Gunston done deal

[Slippery Pete]

I hope you don't think I'm coming

Usually preceded by

a wank

 

[weneverland]

Just because we turned it into gold doesn't mean we won the trade. We traded with Hawthown and were inadequately compensated by them. Then again, at least we got to keep the pick and use it.

You're right but the trade still managed to allow you guys to pick up Kerridge, Jenkins etc.

So in the end it could really be a win/win for both clubs, we just did the trade to get Gunston and you could say it was a good trade for us but you guys made the most of that trade and did impressive to turn that pick into multiple picks especially picking up someone as impressive as Kerridge is.

Hopefully in the end it could look like one of those win/win trades for both clubs, it's looking likely.

I hope you don't think I'm coming across being a wank, I genuinely have always liked the Crows and surprised at how well you've done with losing so many KPP's over the years and it still has hardly affected the club and you guys have arguably improved. That shows a strong culture!

I agree. At the time it looked to me that we had been shafted by Gunston and Hawthorn. But full credit to Nobes. As he said at the time, that trade was the beginning of a cascading series of trades that netted us essentially Kerridge and Jenkins. At the moment, not only would Hawthorn supporters be happy but Crows supporters would be thinking that we would have to be in front. Josh Jenkins looks to be turning out to be just as important to the Crows as Gunston would have been and the upside to Kerridge looks to be enormous. For me, a win-WIN

 

[Elder van Berlo]

Nice to see the rag's usual quality of investigative journalism today.

 

[icrow32]

You're right but the trade still managed to allow you guys to pick up Kerridge, Jenkins etc.

So in the end it could really be a win/win for both clubs, we just did the trade to get Gunston and you could say it was a good trade for us but you guys made the most of that trade and did impressive to turn that pick into multiple picks especially picking up someone as impressive as Kerridge is.

Hopefully in the end it could look like one of those win/win trades for both clubs, it's looking likely.

I hope you don't think I'm coming across being a wank, I genuinely have always liked the Crows and surprised at how well you've done with losing so many KPP's over the years and it still has hardly affected the club and you guys have arguably improved. That shows a strong culture!

All this has been done in spite of our culture, the CEO who is currently banned for cheating, and the plethora of high draft picks we have had taken away from us.

 

[iamcorky]

Sad to see big gunston go but bloody good deal to pick up top 3 Hawthorn picks

 

[cmndstab]

We only got one Hawthorn pick. We traded it for three picks from Gold Coast.

 

[SugarShane]

Hawthorn still won their initial trade with us. We might have come out of the whole situation better, but in terms of what they gave up versus what they got, they are still big winners.

 

[Skippy231]

but we did work some magic in that trade period, kudos to our recruiting team

 

[sbenno]

We only got one Hawthorn pick. We traded it for three picks from Gold Coast.

That's where the real win is.

Inadequately compensated originally, but turned it into gold with this trade, and good drafting.

 

[Elder van Berlo]

Hawthorn still won their initial trade with us. We might have come out of the whole situation better, but in terms of what they gave up versus what they got, they are still big winners.

Maybe so, but in terms of what we gave up versus what we got, I would say we are big winners.

Gold Coast were probably also winners as well - given that they were only using one pick in the draft, they effectively upgraded pick 27 to pick 24 for free.

Essendon are probably the only losers here, giving up Jenkins for a 10 pick upgrade in the second round.

 

[Hank93]

I always thought it was a win, after the end of the trade week. At the time of the trade, I was a little miffed, but they clearly had a plan that they executed really well.

Whether we got pick 24 from Hawthorn, or a slightly better pick from North for example, it probably didn't matter in the end.

I'd rarther Kerridge, Jenkins and Grigg then a slightly better 1st round pick.

The first round picks from pick 15 (the first non GWS/Bris/Port pick) before Kerridge are:

Ellis
Sheridan
Clay Smith
McKenzie
Kavanagh
Crozier
Mitchell
Bootsma
Newman
Schade
Ross
Elton

From that list, only Ellis, Crozier and Smith have been better or matched Kerridge's output.

 

[cmndstab]

Maybe so, but in terms of what we gave up versus what we got, I would say we are big winners.

Gold Coast were probably also winners as well - given that they were only using one pick in the draft, they effectively upgraded pick 27 to pick 24 for free.

Essendon are probably the only losers here, giving up Jenkins for a 10 pick upgrade in the second round.

It's hard to really work out the winners and losers in this trade.

Hawthorn definitely came out in front.
Adelaide have at least broken even, I would say. Probably just in front.
Gold Coast came out in front too. Tiny upgrade, but in front nonetheless.
Essendon definitely lost.

But that's not the whole story. Even if we'd never traded for Jenkins, picking up Kerridge + whoever pick 31 was could have turned into a decent day for us as well, and then there would be no losers. Trading is not always a zero-sum game, but in this case I think there is some missing "hurt" somewhere in the system. I'll say that it was shared equally by other teams who A) had to deal with Gold Coast having a zillion top 25 picks, and B) missed out on selecting Kerridge.

 

[cmndstab]

I always thought it was a win, after the end of the trade week. At the time of the trade, I was a little miffed, but they clearly had a plan that they executed really well.

Whether we got pick 24 from Hawthorn, or a slightly better pick from North for example, it probably didn't matter in the end.

I'd rarther Kerridge, Jenkins and Grigg then a slightly better 1st round pick.

I wonder... presumably the option of trading Gold Coast's unwanted picks with an upgrade was always on the cards. If we had secured, say, pick 19 rather than pick 24, would we have gotten anything else? Or was it always pick 27, 31 and 68 for whatever late first rounder we could muster up?

Perhaps we would have done something else with pick 19 first? Tried to split it up further but still get back something higher than 27?

Either way, good to just get the trade done. With the fingers in the pie that we had, we knew we were effectively trading Gunston for Jenkins, 27, 41 and 68 before any further trades or drafts were done. That would have looked like a loss at the time, but at least one that we could recover from.

 

[Hank93]

I wonder... presumably the option of trading Gold Coast's unwanted picks with an upgrade was always on the cards. If we had secured, say, pick 19 rather than pick 24, would we have gotten anything else? Or was it always pick 27, 31 and 68 for whatever late first rounder we could muster up?

Perhaps we would have done something else with pick 19 first? Tried to split it up further but still get back something higher than 27?

Either way, good to just get the trade done. With the fingers in the pie that we had, we knew we were effectively trading Gunston for Jenkins, 27, 41 and 68 before any further trades or drafts were done. That would have looked like a loss at the time, but at least one that we could recover from.

I tend to lean towards pick 19 getting the same result, which is why I'm not that fussed we got pick 24 from Hawthorn in the end.

I do find it weird though that the Jenkins and GC trades were done so late in trade week.

Surely we had these plans in place before the trades were actually completed.

 

[Elder van Berlo]

It's hard to really work out the winners and losers in this trade.

Hawthorn definitely came out in front.
Adelaide have at least broken even, I would say. Probably just in front.
Gold Coast came out in front too. Tiny upgrade, but in front nonetheless.
Essendon definitely lost.

But that's not the whole story. Even if we'd never traded for Jenkins, picking up Kerridge + whoever pick 31 was could have turned into a decent day for us as well, and then there would be no losers. Trading is not always a zero-sum game, but in this case I think there is some missing "hurt" somewhere in the system. I'll say that it was shared equally by other teams who A) had to deal with Gold Coast having a zillion top 25 picks, and B) missed out on selecting Kerridge.

It's always a bit fraught (albeit fun) going back over trades that involved draft picks and determining wins and losses based on who the club drafted and how they've panned out.

Looking at it from GC's point of view, in one sense it is unarguable that they won from their end - they turned their only pick in the draft from 27 to 24 for free. How can that be a loss? In another sense, you compare the players drafted at those positions, they got Henry Schade who hasn't debuted yet and we have flavour of the month Sam Kerridge. So I suppose you can see how the "hurt" goes missing, if each club uses different measures to assess the result of the trade.

In another way, Essendon might look at that trade as a win, thinking that they lost Jenkins, who was never going to play for them anyway, and netted pick 31 where they took Jackson Merrett, who at this early stage has probably shown enough to suggest he'll be a decent player. All they gave up was pick 41, where (from their point of view) the Crows picked up some kid who doesn't look like debuting and spent all last year playing for Norwood's seconds.

I guess our apparent success in this trade (and it's early days) probably came as much from good drafting as clever trading. Having said that, I think our trading certainly made the best of a bad situation.

 

[Crows4Eva]

Ultimately, we managed to turn a crappy situation into a win losing Gunston for #27 and by turning it into #27, 31 and 68 we ended up with Kerridge, Jenkins and Johnston out of it. Club did the best they could in what looked like a no win situation.

 

[Cap]

so what people are saying is whenever you trade a player for a pick, you lose because there is no guarantee of the quality of the pick.

 

[xchadders]

while we had a win on the recruiting/drafting front, i still think we 'lost' with our trade of gunston. it could have been win/win/win for us.

 

[cmndstab]

so what people are saying is whenever you trade a player for a pick, you lose because there is no guarantee of the quality of the pick.

The point is, it's unlikely that a player of Gunston's quality will be taken with pick 24. A pick in the teens, yes, but in the mid-20s? It's possible but you're behind the eight ball.

Fortunately, we managed to, well... if I had a better grasp of pool analogies I could say something really clever here But let's just go with we turned it into a win.

 

[weekend at bernies]

Cant really judge who wins the trade's until the end of their respective careers...

I am happy where we are at, at the moment.

it should come down to which player helps their team win a premiership!!
Which Gunston has already had a chance & failed!!

 

[LC40]

It was definitely a win for us, if they don't want to play for you then get rid of them quick smart.

Gunston is a superb talent but he really didn't want to be here so get rid of him.
Football is such a team sport everyone needs to be on the same page.
I was filthy when he left but the more I follow football I beginning to see that those who actually choose to stay or like Jenkins choose to come are in the long run better value.
Guys like Armstrong could have sown up a spot here if he had put his head down and really given it a crack but he wanted greener pastures. In the end we are the winners because his replacement is 100% committed to the team.
Tippett is the same, a talent but his whole attitude was tainted in the end towards our team. All it causes is friction and envy.

Would I think the same if Dangerfield said he wanted to go?

 

[Allefgib]

Can someone shed light on why Gold coast gave us 3 picks for one to go up 3 spots?

Was there an offset from the Hawks to the suns?

Did they not draft past 24?

 

[cmndstab]

Can someone shed light on why Gold coast gave us 3 picks for one to go up 3 spots?

Was there an offset from the Hawks to the suns?

Did they not draft past 24?

The last one, yeah. They could only use so many picks and had determined that pick 27 would be their last pick used - they were intending to hold off until the PSD or something, or perhaps they traded in sufficiently many earlier picks, but they couldn't select beyond pick 27. We picked up on this early and offered to find a slightly earlier pick in exchange for pick 27 and the later picks they wouldn't use.

Quite clever, really, particularly in the light that Essendon were willing to do the Jenkins deal for a pick downgrade. No point downgrading 24 when you can get two picks of roughly similar value and keep one of them.

 

[Cap]

The point is, it's unlikely that a player of Gunston's quality will be taken with pick 24. A pick in the teens, yes, but in the mid-20s? It's possible but you're behind the eight ball.

Fortunately, we managed to, well... if I had a better grasp of pool analogies I could say something really clever here But let's just go with we turned it into a win.

Gunston talent is purely subjective.

as I said, talented 3rd talls are great....if they can kick straight

 

[cmndstab]

Gunston talent is purely subjective.

as I said, talented 3rd talls are great....if they can kick straight

This was the feeling at the time That Gunston was a quality third tall with a quality leg.

I must admit I haven't paid enough attention to him since to know if that has changed