List Mgmt. 2021 Trade & List Management Thread II - IN: CCJ

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

ferball

Premium Platinum
Jul 24, 2015
27,813
53,016
AFL Club
North Melbourne
The problem with this is that it requires a fair bit of revisionist thinking and captain hindsight type stuff.

The 2018 draft was probably the most hyped draft since 2001. Clubs were loathe to give up their early selections due to the talent available and any club that traded up had to give up a lot. For example, Port traded 11, 23, 30 and 49 for a 5 pick upgrade from 11 to 6 and a future third. Port then had to give up 36, a future third and take on Sam Mayes to move up a single spot in the draft from 6 to 5.

To get ahead of a Thomas bid, and it's fair to point out here that we didn't know where it was going to come, we would have had to get into at least the top 6 to be sure and that either would have cost the rest of our draft capital that we had available to match the Thomas bid or most likely a future first.

Now, it's easy to criticise Joyces in hindsight and say he should have done all those things, but trading always requires two willing parties, and clubs just didn't want to give up those early picks that year. And in hindsight, you can say we should have traded a future first but those what if games are a bit silly (even if I sometimes think about them as well). Who's to say that we trade that future first, and then the next year we can't do the deal with Melbourne and ultimately we don't end up with Tom Powell? There's too many permutations.
Spot on.

Who is giving us a top six pick when Walsh, Lukosius, Rankine, the Kings, Rozee and Smith were all there to be taken? As it is we came out with Scott and Taylor and may get great service out of Hall again this coming season. Who knows we might even see a repeat of 2019 from Polec. If we get a good year out of those four then 2018 looks great. As it is it still looks good with Taylor, Scott and Hall's form after getting his breathing fixed.

And of course TT.
 

The Filth Wizard

These Meats Are Spoiled
Jul 26, 2007
83,581
123,459
The Throne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
Arsenal, Gold City Royals
We didn't trade for Polec to absorb the first rounder. We traded for Polec because we bought him to come in with Gaff and then Gaff changed his mind. Perhaps we could have traded better but we were committed to Polec long before we had to trade for him and as much as it seems wrong now, he was worth a late first rounder based on his last season at Port.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Psicosis

Norm Smith Medallist
May 7, 2012
7,890
25,329
Bird Rock
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Spot on.

Who is giving us a top six pick when Walsh, Lukosius, Rankine, the Kings, Rozee and Smith were all there to be taken? As it is we came out with Scott and Taylor and may get great service out of Hall again this coming season. Who knows we might even see a repeat of 2019 from Polec. If we get a good year out of those four then 2018 looks great. As it is it still looks good with Taylor, Scott and Hall's form after getting his breathing fixed.

And of course TT.
Very simple, we should have traded the Polec pick for future pick/s. 2018 was a power house draft and multiple clubs would have taken that pick.

Revisionist or not, I think we need to be able to wear, learn from & own poor list management decisions. Trading that 2018 first rounder for Polec, is one of those.
 

ferball

Premium Platinum
Jul 24, 2015
27,813
53,016
AFL Club
North Melbourne
This time it just seemed a bit cobbled together, with data and comparisons that didn't suit the analysis, or was too scant on explaining the methodology.
Maybe a tight deadline hurt them.

Edit: I also must admit to a dislike of the extent these types of articles go to justify calls on 'winners' and 'losers' so early.
And I should have said trade period, nobody is perfect I guess.
Its a sh*t trade period and they have to fill hours of time talking about what amount to fu** all really.

It wouldn't be easy to make it sound not totally sh*t, the fact its vaguely interesting sometimes (tho I only listen to bits about our players posted here so maybe that's why) is actually a credit to them.
 

Lomas

Premium Platinum
Nov 4, 2020
2,925
7,086
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Its a sh*t trade period and they have to fill hours of time talking about what amount to fu** all really.

It wouldn't be easy to make it sound not totally sh*t, the fact its vaguely interesting sometimes (tho I only listen to bits about our players posted here so maybe that's why) is actually a credit to them.
They were not talking though, they cobbled some sh*t stats together and wrote who won and who lost. Wasted their time and ours.
 

ferball

Premium Platinum
Jul 24, 2015
27,813
53,016
AFL Club
North Melbourne
So the Dog's pick 23 and Pies pick 27 are on the trade table. Any chance we can move our 40's pick into that range?


42+ 47 = 711 points

Pick 23 = 815
Pick 27 = 703
I've been saying that all week... we're in the box seat for it. We might need to offer them something from next year cos they don't have to do it. it doesn't change anything for them. It would probably be worth it to give up our third next year and go all in on finishing the rebuild.

But 42 will become 40 or 41 (40 if Richmond can motivate the Dogs to trade 23.) I think they are in the best position to make that trade and it would really bolster their stocks. If they can do 38 and 40 for 23. Might be an 80 point increase but you'd have to check, I jave a feeling when I checked I thought they had 35. They'd have 7, 15, 23, 26 and 28. This year in a draft that's sposed to be even till 30ish. If they nail this they rebuild quickly. If they can't get the dogs pick 23 they will probably chase 27, so it comes down to what they offer ... it might be our 2nd next year. (Tho I doubt it.) If the points match close enough the Pies will want the best deal they can.

If Richmond do trade 38 and 40 for one in the 20s and we keep those later picks (42 & 47) they end up as 40 and 41. The pies turn 2 picks under 42 and three picks before 47 into one pick - Daicos if he goes early enough (top 4?). The Dogs have one pick under 42 and four under 47 and they all disappear ... well turn into Darcy, if a bid comes early enough, around 6th or 7th pick I think.

Our 42 moves up one spot if the pies match an early bid and two (to pick 40) if Richmond trade into the 20s. Our pick 47 moves up two picks if the Pies match early, and three if the Dogs do. Five spots for those two and another one if Richmond trade up into the 20s.

That's barring any other shenanigans that may move us up more. Nothing will move us back (apart from late Bids on the two F/S prospects.)

We might even prefer to gamble on the lack of exposure and try to get two players in the early 40s in the hope at least one is further up our target list and not even bother chasing 27.

I genuinely think they were aware of all this and aware of the value of those picks not only in terms of ending up lower as the F/S bids get matched but also of the points value and the chance to trade with Collingwood when they did the CCJ deal. (The Eagles also have 29 tho i dunno why they'd trade it for points. Carlton have 25 but ... well Voss is coach so anything's possible I guess.) Its the sort of thing Merlin007 was referring to when he talked about the way Melbourne trade so well for points.
 

Merlin007

Club Legend
Jun 7, 2019
2,566
7,797
AFL Club
North Melbourne
I've been saying that all week... we're in the box seat for it. We might need to offer them something from next year cos they don't have to do it. it doesn't change anything for them. It would probably be worth it to give up our third next year and go all in on finishing the rebuild.

But 42 will become 40 or 41 (40 if Richmond can motivate the Dogs to trade 23.) I think they are in the best position to make that trade and it would really bolster their stocks. If they can do 38 and 40 for 23. Might be an 80 point increase but you'd have to check, I jave a feeling when I checked I thought they had 35. They'd have 7, 15, 23, 26 and 28. This year in a draft that's sposed to be even till 30ish. If they nail this they rebuild quickly. If they can't get the dogs pick 23 they will probably chase 27, so it comes down to what they offer ... it might be our 2nd next year. (Tho I doubt it.) If the points match close enough the Pies will want the best deal they can.

If Richmond do trade 38 and 40 for one in the 20s and we keep those later picks (42 & 47) they end up as 40 and 41. The pies turn 2 picks under 42 and three picks before 47 into one pick - Daicos if he goes early enough (top 4?). The Dogs have one pick under 42 and four under 47 and they all disappear ... well turn into Darcy, if a bid comes early enough, around 6th or 7th pick I think.

Our 42 moves up one spot if the pies match an early bid and two (to pick 40) if Richmond trade into the 20s. Our pick 47 moves up two picks if the Pies match early, and three if the Dogs do. Five spots for those two and another one if Richmond trade up into the 20s.

That's barring any other shenanigans that may move us up more. Nothing will move us back (apart from late Bids on the two F/S prospects.)

We might even prefer to gamble on the lack of exposure and try to get two players in the early 40s in the hope at least one is further up our target list and not even bother chasing 27.

I genuinely think they were aware of all this and aware of the value of those picks not only in terms of ending up lower as the F/S bids get matched but also of the points value and the chance to trade with Collingwood when they did the CCJ deal. (The Eagles also have 29 tho i dunno why they'd trade it for points. Carlton have 25 but ... well Voss is coach so anything's possible I guess.) Its the sort of thing Merlin007 was referring to when he talked about the way Melbourne trade so well for points.
the general proposition about trading up is the option we need to pursue, but with one correction to detail, in that I don't understand the reference to our second next year, which went with the CCJ trade (apologies if I've misunderstood the argument). Even if 42 and 47 (and 72 is also worth a few points) can't be turned into anything higher up, there's still good prospects at those picks, so it's still a strong overall position given we will get the outstanding talent in the draft at #1
 

hellas_johnny

Club Legend
May 26, 2008
2,151
1,931
Melbourne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
South Melbourne Hellas
he
the general proposition about trading up is the option we need to pursue, but with one correction to detail, in that I don't understand the reference to our second next year, which went with the CCJ trade (apologies if I've misunderstood the argument). Even if 42 and 47 (and 72 is also worth a few points) can't be turned into anything higher up, there's still good prospects at those picks, so it's still a strong overall position given we will get the outstanding talent in the draft at #1
hes saying richmond might need to trade the 2nd next year to dogs to get the deal through
 

Nutjob

Club Legend
Oct 23, 2014
1,893
3,631
AFL Club
North Melbourne
The problem with this is that it requires a fair bit of revisionist thinking and captain hindsight type stuff.

The 2018 draft was probably the most hyped draft since 2001. Clubs were loathe to give up their early selections due to the talent available and any club that traded up had to give up a lot. For example, Port traded 11, 23, 30 and 49 for a 5 pick upgrade from 11 to 6 and a future third. Port then had to give up 36, a future third and take on Sam Mayes to move up a single spot in the draft from 6 to 5.

To get ahead of a Thomas bid, and it's fair to point out here that we didn't know where it was going to come, we would have had to get into at least the top 6 to be sure and that either would have cost the rest of our draft capital that we had available to match the Thomas bid or most likely a future first.

Now, it's easy to criticise Joyces in hindsight and say he should have done all those things, but trading always requires two willing parties, and clubs just didn't want to give up those early picks that year. And in hindsight, you can say we should have traded a future first but those what if games are a bit silly (even if I sometimes think about them as well). Who's to say that we trade that future first, and then the next year we can't do the deal with Melbourne and ultimately we don't end up with Tom Powell? There's too many permutations.
Completely agree it was a difficult task to move up in the 2018 draft. But it would have been a fairly simple task to trade it for a future first with some icing on top. Unfortunately at the time the club thought our list was better than it really was.

I don’t blame Joyce necessarily for doing the Polec deal. He didn’t solely choose the direction the club was taking at the time. I think people need to take into account that when Joyce was in charge of our list, he had a certain direction he had to adhere too.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad