Analysis The Case for a Priority Pick

[spotthedog1]

Based on what the club has said, I think the intent is to play him mainly on a wing to try and use his pace and run and carry to maximum effect.

I know. And that's a factor. But that's also an unknown. Generally, you pay a premium for a known ability. We paid a premium for a hopeful, unknown ability.

Just out of interest Spot, have you played any footy yourself, or coached?

Sure, everyone's entitled to an opinion but yours above are incredibly different to mine, and like you I have watched a lot of Adelaide games in recent years.

How would you have rated Cameron at the end of 2016?

Nope. Just an armchair fan, and I get that the club is far better at this than me. I've just looked through Noble's trades a few times over the years, and wondered whether Adelaide, and now us, should consider having someone else take over the trade negotiations. He tends to overpay and underask. The rest of his job he seems great at, just at the trade table I've had questions.

To be honest, I didn't catch as many Adelaide games last year, and wasn't watching as much for Cameron. Caught a few in the first half of the year, and really started watching Charlie specifically after he was quite initially linked to us about half way through the season.

 

[POBT]

I'd say we just wasted pick 12.

Whether Cameron was "worth" pick 12, wasn't the point that I disputed though. You said he had a low ceiling and could still be a bust. I disagree on both counts.

If that is (part of) the reason why you think we "wasted" pick 12, then your thinking is flawed IMO.

 

[pod17]

Still, if you ask me which player I'd rather have on our list, the answer would be Cameron, because the stats really are just a small part of the story. But if you tell me that we would get Barrett for a rookie spot, and then Cameron with pick 12, I'd say we just wasted pick 12.[/QUOTE]

What guarantee does pick 12 give us? Cameron is proven at senior level. His line-breaking pace, tackling and at least one goal a game are really nice attributes to work with. Look at Betts at the same age. His statistics would be comparable to Cameron and he has gone on to be a 3 time All Australian. Cameron has time up his sleeve.

I think a known entity like Cameron is a better bet for us, especially given our issues around retention/player attractions, than an unproven 18 year old. And besides, Fagan has obviously identified that our list lacks a player of Cameron's type and is needed for his game plan. It's the same reason we were linked to Puopolo last year.

 

[jackess]

I know. And that's a factor. But that's also an unknown. Generally, you pay a premium for a known ability. We paid a premium for a hopeful, unknown ability.

Nope. Just an armchair fan, and I get that the club is far better at this than me. I've just looked through Noble's trades a few times over the years, and wondered whether Adelaide, and now us, should consider having someone else take over the trade negotiations. He tends to overpay and underask. The rest of his job he seems great at, just at the trade table I've had questions.

To be honest, I didn't catch as many Adelaide games last year, and wasn't watching as much for Cameron. Caught a few in the first half of the year, and really started watching Charlie specifically after he was quite initially linked to us about half way through the season.

We 'wasted' pick 2 in a stronger draft 2 years ago. Getting someone we can lock in for 6-8 seasons will be a good result for pick 12.

 

[spotthedog1]

Whether Cameron was "worth" pick 12, wasn't the point that I disputed though. You said he had a low ceiling and could still be a bust. I disagree on both counts.

If that is (part of) the reason why you think we "wasted" pick 12, then your thinking is flawed IMO.

I said he could be a bust because:
- He's pretty much untried in the mids
- He's untried as the first small forward (though i fully accept no small forward in the comp would take the first small defender off Bettsy) and has been pretty well unaccountable in the Adelaide forward line. He also had just 2 genuinely good games this year so has absolutely no consistency at 24yo. Both in 10 goal wins (Prelim and Lions). I'm not saying he is a downhill skier, but I'm not saying he's not. The point I'm making is that he is still an unknown quantity.

I said he has a low ceiling because it's tough to be an elite winger or small forward when you can't kick straight.

Still, if you ask me which player I'd rather have on our list, the answer would be Cameron, because the stats really are just a small part of the story. But if you tell me that we would get Barrett for a rookie spot, and then Cameron with pick 12, I'd say we just wasted pick 12.

