List Mgmt. 2020 Draft and Trade Hypotheticals

[caesar88]

Lol you pick and choose your stats.

When it's a concrete stat like 'goals kicked' I don't have to pick or choose anything.

 

[JohnZ]

Hey guys. Good luck for tmw. Delete if I'm not allowed to post here.

I read that you guys were looking for points instead of high picks. Do you think your club would consider trading your 4+23 for our 11+16+33? Would give you another 100 points or so by my calculations.

 

[Kapers]

Hey guys. Good luck for tmw. Delete if I'm not allowed to post here.

I read that you guys were looking for points instead of high picks. Do you think your club would consider trading your 4+23 for our 11+16+33? Would give you another 100 points or so by my calculations.

IMO, we would only do that if we were looking to pick up some players via trading, otherwise we would probably want to keep our first pick.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Hey guys. Good luck for tmw. Delete if I'm not allowed to post here.

I read that you guys were looking for points instead of high picks. Do you think your club would consider trading your 4+23 for our 11+16+33? Would give you another 100 points or so by my calculations.

No. To have a chance to use pick 4 is invaluable. Yes we need the points to cover Campbell and Gulden thereafter but see what position we are in after trades in terms of picks. I’d try and do the three....a Phillips/ McDonald followed by Campbell and Gulden. If pattern goes true to form pre known academy picks tend to slide a little so who knows where Campbell and Gulden go on the night

 

[JohnZ]

IMO, we would only do that if we were looking to pick up some players via trading, otherwise we would probably want to keep our first pick.

My belief was that you had some high value academy players so didn't care about the specific picks, just total points value. If I'm wrong there, then obviously you'd take Pick 4 over 11+16

 

[Kapers]

My belief was that you had some high value academy players so didn't care about the specific picks, just total points value. If I'm wrong there, then obviously you'd take Pick 4 over 11+16

You are right, but it looks like they go later than our first, so at least on the board we are hoping to get a top 5 player + our academy kids. We will probably have to do some future pick shenanigans.

 

[JohnZ]

No. To have a chance to use pick 4 is invaluable. Yes we need the points to cover Campbell and Gulden thereafter but see what position we are in after trades in terms of picks. I’d try and do the three....a Phillips/ McDonald followed by Campbell and Gulden. If pattern goes true to form pre known academy picks tend to slide a little so who knows where Campbell and Gulden go in the night

You are right, but it looks like they go later than our first, so at least on the board we are hoping to get a top 5 player + our academy kids. We will probably have to do some future pick shenanigans.

That's fair then. If you don't expect to need to use your Pick 4 to get one of them, then no point trading it out.

 

[replicant]

My belief was that you had some high value academy players so didn't care about the specific picks, just total points value. If I'm wrong there, then obviously you'd take Pick 4 over 11+16

It could happen in live trading i suppose? If a bid came in for Campbell at 3, it would make sense for us to trade 4 for more points, and pay with those. But i would expect we are hoping a bid won't come for Campbell before 4, giving us a top 5 pick, Campbell and Gulden.

 

[TheMase]

My belief was that you had some high value academy players so didn't care about the specific picks, just total points value. If I'm wrong there, then obviously you'd take Pick 4 over 11+16

If a trade did eventuate then it would be live in the draft if somebody bid on Campbell before our pick 4.

Other than another trade target that would require us splitting pick 4 I don’t see why we would devalue our draft hand when we can just take some points deficit (aside from any other side trades we might make to boost points).

 

[JohnZ]

It could happen in live trading i suppose? If a bid came in for Campbell at 3, it would make sense for us to trade 4 for more points, and pay with those. But i would expect we are hoping a bid won't come for Campbell before 4, giving us a top 5 pick, Campbell and Gulden.

If a trade did eventuate then it would be live in the draft if somebody bid on Campbell before our pick 4.

Other than another trade target that would require us splitting pick 4 I don’t see why we would devalue our draft hand when we can just take some points deficit (aside from any other side trades we might make to boost points).

Sounds ideal. From what I had read, Campbell was a top 3 pick, but with everything going on this year no one really knows ey.

Wonder if the cats would bid to force the trade. The live pick trading and F/S + Academy points for picks has certainly made draft night more interesting than before.

 

[TheMase]

Sounds ideal. From what I had read, Campbell was a top 3 pick, but with everything going on this year no one really knows ey.

Wonder if the cats would bid to force the trade. The live pick trading and F/S + Academy points for picks has certainly made draft night more interesting than before.

Cats would need a pick in front of Sydney at 4 to force a trade.

 

[JohnZ]

Cats would need a pick in front of Sydney at 4 to force a trade.

True. Which would also negate the need to trade for pick 4. Forget I said that.

 

[HighReeve]

we never offer two first rounders for anyone

Its only been about five years of being able to trade future picks and no one good has come to us in that time, doesnt mean we havent offered

In 09 we offered picks 6 and 14 for pick 3
in the 01 super draft we traded two first rounders for Barry Hall

 

[mikey_san]

My belief was that you had some high value academy players so didn't care about the specific picks, just total points value. If I'm wrong there, then obviously you'd take Pick 4 over 11+16

Your offer (as it were) is made a poor one for us if our first academy guy (Campbell) is selected at say pick 8 (where he is projected to be in the running) It would then blow the second pick out a long way - and we'd need to use that on our second academy guy (Gulden).
So instead pick 4 and our two academy guys we end up with our two academy guys and a 3rd rounder.
So that's never going to make sense.

I reckon we look to bring in a 3rd round pick somehow to make up the points we need.

