List Mgmt. Carlton's 2018 Draft Thread (cont. in Part 2)

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
1. The Next Nick Riewoldt
2. Muscly goal-kicking mid, billed as Dusty 2.0
3. Tall mid, billed as the next Cripps
4. Academy kid, reignites anti-academy rage
5. Ruckman-sized KPF
6. HFF who never develops into a midfielder
7. Bolter
8. Slider
9. Kid with a heart-warming backstory
10. Accumulator with poor kicking skills
11. Slider who tanked interviews to stay in SA

No specific Tassie kid?. You hate Tassie. Just like the AFL. I'm emailing that to Tim Lane. May he flog you with a thousand wet Age's.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

No specific Tassie kid?. You hate Tassie. Just like the AFL. I'm emailing that to Tim Lane. May he flog you with a thousand wet Age's.

Just outside the top 10.

12. Ruckman, despite everyone saying no ruckman should ever again be picked 1st round
13. Taswegian who continually draws mention of Jack Riewoldt, despite being a 182cm HBF
14. Guy who tested amazingly at combine, only weakness is he can't football
15. Played basketball as a kid, swamped by pendelbury mentions and talk of '360' ball game
16. Not in Knightmare's top 30, so BF goes into Meltdown.
17. KPF-Ruck or Ruck-KPF. Can't do either to a passable standard, but clubs love flexibility
18. Guy who will look like an instant superstar, as attracts no attention playing for reigning premier
 
I've only watched highlights so take it with a grain of salt, BUT:
  1. People said the same thing about Boyd...Weitering...Gibbs
  2. Forwards especially can get nice numbers in the TAC due to the different rules, namely you can't have a loose man back
Having said that, I'd really love Lukosious, but not sure if I want him enough to pay a wooden spoon for him.
Covered this a few times, but:

Boyd - depression
Weitering - 'enduring'
Gibbs - Pagan
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

But he isn't good enough...
Often what happens and it certainly happened last year with Will Sutherland is that clubs will request that certain players are selected. Metro coach actually didn't know Sutherland was playing until he was told a couple of days before one match. Regardless of whether Ben is or isn't good enough there was no way he was never playing, clubs will definitely want to look at him.
 
lol...yes, and no one foresaw that happening did they? point is all these kids are...just kids.
What I'm saying is two are development issues inflicted upon them by the club, the other is a guy who's probably not given off any warning signs (i.e. it's a physical manifestation, rather than external trauma/stress).

Plenty of people have pointed out our club concerns, and it's silly to think that they would only affect fresh draftees. So what I'm trying to tell is your point is likely moot given Wines doesn't strike me as an exceptional athlete, merely another beneficiary of Port's fitness staff.

Ben Silvagni named at Full Back for Vic Metro
Will Hickmott on the bench for WA

With the squad WA have turned out this year, it wouldn't surprise me to see Metro front up as named.
 
What I'm saying is two are development issues inflicted upon them by the club, the other is a guy who's probably not given off any warning signs (i.e. it's a physical manifestation, rather than external trauma/stress).

I understand what you're saying, but you're oversimplifying it. Sure, club development is important, but it's still just one factor.

Gibbs, Weitering and Boyd had a number of factors that went into their eventual success levels or ability to reach their perceived ceilings.

There's just so much variability with taking players at 18yrs old, it's foolish to think Lukosius is anything more than an elite prospect.

Superstar/Very Good Player/Roleplayer/Bust
In the NBA draft analysis, players are taken slightly later and with a lot more vigorous due diligence and testing. They spit out information by categorising each player projections as follows:
  1. Superstar - Generational Talents or sustained top 5 player in the league
  2. Very Good Player - One or two time AA, top 25 player in the league
  3. Roleplayer - Key part of your rotations, 100+ game player
  4. Bust - Disappointment, plays under 3 seasons
Even the best prospects in the NBA may get the following % breakdown:

Superstar: 20-25% probability
Very Good Player: 35% probability
Roleplayer: 35% probability
Bust: 5-10% probability

AFL
Probably will be slightly different probabilities in the AFL, but when we talk about generational talent, we should still be wary it's more like a 1 in 5 chance they turn out to be a superstar, although it's very likely they'll be a very good player.

TLDR: Applying the same % above, we can say all those no.1's and Lukuousius are more than likely to make 1 or 2 AA teams or better...but that it's only a relatively small chance that they turn out a superstar.
 
I understand what you're saying, but you're oversimplifying it. Sure, club development is important, but it's still just one factor.

Gibbs, Weitering and Boyd had a number of factors that went into their eventual success levels or ability to reach their perceived ceilings.

There's just so much variability with taking players at 18yrs old, it's foolish to think Lukosius is anything more than an elite prospect.

Superstar/Very Good Player/Roleplayer/Bust
In the NBA draft analysis, players are taken slightly later and with a lot more vigorous due diligence and testing. They spit out information by categorising each player projections as follows:
  1. Superstar - Generational Talents or sustained top 5 player in the league
  2. Very Good Player - One or two time AA, top 25 player in the league
  3. Roleplayer - Key part of your rotations, 100+ game player
  4. Bust - Disappointment, plays under 3 seasons
Even the best prospects in the NBA may get the following % breakdown:

Superstar: 20-25% probability
Very Good Player: 35% probability
Roleplayer: 35% probability
Bust: 5-10% probability

AFL
Probably will be slightly different probabilities in the AFL, but when we talk about generational talent, we should still be wary it's more like a 1 in 5 chance they turn out to be a superstar, although it's very likely they'll be a very good player.

TLDR: Applying the same % above, we can say all those no.1's and Lukuousius are more than likely to make 1 or 2 AA teams or better...but that it's only a relatively small chance that they turn out a superstar.

It’s a good post but l will say l’ve been following the drafts pretty closely for the last 5 to 10 years and l haven’t seen as complete a player as Lukosius.

Superstar 20 to 25% - eg. Cripps. Probably need to determine what a superstar is, roughly how many on average in each draft. How many in the AFL.

Very Good 35% - eg. Gibbs.

Lukosius looks highly likely to be at least a very good player.

Also need to remember the NBA is far more competitive talent wise. Flatter talent pool at the top. Population of 300 million, excluding other countries, to draw from whilst only having 5 on the court at a time. Makes an AFL club look like a country town team where nearly anyone can get a game.


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
if we pick up pick 1 and decide to go for lukosius and go Silvagni. probably need to put up casbloult and McKay for trade!
can't see the point of keeping them all
lukocius would come straight into the team and having McKay another year playing reserves evaporates his trade value
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top