List Mgmt. 2018 Draft thread.

[Saintly Viewed]

Yes applying principles of trust amongst the group is worth more than a few points in draft rankings.

Ultimately the trust must work both ways. Nobody is under any illusion that Murray is hanging by a thread his career in peril.

That said, the group knows we will honour our word and that keeps a feeling of genuine trust.

 

[Albert Parker]

So it was an option then? Murray will be banned very shortly.

My issue is that we always over pay to make trades happen, we are push overs. Most clubs would of just straight up switched 4th's, Hawks obviously were keen on someone at that range or they wouldn't of did it even if we initiated it. Yes I know its a nothing pick but it is the principal of it, combined with our recent overpaying trade history it annoys me.

On what basis do you conclude we 'always overpay'? I don't think you appreciate how the points system works and how the NGA and FS systems can be exploited.

Murray will be gone. In the meantime, we have to keep him on the list until his B test comes in and have taken him off the main list accordingly.
We picked him up for a mid 50's pick. Seems fair.

We've just finished runner up with our list and will have plenty of talent back from injury you'd expect.

We have just added Beams - effectively costing us one first round pick in 2019 (hopefully pick 15-18) given we still got Quaynor that we would have used pick 18 on, for a player top 10 in the past 2 Brownlows. Dirt Cheap.

We've also built for the future with 2 well-credentialled new starters from this draft in the top 30 - Quaynor and Kelly

We've added Jordan Roughead (Premiership ruckman/tall just 3 seasons ago) for a mid 70's pick too.

 

[Crazy Tails]

So can we actually select Marlion Pickett through this pre season SPP anyway? Thought you could only add players who have previously been on an AFL list. Pretty sure he hasn't been on one.

He could maybe be added via the mid season rookie draft next season if we still have the Murray list spot open at that stage.

 

[loki04]

On what basis do you conclude we 'always overpay'? I don't think you appreciate how the points system works and how the NGA and FS systems can be exploited.

Murray will be gone. In the meantime, we have to keep him on the list until his B test comes in and have taken him off the main list accordingly.
We picked him up for a mid 50's pick. Seems fair.

We've just finished runner up with our list and will have plenty of talent back from injury you'd expect.

We have just added Beams - effectively costing us one first round pick in 2019 (hopefully pick 15-18) given we still got Quaynor that we would have used pick 18 on, for a player top 10 in the past 2 Brownlows. Dirt Cheap.

We've also built for the future with 2 well-credentialled new starters from this draft in the top 30 - Quaynor and Kelly

We've added Jordan Roughead (Premiership ruckman/tall just 3 seasons ago) for a mid 70's pick too.

Treloar and late 2nd = 2 x firsts, Beams + 5th rounder = 2 x firsts, Murray and late 3rd 2018 = 2018 2nd rounder, 2019 4th = 4th 2018 and 5th 2019.

Every one of those trades was overs.

I know exactly how the points work, cheers. A 28 year old should of been secured for a first 2018 and 2nd 2019 (still can do the IQ points), we buckled and gave up the 2019 first rounder as well.

Now I am happy to have the players at our club but that doesn't mean I don't think we over paid to get it done.

 

[loki04]

It wasn't an option. You don't go back on your word and undermine trust from the playing group in order to add someone that you don't rate particularly highly.

We didn't overpay. As I pointed out the other day, when we traded it, pick 63 effectively had no academy points attached, because you no longer needed points to match, thus it had less value than a 4th rounder from next year which still has academy points attached. We traded a fourth rounder with no points attached, which we had no advantage in keeping for a 4th rounder with points attached in next year's draft. We traded something that had no value to us for an upgrade in next year's draft, which could also be a small trade chip for a club that needs academy points. It was a good deal. If you can't see that, you're not looking closely enough.

Points are only relevant if you need them. If not then a 4th rounder is a 4th rounder points or not.

 

[partypie]

Giants need to remember that what goes around, comes around.

Karma baby it's coming for ya.

I don't necessarily think they were picking him early - after losing Nathan Wilson and with Heater not getting any younger I can see how they would want a line breaker who can use the ball off half back to free up Whitfield and allow them to play him through the midfield.

