Recommitted Tim Kelly [exploring trade options home to West Coast]

[Scotland]

Menzel an odd inclusion? Cockatoo and Thurlow cruelled by injury. Could do the same for the Eagles.

It's the list going back to the last top 10 pick. Not all failures, but Geelong do a have a reputation for drafting poorly in the first round then better from 20 onward.

 

[iameviljez]

Menzel an odd inclusion? Cockatoo and Thurlow cruelled by injury. Could do the same for the Eagles.

As was Brown. Dislocations and broken leg.

 

[Arr0w]

But when people talk about it being a good draft they're including the academy and f/s players in that. My only point is that obviously pick 20 in a draft with a heap of academy and f/s prospects isn't as valuable as pick 20 in a draft with no academy or f/s prospects. The fact is pick 20 and 22 in a strong draft weren't on the table. It was pick 20 and 22 once a bunch of the best players were removed.

That is no different to past or future years. Holding out for a pick in the top 10 versus 2 picks in the 20's (plus a future 2nd), makes no sense.

 

[Scotland]

That is no different to past or future years. Holding out for a pick in the top 10 versus 2 picks in the 20's (plus a future 2nd), makes no sense.

Holding out for a top 10 pick makes perfect sense if it is likely that you will get one.

So not like this case at all.

 

[MisterMarcus]

10 Cockatoo
16 Lang
16 Thurlow
15 Smedts
17 Menzel
15 Brown

Most of those guys suffered from injury. You're really going to troll us over a guy who did his knee 4 times??

Others we were able to leverage into better players. e.g. we pretty much exchanged Smedts for Tuohy.

 

[iameviljez]

There was based on the evidence.

That would be a bit silly, IMO.

It probably doesn't hurt, that said, that it's been a rare thing that the same player has made sense for both clubs - they've had very different needs over the years

 

[Arr0w]

Holding out for a top 10 pick makes perfect sense if it is likely that you will get one.

So not like this case at all.

And now you run the risk, of an uncontracted player, that can suffer form slumps or injuries, one or all these factors will reduce his value, end of next year

 

[Footy Smarts]

That is no different to past or future years. Holding out for a pick in the top 10 versus 2 picks in the 20's (plus a future 2nd), makes no sense.

But this year there are way more academy and f/s picks than normal. Last year of you had pick 20 you got the 20th best player overall in the draft because (I think) there were no early f/s picks. This year the west coast pick 20 will get them the 24th-30th best player in the draft overall. Of course that has an impact on the relative value of the pick.

 

[juss]

He entered the draft he knew he could go anywhere as a result so can’t complain, shouldn’t have entered if he didn’t want to move - is the worst argument. The afl restricts entry, he had no other option but to enter the draft in order to play afl and Make the most $’s he can from his skills. He’s then perfectly entitled to turn around and ask for a trade.

Which he did, he asked for a trade to one particular club, that Geelong negotiated with and felt they could not fulfill their demands and so held Kelly to his contract. Neither Geelong or Eagles have done anything wrong in this scenario.

The issue many have is not that Kelly asked for a trade, everyone is entitled to that, the issue is that if he (or any other player, this issue is not unique to Kelly) cites going HOME as his reason, he cannot then exclude Fremantle in the negotiations. He can ask to be traded to West Coast, but then Geelong aren't obliged to send him there just because Kelly wants to break his contract.

If he asked to go home, Geelong would have been able to accept offers from Freo too, and maybe they would have filled Geelong's demands, or come up with a better offer. It's not Geelong or West Coast who didn't meet their expectations here, it's Kelly who used going home as a reason but excluded the only other club in WA in his request.

 

[Taylor]

With Blakey, Thomas, Quaynor and West all rated inside the top 20 and those clubs having traded down the picks 20 and 22 will likely become picks 24 and 26 at best when they're eventually taken. With players like McFadyen, Will Kelly, Bailey Scott, Kieren Briggs and Buku Khamis being projected to go in that range it's possible those picks could end up barely inside the top 30. Picks 27 and 29 sure doesn't sound as good as 20 and 22. I imagine this is one reason Geelong was adamant that they needed the 2019 1st rounder to be involved.

This is silly. All the mocks have accounted for academy and f/s picks. And there are still quality kids projected at the spot that we will now pick.

That's a false argument and the wrong response to it.

If 40 players walked into this draft tomorrow that only GWS could pick because they were strictly their academy and all of them were rated as top ten picks, they are all superstars. Freo's #14 pick would become #54 and they would pick the exact same player they were going to pick before.

Academy and father son picks moving selections backwards means nothing unless you're losing out on points for your own academy players due to it.

You take A Gunn at pick #10 or you take A Gunn at pick #15 because five academy players were taken before you got to take a pick. It makes no difference. The same players are available to you at that pick.

 

[STPer18]

It's just great to see both sets of supporters happy. Granted some people go about showing their happiness in differing ways - for example many of the WCE supporters seem to display their happiness through a great amount of bitterness and moaning, and if one didn't know any better you'd think they weren't actually happy about missing out on Kelly at all. Thankfully we know better, and they are in fact stoked to be taking their multitude of junk picks to the draft.

Group hug?

 

[Scotland]

While I don't disagree I am bemused by the fact that people believe that Kelly is in the wrong for nominating a club the way players do every single year.

 

[Arr0w]

But this year there are way more academy and f/s picks than normal. Last year of you had pick 20 you got the 20th best player overall in the draft because (I think) there were no early f/s picks. This year the west coast pick 20 will get them the 24th-30th best player in the draft overall. Of course that has an impact on the relative value of the pick.

