Player Watch Welcome to Collingwood Angus Anderson

[Pragmatic Shill]

Isn't that obvious? We risked missing out on Anderson, for seemingly no benefit?

But we didn't miss out.

 

[Kappa]

But we didn't miss out.

Astute observation, entirely missed the point though.

 

[Pragmatic Shill]

Astute observation, entirely missed the point though.

The point is you're getting antsy about something that might have happened but didn't, and even if it did happen it is basically inconsequential right now given we don't know how either McCarthy or Anderson are going to pan out.

Why actually care about it? We ended up getting him so it's a moot point. I think you're just scratching around looking for yet another thing to have a moan about.

 

[Kappa]

The point is you're getting antsy about something that might have happened but didn't, and even if it did happen it is basically inconsequential right now given we don't know how either McCarthy or Anderson are going to pan out.

Why actually care about it? We ended up getting him so it's a moot point. I think you're just scratching around looking for yet another thing to have a moan about.

"getting antsy" hahahah I asked a question about the clubs decision. Hilarious use of manipulative language. Why are you getting so antsy about me questioning a decision?

It's about the decision making of our new list manager, what made him use the picks that way? Was there a plan or was it a sloppy mistake? So no, its not a moot point, you're grading something based on the outcome rather than the decision, which is very silly and low level.

 

[sr36]

Isn't that obvious? We risked missing out on Anderson, for seemingly no benefit?

I've explained a possible reason. There was a few picks to follow whereby matching would have cost points. The Anderson pick didn't have points so we would have gone into defecit if a bid came. And we probably knew no-one else was interested in Anderson. So we took out the risk of defecit by taking McCarthy.

 

[Kappa]

I've explained a possible reason. There was a few picks to follow whereby matching would have cost points. The Anderson pick didn't have points so we would have gone into defecit if a bid came. And we probably knew no-one else was interested in Anderson. So we took out the risk of defecit by taking McCarthy.

If someone gets picked at a draft pick that has no value, wouldn't it be free to match?

 

[sr36]

If someone gets picked at a draft pick that has no value, wouldn't it be free to match?

Check out the DVI. 48 to 54 are all worth points. I assume we'd have gone into deficit if he went between those picks. We took out the possibility of deficit.

There might be a different reason, but that seems likely to me. It's not like they won't have thought it through.

 

[RobJD]

At the point McCarthy was drafted the draft picks no longer have any value, which means I assume, we could have matched a bid on Zac for free... So...?

As mentioned in the club article about AA, the club knew that no other club had recently spoken to AA about drafting him.

One possible scenario is that the club wanted to cover for a pick on Jai by the Hawks after our P55 - if the club picked AA with P55, we exposed ourselves to the potential for the Hawks bidding on Jai. If that happened, we would have needed to choose between listing either Jai or Zac as our last pick.

By Selecting Zac at P55 we still had a spare list spot to allow us the flexibility of either matching a bid by the Hawks on Jai at P56 or taking AA.

All this assumes that the club were sure that the Saints, Giants and Dogs had already reserved their last picks for other players

 

[sr36]

It's about the decision making of our new list manager, what made him use the picks that way? Was there a plan or was it a sloppy mistake? So no, its not a moot point, you're grading something based on the outcome rather than the decision, which is very silly and low level.

The likelihood that they were really sloppy and forgot how the draft worked is a ridiculously unlikely reason why they took them in that order.

What's more likely is that you don't understand something and assume they're idiots ...

 

[jmac70]

The likely that they were really sloppy and forgot how the draft worked is a ridiculously unlikely reason why they took them in that order.

What's more likely is that you don't understand something and assume they're idiots ...

There is only one idiot in this scenario.

 

[Kappa]

Check out the DVI. 48 to 54 are all worth points. I assume we'd have gone into deficit if he went between those picks. We took out the possibility of deficit.

There might be a different reason, but that seems likely to me. It's not like they won't have thought it through.

But Zac was picked at pick 55 which has no value? Why are u bringing up picks 48-54?

 

[Kappa]

The likelihood that they were really sloppy and forgot how the draft worked is a ridiculously unlikely reason why they took them in that order.

What's more likely is that you don't understand something and assume they're idiots ...

I'm asking why it happened, don't tell me what I assume

 

[sr36]

But Zac was picked at pick 55 which has no value? Why are u bringing up picks 48-54?

