News Charlie and the Lions Factory - the Everlasting Charlie Cameron Trade Thread

[Checkered]

He went to another level which I didn't think he had in him. Makes pick 12 look like a pretty reasonable deal for both parties in the end - although at the time I was annoyed that we caved from pick 18.

 

[chiwigi]

Hi!

More than happy for you to win this trade .
Still think 12 was overs, but not by as much now. Much depends on how Fogarty goes I guess, though they could do with Cameron right now .

 

[jackess]

He's still in his early-mid 20's. I fail to see how it wasn't a good deal for us. Its surely better than getting a draftee who likely won't be as good or won't even stay.

We saw what a rookie could do last Friday playing small forward. For pick 12 a small forward has to be elite.

 

[lioninthesand]

Widely being agreed upon as recruit of the year, him or Gibbs.. we rarely have anything 'of they year' so thats nice.. do that deal everyday of the week

 

[Checkered]

We saw what a rookie could do last Friday playing small forward. For pick 12 a small forward has to be elite.

This is a terrible argument

 

[jackess]

This is a terrible argument

Most gun forwards are taken late in the draft or rookie draft. So if you’re smart you draft them with late picks. Conversely gun talls usually go early in the draft so you’re willing to pay more usually.

 

[PattyKwasagun]

Most gun forwards are taken late in the draft or rookie draft. So if you’re smart you draft them with late picks. Conversely gun talls usually go early in the draft so you’re willing to pay more usually.

But how many small forwards have we taken with late/rookie picks in previous years that haven't worked out as gun players? Banfield, Green, and McGrath all come to mind off the bat. Could say that Jake Barrett is another.

Ronke was outstanding last Friday night and made headlines because he was an exception rather than the rule. If taking elite small forwards late in the draft was that easy, why haven't we/other clubs been doing it with that sort of success for years?

Also, looking at the elite small forwards of the comp, there are plenty who were taken high in the draft:
Jack Martin - Pick 1 in the Minidraft
Toby Greene - Pick 11
Cyril Rioli - Pick 12
Chad Wingard - Pick 6

Alternatively, the leading goal kicker in the comp this year was Ben Brown who was taken at pick 47. Jack Darling is third and was pick 26.

I'm not arguing that you can't find quality smalls late in the draft, but I don't agree that it's as easy as you make it out to be. And when you have somebody with elite traits (which Charlie clearly does, even if he hasn't delivered on them consistently) in the right age bracket who wants to come to a club that has struggled to attract anything close to elite level talent in recent years, I think pick 12 is a more than reasonable price.

 

[Jivlain]

Most gun forwards are taken late in the draft or rookie draft. So if you’re smart you draft them with late picks. Conversely gun talls usually go early in the draft so you’re willing to pay more usually.

Takes some doing to pick the winners though. For every Cameron or Ronke picked up in the rookie draft each club has a long list of delistings who didn't manage to do anything nearly as spectacular at senior level (we'll also have to see whether Ronke can sustain that). Trading for an established player reduces the uncertainty.

 

[Dalions]

Even if you did happen to snavvle a good one late in the draft, in three or 4 years time when they become a gun, are they going to be traded for a late pick? No.
Its all relative. Charlie is turning into a gun and he is now on our list. I for one am thankful.
Thank you Charlie! How long has it been since we have had someone who lights up the Gabba like Charlie?

 

[werdna78]

More than happy for you to win this trade .
Still think 12 was overs, but not by as much now. Much depends on how Fogarty goes I guess, though they could do with Cameron right now .

Fogarty looks like a beast.

 

[Dom PC]

I was one that thought we paid overs, but from what I've seen this year, pick 12 for that x-factor he brings is very fair.

He has exteme pace, creative foot skills(probably sometimes inconsistent), applies awesome pressure and is a good shot at goal.

I'd argue he is very close to an elite small forward now. So yeah, provided he keeps his form up, pick 12 could turn into a good deal for us.

 

[jackess]

But how many small forwards have we taken with late/rookie picks in previous years that haven't worked out as gun players? Banfield, Green, and McGrath all come to mind off the bat. Could say that Jake Barrett is another.

