Roast Cripps - time to go

[El_Scorcho]

Respectfully, and I've been told this for months (even before the possibility of Houston moving on was a thing) that this draft was an elite one, whereby there were 4-5 standouts and then players 6-20 on the big board were all in a very similar category of talent level, and that the order they went in was not going to be determined so much on talent but rather each club's individual needs. And 21-35 is still strong too relative to other drafts where most of these players would be top 20 selections any other year. And these numbers above are not including the F/S and academy prospects, these are the actual players they'll be able to select.

I, like many of us on here wanted more for Houston. But I'll also acknowledge that with a likely 3-4 picks inside the top 35ish, they'll have every opportunity to make the most of things with a view to the long term.

Two issues with this.

1) we pissed away our own pick in this draft to plug list gaps with fringe players just 12 months ago. Is this a surprise superdraft? Did we only just find out?
2) the quality of the draft is always speculative and we still didn't get adequate value for the player we lost. Richmond are having no issues getting multiple firsts for their departing stars. It wasn't impossible, we just played our hand exceptionally poorly.

We're just compounding past list management errors with new list management errors. It's a disaster. We've hurt our list position badly over the last 2 seasons as we should be building around the midfield. We might get lucky in the draft, but we might have gotten even luckier if we'd managed the trade periods well instead of getting fleeced.

A club that held people accountable would sack Cripps here. Obviously that won't happen at Port.

 

[bomberclifford]

we seem to be making more mistakes over the past few years.

Desperate moves by desperate people.

 

[TazD]

This circles back to Hinkley for mine. He had his "best list ever" in 2023 and failed, he got his plug-ins for 24 and failed again. If he got his deserved sacking I think this trade would be viewed as a needed reset as Josh takes over.

Now we have pure jank.

 

[Chewy316]

Two issues with this.

1) we pissed away our own pick in this draft to plug list gaps with fringe players just 12 months ago. Is this a surprise superdraft? Did we only just find out?
2) the quality of the draft is always speculative and we still didn't get adequate value for the player we lost. Richmond are having no issues getting multiple firsts for their departing stars. It wasn't impossible, we just played our hand exceptionally poorly.

We're just compounding past list management errors with new list management errors. It's a disaster. We've hurt our list position badly over the last 2 seasons as we should be building around the midfield. We might get lucky in the draft, but we might have gotten even luckier if we'd managed the trade periods well instead of getting fleeced.

A club that held people accountable would sack Cripps here. Obviously that won't happen at Port.

The Club hold a philosophy that they will always be able to get back into a draft if they've traded a future pick because the academy teams are always willing to do deals involving lower and future picks in exchange for a higher pick provided the draft points are roughly equal on both sides.

Richmond got a ridiculous deal for Rioli because of 2 reasons: 1 being the academy stuff as I described earlier, the other being that Richmond are filthy with GC for the Hardwick stuff and they were holding GC to ransom. And Hardwick has immense ties to Rioli and was beyond desperate to get that deal done.

The BS one was the Bolton trade, they got a great deal there, and that's the type of deal Port should have tried to get with Houston. I'll also preface it by saying that Freo had the picks which naturally increased demand, but you're not going to have me disagree with the notion that Port should have gotten more for Houston.

You imply the draft is luck - and i agree to a point. But are you saying that instead of trading for Ratugolea and Soldo last year - two positions of massive need at the time, that they should have built around the midfield? Are you implying that you would have traded those picks for more established players? Or would you have kept those picks and went to the draft, where as you say, they "might get lucky" ?? I'm just intrigued as to what you would have done differently (granted hindsight is always a wonderful thing).

To suggest that Cripps should be sacked based on this trade and the Ratugolea and Soldo deals last year is egregiously shortsighted imo given he's managed the cap arguably better than any other team, and has accomplished the footy committee's objectives every year.

