Club Focus Western Bulldogs 2020 - Hannan, Martin, Treloar, Ugle-Hagan, Bedendo

AFL Club Focus

What should the Western Bulldogs prioritise this off-season?

  • Getting more draft points to match a bid for Jamarra Ugle-Hagan

    Votes: 34 81.0%

  • Getting an early pick before a bid comes for JUH

    Votes: 5 11.9%

  • Managing the age profile

    Votes: 2 4.8%

  • Managing the salary cap

    Votes: 1 2.4%
  • Total voters
    42

Remove this Banner Ad

Reader mode
Western Bulldogs club focus thread
  • Index
    • Thread starter
    • Moderator
    • #2

    Data from footywire. To check the draft order (updated weekly) see the thread here.
     
  • Index
    • Northernsoul74 said:
    How mature of you. Some tough love delivered there, straight out of the Collective Minds handbook.
    There’s a huge difference between the messaging of having the number 1 pick and the rest. If you don’t get that then your view is more akin to a child than the previous poster. No surprises there. Crows fans have had a mare this off season with the complete inability to grasp basic trade concepts and how their clubs messaging is perceived by the rest of the afl.
    If JUH is number 1 on your board bid on him. If he isn’t and you bid on him to prove a point your idiots to hand the number 1 pick to another club after you previous couple of seasons.
    Click to expand...

    We select the highest placed player on our talent order, it's what we've done in the past and I don't see why it would change just because it's pick 1. No different to Roos at 2, they know they're not getting him as well, so using the logic of that other poster, they also shouldn't bid. So he slips through to you guys at 20whatever your first selection is at. Anybody suggesting to do it as a strategy to impact the Dogs is a moron, bidding or not has got nothing to do with the Dogs and everything to do with our talent list.

    You'll have to explain the messaging comment and the relevance to collective minds. Is there some special improvement that is imbibed by the player called first on draft night? They don't seem to end up being the best player of the pool too often, so whatever it is, it doesn't seem to work that well.
     
    Thetrader15 said:
    Say Swans get a bid on Campbell at pick 4 (2023), they already geta a 20% discount, so 1627 points (pick 7).

    They can then go and match with 5 picks in the 40s they were never going to use. What a joke!
    Click to expand...

    I thought you can only have as many draft picks as you have free spots on the list.

    So if 4 picks are burned matching then there are still 3 picks required to fill the list. I guess they could all be late picks or Rookie picks...
     

    Log in to remove this ad.

    1970crow said:
    We select the highest placed player on our talent order, it's what we've done in the past and I don't see why it would change just because it's pick 1. No different to Roos at 2, they know they're not getting him as well, so using the logic of that other poster, they also shouldn't bid. So he slips through to you guys at 20whatever your first selection is at. Anybody suggesting to do it as a strategy to impact the Dogs is a moron, bidding or not has got nothing to do with the Dogs and everything to do with our talent list.

    You'll have to explain the messaging comment and the relevance to collective minds. Is there some special improvement that is imbibed by the player called first on draft night? They don't seem to end up being the best player of the pool too often, so whatever it is, it doesn't seem to work that well.
    Click to expand...
    I completely agree, if you have him number 1 on your board you should bid but your club does have to take into account whether the “story” of having pick 1 is compelling enough for you to skip.
    Dogs fans and the club know we’ve lucked out. We know a bid is coming at 1-4. That’s why we’ve stacked enough(nearly) points to match a bid at 1.
    The argument is around if you have him 2/3 on your board is it worth bidding at 1 anyway? If you do the kid you get after we match will get over it but don’t be mistaken, these kids want to go at 1. They’ve been working to this point and they want to be known as pick 1 from their year. Any elite kid that says “actually I’d rather you took me at 2 to ease the pressure” should be raising red flags all over the place. These kids aren’t shrinking violets.
     
    HairyO said:
    I thought you can only have as many draft picks as you have free spots on the list.

    So if 4 picks are burned matching then there are still 3 picks required to fill the list. I guess they could all be late picks or Rookie picks...
    Click to expand...
    They changed this this year because of the list changes and draft problems due to Covid. Only 1 player needs to be drafted and no cap on amount of picks vs list space.
     
    HairyO said:
    I thought you can only have as many draft picks as you have free spots on the list.

    So if 4 picks are burned matching then there are still 3 picks required to fill the list. I guess they could all be late picks or Rookie picks...
    Click to expand...
    No, the AFL changed the rules for this year and will change them back next year.