Ronke was outstanding last Friday night and made headlines because he was an exception rather than the rule. If taking elite small forwards late in the draft was that easy, why haven't we/other clubs been doing it with that sort of success for years?

Also, looking at the elite small forwards of the comp, there are plenty who were taken high in the draft:
Jack Martin - Pick 1 in the Minidraft
Toby Greene - Pick 11
Cyril Rioli - Pick 12
Chad Wingard - Pick 6

Alternatively, the leading goal kicker in the comp this year was Ben Brown who was taken at pick 47. Jack Darling is third and was pick 26.

I'm not arguing that you can't find quality smalls late in the draft, but I don't agree that it's as easy as you make it out to be. And when you have somebody with elite traits (which Charlie clearly does, even if he hasn't delivered on them consistently) in the right age bracket who wants to come to a club that has struggled to attract anything close to elite level talent in recent years, I think pick 12 is a more than reasonable price.

Off the top of my head Papley, Ronke, Castagna, Butler, AMT, Fantasia, Breust, Puopolo, Betts, Cameron (originally), Gray, Walters, Ballantyne, Garlett, Gresham, Lonie.

If you use early picks like the ones you listed you expect a lot more.

 

[ImAFreeMan]

Off the top of my head Papley, Ronke, Castagna, Butler, AMT, Fantasia, Breust, Puopolo, Betts, Cameron (originally), Gray, Walters, Ballantyne, Garlett, Gresham, Lonie.

If you use early picks like the ones you listed you expect a lot more.

Let’s be honest some of those aren’t that much


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jackess]

Let’s be honest some of those aren’t that much


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It isn’t but you don’t need A grade small forwards when you’ve got the rest of your team sorted.

 

[ImAFreeMan]

It isn’t but you don’t need A grade small forwards when you’ve got the rest of your team sorted.

Could not agree more, someone to kick it too would be a start


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[briztoon]

I was another against giving up pick 12 for Cameron.

I am more than happy to eat humble pie on this trade. If for no other reason, than Cameron is the one athlete that gets my misses interested in any type of sport. When watching the game, all I hear is, "is Cameron playing? where's Cameron? why don't they give the ball to Cameron? why is Cameron sitting on the bench?".

Cameron is showing much, much more than I expected, and pick 12 clearly looks like a win for us.


One aspect of the draft that I do not understand here is people's insistence that clubs should not draft certain types of players or positions with early picks. Form my point of view this is silly (wanted to use much stronger language here). The draft is about acquiring elite talent. If the very best kid in the draft is a small forward, take him.

If you look back through the history of the draft, you can find champion players at every position taken late in the draft. They don't prove or disprove a point about where certain positions should be drafted. All this highlights that the draft is still an inexact science, and club scouting can improve. And in the case of Ronke, one game does not make a career.

 

[M Malice]

Off the top of my head Papley, Ronke, Castagna, Butler, AMT, Fantasia, Breust, Puopolo, Betts, Cameron (originally), Gray, Walters, Ballantyne, Garlett, Gresham, Lonie.

If you use early picks like the ones you listed you expect a lot more.

Let’s be honest some of those aren’t that much


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IMO that is a very good list of late pick ups in the draft, I would take all of them in their prime except Ronke (not enough of a sample yet) and Lonie. Jade Gresham was a top 20 selection.

 

[Skoob]

Clubs don't select late picks with the thought "This guy is going to be a gun small forward". A gamble is taken based on their skill set, that they'll be of use, and sometimes turn out to be good small forwards.
The thing with Charlie was that he was recognised as a potentially great asset, and he wanted to come, and Adelaide weren't super keen to let him go. When you target a specific player of value, you have to expect to pay overs for them. Their value increases beyond pure footballness. In terms of footballer, he could be considered worth less than pick 12, but as soon as you want him, and his current club is reluctant, then that becomes his worth. I think we're getting what we want from him, if not more. That's a win. What we paid is moot. Right now, he's better than Rayner, who was number one.

 

[jackess]

If their was a midfielder as good as Cameron, same age, experience, etc. Wanting to come to us and we had to choose one to use pick 12 on I think we wouldve chosen the midfielder.

That's the other issue I have. I know that nobody wants to play for us but small forward wasnt high on my priority list.