With Adelaide also reportedly interested in Quaynor at pick 15 pick GWS had to bid where they did or not at all.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Treloar and late 2nd = 2 x firsts, Beams + 5th rounder = 2 x firsts, Murray and late 3rd 2018 = 2018 2nd rounder, 2019 4th = 4th 2018 and 5th 2019.

Every one of those trades was overs.

I know exactly how the points work, cheers. A 28 year old should of been secured for a first 2018 and 2nd 2019 (still can do the IQ points), we buckled and gave up the 2019 first rounder as well.

Now I am happy to have the players at our club but that doesn't mean I don't think we over paid to get it done.

For the discussion I’m Interested in each of these deals if you were the person making the decision would you have agreed to the deal as completed?

Or walked away and not done the deal?

Or been able to negotiate a better price?

Im genuinely interested in how the negotiations could have been done better if the poster was doing the deal and which deals would we just walk away?

For what it’s worth I’d have done the Treloar deal but I’m sure they would not have budged on two picks.

 

[loki04]

I don't necessarily think they were picking him early - after losing Nathan Wilson and with Heater not getting any younger I can see how they would want a line breaker who can use the ball off half back to free up Whitfield and allow them to play him through the midfield.

With Adelaide also reportedly interested in Quaynor at pick 15 pick GWS had to bid where they did or not at all.

At the end of the day it didn't effect anything we done anyway.

 

[Crazy Tails]

Points are only relevant if you need them. If not then a 4th rounder is a 4th rounder points or not.

Agree. Gathering points doesn't look like it will be an issue for us next year due to having no F/S or NGA's (worth taking).

Even though we are not in the market for points there will still be plenty of other clubs who are. I would hope that we would try and use those 2 X 4th rounders in a deal with a club looking for points so that we move a bit higher up the draft board.

 

[sr36]

Points are only relevant if you need them. If not then a 4th rounder is a 4th rounder points or not.

Points are relevant if any clubs need them, as it makes them potential trade chips, eg. they can be used to trade up further in the draft like several teams did pre-draft this year or as the final chip that gets a bigger trade across the line.

 

[CFC2010]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch...……

 

[loki04]

For the discussion I’m Interested in each of these deals if you were the person making the decision would you have agreed to the deal as completed?

Or walked away and not done the deal?

Or been able to negotiate a better price?

Im genuinely interested in how the negotiations could have been done better if the poster was doing the deal and which deals would we just walk away?

For what it’s worth I’d have done the Treloar deal but I’m sure they would not have budged on two picks.

I can accept the odd over paying to get a star but we are making a habit out of it with all different draft ranges, I think they are happy to just get the players in they want regardless of cost.

Treloar trade initially had paper work filled and signed off for a 1st and 2nd rounder, only 1 signature was missing Dave Matthews. Who had a deal with his brother at Richmond to send him there so blocked the trade. (So the rest of the GWS team were initially happy to deal).
He then called in AFL to be a 3rd party and Richmond upped there bid to 2x late teen first rounders.
Given Treloars age and ability I was ok with the trade, annoyed we had to pay through the teeth due to Matthews bros, but we got a 10 year gun so...

Then we did the Murray trade a *rookie listed* player this trade is one where I feel we should of made a stand and been fully prepared to walk if a better (fair for both teams) deal couldn't be reached, iirc we still had a day left to trade.

Beams firstly I'll state he is a gun and it is good to have him back but imo he is also 28 and likely has 3 good years left, with a history of soft tissue issues and now also grieving.
I feel a fair trade would of been a first (2018) and 2nd (2019) rounder given that, he is not the 24 year old we traded out. They have clearly felt IQ offset the price of beams but imo that isn't an efficient use of the 2 firsts which could of kept our 2019 with better negotiating.
I'm conflicted here given our midfield depth he wasn't a dire need plus what other options were available to us (Carlton trade pick 19 for their likely top 3 pick next year a 12 year player just for example) but on the other hand no doubting he is a gun and should make us better. So can see the reasoning to strike while the irons hot and try flag out next 2 years.

4th swapsies, this annoyed me for no other reason then it added to the last 3 trades, realistically a 5th rounder means sweet fa but again we over paid to do it cant just have a win/win trade.