What guarantee does pick 12 give us? Cameron is proven at senior level. His line-breaking pace, tackling and at least one goal a game are really nice attributes to work with. Look at Betts at the same age. His statistics would be comparable to Cameron and he has gone on to be a 3 time All Australian. Cameron has time up his sleeve.

I think a known entity like Cameron is a better bet for us, especially given our issues around retention/player attractions, than an unproven 18 year old. And besides, Fagan has obviously identified that our list lacks a player of Cameron's type and is needed for his game plan. It's the same reason we were linked to Puopolo last year.

Disagree. See above. Cameron is not a known quantity.

We 'wasted' pick 2 in a stronger draft 2 years ago. Getting someone we can lock in for 6-8 seasons will be a good result for pick 12.

Also disagree. For one, up until 1 hour before trade deadline, we looked like the good guys, and Cameron would've walked here on the cheap next year (admittedly, no guarantees on that, but likely). We don't need him in 2018. He's not the difference between anything for us. Him starting in 2019 instead would've been just fine.

In hindsight, Schache turned out bad. But I'd argue that part of that was that we let him leave after 2 years, despite being contracted, rather than seeing if he could get through his homesickness issues (much on which has been said regarding some of our threepeat players). Another part of that is that we let him leave for (effectively, after the pick trade with Richmond) an upgrade from pick 20 to pick 15, and some points for academy bidding. Yes, I think that set us back. And before I get more posts about how callous and uncaring about Schache I am, I still am yet to see anything suggesting mental health issues. I see a homesick kid, and that's fine, but that's not our job to pander to, and definitely not cause for us to bend over. And for those saying he'll never make it at the level, he's a key forward with 2 years experience! Of course he hasn't made it yet. Most of these kids take time. Time which we had, and decided to forfeit for scraps. I was fine with him going for reasonable compensation. We got some ridiculous parody of reasonable compensation, and Noble spinning it as worth around "pick 12 or 13", despite us trading it 2 mins later for pick 15 (and giving up pick 20).

 

[jackess]

I said he could be a bust because:
- He's pretty much untried in the mids
- He's untried as the first small forward (though i fully accept no small forward in the comp would take the first small defender off Bettsy) and has been pretty well unaccountable in the Adelaide forward line. He also had just 2 genuinely good games this year so has absolutely no consistency at 24yo. Both in 10 goal wins (Prelim and Lions). I'm not saying he is a downhill skier, but I'm not saying he's not. The point I'm making is that he is still an unknown quantity.

I said he has a low ceiling because it's tough to be an elite winger or small forward when you can't kick straight.

Disagree. See above. Cameron is not a known quantity.

Also disagree. For one, up until 1 hour before trade deadline, we looked like the good guys, and Cameron would've walked here on the cheap next year (admittedly, no guarantees on that, but likely). We don't need him in 2018. He's not the difference between anything for us. Him starting in 2019 instead would've been just fine.

In hindsight, Schache turned out bad. But I'd argue that part of that was that we let him leave after 2 years, despite being contracted, rather than seeing if he could get through his homesickness issues (much on which has been said regarding some of our threepeat players). Another part of that is that we let him leave for (effectively, after the pick trade with Richmond) an upgrade from pick 20 to pick 15, and some points for academy bidding. Yes, I think that set us back. And before I get more posts about how callous and uncaring about Schache I am, I still am yet to see anything suggesting mental health issues. I see a homesick kid, and that's fine, but that's not our job to pander to, and definitely not cause for us to bend over. And for those saying he'll never make it at the level, he's a key forward with 2 years experience! Of course he hasn't made it yet. Most of these kids take time. Time which we had, and decided to forfeit for scraps. I was fine with him going for reasonable compensation. We got some ridiculous parody of reasonable compensation, and Noble spinning it as worth around "pick 12 or 13", despite us trading it 2 mins later for pick 15 (and giving up pick 20).

You have to at least admit that your opinion involves a lot of assumptions and they tend to be contrary to what common sense would indicate happened behind the scenes during trade week.

