Higher Pick?

[Streaker]

Should we be going after a higher draft pick?

With the Bulldogs getting pick 6 should we try to trade Cox for 4 or 6

Jacobs ---> Bulldogs
Pick 6 ----> West Coast
Cox ------> Essendon

Essendon require a ruckman with the retirement of Allesio.
Jacobs would be a handy replacement for Brown.
We get a better pick in a draft where the top 10 players are considered a long way ahead of the rest.

 

[ozzult]

In a word, no.


Reason 1, Cox is very much a required player for us.

Reason 2, A 17 year old kid isn't gonna help us win a premiership in the next 3 years.

Reason 3, Danny Jacobs is not worth pick 6.

 

[ImperialPurple]

Originally posted by ozzult
In a word, no.


Reason 1, Cox is very much a required player for us.

Reason 2, A 17 year old kid isn't gonna help us win a premiership in the next 3 years.

Reason 3, Danny Jacobs is not worth pick 6.

Yeah but it would give you the first shot at local WA talent, which we might get now if the Croad for pick 10 trade goes through. Would it be worth it to WC to get in ahead of Freo? I reckon that's half the reason for the Croad trade - he's been sacrificed to improve our posistion ahead of WC.

 

[Streaker]

Originally posted by ozzult
In a word, no.

Reason 1, Cox is very much a required player for us.

Yes but not expendable.

Reason 2, A 17 year old kid isn't gonna help us win a premiership in the next 3 years.

Are you saying we lack depth. One man does not a team maketh.

Reason 3, Danny Jacobs is not worth pick 6.

To you and I maybe. Others may value him more.

 

[Streaker]

Originally posted by ImperialPurple
Yeah but it would give you the first shot at local WA talent, which we might get now if the Croad for pick 10 trade goes through. Would it be worth it to WC to get in ahead of Freo? I reckon that's half the reason for the Croad trade - he's been sacrificed to improve our posistion ahead of WC.

Across town rivalry hasn't extended that far yet.

It's just that according to a few people the top 10 draft picks are head and shoulders above the rest. I would rather make sure we got a quality player.

As for Croad being sacrificed, I would have thought it would have been a godsend getting rid of him and would have been trying to include Waterhouse in the deal.

 

[ImperialPurple]

Of course my theory could just be a result of the over oxygenisation of the brain from the hyperventilation caused by the excitement of trade week....

 

[daddy_4_eyes]

Originally posted by ImperialPurple
Yeah but it would give you the first shot at local WA talent, which we might get now if the Croad for pick 10 trade goes through. Would it be worth it to WC to get in ahead of Freo? I reckon that's half the reason for the Croad trade - he's been sacrificed to improve our posistion ahead of WC.

In the last few years, WC has shown they draft the best player available, be they from WA or not.

Back on topic, IMO if WC were offere pick 6 for Cox, they would take it.

 

[ImperialPurple]

Originally posted by daddy_4_eyes
In the last few years, WC has shown they draft the best player available, be they from WA or not.

Back on topic, IMO if WC were offere pick 6 for Cox, they would take it.

It was on topic - it was a fair question wondering about Ozzult's response of "in a word no".

Also - yes, WC have always drafted the best available from wherever in recent years. Freo have also (Pavlich, Schammer spring to mind).

But look at the "hoo-haa" surrounding your lot getting Judd's and Wirrpunda's sigs this year, and us getting Pavlich's last year.

With local players you don't have that issue (or much less so), so I think it was a fair question and on topic.

 

[daddy_4_eyes]

Originally posted by ImperialPurple
It was on topic - it was a fair question wondering about Ozzult's response of "in a word no"
.....
With local players you don't have that issue (or much less so), so I think it was a fair question and on topic.

Sorry, didn't mean to infer that your post wasn't. Sentence one in my post is seperate from sentence two

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by daddy_4_eyes
In the last few years, WC has shown they draft the best player available, be they from WA or not.

Back on topic, IMO if WC were offere pick 6 for Cox, they would take it.

Pick 6 for Cox.. I don't want to trade him, but that's a pretty good pick if it came up- there are reasons to take it, and reasons not to-
on one hand, pick 6 is bloody high quality. Draft picks later than 15-20 are generally development prospects, but pick 6 is less so- if you look at our last pick 6 player, Sampi, you have to say if you got a player of that level of quality for Cox (hopefully a tall 'un) then you're doing okay. The argument about the youngun being a long term development prospect doesn't always hold true either- pick 6 could very likely get you a top level, afl ready kid who could slot straight into the team.

On the other hand, Cox is young, still developing, and not yet at the point in his career where ruckman are expected to hit their best form. People talk about him like he'll only ever be a blue collar, workmanlike player, but for ffs, he's actually a fair bit better now than Gardiner was in his third year- where will Cox be when he's Gardiner's age? Given how skinny Gardiner was 3 years into his career, its worth realising that a season or so down the track, Cox will very likely be a 204cm, 110kg behemoth, and still as quick and agile as he is now. Sounds a bloody interesting prospect to me. Even if we did decide to put our eggs in the Seaby basket, at the very least, Cox's continued development would make him worth a lot more on the trade block

Other thing, of course, is that Gardiner has never yet played a full season. Chances are he'll get injured at some point next year, and when he does, I don't fancy relying on Seaby to hold up our ruck division- classy as he may be, he's simply too scrawny to handle AFL rucking now- we'd be butchered with him in the ruck next year.

Its not an easy decision to make. I suppose I think West Coast would do that trade only if they had a very clear idea who they'd select with pick 6, and were sure he'd be an instant impact player who would more than make up for the hole Cox will leave. If that's the case, then goodo, the trade is a no-brainer, but otherwise, I think it makes sense to just be patient, and give Cox another year of development. This time next year, Cox should be a much better player, Seaby will have developed enough to backup Gardiner if necessary, or possibly turned himself into a full time FF. We'd be able to cover the loss of Cox much easier, and Dean would probably be further developed as a player and worth more on the trading block. Either way, we'd have a much better idea of whether this trade should happen.

 

[The Passenger]

basically, we can't trade Cox unless we know we're getting a quality second ruckman in return in another deal (there'd be no point trading Cox for a second ruckman).

We can't rely on Seaby coming in next year and being able to hold the second ruck spot.

 

[Streaker]

Originally posted by Black Thunder
basically, we can't trade Cox unless we know we're getting a quality second ruckman in return in another deal (there'd be no point trading Cox for a second ruckman).

We can't rely on Seaby coming in next year and being able to hold the second ruck spot.

With Johnson, Lynch, McDougall and Beeck as backups I don't see why not. Show some faith in our big men.

If you don't play them they can't develop.

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by West Coast Stre
With Johnson, Lynch, McDougall and Beeck as backups I don't see why not. Show some faith in our big men.

If you don't play them they can't develop.

Lynch isn't ruckman height, Beeck is as raw as Seaby, Johnson is an average player at WAFL level, who may or may not come good long term. McDougall will most likely be required in a full time forward role next year.

If Gardie get injured (and he has in every single season of his career so far), would you feel okay having any two of the above names functioning as our ruck duo?

 

[no1bankteller]

How about if instead of pick 6, we trade our no 1 pick and David Haynes for Geelongs number 1 pick ( no 7.?)

Do you think that would be a fair trade?

 

[Streaker]

Originally posted by no1bankteller
How about if instead of pick 6, we trade our no 1 pick and David Haynes for Geelongs number 1 pick ( no 7.?)

Do you think that would be a fair trade?

Rather have 2 first round picks.

 

[Streaker]

Originally posted by Mead
Lynch isn't ruckman height, Beeck is as raw as Seaby, Johnson is an average player at WAFL level, who may or may not come good long term. McDougall will most likely be required in a full time forward role next year.

If Gardie get injured (and he has in every single season of his career so far), would you feel okay having any two of the above names functioning as our ruck duo?

In a word YES.

With the quality of the Midfielders we have we should still be able to provide a contest in the centre square.

 

[llosis]

Originally posted by no1bankteller
How about if instead of pick 6, we trade our no 1 pick and David Haynes for Geelongs number 1 pick ( no 7.?)

Do you think that would be a fair trade?

Wouldn't we only do this if there was a player we wanted but would likely not be able to get with pick 11.

Can't see that moving up 4 spots is such a big advantage when there is no obvious target in mind.