List Mgmt. Contracts, trades, draft - 2022 superstar edition

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Link to contract status of all players -

 
I mean, seriously, why the duck would we do this? Why would we not get a look at 2 draftees? Results this season don't matter.

We're. In. A. Rebuild.

None of the players on the inactive list are going to be delisted (other than Sheppard) so every extra player we bring in in the MSD means either an extra player we have to delist at the end of the year or one less draft pick we can take.

There might also be salary cap reasons if we’re paying 46 players, plus maybe some of Shep’s salary under the cap, plus maybe some of Venables’, plus maybe some of Cameron’s.
 
None of the players on the inactive list are going to be delisted (other than Sheppard) so every extra player we bring in in the MSD means either an extra player we have to delist at the end of the year or one less draft pick we can take.

There might also be salary cap reasons if we’re paying 46 players, plus maybe some of Shep’s salary under the cap, plus maybe some of Venables’, plus maybe some of Cameron’s.

Or only a six month contract for MSD players.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Well, 2 out of the 9 options have become a reality… 😅

I think we will take….

Florenca - This is a given obviously?

+

A Key forward prospect to provide insurance for Kennedy’s impending retirement (that ‘grumbly knee’ will finish him off within the next couple of months).

So….Derkson.


The melts here will be moderate but not extreme. Usual suspects to drop their bundle.

Oh and neither of them will amount to anything at AFL level.

I will add though…Callum Jamieson should be forced to give Derkson the #40 jumper so we can call him WD40 or ‘The Big Lube’.
 
Agree on rucks - they are a jigsaw piece, not a top draft pick play. You wait until you get your mids and KPP's most sorted then get someone who has been developed by another club, is a No2 rucks, and wants a gig somewhere as the big dog.

But when you have top 2 pick - unless there is someone who is an incredible standout, you have to take a mid. Why? Because 80% of KPF's taken with a top 2 pick end up being duds. 50% of mids taken end up A grade, and 66% of them end up A+.

We will most certainly get top 2 this year. Next year, maybe top 2 but maybe top 5. The time to draft a KPF with a pick 4 - 10 will come. And I know KPF's take longer to develop, but if you draft a hand full of A+'ers, they're all going to have a window when they're all peaking.

Also, counting chickens doesn't work. We all think OA is the goods, and maybe Chesser will come on. But counting on Williams and Jamieson etc as if we already have certain positions sorted - it just doesn't work like that. We just need to get our heads down and draft well. If we draft well, the picture will become clearer and we can fill the jigsaw pieces once we know.

You can't use statistics to drive your drafting strategy.
I appreciate you put a lot of thought into your analysis post, but you're misrepresenting what those statistics mean.

What you unearthed is more a product of the talent that is at the high end of drafts rather than an indicator of how to draft successfully.
 
Haven't see a Phil Matera type for years, Sheezel or George the closest to that.

I'd love to have Peter Matera on the wing and Phil in the pocket right now. I truly believe two of the most underrated of all time.

The forgotten brother Phil Matera`s highlights popped up on my Youtube , gee I missed seeing that ..
 
I mean, seriously, why the duck would we do this? Why would we not get a look at 2 draftees? Results this season don't matter.

We're. In. A. Rebuild.

It also depends when Cole is ready to play. Let's say it is round 15/16. By that stage we will likely have another candidate for the inactive list - or can give Hurn a proper farewell game (which, sadly based on our history of milestone game may be a record-breaking loss) then he can just move to the inactive list.

No reason other than salary cap not to take 2 x MSD players. And for salary reasons, just work it out with a few players (either 2022 or 2023 we'll be light-on for paying 95% of the cap, so surely someone will forego $20k now to get $40k then... win/win even with inflation as it is!)
 
You can't use statistics to drive your drafting strategy.
I appreciate you put a lot of thought into your analysis post, but you're misrepresenting what those statistics mean.

What you unearthed is more a product of the talent that is at the high end of drafts rather than an indicator of how to draft successfully.

Incorrect.

1. I didn't put a lot of thought into it. I just went and grabbed all top 2 picks since 2000 (objective). I sorted them into playing positions (objective), and then made a call on how good they are/were (subjective, but swings and roundabouts accurate).

2. The stats aren't misrepresented. If you choose a midfielder you have a 50% chance of getting an A grader, and out of those A graders, a 66% chance of getting an A+ grader. If you choose a KPF, you have an 80% chance of getting a dud.

