Traded Dan Houston - Joins Collingwood as part of 3-way trade with Port and GC

[Johnny Bananas]

I wonder why neither GC nor Port preferred to deal with North. Their first pick next year should be a good one.

 

[Professor Knowall]

So, a direct quote, straight from Houston - "I have a good relationship with (Michael Voss) and I wanted to play for him and he wanted to have me in the team."

Now this is interesting. Houston would never have said "... he wanted to have me in the team", if Voss hadn't said this straight to him. So Voss wanted Houston - and quite right too, he would've immediately strengthened their team. And it would've been far easier for Carlton, with their superior draft hand, to land Houston had they really wanted to, in comparison to the Pies having to cobble together a complicated 3 club deal that ultimately included trading 5 players.

So clearly, Voss was overruled by either the football department or the board. Hmmm ...Voss can't be happy with this.

 

[Jeremias]

I said a few weeks back their cap would be the reason they wouldnt get Houston.

That doesn't really answer the question.

Carlton put a decent offer on the table for Hayward and were reportedly keen on Stengle. Yet you don't think they'd be able to afford Houston?

So clearly, Voss was overruled by either the football department or the board. Hmmm ...Voss can't be happy with this.

That's a shame. Ultimately it's not Voss' call and he would be well aware of that.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

how do you know its false if you don't have a clue about it?

Why would we have made offers for a range of quality players if we had no cap space?

 

[TW Sherrin]

That doesn't really answer the question.

Carlton put a decent offer on the table for Hayward and were reportedly keen on Stengle. Yet you don't think they'd be able to afford Houston?



That's a shame. Ultimately it's not Voss' call and he would be well aware of that.

no.

 

[TW Sherrin]

Why would we have made offers for a range of quality players if we had no cap space?

who?

 

[Jeremias]

no.

Strange take.

But hey, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

who?

We were reportedly in the hunt for Hayward, Stengle, Petracca and Houston... Is that a sign of a team who doesn't have any cap space to use?

 

[tigerwill]

We were reportedly in the hunt for Hayward, Stengle, Petracca and Houston... Is that a sign of a team who doesn't have any cap space to use?

Who reported that? Not the media?

 

[TW Sherrin]

Strange take.

But hey, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Strange would be not understanding the first post you quoted

 

[Jeremias]

Strange would be not understanding the first post you quoted

I understood it perfectly.

Now that you've had your cheap laugh about the salary cap, let's move on shall we?

 

[TW Sherrin]

I understood it perfectly.

Now that you've had your cheap laugh about the salary cap, let's move on shall we?

Missed it again. It was nothing to do with their cap.

 

[Jeremias]

Missed it again. It was nothing to do with their cap.

Of course it wasn't...

I said a few weeks back their cap would be the reason they wouldnt get Houston.

Move on now. Thanks.

 

[Anzacday]

So in summary the blue mob could afford him but didn’t want him.
Or they couldn’t afford him and therefore didn’t try.
North wanted him and he didn’t want them.
Although some supporters didn’t want him.
Either way they could afford him but didn’t get him.
Easy to see why he ended up a Pie.
He said yes, we said yes - the stars aligned and we made it happen.
Now all three sets of supporters are happy and importantly, so is Dan.

 

[TW Sherrin]

Of course it wasn't...



Move on now. Thanks.

yes sir

 

[Eric Shin]

So much salt in this thread


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[CCurnow3picks]

So in summary the Blues could afford him but didn’t want him.
Or they couldn’t afford him and therefore didn’t try.
North wanted him and he didn’t want them.
Although some supporters didn’t want him.
Either way they could afford him but didn’t get him.
Easy to see why he ended up a Pie.
He said yes, we said yes - the stars aligned and we made it happen.
Now all three sets of supporters are happy and importantly, so is Dan.

Dan’s a bit down on it actually…

He really wanted Carlton you see

 

[HugeJohnson]

Well put. So much spoken about "the cliff", as if the club has used all its chips on two late stagers to try and get us over the line. Houston and Perryman are every bit long-term pick-ups at 27 and 25 years of age. They will quite literally assist the rebuild as quality core players.

Collingwood's 2028 side will be led by N Daicos (25), J Daicos (28), Hill (28), Quaynor (28), Perryman (29), Houston (31), Schultz (31), Maynard (32), Moore (32), De Goey (32), Cameron (33) and McCreery (27). Crisp (35), McStay (33) and Lipinski (30) could potentially still form part of this team also.
.

If I told you 5 years ago Richmond's side in 2024 would contain the likes of Martin, Lynch, Grimes, Vlastuin, Broad, Nankervis, Balta, Rioli, Prestia, Baker, Taranto, Graham, do you think you would be surprised to hear they finished on the bottom of the ladder?

 

[adammania9]

If I told you 5 years ago Richmond's side in 2024 would contain the likes of Martin, Lynch, Grimes, Vlastuin, Broad, Nankervis, Balta, Rioli, Prestia, Baker, Taranto, Graham, do you think you would be surprised to hear they finished on the bottom of the ladder?

Probably.

It would likely take the worst of all scenarios to get into that position - no free agents acquired or good value trades made, and most if not all drafted players becoming busts.

 

[4tune8]

Probably.

It would likely take the worst of all scenarios to get into that position - no free agents acquired or good value trades made, and most if not all drafted players becoming busts.

Pretty much the worst of all scenarios did happen, but i don't want to bore you with the details.

I guess the Pies still see themselves as contenders, hence the trades and good on the club for having a crack.

If you don't succeed in climbing the mountain then there's the distinct possibility of falling off the cliff on the way back down.

You finished 9th this year with the lowest % out of the top 10. Do you think that the additions to your list will propel you back up the ladder? The optimistic answer is yes, but where in actuality will you finish? Anything less than a premiership is a fail.

Then there's been talk about having players around that can form the core of a rebuild from 2027. You're not going to have a core of highly talented, early draft picks that will form the basis of a rebuild because you've already spent that capital. Yes, you'll have 8 or so experienced players left to guide the young blokes, but the talent won't be there.

Then you'll have 2 years of compromised drafts where you wont have access to that top end talent. The Tigers had to deal with exactly the same thing but with 2 expansion clubs. Luckily we had Riewoldt, Cotchin and Dusty already on the list and also very young, talented players that a list could be built around. Collingwood are not going to have that luxury because they've spent their hard earned for the here and now.

 

[adammania9]

Pretty much the worst of all scenarios did happen, but i don't want to bore you with the details.

I guess the Pies still see themselves as contenders, hence the trades and good on the club for having a crack.

If you don't succeed in climbing the mountain then there's the distinct possibility of falling off the cliff on the way back down.

You finished 9th this year with the lowest % out of the top 10. Do you think that the additions to your list will propel you back up the ladder? The optimistic answer is yes, but where in actuality will you finish? Anything less than a premiership is a fail.

Then there's been talk about having players around that can form the core of a rebuild from 2027. You're not going to have a core of highly talented, early draft picks that will form the basis of a rebuild because you've already spent that capital. Yes, you'll have 8 or so experienced players left to guide the young blokes, but the talent won't be there.

Then you'll have 2 years of compromised drafts where you wont have access to that top end talent. The Tigers had to deal with exactly the same thing but with 2 expansion clubs. Luckily we had Riewoldt, Cotchin and Dusty already on the list and also very young, talented players that a list could be built around. Collingwood are not going to have that luxury because they've spent their hard earned for the here and now.

Fair points. But I don't think "spending the capital now" has cost us elite talent in the short run. Pick 13 was the highest pick we could have possibly acquired in this draft, and we traded that plus later picks that usually don't get you access to elite talent. Could pick 13 have gotten us an elite talent? Possibly. It also could have gotten us a bust. Collingwood should reasonably expect 110+ games from Houston, a lot at a very high level, and plenty at a good enough level. Running the numbers, Collingwood will likely get better football out of Houston than a prospective pick 13. Possibly more games too.

If we had have acquired pick 13 and not gone for Houston, it more than likely would have cost our F1 with Noble for 13 and a 2nd. I think we can scratch out Collingwood having first round selections in both the next two drafts without trading established players. Tom McGuane is a highly rated enough prospect going into 2025 that he could come at a bid before our first round pick will land. Very early I know, and the club has taken a risk there. But it's to get two players that are actually long-termers as opposed to short-term top ups to try and nab a flag like many would have you believe.

I don't think Perryman and Houston themselves will propel us back up - other players will need to improve on their 2024 specifically some defenders who are supposed to be in their prime. I'm optimistic that players like Moore and Quaynor are not yet past their best footy and can improve again. Pound for pound, I think our list is as good as it was in 2023 when it topped the ladder for most of the year, with the highest %. The club has plugged our holes very well, key defence aside.

Historically, clubs have needed to nail early selections in order to compete. But there have been outliers. Geelong this year for example. Geelong's earliest draft selection taken by the club that played finals this year was Max Holmes (pick 20). They were possibly a Holmes hamstring away from lifting their 2nd cup in three years. They have traded their way into competing endlessly.

I also don't really subscribe to the idea that Richmond struggled as a result of the expansion drafts. In 2010 you'd have had pick two, would you have been much better in the long run if you'd taken Bennell or Day who went 2 and 3 instead of Conca? In 2011 you were pushed back to pick 15 after finishing 12th and selected Ellis who played in two premierships. You might have been able to take Haynes who is a better player, conversely you might have ended up with Billy Longer, Adam Tomlinson or Liam Sumner. A well managed club will see through the Tasmania drafts without much issue. Good talent ID can win you any draft no matter your picks, and logically there will be young Tasmanian players that will exit to other clubs so there are opportunities to build talent there.

 

[4tune8]

Fair points. But I don't think "spending the capital now" has cost us elite talent in the short run. Pick 13 was the highest pick we could have possibly acquired in this draft, and we traded that plus later picks that usually don't get you access to elite talent. Could pick 13 have gotten us an elite talent? Possibly. It also could have gotten us a bust. Collingwood should reasonably expect 110+ games from Houston, a lot at a very high level, and plenty at a good enough level. Running the numbers, Collingwood will likely get better football out of Houston than a prospective pick 13. Possibly more games too.

If we had have acquired pick 13 and not gone for Houston, it more than likely would have cost our F1 with Noble for 13 and a 2nd. I think we can scratch out Collingwood having first round selections in both the next two drafts without trading established players. Tom McGuane is a highly rated enough prospect going into 2025 that he could come at a bid before our first round pick will land. Very early I know, and the club has taken a risk there. But it's to get two players that are actually long-termers as opposed to short-term top ups to try and nab a flag like many would have you believe.

I don't think Perryman and Houston themselves will propel us back up - other players will need to improve on their 2024 specifically some defenders who are supposed to be in their prime. I'm optimistic that players like Moore and Quaynor are not yet past their best footy and can improve again. Pound for pound, I think our list is as good as it was in 2023 when it topped the ladder for most of the year, with the highest %. The club has plugged our holes very well, key defence aside.

Historically, clubs have needed to nail early selections in order to compete. But there have been outliers. Geelong this year for example. Geelong's earliest draft selection taken by the club that played finals this year was Max Holmes (pick 20). They were possibly a Holmes hamstring away from lifting their 2nd cup in three years. They have traded their way into competing endlessly.

I also don't really subscribe to the idea that Richmond struggled as a result of the expansion drafts. In 2010 you'd have had pick two, would you have been much better in the long run if you'd taken Bennell or Day who went 2 and 3 instead of Conca? In 2011 you were pushed back to pick 15 after finishing 12th and selected Ellis who played in two premierships. You might have been able to take Haynes who is a better player, conversely you might have ended up with Billy Longer, Adam Tomlinson or Liam Sumner. A well managed club will see through the Tasmania drafts without much issue. Good talent ID can win you any draft no matter your picks, and logically there will be young Tasmanian players that will exit to other clubs so there are opportunities to build talent there.

Nonetheless the available talent is diluted, to say a rebuilding club can negotiate their way through the Tassie concessions is placing a lot of trust in your recruiting staff, not to say it wont happen, but the percentages of hitting top end talent are reduced.

I'd assume that Tassie will have access to the best 17yo's in 2027, if it's like GWS then that's 12 elite talents already removed from the pool, GWS scored Jeremy Cameron, Adam Treloar, Dylan Shiel, Nathan Wilson and Jack Hombsch via that mechanism.

They will probably end up with 10 of the first 15 picks in the 2028 ND and possibly the first 8 picks in the rookie draft. Added to that will be priority access to the uncontracted players, GWS picked up Phil Davis, Callan Ward and Tom Scully as well as some older blokes wanting to jump on the gravy train.

All I'm saying is that the Pies are going to have to be elite in scouring through the left overs to manage a rebuild given the above circumstances and kudos if it can come off.

 

[Pleasedontfail11]

I don't think Houston, Perryman and even Schultz have cost us anything in the short term and very little in the long term.
They are 3 good to elite players in the 25-27 age bracket that cost us #10, #36 last years #34, next years F1st, J Noble and J Richards.

Statistically those 4 picks would usually add up to 2 solid players and 2 list cloggers.
You could even argue that our F1st had a very good chance to be completely eaten by T McGuane.

So I would say we exchanged
Houston, Schultz, Perryman and McGuane

For

Noble, Richards, Good player 1 (200 games), Good player 2 (150 games) and 2 list cloggers (0-70 games). There's obviously speculation on these picks but in those sort of draft ranges it's a real 50/50 chance of drafting a viable long term player.

I see Collingwood coming out ahead over the next 1 to 5 years by doing the trades and with a lot of older players on our list, it was the right call even though there is a good chance of no premierships over the next 10 years because of it.

Long term I don't see us doing to much better even if we kept the picks. Our young players in the age range of 21 and under are very speculative at best. I see us continuing to target free agents and trade targets more than draft picks. It is a strategy that has kept us top 4 very often over the last 25 years.

 

[Warhorse]

I don't think Houston, Perryman and even Schultz have cost us anything in the short term and very little in the long term.
They are 3 good to elite players in the 25-27 age bracket that cost us #10, #36 last years #34, next years F1st, J Noble and J Richards.

Statistically those 4 picks would usually add up to 2 solid players and 2 list cloggers.
You could even argue that our F1st had a very good chance to be completely eaten by T McGuane.

So I would say we exchanged
Houston, Schultz, Perryman and McGuane

For

Noble, Richards, Good player 1 (200 games), Good player 2 (150 games) and 2 list cloggers (0-70 games). There's obviously speculation on these picks but in those sort of draft ranges it's a real 50/50 chance of drafting a viable long term player.

I see Collingwood coming out ahead over the next 1 to 5 years by doing the trades and with a lot of older players on our list, it was the right call even though there is a good chance of no premierships over the next 10 years because of it.

Long term I don't see us doing to much better even if we kept the picks. Our young players in the age range of 21 and under are very speculative at best. I see us continuing to target free agents and trade targets more than draft picks. It is a strategy that has kept us top 4 very often over the last 25 years.

Forgot that Ginnavin left when Schultz was traded in.

 

[Pistol Night]

Forgot that Ginnavin left when Schultz was traded in.

Oh no

 

[Nvent]

Oh no

Rather Ginnivan.