Hypothetical trades super thread

[shawthing09]

Re: Didak for pick 4 + Adam Thompson

TheClokes and co. you're a bunch of fools, Why do we need to get more draft picks and lose experience every year, you can't win a flag with a team that have played a total of about 120 games between( which is what you guys are obviously expecting, by saying "we need more picks, we need more picks) because it is absolute CRAP! What we need right now ESPECIALLY after the last couple of years(retirements), is bloody experience. So do your research and please think about your posts before you post them.
and BTW TheClokes no-one takes anything you say about Didak into account because practically every bloody post you do has something to do with getting rid of our BEST player in Didak...

Experince is only worth something if your a leader which Didak is not. We next year we'd be trying to pinch one rather then being the strongest side. You aim to build the strongest side and if you manage to pinch one before that good and well. We will be a stronger side long term by adding an elite mid at the expense of a HFF especially as we have a shit load of flanks to replace the one we lose.

 

[Pedro]

Re: Didak for pick 4 + Adam Thompson

no one said he was but given he is only 26 and an elite HFF with superb foot skills (something we lack) why would we want to trade him?

What if pick 4 doesn't turn out to be what we wanted?

I think its pretty obvious why we would want to trade him. I'm not suggesting that we do want to, but none of us really know if the decision has been made or not. I'm open minded on Didak. If they have decided to trade him, its their job to get as much as they possibly can. Try and make the best of a bad situation. If they keep him, I just hope he pulls his finger out and repays the faith so to speak.

Re pick 4 not working out - You just have to trust your judgement I suppose. If you don't take a punt now and again, you'll never know. It was a risk to trade Tarrant too, but most will agree that has worked out well. It will depend on how highly Hine rates some of the kids I suppose.

 

[Keele]

People need to remember two things on the alan didak topic....

1/ They need to divorce themselves from the 'I love Alan Didak Unconditionally' mindset and think of this as a business decision. An early pick that ensures we get the best or second best young midfielder in the land, + steak knives, will help to set up our club for the future. It's business. There were plenty who didn't want to trade Tarrant. We won that trade overwhelmingly.

2/ Forget anything that has come out of the club about Didak being a required player, contracted etc etc. That's just spin. They aren't going to come out and say we don't want him. That just brings down his trade value. they are trying to create an air of reluctance to part with him but if the right deal comes across the table next week, IMO they won't hesitate to move Alan on.

1/ People like you need to divorce themselves with the fact that pick four is not the do all end all assurance that will fix our midfield. Egan example one.
Alan is a proven great star... other wise we could not demand the early draft pick that you guys think he is only worth.

2/ If the club was laying Alan on the table as trade bait believe me they would be making it known. One of the main things that people forget is that Alan was used in the midfield for the first time this season on a reg basis that is... by all accounts he succeeded in a position he was not used to and prior to being suspended was leading the AFL kicks... and some were saying he was having his best season ever. Would not a good midfield and the best forward flanker in the AFL who can also play midfield be a better option for Collingwood than placing all their hopes on a young UNPROVEN midfielder by trading Alan for it

I am all for youth, but I am not all for doing away with proven class to get it. There are other ways to increase our chance of a lower pick by other trades along with pick 11 to increase our chances of a better selection at draft.

Alan will be with the pies as his contract suggests in 2009

 

[Skade]

Re: Ports picks

I know we would need a Ziebell/Hartlett/Sidebottom with pick 4 but Vickery is almost impossible to pass up if the top 3 go the way they should (Watts Nat Rich)

At 200 cms and guns to put Tarrant to shame he just ran top 10 at draft camp for the 20 metre sprint.

Why wouldn't port go for him then if they want height.

 

[Skade]

Re: Ports picks

Messing with us, the prick.

 

[Bigness]

1/ People like you need to divorce themselves with the fact that pick four is not the do all end all assurance that will fix our midfield. Egan example one.
Alan is a proven great star... other wise we could not demand the early draft pick that you guys think he is only worth.

2/ If the club was laying Alan on the table as trade bait believe me they would be making it known. One of the main things that people forget is that Alan was used in the midfield for the first time this season on a reg basis that is... by all accounts he succeeded in a position he was not used to and prior to being suspended was leading the AFL kicks... and some were saying he was having his best season ever. Would not a good midfield and the best forward flanker in the AFL who can also play midfield be a better option for Collingwood than placing all their hopes on a young UNPROVEN midfielder by trading Alan for it

I am all for youth, but I am not all for doing away with proven class to get it. There are other ways to increase our chance of a lower pick by other trades along with pick 11 to increase our chances of a better selection at draft.

Alan will be with the pies as his contract suggests in 2009

Just saying mate, that some people need to be more open minded to the possibilities. Saying point blank that he shouldn't be traded is ridiculous. Who knows what might be offerred up next week?

I accept the point about Alan's abilities. That's not being questioned. I don't accept that he can't be replaced by equal or better in a trade though. I would back Derek Hine in every day of the week to make the right call on pick 4 in any draft. If you stuff up pick 4 you shouldn't be a recruiter.

 

[Pedro]

Re: R. Shaw and a sweetener for..

cheers big fella, i swear i read it as well

I read the article. Without looking it up, I have a feeling it was a Greg Denham article in the Australian. I think it went along the lines of "It is believed that Rhyce Shaw will probably ask to be traded", without anything solid to suggest why that would be the case.

 

[didaka]

Re: R. Shaw and a sweetener for..

I saw the article where it said Shaw and Johnson have asked for trade also.

 

[Jabso]

Re: Didak for pick 4 + Adam Thompson

People need to remember two things on the alan didak topic....

1/ They need to divorce themselves from the 'I love Alan Didak Unconditionally' mindset and think of this as a business decision. An early pick that ensures we get the best or second best young midfielder in the land, + steak knives, will help to set up our club for the future. It's business. There were plenty who didn't want to trade Tarrant. We won that trade overwhelmingly.

2/ Forget anything that has come out of the club about Didak being a required player, contracted etc etc. That's just spin. They aren't going to come out and say we don't want him. That just brings down his trade value. they are trying to create an air of reluctance to part with him but if the right deal comes across the table next week, IMO they won't hesitate to move Alan on.

I think what others need to realise is that trading Didak for a high pick is trading him for a young player who may in a few years time be as good as Didak, but is just as likely to be nowhere near his standard.

 

[mdc]

Re: Didak for pick 4 + Adam Thompson

I think what others need to realise is that trading Didak for a high pick is trading him for a young player who may in a few years time be as good as Didak, but is just as likely to be nowhere near his standard.

Given we'd be getting 10+ years service from the kid, and he'd likely be playing a more crucial position (i.e. mid rather than HFF), he wouldn't need to be as good.

If we were fairly confident we could pick up a 200 game pure midfielder, and with the 4th pick there's no reason we couldn't, then it's a no-brainer imo.

Realistically though, as I've said elsewhere, the highest pick that could be offered for Didak is pick 9, and that's a long-shot. So given that, I'd prefer we kept him.

 

[duds0101]

Sorry new to the threads etc

Can people update me on the terms IMO and KPP and other jargon on here pleaese. thankyou.

 

[didaka]

Sorry new to the threads etc

Can people update me on the terms IMO and KPP and other jargon on here pleaese. thankyou.

In my opinion and key position player

 

[duds0101]

In my opinion and key position player

Thank you is there any more I should know?

 

[Quicky]

Re: Didak for pick 4 + Adam Thompson

Given we'd be getting 10+ years service from the kid, and he'd likely be playing a more crucial position (i.e. mid rather than HFF), he wouldn't need to be as good.

If we were fairly confident we could pick up a 200 game pure midfielder, and with the 4th pick there's no reason we couldn't, then it's a no-brainer imo.

Realistically though, as I've said elsewhere, the highest pick that could be offered for Didak is pick 9, and that's a long-shot. So given that, I'd prefer we kept him.

Yeah I agree with you here. What we need for a realistic tilt at a flag is midfielders and if Didak can get us the picks required to build a midfield he is expendable. Pick 4 is a long shot from Port as he does not fill a specific need at the club as good as he is. So in reality he is unlikely to command pick 4. That said if it was offered for Didak you would be stupid to knock it back.

 

[Jabso]

Re: Didak for pick 4 + Adam Thompson

Given we'd be getting 10+ years service from the kid, and he'd likely be playing a more crucial position (i.e. mid rather than HFF), he wouldn't need to be as good.

If we were fairly confident we could pick up a 200 game pure midfielder, and with the 4th pick there's no reason we couldn't, then it's a no-brainer imo.

Realistically though, as I've said elsewhere, the highest pick that could be offered for Didak is pick 9, and that's a long-shot. So given that, I'd prefer we kept him.

You cannot be confident in picking up a 200 game midfielder.

In Collingwood's history we have had 1076 players who have played a game. 24 of them have played 200 games or more. 3 of our current players will probably break that mark (Presti, O'Bree, Lockyer). 80 players in our history have been 150+ game players.

If we get Kerr for him then I would be happy with it. I would prefer a top 20 player in the AFL with a fair amount of years and perhaps his best footy ahead of him to a kid who has the potential (i.e. he may or may not be AND if he is he will take his time) to be top 20 in a slightly more useful position.

Bird in hand, two in bush.

Let's have a look at every 3-6 pick since 2000. Pick 3-6 is what we seem to be talking about.

2000: 3. Didak, 4. Livingston, 5. McDougall, 6. D.Smith
2001: "Super Draft": 3. Judd, 4. Polak, 5. X. Clarke, 6. Sampi
2002: 3. J.Brennan, 4. T.Walsh, 5. J.McVeigh, 6. S.Salopek
2003: 3. Sylvia, 4. Ray, 5. McLean, 6. Bradley
2004: 3. R.Griffen, 4. Tambling, 5. Franklin, 6. T. Williams
2005: 3. Ellis, 4. Kennedy, 5. Pendlebury, 6. Dowler
2006: 3. L.Hansen, 4. Leuenberger, 5. Boak, 6. Thorp
2007: 3. Masten, 4. C.Morton, 5. Grant, 6. Myers

There is the odd player who slotted straight in and is a good player by year 1, and gun by year 3. There is the odd dud. A lot of the better players took a lot of time, like Salopek, McVeigh and now Tambling. Would you trade Didak for McVeigh or Salopek outright?

 

[mdc]

Re: Didak for pick 4 + Adam Thompson

You cannot be confident in picking up a 200 game midfielder.

In Collingwood's history we have had 1076 players who have played a game. 24 of them have played 200 games or more. 3 of our current players will probably break that mark (Presti, O'Bree, Lockyer). 80 players in our history have been 150+ game players.

If we get Kerr for him then I would be happy with it. I would prefer a top 20 player in the AFL with a fair amount of years and perhaps his best footy ahead of him to a kid who has the potential (i.e. he may or may not be AND if he is he will take his time) to be top 20 in a slightly more useful position.

Bird in hand, two in bush.

You're overrating the bird in hand.

If Didak was a top 20 player, then I'd be in agreement with you. If he was a top 50 player and under 24 years of age, I'd still probably be in agreement with you. But he's neither.

As for the numbers you cited, keep in mind that the game has become a lot more professional in the last decade or two, and history before, say, the early 90's, is almost irrelevant. Clubs' investment in drafting has also changed dramatically in the last 5-10 years particularly.

As an exercise, go through the midfielders taken in the top 5 of the draft in the past 5 years. How many of them will play at least 150 games, barring injury? I'd say at least 80%.

In fact, right now the only two suspect are Ray (already has 68, and if picked up by the right club will make it) and Tambling (who already has 66, and looks to be improving). Everyone else is a lock.

And at least half of them, probably more, will play 200 games.

KP players are a bit more speculative, but it's still hard to judge the last 5 years wrt KP.

 

[Jabso]

Re: Didak for pick 4 + Adam Thompson

You're overrating the bird in hand.

If Didak was a top 20 player, then I'd be in agreement with you. If he was a top 50 player and under 24 years of age, I'd still probably be in agreement with you. But he's neither.

As for the numbers you cited, keep in mind that the game has become a lot more professional in the last decade or two, and history before, say, the early 90's, is almost irrelevant. Clubs' investment in drafting has also changed dramatically in the last 5-10 years particularly.

As an exercise, go through the midfielders taken in the top 5 of the draft in the past 5 years. How many of them will play at least 150 games, barring injury? I'd say at least 80%.

In fact, right now the only two suspect are Ray (already has 68, and if picked up by the right club will make it) and Tambling (who already has 66, and looks to be improving). Everyone else is a lock.

And at least half of them, probably more, will play 200 games.

KP players are a bit more speculative, but it's still hard to judge the last 5 years wrt KP.

I think we are overrating the top 10 pick and underrating Didak. Sometimes it's easier to think of the pick and the type of player you may get then think about what type of player you could get with the pick.

I still think Didak is a top 20 or at the very least 30 player, would have been AA and leading kicks in the AFL if not suspended (yes I know the fact he was is taken into consideration when factoring his worth). Didak for pick 3-6 isn't a terrible deal, but I think it would be a trade for trades sake. My line of thinking is unless you have a specific player in mind and are absolutely sure they'll be there at your pick you don't trade for a pick to suit needs. You trade for a pick to boost your lists future stocks, and not because you really need a certain type of player. That's where you should trade for a particular player on a clubs list.

Those stats I gave you are a bit extreme, I mean nowadays you've got more than a 1/100 chance of playing but it still is pretty sobering and true today, and whilst drafting and picking up players was a bit poorer, remember it also factors in the days clubs could just basically use their clout to pick up the best players, of which we had a lot of.

 

[Brahma Bull]

Does anyone know if Mitch Brown from WCE has re-signed?

 

[PendlePie]

Didak + Egan/Johnson/R Shaw + 2nd Rounder --> Pick 4 + Thomson

Thomson --> Harris

Didak will never be a superstar midfielder. Our side at the moment needs good midfielders more than anything else.

Pies gain: Pick 4 (to go with Pick 11) and a good replacement for Burns in Daniel Harris. Two top 11 picks in the last uncompromised draft is pretty handy if you ask me.

Pies lose: 2nd round pick, Didak, Egan/Johnson/Shaw

 

[Brahma Bull]

Collingwood Get: Pick 3, Harris, Pick 37
Collingwood Lose: Didak, Johnson, Pick 29

Port Adelaide Get: Didak, Pick 29
Port Adelaide Lose: Pick 4, Thomson

Fremantle Get: Pick 4, Johnson, Pick 45
Fremantle Lose: Pick 3, Pick 37, Pick 53

Kangaroos Get: Thomson
Kangaroos Lose: Harris

Why

Collingwood- Get a high draft pick for Didak and also get a good clearance winning mid.
Port- Get the match winning Didak.
Fremantle- After having lost/losing around 8 players, Johnson would be very valuable.
Kangaroos- Swap their clearance player for a younger clearance player.

I reckon its a win/win/win/win deal.

Thoughts?

 

[mdc]

Fremantle Get: Pick 4, Johnson, Pick 45
Fremantle Lose: Pick 3, Pick 37, Pick 53

Kangaroos Get: Thomson
Kangaroos Lose: Harris

Both freo and north would be getting reamed.

 

[Primetime Pricey]

Didak + Egan/Johnson/R Shaw + 2nd Rounder --> Pick 4 + Thomson

Thomson --> Harris

Didak will never be a superstar midfielder. Our side at the moment needs good midfielders more than anything else.

Pies gain: Pick 4 (to go with Pick 11) and a good replacement for Burns in Daniel Harris. Two top 11 picks in the last uncompromised draft is pretty handy if you ask me.

Pies lose: 2nd round pick, Didak, Egan/Johnson/Shaw

bit hard to trade Egan when he has been delisted

 

[PieLebo87]

Possible Green & Didak move (hypothetical)

I'd have no complaints with keeping Didak, but since its trade week, and there are particular names and picks being thrown up, I was wandering what you guys thought of this hypothetical.

Number 1-
Collingwood trades Didak to Port Adelaide for pick 4, a 1st round pick, and their 4th round pick.

Number 2-
We then trade Rhyce Shaw and our 3rd round pick for Melbourne's Brad Green.

That way, we've gained Brad Green to play a similiar role to Alan Didak, as a HF aswell as pinch-hitting in the midfield. Whilst also gaining pick 4 for a Steele Sidebottom or another quality young midfielder.

We'd pretty much get rid of a late 3rd rounder and gain an early 4th rounder so in essence we've traded Didak for pick 4 and Brad Green. Its giving up a slight quality in an already enormous forward line for a pick 4/great young midfielder.

Some people will say that pick 4 may never turn out to be elite, but its safer that he will in this draft then others because of the quality of the top 5 or so.

What do you guys think?

 

[Headless]

Re: Possible Green & Didak move (hypothetical)

I'd have no complaints with keeping Didak, but since its trade week, and there are particular names and picks being thrown up, I was wandering what you guys thought of this hypothetical.

Number 1-
Collingwood trades Didak to Port Adelaide for pick 4, a 1st round pick, and their 4th round pick.

Number 2-
We then trade Rhyce Shaw and our 3rd round pick for Melbourne's Brad Green.

That way, we've gained Brad Green to play a similiar role to Alan Didak, as a HF aswell as pinch-hitting in the midfield. Whilst also gaining pick 4 for a Steele Sidebottom or another quality young midfielder.

We'd pretty much get rid of a late 3rd rounder and gain an early 4th rounder so in essence we've traded Didak for pick 4 and Brad Green. Its giving up a slight quality in an already enormous forward line for a pick 4/great young midfielder.

Some people will say that pick 4 may never turn out to be elite, but its safer that he will in this draft then others because of the quality of the top 5 or so.

What do you guys think?

Reckon Melbourne would accept that?

 

[PieLebo87]

Re: Possible Green & Didak move (hypothetical)

Reckon Melbourne would accept that?

I believe so, considering you need to free up some cap space as well as him being out of contract, thus allowing him to choose where he would want to go. I don't think its a bad offer, because you wouldn't have gotten more than a 2nd rounder, so a 3rd rounder + a servicable midfielder in his mid 20s with plenty of pace would do the deal.