Are we finished yet?

[3183 Dee 2,602]

12 hours ago, Maxwell Edison MD said:

 

I’m sold!

[adonski 9,102]

Perkins doesn't feel like a Jason Taylor pick

[Binmans PA 25,898]

14 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

A potentially interesting twist:  "The Bulldogs held their nerve on Josh Dunkley, but what might happen if the AFL holds a second trade period this year, just before the draft? Age Podcast

Michael Gleeson, Peter Ryan and Jake Niall are good reporters and doubt they would hypothesise that without something behind it.

It could be linked to the late advice of List sizes/TPP.  Only guessing tho.  Or is their a hint that the AFL may do it to help Essendon and the Bulldogs, both AFL darlings in recent years...

I'm hoping this is the end of the player trade and lets get on with the draft etc.

We all know this, but how are the AFL? They really make it up on the fly, don't they? Strange year and strange times, but seriously, it's farcical for a multi-billion dollar industry's peak body.

[Lampers 563]

I’ve been trying to reverse engineer Melbourne’s approach based on what we can see. This is what I think it is.

List management is a multi year discipline and includes contracts, drafting, trading, free agency, current list development projections, junior footballer development projections and finally industry assumptions (e.g. salary cap increases).

There are a hell of a lot of assumptions and guesses in there.

As time progresses assumptions become less risky as you learn more.

Melbourne appear to want to position themselves where they hold the least risk (i.e. highest confidence on likely outcomes) and away from high risk. They engineer this by looking for market imbalances - which is often enabled by the bidding system which means different clubs place significantly different value on the same pick.

You see this in securing proven players for identified needs (Langdon, Tomlinson which hasn’t worked out but still illustrates the point) which is not certainty, but close to it.

You see this in the willingness to trade out of the following year’s draft (lots of uncertainty about junior players, order of draft picks, future development of the current list and therefore future gaps) and into the nearest draft where there is less uncertainty. Only to repeat that the next year.

You see it in targeting very specific players like Pickett and then using pick swaps that are win-win to secure that targeted player, but also not over pay. Not a bullet proof approach as pick 1 is the only way to secure who you want for sure.

It’s quite a sophisticated approach and requires the confidence to be seen to “pay overs” by some commentators and not get spooked.

I think this contrasts to an Essendon, who appear to go down the flashy messiah signing, and bravado approach that requires every trade to be “I win, you lose”.

I’m happier with Melbourne’s approach.

Edited November 13, 2020 by Lampers
Typos

[Kent 2,574]

53 minutes ago, Lampers said:

I’ve been trying to reverse engineer Melbourne’s approach based on what we can see. This is what I think it is.

List management is a multi year discipline and includes contracts, drafting, trading, free agency, current list development projections, junior footballer development projections and finally industry assumptions (e.g. salary cap increases).

There are a hell of a lot of assumptions and guesses in there.

As time progresses assumptions become less risky as you learn more.

Melbourne appear to want to position themselves where they hold the least risk (i.e. highest confidence on likely outcomes) and away from high risk. They engineer this by looking for market imbalances - which is often enabled by the bidding system which means different clubs place significantly different value on the same pick.

You see this in securing proven players for identified needs (Langdon, Tomlinson which hasn’t worked out but still illustrates the point) which is not certainty, but close to it.

You see this in the willingness to trade out of the following year’s draft (lots of uncertainty about junior players, order of draft picks, future development of the current list and therefore future gaps) and into the nearest draft where there is less uncertainty. Only to repeat that the next year.

You see it in targeting very specific players like Pickett and then using pick swaps that are win-win to secure that targeted player, but also not over pay. Not a bullet proof approach as pick 1 is the only way to secure who you want for sure.

It’s quite a sophisticated approach and requires the confidence to be seen to “pay overs” by some commentators and not get spooked.

I think this contrasts to an Essendon, who appear to go down the flashy messiah signing, and bravado approach that requires every trade to be “I win, you lose”.

I’m happier with Melbourne’s approach.

Mate we have already been through the messiah stage thank god!!

[Lucifers Hero 36,983]

Our draft picks are 18, 19, 28 and 50 (89 used to promote Lockhart and he is counted as a draftee pick by the AFL). 

After the latest contract signings we have 35 senior players (incl Lockhart)

We then have a max of 3 vacant spots going into the draft.  This means we cannot use pick 50 so it will need to be packaged eg with 28 and swapped for a low 20's pick.  Or some other combo depending on how many players we want to draft.