Those stats don't lie. They are not misrepresented nor misinterpreted. That is fact (with a small margin of sway).

What is subjective; is that the most important stat that you can draw from that data? You believe whatever you want, but given my professional expertise, I know they are.

3. No, the data is pretty simple:

If you have a top 2 pick, unless you're full of mids and scant on KPF's, choose a mid, or unless there is an absolute standout (Weitering, Nicnat), choose a mid.

Think about it this way;

The AFL clubs have elite recruiters and list builders. We can see, going by historical data that they too believe choosing a midfielder with a top 2 pick is a better option. KPFs are like hens teeth, midfielders arent. Most clubs need KPF's more than midfielders. But the recruiters by and large target midfielders with those top 2 picks.

All I've done is twisted what the top recruiters do and you're saying I'm wrong? I don't think so.
 
Surely we don’t get another tall with our second pick, even with Kennedy doubts.

We are the land of the giants already.

Kennedy, Darling, HUGE Dixon, Williams x2, Waterman, Strnadica, or even swing Gov forward is more than enough forward coverage. Then Gov, Edwards, TB, Jamieson back is enough.

We need young mids. With covid affecting youth teams last year, there’s some hidden gems that have slipped through the cracks. Now is the best time to grab them before the next national draft.

I can handle Florenca with one of the picks, but we have to select a Culley type mid with the second pick.
 
Last edited:
Surely we don’t get another tall with our second pick, even with Kennedy doubts.

We are the land of the giants already.

Kennedy, Darling, HUGE Dixon, Williams, Waterman, Strnadica, or even swing Gov forward is more than enough forward coverage. Then Gov, Edwards, TB, Jamieson back is enough.

We need young mids. With covid affecting youth teams last year, there’s some hidden gems that have slipped through the cracks. Now is the best time to grab them before the next national draft.

I can handle Florenca with one of the picks, but we have to select a Culley type mid with the second pick.
Darling isnt a 2022 tall, waterman is less so and not a footballer. So we build a team around Hugh Dixon? Williams I must say is an intersting prospect but still not 2022 tall and untested.
 
Surely we don’t get another tall with our second pick, even with Kennedy doubts.

We are the land of the giants already.

Kennedy, Darling, HUGE Dixon, Williams, Waterman, Strnadica, or even swing Gov forward is more than enough forward coverage. Then Gov, Edwards, TB, Jamieson back is enough.

We need young mids. With covid affecting youth teams last year, there’s some hidden gems that have slipped through the cracks. Now is the best time to grab them before the next national draft.

I can handle Florenca with one of the picks, but we have to select a Culley type mid with the second pick.
We need to choose now for 5 years time. I'd be taking a mid with our first selection and if there's a JD or OA slider then would consider. Other wise another mid and look at grabbing a KPP next draft or the one after.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Doesn't really matter, short term, who we draft in the MSD as they aren't going to have such an impact that will drive us to winning games. Long term I don't have the confidence in the recruiting staff to find us someone in the MSD who will become a 100 game player for West Coast.
 
We should not be getting any depth players. We should use this to get players with a decent ceiling that happened to not get the run in a covid year.

We already have West and Clark who have shown they can fill in if needed at an AFL level. Would Florenca be much better? Not seen enough but what I saw was a good toiler.

Culley is the obvious. Ramsden another.

Pick 1 or 2 in the midseason should be about getting higher end potential.
 
Didn`t mind watching the wheels of the Davey boys at the Bombers ..
I'd love one or both holding down the fort. GO for Cyril or Kyasiah eaarly if they're available- however jr just doesnt get involved enough for my liking. Doesn't have that same fwd pressure and has only kicked 1 goal in 4 games.
 
Connor West was a pretty good pick up at last MSD who is of an age that he still has improvement in him and has shown signs already - last game was v promising

I think we should try to draft a similar age profile 19-23 rather than plug holes with mature agers

In other words I’d rather get a Tim Kelly type circa 2017 rather than a Marlion Pickett type circa 2019/20 when Richmond drafted him just prior to GF - it was a shrewd pick up by them but wouldn’t suit us
 
Hall-Kahan from Sandy Dragons another really good young MSD candidate. Half fwd flanker with really good pace, and looked good on a wing.
Kicked bag of 4 and 5 for Sandy and one of young guns best players across the two games.
If we took Culley with our first and H-K with our second I'd be bloody happy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top