List Mgmt. Nick Daicos

[ZEV]

So if nothing else this year, we can look forward to a daily dose of media hype over young Nick.
Gonna be a fun year eh?

It's like 1999 and Josh Fraser all over again....

 

[Gone Critical]

But wouldn’t the 2 later round 1 picks be used as points for Daicos anyway?


Sent from my iPad using BigFooty.com

Lots of scenarios. You could trade for picks in the next draft etc. Real point is if we finish bottom four the pick we sold has become much more valuable than the compensation we received

 

[Gone Critical]

Hah! You’re dreaming if you think a club would give up two later 1st rounders for a pick that we absolutely have to get rid of. A late first and maybe a mid second would be the absolute best scenario.

There is 17 clubs out there and pick 3 in this years draft would be extremely valuable.

I think you are dreaming if you think 16 clubs would stand by and watch one club force us to take way unders without upping the ante.

Even on your senario a late
1st and mid 2nd is better than two picks in the 30’s. Whatever was bargained, players 2022 picks etc you could be sure it would be better as you have conceded

 

[Jen2310]

No matter what we think of whether we should have held onto our 1st for 2021 or not, its done now. We just gotta hope the kids we got for those picks will be worth it. The next few years will determine that.

 

[Jen2310]

It would be all time scenes on this board if Daicos turns around and says “lol ya kidding ya self if you think I’m coming here” to the pies prior to draft day

That's not happening. He loves this club and the boys.

 

[Apex36]

There is 17 clubs out there and pick 3 in this years draft would be extremely valuable.

I think you are dreaming if you think 16 clubs would stand by and watch one club force us to take way unders without upping the ante.

Even on your senario a late
1st and mid 2nd is better than two picks in the 30’s. Whatever was bargained, players 2022 picks etc you could be sure it would be better as you have conceded

Stop pushing this ‘two picks in the 30’s’ narrative. We traded our future first for pick 24 and 27(?). There were several more trades involved after that to get to 30/31, which resulted in a significant amount of points for this years draft. Trying to downplay the actual trade to a lower value to push your narrative is disingenuous, and I’d expect better from a poster like you.

 

[sr36]

Hah! You’re dreaming if you think a club would give up two later 1st rounders for a pick that we absolutely have to get rid of. A late first and maybe a mid second would be the absolute best scenario.

Disagree. When the start up clubs had concession picks that they were always going to trade, it was a bidding war and they didn't go at a discount. Clubs will be competing with each other for it - not competing with us. Personally, I would have kept it and then ontraded it into 2023. We'd hit 2023 hopefully with cash and two first rounders to trade in someone or use.

 

[sr36]

Stop pushing this ‘two picks in the 30’s’ narrative. We traded our future first for pick 24 and 27(?). There were several more trades involved after that to get to 30/31, which resulted in a significant amount of points for this years draft. Trying to downplay the actual trade to a lower value to push your narrative is disingenuous, and I’d expect better from a poster like you.

You're not really upselling it though. Pick 24 and 27 is never likely to get you a first likely to be around the top 10. It was a dumb short term thinking trade.

 

[Apex36]

You're not really upselling it though. Pick 24 and 27 is never likely to get you a first likely to be around the top 10. It was a dumb short term thinking trade.

Disagree. You’re underselling the value of having two years of development in two extra players for a team that’s starting to rebuild. Add to that, that both Poulter and McMahon are looking like extremely promising prospects, and as of now, their draft number is irrelevant. So the question is, what’s better value for a club rebuilding? Poulter and McMahon with two years under their belt, or an early pick in 2022? I’m pretty satisfied with how things were handled on draft night tbh.

 

[sr36]

Disagree. You’re underselling the value of having two years of development in two extra players for a team that’s starting to rebuild. Add to that, that both Poulter and McMahon are looking like extremely promising prospects, and as of now, their draft number is irrelevant. So the question is, what’s better value for a club rebuilding? Poulter and McMahon with two years under their belt, or an early pick in 2022? I’m pretty satisfied with how things were handled on draft night tbh.

