Analysis 2018 List Management discussion Pt 3

[Macca43]

But that response was nonsensical Macca.

SoS has already come out and said 'EVERYTHING IS ON THE TABLE'. That refutes everything you said in that silly post.

And here I was thinking you were capable of complex thought. See if you can follow me here, it isn't that hard;

SOS has said everything is on the table BUT "it is highly unlikely" that he would trade pick 1 AND "it would take something big" - can you see how both things can be true, so the first doesn't refute the second, the second constrains the first?

 

[BlueRenaissance]

And here I was thinking you were capable of complex thought. See if you can follow me here, it isn't that hard;

SOS has said everything is on the table BUT "it is highly unlikely" that he would trade pick 1 AND "it would take something big" - can you see how both things can be true, so the first doesn't refute the second, the second constrains the first?

1 for 3, 24 and 29 is quite big in my eyes. Sign me up.

Also, SoS isnt stupid like some maccas. Sos wont advertise it too hard that 1 is up for grabs in the media as it shows a rejection of Walsh if in fact we do retain him. Understand? He is being diplomatic publicly. Inwardly, he will review anything put forward.

 

[1981]

All that blather and you still can't answer a simple question of what you THINK they are worth, which is hardly surprising because thinking seems beyond you.

By the by, I never forbade you from saying what you would do, just said it was irrelevant to the question and requested you answer the question asked rather than one of your own making.

I do look forward to you expending yet more time and effort trying not to answer a very simple question

Jesus are you a lawyer in a criminal trial, cause that's what you sound like.

I would take 1 for 3 and 24 and 29, and what the value is of those two seconds is in the eye of the beholder, or some magical calculation by some nerds.

3 will give you an exceptional prospect, arguably as good as 1, and 24 and 29 give you two shots at a barrel that might produce a very good player.

It is as SIMPLE as that. No need to meaninglessly go twisting oneself and others around.

 

[Macca43]

1 for 3, 24 and 29 is quite big in my eyes. Sign me up.

Also, SoS isnt stupid like some maccas. Sos wont advertise it too hard that 1 is up for grabs in the media as it shows a rejection of Walsh if in fact we do retain him. Understand? He is being diplomatic publicly. Inwardly, he will review anything put forward.

The american indians thought $24 for the island of Manhattan was quite big as well. If you are happy with that deal good for you, I think it is a pittance.

"Sos wont advertise it too hard that 1 is up for grabs" - he has said repeatedly it is up for grabs, there has been countless articles written in the media about it, everyone knows it is up for grabs - but it is going to take multiple top end first round picks not pick 3 and a couple of mid to late second rounders.

 

[Macca43]

Jesus are you a lawyer in a criminal trial, cause that's what you sound like.

I would take 1 for 3 and 24 and 29, and what the value is of those two seconds is in the eye of the beholder, or some magical calculation by some nerds.

3 will give you an exceptional prospect, arguably as good as 1, and 24 and 29 give you two shots at a barrel that might produce a very good player.

It is as SIMPLE as that. No need to meaninglessly go twisting oneself and others around.

1 gives us an exceptional prospect that is exactly the type of player we need, he won't be there at 3.

The next best midfielder is Bailey Smith who we could get at 5 if we traded with Port and maybe even 8 if we traded with Adelaide and we would get much better "steak knives" from them.

Out of all the possible trades for pick 1 - 3, 24 & 29 is by far the worst and I can't see it being done. The blues value Walsh much higher than that.

 

[HereComesJuddy]

1 gives us an exceptional prospect that is exactly the type of player we need, he won't be there at 3.

The next best midfielder is Bailey Smith who we could get at 5 if we traded with Port and maybe even 8 if we traded with Adelaide and we would get much better "steak knives" from them.

Out of all the possible trades for pick 1 - 3, 24 & 29 is by far the worst and I can't see it being done. The blues value Walsh much higher than that.

Yep, if people want Walsh there would be better offers on the table than 3 and 24 or whatever speculative picks come our way.