It was reported that mfc will take 3 draftees. 

If it is assumed Lockhart is one of those 3 draftees we aren't planning to use pick 28 at the draft (and will keep a list spot vacant) and it becomes 'surplus'.

Some possibilities:

• package 19 (or 18), 28 and 50 for a mid low teen pick (altho there will be a lot of competition for mid-teen picks).
• if we can't do that convert 28 and 50 to a 2021 future pick

So we aren't finished with pick swaps, yet! 

Edited November 23, 2020 by Lucifer's Hero

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,381]

On 11/14/2020 at 8:58 AM, Kent said:

Mate we have already been through the messiah stage thank god!!

Otherwise known as the modern Aussie translation of Deuteronomy 18:15...

"The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him."

[deanox 8,516]

32 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Our draft picks are 18, 19, 28 and 50 (89 used to promote Lockhart and he is counted as a draftee pick by the AFL). 

After the latest contract signings we have 35 senior players (incl Lockhart)

We then have a max of 3 vacant spots going into the draft.  This means we cannot use pick 50 so it will need to be packaged eg with 28 and swapped for a low 20's pick.  Or some other combo depending on how many players we want to draft.

It was reported that mfc will take 3 draftees. 

If it is assumed Lockhart is one of those 3 draftees we aren't planning to use pick 28 at the draft (and will keep a list spot vacant) and it becomes 'surplus'.

Some possibilities:

• package 19 (or 18), 28 and 50 for a mid low teen pick (altho there will be a lot of competition for mid-teen picks).
• if we can't do that convert 28 and 50 to a 2021 future pick

So we aren't finished with pick swaps, yet! 

Is there any club who may be interested in the points available from 28 and 50, the list spots to actually "take them into the draft" and a willingness to give away a 2021 second?

Alternatively, same deal but 19 and 50 for a 2021 first? (Using 18 and 28, keeping a list spot open for mid season draft)

Edited November 23, 2020 by deanox

[DeeSpencer 23,061]

31 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

It was reported that mfc will take 3 draftees. 

If it is assumed Lockhart is one of those 3 draftees we aren't planning to use pick 28 at the draft (and will keep a list spot vacant) and it becomes 'surplus'.

Some possibilities:

• package 19 (or 18), 28 and 50 for a mid low teen pick (altho there will be a lot of competition for mid-teen picks).
• if we can't do that convert 28 and 50 to a 2021 future pick

So we aren't finished with pick swaps, yet! 

I don't think it's correct to assume Lockhart is one of the 3 draftees. In fact, I'd assume the opposite. When reporting on draftees I think that clearly means how many fresh faces we'll take in the draft.

We'll certainly be looking at pick swaps and will likely make some, but my guess is it will end up in 3 picks. I doubt we'd only want 2 new kids. This list needs fresh new talent, any less than 3 solid national draft picks would be crazy.

[Lucifers Hero 36,983]

3 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

I don't think it's correct to assume Lockhart is one of the 3 draftees. In fact, I'd assume the opposite. When reporting on draftees I think that clearly means how many fresh faces we'll take in the draft.

We'll certainly be looking at pick swaps and will likely make some, but my guess is it will end up in 3 picks. I doubt we'd only want 2 new kids. This list needs fresh new talent, any less than 3 solid national draft picks would be crazy.

Lockhart's promotion must be via a draft pick and therefore he is counted as a draftee. 

Whether we take 2 more or 3 more draftees is the unknown.  Depending on that we will have 1 or 2 too many picks (until we swap).

[Dirts 429]

Use pick 18 and 19, as 2 in a row seems a better chance of 1 coming through. Pick 28 perhaps trade for a future as would seem a waste not to use!

[deelusions from afar 1,608]

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Our draft picks are 18, 19, 28 and 50 (89 used to promote Lockhart and he is counted as a draftee pick by the AFL). 

After the latest contract signings we have 35 senior players (incl Lockhart)

We then have a max of 3 vacant spots going into the draft.  This means we cannot use pick 50 so it will need to be packaged eg with 28 and swapped for a low 20's pick.  Or some other combo depending on how many players we want to draft.

It was reported that mfc will take 3 draftees. 

If it is assumed Lockhart is one of those 3 draftees we aren't planning to use pick 28 at the draft (and will keep a list spot vacant) and it becomes 'surplus'.

Some possibilities:

• package 19 (or 18), 28 and 50 for a mid low teen pick (altho there will be a lot of competition for mid-teen picks).
• if we can't do that convert 28 and 50 to a 2021 future pick

So we aren't finished with pick swaps, yet! 

Thanks LH.  Was kind of hoping we would draft 3 kids as a scatter gun approach might net someone who has slipped through this year.

If what you say is true, they may also have their eyes on someone in the early teens and be prepared to swap 18 and 19 to get him knowing that at 28 we are still likely to land a player we would consider at 19.  I think as others have stated, depending on how it plays out on draft night, a number of picks between 19 and 28 may end up being used as points for academy / father sons so there may not be a huge difference between 19 and 28 in the end.

[Lord Nev 13,511]

29 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Lockhart's promotion must be via a draft pick and therefore he is counted as a draftee. 

Whether we take 2 more or 3 more draftees is the unknown.  Depending on that we will have 1 or 2 too many picks (until we swap).

Might be a dumb question, but given the list minimum is 36 (37 inc. rookies) and we only have to use 1 pick this year, could there also be a chance we try to bundle up 18,19 and 28 into a top 10 pick and only take 1 draftee (aside from Lockhart)?

Doesn't seem super likely, but it's another option yeah?

[Lucifers Hero 36,983]

12 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Might be a dumb question, but given the list minimum is 36 (37 inc. rookies) and we only have to use 1 pick this year, could there also be a chance we try to bundle up 18,19 and 28 into a top 10 pick and only take 1 draftee (aside from Lockhart)?

Doesn't seem super likely, but it's another option yeah?

Yes it is an option but the I think GWS and Coll hold a much stronger hand and will out trump ours for a top 10 pick. 

What happens to pick 50?

Given today's contracts I wouldn't be surprised if we take 2 new draftees plus Lockhart (leaving a senior list spot vacant) and swap the 4 picks we have for the 2 best draft picks we can get.

Edited November 23, 2020 by Lucifer's Hero

[Redleg 37,478]

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Otherwise known as the modern Aussie translation of Deuteronomy 18:15...

"The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him."

I am here already and have been sitting here talking to myself, with no one listening.

[roy11 2,918]

9 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Yes it is an option but the I think GWS and Coll hold a much stronger hand and will out trump ours for a top 10 pick. 

What happens to pick 50?

Given today's contracts I wouldn't be surprised if we take 2 new draftees plus Lockhart (leaving a senior list spot vacant) and swap for the 2 best draft picks we can get with the 4 picks we have.

Just wondering if there is any interest in L Jetta. Might impact the number of picks we take to the draft

[Lucifers Hero 36,983]

2 minutes ago, roy11 said:

Just wondering if there is any interest in L Jetta. Might impact the number of picks we take to the draft

If we were to add a player eg Jetta as a DFA it would use up a senior list spot so we could only take 2 picks to the draft.

[Gawndog98 306]

Our two options to get rid of 1 of our picks so that we satisfy list spots is to trade up or trade for a future pick.

To trade up these are options (I didn't consider anything higher than Essendon since they turned down Brisbane's two first rounders for one of their first rounders in the trade period):

* Adelaide pick 9: Adelaide already have 5 picks in the first 2 rounds, plus some academy boys, so it's highly unlikely they'd want to bring in more picks

* GWS multiple first rounders: The Giants have 5 picks in the first 2 rounds too, I highly doubt they will be looking for more picks

* North Melbourne pick 11: this would be our best candidate as they have recently delisted a ton of players and are looking to rebuild, they currently have 4 picks in the first 2 rounds. We could try offer one first and our second but it would probably take our two firsts to get it done.

* Fremantle pick 12: Freo is in a pretty comfortable position to take their first rounder and two academy boys, don't see why they would budge from that as a later pick might get stalled up by an academy bid anyway.

 

I think Macrae would definitely be there at North's pick, as would Jack Carroll. Others who might be there would be Perkins, Chapman, and Henry. Our other options is to trade one of our picks for a future pick, come draft night I think Collingwood would be a good chance to trade their future first for one of our first rounders if there's someone on the board at our pick that they really rate. 

[deebug 1,754]

On 11/13/2020 at 9:09 PM, ChaserJ said:

If we want Perkins or Macrae, we’ll have to move up into the 8-13 range.

Failing that, there will still be some handy options at our current range. I imagine we’ll be looking at pace & ball use, so these players could be around the mark (Bailey Laurie & Brayden Cook are 2 who also fit the bill, but aren’t on the list below) :

https://afl.draftcentral.com.au/2020/07/02/2020-afl-draft-positional-analysis-outside-midfielders/

There is also an Ira Jetta, wonder if he is related to our very own Nev?

[Dannyz 2,301]

The club has tried unsuccessfully to convince Cedric Cox that we like his talents and could guarantee him 2 years. Complicated situation with family in remote Halls Creek. 

[BScotti 112]

1 hour ago, Gawndog98 said:

Our two options to get rid of 1 of our picks so that we satisfy list spots is to trade up or trade for a future pick.

To trade up these are options (I didn't consider anything higher than Essendon since they turned down Brisbane's two first rounders for one of their first rounders in the trade period):

* Adelaide pick 9: Adelaide already have 5 picks in the first 2 rounds, plus some academy boys, so it's highly unlikely they'd want to bring in more picks

* GWS multiple first rounders: The Giants have 5 picks in the first 2 rounds too, I highly doubt they will be looking for more picks

* North Melbourne pick 11: this would be our best candidate as they have recently delisted a ton of players and are looking to rebuild, they currently have 4 picks in the first 2 rounds. We could try offer one first and our second but it would probably take our two firsts to get it done.

* Fremantle pick 12: Freo is in a pretty comfortable position to take their first rounder and two academy boys, don't see why they would budge from that as a later pick might get stalled up by an academy bid anyway.

 

I think Macrae would definitely be there at North's pick, as would Jack Carroll. Others who might be there would be Perkins, Chapman, and Henry. Our other options is to trade one of our picks for a future pick, come draft night I think Collingwood would be a good chance to trade their future first for one of our first rounders if there's someone on the board at our pick that they really rate. 

Our 3 picks at the draft will complete our senior list to 38.  That will leave 1 spot left on rookie list (after Neitschke is selected).  I understand we can also select an SPP as we place KK on the LTI or non-playing list.

 

[Cheesy D. Pun 1,762]

1 hour ago, deebug said:

There is also an Ira Jetta, wonder if he is related to our very own Nev?

Cousin, apparently. From highlights, moves a little like Nev but has a bit of Lewis' leg speed.

[Turner 1,482]

5 hours ago, Dannyz said:

The club has tried unsuccessfully to convince Cedric Cox that we like his talents and could guarantee him 2 years. Complicated situation with family in remote Halls Creek. 

damn! this woulda been a really good get, in that cal ah chee mold, could rebound off half back with a neat kick or play a pressure forward role. shame coz i reckon we coulda convinced him to stay beyond the 2 as well with a spot in the team there for the taking. i guess he'll either sign a 1yr deal and request a move again next year or be delisted and hinge gets that final spot coz he's a more reliable choice long term?

[Lampers 563]

My guess is Melbourne will be keeping spot on the list open for after draft day, be them main list or rookie, given the unusually high amount of quality available from DFA given the list shrinkages, plus the precedent of prior years where Melbourne have added players just before the season and mid year.

I think this means we will see some more delistings, perhaps Bedford or Chandler or maybe KK as I doubt any would be snapped up by another club so Melbourne could just redraft them ultimately.

I also guess that Melbourne will be trying to take advantage on draft day during live trading if they can’t package two picks into one earlier pick to move up the order prior to the draft.

I wouldn’t be surprised if another club is willing to trade for Melbourne’s picks live during the draft when they know it will for sure get them a “slider”, and in exchange give up something potentially better in the 2021 draft.

The risk for Melbourne is other clubs knowing Melbourne may not really want to use some of their 2020 picks and so trying to low ball for them.

As confusing as the live trading and future pick trading and rule restrictions are for the average Joe, it really does open up possibilities and make the Mahoneys and Taylors or the world work for their money.

I reckon the next step is allowing just drafted players to be part of a trading window immediately after the draft concludes. The drafted player should have no say in proceedings. AFLPA surely can’t have a problem with that as 24 hours earlier the player had no choice in where they were drafted to so it’s just an extension and it will create even more opportunity for list managers to improve their list.

[deebug 1,754]

11 hours ago, Cheesy D. Pun said:

Cousin, apparently. From highlights, moves a little like Nev but has a bit of Lewis' leg speed.

If he can play as an outside mid, then maybe we could use pick 50 for him?