Where do we draw the line in future trades do we keep just ponying up?

Anyway this is just my opinion everyone else is entitled to think those deals are bargains, at the end of the day I am overall happy to have them the price just leaves a sour taste.

 

[loki04]

Points are relevant if any clubs need them, as it makes them potential trade chips, eg. they can be used to trade up further in the draft like several teams did pre-draft this year or as the final chip that gets a bigger trade across the line.

True.

 

[Snoop Dog]

Just to contine the theme

If you had a choice which couplet would you take:

Quaynor/ Kelly

V

Gown/ Ross

?

No

Quaynor for mine is an exciting talent. He has very clean hands and his composure, vision and decision making is elite. He doesnt waste footy and that is a big theme for clubs at the moment with the 'pressure' in games at the moment. His kicking is good but his hands are elite. Clean and creative.

Will Kelly reads the play very well. You can see he has played forward. He reads the ball off the boot equally as well as his opponents. His speed, leap and ability to close a contest is very good. You can see the old man has had an influence. I think he will def be a back. Havent liked him forward.

Gown and Ross are players I like and I think that was about the right spot for them. Ross is a beast but we have Sier and RW for that so I wasnt keen to overload that style of player. Gown I like....a lot. His effort and leading patterns along with body use gives him a competitive advantage. I just worry does he have the speed. Very few elite talls come from this far back in the draft. He could go back as a defender.

So both sets good but Isaac is a class above the others.

 

[Crazy Tails]

Slightly off the current topic being discussed but can anyone explain to me how we were able to trade our future 5th rounder in that Hawks picks swap involving 63?

I was under the impression that we could not trade any future picks at the draft due to us trading away our 2019 1st in the Beams trade. I put the question out a couple of times on Twitter to draft experts, the Club and to a couple of journos but no one has responded.

Could it have something to do with a 5th round pick not having points attached?

 

[76woodenspooners]

What does our young players look like, say about the 25 age mark. With our new draftees.
I’m guessing at ages so happy to be corrected.

Something like this perhaps:

Collingwood About U25 with new draftees:


B. M Scharenberg ~ W Kelly ~ T Langdon

HB. I Quaynor ~ D Moore ~ J Crisp

C. J Stephenson ~ A Treloar ~ T Phillips

HF. N Murphy ~ J De Goey ~ B Maynard

F. W Hoskin-Elliott ~ M Lynch ~ J Daicos

R. B Grundy (c) ~ B Sier ~ J Aish

I. F Appelby ~ T Brown ~ B Crocker ~ A Bosenavulagi

E. A Tohill, M Keane

Add Adams? (25)

 

[TradeDraft]

Nice for Crows to Trade Back few Times before Bidding on Kelly

 

[jackcass]

So can we actually select Marlion Pickett through this pre season SPP anyway? Thought you could only add players who have previously been on an AFL list. Pretty sure he hasn't been on one.

He could maybe be added via the mid season rookie draft next season if we still have the Murray list spot open at that stage.

Only via the mid-season draft I'd have thought.

 

[jackcass]

I can accept the odd over paying to get a star but we are making a habit out of it with all different draft ranges, I think they are happy to just get the players in they want regardless of cost.

Treloar trade initially had paper work filled and signed off for a 1st and 2nd rounder, only 1 signature was missing Dave Matthews. Who had a deal with his brother at Richmond to send him there so blocked the trade. (So the rest of the GWS team were initially happy to deal).
He then called in AFL to be a 3rd party and Richmond upped there bid to 2x late teen first rounders.
Given Treloars age and ability I was ok with the trade, annoyed we had to pay through the teeth due to Matthews bros, but we got a 10 year gun so...

Then we did the Murray trade a *rookie listed* player this trade is one where I feel we should of made a stand and been fully prepared to walk if a better (fair for both teams) deal couldn't be reached, iirc we still had a day left to trade.

