Traded 2018 Live Trade: Carlton trade #4 (2019) to Adelaide for #19 (2018) and #9 (2019)

[Mikevk123]

I reckon Carlton won that trade in the end. The upside on Kemp is huge.

 

[F_therest]

I reckon Carlton won that trade in the end. The upside on Kemp is huge.

I think both teams did well out of it, but on paper right now Carlton arguably slightly more so.

Would have preferred Papley & Stocker for pick 4, but given what transpired i'm very happy to get Kemp, Philp & Stocker for pick 4 & a late pick.
Good wheeling and dealing in the end by SOS to get creative and make that happen.

 

[lozstar]

I reckon Carlton won that trade in the end. The upside on Kemp is huge.

You can't say that theres is still a pick in play but I think it's a win win

 

[Crows I Am]

I think most people in this thread have their heads fair & square up their backsides.

Why does there have to be a winner and a loser in this trade ??

The best position in every business deal is that it is a win-win scenario, in this situation, if both clubs come out of it in a stronger position and are pleased with the outcome then that is an ideal eventuality.

There is definitely no clear loser, which in my eyes make this a win-win trade for both teams.

 

[footyfan1978]

I LOVE live trading. Makes the first nights of draft so much more exciting now.
To have Stocker, Kemp and Philp to look forward to watching for next decade together is super exciting journey to have in front of us.
We wanted to use our first rounder this draft in trade period to help get us Papley but Swans could not afford to let him go once they could not get their own target in Daniher. Sliding doors moment will be fascinating to look back on in five years time.

We would obviously benefit more to have Papley for more immediate impact but long term this sliding doors moment of not being able to get him in trade period probably gains us more benefit later next decade when these young punks are in their mid twenties themselves.

For Crows it will be interesting to see if McAsey career can become better than an Ash, Young or Serong that I think they could have got if they kept the pick we traded them. I think we would have picked Serong or Young if we had kept pick 4 and not got Stocker, Kemp and Philp from live trades. I really like look of Serong but like the look of Stocker and Kemp even more and the less known Philp I will be excited to see how his inside game and pace develops at senior level.

 

[TwiggleyFanClub]

Either way, people (and especially the AFL) should appreciate what SOS has done over the last 2 years.
No SOS magic on draft night = typical draft snoozefest.

 

[Robertio]

There is definitely no clear loser, which in my eyes make this a win-win trade for both teams.

Spot on that's what it's all about, plus we get to have the death riding threads which is added entertainment.

 

[Crows I Am]

Spot on that's what it's all about, plus we get to have the death riding threads which is added entertainment.

It will be strange not having one next year!

 

[richoatthedisco]

Interesting story. Who didn’t allow Bolton to do that? As I understand it, assistant coaches suggested he to make similar changes but he stuck to his guns. It wasn’t so much the age of the team that changed under Teague, but where on the field players of certain ages played.

I think that’s a fair summary. Though if Carlton only take 3 players at the draft then it’s really just Stephens/Young for Stocker, Kemp and Philp. Or who knows, maybe having pick 4 would’ve been too tempting for the Swans and used to get Papley and Martin over the line.

It felt like Bolton was forced out, and his last teams were young (as opposed to his first year when he did like Teague and picked the oldest sides he could).

Teague won games with teams significantly older on average than your opponents against Gold Coast, Sydney and the Bulldogs. St Kilda was the same age when you beat them (and when Bolton lost to them in his last game, funnily enough). The only games Teague won with teams younger than your opponents were his first against Brisbane, and against the rabble that was the Crows.

