Our First Pick - The Deficit - We have pick 10!

[wayToGo_]

A bid on Green (once again based on the assumption that we would have accepted him and that GWS would have trumped the bid - as everyone expected them to do) would have meant no deficit. Because of the points deficit, Henry's discount was effectively wiped out (by losing our high first round pick this year for a lower one).
Yes 2019 draft was excellent but it will cost 2020 currency to complete it and that impact needs to be considered in that. If we were sure GWS were taking Green, and all indications were pointing that way, a bid at 7 would have removed this from the conversation. Then you could claim we had a fantastic draft haul and we would have a higher pick this year.
I'm not treating the deficit in isolation, I'm including it in the trade period that it was acquired. It seems you think it doesn't matter though, when it clearly should.

If Freo don't think they can learn from what happened in 2019 then we are stuffed, because I guarantee there are 17 other clubs that would have learnt from it.

We've also been through the Green bid at the time. Our recruiters were chomping at the bit to get Young and Serong. And if you can't see why given what we've seen from them already then this whole convo with you is pointless.

You don't bid on someone for the sake of it. If the prospects you want are there, you grab them. Playing stupid by bidding on players that aren't your first preference is dumb. We are talking a 1-3 pick shift - anyone who has done any analysis on a draft knows that is close to meaningless when it comes to picks outside the top 4ish.

edit - remember we got Young, Serong and Henry with picks 7, 8 & 9 (not a top 5 pick ) Would you swap any of them with anyone other than perhaps Rowell?

 

[arsesmart]

3 or 4 other clubs win by getting a higher draft pick this year. We lose. In your example, GWS win but we lost on Green (assuming they wanted their highly touted academy pick) vs Henry (who we clearly wanted), in a way that we could have not lost.

It's zero sum because there is only one winner and every decision made that makes it harder to win (like unnecessarily moving down the draft by having a points deficit) makes it tougher to beat another, smarter team. We have not always made smart decisions, this is another example.

That's not a lose if the player you select is the one that you wanted to pick anyway. Or, say the player you were going to pick doesn't work out for whatever reason. There almost never is one winner in terms of the draft and picks as there are so many variables to account for in between the pick and the player reaching whatever potential they've got.

 

[Nothing]

OK, I'll concede. Freo should be happy to take a points deficit they could have avoided.

 

[wayToGo_]

OK, I'll concede. Freo should be happy to take a points deficit they could have avoided.

Maybe send in your application to Freo? They could clearly do with a genius like you

 

[station to station]

This is why I stopped paying attention to the draft. What a bunch of bullshit Byzantine rules.

 

[Johnny Dalmas]

OK, I'll concede. Freo should be happy to take a points deficit they could have avoided.

Would you have been more happy with Green, Young and Henry with no points deficit this year?

Is getting Serong over Green worth a potential 5 pick downgrade in a future draft?

Before the draft if Freo had traded a (hypothetical) #10 and a (potential) 5 pick downgrade for a guaranteed pickup of Henry would you have accepted that outcome?

 

[Joao]

There is no way GWS would have passed on Green at 7 or 8.

 

[Hazelsnuts]

A bid on Green (once again based on the assumption that we would have accepted him and that GWS would have trumped the bid - as everyone expected them to do) would have meant no deficit. Because of the points deficit, Henry's discount was effectively wiped out (by losing our high first round pick this year for a lower one).
Yes 2019 draft was excellent but it will cost 2020 currency to complete it and that impact needs to be considered in that. If we were sure GWS were taking Green, and all indications were pointing that way, a bid at 7 would have removed this from the conversation. Then you could claim we had a fantastic draft haul and we would have a higher pick this year.
I'm not treating the deficit in isolation, I'm including it in the trade period that it was acquired. It seems you think it doesn't matter though, when it clearly should.

If Freo don't think they can learn from what happened in 2019 then we are stuffed, because I guarantee there are 17 other clubs that would have learnt from it.

We didn’t want Green, we wanted Henry with Serong and Young - I reckon we need to be happy with our hand - IF GWS hadn’t matched a bid on Green we end up with no Henry, it all sounds a little too perfectly simplistic - keep hypotheticals coming Sundays experts......
If there is someone we really want highly rated in the draft we can trade and swap picks to position ourselves to get that player - there is always a way -it’s just how badly the need or rating of the player with a view of list management- or generational talent

 

[Bender571]

Sounds like both are plausible. Does anyone remember that draft where someone took the player we were obviously going to pick, then we looked clueless and panicked. I think it was when GWS took McCarthy and after a mad scramble we called out Apeness in a WTF moment.

I doubt that they scrambled. It was reported on AFL.com before the draft that we were interested in Apeness with our first pick.

Vic Metro ruckman Michael Apeness shoots into first-round draft contention

Victorian Michael Apeness could be the first ruckman picked at the draft

www.afl.com.au

"It appears unlikely Apeness will be taken any earlier than Fremantle's pick No.17"

 

[arsesmart]

OK, I'll concede. Freo should be happy to take a points deficit they could have avoided.

Well, it just depends on what sort of shenanigans you think it's worth to avoid a possible scenario that may never happen and may not cost you much anyways, should it eventuate. In the trade for McCarthy, some were apoplectic that we gave up a shot at SPS for Logue. Injury setbacks aside and given the current makeup of the list, I'm pretty happy with that choice.

