List Mgmt. The "We Should Have Kept Brander" Tears Thread

[Truckosaurus]

In the interests of the Contracts thread, the Injuries thread, Preseason thread, etc. not being swamped by the same argument over and over again, and in the interests of being able to say "I told you so".

 

[Bender_]

Dark Sharks in here mate.

 

[Doashuey]

Please rename: The "We shouldn't have drafted Brander tears thread" .
Thanks.
God, imagine the position we would be in if we took Kelly in place of Brander?

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

Eagles stuffed up by drafting a spud.

 

[06Premiers]

We Should Have Kept "Brander Tears" Thread

I've heard they hold mystical powers & prevent pre-season injuries/vaccine induced brain damage.

 

[Coasters7]

It’s only a stuff up because of what followed. Plenty of first round picks are duds. The fact we took a key forward over a midfielder, who we proceeded to trade an entire draft haul for 2 years later, THEN lose that same key forward for absolutely nothing is the real reason it’s a hard L.

Only smidge of comfort is the fact that draft came before 2018 so any decisions made are semi redundant because of that flag. Things would’ve panned out differently, we may not have won it, and we certainly wouldn’t have got the finish we did with Sheed

 

[3agles87]

******* west coast. They ****ed up somehow, just haven’t worked out if it is because we drafted him or because we let him go, but I am melting anyway.

 

[KERRPOW]

Please rename: The "We shouldn't have drafted Brander tears thread" .
Thanks.
God, imagine the position we would be in if we took Kelly in place of Brander?

Or even traded for brander for kelly as apparently the pusseys would have been open to it.

We would only have had to sell the prized cow rather than the farm for him.

 

[FKASC]

Should of

 

[Bleedblueandgold]

We should not of drafted him.

 

[xInfected_Virus]

In hindsight we should've taken Allen at 13 and Kelly at 21 and Ryan at 26.

It did not make sense to take Brander in the first place when we're planning to take another KPF in Oscar Allen

12

Oscar Allen

Age

25

Ht

196cm

Wt

96kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

9.8

2star

K

6.6

3star

HB

3.2

3star

M

3.8

4star

T

2.4

4star

G

1.1

4star

No current season stats available

D

8.6

3star

K

5.8

3star

HB

2.8

3star

M

3.8

4star

T

2.0

4star

G

1.2

4star

(the greatest god of all), Brander's a KPF but we already have an inform JK in 2017 who would've won his third Coleman had he not gotten injured and Darling doing pretty well in 2017 then we took another KPF in Allen. With JK not showing signs of slowing down because the idea of taking Brander is to replace JK who just came off a year he could've been Coleman medal winner so it made no sense to take Brander solely to replace JK who still has a few years left in him and with Allen being favored for the KPF successor spot. At the end with the KPF positions filled up by JK, Darling, Allen who's gone ahead of him, Waterman who also gone ahead of him and Bailey Williams too that we turned Brander into a defensive wingman.

Don't get me started with the Darling refusing to vax saga. At this stage Allen is ahead of him in the KPF role for Darling's spot and if we do decide to keep Brander then they would be no need to have either Keitel or Dixon in the training squad, we'd have to turn him back into a KPF especially JK on his last legs and probably will not play all 22 games in JK's case.

As a midfielder he shown he's a good runner, decent user of the footy, clean gatherer even in the wet, good marking hands, can fill a KPP hole in a match but he lacks consistency doesn't always find the footy and lacks toughness for a big bodied player.

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

My intel is that it was a toss up between Brander and Oscar at 13. So when Oscar was still there at 21, like a 19 year old with a hard on, we could not help ourselves having both.

I thought Brander would turn into our CHB and Oscar our CHF.

So in a perfect world, Oscar Kelly and Ryan with our first 3 picks would have made a serious change in future list management. Kelly may have also added to our 2018 strength.

Here’s the but. I did not see the immediate impact that both Kelly and Ryan would bring. If we are honest, I believe very few saw Tim doing in 2018 what he did when arriving at the Cattery. I suspect we had drafting regrets with Kelly which is why it became more emotive in getting him to the club and we paid overs.

I think the other part to the trade was that we offered big $$$ for Kelly. Having done that, the draft capital to get him was probably aligned. I suspect Kelly taken at 21 would not have seen such a high salary in 2020 etc and we would be seeing a $500k to $600k at there about player and not a $750k to $800k player.

Our big dollar pointy end signings in 2018/19 of Guv, Kelly and Gaff are starting to bite us.

Oh well, the Brander draft decision opens up so many could have been scenarios

Question for posters- would you have wanted
1) Brander at 13, Allen at 21 and Ryan at 26
Or
2) Brander at 13, Kelly at 21 and Ryan at 26?

Without Oscar, would Brander have been given more opportunities?

 

[Doashuey]

My intel is that it was a toss up between Brander and Oscar at 13. So when Oscar was still there at 21, like a 19 year old with a hard on, we could not help ourselves having both.

I thought Brander would turn into our CHB and Oscar our CHF.

So in a perfect world, Oscar Kelly and Ryan with our first 3 picks would have made a serious change in future lust management. Kelly may have also added to our 2018 strength.