Apologies. For some reason I thought he was 47.

 

[sr36]

I'm asking why it happened, don't tell me what I assume

Then don't throw incompetence out as a likely scenario.

Do you really think they don't understand the draft?

 

[Kappa]

Then don't throw incompetence out as a likely scenario.

Do you really think they don't understand the draft?

People really lose their heads when anyone dares to question the club it really is quite funny.

All I said was "why did the club do this" and now you're saying I called the club incompetent and idiots (both words i never used). Lmao.

 

[Anzacday]

People really lose their heads when anyone dares to question the club it really is quite funny.

Amazing how many of your questions are reacted to in a similar way.
I just can’t decide if it’s the “questioning of the club”, or whether you are clever with your questioning.

 

[frizzle]

I remember in the post draft interview Angus saying O’Bree asked him if any other clubs had spoken to him. This was while he was in London in the lead up to the draft. Angus told him no other club had spoken to him, so I assume we thought the risk of him being snapped up elsewhere was very low, seeing no other club had even interviewed him. We would have factored this in with our late selection & assumed no other team was going to jump us. Perhaps if Angus had said that 3 other clubs had spoken to him that scenario may have turned out differently. All’s well that ends well.

 

[sr36]

People really lose their heads when anyone dares to question the club it really is quite funny.

All I said was "why did the club do this" and now you're saying I called the club incompetent and idiots (both words i never used). Lmao.

YOu brought up "sloppy mistake". And it's your standard fare. Are you being disingenuous or unaware? There is no possibility that they hadn't thought through what order to take them. You don't know the reason and go to them making a sloppy mistake.

If no one else had spoken to Anderson, there was no possibility of a mistake occuring with the order anyway.

Here's another possibility.When we brought in Tohill and Keane, there was confusion about which one was cat B and they seemed to swap. Perhaps Saxena is cat b as reported by the club, even though on the cat a list and can switch lists if Condon gets drafted. Now if we rate Saxena above Anderson, that'd be another reason for the order. Or perhaps they simply wanted to put McCarthy out of his misery sooner.

 

[Eric Shin]

Everyone calm the **** down

 

[Chunky Steak]

 

[JuniorB]

Just settling in for a loooong preseason.

 

[RobJD]

YOu brought up "sloppy mistake". And it's your standard fare. Are you being disingenuous or unaware? There is no possibility that they hadn't thought through what order to take them. You don't know the reason and go to them making a sloppy mistake.

If no one else had spoken to Anderson, there was no possibility of a mistake occuring with the order anyway.

Here's another possibility.When we brought in Tohill and Keane, there was confusion about which one was cat B and they seemed to swap. Perhaps Saxena is cat b as reported by the club, even though on the cat a list and can switch lists if Condon gets drafted. Now if we rate Saxena above Anderson, that'd be another reason for the order. Or perhaps they simply wanted to put McCarthy out of his misery sooner.

I mentioned earlier a scenario that may have driven the club's thinking around the selection of Zac before AA even though there was no apparent reason to do this. In an effort to add some further clarification, assume that at in the lead up to our Pick55, the club was planning on how they could be best assured of getting all the remaining draftees they wanted, that is, Zac, Jai and AA.

They knew that no-one had spoken to AA in the days leading into the Draft
They knew that Zac was the highest rated of the three candidates
They knew that if Jai didn't get drafted in the open draft, that they could secure him as a rookie draft pre-selection
They would have been confident that the GWS, Saints and Dog's open draft picks would go the way that they did

All that meant that the approach with the highest probability of succeeding was to take a Hawthorn bid at P56 on one of our academy draftees out of the equation: So:

Picking Zac at P55 meant he was off the table at P56 - that meant that the risk of not getting the three draftees that we wanted was now down to the Hawks picking Anderson (which we knew they weren't interested in) as a Pick on Jai by the Hawks could be matched with our Pick 57.

Taking AA with our P57 and not Jai made sense, as we knew that we could pre-select Jai as a Rookie - taking Jai with our P57 would have meant that AA was freely available to all those clubs that had Rookie draft selections prior to us - hence the order of our Picks55 and 57 can be logically explained as something other than a brainfart

 

[Lifelong Pie]

I mentioned earlier a scenario that may have driven the club's thinking around the selection of Zac before AA even though there was no apparent reason to do this. In an effort to add some further clarification, assume that at in the lead up to our Pick55, the club was planning on how they could be best assured of getting all the remaining draftees they wanted, that is, Zac, Jai and AA.

