List Mgmt. 2024 Young Talent Time (Drafting)

[Snuffaluphagus]

 

[malpaso]

Nah, I get this. People arguing it doesnt matter in trades are flat out wrong IMO and like you, I've had this discussion ad nauseum. To prove mine (and your) point, David Walls literally said on radio they wanted a future pick knowing how far the Pies pick will fall for Schultz. So that's from a list managers mouth (after a trade is done, so less bullshit).

Once trade period is over though, yes, doesnt matter anymore, those players basically dont exist. Interestingly, I can see a situation if the new bid points is actually effective where they are still counted.

Well yeah when your talking about it in relation to Trade Period however I'm not refering to that, thought that would be obvious. I'm just specifically talking about the statements "It was pick 14, it's not fallen to pick 17 in the first round" with no context.

 

[CaseySibosadoHOF]

Richmond signed Bolton long term because it was in their best interests.

We signed Brodie to a long term deal, doesn't mean we wouldn't happily trade him.

Best interests are a fluid thing.

But the world where we think trading away any of them 3 is in our best interests is practically inconceivable. Just coz we can find a few exceptions every year where long-term signed players are traded away doesn't mean we go silly and treat every player signed long-term as a flight risk, especially when 2 of those 3 are from WA.

If there's gonna be a case for getting a KPF with a decently high pick, it'd be either "he's so clearly best available that we have to do it" or "Luke Jackson is gonna start unicorning real soon, so we need another fwd". But right now, especially with the fact that we're probably gonna add Joshua Nomlatyu in 2025, the idea of using 1 of our top 2 picks on a KPF feels questionable.

To a certain extent, I think people are looking at the 2024 list numbers, going "well 3 KPFs left", and concluding that we therefore need replacements. We were heavily overstocked in that department, and now the numbers at WAFL level in particular look about right. Darcy and Triple J as the AFL starters, Voss, Reidy, Knobel and Jones as the 2nd unit. Another wouldn't be a disaster, but would likely either play WAFL Reserves next year or push 1 of them 4 into WAFL Reserves.

 

[Purple Suit]

But the world where we think trading away any of them 3 is in our best interests is practically inconceivable. Just coz we can find a few exceptions every year where long-term signed players are traded away doesn't mean we go silly and treat every player signed long-term as a flight risk, especially when 2 of those 3 are from WA.

If there's gonna be a case for getting a KPF with a decently high pick, it'd be either "he's so clearly best available that we have to do it" or "Luke Jackson is gonna start unicorning real soon, so we need another fwd". But right now, especially with the fact that we're probably gonna add Joshua Nomlatyu in 2025, the idea of using 1 of our top 2 picks on a KPF feels questionable.

To a certain extent, I think people are looking at the 2024 list numbers, going "well 3 KPFs left", and concluding that we therefore need replacements. We were heavily overstocked in that department, and now the numbers at WAFL level in particular look about right. Darcy and Triple J as the AFL starters, Voss, Reidy, Knobel and Jones as the 2nd unit. Another wouldn't be a disaster, but would likely either play WAFL Reserves next year or push 1 of them 4 into WAFL Reserves.

We have Voss, the other three are rucks. Jones maybe 50/50 but I haven’t seen much of him.

We need a developing KPF this draft or we are playing Cox as a forward / going with 2 talls & Sturt at times.

We could easily use our 3rd pick for this but if Gerreyn is best available by a margin, just grab him. I am also assuming he has AFL KPF traits (not ruck) & character. Grab the small forward or HBF that we didn’t tick the box with the 3rd pick.

Pick 30 isn’t a huge investment that is going to ruin us if it doesn’t pan out or he leaves due to opportunity in 4 years time. We used 33 on Davies as an example.

 

[theGav56]

But the world where we think trading away any of them 3 is in our best interests is practically inconceivable. Just coz we can find a few exceptions every year where long-term signed players are traded away doesn't mean we go silly and treat every player signed long-term as a flight risk, especially when 2 of those 3 are from WA.

If there's gonna be a case for getting a KPF with a decently high pick, it'd be either "he's so clearly best available that we have to do it" or "Luke Jackson is gonna start unicorning real soon, so we need another fwd". But right now, especially with the fact that we're probably gonna add Joshua Nomlatyu in 2025, the idea of using 1 of our top 2 picks on a KPF feels questionable.

To a certain extent, I think people are looking at the 2024 list numbers, going "well 3 KPFs left", and concluding that we therefore need replacements. We were heavily overstocked in that department, and now the numbers at WAFL level in particular look about right. Darcy and Triple J as the AFL starters, Voss, Reidy, Knobel and Jones as the 2nd unit. Another wouldn't be a disaster, but would likely either play WAFL Reserves next year or push 1 of them 4 into WAFL Reserves.

You don't think trading Brodie would be in our best interests?

You think Bolton wasn't a player they couldn't conceive of trading?

It happens. Much of what it takes is a player saying 'I want to be traded'. Oh, and also, 'homesick'.

The rest is negotiating the price.