Beams firstly I'll state he is a gun and it is good to have him back but imo he is also 28 and likely has 3 good years left, with a history of soft tissue issues and now also grieving.
I feel a fair trade would of been a first (2018) and 2nd (2019) rounder given that, he is not the 24 year old we traded out. They have clearly felt IQ offset the price of beams but imo that isn't an efficient use of the 2 firsts which could of kept our 2019 with better negotiating.
I'm conflicted here given our midfield depth he wasn't a dire need plus what other options were available to us (Carlton trade pick 19 for their likely top 3 pick next year a 12 year player just for example) but on the other hand no doubting he is a gun and should make us better. So can see the reasoning to strike while the irons hot and try flag out next 2 years.

4th swapsies, this annoyed me for no other reason then it added to the last 3 trades, realistically a 5th rounder means sweet fa but again we over paid to do it cant just have a win/win trade.

Where do we draw the line in future trades do we keep just ponying up?

Anyway this is just my opinion everyone else is entitled to think those deals are bargains, at the end of the day I am overall happy to have them the price just leaves a sour taste.

For every one of those trades you could equally cite a Wellingham for P18, or a Dawes & P61 for P20 & P47, or Beams & P67 for P5, P25 & Crisp, or a Seedsman for P32, or Howe for Kennedy. It's swings and round-abouts and hardly shocking that not every deal is skewed toward the Pies.

 

[jackcass]

Points are relevant if any clubs need them, as it makes them potential trade chips, eg. they can be used to trade up further in the draft like several teams did pre-draft this year or as the final chip that gets a bigger trade across the line.

Exactly. At this early stage it appears we might not need them in 2019 for NGA's or F/S's, but at a minimum they provide trade opportunities with those clubs that do.

 

[Albert Parker]

Treloar and late 2nd = 2 x firsts, Beams + 5th rounder = 2 x firsts, Murray and late 3rd 2018 = 2018 2nd rounder, 2019 4th = 4th 2018 and 5th 2019.

Every one of those trades was overs.

I know exactly how the points work, cheers. A 28 year old should of been secured for a first 2018 and 2nd 2019 (still can do the IQ points), we buckled and gave up the 2019 first rounder as well.

Now I am happy to have the players at our club but that doesn't mean I don't think we over paid to get it done.

This is all of course a matter of opinion.

Yes, I too am aware of the transactions which took place.

You could argue Treloar was a full price. I'd tend to agree given where we finished at the time.

Beams was in effect for a net price of our 1st round next year. That's not a full price for their club captain, a top 10 finisher in the Brownlow the past 2 years and a player that they had already paid a heavily front-ended contract to. I don't think that they were going to give him cheaply and we had been targeting him for some time (it was no surprise, last-minute, desperate trade period lunge by us).
Given we secured Quaynor ( who we were going to use with our 2018 1st round pick) and Kelly (a second round pick) this season, both of whom we were committed to, and also via using the pick that we got back from Brisbane. We also didn't go into deficit. That's a great outcome.
You also state that we could have got him for less. How do you know that? Did someone from Brisbane's recruiting team tell you that?

Murray was for a swap of picks which meant we conceded the points equivalent to about pick 55 for a ready to go player in his low 20's age-wise who ended up playing about half the games he was available for in his first season. Seems pretty fair. There was a certain amount of luck in that though because had we finished lower down the ladder this season, the value of what we paid would have been higher. Pick 55 is a pretty speculative pick most years. We got value for that until he went and hit the coke mid week.

Rd 4 pick this year, had we wanted to, we could have used it. We had no need for it given our list was full. We shopped it around and took the best offer. We still got Atu for less than that and extracted some extra value for that pick 4 with Hawthorn, who were hardly players in the draft this year and had a desire to get in.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

No

Quaynor for mine is an exciting talent. He has very clean hands and his composure, vision and decision making is elite. He doesnt waste footy and that is a big theme for clubs at the moment with the 'pressure' in games at the moment. His kicking is good but his hands are elite. Clean and creative.

Will Kelly reads the play very well. You can see he has played forward. He reads the ball off the boot equally as well as his opponents. His speed, leap and ability to close a contest is very good. You can see the old man has had an influence. I think he will def be a back. Havent liked him forward.