 

[Jonts]

The rebuilding on the run mantra means you are constantly trying to tread water, and thus don't have a clear larger plan to fall back on.
And consequently doing things like trading pick 18 for Esava and Soldo

 

[Jonts]

The academy sides treating picks differently due to the points value is the main reason they should scrap the draft order all together

You get X amount of points of based off where you finished and you trade the points for players. Then auction off each selection in the first 2 rounds before going back to default draft after that

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Well the big hope is that the straw that broke the back and got this thread started was trading out our 2020 Future First for Brisbane's late 2019 first. Because everyone was convinced that future first was going to be a top 5 pick.

A trade that ended up with us giving up pick 22 for Pick 18 in 2019. And even with hindsight, I still think I'd want Mitch Georgiades

19

Mitch Georgiades

Age

23

Ht

192cm

Wt

92kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

11.0

3star

K

8.0

3star

HB

3.0

3star

M

3.0

3star

T

2.0

4star

G

2.0

5star

D

11.0

3star

K

8.0

3star

HB

3.0

2star

M

3.0

3star

T

2.0

3star

G

2.0

5star

D

11.0

3star

K

8.0

3star

HB

3.0

3star

M

3.0

3star

T

2.0

4star

G

2.0

5star

even if we were trading away 2020's pick 2. The only player in that draft I'd definitely take ahead of him is Errol Gulden (not actually available). With maybe on Ugle-Hagan (not actually available), Thilthorpe and Holmes.

Mind you, its going to take some effort to turn this years trading around like that one did.

 

[FishingRick04]

Even if 13 busts we do have plenty of young kids. Sinn is the 2025 key IMO. Logan Evans could have an adjustment and flatter year in year 2

 

[Georgemehardies]

Hold off on the Cripps criticism until after the draft I say, let him focus. Sure, he may have been involved in two years in a row of poor trades, but he is also the best draft selector in the competition. He has kept Port in a good position for the whole Ken era despite them having to drag along the ball and chain of Ken Hinkley. I hear everyone saying we have had such a good team which Ken keeps wasting, well, this guy is the reason for the good team.

 

[longdonkey]

To suggest that Cripps should be sacked based on this trade and the Ratugolea and Soldo deals last year is egregiously shortsighted imo given he's managed the cap arguably better than any other team, and has accomplished the footy committee's objectives every year.

I don't have an issue with the strategy I just think we got the wrong player at an excessive cost, way too late.

It's not as though there weren't other cheaper options in the preceding years. Lewis Young is one who readily springs to mind. What I don't understand is for years not feeling the need to get a tall back they then got 2 in one year.

 

[tribey]

bro what

Lol. Love the outright lie regarding the alleged Wingard trade.

But to be fair, why would a List Manager remember what we actually got in that deal when you can just claim it netted us the two best players.

 

[Malibu#27]

Interesting times with Kane teeing off on the recruiting and wgt defending it.

 

[Chewy316]

Interesting times with Kane teeing off on the recruiting and wgt defending it.

Where has Tredders defended it?

I don't have an issue with the strategy I just think we got the wrong player at an excessive cost, way too late.

It's not as though there weren't other cheaper options in the preceding years. Lewis Young is one who readily springs to mind. What I don't understand is for years not feeling the need to get a tall back they then got 2 in one year.

They identified the need at the end of 2020 to get a KPD and brought in Aliir. McKenzie was still playing really well in 2021 so they rolled that into 2022. They needed a KPD at the end of 2022 but literally all their assets went into the JHF and Rioli trades except for pick 37ish which they tried to get a deal done for Ratugolea, which Geelong rebuffed.

I suspect they got Ratugolea and BZT because of two reasons: 1 being that McKenzie and Clurey were both getting on in age and on the downside of their careers so were likely no longer first 23 players. And the second was that the gameplan they wanted to employ this year (at least at the start of the year) was to have three bigs in defence who could act as the final stoppers in a high press system whereby Port lock the ball in and create enough pressure in the forward 50 that any disposal from the defence is a hack kick out, and Port's height would then have an advantage. But that isn't a sustainable strategy imo and we saw the team defence was much better when they played two talls and Bergman as a hybrid.

 

[Malibu#27]

Where has Tredders defended it?

Insta - like of ports Cripps quotes.

 

[Chewy316]

Insta - like of ports Cripps quotes.

