Rumour GFC 2024 Player Trading, Drafting FA, Rumours and Wish lists Pt 3

[iameviljez]

The decision changes, rather then using dreg picks, it would have pulled it from their first rounder the next year. Their vulnerability might have encourage some one to try and poach him rather then let him slide.

Possibly, but regardless, it really doesn't do much for Richmond. Arguably, they would prefer that the best youngsters go to a team at the top of the premiership cycle, rather than a more direct competitor on the arse end of the ladder.

 

[iameviljez]

I quite like the idea, for academies at least, that when a club bids on a player the bidding club still gets the player. The club that developed the kid just get the pick immediately after. Every bid is then legitimate. Every reward for developing the player appropriate.

Don't know what to do for father sons though.

I really don't want to throw yet more picks into the draft, it just screws over the team who holds the next pick.

 

[Heckler]

Honestly, I think our defensive play inside our forward half has generally been excellent since 2022 (notable exception of Stengle's chasing in the PF).

F50 intercept marking was an issue in 2024
Co-incidentally Rohan missed most of 2024
You join the dots.

 

[catswhiskers]

A better bidding system would be that the club who owns the academy rights to the player should have to announce before the draft the highest equivalent pick they would be willing to use on the player. Then that player is fair game to every club who has a pick before that number.

EG. This year before the draft Brisbane announce that they are willing to pay the equivalent of pick 3 to secure Ashcroft. Then richmond have the option to actually select Ashcroft at pick 1, and north have the option to select him at pick 2. If neither of these things happen, Brisbane have to honour their bid and pay the equivalent points to pick 3 in the draft.

That way Brisbane still have the first option of securing their player, but they actually have to put some skin in the game and make a realistic bid on his worth. Otherwise he is fair game to any club that values the player higher.

Very interesting idea. The club developing the kid would have the best idea of his ability. Hence, best able to predict draft position.

Must be some snag with it, though.

Far too simple for the AFL !

 

[CatToTheFuture]

I really don't want to throw yet more picks into the draft, it just screws over the team who holds the next pick.

Yeah but i think this would be worth it

 

[CatToTheFuture]

A better bidding system would be that the club who owns the academy rights to the player should have to announce before the draft the highest equivalent pick they would be willing to use on the player. Then that player is fair game to every club who has a pick before that number.

EG. This year before the draft Brisbane announce that they are willing to pay the equivalent of pick 3 to secure Ashcroft. Then richmond have the option to actually select Ashcroft at pick 1, and north have the option to select him at pick 2. If neither of these things happen, Brisbane have to honour their bid and pay the equivalent points to pick 3 in the draft.

That way Brisbane still have the first option of securing their player, but they actually have to put some skin in the game and make a realistic bid on his worth. Otherwise he is fair game to any club that values the player higher.

That's actually really good

 

[iameviljez]

F50 intercept marking was an issue in 2024

I strongly disagree with this. We consistently rated above average for inside-50 conversion and inside-50 marking, we consistently put up a contest even when out of position. I can't find a specific stat for i50 intercept marks against, but I don't think we'd be particularly poor.

 

[Heckler]

Could see Danger playing forward being a huge game changer for us. The problem is we have to win the ball out of the middle somehow.

Guthrie back from injury helps mid rotation.
F50 intercept are not an issue every week
It is a big issue against Demons and Lions
There are games when it needs attention
High pressure games with rushed kicks
Ideally a Stewart type that reads the ball
Rather than leading, hoping for a good pass
Polkinghorne may be solution in a few years

 

[Heckler]

I strongly disagree with this. We consistently rated above average for inside-50 conversion and inside-50 marking, we consistently put up a contest even when out of position. I can't find a specific stat for i50 intercept marks against, but I don't think we'd be particularly poor.