 

[theGav56]

But the world where we think trading away any of them 3 is in our best interests is practically inconceivable. Just coz we can find a few exceptions every year where long-term signed players are traded away doesn't mean we go silly and treat every player signed long-term as a flight risk, especially when 2 of those 3 are from WA.

If there's gonna be a case for getting a KPF with a decently high pick, it'd be either "he's so clearly best available that we have to do it" or "Luke Jackson is gonna start unicorning real soon, so we need another fwd". But right now, especially with the fact that we're probably gonna add Joshua Nomlatyu in 2025, the idea of using 1 of our top 2 picks on a KPF feels questionable.

To a certain extent, I think people are looking at the 2024 list numbers, going "well 3 KPFs left", and concluding that we therefore need replacements. We were heavily overstocked in that department, and now the numbers at WAFL level in particular look about right. Darcy and Triple J as the AFL starters, Voss, Reidy, Knobel and Jones as the 2nd unit. Another wouldn't be a disaster, but would likely either play WAFL Reserves next year or push 1 of them 4 into WAFL Reserves.

The end of last season being a debacle was in large degree the result of Treacy, Darcy and Pearce being injured.

Those injuries all impacted our KPF situation.

• Treacy very directly, but also we lost his handy ability to do some ruckwork in support of Jackson
• Darcy cost us big time with Jackson unavailable as a forward. Darcy is an important part of our machine, but I think he is also our weakest link because his injuries shackle our forward line
• Pearce injured meant that our only plausible swingman, Cox, was not an option (I concede this would not have improved us a lot as his form/condition was limited).

Any of Corbett, Kuek or MacDonald would have got games if available. Taberner got a game and it was a clear act of desperation.

 

[freo_leo29]

The end of last season being a debacle was in large degree the result of Treacy, Darcy and Pearce being injured.

Those injuries all impacted our KPF situation.

• Treacy very directly, but also we lost his handy ability to do some ruckwork in support of Jackson
• Darcy cost us big time with Jackson unavailable as a forward. Darcy is an important part of our machine, but I think he is also our weakest link because his injuries shackle our forward line
• Pearce injured meant that our only plausible swingman, Cox, was not an option (I concede this would not have improved us a lot as his form/condition was limited).

Any of Corbett, Kuek or MacDonald would have got games if available. Taberner got a game and it was a clear act of desperation.

You're missing the obvious part, the player we pick won't be ready for years and if he is any good then he will move on because we don't have a b22 spot for them, I'm not exactly stoked on wasting a first or 2nd round pick on developing someone who will likely leave.


We already have Voss and Jones developing in a KPF role


I won't be mad if the player is clearly better than any other selections at that point in the draft but if they aren't then we should go for needs and impact now.

 

[Dockernut]

You're missing the obvious part, the player we pick won't be ready for years and if he is any good then he will move on because we don't have a b22 spot for them, I'm not exactly stoked on wasting a first or 2nd round pick on developing someone who will likely leave.


We already have Voss and Jones developing in a KPF role


I won't be mad if the player is clearly better than any other selections at that point in the draft but if they aren't then we should go for needs and impact now.

No, I think it’s you who is consistently missing the point that adding a KPF talent via the draft doesn’t disturb our current KPF set up, doesn’t impact the progression of two developing forwards (one might argue it drives them) and isn’t a “waste” on a “player who is likely to leave”, it’s a mere balancing of the list to select a kid in a position where we’ve just delisted three players. Pretty obvious.

 

[freo_leo29]

No, I think it’s you who is consistently missing the point that adding a KPF talent via the draft doesn’t disturb our current KPF set up, doesn’t impact the progression of two developing forwards (one might argue it drives them) and isn’t a “waste” on a “player who is likely to leave”, it’s a mere balancing of the list to select a kid in a position where we’ve just delisted three players. Pretty obvious.

We already replaced 2 of those last year in Jones for Kuek and Voss for Corbett??? (both players were known to be LTI before the draft, ACL and Hip replacement)

Drafting another KPF does affect progression too, Jones barely played league last year (Managed to get in when Voss played AFL due to Cohuna), whoever is drafted means someone gets sent to Reserves. (Especially with the emergence of Tregenza)

We are well stocked for KPF/Ruck options, its not an area of need at all. As you'd say, pretty obvious.


As a side note, I'd consider Corbett more a medium forward/hybrid, wouldn't be against replacing him with a medium forward in the draft, reckon we are lighter on those than we are KPF.

 

[Alfonz]

No, I think it’s you who is consistently missing the point that adding a KPF talent via the draft doesn’t disturb our current KPF set up, doesn’t impact the progression of two developing forwards (one might argue it drives them) and isn’t a “waste” on a “player who is likely to leave”, it’s a mere balancing of the list to select a kid in a position where we’ve just delisted three players. Pretty obvious.

But is it a balancing of the list? Maybe we had too many KPFs and replacing them with mediums/smalls is actually the balancing.

I'm going through various good teams, and our current situation after the delistings seems pretty normal for a KPF setup.

I don't mind bringing in a KPF, but I don't think it is necessary for list balance and they would have to be best available by a clear margin.

