Rumour GFC 2018 Player Trading, Drafting, FA, Rumours, and Wish lists - PT4

[Ratcat]

Come on to be fair I am not a knocker! You can't just have completely rose coloured glasses on him. I have highlighted what he is fantastic at including his elite endurance and ball winning at the contest as well as his astronomical numbers for a junior. I have met him and his old man and may well be working relatively closely with him next year but even I can acknowledge he has some flaws. Trust me when I tell you he is not a great kick. Neither his penetration nor his ball to hand when kicking is impressive. I still absolutely rate him as a player but he just isn't a great kick. He probably end up being serviceable to good and that would be enough for him to become a very good player IMHO.

These days that's an indefenseable knock, that's all l'm saying.
It's serious when this is raised, enough to kill him off although he's barely 18.

 

[Grimoz]

Collingwood supporter, DO NOT WANT!!! But seriously its a bit strange for him to say he's a hardcore Collingwood supporter just before he is about to get drafted to another club...that wont be Collingwood!!!

 

[ChookNorris]

Agree, sounds like GWS are very keen. We’re continuously linked to RCD, Stocker and Valente, so I think it will be one of them. Against popular opinion, I’d take Valente out of those three. There’s a reason he won SA’s MVP ahead of Lukosius, Rankine and Rozee.

One of my coaches thinks Valente will be the steal of this draft. Most people on the forums seem to base their wants for the draft based on where other phantoms have ranked players, rather than giving a lot of comment on why they don't want the player.

"Why don't you want player x?"

"Well Knightmare has him ranked 5 picks below our pick, must mean its a reach."

Every pick we had last year were in Buckenara's top 20, so people thought we had nailed it. Kelly was clearly best available, but we wont know on the others for years to come.

 

[Larry Donohue]

A 1 minute clip, look across the season.

Ratcat you will have a coronary at this rate. Settle. You seem to need to defend him at every turn. Why is he so important to you? There are so many decent players on the board.

 

[strauchnyy]

The main difference between the two is Hately finds a lot of the ball and is a clearance machine, whereas RCD can't get near it.

Hately definitely gets more of the footy, but I think his endurance is better and also because RCD played forward a lot more. I think it's obvious that when looking at how they play, RCD is far superior with his possessions and how he moves with the ball. I think the scope is much higher for RCD (more evasive, quicker) and you draft for the future, not how many possessions they get before they are drafted.

 

[Pack Specialist]

Ratcat you will have a coronary at this rate. Settle. You seem to need to defend him at every turn. Why is he so important to you? There are so many decent players on the board.

To be fair to Ratcat he's been consistent in his opinion and he's not half wrong IMO.

Posters keep questioning his opinion on multiple players and he has provided data and observations in return.

As Chook Norris has pointed out above, posters are shooting down others opinions without actually providing any reasoning whatsoever.

Like Ratcat, I believe both RCD and Bailey Williams are worthy of pick 12.

Posters may laugh and question that but the reality is that I have at least posted why I believe so, with combine numbers, statistics and footage etc.

Ratcat has done a good job explaining why he believes what he does and posters are shooting him down without contributing anything of note IMO.

 

[Ratcat]

Ratcat you will have a coronary at this rate. Settle. You seem to need to defend him at every turn. Why is he so important to you? There are so many decent players on the board.

The guy has huge performances across the season the knockers don't or won't acknowledge. If they scrutinized others to the same degree we wouldn't pick anyone.

I just don't want another 180cm mid with a very good pick opportunity.
Ely Smith is a monster mid with huge combine stas etc, who can say he won't be a champion? It's a raffle without the best of intel.

 

[year of the cat]

This is a great example as to where the recruiters earn their money. Trying to project the ceilings of the likes of Hately and RCD is difficult.