Comparative ages of Carlton sides in 2019:
Under Bolton:
R1 v Richmond 24yr 9mth v 25yr 11mth, lost by 33
R2 v Port 24yr 8mth v 25yr 1mth, lost by 16
R3 v Sydney 24yr 9mth v 24yr 11mth, lost by 19
R4 v Gold Coast 24yr 10mth v 23yr 11mth, lost by 2
R5 v Bulldogs 24yr 10mth v 23yr 11mth, won by 44
R6 v Hawthorn 24yr 11mth v 26yr 1mth, lost by 5
R7 v North 23yr 9mth v 26yr 3mth, lost by 58
R8 v Collingwood 23yr 9mth v 26yr 2mth, lost by 19
R9 v GWS 23yr 9mth v 25yr 10mth, lost by 93
R10 v St Kilda: 24yr 3mth v 24yr 3mth, lost by 13
R11 v Essendon: 23yr 4mth v 25yr 3mth, lost by 41, got sacked

Average age under Bolton in 2019: 24yr 3 mth. Average age in Bolton's last 5 games: 23yr 9mth. Were the older team twice: lost by 2 (away to a side that was 3-1 at the time) and won by 44. Six times more than a year younger on average than opponent, three of those more than two years younger (and once all but two years younger).

Under Teague:
R12 v Brisbane 24yr 3mth v 25yr 0mth, won by 15
R13 v Dogs 24yr 9mth v 24yr 7mth, lost by 3
R15 v Freo 25yr 0mth v 24yr 4mth, won by 4
R16 v Melbourne 25yr 0mth v 24yr 8mth, lost by 5
R17 v Sydney 25yr 1mth v 24yr 0mth, won by 7
R18 v Gold Coast 25yr 2mth v 24yr 0mth, won by 24
R19 v Adelaide 25yr 0mth v 26yr 3mth, won by 27
R20 v West Coast 24yr 4mth v 26yr 2mth, lost by 24
R21 v Richmond 25yr 4mth v 25yr 2mth, lost by 28
R22 v St Kilda 25yr 0mth v 25yr 0mth, won by 10
R23 v Geelong 24yr 10mth v 26yr 11mth, lost by 68

Average age under Teague: 24yr 11mth. Were the older team six times: won 3, lost 3. Were the younger team four times: won 2, lost 2. Same age once: won 1. Twice faced a team more than a year older for a win over Adelaide and a thrashing at the hands of Geelong. Were twice more than a year older, won both.

Only twice in three years under Bolton did Carlton field teams with an average age over 25. In 6 of 11 games under Teague your average was 25 or over.

I don't know if Bolton was forced to play younger teams but his teams got younger in his last games, while Teague's teams got progressively older before plateauing. Whether that is by design or availability I'd have to examine further. What can't be denied is the chances of winning go up when you are older than your opponent. Teams +6mths on their opponents have a 55% winning ratio over time, rising to 57% for +1yr, 62% for +1.5yrs, and 66% for +2yrs.

Teams with an average age of 25 should be playing finals. Teague's acid test is coming in 2020 (which is not telling you anything, I'm sure).

 

[Jimbojay]

It felt like Bolton was forced out, and his last teams were young (as opposed to his first year when he did like Teague and picked the oldest sides he could).

Teague won games with teams significantly older on average than your opponents against Gold Coast, Sydney and the Bulldogs. St Kilda was the same age when you beat them (and when Bolton lost to them in his last game, funnily enough). The only games Teague won with teams younger than your opponents were his first against Brisbane, and against the rabble that was the Crows.

Comparative ages of Carlton sides in 2019:
Under Bolton:
R1 v Richmond 24yr 9mth v 25yr 11mth, lost by 33
R2 v Port 24yr 8mth v 25yr 1mth, lost by 16
R3 v Sydney 24yr 9mth v 24yr 11mth, lost by 19
R4 v Gold Coast 24yr 10mth v 23yr 11mth, lost by 2
R5 v Bulldogs 24yr 10mth v 23yr 11mth, won by 44
R6 v Hawthorn 24yr 11mth v 26yr 1mth, lost by 5
R7 v North 23yr 9mth v 26yr 3mth, lost by 58
R8 v Collingwood 23yr 9mth v 26yr 2mth, lost by 19
R9 v GWS 23yr 9mth v 25yr 10mth, lost by 93
R10 v St Kilda: 24yr 3mth v 24yr 3mth, lost by 13
R11 v Essendon: 23yr 4mth v 25yr 3mth, lost by 41, got sacked

Average age under Bolton in 2019: 24yr 3 mth. Average age in Bolton's last 5 games: 23yr 9mth. Were the older team twice: lost by 2 (away to a side that was 3-1 at the time) and won by 44. Six times more than a year younger on average than opponent, three of those more than two years younger (and once all but two years younger).

