Traded Melbourne sends pick 6, pick 29 and next year's first rounder for picks 3, 10 and 43

Remove this Banner Ad

Suppose they're banking on going up the ladder next year and have identified whoever they want as not being available at pick 6
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I reckon this favours GC.

This draft is pretty even, not like a few in the past, where there is a big difference between 3 vs 6, i.e Dustin Martin type vs Gary Rohan.

7,8 or 9 next year is a lot more valuable than 10 this year.
 
Okay so Picks 3 and 10 worth 3629 points
Pick 6 worth 1751 points

Difference = 1878 points which is pick 5 exactly

Melbourne gambling they will finish better than 14th next year and Gold Coast betting against that.

(assuming no compo picks, priority picks)
 
Okay so Picks 3 and 10 worth 3629 points
Pick 6 worth 1751 points

Difference = 1878 points which is pick 5 exactly

Melbourne gambling they will finish better than 14th next year and Gold Coast betting against that.

(assuming no compo picks, priority picks)

Except for the fact pick 5 doesn't equal the same as pick 5 the following year, when taking into account strengths of drafts.

I hope Melbourne has done their due diligence on next years crop.
 
Good deal for GC. Essentially downgrading 3 to 6 in a weak draft in exchange for upgrading 10 in a weak draft to something probably higher than 10 in a stronger draft.
 
More details:

Gold Coast traded out 3, 10, 43.
Melbourne out 2, 29, next year's first rounder.

Makes more sense. The fourteen pick upgrade helps.
Helps a little but not that much

3 + 10 + 43 = 4007 points
6 +29 = 2404 points

Difference is 1603 points which is about pick 8.

So Melbourne betting they finish better than 11th.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Happy with this move.
7,8 or 9 next year is a lot more valuable than 10 this year.
I have no idea about what the talent is like for next years draft. But hypothetically if they were equivalent, pick 10 this year is more valuable than 7,8 or 9 next year, simply because you get access to the player a year earlier. Needs to be taken into calculations.
 
One year a club is going to trade away their next year's first-rounder then finish on the bottom of the ladder. You'd think Melbourne will move upwards, but if the wheels fall off, boy will 2016 be an unimaginably bad year.

I would hate to see my club gambling its future first-rounder on a minor pick upgrade.
 
One year a club is going to trade away their next year's first-rounder then finish on the bottom of the ladder. You'd think Melbourne will move upwards, but if the wheels fall off, boy will 2016 be an unimaginably bad year.

I would hate to see my club gambling its future first-rounder on a minor pick upgrade.
I guess there is someone they really want? or worried them and Essendon have too similar tastes?
 
I guess if Prestia has any chance of coming to us he will have to request a trade to us because we cannot satisfy them in a trade next year without a first rounder
 
They're really overrating that Melksham pick if they think he's going to make them that much better that they can trade away future firsts lol.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top