 

[wilsonmatic]

There is no other way to interpret what you said. You didn't want us to trade him in because he has a passion for social justice issues. Was Goodes less of a footballer because he was the same? It's entirely irrelevant.

I love Goodsey, no issues there. Keep trying.

 

[Parky79]

I suspect JD staying put. McKernan delisted

 

[BloodySwan]

I reckon we look to bring in a 3rd round pick somehow to make up the points we need

Ronke for a 3rd round pick. Reckon there'd be a few teams interested

 

[Olian]

I suspect JD staying put. McKernan delisted

McKernan is 30. They moved on Mitch Brown who was younger last year.

 

[Dubai Quacker]

If ever there was a year we needed to pull a Sam Murray trade out of the hat .....

 

[Tesla Tenet]

Our current draft position and we have

4 - 2034
23 - 815
54 - 220
56 - 197
= 3266 points

Our draft options: What could happen if we match early bids for Campbell and likely that JUH is the only player matched before Campbell and that well happen. Remaining points creates a new pick for matching club, but the picks will shift all night so points will also fluctuate, so I am pretending it won't.

Pick 1
I cant see it but the Crows select Campbell
2400 points
Pick 4 totally spent
Pick 23 partially spent (815-366= 449)
Now we have pick 39
New total points = 866

Pick 2
2014 points
Pick 4 partially spent (2034-2014= 30)
Now we have pick 71
New total points = 1262

Pick 3
1787 points
Pick 4 partially spent (2034-1787 = 247)
Now we have pick 52
New total points = 1479

Pick 4
New whipping boy or we select Campbell or we move down the order
Woohoo[emoji846]

Pick 5 (if Campbell not picked yet)
1502 points
Picks 23, 52, 54, 56 all spent
Deficit of 22 points
But if JUH picked and matched previously its our pick so see Pick 4. Woohoo [emoji846]

Pick 6 (When the Hawks tank its Dodos pick)
Cameron picked[emoji12] and matched
1401 points
Picks 23, 52, 54, 56 partially spent
(1479-1401=78)
New pick 67.

If we want player x at pick 4, Campbell and Gulden we HAVE to trade for points, or go into deficit.

or we take/ match Campbell at our first pick and Gulden on our second pick and maybe bundle last two picks to a mid/late 40s pick.
No real issue after pick 17 for Gulden leaving with the 2 x 50s picks.

In the weirdest year so far anything could happen.





Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[McRobie]

ScoMo is PM. What can I say...people are eejits.

Try living under the Dictator Dan regime.

 

[Bandicoot]

rding

I dont disagree with the intent of your argument. However, with two highly rated academy players and a potential pick before them this is not the year to colour outside the lines. take the best available, pick up two highly rated prospects and next year your arguments has legs. All due respect to you.

As I've stated in all my earlier comments, grab 3 very talented kids this year, 2 of which will come from our academy. If it means we go into deficit next year, so be it. It will mean our first round draft pick next year may be 5-6 places lower than what it would otherwise be. We will still have a first rounder though.
Our picks in 2021 should be used predominantly for trades and not draft picks.
Like you, I agree with #caesar88 in his thinking to a degree but I just think he's a year too early with going heavy in trades.

 

[caesar88]

rding

As I've stated in all my earlier comments, grab 3 very talented kids this year, 2 of which will come from our academy. If it means we go into deficit next year, so be it. It will mean our first round draft pick next year may be 5-6 places lower than what it would otherwise be. We will still have a first rounder though.
Our picks in 2021 should be used predominantly for trades and not draft picks.
Like you, I agree with #caesar88 in his thinking to a degree but I just think he's a year too early with going heavy in trades.

FWIW your preferred outcome is also my preferred outcome. It's highly unlikely anyone worth a pick 4 presents as a trade target, and I wouldn't be in favour of splitting pick 4 unless we were guaranteed to be trading in two quality players with those picks. So I too want us to take pick 4 to the draft and try to get an elite junior before a Campbell bid comes.

However I guess where we differ is that I am less resolute in that plan than you, in that if the right players to trade in entered the frame, I would be willing to abandon the go-to-the-draft thing all together. I really am convinced that between Heeney, Mills, Papley, Dawson, Hewett (if he stays), Florent, Hayward, McCartin, Blakey, Rowbottom, McInerney, Wicks, Stephens and, hopefully, Campbell, Gulden, Warner and Gould, there's enough of a nucleus of a good future team for us to start adding the right pieces to it.

 

[Bandicoot]

ScoMo is PM. What can I say...people are eejits.

And Victorians elected dictator Dan. Got what they deserved.

 

[Dubai Quacker]

FWIW your preferred outcome is also my preferred outcome. It's highly unlikely anyone worth a pick 4 presents as a trade target, and I wouldn't be in favour of splitting pick 4 unless we were guaranteed to be trading in two quality players with those picks. So I too want us to take pick 4 to the draft and try to get an elite junior before a Campbell bid comes.

However I guess where we differ is that I am less resolute in that plan than you, in that if the right players to trade in entered the frame, I would be willing to abandon the go-to-the-draft thing all together. I really am convinced that between Heeney, Mills, Papley, Dawson, Hewett (if he stays), Florent, Hayward, McCartin, Blakey, Rowbottom, McInerney, Wicks, Stephens and, hopefully, Campbell, Gulden, Warner and Gould, there's enough of a nucleus of a good future team for us to start adding the right pieces to it.

Given that Wicks seemingly rates behind Bell, I’m not too sure he’s part of the future team.