Collingwood WILL trade their first pick.....

[bucksisbest]

When was it stated we would be looking to trade our first pick and by whom?

 

[hotpie]

Try to get pick 1-3 and snap up Marc Murphy and then we will be right

Brisbane will probably father-son him.

 

[pieman1]

I don't know how true this is but i have heard the players that will be in this years draft are very ordinary??? If this is true (not saying it is) would we rather trade for established players instead of trying to obtain higher picks??? Any way as a supporter i would rather watch collingwood rebuild with younger players rather than tryin to get some 'quick fix' player i think this will do us better in the long run.

It is true! This years draft crop is an ordinary bunch and that's why we should go out and get a known comodity. You'll hear phrases in the lead up to the draft like "pick 5 might end up being as good as pick 30" so why take the risk?

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

Brisbane will probably father-son him.

We know Brisbane want to, but apparently he doesn't want to go to Brisbane.

Xavier Ellis is the man on top of my list, although he's equally out of reach, most likely.

 

[itsintheblood]

....But for who is anyone's guess. It's obvious a classy midfielder is what's required. Personally I'd make a play for Nick Stevens, he's their only player thats worth anything and we could shave a million bucks off their cash strapped ass. Now Mick might crap on about 'man management years' but if we can get Stevens he'll be 26 next year and have maybe 7 good years left. Two years with no finals means getting an established player is our only option. Bucks desreves to go out playing finals, not just an after thought in another rebuild.

PS If we do lock on to a classy midfielder Balme needs to be kept well away from negotiations.

Sorry pie fans but this would have to be the dumbest thread I've ever seen.

Fair dinkum.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

We'll give you Kayne Pettifer for your first pick

This is as good as our first pick for Nick Stevens. I would rate Pettifer almost on a par with Stevens, and let me make it perfectly clear that that IS an insult to Nick Stevens.

He has got to have the least impressive kicking of any supposed "good kick" in the AFL. He usually doesn't miss when kicking at goal, and he doesn't turn the ball over all the time.

However, you rarely, if ever, see him use his footskills to seriously hurt the opposition, ala Nathan Buckley. You just don't see him hitting a target 50m away on the chest very often. I know few players can do that, but a player with his supposed "skill" should do it more often than he does.

I feel almost the same way about Nick Dal Santo's kicking (although I think he's a little better), but at least he's faster, can carry the ball more effectively, has a willingness to tackle, and for those reasons I would give up our first round pick for a guy like that. However, in both cases, their kicking is probably a bit overrated.

If we're giving up our first pick, it better be for a guy better than Nick Stevens.

I can't believe there is anyone that would trade a potentially top 5 pick for Nick Stevens.

 

[Lajon]

I would see if the Blues were interested in our 3 and 4th round plus an O'Bree/Walker?? type for their No. 3. A longshot but an extra player and another pick for them and another top 5 pick for us.

These are some of the most one eyed comments I've ever read.

We (Carlton) have the worst list in the league at the moment and we need all the top end draft picks we can get to stock up on class for the future. Why on earth do you think the club would look at trading picks 1&3 (or 2&4 should it work out that way), for late draft picks and fringe/hack players who we have an abundance of?

If you guys were going to have picks 1&3, it's like Carlton supporters offering a 3'rd and 4'th rounder alongside a Digby Morell. Would that impress you?

Tarrant and pick 22ish for their pick 3?.

And I wouldn't trade anything more then a late second round draft pick for Tarrant. Carlton already have Whitnall and Fevola in our forward line which is enough liabilities up there.

With these attitudes it's no wonder clubs refuse to deal with Collingwood come trade time.

 

[hotpie]

And I wouldn't trade anything more then a late second round draft pick for Tarrant. Carlton already have Whitnall and Fevola in our forward line which is enough liabilities up there.

With these attitudes it's no wonder clubs refuse to deal with Collingwood come trade time.

Tarant is a gun, albeit with a dodgy knee and no CHF to help him this year.

Tarrant + a second round pick (and/or maybe a player like Walker) would be an extremely generous offer for a single pick, either 1 or 3. Extremely.

 

[sealer]

Murphys kid would be great - but Haw and Carl get priority picks and we might not have the chance to get him - hopefully he does not want to go to Brisbane. At best we will have pcik 5

We could trade for stevens - hey I'd take lappin and I would give him a 3 year contract as he is only 27 - maybe 28 at the very oldest....if they would take Lonie or woey ....wot about cole he has to be trade bait...? someone must want him - there is no use drafting a kid at pick 75 as it is a longshot - go for a hard backman to run off the back flank - you only have to offer a 1 year contract if you get picked up in the pre season draft.....

 

[Lajon]

Tarant is a gun, albeit with a dodgy knee and no CHF to help him this year.

Tarrant + a second round pick (and/or maybe a player like Walker) would be an extremely generous offer for a single pick, either 1 or 3. Extremely.

That's your opinion and that's fair enough.

Personally speaking, if we traded one of our top picks away I would be absolutely disgusted at the club. If we traded one away for Tarrant, I would hand in my membership and I suggest most Blues members would be calling for Pagan's head. The club needs to rebuild and address problem areas such as the midfield which is in dire need of class, speed, and hardness and not to mention our undersized and poorly skilled defence.

Tarrant has a questionable attitude towards footy and with Fevola and Whitnall in a similair boat and already stationed in our forward line, the last thing we need is a player like Tarrant. Not to mention the fact that if we are able to sort our downfield problems out, players like Waite, Fisher and Betts look likely to be able to fill our foward line quite nicely in years to come around Fevola and possibly Whitnall.

