Club Focus Geelong 2021 - Stengel, Ceglar, Conway, Knevitt, Willis, Kroeger, Whyte

AFL Club Focus

Remove this Banner Ad

Reader mode
Shadow89 said:
I suspect the reason we were happy to upgrade our pick, is because we'll take Schlensog with that Pick 88, IMO. Won't make it through the roomie draft, but if he's still available at that pick - I'd say we end up using it and upgrade both Close and Atkins next year (as I suspect we won't be using too many picks - as we'll be trying to trade up to ensure we get Jhye Clark)
Click to expand...

Honest question though why didnt we just take him as a DFA rather than use pick 88 on him? You could be right it just seems odd.
 
Pure_Ownage said:
Honest question though why didnt we just take him as a DFA rather than use pick 88 on him? You could be right it just seems odd.
Click to expand...

I suspect we didn't know if we'd have the list spots to accommodate him on the senior list. Once the option opened up for us to trade up the order with the Dogs, we then knew we'd have a spare list spot for him.

If we hadn't traded up, we then likely would not have taken him - unless he made it our first rookie pick. That's my rationale anyway
 
Shadow89 said:
I suspect we didn't know if we'd have the list spots to accommodate him on the senior list. Once the option opened up for us to trade up the order with the Dogs, we then knew we'd have a spare list spot for him.

If we hadn't traded up, we then likely would not have taken him - unless he made it our first rookie pick. That's my rationale anyway
Click to expand...

I suppose but we could have just DFAd him for example and traded our last R3 for someones future 3rd/4th to open up a spot so i find it odd that we didnt DFA him yet are prepared to spend a pick drafting him.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Pure_Ownage said:
I suppose but we could have just DFAd him for example and traded our last R3 for someones future 3rd/4th to open up a spot so i find it odd that we didnt DFA him yet are prepared to spend a pick drafting him.
Click to expand...

Well, either way, we'll know in about 3 hours anyway if I'm right or wrong, haha
 
CatToTheFuture said:
Pick 25 for a 3 pick upgrade that lands at a point of the draft where talent scouting produces statistically negligible advantages is just wildly over rating your own abilities.
Click to expand...

Depends where you have said player in your ranks. If its 12-15 then its probably around the mark

Everyone over pays to trade up because everyone wants to do that

See what Essendon gave away for HJ

What GC suns gave away for Flanders and J.Sharp. Carlton for Stocker ect
 
Keystone agony said:
Depends where you have said player in your ranks. If its 12-15 then its probably around the mark

Everyone over pays to trade up because everyone wants to do that

See what Essendon gave away for HJ

What GC suns gave away for Flanders and J.Sharp. Carlton for Stocker ect
Click to expand...
It's more about how much you trust your own rankings. Your valuation is already an outlier if you value a kid at 12 and he's still there at 21. I know you have to lose value to trade up but 24+25 is frankly extracting the urine
 
Thanks for the thread title update Lore but it's Kroeger not Kreuger

Kreuger is the guy we traded to Collingwood for the pick that was used in the three way ruck trade also involving Collingwood netting us the pick we would trade to Collingwood that got us back the pick we used to pick Kroeger. Not confusing in the slightest
 
CatToTheFuture said:
It's more about how much you trust your own rankings. Your valuation is already an outlier if you value a kid at 12 and he's still there at 21. I know you have to lose value to trade up but 24+25 is frankly extracting the urine
Click to expand...
If you don’t trust your own rankings then you shouldn’t be in the job. It can also be a situation where there is possibly a massive drop off after a certain pick. You have to ask yourself why Freo didn’t accept the trade and presumably every side before that would’ve had the same offer on the table so you would expect no side who had the picks before rated picks 24 and 25 worthy of anything more then possibly pick 22.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

HavUEvaSeenTheRain said:
If you don’t trust your own rankings then you shouldn’t be in the job. It can also be a situation where there is possibly a massive drop off after a certain pick. You also have to ask yourself why Freo didn’t accept the trade and presumably every side before that would’ve had the same offer on the table so you would expect no side who had the picks before rated picks 24 and 25 worthy of anything more then possibly pick 22.
Click to expand...
Trust your own rankings yeah, but trusting to the point where you're throwing away nearly half the draft capital in a trade indicates you are out of step with every other professional in the industry and are most likely wrong.

You need to trust your instincts but also verify that you're not going off the rails. The trade as specified would have been 1980s Trump levels of overcapitalisation
 
CatToTheFuture said:
Trust your own rankings yeah, but trusting to the point where you're throwing away nearly half the draft capital in a trade indicates you are out of step with every other professional in the industry and are most likely wrong.