Under Teague:
R12 v Brisbane 24yr 3mth v 25yr 0mth, won by 15
R13 v Dogs 24yr 9mth v 24yr 7mth, lost by 3
R15 v Freo 25yr 0mth v 24yr 4mth, won by 4
R16 v Melbourne 25yr 0mth v 24yr 8mth, lost by 5
R17 v Sydney 25yr 1mth v 24yr 0mth, won by 7
R18 v Gold Coast 25yr 2mth v 24yr 0mth, won by 24
R19 v Adelaide 25yr 0mth v 26yr 3mth, won by 27
R20 v West Coast 24yr 4mth v 26yr 2mth, lost by 24
R21 v Richmond 25yr 4mth v 25yr 2mth, lost by 28
R22 v St Kilda 25yr 0mth v 25yr 0mth, won by 10
R23 v Geelong 24yr 10mth v 26yr 11mth, lost by 68

Average age under Teague: 24yr 11mth. Were the older team six times: won 3, lost 3. Were the younger team four times: won 2, lost 2. Same age once: won 1. Twice faced a team more than a year older for a win over Adelaide and a thrashing at the hands of Geelong. Were twice more than a year older, won both.

Only twice in three years under Bolton did Carlton field teams with an average age over 25. In 6 of 11 games under Teague your average was 25 or over.

I don't know if Bolton was forced to play younger teams but his teams got younger in his last games, while Teague's teams got progressively older before plateauing. Whether that is by design or availability I'd have to examine further. What can't be denied is the chances of winning go up when you are older than your opponent. Teams +6mths on their opponents have a 55% winning ratio over time, rising to 57% for +1yr, 62% for +1.5yrs, and 66% for +2yrs.

Teams with an average age of 25 should be playing finals. Teague's acid test is coming in 2020 (which is not telling you anything, I'm sure).

Just FYI the 4 games where the average age was below 24, were the 4 games in which Simpson was injured (vs North, Pies, GWS and Bombers) and the youngest game vs Bombers is the week Daisy decided to go drinking.

There is no doubt that Bolton tried to put the younger guys in more prominent roles, but 30+ year olds missing a game can really swing the average.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

It felt like Bolton was forced out, and his last teams were young (as opposed to his first year when he did like Teague and picked the oldest sides he could).

Teague won games with teams significantly older on average than your opponents against Gold Coast, Sydney and the Bulldogs. St Kilda was the same age when you beat them (and when Bolton lost to them in his last game, funnily enough). The only games Teague won with teams younger than your opponents were his first against Brisbane, and against the rabble that was the Crows.

Comparative ages of Carlton sides in 2019:
Under Bolton:
R1 v Richmond 24yr 9mth v 25yr 11mth, lost by 33
R2 v Port 24yr 8mth v 25yr 1mth, lost by 16
R3 v Sydney 24yr 9mth v 24yr 11mth, lost by 19
R4 v Gold Coast 24yr 10mth v 23yr 11mth, lost by 2
R5 v Bulldogs 24yr 10mth v 23yr 11mth, won by 44
R6 v Hawthorn 24yr 11mth v 26yr 1mth, lost by 5
R7 v North 23yr 9mth v 26yr 3mth, lost by 58
R8 v Collingwood 23yr 9mth v 26yr 2mth, lost by 19
R9 v GWS 23yr 9mth v 25yr 10mth, lost by 93
R10 v St Kilda: 24yr 3mth v 24yr 3mth, lost by 13
R11 v Essendon: 23yr 4mth v 25yr 3mth, lost by 41, got sacked

Average age under Bolton in 2019: 24yr 3 mth. Average age in Bolton's last 5 games: 23yr 9mth. Were the older team twice: lost by 2 (away to a side that was 3-1 at the time) and won by 44. Six times more than a year younger on average than opponent, three of those more than two years younger (and once all but two years younger).