Stats can disguise general problems :-
Multi situations all with same outcome
Demons have strong intercept defenders
Teams will plan to double team Neale
High pressure games with rushed kicks
Long high bombs into the F50 hot spot

 

[And_ROOS]

Guthrie back from injury helps mid rotation.
F50 intercept are not an issue every week
It is a big issue against Demons and Lions
There are games when it needs attention
High pressure games with rushed kicks
Ideally a Stewart type that reads the ball
Rather than leading, hoping for a good pass
Polkinghorne may be solution in a few years

Cannot rely on CGuthrie considering he has now basically spent 2 years injured. I would much prefer we give Stewart another midfield preseason and play him there (that was where his best form for us this year was), see continued midfield development from Bowes, Bruhn and Holmes, and hope that we get immediate output from Smith and a bolter who does a Humphries/Dempsey for us but in midfield (i.e we see serious progress from Clark/Knevitt/Mullin etc)

 

[iameviljez]

Stats can disguise general problems :-
Multi situations all with same outcome
Demons have strong intercept defenders
Teams will plan to double team Neale
High pressure games with rushed kicks
Long high bombs into the F50 hot spot

Sure, but I have a strong suspicion that your assertion that we give up a lot of forward-50 intercept marks is based more so on confirmation bias than anything concrete.

We are still pretty competitive in the air, and generally tend to use the ball extremely well going forward. Miers is the poster boy for this, but our old chip-chip-chip-BOMB problem that we had before 2022 is largely gone.

 

[Gunf]

A better bidding system would be that the club who owns the academy rights to the player should have to announce before the draft the highest equivalent pick they would be willing to use on the player. Then that player is fair game to every club who has a pick before that number.

EG. This year before the draft Brisbane announce that they are willing to pay the equivalent of pick 3 to secure Ashcroft. Then richmond have the option to actually select Ashcroft at pick 1, and north have the option to select him at pick 2. If neither of these things happen, Brisbane have to honour their bid and pay the equivalent points to pick 3 in the draft.

That way Brisbane still have the first option of securing their player, but they actually have to put some skin in the game and make a realistic bid on his worth. Otherwise he is fair game to any club that values the player higher.

Hmm i actually really like this

 

[Oisin_the_Goat]

Cannot rely on CGuthrie considering he has now basically spent 2 years injured. I would much prefer we give Stewart another midfield preseason and play him there (that was where his best form for us this year was), see continued midfield development from Bowes, Bruhn and Holmes, and hope that we get immediate output from Smith and a bolter who does a Humphries/Dempsey for us but in midfield (i.e we see serious progress from Clark/Knevitt/Mullin etc)

Maybe a hot take but I like the idea of Mullin in the midfield

 

[Oisin_the_Goat]

Cannot rely on CGuthrie considering he has now basically spent 2 years injured. I would much prefer we give Stewart another midfield preseason and play him there (that was where his best form for us this year was), see continued midfield development from Bowes, Bruhn and Holmes, and hope that we get immediate output from Smith and a bolter who does a Humphries/Dempsey for us but in midfield (i.e we see serious progress from Clark/Knevitt/Mullin etc)

Can't see Bowes being a permanent midfielder. Will probably play Duncan's role of HB. Bruhns showed glimpses but needs consistency. Clark has a chance. We probably need to trade in a midfield superstar like a LDU.

 

[catswhiskers]

Cannot rely on CGuthrie considering he has now basically spent 2 years injured. I would much prefer we give Stewart another midfield preseason and play him there (that was where his best form for us this year was), see continued midfield development from Bowes, Bruhn and Holmes, and hope that we get immediate output from Smith and a bolter who does a Humphries/Dempsey for us but in midfield (i.e we see serious progress from Clark/Knevitt/Mullin etc)

Yes, a little good fortune is needed BUT if Cam gets and stays fit, he will add class. In the guts or even playing the Smith (retired variety) role.

BnF winner


Then again, if he is fit and can't break in, that's even better news.
Means Smith (new variety) Holmes, Bruhn, Bowes, Clark, Dempsey and 50% Danger are at last , a highly competitive unit.

