List Mgmt. 2015 Trade, Draft, Rookie Draft and FA Megathread

[Kildonan]

OI MODS.... Gimme back my damn thread!!

Ha ha - sorry about that - just moved posts from other threads into this one and it turns out some are earlier than your opening post...

 

[Barrels]

Ha ha - sorry about that - just moved posts from other threads into this one and it turns out some are earlier than your opening post...

Booooooooooooooooooooo

 

[SK_MD_#7]

Booooooooooooooooooooo

Sucked in.

Hahahahaha

 

[Barrels]

Sucked in.

Hahahahaha

God I hate you.

 

[12Chill]

Hypothetical time.

Let's say Tommy Lee's shoulders don't hold up again next year, after Riewoldt our talls are now only McCartin and White with a possible resting ruck/Or Goddard/Bruce swing man.

If we have a pick to go for a tall forward (Ryan Burton) or a tall defender type (Jacob Weitering) what do we do? Use one of Goddard/Bruce up forward each game to tag with McCartin/White in the future or do we leave them down back and draft Ryan Burton, another tall playing forward?

I'm interested in how you guys view this situation because it could well eventuate this time next year.

 

[STK2020]

One draft pick would be enough for you? At best it's a lateral move, worst case we've lost a really good player for nothing. Surely it would take more?

You always want more , I think if rules for compo picks dont change and hate to say it BUT we finish bottom we could have pick 1 & compo pick 2 , surely that must get discussion happening.
Dont like idea of off loading a mid for a mid I admit but another key defender would nice with a comp pick selection .

 

[dewah07]

Hypothetical time.

Let's say Tommy Lee's shoulders don't hold up again next year, after Riewoldt our talls are now only McCartin and White with a possible resting ruck/Or Goddard/Bruce swing man.

If we have a pick to go for a tall forward (Ryan Burton) or a tall defender type (Jacob Weitering) what do we do? Use one of Goddard/Bruce up forward each game to tag with McCartin/White in the future or do we leave them down back and draft Ryan Burton, another tall playing forward?

I'm interested in how you guys view this situation because it could well eventuate this time next year.

I don't see the point speculating on our 2nd round pick when we can't even figure out the top5

 

[12Chill]

I don't see the point speculating on our 2nd round pick when we can't even figure out the top5

It's a hypothetical, doesn't even have to be the player, it's more a point on which position would we rather fill with that given pick given the situation.

 

[Mindtraveller]

Hypothetical time.

Let's say Tommy Lee's shoulders don't hold up again next year, after Riewoldt our talls are now only McCartin and White with a possible resting ruck/Or Goddard/Bruce swing man.

If we have a pick to go for a tall forward (Ryan Burton) or a tall defender type (Jacob Weitering) what do we do? Use one of Goddard/Bruce up forward each game to tag with McCartin/White in the future or do we leave them down back and draft Ryan Burton, another tall playing forward?

I'm interested in how you guys view this situation because it could well eventuate this time next year.

Weitering because he coud become a midfielder?

 

[12Chill]

Weitering because he coud become a midfielder?

If Jacob Weitering becomes a good midfielder, he'd be a pretty scary height for it...

Has grown to 194cm now according to the recent article on AFL.com.au. And he has a very late season birthday (23/11/1997) so there's still 11 months until he turns 18, and often draftees will continue growing another 1-3cms after they turn 18 too.

197-198cm midfielder anyone?

Like him, is currently 194cm/94kg so key defender looks most likely. Think he's suited down back but if he is able to swing in the midfield and develop his game there he'd be pretty scary.

 

[dewah07]

I swear if we dont just take mids...

 

[Barrels]

I swear if we dont just take KPDs...

Fixed.

EDIT: also, stop posting here and get on with the draft!!

 

[SK_MD_#7]

I swear if we dont just take mids...

I'm sure the club will be scared of what you might do if they don't take just mids.

 

[STK2020]

Can we have both ????

 

[felsty]

Fixed.

EDIT: also, stop posting here and get on with the draft!!

He is taking the first pick VERY seriously.. just like Trout and McBain!

 

[Rors]

Increase number of picks in the first 3 rounds by 50% over 4 years. Statement made prior to 2013 draft.
So instead of 3 picks x 4 drafts = 12 picks
They wanted 18 picks in that period, on average 4.5 per draft.

Just talking picks:
2013
We turned McEvoy and our 2nd into two late-first-round picks (18 and 19)
We let Dal go to get us back into the 2nd round again, but then dealt that for Longer.
We had 3 picks in the first three rounds, but I'd include Longer because we were going to use that pick, then Longer being available and being considered great value, was a bonus.

