Play Nice Hypothetical Pick 1 Trade Poll: Pick 1 for Picks 2 & 15 --- Pick 1 & F1 (WCE) for Picks 2 & 3 --- Something else?

[Lore]

And of course, I will remind you all to review the rules of the trade board, in particular:

• No trolling – in addition to the obvious, we have a ban on troll nicknames such as Norf, West Coke, etc similar to the main board, because this type of language is inflammatory and creates more issues than it solves. Keep it civilised or take it elsewhere, such as the Bay or your club board, or whoever will have you really
• Don't be a pest – this includes derailing the thread with off-topic stuff, or trying to starve it of oxygen through proof by assertion/argument ad nauseam, aka filibustering
• Personal attacks – should go without saying but stick to the point, no name calling, no insinuations about someone's intelligence, abilities or other attributes

 

[Barrybran]

Yeah, happy to agree to disagree tbh. It seems that general consensus in here is picks 2-9 are even, but I strongly disagree. McKercher is clear at #2 after Reid/Walter are 1A/1B.

Pick 3 gets whoever has it first choice from that 2nd tier of Curtin, Watson, Duursma, Sanders etc. Personally i think downgrading from 3 to 6 should net us much more that a 4 pick upgrade from 15 to 11.

Why? Aren't five first round picks enough?

Look at what you're arguing from Melbourne's perspective. You're knocking back a fair trade because pick 42 does nothing for you (fair) so you're asking for their F1. Are you sending 17 or 18 back?

Everyone is looking at trades on an individual basis rather than what you can do with them. As you said, picks 2-9 are fairly even but pick 11 is better for North than pick 15 as you can fill a need with a player of your choice.

Melbourne have the leverage on this trade, not North.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I don't think North should be relying on Melbourne either, but the idea that North will trade pick 3 for unders to Melbourne just to appease WC in a trade for Reid is madness.

Best case is just take 2, 3, 15, 17, 18 to the draft and pick up a ton of young talent anyway.

Agree, if I were North I'd at least take picks 2 and 3, and maybe look to bundle 15, 17, 18 whether that be for a pick this year or one next year. North actually are in a situation where they don't have to do anything. End of the day if you don't get Reid, are you still happy with Curtin, Mckercher, etc at 2 and 3, I bet you are. Can see one of those picks ending up in next year's draft to give you some resources next year

 

[Kangas_11]

Why? Aren't five first round picks enough?

Look at what you're arguing from Melbourne's perspective. You're knocking back a fair trade because pick 42 does nothing for you (fair) so you're asking for their F1. Are you sending 17 or 18 back?

Everyone is looking at trades on an individual basis rather than what you can do with them. As you said, picks 2-9 are fairly even but pick 11 is better for North than pick 15 as you can fill a need with a player of your choice.

Melbourne have the leverage on this trade, not North.

We already have 5 first round picks though. I'm not knocking back a fair trade of pick 42, it's a straight up bad trade. I'm a bit confused by your logic, of course pick 11 is better than 15, but pick 3 is better than pick 6 as well.

And you misread my post, I disagree with the assumption that 2-9 is even. Pick 3 is just the first choice in that tier after McKercher. Teams will have vastly different opinions on Duursma, Watson, Curtin etc. Pick 3 guarantees that teams top selection of that group.

There's no leverage at all because this is a straight up hypothetical on a footy fan website lol.

 

[hilly]

Why? Aren't five first round picks enough?

Look at what you're arguing from Melbourne's perspective. You're knocking back a fair trade because pick 42 does nothing for you (fair) so you're asking for their F1. Are you sending 17 or 18 back?

Everyone is looking at trades on an individual basis rather than what you can do with them. As you said, picks 2-9 are fairly even but pick 11 is better for North than pick 15 as you can fill a need with a player of your choice.

Melbourne have the leverage on this trade, not North.

You seem invested in North making a poor trade.

On SM-S901E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[hilly]

We already have 5 first round picks though. I'm not knocking back a fair trade of pick 42, it's a straight up bad trade. I'm a bit confused by your logic, of course pick 11 is better than 15, but pick 3 is better than pick 6 as well.