If we're looking at instagram likes as a personal endorsement I think we're overreaching. I wouldn't be reading anything into that.

 

[FishingRick04]

If we're looking at instagram likes as a personal endorsement I think we're overreaching. I wouldn't be reading anything into that.

I liked your reply, I agree with you! Hmmmm

 

[Malibu#27]

If we're looking at instagram likes as a personal endorsement I think we're overreaching. I wouldn't be reading anything into that.

I guess we see what he says when he’s next on.

 

[Schulzenfest]

Respectfully, and I've been told this for months (even before the possibility of Houston moving on was a thing) that this draft was an elite one, whereby there were 4-5 standouts and then players 6-20 on the big board were all in a very similar category of talent level, and that the order they went in was not going to be determined so much on talent but rather each club's individual needs. And 21-35 is still strong too relative to other drafts where most of these players would be top 20 selections any other year. And these numbers above are not including the F/S and academy prospects, these are the actual players they'll be able to select.

I, like many of us on here wanted more for Houston. But I'll also acknowledge that with a likely 3-4 picks inside the top 35ish, they'll have every opportunity to make the most of things with a view to the long term.

The top 20 picks could all be future Hall of Famers and it doesn't justify our list management over the last two years. We traded a 2024 first rounder out for Ratugolea and Soldo last year and traded a 2024 first rounder back in for Houston this year. So we effectively traded Houston for Ratugolea and Soldo. All time terrible list management.

 

[GremioPower]

Cripps does what he does following guidelines. If it were European soccer, the guidelines would be:

• avoiding relegation;
• making into Europe every now and then.

It all makes sense when seen this way.

 

[KrispyKremeMullanikka]

The Club hold a philosophy that they will always be able to get back into a draft if they've traded a future pick because the academy teams are always willing to do deals involving lower and future picks in exchange for a higher pick provided the draft points are roughly equal on both sides.

Richmond got a ridiculous deal for Rioli because of 2 reasons: 1 being the academy stuff as I described earlier, the other being that Richmond are filthy with GC for the Hardwick stuff and they were holding GC to ransom. And Hardwick has immense ties to Rioli and was beyond desperate to get that deal done.

The BS one was the Bolton trade, they got a great deal there, and that's the type of deal Port should have tried to get with Houston. I'll also preface it by saying that Freo had the picks which naturally increased demand, but you're not going to have me disagree with the notion that Port should have gotten more for Houston.

You imply the draft is luck - and i agree to a point. But are you saying that instead of trading for Ratugolea and Soldo last year - two positions of massive need at the time, that they should have built around the midfield? Are you implying that you would have traded those picks for more established players? Or would you have kept those picks and went to the draft, where as you say, they "might get lucky" ?? I'm just intrigued as to what you would have done differently (granted hindsight is always a wonderful thing).

To suggest that Cripps should be sacked based on this trade and the Ratugolea and Soldo deals last year is egregiously shortsighted imo given he's managed the cap arguably better than any other team, and has accomplished the footy committee's objectives every year.

Yeah, but I get what you're saying, Chewy, but to trade two first rounders in back-to-back years for no good gain whatsoever is beyond pathetic and is a major reason to why they traded Dan.

Crippa, just like everyone knew fully well that this year was gonna be a very good year for drafting talent. So why trade away your future first-round pick away last year to Freo, knowing how good the talent will be the following year?

This situation could have been totally avoided if they CD/Crippa didn’t mismanaged our draft capital and held their nerve with players and player agencies like good ruthless clubs do.

As I’ve mentioned in a post here last night, you don’t see Geelong or Sydney get screwed at the negotiation table.

Geelong held Gold Coast to cough up a top 10, freaking TOP 10 PICK in a National Draft, and Jack Bowes a player that they wanted.

Sydney held Papley to his contract, and he had a completely reasonable reason to leave the Swans, but Sydney held Tom to his contract.

Surely we could have got Luko for F2 considering that GC kick him out and Richards for a 3/4 rounder?

We are in the premiership window (“or so they say"); why get rid of your best kick at the club for? To make Paul Conners of all people happy?
Seriously?

