2020 Trade & List Management discussion

[1970crow]

Whose fault is that. We had a massive opportunity last year and to some extent introduced a few but we could not resist list cloggers and we sign up DM and we will play him. We actually done a backflip from Phil Walsh's edict to get as many games into young players to Pyke's plan to play all the oldies and resigning them to long term contracts.

Even this year we had Hartigan play out the year instead of Butts or McAsey. Mackay played 4 games ahead of Sholl. Gibbs and Mackay both played late when Hamill was playing scratch matches. Sloane hobbled around while Schoenberg was awaiting a debut. When it was a choice between Tex and Fog, it was Fog who made way.

 

[Golumless]

bloody oath I would..Collingwood 'could' be a slider next year and 'if' they fell outside the top 8 it would be another top 10 pick in a strong draft year

Big time. They have serious potential to join us, North, Essendon, Sydney and Hawks in the muck at the bottom of the table.

After all, we've seen first hand what happens when the trust between management and the players are broken, and it looks like the way Collingwood have approached clearing their cap as well as how they've acted, could have similar results. After all, that has all sounded t o x i c.

If I was Collingwood, I'd be holding on to their 2021 1st for dear life and see what you can get for it next year, once the dust settles.

 

[LoBu]

Even this year we had Hartigan play out the year instead of Butts or McAsey. Mackay played 4 games ahead of Sholl. Gibbs and Mackay both played late when Hamill was playing scratch matches. Sloane hobbled around while Schoenberg was awaiting a debut. When it was a choice between Tex and Fog, it was Fog who made way.

Not that I don't agree with many of your points, but the club is clearly trying to protect the young players and the members from absolute floggings week in week out, and is doing this by playing a mix of youth and experience.

The rebuild will happen over a number of years, but the first sign of bouncing back is being competitive. Getting flogged can lead to years at the bottom, we only want to be there for 2 years surely.

On Pixel 3 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[1970crow]

Not that I don't agree with many of your points, but the club is clearly trying to protect the young players and the members from absolute floggings week in week out, and is doing this by playing a mix of youth and experience.

The rebuild will happen over a number of years, but the first sign of bouncing back is being competitive. Getting flogged can lead to years at the bottom, we only want to be there for 2 years surely.

On Pixel 3 using BigFooty.com mobile app

The reason we're in the position in the first place is because we always make the same decisions.

 

[LoBu]

The reason we're in the position in the first place is because we always make the same decisions.

Yeah, not enough youth moving through, but we clearly are addressing this by shifting many players out and we now have the youngest and least experienced list.
By 2022 only 3-5 players would have played 2017 GF 2023 1-2.

On Pixel 3 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[1970crow]

Yeah, not enough youth moving through, but we clearly are addressing this by shifting many players out and we now have the youngest and least experienced list.
By 2022 only 3-5 players would have played 2017 GF 2023 1-2.

On Pixel 3 using BigFooty.com mobile app

Do we have the youngest list though. Was 13th youngest in 2020.

 

[StonesThrow]

Love how Gary Lyons doesn't ask him a question and then is surprised when he doesn't get an answer.

 

[DJ75]

Love how Gary Lyons doesn't ask him a question and then is surprised when he doesn't get an answer.

Some context might be useful...

 

[LoBu]

Do we have the youngest list though. Was 13th youngest in 2020.

Not sure, I guess not given the stat above, I stand corrected on that point.

On Pixel 3 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Thetrader15]

Some context might be useful...

He said something like "So Ben Hollands is your dad", to which Elijah answers "Yes"...Garry Lyon was being a lazy interviewer there and didn't ask the question he wanted answered which was to talk about the influence he had on his career.

Open questions v closed questions. That's year 4 stuff.

 

[Big Dub]

Big time. They have serious potential to join us, North, Essendon, Sydney and Hawks in the muck at the bottom of the table.

After all, we've seen first hand what happens when the trust between management and the players are broken, and it looks like the way Collingwood have approached clearing their cap as well as how they've acted, could have similar results. After all, that has all sounded t o x i c.