 

[spotthedog1]

Other thing to remember is that Cameron wanted to come to us, and had one year on his contract. With one year left, we pay a significant premium. If he's out of contract, we take a significant discount. Pick 12 in 2017 could've been pick 25 in 2018. The Lions have an annoying habit of trading people in for a premium, and out for a discount. This is a trend that needs to reverse.

Of course, while you could wait the extra year, you don't know what happens in 12 months. Maybe Charlie grows to like Adelaide (unlikely). Maybe he grows to resent us for not paying pick 12 (unlikely based on his public comments that he didn't think he was worth pick 12). Maybe Gold Coast woo him. Maybe he has a stellar year that prompts a bidding war.

At the end of the day, we paid a lot, and hopefully it works out long term.

 

[jackess]

One aspect of the draft that I do not understand here is people's insistence that clubs should not draft certain types of players or positions with early picks. Form my point of view this is silly (wanted to use much stronger language here). The draft is about acquiring elite talent. If the very best kid in the draft is a small forward, take him.

If you look back through the history of the draft, you can find champion players at every position taken late in the draft. They don't prove or disprove a point about where certain positions should be drafted. All this highlights that the draft is still an inexact science, and club scouting can improve. And in the case of Ronke, one game does not make a career.

Because that's just the way it is. We've seen it with ruckmen sliding out of the top 10, 2m tall forwards going early despite being undeveloped and every year we hear about whether or not certain players have the fitness to become midfielders at AFL level.

Plus a lot of the time small forwards are drafted late because they're drafted as midfielders but they play forward because they're not good enough to play in the midfield at AFL level.

Most teams (not us) don't have several years of multiple early picks and try to make to most of it by drafting kids to play the most important positions.

 

[jackess]

Other thing to remember is that Cameron wanted to come to us, and had one year on his contract. With one year left, we pay a significant premium. If he's out of contract, we take a significant discount. Pick 12 in 2017 could've been pick 25 in 2018. The Lions have an annoying habit of trading people in for a premium, and out for a discount. This is a trend that needs to reverse.

Of course, while you could wait the extra year, you don't know what happens in 12 months. Maybe Charlie grows to like Adelaide (unlikely). Maybe he grows to resent us for not paying pick 12 (unlikely based on his public comments that he didn't think he was worth pick 12). Maybe Gold Coast woo him. Maybe he has a stellar year that prompts a bidding war.

At the end of the day, we paid a lot, and hopefully it works out long term.

And that's my point. 'Smart' trading isn't picking up when their price is high. He's a quality small forward and has improved my team but was not a smart trade.

 

[Keays2myBeamas]

I'd argue Charlie's stock has gone up since we bought him. It makes our payment look better in retrospect, but we still overpaid at the time. If you pay $1.20 for a stock that is only worth $1, you've overpaid regardless of whether that stock goes up to $1.30 in the future. It looks great because you've made a profit, but you've made 10c instead of 30c - and you will never get back that extra 20c you gave.

Pick 12 at the time was too much, and if we'd been smarter at the trade table we could have got him for a fairer price, and his fantastic start to the year would have been a much bigger win for us.

 

[spotthedog1]

And that's my point. 'Smart' trading isn't picking up when their price is high. He's a quality small forward and has improved my team but was not a smart trade.

I maintain what I said at the end of trade period. For all of Noble's strengths, and there are many, trading isn't one of them. In Brisbane and at Adelaide, he figures out what he wants to do, and he does it regardless of cost. This goes for buying and selling players as well.

Sadly, this really could cost us. You can't negotiate with an open chequebook, and let's face it - we don't have the biggest bank balance in the competition. We need to be smarter than that. In any deal, you have to be willing to walk away from a negotiation.

 

[jackess]

I maintain what I said at the end of trade period. For all of Noble's strengths, and there are many, trading isn't one of them. In Brisbane and at Adelaide, he figures out what he wants to do, and he does it regardless of cost. This goes for buying and selling players as well.

Sadly, this really could cost us. You can't negotiate with an open chequebook, and let's face it - we don't have the biggest bank balance in the competition. We need to be smarter than that. In any deal, you have to be willing to walk away from a negotiation.

If we did trade 18 for Cameron we might have still drafted Bailey and Starcevich at 12 and 15 but who knows.