 

[Nothing]

We didn’t want Green, we wanted Henry with Serong and Young - I reckon we need to be happy with our hand - IF GWS hadn’t matched a bid on Green we end up with no Henry, it all sounds a little too perfectly simplistic - keep hypotheticals coming Sundays experts......
If there is someone we really want highly rated in the draft we can trade and swap picks to position ourselves to get that player - there is always a way -it’s just how badly the need or rating of the player with a view of list management- or generational talent

The choice (in an unmatched bid scenario) is Green and one of Serong or Young. We were always getting Henry.

I'm sure we'd have been happy with Green and one of Serong or Young. I doubt they thought they had a chance, GWS were always matching.

Maybe send in your application to Freo? They could clearly do with a genius like you

I've conceded Freo played it perfectly. Be happy with the points deficit. Besides, having never played for Freo there's no job for me.

 

[theGav56]

By the same token, if Henry was rated 14-20 and the bid came at #9, should they have passed?

Sometimes you have the eat the sandwich in your hand and stop daydreaming about the steak. We had two gun players fall to our pick, then Carlton bid on our player so they could trade for a much later selection.

Would we select Henry over Young? I hope not.

 

[theGav56]

There isn't going to be much to worry about if the player people want, Logan McDonald, goes pick 1 to 5 anyway.

At the top of the draft having as many options as available is definitely valuable, and even more so now that live trading exists.

 

[wayToGo_]

I've conceded Freo played it perfectly. Be happy with the points deficit. Besides, having never played for Freo there's no job for me.

Ha ha. No such thing as perfect - that's kind of the point - draft picks are always speculative ("what's in the mystery box?"). They got the job done and all 4 draftees have debuted and I suspect the club are extremely happy with what they've seen already from all of them. If they were asked to downgrade their pick now to get Henry they'd jump at it.

I heard pre-draft that the club rated Henry as highly as any draftee in the pool - and similarly they did with Young and Serong. If we had picks #2, #3, #4 and there was no NGA concessions we very well could have picked them at those picks. To some it may look a bit expensive - to me and it seems also the club - we got a bargain to get 3 quality players in one draft and still retain a decent 1st rounder the following year.

 

[station to station]

Sounds like both are plausible. Does anyone remember that draft where someone took the player we were obviously going to pick, then we looked clueless and panicked. I think it was when GWS took McCarthy and after a mad scramble we called out Apeness in a WTF moment.

Rumour in 2008 was that we were into Tom Swift and West Coast called his name out right before our pick. So we picked Ballantyne higher than we intended to.

 

[theGav56]

edit - remember we got Young, Serong and Henry with picks 7, 8 & 9 (not a top 5 pick ) Would you swap any of them with anyone other than perhaps Rowell?

I would definitely consider Green without hesitation. I think he has scope to become a dominant player in the competition.

 

[arsesmart]

I would definitely consider Green without hesitation. I think he has scope to become a dominant player in the competition.

So you would rush to pause and think about it very deeply?

 

[theGav56]

Ha ha. No such thing as perfect - that's kind of the point - draft picks are always speculative ("what's in the mystery box?"). They got the job done and all 4 draftees have debuted and I suspect the club are extremely happy with what they've seen already from all of them. If they were asked to downgrade their pick now to get Henry they'd jump at it.

I heard pre-draft that the club rated Henry as highly as any draftee in the pool - and similarly they did with Young and Serong. If we had picks #2, #3, #4 and there was no NGA concessions we very well could have picked them at those picks. To some it may look a bit expensive - to me and it seems also the club - we got a bargain to get 3 quality players in one draft and still retain a decent 1st rounder the following year.

Wow, well that's a concern for me if they rated our 3 above or equivalent to Rowell as you are suggesting. I do see it as a terrific draft at the high end and am not a believer in a fixed hierarchy of best available draftees, but Rowell projects as clearly the #1.

 

[wayToGo_]

I would definitely consider Green without hesitation. I think he has scope to become a dominant player in the competition.

Yes so you've said numerous times. Perhaps the club didn't though?

Wow, well that's a concern for me if they rated our 3 above or equivalent to Rowell as you are suggesting. I do see it as a terrific draft at the high end and am not a believer in a fixed hierarchy of best available draftees, but Rowell projects as clearly the #1.

Wot? Tried reading this five times and it made less sense every time.

 

[theGav56]

So you would rush to pause and think about it very deeply?

I would, and pending needs, would take Green. I would rate them Young, Green, Serong, Henry.

 

[wayToGo_]

I would, and pending needs, would take Green. I would rate them Young, Green, Serong, Henry.

And yet Carlton bid on Henry before Green. And no other club bid on him before our picks.

 

[theGav56]

Yes so you've said numerous times. Perhaps the club didn't though?

Wot? Tried reading this five times and it made less sense every time.

You stated that you heard pre-draft that the club rated Young, Serong and Henry as highly as any draftee in the pool. Rowell seems a clearly better player, so I find it a concern if your statement is correct.

 

[Taylor]

At the top of the draft having as many options as available is definitely valuable, and even more so now that live trading exists.

I agree. But I don't expect McDonald to be available at the pick our performance this season would have given us before the deficit was applied

 

[theGav56]

And yet Carlton bid on Henry before Green. And no other club bid on him before our picks.

Carlton should bid on him if that's where they rank him, and we should match if it is where we rank him. I assume that's what happened.

 

[wayToGo_]

You stated that you heard pre-draft that the club rated Young, Serong and Henry as highly as any draftee in the pool. Rowell seems a clearly better player, so I find it a concern if your statement is correct.

FFS Clearly given I said if we had picks 2,3,4 we'd pick them after Rowell. Stop being a semantics wanka would you?