News Loop hole means we may get Joe Daniher a year early

[morebeer]

This article is very misleading. She is basing her assumption that getting Joe this year would be better value than next year on the premise that offering GWS our first round pick and only our first round pick (or even Collingwood's @ 25ish) would be a sufficient offering to secure the trade with GWS.

This is wrong on 2 counts: Firstly, who's to say that offering would be good enough for GWS to accept as there are 16 (17?) clubs able to bid for the opportunity to take 1 of 4 of the best kids from the 2012 draft. Secondly, clubs are only able to secure 1 of these kids by trading players. That is the point of this concession, to enable GWS to secure experienced players on their list, and just trading draft picks are not in line with the rules.

Frankly, by virtue of the father-son bidding system, we will get Joe between 1 and 17 picks earlier than his worth in the 2012 draft.
At the same time, the very fact that there are 16 (17?) clubs to bid for the chances of getting 1 of these 4 picks, should ensure that the clubs that win these picks pay their worth.

So let's take the win we're already granted with Joe, and if we want to go for 1 of these 17 year olds, lets get another young gun in to the club that we aren't already guaranteed below cost price.

I think you are on the money here Towno, except for the part about not being able to trade 2011 draft picks to GWS for the rights to the 16 year olds. I rekon they will just get the best possible value for them, whether that be draft picks or players or both.

I think for once, Emma is way off the mark here and probably has her EFC goggles on.

Put it this way, if EFC had the rights to trade 4 16 year olds at year end, what value would we expect to get? Not sure about you guys but I would be putting the 16 year olds up to the highest bidders and would expect top 10 picks or very good players in return.

I sure would not be saying to Melbourne "okay Viney is a gun and we can't have him so give us your 2nd rounder this year". There are other gun 16 year olds out there other than the father son guys.

If David Swallow was available at the 2009 draft what would clubs have given for him? Considering he probably would have gone pick 1 Id rekon the value is massive. Recruiters know all the 16 year olds, the risk is not that great at the top end.

 

[Jade]

Interesting read from Terry Wallace on the topic:

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/112004/default.aspx

It's an interesting scenario here. What I still haven't seen clarified anywhere, is HOW does the player (in our case Daniher) make it on to the senior list?

He wouldn't be a senior list player immediately (because we can't play him), so does he take up a rookie spot? Do we then have to draft him with our last pick (ie. Rookie upgrade) in 2012? Is it a spot taken up that we can't use on another player?

That aside, effectively the choice we have is to give up our first round pick for him, or trade with GWS for him.

A list of our first round picks for the last few years:

2010: Dyson Heppell
2009: Jake Melksham
2008: Michael Hurley
2007: David Myers
2006: Scott Gumbleton
2005: Paddy Ryder
2004: Angus Monfries

(lets not go any further then that, just a random number, no need to go back further )

I seriously DO NOT want to lose one of those picks. If we play our cards right, we can effectively grab TWO first rounders for the 2013 season (with Daniher effectively being one of those). That is a big step towards setting us up for the future.

So if we trade, how hard ball do GWS go? And who would we realistically be willing to give up?

Here's a few names worth throwing out there:

Andrew Welsh
Nathan Lovett-Murray
Brent Prismall
Henry Slattery
Mark Williams
Darcy Daniher
Anthony Long
Ricky Dyson

Some of which I would be more willing to give up then others.

Now GWS will obviously start the ball rolling with names like Hurley, Pears and Zaharakis. After which we can sharply tell them to go eff themselves.

What concerns me, is that AFTER that, they'll start talking players a little more realistic that I really don't want to lose:

Scott Gumbleton
Cale Hooker
Ben Howlett
Heath Hocking
Angus Monfries
Courtney Dempsey
Tom Bellchambers

One of which in particular seems likely, Bellchambers.

Rucks are bloody hard to find, GWS will know this. They also know that Bellchambers is a third ruck at Essendon - Bellchambers knows this as well. Maybe he'll want to go? More money, first choice, guaranteed game time - could be an attractive option to him.

So how much does Essendon value Daniher? Do we bite the bullet and give up a first round pick? Or do we sacrifice in the short term, lose a player or two of some value and keep the pick.

Very, very interesting.....

 

[nathan t]

Jade00- Im thinking the same with Bellchambers, If i was him i would be requesting a trade to either GWS or a club like Richmond where he would easily be in the best starting 22. I hope he doesn't go but i wouldn't blame him if he wanted too.

 

[Jade]

Jade00- Im thinking the same with Bellchambers, If i was him i would be requesting a trade to either GWS or a club like Richmond where he would easily be in the best starting 22. I hope he doesn't go but i wouldn't blame him if he wanted too.

Dare I say it, is trading off David Hille a possibility?

 

[mayhem20202]

Essendon had a fairly poor year last year, and even then it was hard enough to work out which players should be delisted. Imagine, given that we have a reasonable couple of years, we then have to increase the number of players delisted by one to fit a player onto our list (be it senior or rookie) who is not even able to play for the first season??? I wouldn't think that is a decision that the Essendon list management team would make, unless it was an instance of not otherwise being able to get access to that player.

In the instance of Joe, I believe he is effectively being treated as an Essendon player at the moment anyway, ie. doing training with the club, on pretty advanced programs for his body development, and access to club dieticians and so on.

Other than the ability to hang on to the first round draft pick, there is no benefit to the club. I guess the question is, approx. what number will that first round draft pick be, and what value will the list management team place on it. All of the players listed that Essendon have picked up in recent drafts have been picked in the top 10 players, most of the stars in the top 6 or 7. If the pick was looking like being 16 - 25, due to GWS having picks and us finishing in the top 4, then, I would say we can allow that pick to pass to pick up Joe.

 

[donspremiers]

I don't think Belly will be going anywhere. Everyone wants to play for Sir James plus we should have plenty of room in the salary cap. Next season Williams, Welsh or Prismall could be gone and their wages could go straight to the big fella.

Hille might only have a year or two in him considering his run or injuries plus dare I say the premiership window seams to be opening slightly.

 

[morebeer]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/112004/default.aspx

Terrys article suggests that Geelong may have to give up "one or several of their past premiership players" to get one of these picks and then says that Essendon may be able to get access to it for "a couple of solid citizens".

Why would we get a discount from GWS because Joe Daniher is involved?

 

[Rack Watts]

Can't we just wait an extra year and get him as a third round pick?

 

[Yoda_]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/112004/default.aspx

Terrys article suggests that Geelong may have to give up "one or several of their past premiership players" to get one of these picks and then says that Essendon may be able to get access to it for "a couple of solid citizens".

Talking of Geelong, James Kelly is very, very under rated, would love him at Essendon, although getting o a bit, might not fit in in time for us to be a real premiership contender.

 

[SirJimi05]

Can't we just wait an extra year and get him as a third round pick?

Third round?

 

[Lance Uppercut]

Can't we just wait an extra year and get him as a third round pick?

notsureifserious.jpg

 

[AndyLesPaul]

What's wrong with that? All we have to do is injure him....

 

[Towno78]

Think it is. Ceglar, Krakouer, Richardson, Mzungu, Faulks, Bewick, Phillips? I don't think any of their clubs directly traded players to the Gold Coast in their "exchange", only picks... Or is it a different form of prelisting?

Nah mate, this is different.

You're talking about the prelisting of up to 12 players who were previously on an AFL list or had previously nominated for the draft. GC had this concession last year, and GWS will have it also this year. I'd be quite happy for Essendon to look into this as other clubs exploited quite effectively last year.

This thread is discussing a concession to GWS that GC did not have. It is the possibility of trading players to GWS for 1 of 4 picks at the best kids born between January and April of 1994 (players that would otherwise be just too young to nominate for the 2011 draft). A concession granted to GWS as the AFL believes they will be less likely to attract experienced players than GC.

 

[Slattery_20]

Why link this loophole to Daniher?

We have the opportunity to get the equivalent of two very early first rounders in two years where other clubs around the same mark as us will only be getting 2 x pick 20-odd... be nice to Kevin now, James...

 

[Mrs Mercuri]

I dont understand why GWS is involved at all.... I thought it was already done that we would get Joe under the F/S rule and would probably have to use our first pick thanks to the bidding system...

Why would Sheeds still have dibs on him????

 

[Slattery_20]

I dont understand why GWS is involved at all.... I thought it was already done that we would get Joe under the F/S rule and would probably have to use our first pick thanks to the bidding system...

Why would Sheeds still have dibs on him????

Did you read the full article?

GWS can acquire rights to 4 x 17yos (born in a certain window). They can't actually ever play them, but they can trade those rights away to other clubs (for picks or players).
It's not dis-similar to how we got Lloydy, way back when.

The question is would we do this (Joe qualifies) to get him around the club (he still can't play while he's only 17) a year early. He's already ours, Sheedy can't ever have him.

 

[Mrs Mercuri]

I knew they could take some 17 yr olds but i thought considering that Daniher is already ours that he wouldnt be counted as one of them...

Sheeds can have Dyson if he really wants him... throw in Neagle as well

 

[Slattery_20]

I knew they could take some 17 yr olds but i thought considering that Daniher is already ours that he wouldnt be counted as one of them...

Sheeds can have Dyson if he really wants him... throw in Neagle as well

You didn't read my post at all, did you?

 

[lamaros]

Why link this loophole to Daniher?

We have the opportunity to get the equivalent of two very early first rounders in two years where other clubs around the same mark as us will only be getting 2 x pick 20-odd... be nice to Kevin now, James...

Agree. We should be looking at it like this.

If S_20 is being a bit too clever for some to follow here, I would put it as follows:

x and y + 2012 First Round Selection for:

A: Top Rated Youngster + Daniher
B: Daniher + 2012 First Round Selection

I would think the former is probably more to our advantage, unless we finish bottom of the table in 2012?

 

[Old man fletch]

i think the thing people are forgetting is that at that age, there's no guarantee that whoever is selected will be an AFL grade player.

There have been plenty of examples of 18 year olds who have been selected based on dominating in the juniors but aren't good enough for seniors footy, or who peak when they're in their teens and don't become what selectors expected. And that's for 18 year olds. Remember michael still, he was selected pick 55 of the 2008 draft. I can't remember the exact quotes but something along the lines of we got him a year early and if we had've waited another year we would've had to use a first round pick to get him...and we all know what happened there.

I'm sure hirdy and the boys are all over this atm, but if they don't end up trying for it remember that a) the younger the player, the bigger the risk in terms of afl potential and b) sheeds isn't an idiot and if there are 17 other clubs which are vying for 4 picks, he's not going to give them to us for our old/ underperforming player(s) and might want what we're not willing to give up

 

[Slattery_20]

Lloyd & Pears were 17yo picks, Ryder too.
If you get the very cream of the 17yos, I don't know there is that much more risk.
Any 3rd or 4th round pick has a fair whack of risk, 17yo or not.