Hopefully Poulter and McMahon make it work out well, but I still think it was a dumb play. To me the fact that we traded those picks down suggests that we were targetting picks within a range - rather than having identified those two as outstanding value. Most draft picks get traded, so the two years of development doesn't mean much to me - as that pick had the potential to become someone already established and a very good player through trade. We spent what is likely to be a very valuable trade chip for two middling - not valuable chips. If we do have a war chest for next year, we've made it much harder to pick someone up in trade. We've also cost ourselves the ability to have a really strong hand in 2023 if that was how we wanted to go. That pick had the potential to give us access to a topliner. Two middling picks doesn't seem to justify it to me.

 

[Scodog10]

Cody Weightman incidentally a massive Pies man himself growing up, was very impressed by what he saw from young Nick on the weekend.

An option post 2021? It’s going to be tough breaking into that Dogs lineup without injuries hitting

Can’t agree with that Sco

If we finish bottom 4 and the pick franks it value as say pick 3 it’s far more valuable that what GWS speculated on when the were probably factoring in a pick 8-13 range.

Pick 3 might net us 2 later round 1 picks in that senario

In the interests of me addressing your post, which has changed significantly, of course you disagree you’ve been down on our talent for 4 months just as you were in 2018...

Let’s look at what we know:

1. The trade itself was for 24 and an unnamed 2nd or the equivalent of about pick 10.

2. In order to get the two firsts a club needed to have them, want to trade them and we needed to be interested.

3. We now get 12 months of footy into Poulter and McMahon.

From there let’s begin the grey. No one was predicting bottom 4, there’s a discount on any Daicos bid and the way the draft fell may have impacted our ability to attain the players we needed. For all we know any player we pick up in the mid season draft may have been high enough up our draft board come the 2021 draft that we get them early anyway (ala Langdon).

I’m only going to deal in what I know to be true and not your ifs and mights. On that basis I’m accepting of the clubs moves and would only question whether our talent ID is right in the sense that we’re still valuing big bodies in the middle when everyone else is looking for speed. Specifically Poulter here. If the draft were re-done tomorrow maybe Gouldon gets a top 5 bid and by the end of the year McMahon could be the top rated tall (unlikely McDonald looks a stud), but the key for me is allowing things to unfold at least more than one game...

 

[Gone Critical]

Stop pushing this ‘two picks in the 30’s’ narrative. We traded our future first for pick 24 and 27(?). There were several more trades involved after that to get to 30/31, which resulted in a significant amount of points for this years draft. Trying to downplay the actual trade to a lower value to push your narrative is disingenuous, and I’d expect better from a poster like you.

Sorry, wasn't quite sure on the numbers but read it was the picks used on Poulter/McMahon.

Doesnt really change my main point which is if, and its a big if, that pick becomes a bottom 4 pick as Sco discussed it will become much more valuable than the picks we recieved for it. I don't think there should be any dispute about that.

 

[Apex36]

Sorry, wasn't quite sure on the numbers but read it was the picks used on Poulter/McMahon.

Doesnt really change my main point which is if, and its a big if, that pick becomes a bottom 4 pick as Sco discussed it will become much more valuable than the picks we recieved for it. I don't think there should be any dispute about that.

A massive if. Frankly, we aren’t a bottom four side, so I have no idea why you’re pushing that scenario so relentlessly.

 

[No SPIN]

Sorry, wasn't quite sure on the numbers but read it was the picks used on Poulter/McMahon.

Doesnt really change my main point which is if, and its a big if, that pick becomes a bottom 4 pick as Sco discussed it will become much more valuable than the picks we recieved for it. I don't think there should be any dispute about that.

what probability do you put, on us finishing bottom 4?

 

[Jen2310]

 

[stormskye]

what probability do you put, on us finishing bottom 4?

If we continue to struggle to kick 10 goals, we are in danger of sliding heavily in what appears to be a more free flowing high scoring season. Bottom 4 is a huge stretch, but anything from 13 is certainty foreseeable

 

[jonmacTrag]

If we continue to struggle to kick 10 goals, we are in danger of sliding heavily in what appears to be a more free flowing high scoring season. Bottom 4 is a huge stretch, but anything from 13 is certainty foreseeable

Actually almost anything is possible for 7 or 8 clubs this season and the next few as the flow on effects from the covid interrupted VLF and junior leagues reverberate through the system.

