Strategy Trade and List Management Thread Part 8 (opposition supporters - READ posting rules before posting)

[_Mike_]

Opposition supporters coming to troll , you have been warned

 

[Euku]

Sanders is a gun has absolutely played quite good in many games with a few immature moments / games he will have a 300 game career, hes an extremely well rounded player whom instead of a couple of good attributes he can just rely on is developing all his attributes that will carry him further than his peers just at a later stage of his career

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Look I'm trying to be objective and balanced and all that, but some of the positive spin from posters in this thread (who are actin as if they're related to Sanders) is a bit strange. He was dropped, and rightfully so, on form, for our most recent crunch game vs. Fremantle. Most midfielders in his draft range have cemented themselves in a best 22 by the end of their second year. The measuring stick for him will always bit a bit more harsh because we rated him, and overpaid in a trade to trade up to get him. I'm optimistic and confident as much as anything and there's still logic to why we traded up, but the actual form his his before being dropped is pretty strong evidence to the contrary of all these weird positive posts.

 

[House_of_Dahl]

Look I'm trying to be objective and balanced and all that, but some of the positive spin from posters in this thread (who are actin as if they're related to Sanders) is a bit strange. He was dropped, and rightfully so, on form, for our most recent crunch game vs. Fremantle. Most midfielders in his draft range have cemented themselves in a best 22 by the end of their second year. The measuring stick for him will always bit a bit more harsh because we rated him, and overpaid in a trade to trade up to get him. I'm optimistic and confident as much as anything and there's still logic to why we traded up, but the actual form his his before being dropped is pretty strong evidence to the contrary of all these weird positive posts.

Also depends on how you spin that story. Could equally say a second year player played all but one game. Had an excellent first half of the season, even though played out of position. I think he's tracking fine/good and will have an excellent career.

 

[Doggies7]

Just wanted to share a little positivity on Sanders to kick off the pre-season and i've created a real kerfuffle...

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Also depends on how you spin that story. Could equally say a second year player played all but one game. Had an excellent first half of the season, even though played out of position. I think he's tracking fine/good and will have an excellent career.

He's still tracking below expectation through two years of the average, expected value you get out of the draft pick - again, trying to speak objectively by measuring on-field performance to draft position through two years, and that's before you get into the fact we already had higher-than-draft-position expectations for him on the basis of overpaying to trade up.

Even players that get dropped in their second year do so with better on-field contribution. E.g. Josh Ward played 3 VFL games in his 2nd year, but his stats were better across the board for the AFL games he did play in his 2nd year (and just using this as an example). Even Ward himself was probably below average through two years, but better than Sanders.

 

[BomToydd]

Just wanted to share a little positivity on Sanders to kick off the pre-season and i've created a real kerfuffle...

Lol too much positivity around preseason. Everyone is always training the house down

 

[Doggies7]

Lol too much positivity around preseason. Everyone is always training the house down

Haha he hasn't even started training the house down to be fair. More just a general comment on his place on the list and importance to become part of the next midfield group with his age, draft and development value and apprenticeship so far etc. But we'll see how the pre-season goes!

 

[grassman75]

Think he has a high floor, low ceiling. 'Special' is over the top. Was Bont playing 2s in his second year?

Bont is an exception

 

[MaxiBont]

He's still tracking below expectation through two years of the average, expected value you get out of the draft pick - again, trying to speak objectively by measuring on-field performance to draft position through two years, and that's before you get into the fact we already had higher-than-draft-position expectations for him on the basis of overpaying to trade up.

Even players that get dropped in their second year do so with better on-field contribution. E.g. Josh Ward played 3 VFL games in his 2nd year, but his stats were better across the board for the AFL games he did play in his 2nd year (and just using this as an example). Even Ward himself was probably below average through two years, but better than Sanders.

Sanders is also trying to get into a midfield rotation with Bont, Richards, Libba, Freijah and Kennedy. It’s not like he’s getting beaten for midfield minutes by nobody’s.

Sanders showed improvement from his first season and had some great games last year. For me, that’s the main thing.

Draft position means nothing once they get on the field. I don’t think some expected value after only 2 seasons is a fair metric to judge a player on.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Sanders is also trying to get into a midfield rotation with Bont, Richards, Libba, Freijah and Kennedy. It’s not like he’s getting beaten for midfield minutes by nobody’s.

Sanders showed improvement from his first season and had some great games last year. For me, that’s the main thing.