I think most clubs are smart enough these days to realise that top end draft picks are extremely precious and when you look at what they can be turned into (Hodge, Judd, Riedwoldt, Ball, Deledio, Wells, Kosi, Pavlich etc), a club that needs to rebuild such as Carlton would be foolish to give these sorts of chances up.

 

[Im The Gun]

....But for who is anyone's guess. It's obvious a classy midfielder is what's required. Personally I'd make a play for Nick Stevens, he's their only player thats worth anything and we could shave a million bucks off their cash strapped ass. Now Mick might crap on about 'man management years' but if we can get Stevens he'll be 26 next year and have maybe 7 good years left. Two years with no finals means getting an established player is our only option. Bucks desreves to go out playing finals, not just an after thought in another rebuild.

PS If we do lock on to a classy midfielder Balme needs to be kept well away from negotiations.

The thing with Stevens is that he'll only be as good as he was at Port if he's playing in a good midfield.
Steven's is like Headland, a player who gets a lot of the ball when the better players are tagged.

Stevens would be as useless in Pie colours as he is for Carlton because we don't have the class midfielders.
Buckley will play more and more football as a forward, meaning didak and players like him will have to start becoming full time midfielders.

The 3 things we need this off season is
1) a class mf
2) a ruckman
3) another to fit in down back and start taking over the role of those there now.

We will get draft picks and we have good players that are worth trading, this year will make or break us as a finals team for the next 5 years.

 

[scooter600x]

2) a ruckman

Not happy with Fraser, C.Cloke, Richards & Fanning?

 

[Im The Gun]

Not happy with Fraser, C.Cloke, Richards & Fanning?

Fraser is not a ruckman, the rest are all too young to take the role full time.
Josh's best spot I think is on the forward line as that second tall, but i also think he'll be great down back once he gets his build up.

 

[hilly69]

we could be looking at the moment i would say at pick 3 who i think could get Marc Murphy who i think would be great to pick up any comments

 

[pieman1]

Sorry pie fans but this would have to be the dumbest thread I've ever seen.

Fair dinkum.

Well we can't say you're not an expert on being dumb.

 

[pieman1]

Many people are forgetting the club was very keen on getting Steven's 2 years ago but we couldn't get the deal done. Why do you think we were after him?, perhaps he was a good fit for our needs. I still say getting a Steven's or Daniel Kerr type is what we need.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Personally I'd make a play for Nick Stevens, he's their only player thats worth anything and we could shave a million bucks off their cash strapped ass.

Nick Stevens for pick 5? That's a terrible idea.

 

[Jabso]

Nick Stevens for pick 5? That's a terrible idea.

You're dead right.
N.Stevens is just a more consistant and quicker version of T.Lockyer.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

You're dead right.
N.Stevens is just a more consistant and quicker version of T.Lockyer.

Nick Stevens will turn 27 next year.

In other words, he'll be retiring just when Collingwood is ready to have another crack at a flag.

You guys should be targetting a player 23 or younger. Like Daniel Kerr. You won't get him, but that's the type of player you should be looking for.

 

[hotpie]

Nick Stevens will turn 27 next year.

In other words, he'll be retiring just when Collingwood is ready to have another crack at a flag.

You guys should be targetting a player 23 or younger. Like Daniel Kerr. You won't get him, but that's the type of player you should be looking for.

Absolutely spot on. We picked up two 28 year olds last year, which is fine, but it fills our quota of old blokes in the side. Any more and we'll tip the balance too far. I'd take Kerr a million times over before taking Stevens.

 

[pieman1]

Nick Stevens will turn 27 next year.

In other words, he'll be retiring just when Collingwood is ready to have another crack at a flag.

You guys should be targetting a player 23 or younger. Like Daniel Kerr. You won't get him, but that's the type of player you should be looking for.

I can understand your fascination with our club, but if you must post on the Collingwood board at least make an effort to get your facts straight. Stevens was born in 1980 which would make him 26 next year.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I can understand your fascination with our club, but if you must post on the Collingwood board at least make an effort to get your facts straight. Stevens was born in 1980 which would make him 26 next year.

Fair enough. I was wrong in the details. Does that really render my broader argument invalid?

For the record, I post on several club boards. Am I "fascinated" by all of them?

 

[Murray]

For the record, I post on several club boards. Am I "fascinated" by all of them?

Why?

How many Collingwood supporters post on the Wet Toast board?

You come here because we are Collingwood and you find it far more interesting than your own club - right?

 

[MarkT]

we could be looking at the moment i would say at pick 3 who i think could get Marc Murphy who i think would be great to pick up any comments

Right now we are looking at pick 5 at best.

 

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Why?

How many Collingwood supporters post on the Wet Toast board?

You come here because we are Collingwood and you find it far more interesting than your own club - right?

I post a fair bit on WC's board. Go and have a look. I posted recently on the Freo, Richmond, Melbourne, Hawthorn and Bulldogs boards as well. I'm just fascinated with all of them. Obviously.

There's only 2 Collingwood threads I've posted in and they're both regarding trades, something that is of inherent interest to opposition supporters because their club could actually be involved.

This idea that Collingwood is more "interesting" is petty silly. What exactly do you actually mean by "interesting"?

If you mean that the Collingwood board hosts a lot of ridiculous opinions that I'm compelled to shoot down, then you're right, the Collingwood board is irresistible. Funny that.

Keep dreaming.