    Why? " The AFL will revert to its usual rule next year, having allowed the clubs a one-off change given some had prepared for matching bids by already trading out future selections during last year's exchange period."

    So because they screwed up the list numbers and not notifying teams, they have made another rule on the run and screwed teams even more (oh, except if you have a FS or NGA)

    www.afl.com.au

    Swans, Pies among clubs buoyed by late draft rule tweak

    Clubs matching bids on Academy and father-son players will be able to use the points from picks they didn't plan to use
    www.afl.com.au www.afl.com.au
     
    Ash1337 said:
    They changed this this year because of the list changes and draft problems due to Covid. Only 1 player needs to be drafted and no cap on amount of picks vs list space.
    Click to expand...
    If list numbers are down by 1, then they should have only said they can have 1 extra pick to match, not open slather.
     
    Thetrader15 said:
    No, the AFL changed the rules for this year and will change them back next year.

    Why? " The AFL will revert to its usual rule next year, having allowed the clubs a one-off change given some had prepared for matching bids by already trading out future selections during last year's exchange period."

    So because they screwed up the list numbers and not notifying teams, they have made another rule on the run and screwed teams even more (oh, except if you have a FS or NGA)

    www.afl.com.au

    Swans, Pies among clubs buoyed by late draft rule tweak

    Clubs matching bids on Academy and father-son players will be able to use the points from picks they didn't plan to use
    www.afl.com.au www.afl.com.au
    Click to expand...
    They’re pretty much just gifting the top end NGAs this year before it gets scrapped for 2021.
     
    Northernsoul74 said:
    I completely agree, if you have him number 1 on your board you should bid but your club does have to take into account whether the “story” of having pick 1 is compelling enough for you to skip.
    Dogs fans and the club know we’ve lucked out. We know a bid is coming at 1-4. That’s why we’ve stacked enough(nearly) points to match a bid at 1.
    The argument is around if you have him 2/3 on your board is it worth bidding at 1 anyway? If you do the kid you get after we match will get over it but don’t be mistaken, these kids want to go at 1. They’ve been working to this point and they want to be known as pick 1 from their year. Any elite kid that says “actually I’d rather you took me at 2 to ease the pressure” should be raising red flags all over the place. These kids aren’t shrinking violets.
    Click to expand...

    Firstly, I think the story around pick 1 is extra pressure on the kid and a reminder that you were the worst team in that year. It's not something I'd go out of my way to ensure became a constant reminder. And I'd be very disappointed if our club bid at 1 for a player they had at any other position. My view is that you bid in the hope that the club who has special access declines to match. You bid because he's the player you want and you cross your fingers that they don't match. Bidding and hoping they do match makes zero sense to me.

    Some perspective is that Rowie said on radio we should bid on JUH at 1, Campbell at 2 and then Jones at 3 just to screw with those clubs. Would be a great get nabbing Jones if he's 12th on our list with effective pick 2. Anyobody that has a view that even loosely aligns with Rowey is complete idiot. There are a few around though.
     
    Mofra said:
    Our Premiership coach
    Click to expand...
    Who has only won a final in one of the 6 years he's been coaching, and seems to love playing players out of position.

    Why play Cody Weightman up forward when you can play Ed Richards there? Why play an ruckman in the ruck when you can just play Josh Dunkley there? Seems to make perfect sense for your coach. I'm sure we'll be seeing Ugle-Hagan playing as a defender before long, and Aaron Naughton as a wingman.
     
    Brass Dog said:
    Beveridge 1, Buckley 0. Big story next season will be how Collingwood's fire-sale has affected the playing group.
    Click to expand...
    At least Buckley won't play Taylor Adams in the ruck.
     
    steve_m said:
    Who has only won a final in one of the 6 years he's been coaching, and seems to love playing players out of position.

    Why play Cody Weightman up forward when you can play Ed Richards there? Why play an ruckman in the ruck when you can just play Josh Dunkley there? Seems to make perfect sense for your coach. I'm sure we'll be seeing Ugle-Hagan playing as a defender before long, and Aaron Naughton as a wingman.
    Click to expand...
    Have you seen Ed Richards play forward? Clearly not as he’s very average up there. His best footy behind the ball.
     

    (Log in to remove this ad.)

    Northernsoul74 said:
    Have you seen Ed Richards play forward? Clearly not as he’s very average up there. His best footy behind the ball.
    Click to expand...
    Is your reading comprehension that bad?
     
    steve_m said:
    Is your reading comprehension that bad?
    Click to expand...
    “Why play Cody Weightman up forward when you can play Ed Richards there?” No it’s pretty good.
     
    steve_m said:
    At least Buckley won't play Taylor Adams in the ruck.
    Click to expand...

