Prediction Crystal Ball 2024 Edition. Who makes it?

[BORIS332]

 

[CHAWKTS]

4 - Tanner Bruhn Yes
6 - Toby Conway Yes
7 - Shaun Mannagh Yes
9 - Max Holmes Yes
10 - Mitch Knevitt No
11 - Edwards Yes, but not at GFC
13 - Jhye Clark Yes
14 - Connor O'Sullivan Yes
16 - Sam De Koning Yes
17 - Lawson Humphries Yes
18 - Tyson Stengle Yes
19 - Phoenix Foster No
15 - George Stevens No
20 - James Willis No
21 - Oliver Wiltshire No
28 - Ollie Dempsey Yes
31 - Oscar Murdoch No
33 - Shannon Neale Yes
34 - Oisin Mullin Yes
36 - Oliver Henry Yes
37 - Joe Furphy No
39 - Zach Guthrie Yes
40 - Ted Clohesy Yes
43 - Emerson Jeka No
45 - Brad Close Yes

As always you and I are usually pretty aligned.

I have a different view on Mitch Knevitt as I think he will be 100 game AFL player (only query for me is if we recruit some A grade mids like Smith then maybe he gets squeezed out and then my answer becomes like yours for Edward’s)

On Edward’s I have not doubt he will be on an AFL list long enough to play 100 games but might end up being a back up for most of it? Hard to tell

I am also hopeful (but not betting my house on it) that Ollie Wiltshire will make it. To round out Ollie, Ollie, Ollie!

 

[Hamingja]

View attachment 2055396

I would agree with this list in general. I would be inclined to say no for Mullin however. I don't think he has the upside that other people do. I think his ceiling is MOC and if Mullin can't break into the AFL side for an extended period, I could see him heading back to Ireland.

Tough gig to rate the talls at this point in time - Neale, Conway (because of injury), COS & Edwards. Fingers crossed for that group as we have a lot riding on them making it.

 

[CHAWKTS]

The other thought I had on this was who have I changed my mind on since beginning of the season.

Knevitt has gone from a yes to a maybe

Dempsey from a maybe to a definite

Toby from a yes to maybe (injury worry)

Lawson from a who to a yes

Mannagh from a very hard (age and position) to a probably

Neale from a probably to a yes but maybe not with Cats


That is quite a lot of changes of mind from me based on 18 games of new evidence. More evidence to come on some

 

[CHAWKTS]

The difference with Mannagh will be the quality of the games that he plays.

As a mature ager the standard that he plays at in games 1-25 will be infinitely higher than games 1-25 for a 19 year old rookie. Most young players are a drag on the team for at least their first 30 games. For example, I am very confident that Jhye Clark will be a good player for Geelong, but Mannagh’s output right now at AFL level is way higher, even though he has only played 5 games (vs Clark’s 16 games played).

It is why I have long been advocating for more mature aged recruits. They give you better bang for your buck - they don’t need years on the list “developing” before they play, when they do play they tend to hit the ground running, and they are often on low salaries (at least initially) for a player of their age.

They can be a great complement to a list, especially one like ours where most of the quality is at the top and bottom of the age ranges (and not much in the middle).

I agree. Of course need a mix as we do need some that have a higher ceiling which more often than not will come from a youngster than a proven commodity (given we are using later draft picks).

In fact, it has really been out strategy along the way (Atkins and Stewart were mature) but agree it doesn’t hurt to get one every year or two if they are going to fit the need - to supplement the young draftees

 

[foxdog50]

Is anyone game enough to say no to Guthrie or Close?

What you mean No to Brad Close?

 

[cats_09]

What you mean No to Brad Close?

A cheeky question that Hinkley29 picked up on

Guthrie is on 95 games & Close on 94 - both are good chances to play 100 games this year

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I'm interested who people think will get delisted/retire/traded at season's end.

Hawkins Tuhoy Stanley will all retire. Bews will be forced to retire as no one will pick him up.

Foster, Hardie, Murdoch will get delisted.

Parfitt will go if he can get a new home

James Willis , will get delisted but we will pick him back up as a rookie

Bailey Smith will come in, so we have 7 free spots in my view

Hawkins tuohy stanley retire bews delisted parfitt FA. I think one more for duncan and rohan 50/50. Foster hardie murdoch jeka delists.
1 More for willis (either senior list or rookie).
Leaves 6 senior and 3 rooke spots (not incl smith in).

 

[foxdog50]

Hawkins tuohy stanley retire bews delisted parfitt FA. I think one more for duncan and rohan 50/50. Foster hardie murdoch jeka delists.
1 More for willis (either senior list or rookie).
Leaves 6 senior and 3 rooke spots (not incl smith in).

You would think we have to have a eye on another player to trade for besides Smith...

AND **** ME SURELY WE WOULD GET ANOTHER BACK UP RUCKMAN! But why wouldn't it surprise me if they didn't too

 

[Kobe Gryant]

You would think we have to have a eye on another player to trade for besides Smith...

AND **** ME SURELY WE WOULD GET ANOTHER BACK UP RUCKMAN! But why wouldn't it surprise me if they didn't too

My guess would be:

- Smith

- Nash (or a similar FA type)

Probably someone like Davies, Garcia, or Angwin on the cheap too, who might not make it, but in all likelihood offers more than a token pick could, and we'll already be taking a couple of those.

Ends up with us adding 3 picks to the senior list through the draft, and maybe adding Willis as a rookie or something like that.

I'm not an English fan, but I'd consider it with our cap space opening up, and our lack of a viable ruck option over the course of a season.

Injury to SDK or Toby, and we're well and truly screwed there.

The cap space is the one caveat on Nash & English for mine, and it should play into our thinking.

