Hot Topic 2016 DRAFT

[FlowersByIrene]

What you're basically saying is Graham = 21.
TBH I don't think he is worth anything, sadly.

First of all, i wasnt saying that. And secondly, 2017 1st + Graham doesnt mean Graham = 21.

2017 1st would be practically #6 and #21 by itself to GC.

They have 6 picks inside the top 30 odd already. Will get two or three more with O'Meara and Prestia going.

A 2017 1st, which they would expect to be high, is pumped up in value because

1. They have fewer picks next year than this year, so next years pick is more valuable to them than one this year. Meaning, say our 2017 1st pick was pick #5, it would be worth more than pick #5 in 2016 to the.

2. They are an Academy club. Which means that picks is extra handy for them for two reasons. Either a) they use it on an Academy player, so it's worth 20% more to them than it is to us, due to the Discount. So for example, if pick the 2017 pick is #5, it's worth to GC around pick #3, due to the Academy selection. The other option is b) it's a pick BEFORE any Academy selections and therefore it is worth 100% more to them than another first round next year as they get a selection of an OPEN MARKET player and their top Academy player.

So the 2017 1st is a lot to them. Graham's addition is really only to take the sweetener from a pick in the 30's which would be the raw value imo of 2017 1st = #6 and #30-40, up to #6 and #21. Effectively Graham is worth about a 9-19 spot upgrade in the draft.. which is not out of his range.

 

[1981]

First of all, i wasnt saying that. And secondly, 2017 1st + Graham doesnt mean Graham = 21.

2017 1st would be practically #6 and #21 by itself to GC.

They have 6 picks inside the top 30 odd already. Will get two or three more with O'Meara and Prestia going.

A 2017 1st, which they would expect to be high, is pumped up in value because

1. They have fewer picks next year than this year, so next years pick is more valuable to them than one this year. Meaning, say our 2017 1st pick was pick #5, it would be worth more than pick #5 in 2016 to the.

2. They are an Academy club. Which means that picks is extra handy for them for two reasons. Either a) they use it on an Academy player, so it's worth 20% more to them than it is to us, due to the Discount. So for example, if pick the 2017 pick is #5, it's worth to GC around pick #3, due to the Academy selection. The other option is b) it's a pick BEFORE any Academy selections and therefore it is worth 100% more to them than another first round next year as they get a selection of an OPEN MARKET player and their top Academy player.

So the 2017 1st is a lot to them. Graham's addition is really only to take the sweetener from a pick in the 30's which would be the raw value imo of 2017 1st = #6 and #30-40, up to #6 and #21. Effectively Graham is worth about a 9-19 spot upgrade in the draft.. which is not out of his range.

No but for all intents and purposes that is what it is.
Our 2017 1st could be around 6-8. So they cancel themselves out.
So the leftover Graham by implication = 21.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

No but for all intents and purposes that is what it is.
Our 2017 1st could be around 6-8. So they cancel themselves out.
So the leftover Graham by implication = 21.

The deal isn't done by what the outcome is, it's what the value is at the time. Graham could end up being worth #21 in that deal if the picks are basically the same. But he could be worth 30 or 40 if we slide to the bottom of the ladder. Or he could be worth seventeen-eighteen if we jump up the ladder. What GWS are paying for is the chance and the convenience.

 

[Jimmae]

No but for all intents and purposes that is what it is.
Our 2017 1st could be around 6-8. So they cancel themselves out.
So the leftover Graham by implication = 21.

Depends on how valuable banking for next year is to GC. If it's just deferring their spend, the future pick is worth less than it's likely place in the order in terms of this year's DVI, but if they are better served by deferring the spend than getting value in this draft, it goes up.

 

[1981]

The deal isn't done by what the outcome is, it's what the value is at the time. Graham could end up being worth #21 in that deal if the picks are basically the same. But he could be worth 30 or 40 if we slide to the bottom of the ladder. Or he could be worth seventeen-eighteen if we jump up the ladder. What GWS are paying for is the chance and the convenience.

Understand what you're saying, but I cannot get past the fact IMO Graham is actually not worth ANYTHING.
I understand what you're saying though.

 

[1981]

So, what do we think is going happen for CFC in tread week, guys???

 

[HARKER]

So, what do we think is going happen for CFC in tread week, guys???

May need to get new tyres?

 

[zeeCFC]

So, what do we think is going happen for CFC in tread week, guys???

Depends on the caliper of next year's crop

 

[Smegger]

Depends on the caliper of next year's crop

This is going to go around and around and around isn't it?

 

[Sin City]

This is going to go around and around and around isn't it?