Adelaide would give up 8 and 13 if not more for 1. Walsh may even get to 8.

Its been said repeatedly that we would listen to offers but it would need to be overs. 3 and a pick or 2 in the mid 2nd round isnt overs. I don't know why people think its a over type scenario putting those picks into the equation. Listen to the club people...

It would need to be 2 or 3 plus another top 10 pick. And no club will produce that. So theres really no point

 

[Blue__Balls]

Can I just jump in and give Macca an answer?

Picks 24 + 29
Draft index value = 1438pts (or somewhere between Picks 9 and 10)
Likely to drop at least 2 spots each after academy bids, meaning their index value is closer to 1335pts, or Pick 11.
For the sake of the argument, we'll assume nominal value is Pick 10.

Nobody with a pick higher than 10 is trading down, they're all clubs who have actively traded up.

Port Adelaide miiiiiight offer Pick 10 alone in a live trading environment, if all the players they really liked were already gone. Very unlikely though.
GWS at 11 have no desire to trade down, given they have no academy players at the top end. Even if they did, they don't come out ahead on points.
Geelong have Pick 12, but are in a position where they need to use first round draft picks to avoid draft restrictions in future years.
Adelaide at 13 already have two second round picks, and have actively traded up the draft order. Doubtful they'd be intersted.
Fremantle could be tempted, given they've just brought in some established talent. More likely they go after a local lad like Clark or Hill.

We now reach the territory where we'd need something else coming back our way (ie. a very late second or early third rounder).

Port Adelaide at 15 is the first real opportunity I think we'd have. They draft at 5 and 10, get some talent, then trade down for two seconds to bring in a pairing like McLennan and Sparrow. If Valente is still on the board at 15 though, the likelihood is that they take him.
Adelaide again at 16. Still have their seconds in the bank, they just take best available here.
Richmond have pick 17, no need for them to do anything silly here, they've got a solid, relatively young list. Maybe if they think they could double up on a good young ruck + a solid midfielder?
Brisbane at 18, this is their chance to take a draft pick ahead of a probably academy bid on McFadyen (who they have the points for later), doubtful they give it up.
GWS with the final first round Pick at 19. Best they could pair with it is Pick 52 - not a deal we'd be interested in.


Soooooo.

Macca.

Maybe Pick 15 or 17. With some chump change coming back.

That all ignores future pick possibilities though.

If we reckon we can get equal talent at 1, 2 or 3, we do a deal for 3, 24 and 29 for sure. It's two free second round picks. Use them if we like the players available, or trade them for future seconds to clubs who like what they see.

Rankine
+ 2 of Stocker, O'Halloran, McHenry, Bytel, Sparrow, Taylor, E. Smith, RCD

Or trade either of those second rounders to a team like St Kilda or Fremantle for one of their future second round picks, to add some trade collateral for next year.

 

[Macca43]

Yep, if people want Walsh there would be better offers on the table than 3 and 24 or whatever speculative picks come our way.

Adelaide would give up 8 and 13 if not more for 1. Walsh may even get to 8.

Its been said repeatedly that we would listen to offers but it would need to be overs. 3 and a pick or 2 in the mid 2nd round isnt overs. I don't know why people think its a over type scenario putting those picks into the equation. Listen to the club people...

It would need to be 2 or 3 plus another top 10 pick. And no club will produce that. So theres really no point

Exactly

 

[Macca43]

Can I just jump in and give Macca an answer?

Picks 24 + 29
Draft index value = 1438pts (or somewhere between Picks 9 and 10)
Likely to drop at least 2 spots each after academy bids, meaning their index value is closer to 1335pts, or Pick 11.
For the sake of the argument, we'll assume nominal value is Pick 10.

Nobody with a pick higher than 10 is trading down, they're all clubs who have actively traded up.

Port Adelaide miiiiiight offer Pick 10 alone in a live trading environment, if all the players they really liked were already gone. Very unlikely though.
GWS at 11 have no desire to trade down, given they have no academy players at the top end. Even if they did, they don't come out ahead on points.
Geelong have Pick 12, but are in a position where they need to use first round draft picks to avoid draft restrictions in future years.
Adelaide at 13 already have two second round picks, and have actively traded up the draft order. Doubtful they'd be intersted.
Fremantle could be tempted, given they've just brought in some established talent. More likely they go after a local lad like Clark or Hill.

We now reach the territory where we'd need something else coming back our way (ie. a very late second or early third rounder).

Port Adelaide at 15 is the first real opportunity I think we'd have. They draft at 5 and 10, get some talent, then trade down for two seconds to bring in a pairing like McLennan and Sparrow. If Valente is still on the board at 15 though, the likelihood is that they take him.
Adelaide again at 16. Still have their seconds in the bank, they just take best available here.
Richmond have pick 17, no need for them to do anything silly here, they've got a solid, relatively young list. Maybe if they think they could double up on a good young ruck + a solid midfielder?
Brisbane at 18, this is their chance to take a draft pick ahead of a probably academy bid on McFadyen (who they have the points for later), doubtful they give it up.
GWS with the final first round Pick at 19. Best they could pair with it is Pick 52 - not a deal we'd be interested in.


Soooooo.

Macca.

Maybe Pick 15 or 17. With some chump change coming back.

That all ignores future pick possibilities though.

If we reckon we can get equal talent at 1, 2 or 3, we do a deal for 3, 24 and 29 for sure. It's two free second round picks. Use them if we like the players available, or trade them for future seconds to clubs who like what they see.

Rankine
+ 2 of Stocker, O'Halloran, McHenry, Bytel, Sparrow, Taylor, E. Smith, RCD

Or trade either of those second rounders to a team like St Kilda or Fremantle for one of their future second round picks, to add some trade collateral for next year.

Thanks for the well reasoned answer. I think it would be closer to 17 or 19 than 15 IMO based on what Sydney got for 13 and what we gave the Bulldogs for the pick that got Curnow in 2015 and to me that is far too little for 1, especially given what else is potentially on offer.

 

[La Dispute]

Even using last years example works well

Raynar (Pick 1) v Dow (Pick 3) and Stephenson (Pick 6)

Or

Brayshaw (1st mid taken) v Dow (Pick 3) and Stephenson (Pick 6)

Using comparable players from this year that’s the equivalent of Walsh v Smith and Rozee.

Easy decision if the trades comes to fruition

 

[Macca43]

Even using last years example works well

Raynar (Pick 1) v Dow (Pick 3) and Stephenson (Pick 6)

Or

Brayshaw (1st mid taken) v Dow (Pick 3) and Stephenson (Pick 6)

Using comparable players from this year that’s the equivalent of Walsh v Smith and Rozee.

Easy decision if it comes to fruition

Given I think Smith will still be on the table at 5 even if we got 5 & 10 from Port it would be a very good deal (Cerra & O'Brien from 2017)

 

[Robertio]

I think they're different. Kerridge was a hard gut running mid who was more an accumulator and link player with poor decision making.

I reckon Bugg's best position is as a small defender who can tag. Can play defensive forward as well. The question I have is if we pick Blakey do we need Bugg?

I would prefer Blakey but with Buggs age and experience he might be in front

 

[thylacine60]

Gee live trading is going to be slow if every offer has to be taken to board level for approval.

It is cute how you think that "consulting other senior stakeholders" insulates someone from carrying the can for bad decisions in a football club.

macca called me cute.......

 

[dlb99]

Out of all the possible trades for pick 1 - 3, 24 & 29 is by far the worst and I can't see it being done. The blues value Walsh much higher than that.

I agree with you one million percent.

1 for 3,24,29 is garbage, straight garbage.

1 for 3 & 6-8 or p-off.

F analytics, we want and need Walsh. If GC wants him then they need to pay way overs.

Keep speaking truth Macca.

