Player Watch Charlie Dixon

Status
Not open for further replies.

El_Scorcho

Hall of Famer
Aug 21, 2007
31,570
98,415
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
Pick 10 would be very good business for us given the incredible hole we have in the key forward position.

We've left it to the point where a low confidence John Butcher comes in and actually makes us a better side by straightening us up. We've neglected the KPF position so badly that we're basically forced to use pick 10 at this stage, and being able to do so is actually a massive get out of jail free card.
 
Sep 3, 2002
28,579
37,617
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Given both clubs are out of finals action, you would hope they sit down and get it sorted well before trade week gets started so as to avoid dragging it out that week. However, Gold Coast may not be so keen as they may not like what Port are offering up. I would say our pick 10 this year is probably right.
We could talk now, but it'd be an extended version of 'GC we want pick 10 + <x>. Port we aren't offering pick 10, how about <y>'. Then we'd get to trade week and repeat until it's pick 10 at the last day. GC would be smarter to get it out the way so they can then take whatever pick we are giving them to other clubs from day 1 of trade week (or now for talking to other clubs out of finals) in turn.

I have my doubts that GC, despite being a new club, has managed to avoid the tail wags dog stupidity of being afraid to do a decent trade straight up, for fear of offending fans who only think trades where one side has clearly destroyed the other are worth doing.
 
We want to give a fair deal and not take the risk of him going to the PSD.

Pick 10 is fair and will get the job done.

You mean the fair deal that we got by getting Pick 16 instead of Pick 7 in 2010, Pick 6 instead of Pick 2 in 2011 and Pick 7 instead of Pick 5 in 2012? After both Gold Coast and GWS already raped the draft by getting all the best players preselected?

If there's clubs we owe zero favours to when it comes to drafting and trading, it's Gold Coast and GWS. Their existence is the only reason we don't have a player like Dixon or Cameron right now, because the AFL only scrapped priority picks when it was clear that both expansion clubs would be entitled to one the following years if they didn't.

Do I want to screw them over? Nope. But if we're giving up Pick 10, I want their second round pick back at a bare minimum. All trades deserve to be stacked in our favour when dealing with these guys.
 
Sep 3, 2002
28,579
37,617
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
You mean the fair deal that we got by getting Pick 16 instead of Pick 7 in 2010, Pick 6 instead of Pick 2 in 2011 and Pick 7 instead of Pick 5 in 2012? After both Gold Coast and GWS already raped the draft by getting all the best players preselected?

If there's clubs we owe zero favours to when it comes to drafting and trading, it's Gold Coast and GWS. Their existence is the only reason we don't have a player like Dixon or Cameron right now, because the AFL only scrapped priority picks when it was clear that both expansion clubs would be entitled to one the following years if they didn't.

Do I want to screw them over? Nope. But if we're giving up Pick 10, I want their second round pick back at a bare minimum. All trades deserve to be stacked in our favour when dealing with these guys.
At least GWS we've gotten even with by them being afraid to take Wingard and giving us Hombsch and Neade (as a steak knife OneGreatClub ). And the disaster of the loss to them blew away any excuses the old SANFL parasitic Footy Park model could ever work. I hold no grudges to them. GC though owe big still.
 

stokholme

All Australian
Jul 17, 2015
860
1,664
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
For everyone who says we shouldn't give pick 10 for Dixon, what do you say we offer?

I haven't seen one person in this 99 page thread suggest another offer that wouldn't get us laughed out of the GC offices

It's really a case of we have nothing else of worth to give and Dixon is someone who at this point is a must-have, ankles and all.
 
You mean the fair deal that we got by getting Pick 16 instead of Pick 7 in 2010, Pick 6 instead of Pick 2 in 2011 and Pick 7 instead of Pick 5 in 2012? After both Gold Coast and GWS already raped the draft by getting all the best players preselected?

If there's clubs we owe zero favours to when it comes to drafting and trading, it's Gold Coast and GWS. Their existence is the only reason we don't have a player like Dixon or Cameron right now, because the AFL only scrapped priority picks when it was clear that both expansion clubs would be entitled to one the following years if they didn't.

Do I want to screw them over? Nope. But if we're giving up Pick 10, I want their second round pick back at a bare minimum. All trades deserve to be stacked in our favour when dealing with these guys.

Dixon + Pick 22 for Pick 10? That won't happen.

*edit* Pick 22 instead of 21 since Gold Coast have an end of first round compensation pick.
 
Last edited:

mic59

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 20, 2002
18,184
10,243
Alberton, the chosen land
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Blyth Spartans, Dallas Cowboys
Whats gc 2nd round pick?
They are 16th and Carlton are 17th. GC play Sydney and Carlton play Hawthorn so I can't see that changing. An end of first round compensation pick(#19) has been activated so they should have #22 as a second round pick. The compensation pick is with GC so Port may target that instead of the 2nd round pick.

Dixon + Pick 21 for Pick 10? That won't happen.
It could, clubs sometimes look at what they have when deciding how they will trade and GC have their first round pick and an end of round compensation pick. If they trade what will be pick 22 along with Dixon they will still have 3, 10 and 19.
 
Oct 4, 2003
11,490
24,285
Portress
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Boston Celtics
We could talk now, but it'd be an extended version of 'GC we want pick 10 + <x>. Port we aren't offering pick 10, how about <y>'. Then we'd get to trade week and repeat until it's pick 10 at the last day. GC would be smarter to get it out the way so they can then take whatever pick we are giving them to other clubs from day 1 of trade week (or now for talking to other clubs out of finals) in turn.

I have my doubts that GC, despite being a new club, has managed to avoid the tail wags dog stupidity of being afraid to do a decent trade straight up, for fear of offending fans who only think trades where one side has clearly destroyed the other are worth doing.
Spot on mate.
 
It could, clubs sometimes look at what they have when deciding how they will trade and GC have their first round pick and an end of round compensation pick. If they trade what will be pick 22 along with Dixon they will still have 3, 10 and 19.

If they opt to use only 3 picks in the draft and give us Pick 22 in the deal I'd be doing cartwheels.
 
Maybe plus swap of our second rounders? Even though that doesn't do much. Pick 10 still seems a bit much for Dixon.
I could see us pitching for that. Dixon + Pick 22 for Pick 10 + Pick 29

But I'll be interested to see how many picks Gold Coast plan to use.
 
I can't understand why people keep saying our pick 10 is required. He is uncontracted yes? We paid pick 17 for Ryder and he was contracted and a better player than Dixon. Why are we going up??

I posted the following earlier in this thread. The value of a contested marking key forward absolutely cannot be understated. They are as rare as hen's teeth and clubs only very rarely collect them in the draft beyond a top 5 pick. Ryder is obviously a very valuable player but Dixon has greater value in the scheme of things.

Link
when Port has no choice but to kick long inside 50, those same forwards [Schulz, Westhoff & Ryder] don’t have the ability to take those important grabs. In fact the Power are ranked 14th for average contested marks inside 50 per game and 16th for general contested marks this season.

...

Dixon, who is having a career-best season with 35 goals from 13 games, has averaged 1.4 contested marks inside forward 50 per game so far this season — ranked third in the competition behind Tom Hawkins and Jesse Hogan.

The 200cm powerhouse is also the fourth-best one-on-one player in the league, winning a one-on-one contest 44 per cent of the time.
Link
 

Chrizzt

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 17, 2009
8,895
18,208
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I posted the following earlier in this thread. The value of a contested marking key forward absolutely cannot be understated. They are as rare as hen's teeth and clubs only very rarely collect them in the draft beyond a top 5 pick. Ryder is obviously a very valuable player but Dixon has greater value in the scheme of things...

I think TBird was more referring to if we needed to give up pick 10 given we probably have the upper hand in bargaining if he chooses us, rather than if he is worth pick 10. I've actually come around on this point after not wanting to part with pick 10, and am happy to do so to get Dixon, but think a straight swap of those two is not in our favour.
Good article btw, missed that one.
 

Boxx

Premiership Player
Mar 2, 2014
4,645
9,756
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys
As has already been stated, GC may only need to use 3 picks in this years draft and as such may not see the value in their second rounder as we would!!!

Dont GC need to reduce their list numbers even further this year as well??
 

El_Scorcho

Hall of Famer
Aug 21, 2007
31,570
98,415
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
GC still wont just chuck in the 2nd rounder to be generous. A high 2nd rounder has a lot of trade value.
 

Chrizzt

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 17, 2009
8,895
18,208
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
If we managed to wangle a 2nd rounder out of GC, then we probably should have just offered magic beans, because clearly GC don't know how to trade.

It will end up being pick 10 and that will be fair.

Similar previous trades are probably:
Longer to Saints for 25 (plus a minor swap)
Crameri to Bulldogs for 26
Tom Lee + 24 to Saints for 12
Tom Hickey + 25 to Saints for 13
Gunston to Hawks for 24 (plus minor swaps)
Mitch Clark to Melbourne for 12

Clark is probably the closest case (very similar conditions actually) and looking at their stats for the same age they're pretty close but Clark probably showed a little more, especially as he showed more promise in the ruck ( http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/...1=3612&tid2=10&pid2=1615&type=A&fid1=O&fid2=O )
They have similar durability issues, except Clark was able to put together a full season in 2009, and put together 19 and 17 game seasons which is more than Dixon, although that's much of a muchness.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back