And you misread my post, I disagree with the assumption that 2-9 is even. Pick 3 is just the first choice in that tier after McKercher. Teams will have vastly different opinions on Duursma, Watson, Curtin etc. Pick 3 guarantees that teams top selection of that group.

There's no leverage at all because this is a straight up hypothetical on a footy fan website lol.

No this is a trade proposed by Melbourne but North has no leverage and must accept!

On SM-S901E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Blackas87]

No this is a trade proposed by Melbourne but North has no leverage and must accept!

On SM-S901E using BigFooty.com mobile app

Melbourne have proposed this trade?

 

[Barrybran]

You seem invested in North making a poor trade.

On SM-S901E using BigFooty.com mobile app

I enjoy the puzzle element of this. But that's not a poor trade. You need KPPs more than you need midfielders and that trade improves your chances of getting one or more of the best KPPs available in this draft.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I enjoy the puzzle element of this. But that's not a poor trade. You need KPPs more than you need midfielders and that trade improves your chances of getting one or more of the best KPPs available in this draft.

To go from 6 to 3 you’ll need to be giving WAY more than you are proposing you are wanting North to be fair doesn’t work like that with pick swaps you always pay a premium for a higher selection. North won’t be trading 2 or 3 unless it’s to WCE for Reid and frankly don’t see the point McKercher isn’t that much behind or Duursma.

Look at what GWS gave to go up in the draft in the last few years.

 

[Barrybran]

To go from 6 to 3 you’ll need to be giving WAY more than you are proposing you are wanting North to be fair doesn’t work like that with pick swaps you always pay a premium for a higher selection. North won’t be trading 2 or 3 unless it’s to WCE for Reid and frankly don’t see the point McKercher isn’t that much behind or Duursma.

Look at what GWS gave to go up in the draft in the last few years.

What do you perceive is the difference between pick 3 and pick 6 this year? Conversely, the same with picks 11 and 15?

 

[Blackas87]

To go from 6 to 3 you’ll need to be giving WAY more than you are proposing you are wanting North to be fair doesn’t work like that with pick swaps you always pay a premium for a higher selection. North won’t be trading 2 or 3 unless it’s to WCE for Reid and frankly don’t see the point McKercher isn’t that much behind or Duursma.

Look at what GWS gave to go up in the draft in the last few years.

But it’s North wanting to split pick 3 to get Melbournes pick 6, Melbourne aren’t trying to jump up.

 

[Farang83150]

But it’s North wanting to split pick 3 to get Melbournes pick 6, Melbourne aren’t trying to jump up.

I think some have jumped in without checking back a few posts.

 

[Wild Bill]

2 & 3 would be a horrible decision from North. Look at the last 10 years of 1 V 2 & 3.

2 & 3 are miles in front of 1.

Boyd V Kelly & Billings
McCartin V Petracca & Brayshaw
Weitering V Schache & Oliver
McGrath V Taranto & McCluggage
Ranyor V Brayshaw & Dow
Walsh V Lukosius V Rankine
Rowell V Anderson & Jackson
Thilthorpe V Phillips & McDonald
JHF V Callaghan & MacAndrews
Cadman V Scheezel & Wardlaw.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

What do you perceive is the difference between pick 3 and pick 6 this year? Conversely, the same with picks 11 and 15?

A fair bit. There is a gap between the top 4 and the 6-10 range which will be 7-11 after the Walter bid

 

[perplexed]

But it’s North wanting to split pick 3 to get Melbournes pick 6, Melbourne aren’t trying to jump up.

Err... wouldn't North just take the same player at 3 when they are sure they are still on the board? The trade could only make sense from a North point of view if we can turn 3 and 17 (or similar) into 6 and 8 in a three-way deal with Geelong. Basically, North would only move 3 back if they can get an extra top 8 pick. And this also relies on us not rating Duursma or McKercher much above Watson, Curtin and Sanders.
Similarly Melbourne would only trade up if they valued Duursma or McKercher significantly higher than Watson, Curtin and Sanders.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

But it’s North wanting to split pick 3 to get Melbournes pick 6, Melbourne aren’t trying to jump up.

North don’t need to split 3. They keep 2&3. Bundle 15,17,18 plus they have futures. On no planet would north be splitting 3, in fact they won’t trade it unless it’s to get Reid and that’s a case of how far ahead do you feel he is

 

[Sphynx]

But it’s North wanting to split pick 3 to get Melbournes pick 6, Melbourne aren’t trying to jump up.

Yes they are, they tried to trade for North's pick 3 in trade week and was one of the closest deals that didn't get done according to Twomey.

 

[Blackas87]

Err... wouldn't North just take the same player at 3 when they are sure they are still on the board? The trade could only make sense from a North point of view if we can turn 3 and 17 (or similar) into 6 and 8 in a three-way deal with Geelong. Basically, North would only move 3 back if they can get an extra top 8 pick. And this also relies on us not rating Duursma or McKercher much above Watson, Curtin and Sanders.
Similarly Melbourne would only trade up if they valued Duursma or McKercher significantly higher than Watson, Curtin and Sanders.

Just take your guy at 3.

 

[Blackas87]

North don’t need to split 3. They keep 2&3. Bundle 15,17,18 plus they have futures. On no planet would north be splitting 3, in fact they won’t trade it unless it’s to get Reid and that’s a case of how far ahead do you feel he is

Who keeps bringing up Melbournes picks?

 

[sydney_gws]

2 & 3 would be a horrible decision from North. Look at the last 10 years of 1 V 2 & 3.

2 & 3 are miles in front of 1.

Boyd V Kelly & Billings
McCartin V Petracca & Brayshaw
Weitering V Schache & Oliver
McGrath V Taranto & McCluggage
Ranyor V Brayshaw & Dow
Walsh V Lukosius V Rankine
Rowell V Anderson & Jackson
Thilthorpe V Phillips & McDonald
JHF V Callaghan & MacAndrews
Cadman V Scheezel & Wardlaw.

I agree

 

[Blackas87]

Yes they are, they tried to trade for North's pick 3 in trade week and was one of the closest deals that didn't get done according to Twomey.

Melbourne have made no secrets they want Reid, I didn’t hear Twomey

 

[Sphynx]

Melbourne have made no secrets they want Reid, I didn’t hear Twomey

It wasn't as a part of a pick 1 deal.

It was a deal with GC and North that involved 3,5,6 and other picks.

North ended up with 5 & 6. (So would have had 2,5,6)

Melbourne ended up with 3.

GC a heap of end of Rnd 1 picks etc.

It came extremely close to happening according to Twomey until the Dogs offer for 5 materialized. He described it as the biggest "almost" deal of trade week in his wrap up.

 

[Keystone agony]

Can't even remember posting anything in that thread, such is my lack of care for it(I'm 3rd, BTW).

There's a bunch of posters around the same amount.

Conversely, Keystone agony has more than twice the amount of posts in the WCE thread than anyone else.

What's your point exactly?

I think ive accidentally been posting there thinking its the main trades and draft thread about pick 1. No wonder ive been hammered by eagle fans

 

[Sphynx]

And why is that?

They've met with him multiple times and had a further great interview at the combine, not only that but Curtin is a quality kid and player.

Duursma suddenly gets rated 3 in a couple of lists and everyone just presumes that is who North is taking now.

Clarkson and Rawlings were at Duursma's home a few weeks ago.

 

[perplexed]

West Coast have a reputation in junior footy circles for feigning interest in some players and ignoring their real draft targets. The running joke is that if they haven't interviewed you then they are certain to call out your name and vice versa. Maybe it is some sort of double bluff, but I keep hearing how WC haven't yet interviewed Curtin. Also, apparently he isn't really a key position player. Despite being 197cm tall he just wants to play as a midfielder. Next thing they are telling us how they have just flown to Tassie to talk with Colby and Riley. Is anyone buying this?

If everyone knows they really want Curtin, does that collapse the price for pick one? Is there any point in North trading for it?

 

[pantskyle]

Clarkson and Rawlings were at Duursma's home a few weeks ago.

So before the combine and before the current lists have come out? I would suspect they'd have visited several top rated local talents at home.