Personally I think that Hately is the much surer bet but RCD has the higher ceiling. The acceleration that RCD has out of the contest and intensity at the footy I think translates well to AFL. My question marks are like others over his ability to build a tank and accumulate. I don't think though, like some others, that these are unattainable goals. He has an ability to win his own footy so hopefully IF he is able to improve his endurance he is then able to get to more contests. His kicking is superior to Hately's.

With Hately my concerns are not as great. He may not be quite the impact player that RCD could become but he will be a very reliable contributor each week. I love his ability overhead. He therefore can be a forward option at times. I see this with RCD as well by the way.

If I was to choose between the two its Hately but only because we need a surer bet at the moment.

 

[BORIS332]

Hately definitely gets more of the footy, but I think his endurance is better and also because RCD played forward a lot more. I think it's obvious that when looking at how they play, RCD is far superior with his possessions and how he moves with the ball. I think the scope is much higher for RCD (more evasive, quicker) and you draft for the future, not how many possessions they get before they are drafted.

It’s risk vs reward. I agree RCD has a higher ceiling, though he could be a huge bust too. Hately is a ready-made mid, will play from round one and looks a future 200-gamer.

Cripps averaged more than six clearances a game at the champs in his draft year, and was racking it up in the WAFL colts with one game of 40 disposals.

RCD averaged barely 12 disposals at the Champs, and he only recorded five or more clearances twice in his 16 TAC games. I get the comparison, though I think it’s highly unlikely RCD will reach anywhere near Cripps/Bont heights. The risk outweighs the reward with RCD for mine.

 

[BORIS332]

This is a great example as to where the recruiters earn their money. Trying to project the ceilings of the likes of Hately and RCD is difficult.

Personally I think that Hately is the much surer bet but RCD has the higher ceiling. The acceleration that RCD has out of the contest and intensity at the footy I think translates well to AFL. My question marks are like others over his ability to build a tank and accumulate. I don't think though, like some others, that these are unattainable goals. He has an ability to win his own footy so hopefully IF he is able to improve his endurance he is then able to get to more contests. His kicking is superior to Hately's.

With Hately my concerns are not as great. He may not be quite the impact player that RCD could become but he will be a very reliable contributor each week. I love his ability overhead. He therefore can be a forward option at times. I see this with RCD as well by the way.

If I was to choose between the two its Hately but only because we need a surer bet at the moment.

On the tank vs production correlation, both Constable and Cripps were racking up huge U18 numbers despite having poor tanks. I think production is more about reading the game, which RCD does not do well.

 

[Pack Specialist]

This is a great example as to where the recruiters earn their money. Trying to project the ceilings of the likes of Hately and RCD is difficult.

Personally I think that Hately is the much surer bet but RCD has the higher ceiling. The acceleration that RCD has out of the contest and intensity at the footy I think translates well to AFL. My question marks are like others over his ability to build a tank and accumulate. I don't think though, like some others, that these are unattainable goals. He has an ability to win his own footy so hopefully IF he is able to improve his endurance he is then able to get to more contests. His kicking is superior to Hately's.

With Hately my concerns are not as great. He may not be quite the impact player that RCD could become but he will be a very reliable contributor each week. I love his ability overhead. He therefore can be a forward option at times. I see this with RCD as well by the way.

If I was to choose between the two its Hately but only because we need a surer bet at the moment.

Great post.

I agree with your reasoning and do not understand the criticism of Hately in this thread.

I do understand the question marks being raised around RCD.

However, I truly believe that we have to take a swing in this draft IMO.

Hately, Caldwell, Clark, Hill, Valente, Jones etc are all good prospects but all have just as much bust potential as RCD IMO.

RCD has the highest ceiling by far to me and I believe that he is being underrated in this class.

 

[year of the cat]

On the tank vs production correlation, both Constable and Cripps were racking up huge U18 numbers despite having poor tanks. I think production is more about reading the game, which RCD does not do well.

Fair call. The only thing I'd say is that he has games where he does accumulate so it's not like he has a complete inability to read the game. It's more his consistency at this stage is poor.

 

[strauchnyy]

I think we will end up with Butters anyway, another sub 181cm outside-ish mid/fwd.

