List Mgmt. 2020 Draft Thread

[Prochard123]

Had a friend mention Pies are sounding out Crows to get up the order and receive more points.

Something like:

Pies: 16 Future 1st 2021
Crows: 9, 23, 24.

Look honestly that's not horrendous when you consider McInnes bid being dodged - I still think he will attract a bid higher than we expect.

Still think 14 + 16 + future 1st for

7 and 8 is better, since this also ensures Essendon won't be bidding on McInnes, but the above is acceptable too.

 

[gopies123]

I like this golden magpie, I think there is some really good value in the 15-30 range this year.
I would also look at trading future first and future third to melbourne for 18,19. Rumour has it they are looking to move them for a high pick next year, who knows.
If this could eventuate we would have 14,18,19,22,23,40.
With 14 I would take cook, hits the scoreboard, has class and speed and score involvements. bit of Stevie J about him.
18,19,22,23 Mcinnes, Carroll or powell, then be brave enough to take Baldwin and Callow here as well.
This would leave pick 40 for a small forward.
I don't think we should burn up 2 first rounders trying to move up the board. Im not as sold on the two stick insects as others, Im sure they will probably go
on to be very good players but neither are the strong bodied forwards we need. Cox could get there but will take some time.
Would much rather a Mcinnes,cook,Carroll,baldwin, callow, plus pick 40 type draft then a reid/cox, mcinnes, callow draft.
Clearly there would be points repercussions with diacos, I would look to trade out hosking elliot, thomas, cal brown, possibly sier, maybe even sidebottom to accumulate some points, we could still fall short but would be happy to take a slight deficit into the year after.
Im sure this will send some in here haywire ( the usual suspects), its just a thought/ opinion.

Ford would be in the mix too. I also like the look of a lot of the later picks. Reckon there will be a few Swannies, Hirds or even recently Neales in this draft!


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[TakingThePies]

Look honestly that's not horrendous when you consider McInnes bid being dodged - I still think he will attract a bid higher than we expect.

Still think 14 + 16 + future 1st for

7 and 8 is better, since this also ensures Essendon won't be bidding on McInnes, but the above is acceptable too.

But Essendon need those picks now. They need to start building youth, specially with Merrett looking gone next year.

 

[loki04]

If combine results were the be all and end all, [PLAYERCARD]Joel Wilkinson[/PLAYERCARD] would be one of the best players of all time.

Never said they were "be all and end all" but they can make a change to where a player falls.

 

[TradeDraft]

 

[TradeDraft]

 

[Jen2310]

Very smart. Getting on the front foot of this.

 

[GoldenMagpie16]

Might be the first time that page hasn't came out with such bullshit

 

[sr36]

Had a friend mention Pies are sounding out Crows to get up the order and receive more points.

Something like:

Pies: 16 Future 1st 2021
Crows: 9, 23, 24.

One of the better outcomes which actually sounds plausible. You'd think that we'd wait for the draft though, to see if anyone we really rated was available and to make sure that pick 9 isn't just wasted on Reef.

 

[Pie 4 Life]

I'll preface this by saying I realise this is unrealistic.

If North would be willing to part with pick 2 for our three 1st rounders, and assuming McDonald makes it past Adelaide, would you consider it?

I feel like it is a massive gamble but if we could get McDonald, Reef and Daicos we get some really high end talent.

If we're shrewd with our other business, for example I like the idea of Ballenden as a DFA and there seems good small forwards late in the draft, we could address a lot of areas of need.

Key position with McDonald/Ballenden, midfield Reef/Daicos and a late draft small forward.

If we did something like that I’d want a pick back. I would rather transform the picks into a top 10 pick and another mid-range pick, particularly if we say match Reef with 16. I feel considering what we've given up (in terms of volume of players and picks out) to effectively hinge everything on that early pick would put a lot of pressure on the kid. I think with this year being even, at least in the top end, if we can get a couple of top picks, even if they are in that 5-15 odd bracket, that is just as, if not more valuable than a top two pick. Especially given there is every chance Adelaide end up taking McDonald.

We could fix our KPD issues with a later top 10 pick, and always trade in a pick for one of our R2s next year and grab a Callow if we need to, which I think would be better value. McDonald is great, but I wouldn't sell the farm for him. Three top 16 picks are better than one top two pick IMO anyway.