I agree we overpaid for Cameron but it's not wasted and who knows; taking 12 to the draft could have led to us being worse off.

 

[bungalow_bill]

We 'wasted' pick 2 in a stronger draft 2 years ago. Getting someone we can lock in for 6-8 seasons will be a good result for pick 12.

I recall the uproar over trading 12 for Fevola. Not 12!!!! Carlton drafted Kane Lucas - bust. Fevola of course was also a bust

 

[pod17]

Spot - how can Cameron not be a known entity? He has played 73 AFL games, is 23 and has held is spot in a top 8 side for the last 3 years. I do agree that his ceiling is unknown in that he may or may not improve his current output.

As we all know, so many draftees fail to adjust to the level. Even on Cameron's 2017 statistics that you outlined, he is a safer bet than this year's pick 12. There's as much chance of nabbing a Ben Lennon, Jaksch or Lucas as there is a Lever.

We know what he offers, and we are in need of a player with his attributes. We also can't keep fielding a team of 18-20 year olds. We need to stagger our age profile and Cameron fills an age bracket we are lacking courtesy of the GH5.

 

[spotthedog1]

You have to at least admit that your opinion involves a lot of assumptions

agree - I think both sides of this argument have lots of assumptions

and they tend to be contrary to what common sense would indicate happened behind the scenes during trade week.

and disagree again. I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if there were significant other issues for Schache. But the news that Schache's manager was making lined up with the noises that the club were making, being that Schache could come back to Brisbane. I wouldn't be surprised if there were significant other issues, but I also wouldn't be surprised if he was just badly homesick. Introversion isn't crippling. I'm introverted, and I'm still here. I'm also an arrogant wiseass, so that helps.

I agree we overpaid for Cameron but it's not wasted and who knows; taking 12 to the draft could have led to us being worse off.

It's not wasted, but it's a ridiculous overpayment, and was hilarious watching the commentators through the last few weeks. Cameron was worth less than pick 20, but they'd give up pick 20, maybe ask for a pick swap. Then he was worth pick 20. Then he was worth pick 18. Then they'd give up pick 12 to get it done.

I agree that, as you've pointed out, pick 12 could be a waste. Conversely, pick 12 could be a future Brownlow Medallist. Completely agree that it's a risk either way. For mine though, Cameron for 20 was overpaying but reasonable. At pick 12, I'd have rather us gone to the draft though and try again next year...

I recall the uproar over trading 12 for Fevola. Not 12!!!! Carlton drafted Kane Lucas - bust. Fevola of course was also a bust

Interesting part though. Carlton drafted Kane Lucas and brought in Lachie Henderson, who on his own did more for Carlton than Fev did for us. He was later traded out though for Geelong's future first rounder. Who, after a few more trades, just so happened to turn into a young lad named Jarrod Berry.

That said, I think the Fevola debacle on its own extended our stay at the bottom of the ladder. I could see to potential at the time, but it cost us not only Henderson and pick 12 (who may or may not have been Lucas if we had kept it), but also Bradshaw and Rischitelli, etc.

 

[jackess]

agree - I think both sides of this argument have lots of assumptions and disagree again. I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if there were significant other issues for Schache. But the news that Schache's manager was making lined up with the noises that the club were making, being that Schache could come back to Brisbane. I wouldn't be surprised if there were significant other issues, but I also wouldn't be surprised if he was just badly homesick. Introversion isn't crippling. I'm introverted, and I'm still here. I'm also an arrogant wiseass, so that helps.

It's not wasted, but it's a ridiculous overpayment, and was hilarious watching the commentators through the last few weeks. Cameron was worth less than pick 20, but they'd give up pick 20, maybe ask for a pick swap. Then he was worth pick 20. Then he was worth pick 18. Then they'd give up pick 12 to get it done.

I agree that, as you've pointed out, pick 12 could be a waste. Conversely, pick 12 could be a future Brownlow Medallist. Completely agree that it's a risk either way. For mine though, Cameron for 20 was overpaying but reasonable. At pick 12, I'd have rather us gone to the draft though and try again next year...