Under Teague:
R12 v Brisbane 24yr 3mth v 25yr 0mth, won by 15
R13 v Dogs 24yr 9mth v 24yr 7mth, lost by 3
R15 v Freo 25yr 0mth v 24yr 4mth, won by 4
R16 v Melbourne 25yr 0mth v 24yr 8mth, lost by 5
R17 v Sydney 25yr 1mth v 24yr 0mth, won by 7
R18 v Gold Coast 25yr 2mth v 24yr 0mth, won by 24
R19 v Adelaide 25yr 0mth v 26yr 3mth, won by 27
R20 v West Coast 24yr 4mth v 26yr 2mth, lost by 24
R21 v Richmond 25yr 4mth v 25yr 2mth, lost by 28
R22 v St Kilda 25yr 0mth v 25yr 0mth, won by 10
R23 v Geelong 24yr 10mth v 26yr 11mth, lost by 68

Average age under Teague: 24yr 11mth. Were the older team six times: won 3, lost 3. Were the younger team four times: won 2, lost 2. Same age once: won 1. Twice faced a team more than a year older for a win over Adelaide and a thrashing at the hands of Geelong. Were twice more than a year older, won both.

Only twice in three years under Bolton did Carlton field teams with an average age over 25. In 6 of 11 games under Teague your average was 25 or over.

I don't know if Bolton was forced to play younger teams but his teams got younger in his last games, while Teague's teams got progressively older before plateauing. Whether that is by design or availability I'd have to examine further. What can't be denied is the chances of winning go up when you are older than your opponent. Teams +6mths on their opponents have a 55% winning ratio over time, rising to 57% for +1yr, 62% for +1.5yrs, and 66% for +2yrs.

Teams with an average age of 25 should be playing finals. Teague's acid test is coming in 2020 (which is not telling you anything, I'm sure).

Only major difference in the line ups was putting Ed Curnow and Murphy back in the middle, age difference came from a few injuries to Simmo and Daisy etc who almost put a year on to the average age each. Players got some belief after a couple of wins and started showing their natural talent instead of spending every game in their shell scared of making a mistake. If you watch SPS frequently he's the biggest indicator of how our teams doing mentally, either spends the entire game doing small 20m safe passes, or cuts teams apart looking for longer options and hitting targets inside 50, Under Bolton you could physically see the cluttered decision making he was going through on screen every time he got the pill, then every now and then he just decided to pull the trigger and was arguably better than Cripps in those games.

Can't claim to know what exactly was going on, but from everything thats been released it sounds like Bolton's game plan was far too complicated and more suited to the likes of a team like Hawthorn who had extremely intelligent players. Carlton just have a bunch of high draft pick space cadets who know how to play on instincts and Teague clearly was better at tailoring roles for those players, such as Charlie, LOB, SPS, Plowman and Matt Kennedy

 

[richoatthedisco]

Just FYI the 4 games where the average age was below 24, were the 4 games in which Simpson was injured (vs North, Pies, GWS and Bombers) and the youngest game vs Bombers is the week Daisy decided to go drinking.

There is no doubt that Bolton tried to put the younger guys in more prominent roles, but 30+ year olds missing a game can really swing the average.

Absolutely a couple of oldies can swing the average, especially a 36-year-old. Equally, it affects leadership and team composure under pressure.

Only major difference in the line ups was putting Ed Curnow and Murphy back in the middle, age difference came from a few injuries to Simmo and Daisy etc who almost put a year on to the average age each. Players got some belief after a couple of wins and started showing their natural talent instead of spending every game in their shell scared of making a mistake. If you watch SPS frequently he's the biggest indicator of how our teams doing mentally, either spends the entire game doing small 20m safe passes, or cuts teams apart looking for longer options and hitting targets inside 50, Under Bolton you could physically see the cluttered decision making he was going through on screen every time he got the pill, then every now and then he just decided to pull the trigger and was arguably better than Cripps in those games.

