Autopsy Preseason Match Simulation. Collingwood v Brisbane v Gold Coast @ People first Stadium. Thurs Feb 20. 6pm AEDT, 5pm Local.

[sr36]

You trade out of the draft as much as we do and some of that ends up at other teams and what do you think will eventually happen.. a talent drain.

Treloar 2x pick 7 at Dogs.
Stephenson wasted top 6 pick retired via Norf.
Adams cost us Heater, we recruited Mitchell because Adams was having hamstring issues. Squeeze him out by way of role change and told to seek opportunities elsewhere. Lost talent.
(Mitchell then spends majority of time on sidelines.)
Trade pick 2 for a heap of picks 20 to 45. Reef and Macrea left.
Pick 32 for a rookie that was set to be delisted by Swans lasted 3 years delisted.
Proceed to trade out of last 2 years Schultz over cost, Houston great player but again as far as Youth replacement goes leaves us wanting.

There's others I've missed but many of the should be supporting and maturing into replacements of elder statemen aren't on our list because if the above.

Now we are all chips in and hopefully it pays off because we going to have the mother of all crashes when Tas fires up.

Can't mature player trade your way into replace 8 of your very good to former stars in 2 years...

Including Stepho in your argument is odd. An unsuccessful early pick doesn't support your argument. It weakens your argument.

Draft picks are liquid recruiting chips. The question is how do we get the best value for them.And the reality is it varies depending on the teams context, the year involved and the individual price paid in trade. It's a futures market and without a crystal ball we'll get some right and some wrong.

The question is the overall strategy and the odds of success. Did the Cats do the wrong thing during that decade when they favoured mature recruits over the draft? Results suggest no to me.

 

[Dtennent94]

I see almost no reason to draft anyone with later R1 or R2 picks if you can lure good players who are equivalent value.

You lose basically nothing by missing the first 5 years of a player’s career. You can guarantee immediate impact rather than gambling on a draftee coming good and not even know when that will happen if it does.

Take your FS/NGA draftees because they present extra value and probably have a stab with top 5 draft picks, but otherwise just trade them out as 6-30 picks are overvalued.

 

[Exambolor]

Including Stepho in your argument is odd. An unsuccessful early pick doesn't support your argument. It weakens your argument.

Draft picks are liquid recruiting chips. The question is how do we get the best value for them.And the reality is it varies depending on the teams context, the year involved and the individual price paid in trade. It's a futures market and without a crystal ball we'll get some right and some wrong.

The question is the overall strategy and the odds of success. Did the Cats do the wrong thing during that decade when they favoured mature recruits over the draft? Results suggest no to me.

And look at North, literally being HANDED top 5 picks and they’ve been stuck at the bottom for 6 years

 

[sr36]

I see almost no reason to draft anyone with later R1 or R2 picks if you can lure good players who are equivalent value.

You lose basically nothing by missing the first 5 years of a player’s career. You can guarantee immediate impact rather than gambling on a draftee coming good and not even know when that will happen if it does.

Take your FS/NGA draftees because they present extra value and probably have a stab with top 5 draft picks, but otherwise just trade them out as 6-30 picks are overvalued.

I think it's pretty obvious that a fair while ago a couple of teams crunched the numbers regarding late r1 and r2 picks and realised you were getting better value in trade for them - as the likelihood of success from taking those picks to the draft isn't much higher than a 3rd round pick.

The trade landscape however will continue to change as more clubs use more sophisticated analysis of the value of picks versus senior players. So who knows if that situation will remain.

 

[No SPIN]

You trade out of the draft as much as we do and some of that ends up at other teams and what do you think will eventually happen.. a talent drain.

Treloar 2x pick 7 at Dogs.
Stephenson wasted top 6 pick retired via Norf.
Adams cost us Heater, we recruited Mitchell because Adams was having hamstring issues. Squeeze him out by way of role change and told to seek opportunities elsewhere. Lost talent.
(Mitchell then spends majority of time on sidelines.)
Trade pick 2 for a heap of picks 20 to 45. Reef and Macrea left.
Pick 32 for a rookie that was set to be delisted by Swans lasted 3 years delisted.
Proceed to trade out of last 2 years Schultz over cost, Houston great player but again as far as Youth replacement goes leaves us wanting.

There's others I've missed but many of the should be supporting and maturing into replacements of elder statemen aren't on our list because if the above.

Now we are all chips in and hopefully it pays off because we going to have the mother of all crashes when Tas fires up.

Can't mature player trade your way into replace 8 of your very good to former stars in 2 years...

Not this again!!!!
The only true measure of List Management IS making Top 8, Top 4, GF's, and winning flags and by that metric we have done very well.

Would you unwind the laments above and not win the 2023 Flag?
Obviously not, so your argument is hollow.

 

[Bianconeri]

I’m not sure why Moore and Howe were taking kick ins in a backline that has Josh Daicos and Houston. Hopefully the latter two start taking them in the season proper.

 

[Rorzza]

First Game:

Reef was really good, he made a couple of blunders early, a hack kick in the first five minutes being the most notable, after that I didn't see him beaten one on one once. Reef did get caught holding the ball trying to break the defense but I like that intent. Reef's presence in the air defensively was the most pleasing aspect of his game
for me!

Yes, Perryman is a great get, he won't be flashy but you can expect 110 percent all the time.

The first game was a good hit out, there was some good work. Second game too wasn't a disaster either. IMO, when splitting the squads, CFC can't compete with the depth of the northern states, the results were as expected.

 

[sr36]

I’m not sure why Moore and Howe were taking kick ins in a backline that has Josh Daicos and Houston. Hopefully the latter two start taking them in the season proper.

Fly has mentioned us not putting much attention into kick ins as they're not a very good score source. So I'd guess our strategy is just to take territory from kick ins - mainly keeping our attacking half backs higher up the ground in better position to take part in scoring chains.

 

[Jen2310]

 

[Jen2310]

 

[Bianconeri]

Fly has mentioned us not putting much attention into kick ins as they're not a very good score source. So I'd guess our strategy is just to take territory from kick ins - mainly keeping our attacking half backs higher up the ground in better position to take part in scoring chains.

Issue with the just take the the territory approach every kick in is it become too predictable defend and allows the opposition to build up the repeat entries if their stoppage game is stronger than ours.

You need good kickers to occasionally hit the centre to keep the opposition honest when you defend.

Plus I don’t buy the keeping our attackers up the field part when most of the time one of Daicos or Houston was deep enough to take the kick in. If they were both up the field then fair enough.

 

[BillyElliott]

 

[Jen2310]

 

[VinnieB]

I’m still pinching myself we were able to pick up a 2023 and 2024 AA who still has at least 5/6 years of high quality footy in him.

How often do you land a deal like that?

 

[VinnieB]

And add to that provides us with the ability of having Daicos permanently in the midfield without losing anything from half back!

 

[901023]

First Game:

Reef was really good, he made a couple of blunders early, a hack kick in the first five minutes being the most notable, after that I didn't see him beaten one on one once. Reef did get caught holding the ball trying to break the defense but I like that intent. Reef's presence in the air defensively was the most pleasing aspect of his game
for me!

Yes, Perryman is a great get, he won't be flashy but you can expect 110 percent all the time.

The first game was a good hit out, there was some good work. Second game too wasn't a disaster either. IMO, when splitting the squads, CFC can't compete with the depth of the northern states, the results were as expected.

Reef was okay. Needs to add aggression to his game whatever position he plays. That is the obvious thing for me, seems to lack confidence.

Perryman, hard to judge as a midfielder from the limited showing against the Lions, so I will refrain. I loved him as a backman for GWS, so that is insurance if necessary.

I didn't stay to watch the second game, but in the first, the players from CFC that caught my eye were;
N Daicos (not enough adjectives to describe my joy at watching him play),
D Cameron (aerial presence is exceptional and something we haven't seen from a CFC ruckman for a long time and I love it),
Schultz (he looks fit and worked exceptionally hard 2 ways),
Jakob Ryan (Showed ability to intercept and create plays from the backline. Seemed more confident and I was impressed with his willingness to run and carry),
Will Hayes (small frame, but quick mind, feet and good skills). Give him time as he will need to get used to playing against bigger bodies and develop his own.
J Crisp Fit as always and keeps linking up.

Perhaps the only player I was slightly disappointed in, given that in many ways he should be entering his prime and is now established at the club, is Patrick Lipinski. I know it was a practice game and everybody waspreserving themselves to a degree, but gee wiz, he doesn't seem to want to win a contest? Like Reef McInness, I question Lipinski's desire to win. He should be stepping up to lead this club, and I just don't see the hunger there to win a contest. Seems like he is happy running around collecting handball receives, and letting others extract balls from every contest.

Sorry everyone for sounding harsh on Lipinski, but I would have thought most coaches would observe this also when watching him play. Great skill, stamina, size.... but that intangible called 'heart' or 'ticker' is missing for mine.

These are just my opinions, nothing more or less and I am not an expert.