Interesting part though. Carlton drafted Kane Lucas and brought in Lachie Henderson, who on his own did more for Carlton than Fev did for us. He was later traded out though for Geelong's future first rounder. Who, after a few more trades, just so happened to turn into a young lad named Jarrod Berry.

That said, I think the Fevola debacle on its own extended our stay at the bottom of the ladder. I could see to potential at the time, but it cost us not only Henderson and pick 12 (who may or may not have been Lucas if we had kept it), but also Bradshaw and Rischitelli, etc.

So could Cameron

 

[spotthedog1]

Spot - how can Cameron not be a known entity? He has played 73 AFL games, is 23 and has held is spot in a top 8 side for the last 3 years. I do agree that his ceiling is unknown in that he may or may not improve his current output.

As we all know, so many draftees fail to adjust to the level. Even on Cameron's 2017 statistics that you outlined, he is a safer bet than this year's pick 12. There's as much chance of nabbing a Ben Lennon, Jaksch or Lucas as there is a Lever.

We know what he offers, and we are in need of a player with his attributes. We also can't keep fielding a team of 18-20 year olds. We need to stagger our age profile and Cameron fills an age bracket we are lacking courtesy of the GH5.

I've already gone through why I think he's an unknown. He'd be our top small forward, and he's never played that role. That would attract the best small defender, and he's never done that. He's never really played midfield, and apparently we want him to do that. He's also had pretty rubbish conversion rates coming out of one of the best midfields in the competition. He won't have that sort of delivery here. Plenty of unknown there. Some known too, no doubt. We know he can play at AFL level.

I'm also seeing a lot of people saying "pick 12 could bust". That's true, and the draft is always a gamble, but realistically, it's also where you can get something special.

For example, if you try to rank player ability from 1 to 100, you might say that:
- 90% of pick 1s will be rated 70-100
- 90% of pick 90s will be rated 0-20
I might say that 90% of pick 12s would be worth about a 40-80.
I might also say that Cameron is worth about 50-60.

It's a gamble, and I think pick 12 was worth keeping for that reason. Very subjective, and I know that many here would disagree with those ratings. I do think Cameron is a solid b-grader though, and don't see him turning into an a-grader. And that's fine, but it isn't worth pick 12. You get the potential downside with a fresh draftee, but you also get the potential upside. Of course, we also have another factor, being that first round draftees for us tend not to struggle to stay on a list and have been told for years by coaches and agents that they'll be stars, so they tend to more commonly request to be traded. That's an argument I've seen floated a few times -- pick 12 could've had homesickness issues too. At least we know Cameron won't. I don't think that we stop drafting first round talent though simply because they might leave. Especially for a player who has declared that he's annoyed at the departing club for being stubborn, and walk to us next year on the cheap when he's out of contract.

Realistically, this trade period, we had "Cameron has homesickness issues so we should overpay to get the deal done" and "Schache has homesickness issues so we should accept unders to get the deal done". I'm just sick of us being a feeder team, and Noble's attitude of "do whatever it takes to get the deal done" doesn't sit well with me. In a negotiation, you have to be willing to walk away, and we weren't. Twice.

So could Cameron

Not sure if serious. REALLY don't think Cameron could ever compete for a Brownlow.

 

[jackess]

I've already gone through why I think he's an unknown. He'd be our top small forward, and he's never played that role. That would attract the best small defender, and he's never done that. He's never really played midfield, and apparently we want him to do that. He's also had pretty rubbish conversion rates coming out of one of the best midfields in the competition. He won't have that sort of delivery here. Plenty of unknown there. Some known too, no doubt. We know he can play at AFL level.

I'm also seeing a lot of people saying "pick 12 could bust". That's true, and the draft is always a gamble, but realistically, it's also where you can get something special.

For example, if you try to rank player ability from 1 to 100, you might say that:
- 90% of pick 1s will be rated 70-100
- 90% of pick 90s will be rated 0-20
I might say that 90% of pick 12s would be worth about a 40-80.
I might also say that Cameron is worth about 50-60.