 

[Warhorse]

Maybe a hot take but I like the idea of Mullin in the midfield

He can play wherever he wants. As long as it's VFL

 

[And_ROOS]

Yes, a little good fortune is needed BUT if Cam gets and stays fit, he will add class. In the guts or even playing the Smith (retired variety) role.

BnF winner


Then again, if he is fit and can't break in, that's even better news.
Means Smith (new variety) Holmes, Bruhn, Bowes, Clark, Dempsey and 50% Danger are at last , a highly competitive unit.

I think depending on rotations etc we might see CGuthrie off half back rotating there with Duncan who will be in and out of the team this year but a fit CGuthrie helps the midfield rotation which during our slump last season was a big issue.
I think we see Danger with 25% midfield time, I feel like we see him forward more next year.

 

[cats_09]

He can play wherever he wants. As long as it's VFL

Thinking a few folk will be disappointed when he's not playing much VFL next year

 

[Turbocat]

A better bidding system would be that the club who owns the academy rights to the player should have to announce before the draft the highest equivalent pick they would be willing to use on the player. Then that player is fair game to every club who has a pick before that number.

EG. This year before the draft Brisbane announce that they are willing to pay the equivalent of pick 3 to secure Ashcroft. Then richmond have the option to actually select Ashcroft at pick 1, and north have the option to select him at pick 2. If neither of these things happen, Brisbane have to honour their bid and pay the equivalent points to pick 3 in the draft.

That way Brisbane still have the first option of securing their player, but they actually have to put some skin in the game and make a realistic bid on his worth. Otherwise he is fair game to any club that values the player higher.

This is an interesting idea.

Using this year as an example… Brisbane announce they would take Ashcroft at 1 …. which I think they would have ..especially with the discount they get. Rich still call Lalor as they want the player they pick to be rated as P1… what do North do ? Im not sure … as the bid will be matched maybe they still prefer to call out a player who they can take too.

But where it would have been really interesting is for Marshall. If Brisbane say we rate him a weak value ..let say at 25 .. (where he went this year )… then id say pre-draft other clubs would look at him more closely.. and potentially under cut them. Brisbane probably have to announce a real/strong value ..lets say something in the 15 range. What happens if he gets to 15? The reluctance to bid for players yo cant really get seems to be a strong factor for some clubs.

I wonder what Stk would have said they rated Hofmann as predraft? Then drafting the 3 def’s …they still might not have paid it.

It would put pressure the aligned club ..and potential make them pay up and perhaps over pay. There are multiple crinkles in the current system but this proposal would at least have the potential to make them pay based on their own assessment of the talent they are being gifted.

 

[Hinkley29]

This is an interesting idea.

Using this year as an example… Brisbane announce they will take Ashcroft at 1 …. which I think they would have ..especially with the discount they get. Rich still call Lalor as they want the player they pick to be rated as P1… what do North do ? Im not sure … as the bid will be matched maybe they still prefer to call out a player who they can take too.

But where it would have been really interesting is for Marshall. If Brisbane say we rate him a weak value ..let say at 25 .. (where he went this year )… then id say pre-draft other clubs would look at him more closely.. and potentially under cut them. Brisbane probably have to announce a real/strong value ..lets say something in the 15 range. What happens if he gets to 15? The reluctance to bid for players yo cant really get seems to be a strong factor for some clubs.

I wonder what Stk would have said they rated Hofmann as predraft? Then drafting the 3 def’s …they still might not have paid it.


It would put pressure the aligned club ..and potential make them pay up and perhaps over pay. There are multiple crinkles in the current system but this proposal would at least have the potential to make them pay based on their own assessment of the talent they are being gifted.

In your example, if Brisbane announce they are putting a pick 1 value on Ashcroft, then they have to pay the equivalent of pick 1 points. So he becomes the number 1 pick in the draft by Brisbane, Lalor is 2 by Rich, norths pick 3, etc.

So before the draft even starts, all clubs know that Ashcroft is off the table as pick 1, and then clubs just pick accordingly. There is no bidding, all picks are live depending on the players still in the pool at that time.

I agree that where it would get interesting is the mid draft academy prospects. anything from mid first round onwards would be fascinating to see what value the clubs put on their academy players.

In your Marshall example, if Brisbane placed a mid 20’s pre draft value on him, every club in the league with a pick before 25 has the opportunity to get the player. How much would brisbane be prepared to gamble and risk losing the player? It would make for some much more interesting decisions by the clubs. They would need to get strategic and place pre draft values to get ahead of clubs that they think are interested in the player, etc. the pre draft machinations and manoeuvring would be great.

 

[Heckler]

Sure, but I have a strong suspicion that your assertion that we give up a lot of forward-50 intercept marks is based more so on confirmation bias than anything concrete.

We are still pretty competitive in the air, and generally tend to use the ball extremely well going forward. Miers is the poster boy for this, but our old chip-chip-chip-BOMB problem that we had before 2022 is largely gone.

Cats forwards rely on leads or pin point passes
Hawkins was competitive in the air... now gone.
Neal is a work in progress, Ollie a little too short.
How many passes to Cats small forwards been
Easily picked off be a taller intercept defender?
This is when an intercept forward (Danger) excels
Why do think Polkinghorne was Cats first pick?
Suspect Jay will be fast tracked this position.

Presently Cats lack a reliable F50 pack mark
Agree Cats are working to avoid long bombs
However long kicks to a contest still happen
Pack marking option would be added benefit
Until Neale becomes a monster the issue persists

 

[iameviljez]

Cats forwards rely on leads or pin point passes
Hawkins was competitive in the air... now gone.
Neal is a work in progress, Ollie a little too short.
How many passes to Cats small forwards been
Easily picked off be a taller intercept defender?
This is when an intercept forward (Danger) excels
Why do think Polkinghorne was Cats first pick?
Suspect Jay will be fast tracked this position.

Presently Cats lack a reliable F50 pack mark
Agree Cats are working to avoid long bombs
However long kicks to a contest still happen
Pack marking option would be added benefit
Until Neale becomes a monster the issue persists

Our forward line is pretty aerially capable - and big pack marks aren't the main avenue to goal for most teams. For what it's worth, Hawkins hasn't been capable of big pack marks since he did his back in 2013 and lost his spring - most of his contested marking is wrestling 1v1.

Of all the teams in flag contention last year, the only genuinely good pack marking forwards are Jesse Hogan and Joe Daniher.

I genuinely don't think that i50 intercepts are a bigger problem for Geelong than anyone else. FWIW, we had two nibbles at other players first before we actually took Polkinghorne - I don't think Polkinghorne was specifically targeted as such.

 

[nohairandfair]

Our forward line is pretty aerially capable - and big pack marks aren't the main avenue to goal for most teams. For what it's worth, Hawkins hasn't been capable of big pack marks since he did his back in 2013 and lost his spring - most of his contested marking is wrestling 1v1.

Of all the teams in flag contention last year, the only genuinely good pack marking forwards are Jesse Hogan and Joe Daniher.

I genuinely don't think that i50 intercepts are a bigger problem for Geelong than anyone else. FWIW, we had two nibbles at other players first before we actually took Polkinghorne - I don't think Polkinghorne was specifically targeted as such.

Perhaps the Cats were targetting Riley Bice.

 

[year of the cat]

Perhaps the Cats were targetting Riley Bice.

We were all in for Dodson weren’t we?

Apparently we offered the Tigers our FF for Shanahan. Not aware of any other pick trades we attempted.

 

[Farmer2Goggin]

He can play wherever he wants. As long as it's VFL

Respect your opinion but I think he'll launch in 2025 and become pretty damn good as a mid.......