Why on god green earth did Crippa thank Paul Conners and his agency for? After being royale fúcked? Like seriously, how pathetically idiotic does one have to be?

Crippa will get the time, and time is certainly on his side at the minute, but my god, he is
certainly skating on a very thin ice in my books.

 

[Malibu#27]

If we're looking at instagram likes as a personal endorsement I think we're overreaching. I wouldn't be reading anything into that.

I guess we see what he says when he’s next on.

 

[Enviable Tradition]

Hold off on the Cripps criticism until after the draft I say, let him focus. Sure, he may have been involved in two years in a row of poor trades, but he is also the best draft selector in the competition. He has kept Port in a good position for the whole Ken era despite them having to drag along the ball and chain of Ken Hinkley. I hear everyone saying we have had such a good team which Ken keeps wasting, well, this guy is the reason for the good team.

Does Cripps even do the draft? Isn't that Parker?

On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[longdonkey]

Where has Tredders defended it?



They identified the need at the end of 2020 to get a KPD and brought in Aliir. McKenzie was still playing really well in 2021 so they rolled that into 2022. They needed a KPD at the end of 2022 but literally all their assets went into the JHF and Rioli trades except for pick 37ish which they tried to get a deal done for Ratugolea, which Geelong rebuffed.

I suspect they got Ratugolea and BZT because of two reasons: 1 being that McKenzie and Clurey were both getting on in age and on the downside of their careers so were likely no longer first 23 players. And the second was that the gameplan they wanted to employ this year (at least at the start of the year) was to have three bigs in defence who could act as the final stoppers in a high press system whereby Port lock the ball in and create enough pressure in the forward 50 that any disposal from the defence is a hack kick out, and Port's height would then have an advantage. But that isn't a sustainable strategy imo and we saw the team defence was much better when they played two talls and Bergman as a hybrid.

Question about our defence. To me it looked like that we didn't play the high line as much in the second half of the year. To me it looked like a significant change. They still played it, but not as high and with cover.

Was I imagining that?

 

[OneGreatClub]

Cripps:
Basically..

“it’s a complex situation and a fair bit of luck is involved”
“We’ve been top 4 for 4 of past 5 years and we never intend to bottom out so we have to find draft picks to refresh our list”
‘We feel we have plenty of strength in the area Dan played’
“ Atkins provides experience and leadership”

 

[El_Scorcho]

You imply the draft is luck - and i agree to a point. But are you saying that instead of trading for Ratugolea and Soldo last year - two positions of massive need at the time, that they should have built around the midfield? Are you implying that you would have traded those picks for more established players? Or would you have kept those picks and went to the draft, where as you say, they "might get lucky" ?? I'm just intrigued as to what you would have done differently (granted hindsight is always a wonderful thing).

To suggest that Cripps should be sacked based on this trade and the Ratugolea and Soldo deals last year is egregiously shortsighted imo given he's managed the cap arguably better than any other team, and has accomplished the footy committee's objectives every year.

It's checkmate for Cripps here. Or, if you think it's a problem wider than Cripps, Davies has oversight. Sack him.

Why was the list was so full of holes that he was forced to trade a superdraft first rounder for 2 fringe players?

Why are our key position and ruck stocks so chock full of players we've been forced to trade in? Why can't we develop a tall? Have we neglected developing talls? Drafting talls? What is it?

Ultimately what I would have done is played Sam Hayes and Jake Pasini about 30 more times each so I wasn't forced to emergency trade in players to fill list holes.

Is that a Hinkley issue? A Davies issue? A Cripps issue? When we try to blame Hinkley, the list is a problem. If we try to blame Cripps, he's a genius, it couldn't be him. If I question the footy department, then Chris Davies is one of the most respected footy administrators in the game. SOMEONE is responsible for this shitshow.

Our list development strategy is dogshit and it's caught up with us hard over the last 2 trade periods. The excuses that we're excited to hit this draft is absolute dogshit. It's just a lie. We got strongarmed into bad trades by other clubs who could see how weak we were.

Will someone be held accountable for that?

lol.