Toast Jamarra Ugle-Hagan - Welcome to the club

Remove this Banner Ad

So.....how do we pick this kid up? I don't understand this NGA and draft points malarkey. Can someone explain?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

redmania said:
So.....how do we pick this kid up? I don't understand this NGA and draft points malarkey. Can someone explain?
Click to expand...

Because he's part of our Next Generation Academy, we have rights to him. If another team tries to pick him at the draft, we have first dibs. Say Adelaide tries to take him at pick 1, we forfeit enough later draft picks to equal the same value as pick 1 (with a discount, because that's how academy picks work), take him, and Adelaide now has pick 2 and can pick again.
 
So Adelaide go for him at Pick 1, we take him.

Where does that leave our next pick?
 
Hoges64 said:
So Adelaide go for him at Pick 1, we take him.

Where does that leave our next pick?
Click to expand...

End of the draft. As far as I know, we have to use three picks, so if we spend them all we get two junk time picks.
Edit: not actually sure now, I thought that happened to GWS, but they traded back in to get Riccardi.
 
Last edited:
weltschmerz said:
End of the draft. As far as I know, we have to use three picks, so if we spend them all we get two junk time picks.
Edit: not actually sure now, I thought that happened to GWS, but they traded back in to get Riccardi.
Click to expand...

I think you may be right.

If the 20% rule still applies(?) for F/S / Academies he's still worth 2400...

Even combining 12, 26, 48 and 84 (no value) we're at 2112.

Any chance Brisbane want 12 & 34 (1810) for 16 & 17 & 64 (2193)?

Would give us 16, 17, 48 (2495) and 84, and they'd move from 16, 17, 38, 64, 80, 88 to 12, 34, 38, 80 & 88....

Hmmm, probably not worth it for them. A 4 pick upgrade early for a 17 pick drop later.
 
Hoges64 said:
I think you may be right.

If the 20% rule still applies(?) for F/S / Academies he's still worth 2400...

Even combining 12, 26, 48 and 84 (no value) we're at 2112.

Any chance Brisbane want 12 & 34 (1810) for 16 & 17 & 64 (2193)?

Would give us 16, 17, 48 (2495) and 84, and they'd move from 16, 17, 38, 64, 80, 88 to 12, 34, 38, 80 & 88....

Hmmm, probably not worth it for them. A 4 pick upgrade early for a 17 pick drop later.
Click to expand...
Probably not. It's hardly worth a 4 spot jump in the order. More likely we try to trade for multiple second rounders.

Funnily enough, it may be Adelaide that end up with the most enticing offer since they hold picks 20 + 29 (before compo picks come in).

Gold Coast with 24 + 33 may be another option if we include future picks in the deal from both sides
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

redmania said:
Thanks I'm assuming there is a high probability this will happen then?
Click to expand...
I'd say we're a 99% chance of drafting him, it'll just be the price we have to pay to do so.

With current picks if Crows bid on him at 1 we get wiped out of a draft.

But there's no way we sit still on our current picks, and we finally get to do a GWS and land a first rounder for picks in the 30s, 40s and 50s*.

*Very much tongue in cheek, we'll need more than that, but you get my drift.
 
Hoges64 said:
I'd say we're a 99% chance of drafting him, it'll just be the price we have to pay to do so.

With current picks if Crows bid on him at 1 we get wiped out of a draft.

But there's no way we sit still on our current picks, and we finally get to do a GWS and land a first rounder for picks in the 30s, 40s and 50s*.

*Very much tongue in cheek, we'll need more than that, but you get my drift.
Click to expand...
I think it's nailed on that the crows would bid for him just to wipe us out. Would we really give everything for him? Or would we baulk if the crows go at 1?
 
redmania said:
I think it's nailed on that the crows would bid for him just to wipe us out. Would we really give everything for him? Or would we baulk if the crows go at 1?
Click to expand...

Dogs staff have spent years going to his school, helping him with training, getting him opportunities. He’s shaping up to be an elite talent, and I’d rather have him than a pick 12 and two third rounders, especially given how speculative a lot of third round picks will be.
 
Hoges64 said:
I'd say we're a 99% chance of drafting him, it'll just be the price we have to pay to do so.

With current picks if Crows bid on him at 1 we get wiped out of a draft.

But there's no way we sit still on our current picks, and we finally get to do a GWS and land a first rounder for picks in the 30s, 40s and 50s*.

*Very much tongue in cheek, we'll need more than that, but you get my drift.
Click to expand...
This is a draft I'd be more then comfortable having our points wiped out by jamarra. There will be good talent who others completely sleep on due to no exposed form. Then we have raak and McPherson who we could add in the rookie draft or as cat b
 
Mojorisin said:
This is a draft I'd be more then comfortable having our points wiped out by jamarra. There will be good talent who others completely sleep on due to no exposed form. Then we have raak and McPherson who we could add in the rookie draft or as cat b
Click to expand...
Yeah, I don't have a massive problem with it because of Raak and MacPherson, but there's 0 chance of us sitting on our hands and not moving down the draft order / up the draft points index, so it's almost pointless to even have that as a point of discussion anyway. I'm sure we'll be able to work our way back in to nab at least a 3rd rounder or so.
 
redmania said:
I think it's nailed on that the crows would bid for him just to wipe us out. Would we really give everything for him? Or would we baulk if the crows go at 1?
Click to expand...
It’s still better to take JUH with a 20% discount than pass and wait to take whoever is available at 12. We finished top 8 and yet can draft the potential number 1. It’s a no brainer.
 
redmania said:
I think it's nailed on that the crows would bid for him just to wipe us out. Would we really give everything for him? Or would we baulk if the crows go at 1?
Click to expand...
Fronkalicious reckons we'll trade with Adelaide and they won't bid on JUH.

Not that there's any connection between those two things happening of course ... :think:

It reeks of us doing a Jack Viney but it seems to be the obvious strategic approach if the alternative is to be wiped out of the draft (and if we think it's morally defensible ... or if we don't care that it's not). If Norf then bid on JUH at pick 2 we'd still need 2013 points but we could do that with 60 points left over - the equivalent of a late-60s pick. Or it could give us some currency to get back into the draft at a higher level.
 
dogwatch said:
Fronkalicious reckons we'll trade with Adelaide and they won't bid on JUH.

Not that there's any connection between those two things happening of course ... :think:

It reeks of us doing a Jack Viney but it seems to be the obvious strategic approach if the alternative is to be wiped out of the draft (and if we think it's morally defensible ... or if we don't care that it's not). If Norf then bid on JUH at pick 2 we'd still need 2013 points but we could do that with 60 points left over - the equivalent of a late-60s pick. Or it could give us some currency to get back into the draft at a higher level.
Click to expand...

That scenario will sit comfortably alongside our magnificent Dodoro-esque effort in 2003 of wiping the floor with other teams and the AFL and 'winning the draft' hands-down (and bordering on draft tampering!). The brilliant tactical manouvering that saw us:

- give up Mark Alvey and pick 6 to land potential sleeper megastar Lachlan Veale
- assure ourselves that Hawks would deliver Rawlings to us via the pre-season draft
- burn picks 6 and 20 received from Tiggers for Nafan Brown on Peter Street (love Streety as a cult hero - but pick 20!?) and afore-mentioned Veale deal
- burn pick 19 on Steve Koops (Koops was worth a risk - but for 19!!??)
- trade pick 34 for inexperienced tall (and fanatical Bulldog supporter) Adam Morgan from Port - in hindsight (wonderful thing, that) the least unhinged trade of all when compared to those above

At various stages in that trade period, we could have held draft picks 1,4,6,19,20. Not a brilliant draft admittedly, but we ended up with Cooney, Ray, Rawlings, Veale, Koops and Street. Players that were available at the picks above if we'd retained them:

1. Everyone, but Cooney was the standout #1, and we got him - tick
4. Everyone bar Cooney, Walker, Sylvia - includes Stanton, Chaplin, Mundy and Butler - all handy careers in their own right. We took Ray - not the best or worst option.
6. Everyone bar Cooney. Walker, Sylvia, Ray and McLean - the 4 listed above all still available.
19. Stanton and Chaplain gone, Freo took - Mundy!
20. See 19, and Eagles took - Butler!

The other quality (retrospective and arguable of course, just my opinion) that went later in that draft was:
Jed Adcock at 33 (Lions)
Zac Dawson at 41 (Hawks)
Heath Shaw at 48 (Pies) - F/S
Sam Fisher at 55 (Saints)
Ben Hudson at 58 (Crows)
M Rischitelli at 61 (Lions)
Shane Tuck at 73 (Tigers)

So still using hindsight, we could have kept 20, and used 34 (traded for Morgan) or even 50 (Izaac Thompson!) on Hudson.
In an ideal world, we could have drafted:

1 - Cooney
4 - Ray (actually stands the test of time against all other top 10 except Cooney and possibly Walker)
6 - Stanton/Chaplain/Mundy - none rated highly enough for top 10 at the time, but any had longer and more productive careers than post-2003 Rawlings
19 and 20 - any two of Mundy, Butler, Adcock
34 and 50 - Hudson and two of Dawson/Fisher/Rischitelli (Tuck a long bow)

As it is, we had:
- the brilliance of Rawlings for a few games - until behinds/misses heavily outweighed goals, which was actually round 2, 2004 onwards!
- the not-even a brief spark of Lachlan Veale's non-senior career;
- the average 2004 season of Koops with a few glimpses of the skills and excitement he possessed, before moving on;
- the cult hero Peter Street, who at least gave us some decent performances, and played in our 2006 finals, although still debatable if he was worth pick 20;
- Adam Morgan, who's limited output was really only notable for his 2 strong marks and second half goals in the round 1, 2006 pasting of Richmond: https://afltables.com/afl/stats/games/2006/071420060331.html
- Izaac Thompson - who?

Sorry dogwatch - went off on a real tangent there, just prompted by your allusion to potential draft 'manipulation'!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

_Mike_
  • Sticky
Mod. Notice Welcome Fossie32 to the Bulldogs Community Leader role
Replies
6
Views
313
Dogs_R_Us
Dogs_R_Us
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
62
Views
6K
Bulldogs85
Bulldogs85
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