I think we need a big mid at 12 that has potential to be our no.1 mid in the future once Dangerwood are done.

Also, it seems likely we will try move up the order but the problem is no other clubs will be willing to swap with us unless say B smith slips to 9, and GWS prefer Butters who will be available at 12, over Smith who is a flight risk. But that's unlikely.

It's more likely that we trade our 2019 R2 to say GC for 29 (will be 33 on draft night) if McHenry is still on the board. GC may agree to this if they don't trade it to someone else.

 

[Johnny Cattery]

As mentioned Atkins is a good pick but we'll probably get him in the rookie draft IMO.

Marlon Pickett would also be a great shout at 50 or 51 in the ND. ....
I think our pick 12 ends up as 13 after a Blakey bid at 7 by the WB or 9 or 11 by GWS.
... Our 50 and 51 will come into the 44 and 45 ball park IMO.

F/S O.Brownless

If a bid comes for Brownless in the 40 range, won't we have to use 50 or 51 to get him? Because if we don't take him then, surely we go into deficit next year, because our lower picks couldn't be used to match a subsequent bid.

After pick 51 our next is 70 (39 points). By the time 50-51 roll around it will probably have moved up to about 65 (90 points). That's all we'll have, because 87 will be still worth nothing because it won't have got to 73 (even if it does move that high subsequently).

If we got other players at 45 and 46, then a bid for Brownless came at pick 48 - 302 points, minus the 20% discount is about 240 - then we'd carry over a deficit of around 150 points (I'm taking off that 90 points for pick 70/65).

I could be wrong though ... I'm assuming that the "points deficit" comes off your first pick the following year. Carrying over 200 points could mean dropping from 13 to 17. You'd be silly to do that when you could pay for the same player with a much lower pick this year.

 

[BORIS332]

If a bid comes for Brownless in the 40 range, aren't we likely to lose one of 50-51 to get him? And even if there is no bid, won't we have to take him with one of these or risk going into deficit next year?

Our pick 70 (39 points) will have moved up to about 65 (90 points) but pick 87 will be worth nothing because it won't have got to 73 (the lowest pick that attracts any points), even if it might have got that high by the end of the draft.

Does anyone know whether that carryover or "points deficit" comes off your first pick the following year? If it does, then carrying over 200 points is a potential problem: you'd drop from (say) 13 to 17. That would be silly when you could pay the same player with a much lower pick this year.

Source:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-10-18/fatherson-picks-could-put-pies-into-draft-points-deficit

The AFL added a safeguard to its complex system last year to protect the future first-round picks of clubs who want to take a father-son or academy player late in the draft.

It means that a club will not risk pushing back its first pick in the following year's draft if it goes into a points debt by choosing a later-round selection.

Instead, any points incurred for later round players can be repaid in the round the bid is received. A first-round draft position would only be altered if a bid came in the previous year's first round, which seems unlikely for the Collingwood pair.

This means that if the Pies go into deficit by matching an early third-round bid for Daicos, then their third-round pick next year would be shuffled down the order to make up the leftover points.

 

[Pack Specialist]

If a bid comes for Brownless in the 40 range, aren't we likely to lose one of 50-51 to get him? And even if there is no bid, won't we have to take him with one of these or risk going into deficit next year?

Our pick 70 (39 points) will have moved up to about 65 (90 points) but pick 87 will be worth nothing because it won't have got to 73 (the lowest pick that attracts any points), even if it might have got that high by the end of the draft.

Does anyone know whether that carryover or "points deficit" comes off your first pick the following year? If it does, then carrying over 200 points is a potential problem: you'd drop from (say) 13 to 17. That would be silly when you could pay the same player with a much lower pick this year.

Good question.

I'm not one hundred percent sure.

I believe the points deficit is the equivalent round.

 

[Ratcat]

To be fair to Ratcat he's been consistent in his opinion and he's not half wrong IMO.

Posters keep questioning his opinion on multiple players and he has provided data and observations in return.

As Chook Norris has pointed out above, posters are shooting down others opinions without actually providing any reasoning whatsoever.

Like Ratcat, I believe both RCD and Bailey Williams are worthy of pick 12.

Posters may laugh and question that but the reality is that I have at least posted why I believe so, with combine numbers, statistics and footage etc.

Ratcat has done a good job explaining why he believes what he does and posters are shooting him down without contributing anything of note IMO.

Real nice of you PS, l appreciate your comments, l do try to reason with the information at hand along with my preferred type.
Possibly it's that most disagree about.

Don't quite get the higher ceiling stuff from some, considering Hately was born 20/10/00 makes him nearly a year younger than RCD.
I think the ceiling knocks are to nullify his potential, the fact that he played SANFL and therefore reached his potential early.
It's like you fail if you succeed.... It's so hypothetical it doesn't matter.
Anyway cheers and appreciate your reasonable attitude, in the end what matters is that Wells is right.

 

[Pack Specialist]

Real nice of you PS, l appreciate your comments, l do try to reason with the information at hand along with my preferred type.
Possibly it's that most disagree about.

Don't quite get the higher ceiling stuff from some, considering Hately was born 20/10/00 makes him nearly a year younger than RCD.
I think the ceiling knocks are to nullify his potential, the fact that he played SANFL and therefore reached his potential early.
It's like you fail if you succeed.... It's so hypothetical it doesn't matter.
Anyway cheers and appreciate your reasonable attitude, in the end what matters is that Wells is right.

Whoever Wells selects will be the darling of the board immediately and all previous trash talk is forgotten.

 

[Two Planks]

Cal twomey in his podcast said that the hawks may look to trade 2019 1st rounder to eagles for pick 20.

That gives the eagles 2 round 1 selections next year to easily get the Kelly deal done.

 

[year of the cat]

I think we will end up with Butters anyway, another sub 181cm outside-ish mid/fwd.

I think we need a big mid at 12 that has potential to be our no.1 mid in the future once Dangerwood are done.

Also, it seems likely we will try move up the order but the problem is no other clubs will be willing to swap with us unless say B smith slips to 9, and GWS prefer Butters who will be available at 12, over Smith who is a flight risk. But that's unlikely.

It's more likely that we trade our 2019 R2 to say GC for 29 (will be 33 on draft night) if McHenry is still on the board. GC may agree to this if they don't trade it to someone else.

I think it will be Sturt if we don't go for RCD or Hately. Pretty confident of that.

 

[year of the cat]

Cal twomey in his podcast said that the hawks may look to trade 2019 1st rounder to eagles for pick 20.

That gives the eagles 2 round 1 selections next year to easily get the Kelly deal done.

Please let them win the spoon for double the laughs!

 

[Two Planks]

For next year, we simply need the dockers to finish below the eagles to take out the walking to the draft threat.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

It's really off putting when this thread has turned into a Hately obsession by a couple of posters.

Now is the time to use the ignore function for a little bit.

 

[Pack Specialist]

I'm not surprised that people are discussing players in our range ad nauseum.

That's the whole point of bigfooty isn't it?

 

[Larry Donohue]

To be fair to Ratcat he's been consistent in his opinion and he's not half wrong IMO.

Posters keep questioning his opinion on multiple players and he has provided data and observations in return.

As Chook Norris has pointed out above, posters are shooting down others opinions without actually providing any reasoning whatsoever.

Like Ratcat, I believe both RCD and Bailey Williams are worthy of pick 12.

Posters may laugh and question that but the reality is that I have at least posted why I believe so, with combine numbers, statistics and footage etc.

Ratcat has done a good job explaining why he believes what he does and posters are shooting him down without contributing anything of note IMO.

I didn't question his reasoning, more so his 400 posts on the same player. It's fine to want to get a player. I think Adelaide or Gws will get Hately before us. I hope he will be of level blood pressure when that happens.