 

[Fred Ziffel]

If Sturt can end up a player halfway between Breust and Gunston that would be a great result for FFC. Both of those two have been very handy forwards over many years.

I reckon he already is.

 

[freo_leo29]

But is it a balancing of the list? Maybe we had too many KPFs and replacing them with mediums/smalls is actually the balancing.

I'm going through various good teams, and our current situation after the delistings seems pretty normal for a KPF setup.

I don't mind bringing in a KPF, but I don't think it is necessary for list balance and they would have to be best available by a clear margin.

Yeah, we had already replaced Corbett and Kuek last year with Voss and Jones (Those 2 were LTI and known well in advance of draft plans)

The list is already balanced KPF wise

If anything our list has too many talls when you factor in rucks and KPD

 

[King Huskii]

I just can't go past Hotton as a long term investment not instant hit.

 

[Purple Suit]

Yeah, we had already replaced Corbett and Kuek last year with Voss and Jones (Those 2 were LTI and known well in advance of draft plans)

The list is already balanced KPF wise

If anything our list has too many talls when you factor in rucks and KPD

We lost Tabs though. Therefore your theory is one KPF short.

Jones has done as much as Delean but no one is saying don’t recruit a small forward because he is developing in that spot. Both are long shots to make it.

 

[Dockernut]

But is it a balancing of the list? Maybe we had too many KPFs and replacing them with mediums/smalls is actually the balancing.

I'm going through various good teams, and our current situation after the delistings seems pretty normal for a KPF setup.

I don't mind bringing in a KPF, but I don't think it is necessary for list balance and they would have to be best available by a clear margin.

I’m probably less bullish on Voss than others. He’s reasonable depth, but was still pretty underwhelming in some of those crunch games at the end of the season and Jones is still a project player. Why not keep augmenting your KPF stock until you have undeniable quality in your depth?

 

[freo_leo29]

We lost Tabs though. Therefore your theory is one KPF short.

Jones has done as much as Delean but no one is saying don’t recruit a small forward because he is developing in that spot. Both are long shots to make it.

Evens it up when you don't consider Corbett in the same basket though


Anyway we can replace Tabs with a KPF if they are best available in the rookie draft, we seem to do well out of the rookie draft with KPF's (Tabs, Treacy, Voss) Yes Voss was SSP but he is a rookie pick.

We should be using our other capital on needs

 

[freo_leo29]

Why not keep augmenting your KPF stock until you have undeniable quality in your depth?

Well thats the issue I keep bringing up, any good depth KPF will leave for opportunity

So why spend our high capital on them when they aren't playing?


Instead use our high picks on needs that can fill a role ASAP to help us contend.

 

[Purple Suit]

Evens it up when you don't consider Corbett in the same basket though


Anyway we can replace Tabs with a KPF if they are best available in the rookie draft, we seem to do well out of the rookie draft with KPF's (Tabs, Treacy, Voss) Yes Voss was SSP but he is a rookie pick.

We should be using our other capital on needs

I recon it’s our third need behind small forward & HBF. Wing maybe but we seem to chuck anybody in there with good effect and recon Noddy will go well next year.

If best available changes the order of those three, no big deal as long as we’re not using pick 14 on a KPF.

 

[Walkingwounded]

Well thats the issue I keep bringing up, any good depth KPF will leave for opportunity

So why spend our high capital on them when they aren't playing?


Instead use our high picks on needs that can fill a role ASAP to help us contend.

I’m in the boat that floats, and says a key position forward that demands and commands the forward line, straightens us up, and makes all the other forwards small and medium look good.

If one of those is in this draft.. we get them!

Who fits that in this draft… or could develop into that…. Mmm Jobe Shanahan is my pick.

Currently we have Joel C doing that role but would love a backup.

 

[AstonSouffle]

People who disregard the draft positions sliding back due to FS and NGA academies are taking a very simplistic and flawed view. Snuffaluphagus and malpaso are absolutely correct. The free agency compensation also plays a role in this.

If a team slides from pick 15 to pick 25, in simple terms they are getting the 25th best player in the overall talent pool instead of the 15th. I know that’s an extreme example but it’s not impossible.

One of the things that actually wrong to say is that teams like gold coast and Brisbane are getting free hits. Or Collingwood with their father sons in the first round.

They are not free hits!!!

Somebody has to pay for them - that somebody is the rest of the competition that each gives up a little bit of draft capital. That point is always lost in these debates.

The problem is other aspects of the AFL system remain constant whilst the relative level of talent you obtain via the draft is diluted.

• there is still only one premiership that can be won each year
• there is still only 22 players each year selected for AA honours
• there are still only 18 clubs B&F awards handed out each year.

Therefore us only getting the 17th most talented player on draft night instead of the 14th is a genuine price that we have to pay in the overall scheme of things.

Meh, the NGA's for those northern clubs not existing means they end up picking WA/VIC/SA players instead. Keep in mind Sydney's original plan was to exit the draft entirely and rely on their academy exclusively, the AFL stopped them from doing this.

Father son is different, but there's emotional reasons for that rule and it has had way more misses than hits across the board across the journey.