You also need to consider next year, which at this stage, doesn't have the depth of talent. I understand the many reasons why the Cats held out for a mid 1st, but taking the deal opens up other opportunities. Take them to the draft, where I believe there will still be great value, once you exclude F/S and academy players or the potential to trade forward, with a club like Port or Adelaide, if one of them fail to get to the pointy end of the draft.

If a player is desperate to get out, do it earlier rather than later

 

[Footy Smarts]

That's a false argument and the wrong response to it.

If 40 players walked into this draft tomorrow that only GWS could pick because they were strictly their academy and all of them were rated as top ten picks, they are all superstars. Freo's #14 pick would become #54 and they would pick the exact same player they were going to pick before.

Academy and father son picks moving selections backwards means nothing unless you're losing out on points for your own academy players due to it.

You take A Gunn at pick #10 or you take A Gunn at pick #15 because five academy players were taken before you got to take a pick. It makes no difference. The same players are available to you at that pick.

But you're considering these mysterious academy players as though they're ghosts that nobody has heard of or talked about before the draft. In reality this draft is considered strong because of the number of good players including guys like Thomas, Blakey, etc. If you remove those players the draft is actually quite weak outside the top 10. Hence what west coast actually offered was pick 20 and 22 in what is effectively quite a weak draft once the academy and f/s picks are removed.

 

[Footy Smarts]

If a player is desperate to get out, do it earlier rather than later

The fact Geelong kept him suggests to me that they don't think he's that desperate to get out and that he'll still perform to the best of his abilities. If there was any real chance of keeping him for another year causing major issues then I have no doubt they would've accepted the deal.

 

[Arr0w]

The fact Geelong kept him suggests to me that they don't think he's that desperate to get out and that he'll still perform to the best of his abilities. If there was any real chance of keeping him for another year causing major issues then I have no doubt they would've accepted the deal.

I don't disagree with that, but IMHO, it is a poor, short term strategy, to hold onto a player for just one year, rather than maximising a long term opportunity.

In 12 months time, we will get a better handle on it

 

[Footy Smarts]

While I don't disagree I am bemused by the fact that people believe that Kelly is in the wrong for nominating a club the way players do every single year.

I don't think many people think he's in the wrong. He has every right to ask for a trade to a particular club. The point being made is that obviously there were other considerations at play for him than just moving home. The fact he refused to go to Fremantle demonstrates there was something more important to him than simply moving home. It's also wrong to suggest Geelong refused to trade him home either because they clearly gave him that change with Freo. It's absolutely his right to refuse to go to Freo but he can't then claim going home as his sole motivation (which again is his right).

 

[Footy Smarts]

I don't disagree with that, but IMHO, it is a poor, short term strategy, to hold onto a player for just one year, rather than maximising a long term opportunity.

In 12 months time, we will get a better handle on it

With Geelong's list age they have to give it a crack next year. You don't give up and rebuild with Dangerfield, Selwood, Hawkins, etc still close to their peak. In that context 1 year from Kelly has a lot of value and they're likely to still get some useful compensation next year. There's also the chance however remote that they settle in Geelong over the next 12 months and decide to stay. I'm not saying it was definitely the right move but I can completely understand why they didn't consider the offer from west coast enough to do the deal.

 

[DanA]

It’s interesting that after all that time WCE valued Kelly at 20+22+future 2nd. This is right online with what majority of the clueless Geelong supporters thought he was worth and a mile away from the astute WCE guys did who thought 20 should be enough.

 

[Bestbird]

Thought than Kelly's manager spoke well this morning on SEN. There were obviously some underlying reasons why Freo were excluded. Seems highly likely that he will request a trade next year and that he will do his pre season training till January in Perth

 

[newblueo]

Cats culture is outstanding.Did they not learn from the ezra bray days of poor player welfare.

 

[JackOutback]

While I don't disagree I am bemused by the fact that people believe that Kelly is in the wrong for nominating a club the way players do every single year.

Nobody did anything ‘wrong’; not Kelly, Geelong or West Coast. Other than not get the deal done, that is.

 

[KTFO]

I don't think many people think he's in the wrong. He has every right to ask for a trade to a particular club. The point being made is that obviously there were other considerations at play for him than just moving home. The fact he refused to go to Fremantle demonstrates there was something more important to him than simply moving home. It's also wrong to suggest Geelong refused to trade him home either because they clearly gave him that change with Freo. It's absolutely his right to refuse to go to Freo but he can't then claim going home as his sole motivation (which again is his right).

I don't have a dog in this fight but I agree with this.

It's quite obvious that being in SA was not the sole motivating factor for Kelly.

I don't think anyone minds that Kelly requested a trade but it is obvious that the reason given was disingenuous.

 

[Scotland]

It’s interesting that after all that time WCE valued Kelly at 20+22+future 2nd. This is right online with what majority of the clueless Geelong supporters thought he was worth and a mile away from the astute WCE guys did who thought 20 should be enough.

Reportedly.

20 + 22 + a future pick anywhere from 20-40 is a top 10 pick, is it?

 

[iameviljez]

I don't disagree with that, but IMHO, it is a poor, short term strategy, to hold onto a player for just one year, rather than maximising a long term opportunity.

I think a lot of it was about holding firm in order to protect the value of future trades.

If we'd said "top-ten pick", and then accepted 20 + 22 + ~36 (2019), which was the West Coast final offer, then it would have consequences for our future trading potential.

I get the practical argument in that p20 + p22 + ~p36 is greater than what we'll get next year, though.