Changes V GC - Four ins: Howe, Moore, Wells and....Blairy! Greenwood, Cox, Broomy and Smith out

[doppleganger]

You keep saying it as if the odds are low...but are somehow increased the more that top rated players are taken out of the equation.

It stands to reason that if Hine can pick before 16 other recruiters he should have a very high chance at picking one of the best talents in the draft. True or not?

Not enough to actively want my team to lose.

 

[loki04]

Not enough to actively want my team to lose.

Is it true or not?

 

[jackcass]

It is worth it to get talent that is greater then *good*. We never got below top 5 pick which was traded in. We have yet to truly bottom to get hold of that Petracca or Bont or Kelly etc..

We need a match winner and a KPF at that (but hey I'd also settle for an match winner like Rayner), you wont get that with picks outside the 5.

We have enough solid citizen type players who will hopefully get to the level of a sidebottom but not to the level of a Hodge or Buckley Or Judd or Martin or Franklin or N.Reiwoldt etcetc.


The tier of player is what makes it worth it.

We in *this* season are not at that stage where we can afford to not care which pick comes our way, we are a draft away from that *rebound* stage at least.

I've been reading the trading thread and apparently we can get all 3 for next year for Blair, Broomhead and Oxley.

 

[doppleganger]

Is it true or not?

Is what true.

That pick 2 is before pick 6...no sh1t.

It is not true that pick 2 will always produce a better player than pick 6?

The incentive to lose was removed when the AFL removed the priority pick. It made sense back in 99 and 05, as by not winning more than 5 games netted us a bonus top5 pick.

Barracking for the opposition to hope we lose and finish 17th instead of 13th, just to go from pick 6 to Pick 2 doesn't guarantee any better long term outcome.

 

[doodles98]

Is what true.

That pick 2 is before pick 6...no sh1t.

It is not true that pick 2 will always produce a better player than pick 6?

The incentive to lose was removed when the AFL removed the priority pick. It made sense back in 99 and 05, as by not winning more than 5 games netted us a bonus top5 pick.

Barracking for the opposition to hope we lose and finish 17th instead of 13th, just to go from pick 6 to Pick 2 doesn't guarantee any better long term outcome.

I'm with you on not wanting to see our team lose. I'm with you on not rating a pick 2 that much above a pick 4 or 5 that I actively want us to lose to get it. But unlike you I want to see our club taking the shortest possible route to getting back into some kind of contention. From where we are now that means playing guys to get games into them and to see what they've got and also playing guys to enhance trade outcomes.. This will have more of an impact on our future than whether or not our pick is 3 or 5. So I'd like to see us NOT playing guys like Blair and rushing back Wells and keeping playing an injured Treloar in order to try to save some face for the rest of the year.

 

[Toecrusher]

The only kid in my mind that is nearly ready is Kirby, and his time is soon.
The kids as you call them have been played, except for Kirby, daicos and mcclarty. And we know what we are getting.
I am for one a believer of playing your best team and making the others earn their spot. Gifting games does not do much at this time of year or the team.
There is no priority pick to get so tanking is not with it.
If we are 17th with one game to go then do it, but till then l believe in there is nothing like winning. Sends the right message to the playing group

Nothing wrong with your point of view, and I agree Kirby should get the next spot, but a few games to the others will show them what the big league is like and give them a huge incentive to work for a permanent spot next year. As long as we're not risking an immature body, or potentially shattering a kids confidence, what harm can come from it.

It could be argued most of Coxy's games have been gifted, I guess it comes comes down to if it is gifting, or just trying something different to get an edge. Either way, he hasn't blown too much wind up anyones skirt yet.

 

[loki04]

Is what true.

That pick 2 is before pick 6...no sh1t.

It is not true that pick 2 will always produce a better player than pick 6?

The incentive to lose was removed when the AFL removed the priority pick. It made sense back in 99 and 05, as by not winning more than 5 games netted us a bonus top5 pick.

Barracking for the opposition to hope we lose and finish 17th instead of 13th, just to go from pick 6 to Pick 2 doesn't guarantee any better long term outcome.

It will more often then not produce a better quality player. The incentive is still there however blind you are to it.

 

[loki04]

I'm with you on not wanting to see our team lose. I'm with you on not rating a pick 2 that much above a pick 4 or 5 that I actively want us to lose to get it. But unlike you I want to see our club taking the shortest possible route to getting back into some kind of contention. From where we are now that means playing guys to get games into them and to see what they've got and also playing guys to enhance trade outcomes.. This will have more of an impact on our future than whether or not our pick is 3 or 5. So I'd like to see us NOT playing guys like Blair and rushing back Wells and keeping playing an injured Treloar in order to try to save some face for the rest of the year.

What about pick 8 or 9? These guys want to pick and play to win they are hoping to finish in 10th or 11th spot.

A pick inside the top 3-5 will net you a gun player *more often then not*, a pick around 6, 7, 8, 9 or 10+ will give you *majority* of the time a lesser quality player.

These players help lift the club as well as the getting games into the youth that inevitably shores up said lower position.

They are not arguing whether we are pick 3 or 5, they are arguing we should win at all costs and try get a pick 8 or 9 or 10 because the chances are that you will get a star because every other year a champ falls through the cracks so your odds are just as good. Oh and its out turn to luck out and get said champ at the later pick...D.A.D.S.

 

[doppleganger]

It will more often then not produce a better quality player. The incentive is still there however blind you are too it.

More often than not...what 51 times out of 100?

I am not blind to it, I am just not buying what you are selling.

Deliberately trying to manufacture an earlier draft pick, isn't a big enough long term advantage to actively want my team to lose.

Getting pick 2 AND 6 is reason to not care about the now, but shifting from a pick 6 down to pick 2 isn't.

 

[mike123]

Pendles is on my list not yours. 1-5.

6-10+ is where you and the rest are claiming the stars of the game are frequently found more often then not.

Selwood pick 6 injury slide. Elite Star slipped. tick for you.

Dangerfield great pick by Adelaide one that slipped and developed well. So yes fits the elite star that slipped. tick

Fyfe in a poor draft (one we traded out of) went at 20 developed well and is a star that wasn't rated well by recruiters likely due to his disposal. tick

Wingard and Wines pick 7 very good players but not on the Judd Hodge Franklin Pendles Martin etc tier and fit the bill of a very good but not week in week out star.


Tier of player for example.

Genuine Elite star - Judd Pendles Danger Martin Hodge Franklin N.Reiwoldt

A- to A+ grade - Lewis, Sideass, Wines, Wingard

To have the best chance to land the greatest talent from the draft you need those low end picks, the players who slip are few and far between. It also comes back on the club to develop said players.

So while yes it is possible for the *ODD* player to slip on through and become part of the elite bracket it is not common place or even regular in every occurrence in every draft year. You then assume Hine will be the 1 recruiter to pluck this gem out of hey stack...

So you gave me a few names I gave you like 50 names with a fair percentage in the star bracket and some in the A bracket.

The odds are far greater if you hold a top 5 pick.

Wingard also would have went earlier but told GWS he'd request to go home as soon as he could.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[loki04]

More often than not...what 51 times out of 100?

I am not blind to it, I am just not buying what you are selling.

Deliberately trying to manufacture an earlier draft pick, isn't a big enough long term advantage to actively want my team to lose.

Getting pick 2 AND 6 is reason to not care about the now, but shifting from a pick 6 down to pick 2 isn't.

It would be much closer to 80% probably 90% for some picks.

Again it is a big enough long term advantage if Hine picks the right player. Which if he has pick 2, means he has the entire pool to pick from bar 1 player so the odds are in his favour.

You don't have to try hard, we currently have players playing injured and we are playing poorly anyway.

 

[loki04]

I've been reading the trading thread and apparently we can get all 3 for next year for Blair, Broomhead and Oxley.

The dream team trade.



Maybe while we are doing that trade we can also trade our low pick for the same pick Hird, Swan and Goodes went at cause clearly the later you enter the draft the more odds of getting that star or so this thread is telling me.

 

[left at home]

Nothing wrong with your point of view, and I agree Kirby should get the next spot, but a few games to the others will show them what the big league is like and give them a huge incentive to work for a permanent spot next year. As long as we're not risking an immature body, or potentially shattering a kids confidence, what harm can come from it.

It could be argued most of Coxy's games have been gifted, I guess it comes comes down to if it is gifting, or just trying something different to get an edge. Either way, he hasn't blown too much wind up anyones skirt yet.

The kids who have not played like daicos or brown(2) know what the big time is, through their family, names say it all. Mcclarty who is coming from a long way back will be a very good. Let them grow in the vfl then do another preseason and unleash them next year when they are ready for sustained
Game time and pressure.
Daicos and Kirby will get a shot this year sometime if ready as will brown get another go. Just rather they earn it first
As for cox, l think that he earnt it this year, and his play is not that bad for a guy with such limited experience

 

[peter moore]

Seeing Daniher, Stewart and Hooker all running around in the same forward line tells me how wrong we have are structure.
Most of the season Darcy has been the only big man up there!

