starts getting ridiculous where GWS ask for this and next years first or even this years first and second, then lets go to the draft.

 

[Dirty_11]

If Kelly and Martin want to come, it is an absolute no brainer. Take them, grab Thomas and Scott next year with Ahern back and we have enough organic growth. With the acquisition of Kelly and Martin, Blakey may even rethink his destination.

 

[Passmore]

Absolutely no contest. You'd take current top 10 players over draft picks anyday. Particularly when both players a young and exactly what we would need from the draft anyway.

I'm not sure about this "wait until we are ready to contend" like it's some sort of rite of passage. I say fast track the contention by adding elite talent in an area we lack.

There's also the knock on effect that Higgins becomes third banana and suddenly got more freedom.

Having said that if we don't get Kelly then I hope we don't just throw pick 2 at anyone. It's a nice plan B.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

 

[Groin guru]

No brainer. Kelly is going to be (if he isn't already) in the top 5 for best players in the comp. Martin is already. That's two sure things over some question marks in a draft.

The organic growth will happen. We haven't even begun with hibberd, EVW, mountford, preuss, nielson, clarke, durdin, and simpkin.

We are yet to see larkey, mckay, zurhaar, williams, and ahern.

Question marks over dumont and wagner at the moment.

Watson and williams are unknowns. Junker was promising in the pre-season.

Atley is improving. Garner and wood have had their injuries but both are promising talents.

Turner, marley, hrovat, brown, and LMac will only get better.

Then we still have jacobs and wright to come back.

The future is bright.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

"How close are we?" is the big question for every club. And it's very hard to tell in an even year like this, with so many results that could have gone either way.

At Kelly's age, I don't think it's even a choice - take the known young quantity and he can keep being part of organic development.

But even with Martin, I'd say go for it if we can. It's never a TAC Cup team, we will always have players at different ages and stages and be trying to get the best out of them all individually and as a team for one or more magic seasons.

 

[Moti]

If there is a competitive inside player in the Top 5 with glacial pace, we will select them.

Seriously, Kelly would be the better bet as he has the age on his side but he would be nuts to come now. Too many unknowns.

I think the answer is whichever gets the better result. Happy to go for youth if they come on or go for older players if they make a difference.

Williams, Ahern plus the Top pick / Kelly next year should help our transition. But the big issue, is whether we have a coaching staff that can change the midfield mix with ruthlessness. Be prepared to have none of the current group in at centre bounces and potentially playing VFL if there are better options. I don't have that faith.

 

[Royal Flush]

I feel we have the spine, and spine depth, hence how we have recruited over the years.
A lot of club's struggle with filling the spine, stalls are hard to develop.
We have the HB/HF, we lack in the midfield.
We inject JK and or DM
and the exponential change is instant.

All of a sudden Cunnington because an A Grader, Dumont, montford and Clarke become better players having class around them.
Higgins becomes a dangerous weapon .
We win clearances and mason wood and BBB start getting passes from the corridor into space and onto their chests.
Zeibel can swing/rest all parts of the ground.
Harley
Atleys on a wing gives us vertical run....
The possibilities are endless.
The last time we had a pick 3 or better we picked up Hansen.



Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[FloozyRoozy]

I believe if we land Kelly and Martin it will be a positive for the youngsters on our list and really set the benchmark and standard for our side to compete with the elite in the competition. I think it will allow our players to develop a lot stronger and play with more confidence.

 

[FootySmartSimpson]

If we managed to just land Kelly it would be huge as everyone else is saying. We just need to be smarter with how we play and manage the players we have that we either consider un-tradable or that can fit into a role/who we would realistically not receive value for at the trade-table.

Who in everyone's opinion would we be willing to cut in order to freshen our list with a harsh pruning?

Who would be untouchable?

Cunnington?
Simpkin?
Brown?
Tarrant?
Durdin?
Williams?
Wright?
Ahern?
Preuss?
Higgins?

Who would we deem more valuable not trading?

Gibson?
Hansen?

 

[LETSGOKANGAS]

Bring in quality will improve our better players.

Hoping this affects Ziebell because he has been very poor since taking the captaincy.

 

[Snake_Baker]

the exponential change is instant.

THIS cannot be underestimated. Place 2 x class mids in our side and the rest of the side will blossom across the board.

Great post RF.

 

[spurs]

No doubt, but call me a skeptic, I can't see us landing both. No doubt having a crack, but I will be the first one to congratulate the club if they pull it off.

Just landing Kelly for example, we may hover around 6th-12th, we will be going through an adjustment period regardless to replacing some ageing players.

In 4 seasons time when Kelly is 27, will we find ourselves in the same situation as 2-3 years ago with Wells/Harvey, 10 years ago with Shagga/Harvey/Simpson with what could be a situation with Kelly/Cunnington, we have risen "too quickly" and the 2-3 extra elite pieces were never drafted because of that rise?

It's definitely a balancing act.

Wells/Harvey
Shagga/Harvey/Simpson
We didn't have free agency then, so if we can take Kelly and/or Martin we will be a destination club for another gun or three to join us. I believe that's why we missed out on Tuohy/Jarryd Lyons. Tuohy saw Danger going and he wanted to be a part of that, and Lyons saw Ablett. If we can add Kelly and or Martin with Lyons/Tuohy/Mitchell (Hawks or WCE one) over a two year period with the development of some of our young players......and BANG.

 

[TwentyNine]

We don't know that, in a number of close losses, the opposition put the cue in the rack, there is no evidence to suggest sides couldn't have gone harder.

Obviously taking a s**t player out and replacing them with a good player is a net gain and should result in more wins. The question is how many and at what cost does it come to get these guys in, Collingwood has been poaching good quality players for some time and going nowhere in a hurry, it doesn't necessarily lead to success.

At the end of the day, you need a good 35 players on your list and a strong 25, opposition can shut down your 1-2 good players, you need a good team performance. We have far too many that struggle to win the one-on-one contests. We need better development to lift the standard of the entire squad at the same time as injecting some class into the side one way or another.

I don't recall any cue-in-rack placement in any of our close losses. In four out of five the opposition came from behind.

Collingwood has poached s**t player after s**t player with the occasional half-decent player thrown into the mix. It hasn't worked for them because Chris Mayne is not Josh Kelly.

I'm not saying that Kelly/Martin is the only thing we need to do to improve our team but good players win games and not having good players loses games and they are good players. I don't meant to talk like a five year old but it very much is that simple.

 

[King Corey]

Things can turn quick.

A 1st year Selwood and previously underperforming Ottens tipped an underachieving cats list into overdrive for a flag.

Fatty Dew took a fairly thin hawks list with a few very good young player into 'take your opportunity' mode in '08.

A discarded Luke Ball and a good but not great ruck in Jolly tipped an even but unexceptional Collingwood into flag mode.

It can switch very fast under the right circumstances.

 

[Zondor]

Things can turn quick.

A 1st year Selwood and previously underperforming Ottens tipped an underachieving cats list into overdrive for a flag.

Fatty Dew took a fairly thin hawks list with a few very good young player into 'take your opportunity' mode in '08.

A discarded Luke Ball and a good but not great ruck in Jolly tipped an even but unexceptional Collingwood into flag mode.

It can switch very fast under the right circumstances.

Yes. But we need to Tank. :stern look

 

[D23D]

If Kelly costs us our first pick so be it as using that pick that's the type of player we'd be hoping we get anyway.

Fingers crossed whatever we do we nail it.

Exactly right. A Kelly in the hand is worth two 'potentials' in the draft.

 

[R00StaR]

Is Kelly a better bet than a unknown quantity in a top 3 pick? Most likely
But the central question what difference will he really make. Would it only raise us back up to mid table finishes and never really challenging?
On the other hand i worry the likes of Taz, Cunners, JZ, Higgins and co start getting to the pointy end of the careers if we spend the years rebuilding via the draft.
Theres always the chance we get him and still finish bottom 3-4.

 

[Moti]

I wouldn't give more than 2 for Kelly though. If we traded 2 and 20, I would be scratching the head.

Actually, I would think normal operations.

 

[Snake_Baker]

I wouldn't give more than 2 for Kelly though. If we traded 2 and 20, I would be scratching the head.

Actually, I would think normal operations.

Agree. Pick 2 or suss out Brisbanes position and threaten the PSD.

Of course, if we finish last GWS won't have an option.