 

[TakingThePies]

One of the better outcomes which actually sounds plausible. You'd think that we'd wait for the draft though, to see if anyone we really rated was available and to make sure that pick 9 isn't just wasted on Reef.

Yeah defiantly has a draft night trade about it. No I think the point is for them to use Pick 9 before Reef gets a bid which they can used 23/24 on him.

 

[Prochard123]

Copy and pasting what I wrote on GC's board:

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
14 + 16 + future 1st for 5 + 27?

• It looks likely you guys don't rate the players potentially available at pick 5 (likely Will Phillips), which is why you preferred an established player instead, or to move further up the draft for a KPP (Mcdonald, Thilthorpe, DGB)
• Your midfield is stacked - there really isn't a need to bring in another midfielder at the expense of improving a weaker area, unless you want to be GWS 2.0
• If you only plan to take 1 pick in this year's draft, both 14 and 16 are the sweet spots of this year's draft, as that 6-20 range is super even this year with plenty of potential sliders coming through. You could keep 1 and trade 1.
• Or, Essendon/Adelaide could be keen on splitting 8/9 for 14 & 16 - this can get you another developing tall like Cox/Reid or an intercepting 3rd tall in Chapman
• A strategy that did work for GWS was to smoothen out the age demographic, by evening out the 1st round talents in each year. Our future 1st after losing Stephenson, Treloar, Phillips could easily be top 10, if not top 5 in a super draft. Having 2 future 1sts on top of bringing in 14 & 16 this year would be huge, allowing you to be highly flexible with your list management plans both this year and the next
• You don't even need pick 27

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

With all things considered, our current draft hand is terrible when you're expecting a bid to come for McInnes around the 10-15 range. This just makes our Treloar/Stephenson trade even worse, if it was even possible...

However, there are still ways to salvage this.

Usually, 3x 1sts for 5 + 27 is horrible. However, this allows us to use 27 on McInnes instead of our pick 14 being eaten up by an earlier bid. Pick 5 will also give us access to one of the big 5 - likely to be Will Phillips, who actually plays quite similar to Treloar, as a highly productive inside mid with burst away speed, except he is also competent defensively.

 

[SchuPie]

Copy and pasting what I wrote on GC's board:

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
14 + 16 + future 1st for 5 + 27?

• It looks likely you guys don't rate the players potentially available at pick 5 (likely Will Phillips), which is why you preferred an established player instead, or to move further up the draft for a KPP (Mcdonald, Thilthorpe, DGB)
• Your midfield is stacked - there really isn't a need to bring in another midfielder at the expense of improving a weaker area, unless you want to be GWS 2.0
• If you only plan to take 1 pick in this year's draft, both 14 and 16 are the sweet spots of this year's draft, as that 6-20 range is super even this year with plenty of potential sliders coming through. You could keep 1 and trade 1.
• Or, Essendon/Adelaide could be keen on splitting 8/9 for 14 & 16 - this can get you another developing tall like Cox/Reid or an intercepting 3rd tall in Chapman
• A strategy that did work for GWS was to smoothen out the age demographic, by evening out the 1st round talents in each year. Our future 1st after losing Stephenson, Treloar, Phillips could easily be top 10, if not top 5 in a super draft. Having 2 future 1sts on top of bringing in 14 & 16 this year would be huge, allowing you to be highly flexible with your list management plans both this year and the next
• You don't even need pick 27

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

With all things considered, our current draft hand is terrible when you're expecting a bid to come for McInnes around the 10-15 range. This just makes our Treloar/Stephenson trade even worse, if it was even possible...

However, there are still ways to salvage this.

Usually, 3x 1sts for 5 + 27 is horrible. However, this allows us to use 27 on McInnes instead of our pick 14 being eaten up by an earlier bid. Pick 5 will also give us access to one of the big 5 - likely to be Will Phillips, who actually plays quite similar to Treloar, as a highly productive inside mid with burst away speed, except he is also competent defensively.