They knew that no-one had spoken to AA in the days leading into the Draft
They knew that Zac was the highest rated of the three candidates
They knew that if Jai didn't get drafted in the open draft, that they could secure him as a rookie draft pre-selection
They would have been confident that the GWS, Saints and Dog's open draft picks would go the way that they did

All that meant that the approach with the highest probability of succeeding was to take a Hawthorn bid at P56 on one of our academy draftees out of the equation: So:

Picking Zac at P55 meant he was off the table at P56 - that meant that the risk of not getting the three draftees that we wanted was now down to the Hawks picking Anderson (which we knew they weren't interested in) as a Pick on Jai by the Hawks could be matched with our Pick 57.

Taking AA with our P57 and not Jai made sense, as we knew that we could pre-select Jai as a Rookie - taking Jai with our P57 would have meant that AA was freely available to all those clubs that had Rookie draft selections prior to us - hence the order of our Picks55 and 57 can be logically explained as something other than a brainfart

You have explained it well, I didn't really understand why we selected the way we did but your explanation makes sense, thank you

 

[TradeDraft]

I mentioned earlier a scenario that may have driven the club's thinking around the selection of Zac before AA even though there was no apparent reason to do this. In an effort to add some further clarification, assume that at in the lead up to our Pick55, the club was planning on how they could be best assured of getting all the remaining draftees they wanted, that is, Zac, Jai and AA.

They knew that no-one had spoken to AA in the days leading into the Draft
They knew that Zac was the highest rated of the three candidates
They knew that if Jai didn't get drafted in the open draft, that they could secure him as a rookie draft pre-selection
They would have been confident that the GWS, Saints and Dog's open draft picks would go the way that they did

All that meant that the approach with the highest probability of succeeding was to take a Hawthorn bid at P56 on one of our academy draftees out of the equation: So:

Picking Zac at P55 meant he was off the table at P56 - that meant that the risk of not getting the three draftees that we wanted was now down to the Hawks picking Anderson (which we knew they weren't interested in) as a Pick on Jai by the Hawks could be matched with our Pick 57.

Taking AA with our P57 and not Jai made sense, as we knew that we could pre-select Jai as a Rookie - taking Jai with our P57 would have meant that AA was freely available to all those clubs that had Rookie draft selections prior to us - hence the order of our Picks55 and 57 can be logically explained as something other than a brainfart

And we did not want other teams to find about our Interest in AA before the Rookie Draft

 

[Kappa]

I mentioned earlier a scenario that may have driven the club's thinking around the selection of Zac before AA even though there was no apparent reason to do this. In an effort to add some further clarification, assume that at in the lead up to our Pick55, the club was planning on how they could be best assured of getting all the remaining draftees they wanted, that is, Zac, Jai and AA.

They knew that no-one had spoken to AA in the days leading into the Draft
They knew that Zac was the highest rated of the three candidates
They knew that if Jai didn't get drafted in the open draft, that they could secure him as a rookie draft pre-selection
They would have been confident that the GWS, Saints and Dog's open draft picks would go the way that they did

All that meant that the approach with the highest probability of succeeding was to take a Hawthorn bid at P56 on one of our academy draftees out of the equation: So:

Picking Zac at P55 meant he was off the table at P56 - that meant that the risk of not getting the three draftees that we wanted was now down to the Hawks picking Anderson (which we knew they weren't interested in) as a Pick on Jai by the Hawks could be matched with our Pick 57.

Taking AA with our P57 and not Jai made sense, as we knew that we could pre-select Jai as a Rookie - taking Jai with our P57 would have meant that AA was freely available to all those clubs that had Rookie draft selections prior to us - hence the order of our Picks55 and 57 can be logically explained as something other than a brainfart

Umm…. If hawks bid on Zac at 56 we could have matched it for free with our pick 57… correct?

So the ONLY possible way we don’t get Zac and AA would be to take Zac at 55, and the hawks take AA at 56 (obviously this is a low chance, but many kids have mentioned in interviews getting drafted by clubs who hasn’t really spoken to them much).

If we took AA at 55, we would be 100% secured in getting both AA and Zac, compared to 99.9% chance of doing Zac first. Am I wrong here?