Can't claim to know what exactly was going on, but from everything thats been released it sounds like Bolton's game plan was far too complicated and more suited to the likes of a team like Hawthorn who had extremely intelligent players. Carlton just have a bunch of high draft pick space cadets who know how to play on instincts and Teague clearly was better at tailoring roles for those players, such as Charlie, LOB, SPS, Plowman and Matt Kennedy

I'm no fan of Bolton, and Teague has started well. As you both point out, he put senior, hardened blokes in the key roles, as opposed to Bolton who moved them to the flanks and put kids in the middle. I think the former is the way to go. It makes it easier to win, and winning breeds confidence, which boosts development.

It's Plowman's eighth year next year. Might be time to try someone else.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

Can somebody just add up the points and tell us who won? No as Adelaide have a 2020 pick. Lets revisit next year...

It still won't help.

2018 was a much stronger draft than 2019 and 2020 yet the points are allocated the same.

On SM-G960F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Robertio]

Absolutely a couple of oldies can swing the average, especially a 36-year-old. Equally, it affects leadership and team composure under pressure.


I'm no fan of Bolton, and Teague has started well. As you both point out, he put senior, hardened blokes in the key roles, as opposed to Bolton who moved them to the flanks and put kids in the middle. I think the former is the way to go. It makes it easier to win, and winning breeds confidence, which boosts development.

It's Plowman's eighth year next year. Might be time to try someone else.

Came 3rd in the B+F, had a good year.

 

[richoatthedisco]

Came 3rd in the B+F, had a good year.

Did he?? Wow.

B&F awards can be skewed these days, often judged on how well a player performs his role. Eg, for us, Lambert finished ahead of Cotchin in 3rd place in 2017, but there's no way he had a better year. Do you think Plowman was your third-best player for the year?

 

[Robertio]

Did he?? Wow.

B&F awards can be skewed these days, often judged on how well a player performs his role. Eg, for us, Lambert finished ahead of Cotchin in 3rd place in 2017, but there's no way he had a better year. Do you think Plowman was your third-best player for the year?

I would of pegged him for top 5 or 6, he played on smalls as well as talls and is a leader out on the field. The coaches give the votes so as long as you are doing the job they want you to do you will get rewarded. But don't worry there's a lot of Carlton supporters who were surprised as well.

 

[branedotorg]

I think he's doing fine. Not worth his initial high draft status but is quick enough, well organised and tough. Flexible to play big or small.
Biggest issue for him has been playing on Michael Walters types who can get away from him when our young midfield turn the ball over.

Will look better as the team becomes more experienced.

 

[FyfeToAdelaide]

It will be strange not having one next year!

GWS will be ridden.

 

[FyfeToAdelaide]

Pretty sure if Carlton hadn't traded and were sitting where Bolton had them at the bottom they would of probably rode it out and got pick 1/2. Both good and bad, would of had a higher pick but wouldn't of got some winning experience.

 

[jezzajay]

Insightful stuff...not.

 

[bmaurizio]

Pretty sure if Carlton hadn't traded and were sitting where Bolton had them at the bottom they would of probably rode it out and got pick 1/2. Both good and bad, would of had a higher pick but wouldn't of got some winning experience.

Don't think we'll be sitting nor visiting bottom Ladder for a very long time, Teauge has inspired the boys, it was evident 2nd half 2019 & will continue to be its palpable. Silvagni has further improved the team, recruited experienced players in Betts, Martin and Newws and more talented youth for the future.
I'm expecting Blues to finish vicinity of pick 9 to13, before adjustments in a compromised draft.

 

[Monkey King]

It felt like Bolton was forced out, and his last teams were young (as opposed to his first year when he did like Teague and picked the oldest sides he could).

Teague won games with teams significantly older on average than your opponents against Gold Coast, Sydney and the Bulldogs. St Kilda was the same age when you beat them (and when Bolton lost to them in his last game, funnily enough). The only games Teague won with teams younger than your opponents were his first against Brisbane, and against the rabble that was the Crows.