It's a gamble, and I think pick 12 was worth keeping for that reason. Very subjective, and I know that many here would disagree with those ratings. I do think Cameron is a solid b-grader though, and don't see him turning into an a-grader. And that's fine, but it isn't worth pick 12. You get the potential downside with a fresh draftee, but you also get the potential upside. Of course, we also have another factor, being that first round draftees for us tend not to struggle to stay on a list and have been told for years by coaches and agents that they'll be stars, so they tend to more commonly request to be traded. That's an argument I've seen floated a few times -- pick 12 could've had homesickness issues too. At least we know Cameron won't. I don't think that we stop drafting first round talent though simply because they might leave. Especially for a player who has declared that he's annoyed at the departing club for being stubborn, and walk to us next year on the cheap when he's out of contract.

Realistically, this trade period, we had "Cameron has homesickness issues so we should overpay to get the deal done" and "Schache has homesickness issues so we should accept unders to get the deal done". I'm just sick of us being a feeder team, and Noble's attitude of "do whatever it takes to get the deal done" doesn't sit well with me. In a negotiation, you have to be willing to walk away, and we weren't. Twice.

Not sure if serious. REALLY don't think Cameron could ever compete for a Brownlow.

Look at some of our other recent first round picks; Clark, Rich, Henderson, Polec, Longer, Docherty and Mayes. Docherty is the only one I'd consider an A grader. The rest probably B graders and Longer. Certainly no brownlow medalists among the group.

 

[pod17]

I've already gone through why I think he's an unknown. He'd be our top small forward, and he's never played that role. That would attract the best small defender, and he's never done that. He's never really played midfield, and apparently we want him to do that. He's also had pretty rubbish conversion rates coming out of one of the best midfields in the competition. He won't have that sort of delivery here. Plenty of unknown there. Some known too, no doubt. We know he can play at AFL level.

I'm also seeing a lot of people saying "pick 12 could bust". That's true, and the draft is always a gamble, but realistically, it's also where you can get something special.

For example, if you try to rank player ability from 1 to 100, you might say that:
- 90% of pick 1s will be rated 70-100
- 90% of pick 90s will be rated 0-20
I might say that 90% of pick 12s would be worth about a 40-80.
I might also say that Cameron is worth about 50-60.

It's a gamble, and I think pick 12 was worth keeping for that reason. Very subjective, and I know that many here would disagree with those ratings. I do think Cameron is a solid b-grader though, and don't see him turning into an a-grader. And that's fine, but it isn't worth pick 12. You get the potential downside with a fresh draftee, but you also get the potential upside. Of course, we also have another factor, being that first round draftees for us tend not to struggle to stay on a list and have been told for years by coaches and agents that they'll be stars, so they tend to more commonly request to be traded. That's an argument I've seen floated a few times -- pick 12 could've had homesickness issues too. At least we know Cameron won't. I don't think that we stop drafting first round talent though simply because they might leave. Especially for a player who has declared that he's annoyed at the departing club for being stubborn, and walk to us next year on the cheap when he's out of contract.

Realistically, this trade period, we had "Cameron has homesickness issues so we should overpay to get the deal done" and "Schache has homesickness issues so we should accept unders to get the deal done". I'm just sick of us being a feeder team, and Noble's attitude of "do whatever it takes to get the deal done" doesn't sit well with me. In a negotiation, you have to be willing to walk away, and we weren't. Twice QUOTE]

I also believe he would be our top small forward - but again in comparison to other third year small forwards his record isn't too dissimilar - Betts didn't kick more than 25 goals in his first four seasons of AFL, Cyril was the same. Admittedly he hasn't played as the number one small forward at Adelaide, but despite his conversion rates and disposal efficiency issues, he has still maintained his place in that side. Perceived forward pressure is something that our side has severely lacked. We fight hard for forward entries only for it to bounce straight back out. Cameron will go some way to addressing that.

