Strategy Draft assistance 2023 [Twomey: NMFC get #19 in 2023, x2 end of 1st rd picks in 2024, and x2 extra rookie list spots in 2024; no Sanders/#11]

[Tas]

Nice, lets trade the 2024 picks that are could be reviewed next year...

 

[DrZaius]

Very interesting 2x end of first round next year.

Be almost certain to trade at least one of them you'd think.

 

[Devington]

Good package but my only concern is that the AFL is telling us to trade those future picks without using the explicit wording they did last year, in which case I'm not sure we'll get true value for them. Remove the review caveat and I would be genuinely over the moon.

 

[Makeshift Park]

In any trade for pick 5, I assume GC want one first rounder back this year to pay for their academy kids.

This year's 14 and next year's 19 equals pick 4 in points, but I don't think it'll be enough to trump the Dogs' offer.

I wonder how much higher we'd need to go.

 

[Mute Point]

I struggle to get my head around what "review next year" actually means here. So if we win too many games next year the AFL will strip us of TWO first round picks? Isn't that encouraging us to lose? Don't they discourage tanking? What's the threshold to keep them?

My only answer is that they want us to trade them now so they don't have to deal with that.

In AFL lingo it means use them now or lose them.

 

[giantroo]

 

[Kanga Glory]

Club statement - AFL assistance package

North Melbourne will receive three extra end-of-first round draft selections spread over two years as part of an assistance package determined by the AFL Commission on Monday.

The League confirmed North Melbourne will receive the following:
one end-of-first round selection in the 2023 AFL Draft (currently pick 19)
two end-of-first round selections in the 2024 AFL Draft (currently picks 19 and 20)
the continuation of the club’s ability to have two additional rookie list spots in season 2024

The AFL reserves the right to review the 2024 draft selections at the end of next season, however the club will be able to use the picks in trades this year.

North Melbourne now holds three first-round selections – picks 2, 14 and 19 – and three 2024 first-round selections ahead of this year’s free agency, trade and draft period.

North Melbourne CEO Jennifer Watt welcomed the package, and thanked the AFL for considering the club’s submission.

“We’ve worked closely with the AFL over the past few weeks to build out an assistance package,” Watt said.

“We put a strong case forward given our recent results and the steps we’ve taken to improve on and off the field, and we especially thank Andrew Dillon, Laura Kane and Ned Guy for listening to us.

“We’re looking at every way to improve our list – whether that’s bringing in more high-end draft talent or players with proven AFL experience.

“These selections will give the club flexibility to achieve those aims at the trade and draft table this year and next.”

If north are smart, trade next years picks, as you can be sure the AFL will remove them next year.

 

[Devington]

Good package but my only concern is that the AFL is telling us to trade those future picks without using the explicit wording they did last year, in which case I'm not sure we'll get true value for them. Remove the review caveat and I would be genuinely over the moon.

Following on, this also answers my question as to why TWICE the value of assistance next year than what we get this year. It's so that they can say we got 3 first rounders, meanwhile we don't get the value of 3 first rounders.

 

[Colby Cheer Squad]

14 19 for 4? is that possible? probably not hey.

It's pointless. 4 is worth 2034 and 14 and 19 together are worth 2109. Gold Coast would want more points towards their academy requirements.

 

[KangaRooster]

If the picks get traded you'd assume their 'review' would no longer be attached

 

[Arathrawn]

Nice, lets trade the 2024 picks that are could be reviewed next year...

I reckon that was the AFLs deal.

Trade these future 1st to GC or Syd or we take them off you.

 

[justroyal]

The assistance looks like it was created to benefit 3 clubs getting off the bottom of the ladder quicker.

North. West Coast. GC.

I say **** Sanders and selling picks to get up. Let’s just take all the picks to the draft and over-indulge.

(I don’t mean any of this sanders, I’m just reactive right now)

 

[the big lebowski]

In any trade for pick 5, I assume GC want one first rounder back this year to pay for their academy kids.

This year's 14 and next year's 19 equals pick 4 in points, but I don't think it'll be enough to trump the Dogs' offer.

I wonder how much higher we'd need to go.

Our pitch maybe

Pick 19 - 2023

Pick 19 & 20 - 2024

Won’t bid on Walter at 2 or 3

Can’t see the dogs beating that

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

Yet again, they do something half arsed.

If they have us what we deserve this year, next year wouldn’t be needed.

 

[Kanga Glory]

That has now changed my mood. Turned that frown upside down

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

$1.01 we'll trade those 2024 picks this year.

 

[Rod Stroker]

Nice, lets trade the 2024 picks that are could be reviewed next year...

my thoughts exactly. use it before we lose it. I'd prefer we bundle them into deals to get us higher up the order this year.

 

[FromThePocketx]

Take that I guess…

 

[kool kangas]

At least the AFL statement regarding the F1 2024 picks allow us to use them this year...

The AFL reserves the right to review the 2024 draft selections at the end of next season, however the club will be able to use the picks in trades this year.

 

[Luke72]

Why would it be 1 this year 2 next year? It should have been the opposite.

 

[Makeshift Park]

Our pitch maybe

Pick 19 - 2023

Pick 19 & 20 - 2024

Won’t bid on Walter at 2 or 3

Can’t see the dogs beating that

That's quite a lot of capital for one player. I'd hope we'd get Moyle and Graham too.

 

[Colby Cheer Squad]

Good package but my only concern is that the AFL is telling us to trade those future picks without using the explicit wording they did last year, in which case I'm not sure we'll get true value for them. Remove the review caveat and I would be genuinely over the moon.

Why won't we get value for them? If we trade them, the AFL cannot take them away from another club.

 

[DuckYeah]

So if we have a mini spike next year and finish 12-14 those 2 first rounders next year could potentially be off the table gagf! Trade them into this year along with 14 to move up

Yep, if we can do what we want with em, better off in our pocket

 

[Devington]

Oh well, whatever. Even if I think the structuring and caveat is deranged, it's still a haul that will enhance our list. Hurrah.

 

[justroyal]

Let’s burn those picks so fast.
Have another awful year.
And go back to for PP assistance and do it all again!