Gown and Ross are players I like and I think that was about the right spot for them. Ross is a beast but we have Sier and RW for that so I wasnt keen to overload that style of player. Gown I like....a lot. His effort and leading patterns along with body use gives him a competitive advantage. I just worry does he have the speed. Very few elite talls come from this far back in the draft. He could go back as a defender.

So both sets good but Isaac is a class above the others.

You know what excites me about what you’ve posted?

Elite hands for Quaynor.
Gee IBLove reading that.
I always bang on about elite (A grade) being the difference maker between teams.
So players that are obviously elite or A grade are essentially the reason you win flags in my view.
If you have less elite types at least let them have some elite qualities.
Only helps.

Eg Sidebottom is A grade for me because he is an elite runner amongst other things.

Phillips not a star but a ten year player because he brings elite running to his game.

Sier looks a beast because he is bringing A grade hand work so far.

Great news.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Add Adams? (25)

Adams only 25, well there you go I thought he was past that.

Yes he’s in and in leadership group too.

 

[sr36]

I can accept the odd over paying to get a star but we are making a habit out of it with all different draft ranges, I think they are happy to just get the players in they want regardless of cost.

Treloar trade initially had paper work filled and signed off for a 1st and 2nd rounder, only 1 signature was missing Dave Matthews. Who had a deal with his brother at Richmond to send him there so blocked the trade. (So the rest of the GWS team were initially happy to deal).
He then called in AFL to be a 3rd party and Richmond upped there bid to 2x late teen first rounders.
Given Treloars age and ability I was ok with the trade, annoyed we had to pay through the teeth due to Matthews bros, but we got a 10 year gun so...

Then we did the Murray trade a *rookie listed* player this trade is one where I feel we should of made a stand and been fully prepared to walk if a better (fair for both teams) deal couldn't be reached, iirc we still had a day left to trade.

Beams firstly I'll state he is a gun and it is good to have him back but imo he is also 28 and likely has 3 good years left, with a history of soft tissue issues and now also grieving.
I feel a fair trade would of been a first (2018) and 2nd (2019) rounder given that, he is not the 24 year old we traded out. They have clearly felt IQ offset the price of beams but imo that isn't an efficient use of the 2 firsts which could of kept our 2019 with better negotiating.
I'm conflicted here given our midfield depth he wasn't a dire need plus what other options were available to us (Carlton trade pick 19 for their likely top 3 pick next year a 12 year player just for example) but on the other hand no doubting he is a gun and should make us better. So can see the reasoning to strike while the irons hot and try flag out next 2 years.

4th swapsies, this annoyed me for no other reason then it added to the last 3 trades, realistically a 5th rounder means sweet fa but again we over paid to do it cant just have a win/win trade.

Where do we draw the line in future trades do we keep just ponying up?

Anyway this is just my opinion everyone else is entitled to think those deals are bargains, at the end of the day I am overall happy to have them the price just leaves a sour taste.

I suspect that the club may have somewhat agreed with you concerning trading, hence Hine losing the reins. It's a new Guy in charge. Time to let go of the past trades that you view as errors. It's the equivalent of calling our kicking from defence poor and using Frost, Brown and Marley to justify a claim of us being poor users from defence.

 

[35Daicos]

So can we actually select Marlion Pickett through this pre season SPP anyway? Thought you could only add players who have previously been on an AFL list. Pretty sure he hasn't been on one.

He could maybe be added via the mid season rookie draft next season if we still have the Murray list spot open at that stage.

Only via the mid-season draft I'd have thought.

The rules on this still don't seem clear, but Richmond are likely to have Sydney Stack training with them, with a view to picking him up under the new rookie rules. He's never been on an AFL list (like Pickett) but if he qualifies then we should be able to take Pickett, if we want him. That's if Murray gets banned and he can be replaced on our Rookie List by another player.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-11-26/tigers-seek-draft-lifeline-for-overlooked-wa-star

RICHMOND is hoping to offer talented WA teenager Sydney Stack an AFL lifeline, with the Tigers inviting him to train at Punt Road.

The Tigers submitted a request to the AFL over the weekend and is waiting for League approval.

If given the green light, Stack will arrive at Tigerland on December 1, and can train with Richmond during the pre-season supplemental selection period until March 15.

He could then join Richmond's list under the new rookie rules.