 

[Nori]

Thanks for the well reasoned answer. I think it would be closer to 17 or 19 than 15 IMO based on what Sydney got for 13 and what we gave the Bulldogs for the pick that got Curnow in 2015 and to me that is far too little for 1, especially given what else is potentially on offer.

Well, I've got some good news for you. It most likely won't happen.

Problem solved.

 

[dlb99]

Adelaide would give up 8 and 13 if not more for 1. Walsh may even get to 8.

Walsh lasts to pick 8?

We have entered bizarro land.

 

[Jimmae]

Walsh lasts to pick 8?

We have entered bizarro land.

You are working way to hard to try and up your reputation on here as a spotter... which is ironic given how much you're purporting to deal in absolutes. Sometimes that has you coming across as having the prose of a 15 year old boy trying to play heavyweight.

Start by being reasonable and logical, instead of parroting media buffoons sensationalising everything for clicks, and you'll be off to a good start.

 

[dlb99]

You are working way to hard to try and up your reputation on here as a spotter... which is ironic given how much you're purporting to deal in absolutes. Sometimes that has you coming across as having the prose of a 15 year old boy trying to play heavyweight.

Start by being reasonable and logical, instead of parroting media buffoons sensationalising everything for clicks, and you'll be off to a good start.

Stop acting the headmaster, you ain't that.

Walsh is not lasting to pick 8 under any circumstance, period, end-of-story.

 

[Beer n Skittles]

The american indians thought $24 for the island of Manhattan was quite big as well. If you are happy with that deal good for you, I think it is a pittance.

"Sos wont advertise it too hard that 1 is up for grabs" - he has said repeatedly it is up for grabs, there has been countless articles written in the media about it, everyone knows it is up for grabs - but it is going to take multiple top end first round picks not pick 3 and a couple of mid to late second rounders.

Manhattan isle can't run through the middle, rubbish footballer

 

[thylacine60]

You are working way to hard to try and up your reputation on here as a spotter... which is ironic given how much you're purporting to deal in absolutes. Sometimes that has you coming across as having the prose of a 15 year old boy trying to play heavyweight.

Start by being reasonable and logical, instead of parroting media buffoons sensationalising everything for clicks, and you'll be off to a good start.

if only I'd had such sage advice when I was a wet-eared youngster........

 

[thylacine60]

Stop acting the headmaster, you ain't that.

Walsh is not lasting to pick 8 under any circumstance, period, end-of-story.

won't make it to trade night.......

 

[Jimmae]

Stop acting the headmaster, you ain't that.

Walsh is not lasting to pick 8 under any circumstance, period, end-of-story.

That wasn't the point of my comment comma at all full stop colon roll colon

 

[dlb99]

That wasn't the point of my comment comma at all full stop colon roll colon

Your point was that posts should conform to your particular code of ethics comma full stop comma full stop

Not happening full stop

Again, pick 1 for 3 & 6, if not we take Walsh and we will be more than happy with that. He fills a void we have, hence GC needs to pay a premium, if that's too high, fine, they can draft three more flight risks.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

If we are genuinely tossing up between Walsh, Lukosius and Rankine as potential #1s, then trading for #3 and a couple of second rounders is possible.

If the Suns won't do #3 and #6 however, I'd do #3 and Brisbane's 2019 first BUT the Suns can give us #24 for our trouble.

If we rate Walsh at #1 alone though, then that first suggestion of the second rounders just won't cut it.

Don't just look at points for #1, look at the prestige and publicity. #1 for 3, 24 and 29 on points equates to getting 29 for free. That's not enough if we are giving up our preferred player.

 

[BlueRenaissance]

Don't just look at points for #1, look at the prestige and publicity. #1 for 3, 24 and 29 on points equates to getting 29 for free. That's not enough of we are giving up our preferred player.

Makes sense up until a point. Awkwardly, the prestige of Murphy, Gibbs and Kruezer hasnt quite helped the sheen of our club.

I know...sorry.