    Nah he’d just trade him out for a pick in the 60s and tell him no one wants to play with him
     
    Thetrader15 said:
    If list numbers are down by 1, then they should have only said they can have 1 extra pick to match, not open slather.
    Click to expand...
    The afl stopped allowing teams to do this because it made a joke of their points system. Now they bring back the rort because teams sooked about having to pay a fair price to match bids.
    Most of the third round this year will be zombie picks.
     
    Happy to hold my hand up when wrong. The Swans list manager literally said on the draft podcast they view JUH as the “clear” number 1. Not sure how when he hasn’t played all year but if that’s representative of the broader view by list managers fair enough.
     
    perplexed said:
    The afl stopped allowing teams to do this because it made a joke of their points system. Now they bring back the rort because teams sooked about having to pay a fair price to match bids.
    Most of the third round this year will be zombie picks.
    Click to expand...
    Plus they will change it back next year when they lose first round matching - talk about an uneven playing field.
     
    Northernsoul74 said:
    Happy to hold my hand up when wrong. The Swans list manager literally said on the draft podcast they view JUH as the “clear” number 1. Not sure how when he hasn’t played all year but if that’s representative of the broader view by list managers fair enough.
    Click to expand...
    My understanding is that' the case.

    Most players haven't played this year, and those that have aren't showing enough to push him off the top spot.

    He's a clear #1 and the dogs will get a gift from the AFL.
     
    Northernsoul74 said:
    Happy to hold my hand up when wrong. The Swans list manager literally said on the draft podcast they view JUH as the “clear” number 1. Not sure how when he hasn’t played all year but if that’s representative of the broader view by list managers fair enough.
    Click to expand...
    Interesting, as one WA based draft watcher can't fathom McDonald slipping past pick 1 after what he's done in the WAFL.
    Thilthorpe is being linked to the Crows by virtue of being an SA lad but I see the no 1 pick as a two-horse race. I doubt JUH slips to a bid at pick 4.

    Worth noting that next years' draft is meant to be midfielder-dominant so Hollands may well slip to 4 or 5.
     
    Northernsoul74 said:
    Happy to hold my hand up when wrong. The Swans list manager literally said on the draft podcast they view JUH as the “clear” number 1. Not sure how when he hasn’t played all year but if that’s representative of the broader view by list managers fair enough.
    Click to expand...


    I think the most interesting comment out of that interview was the fact that Thilthorpe sounds like he has serious OP.

    Likely to throw some curveballs on draft night imo.
     
    Would it be possible to trade our pick 33 for a bunch of later pick points gain then live trade 26 to someone when jamarra bid comes in then live trade back in with someone else to say pick 30
     
    Euku said:
    Would it be possible to trade our pick 33 for a bunch of later pick points gain then live trade 26 to someone when jamarra bid comes in then live trade back in with someone else to say pick 30
    Click to expand...
    Yes. The only limitation on that this year (other than the usual ones about future picks) is that you can’t trade a pick back to the club you got it from.
     
    Reader mode
    You must log in or register to reply here.

    Similar threads

    Jeremias
    Recommitted Lachlan Bramble - joins the Western Bulldogs via SSP
    Replies
    1
    Views
    814
    Since 2001
    Since 2001
    Lore
    Recommitted Nic Martin [re-signed to 2027]
    Replies
    8
    Views
    969
    EagleMan87
    EagleMan87
    Mofra
    Club Focus Western Bulldogs 2023
    2 3 4 5 6
    Replies
    129
    Views
    10K
    Vindicater
    Vindicater
    Keystone agony
    Recommitted Dustin Martin [UFA 2024]
    2 3 4
    Replies
    83
    Views
    5K
    Maybe Tomorrow
    Maybe Tomorrow
    Lore
    Free Agency Oskar Baker to the Western Bulldogs as a Delisted Free Agent
    Replies
    0
    Views
    568
    Lore
    Lore
    Elmer_Judd
    Recommitted Dustin Martin [UFA 2024]
    17 18 19 20 21
    Replies
    503
    Views
    22K
    guruisatiger
    guruisatiger
    Dexter6
    Recommitted Adam Tomlinson [OOC 2024] - reportedly completed a medical with the Bulldogs
    2
    Replies
    37
    Views
    2K
    Elmer_Judd
    Elmer_Judd
    Back
    Top