Comparative ages of Carlton sides in 2019:
Under Bolton:
R1 v Richmond 24yr 9mth v 25yr 11mth, lost by 33
R2 v Port 24yr 8mth v 25yr 1mth, lost by 16
R3 v Sydney 24yr 9mth v 24yr 11mth, lost by 19
R4 v Gold Coast 24yr 10mth v 23yr 11mth, lost by 2
R5 v Bulldogs 24yr 10mth v 23yr 11mth, won by 44
R6 v Hawthorn 24yr 11mth v 26yr 1mth, lost by 5
R7 v North 23yr 9mth v 26yr 3mth, lost by 58
R8 v Collingwood 23yr 9mth v 26yr 2mth, lost by 19
R9 v GWS 23yr 9mth v 25yr 10mth, lost by 93
R10 v St Kilda: 24yr 3mth v 24yr 3mth, lost by 13
R11 v Essendon: 23yr 4mth v 25yr 3mth, lost by 41, got sacked

Average age under Bolton in 2019: 24yr 3 mth. Average age in Bolton's last 5 games: 23yr 9mth. Were the older team twice: lost by 2 (away to a side that was 3-1 at the time) and won by 44. Six times more than a year younger on average than opponent, three of those more than two years younger (and once all but two years younger).

Under Teague:
R12 v Brisbane 24yr 3mth v 25yr 0mth, won by 15
R13 v Dogs 24yr 9mth v 24yr 7mth, lost by 3
R15 v Freo 25yr 0mth v 24yr 4mth, won by 4
R16 v Melbourne 25yr 0mth v 24yr 8mth, lost by 5
R17 v Sydney 25yr 1mth v 24yr 0mth, won by 7
R18 v Gold Coast 25yr 2mth v 24yr 0mth, won by 24
R19 v Adelaide 25yr 0mth v 26yr 3mth, won by 27
R20 v West Coast 24yr 4mth v 26yr 2mth, lost by 24
R21 v Richmond 25yr 4mth v 25yr 2mth, lost by 28
R22 v St Kilda 25yr 0mth v 25yr 0mth, won by 10
R23 v Geelong 24yr 10mth v 26yr 11mth, lost by 68

Average age under Teague: 24yr 11mth. Were the older team six times: won 3, lost 3. Were the younger team four times: won 2, lost 2. Same age once: won 1. Twice faced a team more than a year older for a win over Adelaide and a thrashing at the hands of Geelong. Were twice more than a year older, won both.

Only twice in three years under Bolton did Carlton field teams with an average age over 25. In 6 of 11 games under Teague your average was 25 or over.

I don't know if Bolton was forced to play younger teams but his teams got younger in his last games, while Teague's teams got progressively older before plateauing. Whether that is by design or availability I'd have to examine further. What can't be denied is the chances of winning go up when you are older than your opponent. Teams +6mths on their opponents have a 55% winning ratio over time, rising to 57% for +1yr, 62% for +1.5yrs, and 66% for +2yrs.

Teams with an average age of 25 should be playing finals. Teague's acid test is coming in 2020 (which is not telling you anything, I'm sure).

Appreciate the well researched reply.

Compare the difference in players from the oldest and youngest teams.

Players missing from the oldest: C. Curnow (injury), Cuningham (injury), Kennedy (injury), Dow (form), Fasolo (who cares), Stocker (form)

Player missing from the youngest: Simpson (injury), Jones (injury), Thomas (disciplinary), Murphy (injury), Deluca (was he even drafted), McGovern (injury)

Fluctuations in average age weren’t really based on choice rather than circumstance. The only player who really sticks out as contrary in this regard is Dow, who Bolton gave a lot of time to, despite not really being up to it, while Teague not so much. Other than that, there really wasn’t a great change in focus on playing older guys, more just playing them in different positions. Having younger guys spend time on flanks and wing (Fisher, SPS, Kennedy, Setterfield) and older guys spend more time on the ball (Murphy, Curnow, Gibbons).

 

[Deaneus!]

It will be strange not having one next year!

Yes, since we've got five

 

[Robertio]

Yes, since we've got five

Five what?

 

[Deaneus!]

Five what?

Draft picks tied to the final positions of other teams, to death-ride.