You need to trust your instincts but also verify that you're not going off the rails. The trade as specified would have been 1980s Trump levels of overcapitalisation
Click to expand...
No it doesn’t. One thing is for certain and that’s that Fremantle agreed with Geelong’s rankings and you can only presume that 24+25 also wouldn’t get you pick 20,19,18,17,16 etc so I’d assume Geelong’s rating is probably ball park.
 
HavUEvaSeenTheRain said:
No it doesn’t. One thing is for certain and that’s that Fremantle agreed with Geelong’s rankings and you can only presume that 24+25 also wouldn’t get you pick 20,19,18,17,16 etc so I’d assume Geelong’s rating is probably ball park.
Click to expand...
How do you know this rating is real at all? How do we know what Geelong's rankings were pretty alone that Freo agreed with them? Sounds more like freo might have floated it to me as a fishing expedition if anything

Let's look at the redraft of this year in 5 years and see if that trade would have been seen as anything other than a colossal error of judgement
 
CatToTheFuture said:
How do you know this rating is real at all? How do we know what Geelong's rankings were pretty alone that Freo agreed with them? Sounds more like freo might have floated it to me as a fishing expedition if anything

Let's look at the redraft of this year in 5 years and see if that trade would have been seen as anything other than a colossal error of judgement
Click to expand...
Because this whole conversation was based on Twomey and Beveridge saying Geelong went hard for that pick.
If it’s true it’s only logical to assume teams rated Chesser, Aleer*, Sheldrick, Wilmot, Brown, Johnson, Van Rooyen, Lohmann more highly then picks 24-25. They are generally all the best clubs making those calls too.

yes and it is possible Twomey and Beveridge were wrong

Edit. That’s possibly not right because they may have been hoping one of those guys were available before they proposed the trade. It more tells you they don’t rate anyone except Johnson highly
 
Last edited:
HavUEvaSeenTheRain said:
Because this whole conversation was based on Twomey and Beveridge saying Geelong went hard for that pick.
If it’s true it’s only logical to assume teams rated Chesser, Aleer*, Sheldrick, Wilmot, Brown, Johnson, Van Rooyen, Lohmann more highly then picks 24-25. They are generally all the best clubs making those calls too.

yes and it is possible Twomey and Beveridge were wrong

Edit. That’s possibly not right because they may have been hoping one of those guys were available before they proposed the trade. It more tells you they don’t rate anyone except Johnson highly
Click to expand...
Sure, but how did we go from "went hard" to something very specific? "Went hard" could have meant 22 and F3 but no one has any information
 
CatToTheFuture said:
We're not drafting a ruck after taking 2x teenage rucks last year.

Also, they're drafting mostly mids (per Wells) who likely won't be needed at senior level next year so there's no reason to go for a mature ager over a kid as long as that kid isn't a total string bean. I don't see a 2nd round level mature age mid mentioned anywhere either. There might be a mature ager taken with a late or rookie pick, but the bulk of our best picks won't be used on one I think.
Click to expand...

First selection- Ruckman.. nailed it.
 
As with all drafts, the outcome won't be known for some time but I am happy that:

We took a full complement, especially with the lack of exposed junior form in this draft; and

We took a proper ruck prospect after 10 years of trying to cobble together a ruck division from NQR players.
 
Last edited:
The 747 said:
As with all drafts, the outcome won't be known for some time but I am happy that:

We took a full complement, especially with the lack of exposed junior form in this draft; and

We took a proper ruck prospect after 10 years of trying to cobble together a ruck division from NQR players.
Click to expand...
10 years? November 2020 was 12 months ago and we took 2
 
Reader mode

Remove this Banner Ad

Club Focus Geelong 2021 - Stengel, Ceglar, Conway, Knevitt, Willis, Kroeger, Whyte

Similar threads

The Nostradamus
Recommitted Max Holmes [re-signed with Geelong through 2028]
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
215
Views
14K
FootyLad0
FootyLad0
The Nostradamus
Recommitted Dylan Williams [signs til 2025]
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
HugeJohnson
HugeJohnson
The Nostradamus
Recommitted Bailey Williams [signs 4 year deal]
2 3
Replies
57
Views
7K
Foxman98
Foxman98
Lore
Club Focus Geelong 2023 - Reportedly open to trading their first round pick
18 19 20 21 22
Replies
548
Views
33K
CatToTheFuture
CatToTheFuture

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top