You’re right, it is horrible

I wouldn’t give up that much draft capital unless it was for the opportunity to draft a 10 yr KFP (McDonald or similar)

would rather trade our future first in for a straight swap of first rounders w someone and hope the bid for Reef comes late

Then move up on the night to grab other speculative KPPs or sliders

 

[TradeDraft]

 

[Prochard123]

You’re right, it is horrible

I wouldn’t give up that much draft capital unless it was for the opportunity to draft a 10 yr KFP (McDonald or similar)

would rather trade our future first in for a straight swap of first rounders w someone and hope the bid for Reef comes late

Then move up on the night to grab other speculative KPPs or sliders

Yes it is 100% not worth it to give up that much draft capital for a SINGLE KPF.

However, the comparison should be closer to - 2x mid-late 1sts vs top 5 pick? Since another significant part of the reasoning of this trade is to ensure we don't lose pick 14 for McInnes.

Without this factor, no way would we consider it. But if it allows us to use pick 27 on McInnes instead of 14, maybe that gets it over the line.

 

[SchuPie]

Yes it is 100% not worth it to give up that much draft capital for a SINGLE KPF.

However, the comparison should be closer to - 2x mid-late 1sts vs top 5 pick? Since another significant part of the reasoning of this trade is to ensure we don't lose pick 14 for McInnes.

Without this factor, no way would we consider it. But if it allows us to use pick 27 on McInnes instead of 14, maybe that gets it over the line.

If not for McDonald, I’d still rather use 2021 1st to get a pick somewhere 10-15 and then just match Reef bid if it came earlier than expected and use the other 2 first rounders

Will be an interesting (+ nervous) night

 

[cityslick1]

This is Josh not Nick

Apologies all. Did a search on YouTube for Nick Daicos highlights, and this came up... so ran with it without hearing the audio. Lesson learned

 

[TradeDraft]

 

[Jen2310]

Not sure if North will go with 2 talls with their top 2 picks. They need more talent in the middle. If they go with Mcdonald, not sure they'd go with Cox. But then.. That would sure up both ends of the ground, if they use Cox as a defender

 

[partypie]

Might be the first time that page hasn't came out with such bullshit

Jackson Callow taken at pick 15 (18) is firmly in bullshit territory.

 

[TakingThePies]

Not sure if North will go with 2 talls with their top 2 picks. They need more talent in the middle. If they go with Mcdonald, not sure they'd go with Cox. But then.. That would sure up both ends of the ground, if they use Cox as a defender

[PLAYERCARD]Robbie Tarrant[/PLAYERCARD] is like 31... The need talls specially if Cox can play defence.

 

[unplugged]

Not sure if North will go with 2 talls with their top 2 picks. They need more talent in the middle. If they go with Mcdonald, not sure they'd go with Cox. But then.. That would sure up both ends of the ground, if they use Cox as a defender

Didn't you hear? Stephenson is gonna play inside mid

 

[Jen2310]

[PLAYERCARD]Robbie Tarrant[/PLAYERCARD] is like 31... The need talls specially if Cox can play defence.

yeah, I was thinking that. I wasn't sure if they had anyone else.

 

[Jen2310]

Didn't you hear? Stephenson is gonna play inside mid

He's jump out of the way lol Imagine him trying to get a clearance..

 

[partypie]

Yes it is 100% not worth it to give up that much draft capital for a SINGLE KPF.

However, the comparison should be closer to - 2x mid-late 1sts vs top 5 pick? Since another significant part of the reasoning of this trade is to ensure we don't lose pick 14 for McInnes.

Without this factor, no way would we consider it. But if it allows us to use pick 27 on McInnes instead of 14, maybe that gets it over the line.

So much fear rolling through the board over an early bid on Reef.

I strongly feel that our absolute aim should be using three first round picks in 2020 (assuming that we trade out our 2021 first for another 2020 first) and if those picks end up being live picks before a bid comes in for Reef then that's even better for us (three 2020 first rounders + Reef + Daicos in 2021 is a very strong outcome for us across the two drafts), if not then it's still two 2020 first round picks + Reef + Daicos in 2021 which is still a good outcome.

In terms of numbers if a bid comes in at pick 11 or later and we rate him then we match it with pick 14 (17). If it comes in before that and we don't rate him then we just pass and grab three other first round talents. We need quality AND quantity from these next two drafts and the bar should be set at a minimum of 4 first round talents across the two drafts imo.