Jake Stringer had the world at his feet at 21 – an All Australian, and a future star of the game. At 22, he had added the most valuable AFL honour to the AA nod – namely a Premiership, despite an un-and-down year.
Somehow, Stringer managed to put himself on the outs of the Dogs in 2017, and to borrow a term from Clare Bowditch, was a (club) divorcee by 23. Stringer’s form has dropped on a year-on-year basis since that All-Australian year, and it is reflected in his PAPLEY value:
Either one of the Dons two second rounders would have been in the “fair” value range for Stringer, albeit at the lower end of the scale. There are no doubts about Stringer’s on-field potential, but the off-field issues have clouded that in the last few weeks.
From the start the Dogs made it clear they wanted a first rounder in exchange for Stringer. Almost immediately after receiving the two second rounders, they flipped one of them (pick 30) with their own pick 28 for pick 16 – with a couple of other moving parts.
This is a rebuilding year/half decade for Carlton, and they need as much depth as they can muster. Exchanging a late first rounder and early third for three second rounders is a smart move for a club desperately needing best 22 talent.
The Dogs end up about level after all of the moves; despite losing ground they really wanted an extra first rounder. Carlton were patient and were rewarded, while Essendon got the player they were linked to for the last two weeks.
Verdict: The Dogs end up about level, the Dons lose a little ground but Carlton take the spoils.
Note: This post is part of a series of posts using a valuation method called Player Approximate Value (PAV) to evaluate trades for fairness and balance. Elsewhere, you can read much more about the method and theory behind PAV and also about PAPLEY, the projection method used to derive expected future PAVs. This method expresses both picks and players in terms of expected future value allowing them to be compared on this common basis.