List Mgmt. Official 2016 trade period discussion

[nananana catman]

This might be more relevant for the "losing faith in out recruitment" thread... but I had a chat with someone inside our recruitment team about the Caddy trade and I feel vindicated that the club has lost their way, and actually don't know as much as seemingly normal footy fans/have a complete difference in opinion with the entire Geelong supporting base. For instance, I'd say Pure Ownage knows more and would be better working at the club than some of the recruitment staff who are actually making decisions.

Basically when quizzed why he was traded the following was said:

• Geelong was happy to take 27 initially even for Caddy but 'went for' 24 when it was available.
• Don't rate Caddy highly internally (not in the 3 best mids was said)
• Said Caddy has a poor attitude. I asked what do you mean, he said well, the coach believes he's a better forward than mid whereas Caddy thinks he's a better mid than forward. - this is particularly concerning as 99% of anyone with a footy brain knows he's better as a mid - not our coach. AND that doesn't mean his attitude is poor at all. I said he is much better than Blitz, why isn't he playing mid ahead of blitz, response was Caddy doesn't run defensively enough.
• Caddy was actually happy to stay but Geelong preferred to get into the draft - in other words, Geelong rated a mid 20s pick above Caddy
• Wanted more salary cap flexibility
• I asked why didn't we hold out for more as a 20s pick is unders - response was along the lines of "nothing else was available and we think we can get a good player at 24"

Basically that was it. It shows that we willingly thought 24 > Caddy which is astounding and extraordinary. Caddy is clearly worth more especially as we need mature good players in this flag tilt. Basically the entire footy world cannot understand this trade, it is only our recruitment staff and no one else, that believe 24 > Caddy.

Which of those points don't you agree with, other than the pick 24 thing? (which they might end up being vindicated on).

 

[strauchnyy]

Which of those points don't you agree with, other than the pick 24 thing? (which they might end up being vindicated on).

I think he's our third best mid (as a starting centre with Dangerwood). I.e. I think Guthrie is better as a hbf, duncan as wing and motlop as fwd.

I am certain that Caddy has more value than pick 24 if he was actually shopped around.

It is very unlikely that we will get a player at 24 better than Caddy.

We are certainly worse on field in 2017 as a result of this trade.

Caddy believes he's a mid, not a forward - that is obvious. I don't agree with Scott who believes he's more a forward than a mid. Caddy was played out of position.

It was a bad trade, and you won't find many who think it was a good trade...

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Caddy believes he's a mid, not a forward - that is obvious. I don't agree with Scott who believes he's more a forward than a mid. Caddy was played out of position.

I think he's a better mid, too. I thought he was played forward out of necessity more than that being believed to be his ideal spot. We had so few real forward options that we shifted him there given there was enough strength in the mid with Selwood and Dangerfield. In an ideal scenario, though, you'd have stronger forwards and Caddy could spend most of his time in the midfield.

I agree with everything else, although whether he was Geelong's third best mid is debatable. That's a hard one to determine because after Selwood and Dangerfield, the mids play different roles, get moved about the field more, and can all be rated according to potential rather than output (i.e. we think Motlop has the talent to perform a lot better than he has).

But it's definitely foolish to think Caddy is more valuable than a pick 24, especially on a short-term basis. Caddy is a known entity; draft picks never are, and Geelong, especially recently, does not always recruit, manage and develop its young talent as effectively as you would hope. Caddy himself was a pick 7 and cost Geelong a pick 15 so the idea that pick 24 is going to be inherently more valuable is highly flawed. I can't imagine they actually think that, especially seeing as how their approach last year seemed to favour proven entities over draft picks and suggest a strategy that it is better to trade picks to get a known performer than it is to take the chance in the draft.

 

[nananana catman]

I think he's our third best mid (as a starting centre with Dangerwood). I.e. I think Guthrie is better as a hbf, duncan as wing and motlop as fwd.

I am certain that Caddy has more value than pick 24 if he was actually shopped around.

It is very unlikely that we will get a player at 24 better than Caddy.

We are certainly worse on field in 2017 as a result of this trade.

Caddy believes he's a mid, not a forward - that is obvious. I don't agree with Scott who believes he's more a forward than a mid. Caddy was played out of position.

It was a bad trade, and you won't find many who think it was a good trade...

That's completely speculative until we know what player we have drafted as a result of trading him. It's easy to flick Guthrie, Duncan and Motlop to other parts of the ground the bump him up into position 3, but Guthrie and Duncan finished higher in the B and F (one form of measure I know) and so did Blicavs.

We're talking about a guy here who isn't in our top 10 players, is very replaceable, and, most importantly, has gone missing on many occasions when needed (he's not alone there though of late). With all that in mind, pick 24 for a guy who averaged 17 disposals a game this year, is fine. It's simply a matter of using the pick well. There will be plenty of better players than Josh caddy available at that pick, it's a matter of finding them.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

A lot saying Alex witherden a good chance at this pick.

I like the description of him, also missed this year with a leg injury, reckon he could have been much higher otherwise?

Elite kick is s big tick, great reading of the play and finds the ball.

Sounds Enright like.

Anyone else a big fan in here? I am only judging based on readings. Anyone else know more? Pure_ownage? Anyone have good draft knowledge of this player? Country boy as well which works wel

 

[Biggy_Boy]

That's completely speculative until we know what player we have drafted as a result of trading him. It's easy to flick Guthrie, Duncan and Motlop to other parts of the ground the bump him up into position 3, but Guthrie and Duncan finished higher in the B and F (one form of measure I know) and so did Blicavs.

We're talking about a guy here who isn't in our top 10 players, is very replaceable, and, most importantly, has gone missing on many occasions when needed (he's not alone there though of late). With all that in mind, pick 24 for a guy who averaged 17 disposals a game this year, is fine. It's simply a matter of using the pick well. There will be plenty of better players than Josh caddy available at that pick, it's a matter of finding them.

What we do know is that Caddy was Geelong's second best inside mid in 2015 when he was spending more time in the midfield and Dangerfield wasn't around. He was second only to Selwood in contested possession and clearance stats. He averaged less this year because of less midfield time, but if he had kept those averages in 2016, he would have fallen in third behind Dangerfield and Selwood. I think it's fair to say that he was Geelong's third best inside midfielder.

 

[nananana catman]

What we do know is that Caddy was Geelong's second best inside mid in 2015 when he was spending more time in the midfield and Dangerfield wasn't around. He was second only to Selwood in contested possession and clearance stats. He averaged less this year because of less midfield time, but if he had kept those averages in 2016, he would have fallen in third behind Dangerfield and Selwood. I think it's fair to say that he was Geelong's third best inside midfielder.

If we are rating our midfield on best seasons then he definitely isn't top 3. The discussion was never only inside-mids and lets face it, coming second to Selwood last year and 3rd behind Dangerfield and Selwood this year is a bit of a 'first of the worst scenario' in any case.

I need to chuck it out there, I quite like him as a player. He's been great at times and missing on other occasions. But the hysteria here about trading him for Pick 24 is just over the top.

Look at Hawthorn, they got Pick 19 for Franklin and won the flag the year after, and the year after. I'm pretty sure we'll be okay.

 

[nohairandfair]

I think the gf is the problem....bt wag for sure is Duncan's missus

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Big titted? #norks

 

[CharacterFirst]

A lot saying Alex witherden a good chance at this pick.

I like the description of him, also missed this year with a leg injury, reckon he could have been much higher otherwise?

Elite kick is s big tick, great reading of the play and finds the ball.

Sounds Enright like.

Anyone else a big fan in here? I am only judging based on readings. Anyone else know more? Pure_ownage? Anyone have good draft knowledge of this player? Country boy as well which works wel

Might be too much like 2E I think.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Look at Hawthorn, they got Pick 19 for Franklin and won the flag the year after, and the year after. I'm pretty sure we'll be okay.

That wasn't a trade. It was compensation. They are different scenarios.

 

[nananana catman]

That wasn't a trade. It was compensation. They are different scenarios.

Well aware of that.

Wasn't using it to justify 24, was using it to highlight the point that the sky is not about to fall in at Geelong because Caddy went to richmond for pick 24.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Well aware of that.

Wasn't using it to justify 24, was using it to highlight the point that the sky is not about to fall in at Geelong because Caddy went to richmond for pick 24.

So it's fine for clubs to lose players for unders all the time because a great Hawthorn team once lost Franklin and still won the flag? That's sound logic. Might as well have given up Selwood and Dangerfield for picks in the 20s, too, because Hawthorn lost Franklin in 2013 and Geelong lost Ablett in 2010 so obviously losing best 22 players doesn't matter at all. You can trade out whoever you want and still win the flag because of those two examples.

 

[Partridge]

We may very well keep him for a tilt at a flag

Yep I'm sure he'll be a real weapon in September.

 

[thegerman]

We may very well keep him for a tilt at a flag

Why? He won't be contributing to it.

 

[nananana catman]

So it's fine for clubs to lose players for unders all the time because a great Hawthorn team once lost Franklin and still won the flag? That's sound logic. Might as well have given up Selwood and Dangerfield for picks in the 20s, too, because Hawthorn lost Franklin in 2013 and Geelong lost Ablett in 2010 so obviously losing best 22 players doesn't matter at all. You can trade out whoever you want and still win the flag because of those two examples.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.

There's that mention of 'unders' again... Would you give up a first round pick solely for Josh Caddy right here right now? People got narky giving up pick 15? for Henderson and he's a much better, much more important player. Ill say again too, at pick 24 there will be much better players than Josh Caddy around to draft.

How do you rate Zach Tuohy compared to Caddy? Because if you look at current ladder spots we're only going to slip around 5-8 spots in the draft to have picked him up.

Geelong could easily, easily go and draft a ready made replacement for Caddy if need be from the VFL, SANFL, WAFL etc with a pick in the 60's or 70's if they are worried about depth in that area. In fact they did that last year with Menegola.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Yep I'm sure he'll be a real weapon in September.

For your benefit LMcCarthy

 

[Gaz_Brownlow]

Just out of interest....what did pick 24 net in the last 10 years? Would give a pretty clear indication of its worth

Sent from my SM-G928I using Tapatalk

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Just out of interest....what did pick 24 net in the last 10 years? Would give a pretty clear indication of its worth

Sent from my SM-G928I using Tapatalk

2015: Ben Keays
2014: Jack Steele
2013: Billy Hartung
2012: Nathan Wright
2011: Henry Schade
2010: Jamie Cripps
2009: Jake Carlisle
2008: Nick Suban
2007: Clayton Hinkley
2006: Brent Renouf
2005: Cleve Hughes

 

[OzeSparky]

2015: Ben Keays
2014: Jack Steele
2013: Billy Hartung
2012: Nathan Wright
2011: Henry Schade
2010: Jamie Cripps
2009: Jake Carlisle
2008: Nick Suban
2007: Clayton Hinkley
2006: Brent Renouf
2005: Cleve Hughes

Spuds
Except maybe Carlisle

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Where does what we have done over trade period, coupled with retirements leave us with the number of players we need to draft in?

We currently have 34 players on senior list with parsons and ruggles as category A rookies.
You can have 38-40 senior list and 4-6 cat A rookies (total of the 2 must not exceed 44). If you go with 38 senior list (and 2 extra rookies) it saves a little bit of salary cap and you can have 2 nominated rookies who can play senior football without needing a player on long term injury list.

I assume we will want 24 38 and 42 as live picks and then an additional list spot for sam simpson (f/s) and i assume we will go with a senior list of 38. So if we elevate ruggles then to use those 4 picks we need to delist one more player. We would then have 5 cat A rookie spots available.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Spuds
Except maybe Carlisle

Steele is a very good player.

 

[nananana catman]

We currently have 34 players on senior list with parsons and ruggles as category A rookies.
You can have 38-40 senior list and 4-6 cat A rookies (total of the 2 must not exceed 44). If you go with 38 senior list (and 2 extra rookies) it saves a little bit of salary cap and you can have 2 nominated rookies who can play senior football without needing a player on long term injury list.

I assume we will want 24 38 and 42 as live picks and then an additional list spot for sam simpson (f/s) and i assume we will go with a senior list of 38. So if we elevate ruggles then to use those 4 picks we need to delist one more player. We would then have 5 cat A rookie spots available.

Am I 12 months behind or did I see Simpson named as a 19yo for the Falcons for their training Squad?

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Steele is a very good player.

Perhaps pertinent to note that Keays and Steele were academy players so their draft position of 24 isn't really indicative of where they were ranked.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Am I 12 months behind or did I see Simpson named as a 19yo for the Falcons for their training Squad?

I havent seen it but that would be for next year. What the clubs do is they get to have 1-2 players come back next year and play tac as a 19yo if they are undrafted so they nominate a fair few guys who they think are borderline to be picked up an then narrow down after the draft if they bring undrafted guys as 19yo.

If simpson gets a bid it wont be til late and if not we can take him with our very last pick as we did with bews.

 

[Hoooops]

Let's not forget who we got with Pick 24 in 2001.