Draft position means nothing once they get on the field. I don’t think some expected value after only 2 seasons is a fair metric to judge a player on.

True, sure, and he showed versatility in learning new positions.

But a lot of the points about midfield depth were also true last year, and he got more centre bounce attendances in year 1 than he did in year 2.

I agree that draft position means nothing. But people are hanging their hat on traits, personality, etc., the reasons for why he was drafted so high in the first place. If we are only treating them on the basis of what they do "on the field" than that's a pessimistic future for Sanders (ie, he got dropped), not optimistic - you need to use his draft position and the reasons for it, which remain true to this day, as the justification to be optimistic.

 

[MrChristo]

He's still tracking below expectation through two years of the average, expected value you get out of the draft pick - again, trying to speak objectively by measuring on-field performance to draft position through two years, and that's before you get into the fact we already had higher-than-draft-position expectations for him on the basis of overpaying to trade up.

Even players that get dropped in their second year do so with better on-field contribution. E.g. Josh Ward played 3 VFL games in his 2nd year, but his stats were better across the board for the AFL games he did play in his 2nd year (and just using this as an example). Even Ward himself was probably below average through two years, but better than Sanders.

Only because I've got a bit of time to kill on a Sunday afternoon...

Or, you could compare apples and apples.
It was the 2023 draft. We couldn't pick Josh Ward.
So compare Sanders to those who are relevant.
Windsor taken next pick. Definitely a more outside player, but "statistically" (which seems to be your argument) is well down on Sanders pretty much across the board.

Who's a more comparable player? Let's take Harley Reid. The clear #1, who again we had no access to.
Almost identical disposals.
Reid edges Tackles 3.5 to 3.0.
Reid big edge in Contested Poss and Clearances, explained almost entirely by where each player in on the ground.
Reid 59% cba's for the year, Sanders 10%.

Sanders' effective disposal is over 80%. Elite. (Safe, you might say...
...but would you rather Reid's 6.3 clangers and 4.5 turnovers a game for more metres gained but LESS score involvements. (Sanders 5.4 to 4.3).

I mean, we could play these black/white comparison games all day. Some might be fair comparisons, most won't.

Funny how we universally see the Kornes model as cringe (*), but we all [myself included] tend to have a bit of; I-was-rightest-firstest, about us, don't we.

(*) Word of the week, brought to you by the AFL news cycle and media saturation. (Because we all believe each Draft pick takes each team by surprise and therefore need a full final 3 minutes of research to make a decision).

 

[BomToydd]

Bont is an exception

That's what I'm saying. He's no Bont. Not even a Freijah. How many games has he won off his own boot?

 

[BomToydd]

Only because I've got a bit of time to kill on a Sunday afternoon...

Or, you could compare apples and apples.
It was the 2023 draft. We couldn't pick Josh Ward.
So compare Sanders to those who are relevant.
Windsor taken next pick. Definitely a more outside player, but "statistically" (which seems to be your argument) is well down on Sanders pretty much across the board.

Who's a more comparable player? Let's take Harley Reid. The clear #1, who again we had no access to.
Almost identical disposals.
Reid edges Tackles 3.5 to 3.0.
Reid big edge in Contested Poss and Clearances, explained almost entirely by where each player in on the ground.
Reid 59% cba's for the year, Sanders 10%.

Sanders' effective disposal is over 80%. Elite. (Safe, you might say...
...but would you rather Reid's 6.3 clangers and 4.5 turnovers a game for more metres gained but LESS score involvements. (Sanders 5.4 to 4.3).

I mean, we could play these black/white comparison games all day. Some might be fair comparisons, most won't.

Funny how we universally see the Kornes model as cringe (*), but we all [myself included] tend to have a bit of; I-was-rightest-firstest, about us, don't we.

(*) Word of the week, brought to you by the AFL news cycle and media saturation. (Because we all believe each Draft pick takes each team by surprise and therefore need a full final 3 minutes of research to make a decision).

Can cherry pick whatever stats you want but Sanders will never have a highlight reel as good as Reid's. The Petrecca and Oliver fend offs were crazy for a player of his experience.

And no one's doing a Kornes. Would be boring here if we all had the same opinions

 

[maddog37]

That's what I'm saying. He's no Bont. Not even a Freijah. How many games has he won off his own boot?

Who gives a rats toss bag.

How many reserves games did Michael Tuck play? Or Dipper etc

 

[BomToydd]

Who gives a rats toss bag.