2014
Turned Stanley and a 4th rounder into a 1st rounder
Used 4 picks.

So they're actually behind in their projection - they need 10 picks in the first 3 rounds in the next two drafts to meet it. I can't see that happening.

My view is that the original strategy was a complete clearing of the decks. People say that you cant rebuild if you give up your good players. But in reality, that can be countered with the suggestion that you cant rebuild quicker than all the other clubs (who by default get the same number of draft picks) unless you give up good players for extra picks.
I am pretty sure Pelchen would have wanted to move on Armo for the pick. He might even have wanted to forego Paddy and pick 1, if he could get a good enough deal (e.g two very high picks).

I think that when they published that statement, they expected to be drafting 6 kids in the first 50 this year, but that's not how its played out. That might well mean that we have not given up enough, or risked enough, to be able to rebuild enough (significantly more than other clubs). Or it may just be that some of the players on the list are reliable enough, and that the rookie draft is bringing us better than we thought, and that a deal like Delaney's working out for us is very handy.

I can't help but think that the 'increase our draft activity in the 1st 3 rounds' comment was a bit of a 'throw-away line & made to also include traded in players that were taken in the 1st 3 rounds of more recent drafts as well. I agree with you about Longer, as I remember Pelchen saying something along the lines of the club being very happy after picking up 4 1st round picks in 2013 because the club viewed signing Longer during trade week as being that 4th 1st round pick in 2013. The club also seems to be extremely happy with Membrey, who they possibly view as an extra 3rd round pick this year, as he was originally 2012 - 3rd round, pick 46. The club rated Templeton a Top 30 player in the 2013 draft too, so I would assume they consider him to be a '2nd rounder' in their plans...

Using your formula of 18 picks over 4 drafts, if you include Membrey & Eli, you end up with 10 players, being:

2013 - Billings, Dunstan, Acres, Longer (1st rounders) - Templeton (viewed as a 2nd rounder)
2014 - McCartin, Goddard (1st rounders) - McKenzie (2nd rounder) - Lonie, Membrey (3rd rounders)

This leaves 8 picks in the first 3 rounds over the next 2 drafts to achieve our 50% increase. I'm certain that the club would view landing a trade for Shiel/Treloar/Smith/WHE as a '1st round pick' next season, then take 3-4 picks into the draft.

The following year, I'd bank on us adding a Free Agent & another 3 draft picks as well

This should easily achieve our goal of increasing our draft activity over the first 3 rounds over 4 years, ie: 18 players

Edit: I also suspect that if guys like Saunders/Murdoch/Curren don't secure a regular spot in the seniors in coming seasons, they may be used for trade bait to sweeten deals to land guys like Treloar/Shiel in future

 

[ike2112]

Think they probably shouldn't have put a specific number against it, as you need to retain the ability to be flexible when an opportunity is presented. For example if we were offered Cameron and Shiel, then **** the draft!

But the main point in the plan, was that all clubs, even those at the top of the ladder, get to pick 3 of the best 54 kids each year. Due to comp, academies, trades and father-son, they can even get more, and get great value at times.
So in order to catch up, given where our list was at by mid 2013, they felt that we needed to be picking up half as much again talent on top of the other clubs.
Not on that, but we projected that our picks would be high ones, so we'd get real top talent. There was a dual underlying principle there. In order to get the extra picks, we would have to give up players. Giving up senior players would bring in the draft selections we wanted, whilst at the same time ensuring our performance level was low, ensuring in turn our draft choices would be high.

I believe they felt the club had enough B and C grade talent, like Geary, Armo, Webster and confident they'd pick up more along the way (Delaney, Membrey). But AA-level talent recruitment would need to be via the draft. So get those high picks and then make sure to develop them into stars. Paddy, Billings, Goddard, McKenzie and Acres will probably go a long way to determine whether we win or lose games when we intend to be contending for finals. I think there needs to be just a little bit more elite ballplayers in there. Every GF team has maybe 8 or so key players, real stars, and most of them play through the middle, so we are still I think a couple high picks short in our rebuild.

We also have to hope that we picked well, and that some other clubs picked poorly. You can't control the development of other clubs, and if someone else has drafted some stars with good value picks, and develops others well, they might be building a better team than us. We have turned down opportunities to mortgage the present for the benefit of the future (turning down Armo trade, for example).
We'll just need to accept that; we might recruit a side full of mid-level talent with only one or two stars, when other clubs develop their picks better and get lucky with others.

