Draft Profile Liam Stocker

[Marcel Proust]

The misconception here is Carlton weren't looking at drafting talls, it's likely the 6th best midfielder based on needs.

I agree, Im assuming someone misspoke or was misquoted. The 6th best mid on Carlton draft board is a lot more sensible than the current party line - SOS had him literally the sixth best player

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

You are correct both Stocker and Martin had 'fitness issues' like many first year players. Yet dusty had a pretty solid season

Definitely Agree with you, Dusty was a gun from the start. Im just not really sure how Stocker was rated so highly unless they are going off potential alone and see him ending up a top player when he can run out games, maybe he's just that far behind it in terms of his running? I've seen Stocker at training and he definitely has a bit of xfactor, but to trade pick 1 for him... idk... Hoping that once he gets his endurance up he'll show whatever they must have seen cuz aside from the odd moment in a game where he does something awesome I just can't justify this trade from SOS.

 

[Malifice]

The saints had less experienced team and both sides were the same age in the Saint v Carlton contest.

Was a pretty even match up generally

That's not entirely true. We had Simpson, Thomas and Kruezer push our average age (and games) up.

We still had more players with less than 50 games (11 to 9), and where we had 12 players in our side aged 18-22 (including 3 teenagers in Dow, Walsh and Stocker), they only played 4 players aged 18-22 (and the youngest of whom was Battle at 20).

It was 12 kids to 4, with Simpson, Thomas and Kruezer pushing our average age and games played up.

 

[Marcel Proust]

That's not entirely true. We had Simpson, Thomas and Kruezer push our average age (and games) up.

We still had more players with less than 50 games (11 to 9), and where we had 12 players in our side aged 18-22 (including 3 teenagers in Dow, Walsh and Stocker), they only played 4 players aged 18-22 (and the youngest of whom was Battle at 20).

It was 12 kids to 4, with Simpson, Thomas and Kruezer pushing our average age and games played up.

Thats a fair point Mal.

The saints still rolled out a pretty non experienced side. St Kilda had a touch more games in the 60+ games range which is a important given the blues had a lot of kids like you point out. From a neutral perspective id expect the blues extra talent to overcome that

It was a pretty even match up which i think is why blues fans seem a bit more flat than usual.

 

[Malifice]

View attachment 681536

Thats a fair point Mal.

The saints still rolled out a pretty non experienced side. St Kilda had a touch more games in the 60+ games range which is a important given the blues had a lot of kids like you point out. From a neutral perspective id expect the blues extra talent to overcome that

It was a pretty even match up which i think is why blues fans seem a bit more flat than usual.

It's even in the sense of overall average games played and age (not median games/ age though if you exclude the top 2 or 3 and bottom 2 or 3 in age and in games played per squad), but they certainly had a lot more mature bodies than us.

We played a side comprised of over half (12) our best 22 aged 18-22, with 3 teenagers. We had 5 players in the 23-26 age bracket.

They had 4 players in the 18-22 age bracket (and no teenagers) and were mainly in the 23-26 age bracket (16 players aged 23-26).

We looked like a TAC cup squad playing against men.

Unfortunately we also played like a TAC cup squad playing against men.

Most of our squad was recruited in the prior 4 drafts (the 66 game rebuild) so they're quite young. The Saints started rebuilding before us, so they have more mature bodies in thier list.

I still think we clearly have more talent than them; we just lack mature bodies at present to win games of football.

 

[Marcel Proust]

It's even in the sense of overall average games played and age (not median games/ age though if you exclude the top 2 or 3 and bottom 2 or 3 in age and in games played per squad), but they certainly had a lot more mature bodies than us.

We played a side comprised of over half (12) our best 22 aged 18-22, with 3 teenagers. We had 5 players in the 23-26 age bracket.

They had 4 players in the 18-22 age bracket (and no teenagers) and were mainly in the 23-26 age bracket (16 players aged 23-26).

We looked like a TAC cup squad playing against men.

Unfortunately we also played like a TAC cup squad playing against men.

Most of our squad was recruited in the prior 4 drafts (the 66 game rebuild) so they're quite young. The Saints started rebuilding before us, so they have more mature bodies in thier list.

I still think we clearly have more talent than them; we just lack mature bodies at present to win games of football.

Once again I largely agree. Carlton is rolling out a heap of young players (kids). Yet the sides were the same age, saints less experienced.

The saints oldest players were:

30 - Brown
29 -
28 - Savage
27 -
26 - Newnes, Ross, Bruce,
25 - Kent
24 - Dunstan, Sinclair, Young

Its a very young team too, IMO. It almost brings us full circle on the discussion - If SOS and co. knew the blues were going to have a uber young team this year, was it a good idea to trade the first round pick (pick 1)?