Most likely, the wheels have been in motion for some time now.

 

[KohPhi]

Most likely, the wheels have been in motion for some time now.

Understand someone needed to pump up this thread but im not sure these puns will get any more traction to be honest.

 

[Govinda blueboy]

Hey Carltonians, it's been quite a while since I've posted anything, by what I've been reading it seems that we will be getting at least 2 or more talls from GWS this trade period. By that reckoning we would be after some quality mids early in the draft, which leads to my question(s)...

What type of midfielder/s do we think we should/will go for ( inside, outside, pure mid ) or just best available ?
It was mentioned by Trigg that we're after hybrid type players, how mich truth do we think is in that statement or is it merely to confuse others as to our intentions.?

 

[KohPhi]

Hey Carltonians, it's been quite a while since I've posted anything, by what I've been reading it seems that we will be getting at least 2 or more talls from GWS this trade period. By that reckoning we would be after some quality mids early in the draft, which leads to my question(s)...

What type of midfielder/s do we think we should/will go for ( inside, outside, pure mid ) or just best available ?
It was mentioned by Trigg that we're after hybrid type players, how mich truth do we think is in that statement or is it merely to confuse others as to our intentions.?

Im still not sure what SOS has planned, logic dictates that if we trade for Marchbank and Stewart then we would draft mids. But it would not surprise me if he drafts more KPP's to build a strong spine with depth from defence up and "fill" around it.
One thing for sure is that the days of confusing other clubs are over. I think by the time draft day comes, all clubs would have a decent idea of each others strategy.

 

[broady4]

First of all, i wasnt saying that. And secondly, 2017 1st + Graham doesnt mean Graham = 21.

2017 1st would be practically #6 and #21 by itself to GC.

They have 6 picks inside the top 30 odd already. Will get two or three more with O'Meara and Prestia going.

A 2017 1st, which they would expect to be high, is pumped up in value because

1. They have fewer picks next year than this year, so next years pick is more valuable to them than one this year. Meaning, say our 2017 1st pick was pick #5, it would be worth more than pick #5 in 2016 to the.

2. They are an Academy club. Which means that picks is extra handy for them for two reasons. Either a) they use it on an Academy player, so it's worth 20% more to them than it is to us, due to the Discount. So for example, if pick the 2017 pick is #5, it's worth to GC around pick #3, due to the Academy selection. The other option is b) it's a pick BEFORE any Academy selections and therefore it is worth 100% more to them than another first round next year as they get a selection of an OPEN MARKET player and their top Academy player.

So the 2017 1st is a lot to them. Graham's addition is really only to take the sweetener from a pick in the 30's which would be the raw value imo of 2017 1st = #6 and #30-40, up to #6 and #21. Effectively Graham is worth about a 9-19 spot upgrade in the draft.. which is not out of his range.

Graham is the opposite of a sweetner..

 

[Govinda blueboy]

Im still not sure what SOS has planned, logic dictates that if we trade for Marchbank and Stewart then we would draft mids. But it would not surprise me if he drafts more KPP's to build a strong spine with depth from defence up and "fill" around it.
One thing for sure is that the days of confusing other clubs are over. I think by the time draft day comes, all clubs would have a decent idea of each others strategy.

Ok I hear what you are saying but let's just suppose that we get Marchbank, Stewart, and one other tall plus Pickett, which appears likely as Stewart and Pickett have both toured PP. Now let's also take into consideration that it's not really a KPP draft and I can't see SOS reaching for a KP with an early pick. So we've got some talls and a highly skilled and very fast player in Pickett (who hopefully comes good) which to me (and this is a lot of assumptions) points to us drafting midfielders. Personally I think we should draft best available with five and then needs after that, but hey what do I know (js)

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

Ok I hear what you are saying but let's just suppose that we get Marchbank, Stewart, and one other tall plus Pickett, which appears likely as Stewart and Pickett have both toured PP. Now let's also take into consideration that it's not really a KPP draft and I can't see SOS reaching for a KP with an early pick. So we've got some talls and a highly skilled and very fast player in Pickett (who hopefully comes good) which to me (and this is a lot of assumptions) points to us drafting midfielders. Personally I think we should draft best available with five and then needs after that, but hey what do I know (js)

If we get all those players I don't think we will have pick 5 anymore

 

[KohPhi]

Ok I hear what you are saying but let's just suppose that we get Marchbank, Stewart, and one other tall plus Pickett, which appears likely as Stewart and Pickett have both toured PP. Now let's also take into consideration that it's not really a KPP draft and I can't see SOS reaching for a KP with an early pick. So we've got some talls and a highly skilled and very fast player in Pickett (who hopefully comes good) which to me (and this is a lot of assumptions) points to us drafting midfielders. Personally I think we should draft best available with five and then needs after that, but hey what do I know (js)

If we get all those players I don't think we will have pick 5 anymore

Yeah i think you are both on the mark here. If we pick up 3-4 players, we will probably lose 5 and get back one or two late first rounders. As the Bulldogs have shown this season, we can still pick up some talented mids with picks around the 15-30 mark. If Touhy gets traded we could have 3 picks in this range. We may even package 2 of them to get back into the top 10.. interesting times ahead!