 

[Strahany]

FWIW, last time I heard, the club rated Membrey as either a first or second round "pick-equivalent" player.

 

[Nutsngum]

We have turned down opportunities to mortgage the present for the benefit of the future (turning down Armo trade, for example).

Sorry but I disagree with this completely. Getting rid of Armo now removes one of our key mid field leaders (the only other really being Joey) and will really hurt the development of the kids over the next few years. Yes having Lachie Weller or another mid like that would be great but we risk a huge amount by getting rid of all out veterans and mid range experienced players.

This is exactly why Pelchen was no longer a fit into the club. He lacks the football playing knowledge to understand the leadership and experience requirements in a rebuild and would go for broke otherwise. Without people like Armo you can sit back and watch all the top 8 teams push around and smash our kids constantly. That is not going to help them becomes our core.

 

[ike2112]

I think Pelchen wanted to almost clear decks completely.
Hawthorn gave up a good few good players to get a bounty of picks when he was present at their rebuild. He firmly believes in that type of plan, one that can bring a Hodge, Buddy and Roughy into a club in quick time.

I agree there's good reason to keep Armo. But you don't suddenly go from being worse than everyone else to being better than everyone else, by taking no risks and just using your picks wisely each year.

 

[Nutsngum]

Trading out Macca and Rhys are both risks. Others might think of Rhys as being a no brainer trade but he still has the potential to be that excellent forward/ruck.

Had we still had Lenny for 2 more years then letting Armo go would be a good decision but when your only other midfield Veterans are Montagna and Farren Ray then taking the risk that whoever we draft is better then Armo in 4 years and brings as much leadership etc.. starts becoming too great.

 

[ike2112]

The risk/equation isn't whether who we pick is better than who we trade. It's not as simple as that. That sort of thinking gets a team in a mess.
It's just a matter of whether having 5 opportunities to pick elite talent is better than 3, and then whether you can give up what it would take to get those extra picks. Trading out Armo would definitely hurt our team. But would it hurt us enough to not be worth having more picks, and the flexibility it offers?
Put it this way - if the offer was pick 5 instead of 12 I bet we'd have taken it, yet that would still just be one more unproven youngster on the list in exchange for Armo.

 

[Stewart66]

The risk/equation isn't whether who we pick is better than who we trade. It's not as simple as that. That sort of thinking gets a team in a mess.
It's just a matter of whether having 5 opportunities to pick elite talent is better than 3, and then whether you can give up what it would take to get those extra picks. Trading out Armo would definitely hurt our team. But would it hurt us enough to not be worth having more picks, and the flexibility it offers?
Put it this way - if the offer was pick 5 instead of 12 I bet we'd have taken it, yet that would still just be one more unproven youngster on the list in exchange for Armo.

The risk/equation isn't whether who we pick is better than who we trade. It's not as simple as that. That sort of thinking gets a team in a mess.
It's just a matter of whether having 5 opportunities to pick elite talent is better than 3, and then whether you can give up what it would take to get those extra picks. Trading out Armo would definitely hurt our team. But would it hurt us enough to not be worth having more picks, and the flexibility it offers?
Put it this way - if the offer was pick 5 instead of 12 I bet we'd have taken it, yet that would still just be one more unproven youngster on the list in exchange for Armo.

There is no quick fix for club.
They have 35 players recently added & something like 20 players under 50 games , if they trade any more experience the club will be in the wilderness for years . They have promoted 4 rookies , who will be evaluated
over the year together with guys like Simpkin , Siposs , & retirements such as Schneider , Dempster & Fisher
& if Gilbert does not recover, club is in for long haul but will improve by pinching the guys from GWS which will happen .

 

[ike2112]

I believe some of our young players will step up this year.

I don't believe we'll be pinching any star Giants - if a kid has had to go there and toil, despite good money they'd have not particularly enjoyed it, they'll be ready to win a bit and play at a solid club. That's not us right now. Unless we stupidly, hugely overpay, we're not an attractive option at the moment.

 

[SK_MD_#7]

NZ AFL performance manager seems to think a few players were unlucky not to be drafted by us..

Nicholas Palmer @palmerN1982 · Dec 11
Surprised @stkildafc didn't rookie draft Jordan Tabackman after their review of him at the @VAFA_HQ rep game in New Zealand.


Nicholas Palmer @palmerN1982 · Dec 11
@AFLNZ Hawks James Little was also unlucky to miss out on an international scholarship with @stkildafc Keep working hard James #aflnz