 

[doppleganger]

It would be much closer to 80% probably 90% for some picks.

Again it is a big enough long term advantage if Hine picks the right player. Which if he has pick 2, means he has the entire pool to pick from bar 1 player so the odds are in his favour.

You don't have to try hard, we currently have players playing injured and we are playing poorly anyway.

80 - 90% chance that a pick 2 or 3 ends up a better player than pick 5 or 6? Kidding yourself.

If Hine picks the right player it won't matter if we have pick 2 or pick 6, we will get a ripper.

 

[Frank Gallagher]

The smart people will bitterly enjoy the losses as they mount and increase our ranking at draft time, therefore increasing our chances of getting a star which in turn increases our chances of a future flag.

It's chringeing stuff but alas until they change the draft rules it will be a bitter sweet victory to lose.

We are the righteous ones mate, some people think we make these decisions lightly, there's no point talking sense to them.

 

[Quicky]

The fact that we're bad makes it a toss of a coin, for mine.

The less-bad team will win...

Aren't we lucky supporters!

 

[MagpieBat]

Aren't we lucky supporters!

Blessed!

 

[Frank Gallagher]

80 - 90% chance that a pick 2 or 3 ends up a better player than pick 5 or 6? Kidding yourself.

If Hine picks the right player it won't matter if we have pick 2 or pick 6, we will get a ripper.

Hine wanted the Bont, howd that work out?

 

[Gone Critical]

We are the righteous ones mate, some people think we make these decisions lightly, there's no point talking sense to them.

Now Frank about these decisions you believe you are making. We are all nuff nuffs on a footy forum. We ain't making any decisions here. Sorry to burst your bubble.

 

[Frank Gallagher]

Now Frank about these decisions you believe you are making. We are all nuff nuffs on a footy forum. We ain't making any decisions here. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Poorly worded on my part, but you get the gist.

Times have changed, this aint 1997, us fans actually have a lil bit of power now.

 

[Chameleon75]

Poorly worded on my part, but you get the gist.

Times have changed, this aint 1997, us fans actually have a lil bit of power now.

Less power, fans are consumers of a product, part of the marketing push is to make you feel part of it, an appeal to emotion.

 

[Gone Critical]

What about pick 8 or 9? These guys want to pick and play to win they are hoping to finish in 10th or 11th spot.

A pick inside the top 3-5 will net you a gun player *more often then not*, a pick around 6, 7, 8, 9 or 10+ will give you *majority* of the time a lesser quality player.

These players help lift the club as well as the getting games into the youth that inevitably shores up said lower position.

They are not arguing whether we are pick 3 or 5, they are arguing we should win at all costs and try get a pick 8 or 9 or 10 because the chances are that you will get a star because every other year a champ falls through the cracks so your odds are just as good. Oh and its out turn to luck out and get said champ at the later pick...D.A.D.S.

I think your views here are too extreme and in turn you are attributing extreme views in the other direction to anyone who doesn't agree with you. With regard to some of the points you have raised here is how I see things

1. We are looking at a bottom 4 finish regardless of the team we select week to week. Changing Blair for Broomhead, Kirby for Fas, Daicos for Wells probably doesn't change our win loss numbers.

2. If we won or lost 1 more game either way , which is probably the biggest difference we would be talking about, we may finish a spot or two or three different on the ladder

3. I agree that pick 1-5 will net a better player overall than choice 6-10 and so on. The differences in these picks is much less than you are suggesting. When we are really more likely talking about the difference in pick 2 to pick 3 or pick 4 the differences are small and frequently the player at pick 3 will end up being better than the player at pick 2

4. It's better for the clubs future to go all out for wins. I don't expect many more this year but it would be detrimental to the playing group if they sensed the club was not trying fully. The benefits of changing your spot in the draft by 1 or 2 or 3 spots is fools gold.

 

[Gone Critical]

Poorly worded on my part, but you get the gist.

Times have changed, this aint 1997, us fans actually have a lil bit of power now.

Decisions now power. Cmon Frank you don't really believe we have either do you.

 

[Frank Gallagher]

Less power, fans are consumers of a product, part of the marketing push is to make you feel part of it, an appeal to emotion.

Not exactly mate