 

[BluesRule]

Really do not want to lose #5 as one of McGrath, McCluggage, Ainsworth, Brodie or SPS are more critical to us improving than Marchbank IMO.

Hope SOS can get Marchbank deal done without losing #5, and I think trade of Zac (which I would hate to happen) may be the solution.

 

[Dramoth]

We could go all out for this year's draft and I'm starting to think we really should.

**** it, let's try and do this:

2017 1st + #41/Graham/Everitt to GC for #6 + #21 (they'll get #6 from Richmond)
Touhy for #17
2017 2nd to GWS for Marchbank (I'm really not interested in getting Stewart, Pickett, Corr etc because it'll cost us our 2016 2nd as well)

Go to draft with: #5, #6, #17, #21 & #23

#5 > Brodie
#6 > Taranto/Scrimshaw (I'd prefer Taranto but would still be really happy with Scrimshaw)
#17 > Venables (Venables could slide given he's missed a lot of footy)
#21 > Berry
#23 > Battle/Kerr

Adding in Marchbank, Brodie, Taranto, Venables, Berry and Battle with only the loss of Touhy would be a huge result. Of course it screws us up for next year's draft though but that's 7 highly rated kids. We could get a 2017 1st by trading our 2018 1st next year.

One small problem there... you can't trade a future second if you have traded a future first. It's to stop clubs from selling their future for a single big hit in the draft.

 

[Dramoth]

What you're basically saying is Graham = 21.
TBH I don't think he is worth anything, sadly.

Toss in Everitt as well.

 

[Dramoth]

First of all, i wasnt saying that. And secondly, 2017 1st + Graham doesnt mean Graham = 21.

2017 1st would be practically #6 and #21 by itself to GC.

They have 6 picks inside the top 30 odd already. Will get two or three more with O'Meara and Prestia going.

A 2017 1st, which they would expect to be high, is pumped up in value because

1. They have fewer picks next year than this year, so next years pick is more valuable to them than one this year. Meaning, say our 2017 1st pick was pick #5, it would be worth more than pick #5 in 2016 to the.

2. They are an Academy club. Which means that picks is extra handy for them for two reasons. Either a) they use it on an Academy player, so it's worth 20% more to them than it is to us, due to the Discount. So for example, if pick the 2017 pick is #5, it's worth to GC around pick #3, due to the Academy selection. The other option is b) it's a pick BEFORE any Academy selections and therefore it is worth 100% more to them than another first round next year as they get a selection of an OPEN MARKET player and their top Academy player.

So the 2017 1st is a lot to them. Graham's addition is really only to take the sweetener from a pick in the 30's which would be the raw value imo of 2017 1st = #6 and #30-40, up to #6 and #21. Effectively Graham is worth about a 9-19 spot upgrade in the draft.. which is not out of his range.

They don't have pick 6 yet. That still belongs to Bitchmond.

 

[Dramoth]

May need to get new tyres?

I think I need new tyres... Maybe I should trade with Carlton

 

[thylacine60]

what a paucity of talent we have when it's the same 2 or 3 names bandied about as the only potential trades with currency..........I guess it's only the 2 year contract issue that keeps last years draft talent safe

 

[Gavstar]

Just rewatched the U18's All Stars game wouldn't mind getting #7 from GWS.

Maybe our 2017 first rounder and #23 for #7 and the Marchbank combo? They'd still have #15 and #16 to match any bids for Setterfield and Perryman.

out:
2017 first rounder
#23

in:
#7
Marchbank
Stewart
Pickett

End up with something like Taranto, Scrimshaw, Marchbank, Stewart and Pickett. Still with any Tuohy trade and two 3rd rounders up the sleeve.

We would be insane to trade our 2017 first for some GWS maybe's. It will be a pick in the top three, it should be used to acquire an absolute gun or draft one.

 

[thylacine60]

yep - trying to think of that fair player who went at 3 several years back...............