If I was Collingwood, I'd be holding on to their 2021 1st for dear life and see what you can get for it next year, once the dust settles.

I think Collingwood would rather have pick/s this year than in 2 years time.

Our 22 and 23 this year would be attractive given how many list spots they have to fill, as might 40. I'd be happy with getting their first alone, but could 22, 23, 40 and next year's third get their 2021 1st and 2nd round picks (with potentially 65 also coming our way)?

Biggest threat are GWS with their multiple firsts, but I think they need them all and would have taken 40 if they were trading out.

 

[Golumless]

I think Collingwood would rather have pick/s this year than in 2 years time.

Our 22 and 23 this year would be attractive given how many list spots they have to fill, as might 40. I'd be happy with getting their first alone, but could 22, 23, 40 and next year's third get their 2021 1st and 2nd round picks (with potentially 65 also coming our way)?

Biggest threat are GWS with their multiple firsts, but I think they need them all and would have taken 40 if they were trading out.

If they're smart, they would rather the pick next year.

After all, you now have two potential breakpoints. Firstly what if Daicos isn't as good of a prospect as he was hyped to be a year out and drops to picks 6-10? Secondly what if Collingwood implodes? A real risk now seeing their trade period and how they treated Treloar. That's a lot of risk to move out their 2021 first. They're not a Richmond at the moment who you can all but guarantee will be at the pointy end. They need youth, sure, but they certainly don't need their brain falling out of their head. Well, they don't need more of that this trade period.

I'd expect they're only moving on their 2021 1st if they get a deal heavily in their favour this year.

 

[Johnny Rutten]

I think Collingwood would rather have pick/s this year than in 2 years time.

Our 22 and 23 this year would be attractive given how many list spots they have to fill, as might 40. I'd be happy with getting their first alone, but could 22, 23, 40 and next year's third get their 2021 1st and 2nd round picks (with potentially 65 also coming our way)?

Biggest threat are GWS with their multiple firsts, but I think they need them all and would have taken 40 if they were trading out.

Rather use our 22/23 to move up from pick 9 to pick 4 or 5.

 

[Thetrader15]

Some talk on the main board that GC will make a play for North's pick 2...

2 -> 5, 27, 37, 2021/1

The 27 and 37 are a bit irrelevant, but would you do this for pick 1?

 

[DJ75]

He said something like "So Ben Hollands is your dad", to which Elijah answers "Yes"...Garry Lyon was being a lazy interviewer there and didn't ask the question he wanted answered which was to talk about the influence he had on his career.

Open questions v closed questions. That's year 4 stuff.

Like the rest of the Triple M crew - he is a moron. How those idiots get paid what they do is beyond me.

 

[DJ75]

Some talk on the main board that GC will make a play for North's pick 2...

2 -> 5, 27, 37, 2021/1

The 27 and 37 are a bit irrelevant, but would you do this for pick 1?

The 2021/1st is the key component. It would make you consider, especially if you know how the draft is likely to pan out for those first few picks.
GC likely to improve again though, so the pick is probably around 10 or so in 2021.

 

[FAITH]

Some talk on the main board that GC will make a play for North's pick 2...

2 -> 5, 27, 37, 2021/1

The 27 and 37 are a bit irrelevant, but would you do this for pick 1?

not in a million years.

 

[Big Dub]

If they're smart, they would rather the pick next year.

After all, you now have two potential breakpoints. Firstly what if Daicos isn't as good of a prospect as he was hyped to be a year out and drops to picks 6-10? Secondly what if Collingwood implodes? A real risk now seeing their trade period and how they treated Treloar. That's a lot of risk to move out their 2021 first. They're not a Richmond at the moment who you can all but guarantee will be at the pointy end. They need youth, sure, but they certainly don't need their brain falling out of their head. Well, they don't need more of that this trade period.

I'd expect they're only moving on their 2021 1st if they get a deal heavily in their favour this year.

I don't think they'll get the pick next year, it will be eaten up by matching on Daicos.

