Defacto
Brownlow Medallist
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2008
- Posts
- 22,930
- Reaction score
- 17,129
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
You may will be correct, but I just can't wrap my head around why Adelaide would trade down from 10 to 14 for little return. It is a big risk, unless you are 100% confident the player you want is still around. At pick 14 they run the risk that all of Marchbank, Goddard, Lever & Durdin are gone. Not likely, but certainly very possible.
If their target is Goddard, this was a very dumb trade. There is every chance he doesn't get past Geelong, and he probably won't get past Fremantle. If their target was Marchbank, I would understand more, but is still a big risk. He would have to get past Fremantle (need a full McPharlin replacement), West Coast (need a Glass replacement) & Richmond (probably less likely to take a tall). Still, it is highly plausible all 4 tall backs are gone by pick 14.
This trade has me really perplexed, they are either taking a massive risk their favoured tall back is still there, they are not shooting for one of the top 4 key backs, or they want McKenzie. Personally, if I had to guess I think it might be the latter. I think what Adelaide do with this pick has a huge bearing on who we end up with.
I agree the Adelaide move is just head scratching. I'm with you surely they weren't interested in Goddard. That pick downgrade is bizarre unless as you say they want a player seen as falling further down the draft







