Mega Thread Draft Day Supermegaultrathread - It's finally here

[Obeanie1]

This is the crux for me. Getting him and keeping our first rounder I think is imperative, and I wouldn't want him if it means giving them our first. His body is risky and if he breaks down we screw up yet another draft year trading out or first.

If Selwood opts for a fre agency move we may end up with a second first round pick. He'd have to come good and play a number of games this season though. If he's out with his ankle again for most of the year then we'd be lucky to get a 2nd rounder for him.

 

[mattyc75]

dargie is back,this reeks of alphabets many comebacks

 

[Sweet Jesus]

dargie is back,this reeks of alphabets many comebacks

Increase Punctuation +5.

 

[Matera92]

Hope Coniglio re -signs with GWS tomorrow just for the lulz.

 

[mattyc75]

anyone know if blake acres has signed a contract extension?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

anyone know if blake acres has signed a contract extension?

Fraid so.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-09-16/acres-covers-new-ground

 

[mattyc75]

Fraid so.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-09-16/acres-covers-new-ground

bugger,the saints are getting a pretty handy young team together

 

[bffl]

Coniglio playing very well.

 

[Keys]

The two biggest pedants on this board in a multi-quote off on a completely hypothetical subject

Riveting stuff

 

[eagle eyed]

The two biggest pedants on this board in a multi-quote off on a completely hypothetical subject

Riveting stuff

What's the score?

 

[Keys]

What's the score?

Both sides have had plenty of possession but have over used it badly and have struggled to hit targets so scores are low

Almost a scoreless draw but I have the sweet Jesus strawmen just in front of the teaser act hypotheticals

 

[pantskyle]

Another very good game for Coniglio and against a top side.

 

[The Passenger]

By now we're just throwing player's names out there... the number one factor in trading out a player is that they want to leave - when was the last time a player was traded against their will?

Correct. For better or for worse that is just something that rarely happens in the Australian Football World.

Unlike American sports where everyone is tradeable at the right price.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

The two biggest pedants on this board in a multi-quote off on a completely hypothetical subject

It's a fair criticism.

All I wanted to say is that I don't think we'll be able to get Coniglio by offering our second-rounder in a straight swap (or with some change on top).

Both sides have had plenty of possession but have over used it badly and have struggled to hit targets so scores are low

Almost a scoreless draw but I have the sweet Jesus strawmen just in front of the teaser act hypotheticals

There was no strawman.

 

[Matera92]

It's a fair criticism.

All I wanted to say is that I don't think we'll be able to get Coniglio by offering our second-rounder in a straight swap (or with some change on top).

There was no strawman.

Thems fightin werds!

 

[tesseract]

More information about a hypothetical?

This is all unnecessary waffle.

Two-second rounders for Coniglio is surely pretty clear. Our existing 20-something pick plus one more acquired from elsewhere.

It's not unnecessary information for you, given that you think being vague can't be helped when offering up a hypothetical.

"Two-second rounders for Coniglio" isn't clear, for it doesn't discuss how you propose getting an extra 2nd round pick. It makes the hypothetical vague and incomplete.

That would be true if I was suggesting we should trade out of the first round. But I'm not.

Well then you have two contradictory stand points, for on one hand you're saying "make sure a deal gets done" and on the other you say "I'm not suggesting we should trade out of the first round". So, how can WC "make sure a deal gets done" when they've taken their 1st pick off the table, while GWS stubbornly refuse to accept anything else?

That's not true at all. If Coniglio has been persuaded to leave GWS and nominate WC, that's not nothing.

We're just going to have to agree to disagree on the point regarding nothing to lose, for we're repeating ourselves endlessly.

A "chance"/"opportunity" at a "make sure the deal gets done" price, even if GWS are stubborn and hold out for a 1st round pick that this hypothetical states is off the table. Such a chance/opportunity thus involves WC giving up their leverage voluntarily in order to accommodate GWS in an act of submissiveness and weak-willed spinelessness.

I've been pretty clear about not trading out of the first round. So it's not "regardless of price".

"Make sure a deal gets done" still insinuates paying more than WC have to given their leverage, even if their 1st round pick is off the table, for WC are compelled to "make sure a deal gets done".

But I haven't said your rationale involves offering a third-rounder. That would be a strawman if I had.

I'm merely demonstrating that WC can't simply dictate the terms. And it's not because they need to 'maintain trading relations'.

You haven't stated such, you've implied such. It still makes for a strawman under the definition.

You've haven't as yet demonstrated why "WC can't simply dictate the terms". All you've basically said is that WC have to be pragmatic (ie give up more than they have to) in order to appease GWS to "make sure a deal gets done".

Coniglio being out of contract, stating his intention to play for WC and GWS getting nothing if a deal between the two parties can't be reached is why WC can rightfully expect to dictate terms.

"And it's not because they need to 'maintain trading relations" is merely your opinion.

Well, that still strikes me as unrealistic.

You pivot back to the O'Rourke trade but the Hawks had pick 19. Our first-rounder will be much higher and, as we agree, shouldn't be on the table in a straight swap. So even using this example as a basis, I can't see how a pick in 20s and a pick in the 40s would suffice for a young player, like Coniglio, who is actually established.

I think it's more plausible we'd downgrade our first-rounder – either dealing directly with GWS if they finish a few spots higher, or with another club to get an extra second-rounder to add to the deal with GWS.

You've chosen the O'Rourke trade but the deal for Dom Tyson is equally relevant. That was Melbourne's picks 2, 20 and 79 for Tyson and GWS's pick 9 and 53. I'm not suggesting we'll have pick 2 but that exchange of first-rounders, added to our second-rounder, seems a more apt basis for a trade for Coniglio than the deal done for O'Rourke. It would hypothetically get us Coniglio while keeping us in the first round of the draft.

If the deal I've proposed, like an O'Rourke style deal, strikes you as unrealistic, how does WC go about getting for themselves an additional 2nd rounder? Perhaps if Scott Selwood left for greener pastures the AFL would give WC a 2nd round compensation pick given Scooter becomes a free agent at the end of the year. Otherwise a WCE player would have to volunteer or be pushed for a trade.

I brought up the O'Rourke deal under the premise that WC finish quite low on the ladder - having pick 5 was my example - thus taking their 1st pick off the table as an unrealistic demand by GWS and making WC's 2nd pick in the vicinity of the early 20's, thus comparable to the Hawks pick 19.
This comment of yours: "I can't see how a pick in 20s and a pick in the 40s would suffice for a young player, like Coniglio, who is actually established" seems to suggest that WC need to give up market value, or something close to, for Coniglio and dismisses the leverage WC hold. Fairer deals occur when realistic currency for a player is available. Under the premise of my hypothetical, pick 5 isn't a realistic option for GWS to insist upon, hence WC offing their next best pick plus an additional sum, like the O'Rourke deal. For a third party to get involved, WC need player trade options in order to acquire currency or Scooter wanting out, thus giving WC a compensation pick.

If WC finish below GWS, I can see a downgrading of 1st round picks being partly involved. If WC finish mid-table and above GWS and downgrade their 1st (pick 10, for example) for GWS' 2nd (pick 23) as part of the trade would make for a shitty deal for WC given the leverage they hold. That's where WC need to say no to such a downgrade and get a third party involved and make a deal where WC's 1st doesn't come into play. Either that or have a 'take it or leave it' stance.

For a Dom Tyson like trade to come off in the instance of Coniglio, WC would need to finish below GWS in order to downgrade their 1st round pick to GWS' later 1st. The Dom Tyson example becomes irrelevant if WC finish above GWS.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Surely round 3 is a bit early to be having a wall of text multi-quote argument about a hypothetical trade concerning a player who may or may not ask to be traded in six months time?

Can you two take it to PMs if you wish to continue the argument. It's taken up enough space in this thread.

 

[tesseract]

BF to become Twitter - no more than 140 characters.

 

[tesseract]

Btw, this is last year's draft day thread, which makes it obsolete and practically useless, so why not use this thread for a multi-quote-athon rather than have this year's draft thread filled with such? May as well get the hypothetical debate done and out the way in an old and useless thread rather than a soon to be new one.

 

[LordHaart]

I don't think people mind the debate about the trade, it's the fact that the bulk of the jibber jabber is devoted to semantic arguments about debating tactics.

I've never ever seen any such debate come to anything fruitful ever. Only way that can happen is when both parties stop making it personal and/or stop taking it that way.

 

[Keys]

We're just going to have to agree to disagree ...... for we're repeating ourselves endlessly.

For the love of god please

 

[Godfather32]

Surely round 3 is a bit early to be having a wall of text multi-quote argument about a hypothetical trade concerning a player who may or may not ask to be traded in six months time?

Can you two take it to PMs if you wish to continue the argument. It's taken up enough space in this thread.

What do

Surely round 3 is a bit early to be having a wall of text multi-quote argument about a hypothetical trade concerning a player who may or may not ask to be traded in six months time?

Can you two take it to PMs if you wish to continue the argument. It's taken up enough space in this thread.

you mean

Surely round 3 is a bit early to be having a wall of text multi-quote argument about a hypothetical trade concerning a player who may or may not ask to be traded in six months time?

Can you two take it to PMs if you wish to continue the argument. It's taken up enough space in this thread.

it's really fun

Surely round 3 is a bit early to be having a wall of text multi-quote argument about a hypothetical trade concerning a player who may or may not ask to be traded in six months time?

Can you two take it to PMs if you wish to continue the argument. It's taken up enough space in this thread.

and easy to read

 

[Tom Kerrigan]

Surely round 3 is a bit early to be having a wall of text multi-quote argument about a hypothetical trade concerning a player who may or may not ask to be traded in six months time?

Can you two take it to PMs if you wish to continue the argument. It's taken up enough space in this thread.

Nah let's see how long this can play out. At the speed they're resolving this at the draft will all be over by the time they've finished arguing, at which point we'll have made no play for Coniglio and instead saved his spot for rookie upgrading Kane Lucas in traditional West Coast fashion.

 

[mattyc75]

Nah let's see how long this can play out. At the speed they're resolving this at the draft will all be over by the time they've finished arguing, at which point we'll have made no play for Coniglio and instead saved his spot for rookie upgrading Kane Lucas in traditional West Coast fashion.

was lucas signed on a 1 year deal?

 

[Tom Kerrigan]

was lucas signed on a 1 year deal?

Whether he was or not, I'm expecting him to play a bunch of games at the end of the year where he gets a bunch of average possessions and we upgrade him so that we have more quality vanilla to choose our side from.