Theory for the Future

[exile]

With all the high draft picks we have acquired in the last draft, along with the already youth-packed list from the 2009 TAC Cup season onwards, there are a large number of guys in the 18-21 age bracket.

Obviously there will be guys with potential who will not get as many games as they would like throughout the next couple of seasons, and while still young will be looking for more game time (a fair few of them would slide into a few other team's best 22 purely for development).

My thoughts was that this season would be a sort of talent display, in a way to determine who is worthy of a spot in the team, and who is in the 2nd string. Not only of benefit to us, but to the rest of the competition.

At the end of possibly this season, or most likely the next, I would not be surprised if guys from the Draft of last year started shipping out to other teams, in exchange for a draft pick.

This could be seen as a gain from a loss, as more draft picks in the future drafts (similarly to the compensation picks) would be used to keep the youth flowing when we are reaching our peak.

I know most of this is fairly obvious, but it's just an observation.
Thoughts?

 

[Fat Pizza]

I think you are on the right track. List Turnover is an essential part of AFL. Whilst we're all excited by the talent we've drafted so far, some of them won't live up to expectations for one reason or another. Others may get itchy feet & want to move back interstate. Either way, the club will be in a great position to replace them in future drafts. Scotty Clayton did a great job of accumulating early picks to use in future drafts, without giving much away. He's really set us up well.

 

[CoastBhoy]

Will be tough for Scotty Clayton in the coming years , with the list to be trimmed at the end of the year , there will have to be players that show promise having to be cut . What makes it tougher is that all the pkayers that where picked up last year are on 2 year deals.

 

[Thermo]

Summed up some thoughts I've had as well there exile.

 

[TheSunGod]

Given we need to reduce our list from 46 to 42 to 38 over the next couple of years and will need time to assess the players already on our list, unless we have a high number of grossly under-performing players, I wouldn't think we'd de-list / trade more than 7 in both 2011 and 2012 (minimum 3 picks required at the draft and the 4 for the list reduction). So our incoming players should all be high first and second round picks hopefully.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

GC have basically been given half the deck. You can trade any which-way you like, but I wouldn't expect to see a great deal of delistees in the coming seasons.

I'd expect to see lots of 2 GC players for a pick deals, or 2 GC picks for a better pick, etc.

GC is in an ideal position to create a "never ending" cycle of players. Ignoring your 6-8 senior players, every player on your list is theoretically 10 years minimum from retirement.

Every year you move on 3-4 first 18 players (and your lower picks) in exchange for higher picks, which you use to restock your talent pool. It's the ideal situation that all (well, most) clubs aim for, and GC have got it with the biggest leg-up ever seen.

GWS may be in a similar position, but I doubt they will be as well organised as what I've seen (admittedly from an outsiders perspective) as GC have been.

 

[MightyHawks]

GC have basically been given half the deck. You can trade any which-way you like, but I wouldn't expect to see a great deal of delistees in the coming seasons.

I'd expect to see lots of 2 GC players for a pick deals, or 2 GC picks for a better pick, etc.

GC is in an ideal position to create a "never ending" cycle of players. Ignoring your 6-8 senior players, every player on your list is theoretically 10 years minimum from retirement.

Every year you move on 3-4 first 18 players (and your lower picks) in exchange for higher picks, which you use to restock your talent pool. It's the ideal situation that all (well, most) clubs aim for, and GC have got it with the biggest leg-up ever seen.

GWS may be in a similar position, but I doubt they will be as well organised as what I've seen (admittedly from an outsiders perspective) as GC have been.

I think you're spot on here.

If GC are smart (and so far they have been), they'll do a 2 GC players for 1 draft pick with clubs who are (1) looking for depth or (2) trying to top up a list. There'll always be a couple of clubs in those positions.

GC will spend the next 7 years getting other teams 2nd round draft selections.