 

[jmac70]

Reef was okay. Needs to add aggression to his game whatever position he plays. That is the obvious thing for me, seems to lack confidence.

Perryman, hard to judge as a midfielder from the limited showing against the Lions, so I will refrain. I loved him as a backman for GWS, so that is insurance if necessary.

I didn't stay to watch the second game, but in the first, the players from CFC that caught my eye were;
N Daicos (not enough adjectives to describe my joy at watching him play),
D Cameron (aerial presence is exceptional and something we haven't seen from a CFC ruckman for a long time and I love it),
Schultz (he looks fit and worked exceptionally hard 2 ways),
Jakob Ryan (Showed ability to intercept and create plays from the backline. Seemed more confident and I was impressed with his willingness to run and carry),
Will Hayes (small frame, but quick mind, feet and good skills). Give him time as he will need to get used to playing against bigger bodies and develop his own.
J Crisp Fit as always and keeps linking up.

Perhaps the only player I was slightly disappointed in, given that in many ways he should be entering his prime and is now established at the club, is Patrick Lipinski. I know it was a practice game and everybody waspreserving themselves to a degree, but gee wiz, he doesn't seem to want to win a contest? Like Reef McInness, I question Lipinski's desire to win. He should be stepping up to lead this club, and I just don't see the hunger there to win a contest. Seems like he is happy running around collecting handball receives, and letting others extract balls from every contest.

Sorry everyone for sounding harsh on Lipinski, but I would have thought most coaches would observe this also when watching him play. Great skill, stamina, size.... but that intangible called 'heart' or 'ticker' is missing for mine.

These are just my opinions, nothing more or less and I am not an expert.

Hey,
I can see you’ve put a lot of thought into this, and maybe there are some things that are insightful.

But…

What you need to remember is that the match simulation against Brisbane and Gold Coast did not reflect in any way what our players are capable of.

It was a complete waste of time, other than to have a bit of a run around.

Any conclusions based on this game are fragments of your imagination.

 

[Mongo Ming]

Not this again!!!!
The only true measure of List Management IS making Top 8, Top 4, GF's, and winning flags and by that metric we have done very well.

Would you unwind the laments above and not win the 2023 Flag?
Obviously not, so your argument is hollow.

Agree. We won a flag, so everything else in the next couple of years (if we have success) is all gravy. Risk/Reward. It's worked well for Geelong (though their continuous cap cheating also is a contributor), but we'll have a full wallet at the end of this year. Can top up with a Rowell or LDU. And add a future gun in McGuane. We'll be fine.

Known quantity>>>first round draft picks.

Muppets like K.Cornes will poo-poo this tactic, but he's still offended about Houston coming to us.

 

[901023]

Hey,
I can see you’ve put a lot of thought into this, and maybe there are some things that are insightful.

But…

What you need to remember is that the match simulation against Brisbane and Gold Coast did not reflect in any way what our players are capable of.

It was a complete waste of time, other than to have a bit of a run around.

Any conclusions based on this game are fragments of your imagination.

Thanks for you input Jmac70..... but..... what you need to remember is that your interpretation of what I wrote is a mental construct and therefore irrelevant.

 

[MoreMoore]

How many of these players are currently playing at an "irreplaceable" level right now?

We don't need to replace who Scott Pendlebury and Steele Sidebottom used to be in their prime - We'll need to replace who they are when they retire.

Many of these guys are not the world-beater AA level players that they used to be, and some of these 8 older players aren't even rock solid in the best 22 right as we speak. Are we really going to fall off a cliff because we lose Mason Cox, Will Hoskin-Elliott and Tom Mitchell? Even guys like Elliott and Mihocek are good players but I don't think they're beyond possible to replace.

So it's really Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Crisp and Howe. Howe has a number of heir apparents on the list already, and if the one for Steele isn't here already, it sounds like he's incoming in Tom McGuane. So it's the aging Pendlebury, who's obviously impossible to replace regardless of when, and Jack Crisp, who very, very obviously has basically zero history with injury, so while he's 31, there's no reason to assume he's going to retire young.

I just don't see why any of this amounts to a huge cliff we're going to fall off. Three can be lost with replacements not even specifically necessary, another two/three will likely be replaced with what we've already got from within (or on the way), and two/three will need to replaced via trading or drafting over a 2-3 year period - It's just not the impending disaster some people like to imagine it being.

Pendles has already been replaced by Nick
You are exactly right
The older guys in the team will hopefully be really struggling/fighting for their spot by the end of the year.
We are not falling off a cliff

 

[Jen2310]

I need questions answered some people are getting money bag symbols & some with similar points are getting baguettes?