 

[Apex36]

Lol what the hell. I hope he enjoys the limelight, because he sure as hell isn’t going to escape it.

 

[Jen2310]

Lol what the hell. I hope he enjoys the limelight, because he sure as hell isn’t going to escape it.

Nope. I think he kinda does. He likes the attention and the pressure. I get the feeling it makes him better. Looks like he is the face of the chargers promotion wise.

 

[Jen2310]

I guess he'll do lol

 

[Horaceg]

Disagree. You’re underselling the value of having two years of development in two extra players for a team that’s starting to rebuild. Add to that, that both Poulter and McMahon are looking like extremely promising prospects, and as of now, their draft number is irrelevant. So the question is, what’s better value for a club rebuilding? Poulter and McMahon with two years under their belt, or an early pick in 2022? I’m pretty satisfied with how things were handled on draft night tbh.

I agree, the kids we have brought in should be the focus not the number they were selected at. Let's hope they all come good.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Trading out our first rounder if we finish bottom 4 could end up being the biggest fail of the last trade period

We could finish spooners, and having traded out pick #1 would be lucky to squeeze into our top 10 trade period fails of the last five years.

 

[Gone Critical]

A massive if. Frankly, we aren’t a bottom four side, so I have no idea why you’re pushing that scenario so relentlessly.

what probability do you put, on us finishing bottom 4?

Not saying it's likely. I was replying to Sco's opinion that the club made the right call in moving on the 2021 1st unless we finish in last place. My view would be I would rather have our 2021 to trade at the end of the season if we finish in the bottom section of the ladder.

 

[Gone Critical]

In the interests of me addressing your post, which has changed significantly, of course you disagree you’ve been down on our talent for 4 months just as you were in 2018...

Let’s look at what we know:

1. The trade itself was for 24 and an unnamed 2nd or the equivalent of about pick 10.

2. In order to get the two firsts a club needed to have them, want to trade them and we needed to be interested.

3. We now get 12 months of footy into Poulter and McMahon.

From there let’s begin the grey. No one was predicting bottom 4, there’s a discount on any Daicos bid and the way the draft fell may have impacted our ability to attain the players we needed. For all we know any player we pick up in the mid season draft may have been high enough up our draft board come the 2021 draft that we get them early anyway (ala Langdon).

I’m only going to deal in what I know to be true and not your ifs and mights. On that basis I’m accepting of the clubs moves and would only question whether our talent ID is right in the sense that we’re still valuing big bodies in the middle when everyone else is looking for speed. Specifically Poulter here. If the draft were re-done tomorrow maybe Gouldon gets a top 5 bid and by the end of the year McMahon could be the top rated tall (unlikely McDonald looks a stud), but the key for me is allowing things to unfold at least more than one game...

Don't disagree with your 1st sentence. 2018 I was down on the forwards particularly as we came into the season. We were all hoping Moore, Cox and Fas could step up and provide our goal power pre the season starting. I didn't see the rise of Stevo, Thomas, WHE, Mihichek and De Goey in 2017, did have hopes on De Goey.

This year i would be rapt if we could replace the talent of Treloar, Stevo and Phillips with our 8 draftees but I reckon the odds are against that.

As to the 2021 1st if we finish near the bottom we will have to disagree, in that senario I would much prefer to be able to trade it at the end of this season. The other advantage is if Nick D doesn't end up being say top 4 pick and slips to 6 or 7 and we end up with pick 4 we will have missed out on a gun kid. For me holding onto the 2021 1st was a smarter play but how it ends up we will have to wait and see.

 

[No SPIN]

Not saying it's likely. I was replying to Sco's opinion that the club made the right call in moving on the 2021 1st unless we finish in last place. My view would be I would rather have our 2021 to trade at the end of the season if we finish in the bottom section of the ladder.

so by your own logic Scodog10 endorsement of the clubs strategy is sound - given you think your scenario of finishing bottom 4 is unlikely.
I think a club that plans draft strategy, for the “unlikely”, as you’re suggesting here is making a mistake lMO.