Are they the absolute top of the tree types? No, but we're not going to be paying anybody big money for a couple of years anyway.

Unless pick purchasing comes in, stacking cap space that we can't spend on anyone is useless to us.

 

[lettheboysplay]

My guess would be:

- Smith

- Nash (or a similar FA type)

Probably someone like Davies, Garcia, or Angwin on the cheap too, who might not make it, but in all likelihood offers more than a token pick could, and we'll already be taking a couple of those.

Ends up with us adding 3 picks to the senior list through the draft, and maybe adding Willis as a rookie or something like that.

I'm not an English fan, but I'd consider it with our cap space opening up, and our lack of a viable ruck option over the course of a season.

Injury to SDK or Toby, and we're well and truly screwed there.

The cap space is the one caveat on Nash & English for mine, and it should play into our thinking.

Are they the absolute top of the tree types? No, but we're not going to be paying anybody big money for a couple of years anyway.

Unless pick purchasing comes in, stacking cap space that we can't spend on anyone is useless to us.

This is the first I've heard about 'Nash' - are we talking Conor here?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I can no longer see Hawkins and Tuohy's names listed without anything in between and not yell the phrase.

 

[Footy Smarts]

Thinking about the ruckman I'm not sure we will bother going for a back-up given how SDK has done in there.

Conway will be in his 4th season and should be more competitive again (if fit). SdK will be much better at the role with another 10 games and a preseason training those skills. And if we're going to get games into O'Sullivan we won't even be stretching our defence for height shifting SDK into the ruck.

Do we really need to recruit a mature ruck just to be 3rd string? Not for mine. If there's someone we really rate with a rookie pick (Kuol Mun?) go ahead but giving up anything of value just for a guy to be 3rd string doesn't make much sense.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Thinking about the ruckman I'm not sure we will bother going for a back-up given how SDK has done in there.

Conway will be in his 4th season and should be more competitive again (if fit). SdK will be much better at the role with another 10 games and a preseason training those skills. And if we're going to get games into O'Sullivan we won't even be stretching our defence for height shifting SDK into the ruck.

Do we really need to recruit a mature ruck just to be 3rd string? Not for mine. If there's someone we really rate with a rookie pick (Kuol Mun?) go ahead but giving up anything of value just for a guy to be 3rd string doesn't make much sense.

Conway could just as easily be egan or menzel at this point his durability is terrible. You treat it as a bonus if he makes it but you dont rely on it.
Connor is 2-3 PS gym wise off being able to fully match it and we are undersized in the kpd spot with sdk in the ruck. And blitz will be 34.

We absolutely have to recruit a ruck we would be mad not to (but then again geelong has been mad re rucks since 2012). For me thats not even a debate.
The real debate is do you get some cheap older guy (like what we did with ceglar stephenson fort abbott et al) or do you pay a bit more and get a good early 20s ruck who could be a long term solution.

 

[Hinkley29]

I agree. Of course need a mix as we do need some that have a higher ceiling which more often than not will come from a youngster than a proven commodity (given we are using later draft picks).

In fact, it has really been out strategy along the way (Atkins and Stewart were mature) but agree it doesn’t hurt to get one every year or two if they are going to fit the need - to supplement the young draftees

There have been quite a few.

Pods
Harry taylor
Matty egan
Stokes
Oren Stephenson (ha ha, what a star)
Darcy fort
Ryan abbott
Ruggles
Tim kelly

I am sure there are others

Some have been great, some not so much. One of the good things though is you know pretty quickly if they are going to make it, and you can move on if they don’t. They don’t clog your list for 4 years while you evaluate if they are good enough.

 

[Hinkley29]

Thinking about the ruckman I'm not sure we will bother going for a back-up given how SDK has done in there.

Conway will be in his 4th season and should be more competitive again (if fit). SdK will be much better at the role with another 10 games and a preseason training those skills. And if we're going to get games into O'Sullivan we won't even be stretching our defence for height shifting SDK into the ruck.

Do we really need to recruit a mature ruck just to be 3rd string? Not for mine. If there's someone we really rate with a rookie pick (Kuol Mun?) go ahead but giving up anything of value just for a guy to be 3rd string doesn't make much sense.

I think anything we get from Conway at this point will be a bonus. He is just too fragile.

I have a feeling the club may be moving on. I don’t think they will delist him, but he is not someone they are counting on to be in their future plans.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

There have been quite a few.

Pods
Harry taylor
Matty egan
Stokes
Oren Stephenson (ha ha, what a star)
Darcy fort
Ryan abbott
Ruggles
Tim kelly

I am sure there are others

Some have been great, some not so much. One of the good things though is you know pretty quickly if they are going to make it, and you can move on if they don’t. They don’t clog your list for 4 years while you evaluate if they are good enough.

Apart from the above

Stewart
Menegola
Atkins
Technically close was mature age (well an over ager)
Humphries
And now mannagh

So for every timm house or ruggles weve had a fair lot of good hits along the way.

 

[Hinkley29]

Apart from the above

Stewart
Menegola
Atkins
Technically close was mature age (well an over ager)
Humphries
And now mannagh

So for every timm house or ruggles weve had a fair lot of good hits along the way.

Haha timmmmmm house. Someone’s folks were way too creative with his name

“We really like the name Tim, but how do we make it a bit less mainstream? I know, just chuck in an extra m, that will be noice, unusual, different…”

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Haha timmmmmm house. Someone’s folks were way too creative with his name

“We really like the name Tim, but how do we make it a bit less mainstream? I know, just chuck in an extra m, that will be noice, unusual, different…”

Well BT does think it is pronounced ParrrrrrrrrrrFIT and Lllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllloyd