Rumour GFC 2023 Player Trading, Drafting FA, Rumours and Wish lists Pt1

[cats_09]

As we are now getting into the season and we are starting to get a bit more serious with discussion, seems a suitable time to post the following as it's repeatedly shown itself to be a value reference tool in trade & draft discussion

And as per normal, thanks to Lore for putting this together - always a fantastic reference tool



And yes this post is now stickied - makes it easy to keep track of (can easily reverse this though if needed)

 

[Johanpetro]

Interestingly, Esava very low on both counts. But he apparently can’t be picked because of his disposal

Sav doesn’t have turnovers cos his go to is to bomb it as long and far out of D50 as he can (not saying that’s a bad thing) and I’m pretty sure any kick over a certain amount of meters is automatically an effective kick

 

[iameviljez]

Technically he was equal with Jake for turnovers per disposal - Jake averages more disposals per game & marginally more turnovers compared with Ratugolea, and balances out when measured as turnover per disposal


Found it interesting that Stengle was 4th for turnovers per disposal

Players who play forward of the ball will always have more turnovers - they take bigger risks, and kick into the contracting part of the ground rather than the expanding part.

 

[goyoucatters]

Sav doesn’t have turnovers cos his go to is to bomb it as long and far out of D50 as he can (not saying that’s a bad thing).

 

[Mr Meow]

Players who play forward of the ball will always have more turnovers - they take bigger risks, and kick into the contracting part of the ground rather than the expanding part.

That is true. For wingmen/midfielders/forwards you probably want a ratio of score involvements to turnovers or something.

 

[goyoucatters]

Only Menegola from that group made a name as an outside player and he's quicker than Knevitt.

I watched Knevitt in juniors, he's an inside mid.

Wait, wait, wait...you're saying there's a player in our mids group who's slower than Mena?

Wonders will never cease.

 

[Turbocat]

Bet the Dogs aren’t regretting taking English at a very similar pick.

But ruckman are a bit unique in that you can only play one genuine ruckman in each side. If there is genuine belief that Conway is good enough, taking another first-round ruckman is burning a pick.

I have read debate today about Bruhn and Parish today. Id say thats more relative to debate on type than a player in draft. Side skipping the best talent based on height or type for eg. in draft seems problematic as player change a bit as tehy develop. Trade someone in that is a known at the level you do have better feel for what you will have and still I tend to say bring in the best talent and let the water find its own level

Id probably have more talls on a list than some people. Its just too easy to have something negative go wrong with bigs.

In general I do get your point. There would probably be 16 mid type in a side while maybe 4 players that are ruck height and players like Conway are specifically ruck only. To add a r1 pick like Conway again might mean at some stage you have a Grundy Gawn situation. Thats something that might occur 3 to 6 years down the track . In this particular situation and player I think he would add something different but he is in no way rated as highly as English.

 

[iameviljez]

Id say thats more relative to debate on type than a player in draft. Side skipping the best talent based on height or type for eg. in draft seems problematic as player change a bit as tehy develop.

Generally speaking, I agree with what you wrote. Players can be moved back and forward as they develop - Andrew Mackie was drafted as a key forward, Corey Enright as a midfielder, Esava obviously as a forward/ruck, Brad Ottens as a CHF, SJ as a forward.

There are exceptions, though. Ruckmen are really only ever ruckmen (as Melbourne are finding out with Grundy), and you can't turn any other type of player into a tall forward - they are either born with it, or they're not. Sorry Ben Graham and Harry Taylor.

Generally, I think clubs need to be wary of where you can top up cheaply and where you can't. Tall forwards are always the hardest spot to fill; you can usually get a ruckman, a half-back or an inside mid fairly cheaply.

 

[Goggin Our Best]

Only Menegola from that group made a name as an outside player and he's quicker than Knevitt.

I watched Knevitt in juniors, he's an inside mid.

He is a good o/head mark which is an asset - i hope he makes the grade - i dont know whether he will

Who he reminds me a bit from yester year is Grant Tanner - or better known as " The Rifleman "

 

[Lana]

Kolo averages 1.6 turnovers per game. That ranks him 28th out of 33 Cats this year.

View attachment 1770753

And he has the second fewest turnovers per disposal:

View attachment 1770756

Good at dispelling a supposed issue with his turnovers.

But displays a bit of a measurability bias, are a lack of turnovers alone really a good measure of good ball use?

It'd be better to bundle it up with a couple of other stats that provide context and compare to similar players.

 

[goyoucatters]

Good at dispelling a supposed issue with his turnovers.

But displays a bit of a measurability bias, are a lack of turnovers alone really a good measure of good ball use?

It'd be better to bundle it up with a couple of other stats that provide context and compare to similar players.

No matter what the stats say (and I don't dispute them, by the way), surely nobody who's watched more than a few instances of Kolo disposing of the footy would suggest that he is a good ball user. What he is then is a player who generally sticks to what he knows he can contribute with his disposal by foot, while still endeavouring to contribute to the team's plan to not simply bomb the ball up the line incessantly.

 

[moond0g]

Good at dispelling a supposed issue with his turnovers.

But displays a bit of a measurability bias, are a lack of turnovers alone really a good measure of good ball use?

It'd be better to bundle it up with a couple of other stats that provide context and compare to similar players.

Honestly it tells you nothing.

Would you rather the ball in the hands of Holmes, smith, miers, Cameron or Kolo, esava, bews?

It’s all relative to the difficulty of the kicks.

 

[Turbocat]

Generally speaking, I agree with what you wrote. Players can be moved back and forward as they develop - Andrew Mackie was drafted as a key forward, Corey Enright as a midfielder, Esava obviously as a forward/ruck, Brad Ottens as a CHF, SJ as a forward.

There are exceptions, though. Ruckmen are really only ever ruckmen (as Melbourne are finding out with Grundy), and you can't turn any other type of player into a tall forward - they are either born with it, or they're not. Sorry Ben Graham and Harry Taylor.

Generally, I think clubs need to be wary of where you can top up cheaply and where you can't. Tall forwards are always the hardest spot to fill; you can usually get a ruckman, a half-back or an inside mid fairly cheaply.

I have often heard the thought stream of some in the media about dont draft and pilfering other clubs rucks and wondered what would happen if all clubs took that approach. No one drafts and everyone scouring other clubs list for rucks as no one wants to develop them. Id say the afl would change list rules eventually.

While I can agree that rucks generally are thought of as rucks only ... Id say that is because more of the type that is rucking. As I mentioned having a Conway type and then drafting a conway type is probably where I agree with you. If their ages are too close .. is probably similar to Darcy and to Meek.

The kid i mentioned can run a sun 3.0 seconds while being over 200..he is not what I think of as that typical ruck type and not that sort. He is also not a R1 pick.(unless something has really changed) Id say its more likely to be a late pick or rookei for all the reasons we have talked about. Lots of development needed and you are probably not playing him on the wing .. even though he is fast.

Sooner or later a Blitz type with come along that is 205 if not taller. Some freak basketballer type probably I think Lebron James is 206 ..would have been interesting to a athlete like that in our game. Some day a tall mid and it will change the way rucks are thought of. Blitz has almost done that. Is this kid that? No idea.

 

[Oisin_the_Goat]

Sav doesn’t have turnovers cos his go to is to bomb it as long and far out of D50 as he can (not saying that’s a bad thing) and I’m pretty sure any kick over a certain amount of meters is automatically an effective kick

This sort of kick is more likely to add to his turnover numbers than a pin point short kick though right?

 

[TheCatStevensExperience]

No matter what the stats say (and I don't dispute them, by the way), surely nobody who's watched more than a few instances of Kolo disposing of the footy would suggest that he is a good ball user. What he is then is a player who generally sticks to what he knows he can contribute with his disposal by foot, while still endeavouring to contribute to the team's plan to not simply bomb the ball up the line incessantly.

It says something when someone says:

"Every time Kolo disposes of the ball my heart's in my mouth

And the next 6 comments are a long the line of:

"I thought I was the only one"

He's limited and if he sticks to what he knows he can pull of, he's great. If he goes beyond that...it's heart in mouth stuff.

 

[TheCatStevensExperience]

This sort of kick is more likely to add to his turnover numbers than a pin point short kick though right?

It's only ineffective over 40m if certain parameters are met - forget exactly what they are

 

[Johanpetro]

This sort of kick is more likely to add to his turnover numbers than a pin point short kick though right?

“A kick of more than 40 metres to a 50/50 contest” is the official rule from what I can find. I’d say most of his bombs result in a 50/50 contest? Also he only averages 6 kicks a game so don’t know how many of them would be short pin point kicks

 

[BORIS332]

Good at dispelling a supposed issue with his turnovers.

But displays a bit of a measurability bias, are a lack of turnovers alone really a good measure of good ball use?

It'd be better to bundle it up with a couple of other stats that provide context and compare to similar players.

The original post noted Kolo's turnovers specifically.

 

[Oisin_the_Goat]

“A kick of more than 40 metres to a 50/50 contest” is the official rule from what I can find. I’d say most of his bombs result in a 50/50 contest? Also he only averages 6 kicks a game so don’t know how many of them would be short pin point kicks

Ahk this makes sense to me now.

 

[Footy Smarts]

Generally speaking, I agree with what you wrote. Players can be moved back and forward as they develop - Andrew Mackie was drafted as a key forward, Corey Enright as a midfielder, Esava obviously as a forward/ruck, Brad Ottens as a CHF, SJ as a forward.

There are exceptions, though. Ruckmen are really only ever ruckmen (as Melbourne are finding out with Grundy), and you can't turn any other type of player into a tall forward - they are either born with it, or they're not. Sorry Ben Graham and Harry Taylor.

Generally, I think clubs need to be wary of where you can top up cheaply and where you can't. Tall forwards are always the hardest spot to fill; you can usually get a ruckman, a half-back or an inside mid fairly cheaply.

While this is true you can win a flag without a dominant key forward if you have very good small/medium forwards. Look at Melbourne in 2021, the dogs in 2016. Even our gun teams of 2007-2011 only had capable key forwards not guns.

With key forwards you either splash out for an absolute top notch one or save your cash and picks. Chasing a good but not great key forward with big money is almost always a mistake.

It's actually why I think our trade in of Ottens was initially a terrible decision. We recruited him as a key forward and he was never going to be that player for us. Luckily for us he turned into a gun ruck and because of King's injury problems we really needed that too. So we got a gun ruck and a Mooney was a capable key forward rather than being left trying to fit a square peg into a round hole with Ottens as our main key forward.

 

[BORIS332]

“A kick of more than 40 metres to a 50/50 contest” is the official rule from what I can find. I’d say most of his bombs result in a 50/50 contest? Also he only averages 6 kicks a game so don’t know how many of them would be short pin point kicks

Turnover <> ineffective kick.

They're two different measures.

 

[Shadow89]

I know it's not the be all and end all, but we haven't had anyone get 30 touches in most games this year, let alone average that.

Bring back Guthrie, and we will.

 

[Oisin_the_Goat]

Honestly it tells you nothing.

Would you rather the ball in the hands of Holmes, smith, miers, Cameron or Kolo, esava, bews?

It’s all relative to the difficulty of the kicks.

Miers, definitely Miers!

 

[Oisin_the_Goat]

Turnover <> ineffective kick.

They're two different measures.

I think the point they're trying to make is that if it goes to a 50-50 contest it's not considered a turnover.

 

[Lana]

No matter what the stats say (and I don't dispute them, by the way), surely nobody who's watched more than a few instances of Kolo disposing of the footy would suggest that he is a good ball user. What he is then is a player who generally sticks to what he knows he can contribute with his disposal by foot, while still endeavouring to contribute to the team's plan to not simply bomb the ball up the line incessantly.

Honestly it tells you nothing.

Would you rather the ball in the hands of Holmes, smith, miers, Cameron or Kolo, esava, bews?

It’s all relative to the difficulty of the kicks.

What I believe was BORIS332 point (please correct me if I'm wrong) is that there was a specific accusation that Kolodjashnij is turnover prone. Without reference to if he is a good ball user or not, through raw numbers alone he doesn't turnover the ball much. The reason why this could be the case isn't really relevant to their point.

We don't really have access to the detailed stats necessary to take a impartial view of it. Champion data has their kick difficulty rating but we'll have to rely on the mark 1 eyeball and memory.

In general I see turnovers go hand in hand with creativity and congestion. Good ball users get more licence to try risker actions. The gameplan gives poorer users a bail out option. The kick not taken gets no ratings.

 

[iameviljez]

I have often heard the thought stream of some in the media about dont draft and pilfering other clubs rucks and wondered what would happen if all clubs took that approach. No one drafts and everyone scouring other clubs list for rucks as no one wants to develop them. Id say the afl would change list rules eventually.

You'd wind up with one actual living case where the free market corrected itself

If clubs decided not to draft rucks, then guys like Conway, Sean Darcy, English, McInerney would suddenly be available in 60s or the rookie draft, at which point you'd absolutely swoop.

Usually I hear this kind of stuff about not drafting rucks from people who also claim that ruck contests are now redundant in winning games. I think that's underselling how badly our ruck issues have hurt us in the post-Ottens era, and how well Gawn and Darcy have done in the last few years.