How many reserves games did Michael Tuck play? Or Dipper etc

Who gives a rats toss bag lol
I hope he becomes a good player but don't think Sanders is the next Tuck or Dipper

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Only because I've got a bit of time to kill on a Sunday afternoon...

Or, you could compare apples and apples.
It was the 2023 draft. We couldn't pick Josh Ward.
So compare Sanders to those who are relevant.
Windsor taken next pick. Definitely a more outside player, but "statistically" (which seems to be your argument) is well down on Sanders pretty much across the board.

Who's a more comparable player? Let's take Harley Reid. The clear #1, who again we had no access to.
Almost identical disposals.
Reid edges Tackles 3.5 to 3.0.
Reid big edge in Contested Poss and Clearances, explained almost entirely by where each player in on the ground.
Reid 59% cba's for the year, Sanders 10%.

Sanders' effective disposal is over 80%. Elite. (Safe, you might say...
...but would you rather Reid's 6.3 clangers and 4.5 turnovers a game for more metres gained but LESS score involvements. (Sanders 5.4 to 4.3).

I mean, we could play these black/white comparison games all day. Some might be fair comparisons, most won't.

Funny how we universally see the Kornes model as cringe (*), but we all [myself included] tend to have a bit of; I-was-rightest-firstest, about us, don't we.

(*) Word of the week, brought to you by the AFL news cycle and media saturation. (Because we all believe each Draft pick takes each team by surprise and therefore need a full final 3 minutes of research to make a decision).

Or we could compare Reid's 340m gained per match to Sanders' 160m. Or we could not be selective about statistics at all and use the entire range of statistics together, which still quite obviously have Reid as the stronger player even if I agree with you that Reid's on-field production doesn't match the hype.

In any case, the purposes of using Ward was to compare to the general wide range of expected outcomes for mid-late top 10 onballers.

 

[Salad dog]

He's still tracking below expectation through two years of the average, expected value you get out of the draft pick - again, trying to speak objectively by measuring on-field performance to draft position through two years, and that's before you get into the fact we already had higher-than-draft-position expectations for him on the basis of overpaying to trade up.

Even players that get dropped in their second year do so with better on-field contribution. E.g. Josh Ward played 3 VFL games in his 2nd year, but his stats were better across the board for the AFL games he did play in his 2nd year (and just using this as an example). Even Ward himself was probably below average through two years, but better than Sanders.

How is he tracking below expectations through two years of the average, expected value you get out the draft pick?

 

[St 07]

How often do dogs fans have to be proven wrong before they reel their heads in about players?

 

[BallaratBulldog]

How often do dogs fans have to be proven wrong before they reel their heads in about players?

AFL fans in general*

 

[maddog37]

Who gives a rats toss bag lol
I hope he becomes a good player but don't think Sanders is the next Tuck or Dipper

I’m just saying it’s way too early to decide either way.

People are so keen to say they said it first. Like two bob crap journos.

 

[BomToydd]

I’m just saying it’s way too early to decide either way.

People are so keen to say they said it first. Like two bob crap journos.

Nah some people are so sensitive and delusional about any criticism of our players. Not every play will be a star

 

[Doggy]

Nah some people are so sensitive and delusional about any criticism of our players. Not every play will be a star

Do they have to be? Can't have a full team of A graders.

 

[BrisDog]

If Sanders turns out to be as good as Daniel Cross

Daniel Cross

Age

42

Ht

187cm

Wt

87kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

23.3

5star

K

8.5

3star

HB

14.8

5star

M

5.2

5star

T

4.3

5star

CL

3.0

4star

No current season stats available

D

3.2

1star

K

1.6

1star

HB

1.6

2star

M

1.0

1star

T

0.6

3star

I will be very happy. He is the type of player that Sanders could be if he increases his intensity around the ball and probably more importantly - when he doesn’t have the ball.

But let’s be honest, very few clubs spend a high-end, first round pick on slowish inside mid with limited foot skills.

 

[TiAn_]

There’s an unwritten rule on here that discussing a young player’s weaknesses is ok up until they are drafted by the Bulldogs then it immediately becomes the criminal offence of “wRiTinG tHeM oFf”.

 

[BomToydd]

Do they have to be? Can't have a full team of A graders.

Nah but funny how the people calling him special even though it's apparently too early to tell aren't the ones being called Kornes and two bob crap journos