Review Winners and losers 2018

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

Of course there are no real guarantees

Even with a truckload of number 1 draft pics it's still no guarantee to get a gun player.

Carlton is the perfect example of this.

Absolutely but you don't see clubs putting $900k into recruits with such big question marks in the one go often

 

[Tandy]

Hawthorn win because they just got
The Minch

 

[Bazzar]

Winners, Hawks, Tiges and Dee`s
Loser, North

 

[The Joker]

Freo are the only winners!

Neale -> Hogan
Pick 5 -> Lobb & Picks 14 & 31
F3rd -> Conca & Pick 44
F4th -> Colyer & Pick 65

Shit just got real!!!

 

[Tbone McGraw]

His year was quite average. Whether through injury or role change, I'm not sure. All Collingwood mids seemed to be down in TOG%? Maybe to spread the work load.

Lol if you actually think Pendles year was quite average.

Prob best to watch some footy.

 

[Tandy]

Freo are the only winners!

Neale -> Hogan
Pick 5 -> Lobb & Picks 14 & 31
F3rd -> Conca & Pick 44
F4th -> Colyer & Pick 65

Shit just got real!!!

Freo did very well

 

[Pykie]

Winners, Hawks, Tiges and Dee`s
Loser, North

Yes, we lost.

We picked up a genuine top 5 player for our side and we get to use 4 picks in the 40’s on a kid who could end very well end up the best from this draft.

A tragedy.

 

[Rich01]

Freo are the only winners!

Neale -> Hogan
Pick 5 -> Lobb & Picks 14 & 31
F3rd -> Conca & Pick 44
F4th -> Colyer & Pick 65

Shit just got real!!!

Freo did well, but shit is far from getting real for them.

Their best midfielder over the last two years in his prime replaced by Conca. Big loss. Conca is an 16-26 player on a decent list.

Lobb and Hogan into their forward line is a big win. Ross needs to amend his game plan accordingly. Should be exciting seeing Freo play with these guys lining up forward.

Colyer shouldn’t be best 22 at a decent club.

And while I wouldn’t be expecting anything from draft picks, pick 5 for likely close to 17 and 35 after academy and father son picks isn’t anything to write home about.

 

[bmaurizio]

We didn’t do too badly for basically 3 X 2nd rounders.
McGovern.
Setterfield.
Newman.
Fasolo

 

[The Joker]

Freo did well, but shit is far from getting real for them.

Be told, shit is getting real!

Their best midfielder over the last two years in his prime replaced by Conca. Big loss. Conca is an 16-26 player on a decent list.

Big mistake if you think Conca is Neales replacement!

Lobb and Hogan into their forward line is a big win. Ross needs to amend his game plan accordingly. Should be exciting seeing Freo play with these guys lining up forward.

This is where the term, shit is getting real, starts.

Colyer shouldn’t be best 22 at a decent club.

Your opinion might just be correct, but this is a very very young squad and he offers a bit of experience!

And while I wouldn’t be expecting anything from draft picks, pick 5 for likely close to 17 and 35 after academy and father son picks isn’t anything to write home about.

Likely close, did you actually just say likely close?

First of all, picks 14, 31, 44 and 65 is much better than just pick 6 (because you know 5 would be likely closer to 6, even though at the time of trading it was actually pick 6 and not 5 like you have said) and 81. Two draft picks inside 82 isnt a great place to be for a rebuilding side.

Secondly, if teams bid on academy kids and are matched, it doesnt mean 5 other kids just disappear out of the draft. The other team will just select the next kid they rated from the pool and the draft continues. Saying pick 14 will be likely close to 17 means nothing, academy kids arent 'really' apart of the draft anyway. If one team bids on every academy kid at pick 13 and was matched, Freos pick 14 could then be pick 30 and they could still pick Ian Hill, would he then be considered a massive slider?

 

[Rich01]

First of all, picks 14, 31, 44 and 65 is much better than just pick 6 (because you know 5 would be likely closer to 6, even though at the time of trading it was actually pick 6 and not 5 like you have said) and 81. Two draft picks inside 82 isnt a great place to be for a rebuilding side.

Secondly, if teams bid on academy kids and are matched, it doesnt mean 5 other kids just disappear out of the draft. The other team will just select the next kid they rated from the pool and the draft continues. Saying pick 14 will be likely close to 17 means nothing, academy kids arent 'really' apart of the draft anyway. If one team bids on every academy kid at pick 13 and was matched, Freos pick 14 could then be pick 30 and they could still pick Ian Hill, would he then be considered a massive slider?

With pick 6, unless the club that ends up with it has a massive brain fart, they will select one of the top seven players - Lukosius, Walsh, Rankine, Smith, King, King, Rozee.
While no guarantee, these seven at this stage look safer and better prospects than others in this draft.

With 14, 31 and 44 more likely to be closer to 17, 35 and 48 you are picking players where at least 16, 34 and 47 players have already been taken out of the draft pool before them. Yes you might get a slider, but the chances of picking up stars or even solid players at these picks are much much lower.

Freo gave up a pick to get a player in the top bracket of the draft for more picks later in the draft - one in the lower end of the second bracket of 8-20, one in the lower end of the week third bracket 21-40 and a couple of speculative picks.

Twomey has Hill at 17 at the moment, right on your first pick, so could work out well for you.

I can see why you would think giving up Rozee for Hill, 35 and 48 would be appealing. I’d still back the higher pick to turn out better. Time will tell.

 

[The Joker]

With pick 6, unless the club that ends up with it has a massive brain fart, they will select one of the top seven players - Lukosius, Walsh, Rankine, Smith, King, King, Rozee.
While no guarantee, these seven at this stage look safer and better prospects than others in this draft.

With 14, 31 and 44 more likely to be closer to 17, 35 and 48 you are picking players where at least 16, 34 and 47 players have already been taken out of the draft pool before them. Yes you might get a slider, but the chances of picking up stars or even solid players at these picks are much much lower.

Freo gave up a pick to get a player in the top bracket of the draft for more picks later in the draft - one in the lower end of the second bracket of 8-20, one in the lower end of the week third bracket 21-40 and a couple of speculative picks.

Twomey has Hill at 17 at the moment, right on your first pick, so could work out well for you.

I can see why you would think giving up Rozee for Hill, 35 and 48 would be appealing. I’d still back the higher pick to turn out better. Time will tell.

Ian Hill is one of the most skilled footballers in the whole draft and he fills a demand at Freo. If you remove the fact we need skilled players above anything, he could become our second best small forward over night.

As for 35 and 48, they give Freo the opportunity to match bids on their two academy players without going into the 2019 draft bank account.

 

[Joao]

With 14, 31 and 44 more likely to be closer to 17, 35 and 48 you are picking players where at least 16, 34 and 47 players have already been taken out of the draft pool before them. Yes you might get a slider, but the chances of picking up stars or even solid players at these picks are much much lower.

Later picks will end up moving forward as all of Norths and Pies selection get burnt matching bids.

As for 35 and 48, they give Freo the opportunity to match bids on their two academy players without going into the 2019 draft bank account.

Yeah those picks won't be needed for NGA. I'd be surprised if either were bid on before 50 and not surprised if neither are bid on at all.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

Later picks will end up moving forward as all of Norths and Pies selection get burnt matching bids.

Yeah those picks won't be needed for NGA. I'd be surprised if either were bid on before 50 and not surprised if neither are bid on at all.

Fair enough
I dont know much anything about your academy picks. Surely you wanted 0icks 43 and 47 for a reason though. Looks a bit like points to match.

Unless you an eye on a couple of possible late round choices. Any interesting mature age WAFL players this year?

 

[Joao]

Fair enough
I dont know much anything about your academy picks. Surely you wanted 0icks 43 and 47 for a reason though. Looks a bit like points to match.

Unless you an eye on a couple of possible late round choices. Any interesting mature age WAFL players this year?

We just want selections in the draft since we are rebuilding. I am sure we would prefer those picks to all be top 20. We still have lots of list to turn over. We used those picks in the 40s to get back into the second round which we did by trading them to North (who will use them to match).

Our academy guys are Carter (40-rookie) and Medhat (rookie). Pretty speculative types although each have some desirable attributes.

Not sure we are specifically targeting WAFL mature age players either, but there are a couple about I believe. Mature players are particularly of need given we traded in 4 23+ players.

 

[Wild Bill]

Winners, Hawks, Tiges and Dee`s
Loser, North

We got Polac for free. 10 would have been used on Thomas.

Great result - we had a very good trade period as much as it upsets you.

 

[Rich01]

We got Polac for free. 10 would have been used on Thomas.

Great result - we had a very good trade period as much as it upsets you.

Wouldn’t be surprised if Thomas is bid on after 10 meaning you could have had an A grader as well as him, but you can’t predict the future.

Polec is a great get.

Hall is a defensive liability but if coach Scott can teach him to defend he will be worth his $1m contract no doubt.

Tyson’s a clearance machine but an iffy kick. Would have thought you guys were ok inside but a good acquisition if deficient in that position past Cunnington.

You will have a bad year if Pittard is playing seniors but depth isn’t a bad thing. Newman would have been cheaper at this position.

Bailey Scott nominating North is a good win after losing out on Blakey.

 

[Wild Bill]

Wouldn’t be surprised if Thomas is bid on after 10 meaning you could have had an A grader as well as him, but you can’t predict the future.

Polec is a great get.

Hall is a defensive liability but if coach Scott can teach him to defend he will be worth his $1m contract no doubt.

Tyson’s a clearance machine but an iffy kick. Would have thought you guys were ok inside but a good acquisition if deficient in that position past Cunnington.

You will have a bad year if Pittard is playing seniors but depth isn’t a bad thing. Newman would have been cheaper at this position.

Bailey Scott nominating North is a good win after losing out on Blakey.

The bid would have come before our 1st pick. Why would a club not force our hand? He is a top 10 pick as it is imo.

The rest of your post is good. Not sure how you tiger mate thinks we are the loser of the trade period. But hey - trolls gotta troll.

 

[Rich01]

The bid would have come before our 1st pick. Why would a club not force our hand? He is a top 10 pick as it is imo.

The rest of your post is good. Not sure how you tiger mate thinks we are the loser of the trade period. But hey - trolls gotta troll.

Bids on Thomas haven’t happened yet,
Your recruiters banked on Thomas being bid on before your first pick at 11 so traded that pick out. If a bid before then happens, their plan proved correct. If no bid before 11, you could have had an A grader as well as Thomas which would have been a phenomenal result. He’s around the mark so your guys made a conservative call.

Time will tell on this one.

 

[Wild Bill]

Bids on Thomas haven’t happened yet,
Your recruiters banked on Thomas being bid on before your first pick at 11 so traded that pick out. If a bid before then happens, their plan proved correct. If no bid before 11, you could have had an A grader as well as Thomas which would have been a phenomenal result. He’s around the mark so your guys made a conservative call.

Time will tell on this one.

If a bid comes after 11 we will never know if things would have been different if we didn’t trade it out. Glad my club didn’t role the dice. Like McDonald clubs would have been mad to not bid on him before our 1st pick. We would take him no matter when the bid came - same as Blakey at the Swans. We both were always getting rid of our 1st pick.

 

[MartinLifts130]

we're clearly the winner of this period, unless some other team also got a top 10 KPF in the comp for free?

 

[The Joker]

we're clearly the winner of this period, unless some other team also got a top 10 KPF in the comp for free?

Team harmony is a very steep price to pay

 

[Bazzar]

Team harmony is a very steep price to pay

Are their issues with team harmony? Keen to know what they are. Fill us in.

 

[captain cotch 9]

We didn’t do too badly for basically 3 X 2nd rounders.
McGovern.
Setterfield.
Newman.
Fasolo

For a rebuilding club the rejects Carlton picked up are pretty good.
I like Newman.
Setterfield could be anything. A star or a flop ala Jono O'rorke
Fasolo fills a need
McGovern is the only one i dont like TBH. I think he is way to injury prone and very over rated. He does have good mitts and will take a defender away from Curnow

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

For a rebuilding club the rejects Carlton picked up are pretty good.
I like Newman.
Setterfield could be anything. A star or a flop ala Jono O'rorke
Fasolo fills a need
McGovern is the only one i dont like TBH. I think he is way to injury prone and very over rated. He does have good mitts and will take a defender away from Curnow

What you say about Setterfield is objectively right.

There was strong noise coming from the club that he was behind only Josh Kelly as the best prospect we'd had though. Many of us were surlrised we let him go, but I guess it was a difficult process to clear space. The playing group left behind were watching and it was likely hard to pick and choose.