"We played a side comprised over over half (12) our best 22 aged 18-22".

Carlton knew their list prior to this season, it wasn't a complete shock to be fielding this type of team.

I'd argue its also a lot of pressure on Stocker, as the media aims for the low hanging fruit: Stocker v pick 1. I hope he is mentally tougher than say Richard Tambling who couldn't handle it.

 

[Malifice]

Once again I largely agree. Carlton is rolling out a heap of young players (kids). Yet the sides were the same age, saints less experienced.

Simpson, Thomas and Kruezer pushed our average age and games through the roof though. Simpson alone is 35 years old with over 300 games.

Looking at median age (instead of average) you'll see we had 3 very senior players, a large hole in the 23-28 age bracket, and then over half our list aged 22 or younger.

It almost brings us full circle on the discussion - If SOS and co. knew the blues were going to have a uber young team this year was it a good idea to trade the first round pick?

It makes it more of a good idea to trade it, not less.

Adding another 18 year old talented kid isnt going to achive diddly squat. We've used 9 x 1sts at the draft over the past 4 drafts (plus trading in players themselves taken as former 1sts from recent drafts in Setters, Marchbank, Kennedy etc). We need mature bodies.

And re the trade - you're ignoring the fact we do still have a 1st this year (linked to Adelaide) as part of the trade which is currently pick 12. Picks 12 and 19 = slightly more than 2,200 points or = in value to Pick 3 (with Pick 1 valued at 3,000 points).

The trade certainly isnt in our favor, but it's not some kind of 'OMFG end of the world' type deal that people are losing their shit about, and trolling us at every opportunity.

 

[Marcel Proust]

Simpson, Thomas and Kruezer pushed our average age and games through the roof though. Simpson alone is 35 years old with over 300 games.

Looking at median age (instead of average) you'll see we had 3 very senior players, a large hole in the 23-28 age bracket, and then over half our list aged 22 or younger.



It makes it more of a good idea to trade it, not less.

Adding another 18 year old talented kid isnt going to achive diddly squat. We've used 9 x 1sts at the draft over the past 4 drafts (plus trading in players themselves taken as former 1sts from recent drafts in Setters, Marchbank, Kennedy etc). We need mature bodies.

And re the trade - you're ignoring the fact we do still have a 1st this year (linked to Adelaide) as part of the trade which is currently pick 12. Picks 12 and 19 = slightly more than 2,200 points or = in value to Pick 3 (with Pick 1 valued at 3,000 points).

The trade certainly isnt in our favor, but it's not some kind of 'OMFG end of the world' type deal that people are losing their **** about, and trolling us at every opportunity.

I respectfully disagree. We have seen how much of a positive impact an elite kid like Walsh can have on a team.

Another one (Andersen, Rowell), would have been just what the doctor ordered and really speed up the rebuilding process. Perfect compliment for the development of Cripps, Walsh. Even as a non Carlton fan, this kind of elite young core is an exciting prospect to watch build around.

This is just my opinion. I apologies if my thoughts come across as trolling thats not my intention.

I like Stocker and had done many months before the draft due to Richmond being linked to him via mocks and hence researching him. Hopefully he reaches his potential and is a formidable player eventually

 

[bird_man]

The misconception here is Carlton weren't looking at drafting talls, it's likely the 6th best midfielder based on needs.

So we can probably say that SOS didn't have rated in the top 6 players then, which in the end makes the trade make less sense.

If they had of been patient they could have had not only the mid in this draft but also the best player

 

[northeasttiger]

Maybe SOS was comparing him to this years crop and his logic suggested if he picks up Stocker for this season he will be better than most midfielders available at this years draft.

He would have logically thought that Carlton would have moved up to about 12th spot on the ladder and Adelaide would have been about 8th spot making the trade a good deal.

He didn't anticipate the injuries to the players so the gamble probably wont pay off.

In fact if Carlton remain on the bottom the trade will be one of the poorer ones in recent times with the no 1 pick this year rated pretty highly.

 

[SickQwon]

So we can probably say that SOS didn't have rated in the top 6 players then, which in the end makes the trade make less sense.

If they had of been patient they could have had not only the mid in this draft but also the best player

Theres other advantages to drafting a player earlier. For example. Walsh would've been the only draftee from the 2018 draft, leaves a hole in that age group. Particularly if we are still in the phase of collecting draftees. Now that phase is over, SOS doesn't want to hold onto the this seasons first rounder, he priortised recruiting a potential mature age player with the pick instead. Unfortunately he and Carlton didn't expect it to be pick 1-2. Pick 10-12 will still net us a good player. So the whole trade makes more sense given it was forshadowed nearly 4 years ago when the rebuild blueprint was established.

The final trade will look something like

Stocker + Jack Martin for pick 1. Its still a big yikes but enough to conisider it a win for both clubs.

 

[Theo X]

Do you really think you'd get Jack Martin for pick 12?

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Do you really think you'd get Jack Martin for pick 12?

Surely we dont even need to add the "for pick 12." Why on Earth would he go to Carlton after suffering at Gold Coast for his whole career so far.

Seems ludicrous, he'll get paid almost as well where ever he goes

 

[bird_man]

Theres other advantages to drafting a player earlier. For example. Walsh would've been the only draftee from the 2018 draft, leaves a hole in that age group. Particularly if we are still in the phase of collecting draftees. Now that phase is over, SOS doesn't want to hold onto the this seasons first rounder, he priortised recruiting a potential mature age player with the pick instead. Unfortunately he and Carlton didn't expect it to be pick 1-2. Pick 10-12 will still net us a good player. So the whole trade makes more sense given it was forshadowed nearly 4 years ago when the rebuild blueprint was established.

The final trade will look something like

Stocker + Jack Martin for pick 1. Its still a big yikes but enough to conisider it a win for both clubs.

I hope Carlton didn't actually trade away their first pick in the hope that they'd get a mature recruit.

Who's to say Martin wants to go to Carlton? And if he does surely you could have found a way to do that and still keep pick one.

I doubt GC would expect to get pick one for a guy that hasn't fulfilled his potential.

As for trading away the pick to spread put the age, we'll I just don't buy that one bit.

 

[bird_man]

Do you really think you'd get Jack Martin for pick 12?

Pick 12 for Martin sounds about right to me. He's far from a super star of the comp, although he'd be a handy pick up

 

[Peel67skin]

Pick 12 for Martin sounds about right to me. He's far from a super star of the comp, although he'd be a handy pick up

I sell him to you for free in BF here.

 

[La Dispute]

I can’t see a player worth Pick 12 wanting to come to Carlton currently, so we might just have to bank the pick and bring in a player in an area of need.

There’s some interest on our board in obtaining Tom Papley for that pick, which is overpaying slightly, but he’s exactly the sort of player we should be looking to acquire as our small forward stocks are appallingly bad.

 

[SickQwon]

Do you really think you'd get Jack Martin for pick 12?

No, it was an example

 

[nahnah]

Jack Martin is another victim of Gold coasts poor player development, should be a star now he’s 24.

 

[Faz 2000]

Look, everything Carlton touch at the moment turns to disaster, but this guy will be alright. If he was allowed to develop for a year in the VFL like he should be, I think he'd turn up next year and look pretty damn handy.

I give him a tick for running in to give Dunstan what-for when he clipped Gibbons high at the weekend. That shows a bit of attitude and spirit, unlike every other wimp on our list.

 

[Marcel Proust]

Look, everything Carlton touch at the moment turns to disaster, but this guy will be alright. If he was allowed to develop for a year in the VFL like he should be, I think he'd turn up next year and look pretty damn handy.

I give him a tick for running in to give Dunstan what-for when he clipped Gibbons high at the weekend. That shows a bit of attitude and spirit, unlike every other wimp on our list.

Only played 63% game time which is a bit weird?

Stocker 63%
McGovern 63%
SPS 68%

 

[Faz 2000]

Only played 63% game time which is a bit weird?

Stocker 63%
McGovern 63%
SPS 68%

All explainable by the fact there's nobody else to bring in. All those guys could arguably do with a spell.

Friggen McGovern can't play two quarters without limping from the field, and SPS has barely fired a shot since the Dogs game.

 

[Bay Pie]

Thought the lad's been doing OK, albeit looks out of position.

Would still prefer pick 1 or 2 than this lad plus a pick in the teens.

 

[Bojangles17]

Look, everything Carlton touch at the moment turns to disaster, but this guy will be alright. If he was allowed to develop for a year in the VFL like he should be, I think he'd turn up next year and look pretty damn handy.

I give him a tick for running in to give Dunstan what-for when he clipped Gibbons high at the weekend. That shows a bit of attitude and spirit, unlike every other wimp on our list.

That’s a good point and where I’ve seen us benefit from with 20+ vfl games into youngsters building plenty of confidence for their turn at afl . Reality is he should be at vfl and would be better for it

 

[Chocoholic]

I agree, Im assuming someone misspoke or was misquoted. The 6th best mid on Carlton draft board is a lot more sensible than the current party line - SOS had him literally the sixth best player

In a draft vid, SOS said they rate the kid at 6 so I say it was he was the 6th player overall on their board.

Makes me wonder who from the actual top 6 they rated less.