Here’s the but. I did not see the immediate impact that both Kelly and Ryan would bring. If we are honest, I believe very few saw Tim doing in 2018 what he did when arriving at the Cattery. I suspect we had drafting regrets with Kelly which is why it became more emotive in getting him to the club and we paid overs.

I think the other part to the trade was that we offered big $$$ for Kelly. Having done that, the draft capital to get him was probably aligned. I suspect Kelly taken at 21 would not have seen such a high salary in 2020 etc and we would be seeing a $500k to $600k at there about player and not a $750k to $800k player.

Our big dollar pointy end signings in 2018/19 of Guv, Kelly and Gaff are starting to bite us.

Oh well, the Brander draft decision opens up so many could have been scenarios

Question for posters- would you have wanted
1) Brander at 13, Allen at 21 and Ryan at 26
Or
2) Brander at 13, Kelly at 21 and Ryan at 26?

Without Oscar, would Brander have been given more opportunities?

It's a good question but I have no doubt I'd take option A. Allen is a star and will prove a more important acquisition than Kelly by the end of their careers. Also, even if Brander got developed as a key forward in the absence of Allen, he is still a bit of a squib in the contest. When you look at some of the amazing marks Allen has taken I don't see Brander ever doing that.

 

[Dark Sharks]

Dark Sharks in here mate.

Hai gaiz, thanks for the invite

Hopefully Brander makes everyone chipping him look like a bigger dickhead than Nesbitt on trade radio.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

My favourite part of the whole thing is that Brander and Ainsworth came and went at the same time.

 

[In The Rod We Trust]

My intel is that it was a toss up between Brander and Oscar at 13. So when Oscar was still there at 21, like a 19 year old with a hard on, we could not help ourselves having both.

I thought Brander would turn into our CHB and Oscar our CHF.

So in a perfect world, Oscar Kelly and Ryan with our first 3 picks would have made a serious change in future lust management. Kelly may have also added to our 2018 strength.

Here’s the but. I did not see the immediate impact that both Kelly and Ryan would bring. If we are honest, I believe very few saw Tim doing in 2018 what he did when arriving at the Cattery. I suspect we had drafting regrets with Kelly which is why it became more emotive in getting him to the club and we paid overs.

I think the other part to the trade was that we offered big $$$ for Kelly. Having done that, the draft capital to get him was probably aligned. I suspect Kelly taken at 21 would not have seen such a high salary in 2020 etc and we would be seeing a $500k to $600k at there about player and not a $750k to $800k player.

Our big dollar pointy end signings in 2018/19 of Guv, Kelly and Gaff are starting to bite us.

Oh well, the Brander draft decision opens up so many could have been scenarios

Question for posters- would you have wanted
1) Brander at 13, Allen at 21 and Ryan at 26
Or
2) Brander at 13, Kelly at 21 and Ryan at 26?

Without Oscar, would Brander have been given more opportunities?

This is the kind of stuff I want to read or hear about on Podcasts - The decision making at drafts who we wanted but missed, who the 50/50s were and what players we have gone for at the trade table only to miss out/ who has come for our players and what were the offers only for us to say yeah nah.

 

[DanWCE]

We shouldn't have drafted Brander. He's our biggest key position draft blunder in quite some time. Usually we nail our tall player picks. Had to get one wrong eventually, but made up for it with Oscar.

 

[darksquare]

We should not have kept Brander. At the time of delisting, he was the 8th best option to play as one of our three tallest forwards, behind Kennedy, Darling, Allen, Ryan, Waterman, Williams and McGovern. He was just as far down the pecking order as a defender or a midfielder.

Sure, there is a question of whether he might have been a better forward if trained in that position and given opportunities. But he was so far back in the queue that we were never going to have an opportunity to give him, and so we were never going to train him there.

 

[bzparkes]

So in a perfect world, Oscar Kelly and Ryan with our first 3 picks would have made a serious change in future lust management.

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

My bad - I’d been talking to a Kiwi

 

[Dark Sharks]

Drafting was fine. He was a reasonable selection at the time, and is still a very talented player.

Development, coaching, role and eventually the list management over a 4 year period was the problem.


Letting him walk out for nothing, the biggest failure.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

Drafting was fine. He was a reasonable selection at the time, and is still a very talented player.

Development, coaching, role and eventually the list management over a 4 year period was the problem.


Letting him walk out for nothing, the biggest failure.

Jack Watts or Brander?

 

[Dylan82]

Brander may as well be called the tin man, as he lacks a heart.

Despite a huge amount of raw talent and potential, there isn't much the conditioning team can do to remedy that.


Four years in an AFL environment and he averaged just 6.4 pressure acts per game in 2021.

It equates to just a single pressure act from him for every 10 minutes he is on the ground.

That he was playing through the midfield as well makes it all the worse.


Good luck to GWS. If they can ignite something in him, then power to them. I wouldn't get my hopes up though about that.


His departure only stings due to nothing being received in return and the options that remained available at that time of the 2017 draft.

 

[Dark Sharks]

Hard to put pressure on when Simpson made him go guard space alone on the outer wing because dEfeNsIvE wInGs ArE tHe KeY tO PrEmIeRsHiPs.

Why are we even talking about our KPF's apparent failings in the midfield anyway?

Oh that's right.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

BBMFWBM

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk