Toast Jamarra Ugle-Hagan - Welcome to the club

Remove this Banner Ad

Yojimbo said:
Maybe they made the courtesy call on Michael Talia's missing phone. :$
Click to expand...

That phone was not lost. It was concealed, Bali Mule style. That's why it hasn't been found to this very day.
 
It's not as ideal as it could be but playing finals and then getting pick #1 in the draft without giving up any players in some league changing trade (Like Freo would have done in the dark old days) is a great result for the Bulldogs and right before the buzzer sounds on this golden era of NGA players.

Absolutely outstanding result for the Dogs.
 
Reading Nicks’ quotes in article, I don’t believe he’s saying they will bid on JUH at all. It’s certainly a chance but people are taking an implication that the Crows believe he is the best player.

His quotes around ‘we will pick the best player in the draft’ reek of a setup saying that whoever they take at number 1, is who they believe is the best player. Say they take McDonald, they’ll come out and say they rated him ahead of JUH.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

doggies ftw said:
I’m more than happy to pay pick 1, I mean I’d almost prefer it. I wonder if there’s any pick trade which benefits both of us (but mainly them) and comes with a wink wink to not bid? Send em 29 for something?
Click to expand...
That was mooted some time back and the hints I read here were that Adelaide were prepared to do just that. However it involved pick 14 and we traded that to Collingwood in the Treloar deal. So that was the end of that.

Anyway I'm glad we didn't go down that route. It's draft tampering.
If another club did it there'd be outrage here. (Well in fact they have ... and there was.)

As for pick 1 well yes it's a nice PR opportunity but we're kidding ourselves if we say we didn't prefer he came at pick 3 or lower. That way we'd have at least 3 picks in the third round. This way we'll have pick 66.
 
dogwatch said:
That was mooted some time back and the hints I read here were that Adelaide were prepared to do just that. However it involved pick 14 and we traded that to Collingwood in the Treloar deal. So that was the end of that.

Anyway I'm glad we didn't go down that route. It's draft tampering.
If another club did it there'd be outrage here. (Well in fact they have ... and there was.)

As for pick 1 well yes it's a nice PR opportunity but we're kidding ourselves if we say we didn't prefer he came at pick 3 or lower. That way we'd have at least 3 picks in the third round. This way we'll have pick 66.
Click to expand...
Yeah I know it was the original idea but I’m wondering if we could still do it with what we’ve got left
 
Golden_6 said:
Reading Nicks’ quotes in article, I don’t believe he’s saying they will bid on JUH at all. It’s certainly a chance but people are taking an implication that the Crows believe he is the best player.

His quotes around ‘we will pick the best player in the draft’ reek of a setup saying that whoever they take at number 1, is who they believe is the best player. Say they take McDonald, they’ll come out and say they rated him ahead of JUH.
Click to expand...
Yeah I was thinking the same thing.
More a case of the media then running off with "Well Jamarra is the best player in the draft so Adelaide will bid at pick 1".
 
doggies ftw said:
Yeah I know it was the original idea but I’m wondering if we could still do it with what we’ve got left
Click to expand...
I expect a hypothetical could be worked out. However I'd like to think we're better than that.
 
WeedsMullet84 said:
This is just an FYI, don't bite my head off.

Interview with Matthew Nicks this morning where he's basically confirmed Crows will bid on JUH with Pick 1
Click to expand...
No problem mate we have been planning this for 4 plus years so no need to feel bad you need to do what’s best for your club.
 
doggies ftw said:
I’m more than happy to pay pick 1, I mean I’d almost prefer it. I wonder if there’s any pick trade which benefits both of us (but mainly them) and comes with a wink wink to not bid? Send em 29 for something?
Click to expand...
If he’s getting picked at 2 anyway I’d take the number 1 story and fanfare and milk it. Any later pick we get is going to be near the end anyway regardless of pick 1 or 2 which is a crapshoot.
 
Yojimbo said:
Maybe they made the courtesy call on Michael Talia's missing phone. :$
Click to expand...
Only if it’s waterproof
 
I heard that JUH accidentally started COVID while in China attempting to concoct an illegal performance-enhancing treatment for the secret ACL injuries he did to both legs during the last off-season. Probably unwise for any club to use a first-round pick on him as a result.
 
WeedsMullet84 said:
I think McDonald would be a good Tex replacement, and Hollands would provide much needed 'X-Factor' and class through the middle/pushing up forward.

My personal preference is Hollands as i think there will still be a few KPP's floating around come our 2nd pick
Click to expand...

I would take someone who has done an ACL and not played competitively for a year at Pick 1/2/3. I think he will be good but I don’t see him as a midfielder just one of the best HFF in the draft for a while. I see HFF as a secondary position, so I would draft a player in that position in the top 5 IF I was a list manager.
Rather Thilthorpe OR Phillips. Phillips out performed last years pick 2 (Anderson) even though he was a year younger.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Golden_6 said:
Reading Nicks’ quotes in article, I don’t believe he’s saying they will bid on JUH at all. It’s certainly a chance but people are taking an implication that the Crows believe he is the best player.

His quotes around ‘we will pick the best player in the draft’ reek of a setup saying that whoever they take at number 1, is who they believe is the best player. Say they take McDonald, they’ll come out and say they rated him ahead of JUH.
Click to expand...
I heard actual audio and my impression was they did rate him number 1 but it wasn’t the full interview I heard just a replay of part of it by Sam Edmunds
 
dogwatch said:
That was mooted some time back and the hints I read here were that Adelaide were prepared to do just that. However it involved pick 14 and we traded that to Collingwood in the Treloar deal. So that was the end of that.

Anyway I'm glad we didn't go down that route. It's draft tampering.
If another club did it there'd be outrage here. (Well in fact they have ... and there was.)

As for pick 1 well yes it's a nice PR opportunity but we're kidding ourselves if we say we didn't prefer he came at pick 3 or lower. That way we'd have at least 3 picks in the third round. This way we'll have pick 66.
Click to expand...
I don't see us having more than 1 live draft pick after Jamarra anyway (maybe 2?) so having a few 3rd rounders isn't a massive plus (although I suppose we could package them and move up a few spots).

I think given what we've already done, paying for Jamarra in full and having a late speculative is a great result regardless.

If Jamarra goes at 1 we end up with a 2nd pick around 50 (after multiple picks are used up all over the place to match bids), if he goes at 2 or 3, we get a 2nd pick a bit higher.

In this crapshoot of a draft, we may well have selected the same player anyway, so for mine it's not a massive difference. Either way, Sam has shot the lights out, admittedly with circumstances falling his way big time.
 
Is there any reason why we wouldn't (or haven't???) done a pick swap with Hawthorn, our 41 and 42, for their 45, 46 & 49?

That would give Hawthorn 4 picks inside the top 42, surely they're not using any more than that?
(EDIT: Worth 158 points)
 
dogwatch said:
That was mooted some time back and the hints I read here were that Adelaide were prepared to do just that. However it involved pick 14 and we traded that to Collingwood in the Treloar deal. So that was the end of that.

Anyway I'm glad we didn't go down that route. It's draft tampering.
If another club did it there'd be outrage here. (Well in fact they have ... and there was.)

As for pick 1 well yes it's a nice PR opportunity but we're kidding ourselves if we say we didn't prefer he came at pick 3 or lower. That way we'd have at least 3 picks in the third round. This way we'll have pick 66.
Click to expand...

List spots are worth a premium right now, using that many low draft picks in a poor draft is a bad move imo. I'd rather bring us back up to 39 with JUH, Macpherson, Raak, Cavarra and Roarke then look at filling one or two spots with mature rookies or DFAs, and go into next year with a couple spots free. Looking at all of our OOC players next year we want to keep pretty much all of them, the extra list spots let us take our minimum 3 draft selections and get a useful trade in without costing us anyone important. Plus the mid season draft will be full of late bloomers from this year, it might be very useful to have enough room to make 2 selections in that.
 
Boyd oh Boyd said:
List spots are worth a premium right now, using that many low draft picks in a poor draft is a bad move imo. I'd rather bring us back up to 39 with JUH, Macpherson, Raak, Cavarra and Roarke then look at filling one or two spots with mature rookies or DFAs, and go into next year with a couple spots free. Looking at all of our OOC players next year we want to keep pretty much all of them, the extra list spots let us take our minimum 3 draft selections and get a useful trade in without costing us anyone important. Plus the mid season draft will be full of late bloomers from this year, it might be very useful to have enough room to make 2 selections in that.
Click to expand...
There is alot of talent late in the draft if looking in the right spot
 
bobs head soup said:
Crows recruiters have said all along they have a policy of picking the player they rank highest at every available pick, which is the commonsense approach generally I would think.

Much simpler than second guessing which teams may match or not.
Click to expand...
In fact nearly every club would have a best player available policy (at least in the first round).

As a part of proper governance of the club (or any organisation for that matter), if you have a policy in place, you must follow it. Things get set up for failure when you don't follow your own policies.
 
Philthy1 said:
In fact nearly every club would have a best player available policy (at least in the first round).

As a part of proper governance of the club (or any organisation for that matter), if you have a policy in place, you must follow it. Things get set up for failure when you don't follow your own policies.
Click to expand...
True but pick 1 is different to other picks.
 
Philthy1 said:
In fact nearly every club would have a best player available policy (at least in the first round).

As a part of proper governance of the club (or any organisation for that matter), if you have a policy in place, you must follow it. Things get set up for failure when you don't follow your own policies.
Click to expand...

Sometimes best available doesn't mean best for your team though. In 2018, instead of two midfielders in Caldwell and Hately, GWS could have taken Zak Butters and Jordan Clark and been in a much stronger position.
 
weltschmerz said:
Sometimes best available doesn't mean best for your team though. In 2018, instead of two midfielders in Caldwell and Hately, GWS could have taken Zak Butters and Jordan Clark and been in a much stronger position.
Click to expand...
No doubt. However, there is no right and wrong about this when you are dealing with people. It's like hiring people in any organisation, even for the same role each person has their strengths and weaknesses and will bring different things to the wider team / organisation.

The point is that the Football Dept in every single club will have some type of document that codifies how they will go about recruiting players via the draft. What they will assess, how they will assess it and how they will arrive at a decision. This document would be signed off by the board and it would be the role CEO / COO (or delegate) to ensure the Football Dept follow the guidelines / process every time. It would not prevent stuff ups / selecting the wrong player, but it reduces risk.

As such, if any club identifies that player X is the player that best meets the criteria at any given pick, then they must bid. Otherwise the board will be asking questions about what they are doing. Whether other clubs have access to a particular player via NGA or F/S is actually not a relevant point.
 
Last edited:
WeedsMullet84 said:
This is just an FYI, don't bite my head off.

Interview with Matthew Nicks this morning where he's basically confirmed Crows will bid on JUH with Pick 1
Click to expand...
Appreciate the info. Perfectly reasonable by the Crows. You got a link?
 
Norm De Guerre said:
Whats the point of nominating JUH at Number 1 when we have clearly been planning for this eventuality by banking points for quite some time?

I understand why the Swans would at 3 just to keep us honest and to tie our draft hand, but Number 1.

Please explain.
Click to expand...

You asked the question in the first sentence and then answered it in the second..

Reasons to bid at Pick 1:
To make us pay a fair price (significant drop-off in points required after pick 1)
To weaken our draft hand (and maybe move some of their picks higher?)
To stick with the club's drafting policies (best available)
To take the pressure of being Pick 1 off their new draftee (potentially significant)
Because they're mad at us about Keath (unlikely)

Reasons not to:
Losing the marketing value of drafting a Pick 1 (significant)
The player they eventually draft will be sad (lol)
They consider another player to be better

How they weigh up those reasons is up to them. I reckon I'd be tempted to bid in their situation, if he's clearly the best player.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

_Mike_
  • Sticky
Mod. Notice Welcome Fossie32 to the Bulldogs Community Leader role
Replies
5
Views
281
Bulldogs85
Bulldogs85
Testekill
Welcome to the Bulldogs Lachlan Bramble
2 3 4 5
Replies
104
Views
9K
Dogs_R_Us
Dogs_R_Us
weltschmerz
Welcome to the Bulldogs Lachlan Smith
2 3
Replies
61
Views
6K
House_of_Dahl
House_of_Dahl
weltschmerz
Welcome to the Bulldogs Aiden O’Driscoll
2 3
Replies
69
Views
7K
ossie_21
ossie_21
weltschmerz
Welcome to the Bulldogs Joel Freijah
2 3 4 5
Replies
109
Views
11K
dergert
dergert
weltschmerz
Welcome to the Bulldogs Jordan Croft
2 3
Replies
65
Views
5K
DiamondDogs8
DiamondDogs8
Mutt
Autopsy Bulldog's effort and Jamarra's brilliance too much for Freo - (102 - 73)
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
288
Views
13K
GetDimmaBack
GetDimmaBack

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top