Is there a moderate amount of coinage in the bag? Is the baguette spread with truffle paste?

$$ means cheap value for good return and worth considering
The baguettes apparantely just mean Mid role lol

 

[Apex36]

I’m still pinching myself we were able to pick up a 2023 and 2024 AA who still has at least 5/6 years of high quality footy in him.

How often do you land a deal like that?

For what we paid? Pretty much never.

 

[loki04]

How many of these players are currently playing at an "irreplaceable" level right now?

We don't need to replace who Scott Pendlebury and Steele Sidebottom used to be in their prime - We'll need to replace who they are when they retire.

Many of these guys are not the world-beater AA level players that they used to be, and some of these 8 older players aren't even rock solid in the best 22 right as we speak. Are we really going to fall off a cliff because we lose Mason Cox, Will Hoskin-Elliott and Tom Mitchell? Even guys like Elliott and Mihocek are good players but I don't think they're beyond possible to replace.

So it's really Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Crisp and Howe. Howe has a number of heir apparents on the list already, and if the one for Steele isn't here already, it sounds like he's incoming in Tom McGuane. So it's the aging Pendlebury, who's obviously impossible to replace regardless of when, and Jack Crisp, who very, very obviously has basically zero history with injury, so while he's 31, there's no reason to assume he's going to retire young.

I just don't see why any of this amounts to a huge cliff we're going to fall off. Three can be lost with replacements not even specifically necessary, another two/three will likely be replaced with what we've already got from within (or on the way), and two/three will need to replaced via trading or drafting over a 2-3 year period - It's just not the impending disaster some people like to imagine it being.

Agree with some of that not all thought and I still think those guys contribute more then bit players.

They often still stand up in critical moments and under pressure.

Like Steele's '23 GF goal. They all had moments in 2024.

They are on the wane and agree it's not a prime Pendles or Steele or Howe replacement but they imo still an A grade quality player out there.
Elliott is hard replace the impact he makes, Membrey may stall out the need for an extra year of so there.
Crisp in 3 years might not be performing or may want to be done. Could be mentally not wanting another preseason it happens.
Mitchell body is cooked already let alone 2 years more. Is Allan his successor they play very differently.
Imo we don't really have a hard nut warrior inside mid type coming through a Ball, Selwood, Mitchell, Adams type.




Agree on Cox, Illiroo or Steene should come in there.
Mihocek I think West will be his successor so that a tick.
McGuane will likely off set Steele. Tick for another replacement covered.

Including Stepho in your argument is odd. An unsuccessful early pick doesn't support your argument. It weakens your argument.

Draft picks are liquid recruiting chips. The question is how do we get the best value for them.And the reality is it varies depending on the teams context, the year involved and the individual price paid in trade. It's a futures market and without a crystal ball we'll get some right and some wrong.

The question is the overall strategy and the odds of success. Did the Cats do the wrong thing during that decade when they favoured mature recruits over the draft? Results suggest no to me.

How's it odd I'm explaining why there isn't a heap of talented youth coming in, having bad picks or ones who leave early add to that Drain.....no?

 

[loki04]

Not this again!!!!
The only true measure of List Management IS making Top 8, Top 4, GF's, and winning flags and by that metric we have done very well.

Would you unwind the laments above and not win the 2023 Flag?
Obviously not, so your argument is hollow.

If you are wondering why there is less talented youth on the list it is very relevant.

 

[loki04]

This argument seems to be all over the shop. You’re bemoaning lack of young talent but criticising trades that bought in young talent at the same time?

Like, Heater for Adams was a step towards youth. Treloar was only in his early 20’s when we traded him in, and while we overpaid, the picks we used on him also helped us acquire another young player in Aish.

And somehow you’re bringing in Stephenson in to this when he was a player who was drafted early but ended up being a bust anyway, which sort of strengthens the argument about bringing in proven talent over draftees?

And you’re right that you can’t replace 8 players in 2 years through trades, but we’ve managed to trade/FA in:
Hill
McStay
Schultz
Houston
Perryman
Membrey
Mitchell

So that’s 7 players in the last 3 years that are best 22. Yes, not all are young, and will have to be replaced again soon enough, but these guys are also coming in and having an instant impact too, which most draftees outside the top 5 really don’t do.

If we can bring in another couple of best 22 players each year then high picks at the draft become less important. It’s essentially the model that Geelong has followed for well over a decade now with very little time out of the finals. And yeah I know they’ve had the odd early pick too, but they often heck them up anyway, just like we did with Stephenson.

The response was for why don't have the youthful talent coming through.

So i listed why.