I don't think your pick/ranking analysis is far off the mark, and perhaps pick 12 was slightly above market value on what we had to pay. Unfortunately, being in Brisbane and attempting to sign a contracted player, overs was required. The other factor to consider is that the club may have paid the higher premium due to their analysis of the prospective 2017 draftees. With the draft being a reportedly weak one, the club most probably are of the thinking that pick 12 is more of a 30-70 as opposed to a 40-80, making Cameron's 50-60 look more attractive.

I would never suggest that we stop trying to draft first round talent on the basis that they might leave. But, if it is line ball, I would prefer to take the safer option. As posted elsewhere, the Schache situation was a problematic one, and we had to take something - which unfortunately was unders. If he was serving as a poisonous influence to younger players around him, I am pleased that the club acted swiftly. If the picks received from the Dogs help net Ballenden then there was worth to it. My concern re the Schache situation is that our pre drafting processes potentially did not unearth the pretty serious flaws in his character that emerged within a year of being in Brisbane.

I totally agree with you and others that we cannot keep turning first round picks into second round picks inside two years. That will obviously equate to a cycle of perpetual mediocrity - or worse. However, I am hopeful that the core issues that led to our player retention issues have been addressed, and that the Schache and Aish departures were exceptions. Ultimately, when selecting pick 1 this year, I would be confident our recruiters would have no issue selecting the most talented player available. We can then back our environment to help them to stay. We should also have the salary cap space to heavily front end our young players contracts, warding off the Victorian threat in the short term. Hopefully by their next contract we are experiencing an increased level of on-field success, which will naturally result in players wanting to stick around.

 

[spotthedog1]

Look at some of our other recent first round picks; Clark, Rich, Henderson, Polec, Longer, Docherty and Mayes. Docherty is the only one I'd consider an A grader. The rest probably B graders and Longer. Certainly no brownlow medalists among the group.

Agreed on all counts. We can now officially add Cameron to that list. I don't think that's something to celebrate.

Insert lost text here

I can see what you mean, but a few quick points:
- Cameron will force out Barrett, who is a year younger, much slower, but actually, despite being an average shot himself, had better goalkicking accuracy, more tackles and less clangers than Cameron in 2017. So I disagree that we had no forward pressure. He's probably a moderate amount better than Barrett at forward pressure.
- Tough to say we didn't rate who would be available at 12 when we traded Schache for a pick upgrade to get to pick 15.

Basically, I just think we screwed ourselves at the trade table, and I get that you would prefer to take the safer option, but I don't think we can win a premiership taking the safe option. I think that with the way the rules and contracts landscape is at the moment, we need everything to go right if we want to compete for a flag. Far more than a Vic team, who can skirt by on free agents and homesick players at huge discounts. And I think we just gave up a load of our currency to get a b-grader and a pick 15. So I think it lowers our ceiling, and we needed a lot of luck to still be there at the end of September anyway. Glass half empty, sure. But we're fighting against the wind, and Victorian teams have it at their backs. I don't like it, but I just struggle to see how we will get to compete for a flag in the next 10-20 years.

 

[SizeMatters]

Can't see us getting a PP next year even if we have less than 5 wins again because it will be cutting into the Suns 3rd rebuild. The Suns would be the first club since the rule change to get a Pick 1 PP IMO... could even get one next year if Lynch is looking for a new home and they are sitting on the bottom again. Can't see the AFL waiting it out a few more years with them, if they don't get sorted in the next 2 years they will fold. They are getting the footy department revamped and the next thing to upgrade is the playing list.

 

[luthor]

.

That said, I think the Fevola debacle on its own extended our stay at the bottom of the ladder. I could see to potential at the time, but it cost us not only Henderson and pick 12 (who may or may not have been Lucas if we had kept it), but also Bradshaw and Rischitelli, etc.

Not this again.

This "costing" us Rischitelli and Bradshaw thing is a myth.

Riska was just about out the door (before the Fev trade) because GC offered him a contract that we either couldn't or chose not to match.