I also think that, from Collingwood's perspective, they have to plan in case they don't implode. They made finals this year and, apart from Treloar, the rest of the losses won't significantly change 2021's output. All indications are that, at least in their minds, a father/son bid becomes before their pick. If they wait until next year to trade the pick out, it will be pretty hard to trade up (because it always is) and pretty pointless to trade down (compared to a deal this year). So they would have to trade into the following year.

They have 8 senior list spots open and at this stage have 2 picks inside the first 3 rounds (which might be about all that's done this year). They look like they will cover the bid on Reef with either their own or the Dog's first round pick, just to get a high draft pick this year (which is pick 16 before academy bids push it out, only 6 picks ahead of our 22). Even with our 2 early second rounders, they fill their last spot with pick 92, but will at least have 2 more quality players impacting in 2022/23!

Or they go up to 5 lists spots light on the main list to have one quality pick next year (impacting 2022/23/24) and 3 the following (impacting 2024/25).

I know what I would be doing in their shoes!

 

[Big Dub]

Rather use our 22/23 to move up from pick 9 to pick 4 or 5.

Yeah, that would be a better deal, if achievable. And we should be asking everyone about every deal, because you never know what might come through.

 

[WeedsMullet84]

Would we consider pick 9 and 40 for Collingwood's pick 14 and future 1st?

On Pixel 3 using BigFooty.com mobile app

We would, but I reckon Essendon would too for Pick 8

 

[Big Dub]

The 2021/1st is the key component. It would make you consider, especially if you know how the draft is likely to pan out for those first few picks.
GC likely to improve again though, so the pick is probably around 10 or so in 2021.

The potential to get two "big 5" players this year instead of one and a top 10 pick next year? Sure, particularly if we are not THAT keen on McDonald.

 

[LoBu]

Collingwood need to sell some serious hope to their members right now, 14 for Treloar was crap considering the entire deal, but upgrading that to 9 will start to make better sense for the members.

But they will have to pay up two firsts.

On Pixel 3 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[LoBu]

We would, but I reckon Essendon would too for Pick 8

They are also lining up pick 2 for 6&7

On Pixel 3 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[WeedsMullet84]

A LOT of clubs would be vying for Pick 2/3/4, I think.

 

[Golumless]

I don't think they'll get the pick next year, it will be eaten up by matching on Daicos.

I also think that, from Collingwood's perspective, they have to plan in case they don't implode. They made finals this year and, apart from Treloar, the rest of the losses won't significantly change 2021's output. All indications are that, at least in their minds, a father/son bid becomes before their pick. If they wait until next year to trade the pick out, it will be pretty hard to trade up (because it always is) and pretty pointless to trade down (compared to a deal this year). So they would have to trade into the following year.

They have 8 senior list spots open and at this stage have 2 picks inside the first 3 rounds (which might be about all that's done this year). They look like they will cover the bid on Reef with either their own or the Dog's first round pick, just to get a high draft pick this year (which is pick 16 before academy bids push it out, only 6 picks ahead of our 22). Even with our 2 early second rounders, they fill their last spot with pick 92, but will at least have 2 more quality players impacting in 2022/23!

Or they go up to 5 lists spots light on the main list to have one quality pick next year (impacting 2022/23/24) and 3 the following (impacting 2024/25).

I know what I would be doing in their shoes!

I disagree on planning in case you don't with a team like Collingwood. You have to be planning on worst case for them. Should they have a year which is expected, they'll find a good amount of suitors for their first round pick (seeing at that point its minimizing the damage done on a Daicos bid), and really this is not the draft you want to sell your future on if you cannot get a top 3 pick.

Treloar is a big loss, and Phillip's and Stephenson are also pretty significant, especially Jaidyn seeing he had potential to really help Collingwood take the next step. Not only that, but there is a price to pay for how they treated Treloar. If there is even a grain of truth to how Bucks spoke to Treloar about the senior players not wanting him around anymore, that's got the potential to be club destroying.

Collingwood don't have to fill all spots on their list and seeing their cap issues, they won't this off-season. They might take a lot of rookie picks though.