 

[Orange Peanut]

Our spine is good. 2 jets in the midfield and we are contenders. One and we are at least competing, with room to add the following year.

Get neither and it's a whole new story, but I love the plan.

 

[Boro]

The league is that close that two of the very best in the league would of course take us from also ran into contenders. Where would Geelong be without Selwood and Danger?

Would they win us the comp alone? No. But they bring us into contention and then the rest of the squad needs to step up. Not for a minute saying we'll get both, but if the opportunity is there you take it over the unknown in the draft.

Having said that, pick 1/2 alone should be enough for Kelly.

By the way...haven't GWS already lost their pick in the 1st round? So if we were to somehow lose our way to pick 1 we'd also have pick 18? So two first rounders. If neither Kelly or Martin come we'd still be in a decent position to improve...just more slowly. Pick 2/19 isn't too shabby either.

 

[Tas]

I don't recall any cue-in-rack placement in any of our close losses. In four out of five the opposition came from behind.

Collingwood has poached s**t player after s**t player with the occasional half-decent player thrown into the mix. It hasn't worked for them because Chris Mayne is not Josh Kelly.

I'm not saying that Kelly/Martin is the only thing we need to do to improve our team but good players win games and not having good players loses games and they are good players. I don't meant to talk like a five year old but it very much is that simple.

Yeah, fair call about the manner of the games, although I think only two of them we were comfortably in front, I had expected us to hold on against Geelong and the away Fremantle game. I still do think it impacts psychologically, ie I think Port next week would be fairly confident of running our midfield all over the park, how that impacts how they play I am not sure but had we Kelly and Martin in our midfield then the expectation would be that they would have a much tougher fight and raise that bar of expectation. I don't think some clubs have gone at hard at us because they know they have us covered is my point and I think we will find next year if our midfield is much better and we raise up a level, a lot of clubs will also meet that intensity.

I wasn't referring to Mayne. Treloar, Wells and to a lesser extent Hoskin-Elliot in particular to bolster a midfield that had Pendlebury and Sidebottom in it is on paper a great starting midfield. On paper. Where is Collingwood at? Just one win more than us and in the bottom 4. Getting good players into the club is a must, all I am saying is we can't rely on that alone. We must also address the other problems.

Collingwood got in some good quality players, but haven't addressed other problems and thus aren't spectacularly better than before, new players just help to address the natural attrition of good players that retire. We need to get a Boomer and a Wells just to go back to being mid-table, the plan needs to be far more ambitious than that. Kelly isn't going to come for free, there will be a significant opportunity cost we will pay, especially if we are giving #2 plus interest. While I like Martin, he isn't going to solve some of our problems and will likely exacerbate other problems that currently exist if we do not move on any of our slow moving midfield dinosaurs.

 

[TwentyNine]

Yeah, fair call about the manner of the games, although I think only two of them we were comfortably in front, I had expected us to hold on against Geelong and the away Fremantle game. I still do think it impacts psychologically, ie I think Port next week would be fairly confident of running our midfield all over the park, how that impacts how they play I am not sure but had we Kelly and Martin in our midfield then the expectation would be that they would have a much tougher fight and raise that bar of expectation. I don't think some clubs have gone at hard at us because they know they have us covered is my point and I think we will find next year if our midfield is much better and we raise up a level, a lot of clubs will also meet that intensity.

I wasn't referring to Mayne. Treloar, Wells and to a lesser extent Hoskin-Elliot in particular to bolster a midfield that had Pendlebury and Sidebottom in it is on paper a great starting midfield. On paper. Where is Collingwood at? Just one win more than us and in the bottom 4. Getting good players into the club is a must, all I am saying is we can't rely on that alone. We must also address the other problems.

Collingwood got in some good quality players, but haven't addressed other problems and thus aren't spectacularly better than before, new players just help to address the natural attrition of good players that retire. We need to get a Boomer and a Wells just to go back to being mid-table, the plan needs to be far more ambitious than that. Kelly isn't going to come for free, there will be a significant opportunity cost we will pay, especially if we are giving #2 plus interest. While I like Martin, he isn't going to solve some of our problems and will likely exacerbate other problems that currently exist if we do not move on any of our slow moving midfield dinosaurs.

Look, agree to disagree. I don't think anyone at North is thinking "just get Josh Kelly and we don't have to worry about anything else".