Bradshaw overplayed his hand with the club once too often, demanding MORE than than the one year contract extension we had on the table. We stood firm and he hit the Jackpot with the Swans (from memory, $2M over 2 years)....so ta ta Danny boy. He lasted a grand total of 7 games with the Swans before breaking down entirely and retiring mid season. Not much of a return for the Swans for their outlay. For the Lions, NOT a "cost" but a considerable savings !!!

 

[pulpdriver]

Can't see us getting a PP next year even if we have less than 5 wins again because it will be cutting into the Suns 3rd rebuild. The Suns would be the first club since the rule change to get a Pick 1 PP IMO... could even get one next year if Lynch is looking for a new home and they are sitting on the bottom again. Can't see the AFL waiting it out a few more years with them, if they don't get sorted in the next 2 years they will fold. They are getting the footy department revamped and the next thing to upgrade is the playing list.

There's a possibility with the bands for free agency compo picks being discussed at the next CEO meetings that priority picks also get discussed. If pick 1pp s abolished and replaced by the mid first rounder Noble flagged as acceptable for most clubs come in the AFL might be more open to giving one to us if we underperform again. You're right that the Suns will be priority one though. Although if Lynch does leave all the priority picks in the world aren't going to help the situation, the few remaining supporters will jump ship. It would be catastrophic. For their sake, I hope they push up the ladder in 2018.

 

[Lazza16]

Just out of interest Spot, have you played any footy yourself, or coached?

Sure, everyone's entitled to an opinion but yours above are incredibly different to mine, and like you I have watched a lot of Adelaide games in recent years.

How would you have rated Cameron at the end of 2016?

Gun

 

[bhys16]

We need pace, We need tackling and we need more avenues to goal.. charlie is elite in the first 2 and quite capable at the third..
laid 103 tackles this year and kicked 29 goals... I will take that all day for pick 12.
If he even levels out and plays at that level for the next 3 years, we have won that trade. If he progresses further, which given his experience and age, is quite possible, we clearly win.

 

[Lazza16]

I clearly remember watching Charlie in 2016 thinking how good is this guy gunna be....wish we could get him. Can't believe this discussion is happening amongst supporters of the bottom team.....we should be yelllllinggg hallelujah. Amen

 

[Haso]

Can't help but think that SuperCoach culture and/or the fascination with Champion Data's approach to stats gathering has helped embed a very narrow and incomplete framework for assessing player impact in the minds of many.

I think that effect is magnified even more so for the nature of the defensive small forward role in the current state of the game.

HE'S TALKING ABOUT YOU spotthedog1!

I've read all of your recent posts, and I have come to the conclusion that you have a limited understanding of football performance and talent. And value.

 

[pulpdriver]

Half this thread is talking about Charlie

 

[trikster]

Half this thread is talking about Charlie

Well now that the PP was rejected there is nothing to talk about

 

[geekOnaught]

Charlie is gonna be a gun. Y'all need to get on that train.

Back to point:
Think we deserve a PP for looking after Hojee in his retirement years.

 

[spotthedog1]

HE'S TALKING ABOUT YOU spotthedog1!

I've read all of your recent posts, and I have come to the conclusion that you have a limited understanding of football performance and talent. And value.

You are welcome to that opinion. By the way, nice contribution to the debate - generally, if you want to debate someone, try explaining what you think rather than just shouting "YOU'RE WRONG!".

As it is, I still think pick 12 was way too high for Cameron. As I've stated, I think Barrett's stats were more compelling for a similar role (at least initially), though realistically, I agree that Cameron is better... But not by enough to give up pick 12. I think that with a few more games,
Barrett may gain some composure which might improve his kicking. Cameron already had 49 games before this season, and his kicking is just as bad (worse by raw statistics, but within the same range).

I also think that when one combines the Schache and pickswap trades, which realistically is the more reasonable way to read it, we traded Schache+20 for 15 and a bit of change for academy points (picks 40+52). I think that is a ludicrous trade that shows that Schache was never coming back, that the posturing was all ridiculous, and that no rival club managers ever remotely bought it. Noble was clearly outmaneuvered.

Now, if you care to disagree with these points, please feel free to explain what you disagree with and why. That is how this works.