Traded Patrick Lipinski traded to Collingwood for Pick #43

Remove this Banner Ad

Home Alone

Debutant
Apr 28, 2006
122
27
Bayside
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Ok but it’s not our job to sort out your list needs.

Why didn’t you ask for a higher pick for Young?

Why are you asking for more than double for Lipinski than you did for Young?
I thought p44 was going back. Equivalent to a pick in the late 50's
And yes. it isn't your problem to sort out our list needs.
 

Libbaaaa

All Australian
Jun 1, 2021
708
1,613
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Ok but it’s not our job to sort out your list needs.

Why didn’t you ask for a higher pick for Young?

Why are you asking for more than double for Lipinski than you did for Young?
Because we rate him higher than Young plus Collingwood have probably offered him a nice jump in salary too to lure him into asking for a trade.
 

Northernsoul74

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 19, 2016
14,540
24,161
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Ok but it’s not our job to sort out your list needs.

Why didn’t you ask for a higher pick for Young?

Why are you asking for more than double for Lipinski than you did for Young?
You seem very desperate to turn this trade into something it’s not. It’s really not the exciting trade saga you desperately want it to be.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Bay Pie

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 28, 2006
11,336
6,960
QLD
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
LA Lakers,NE Patriots,Liverpool FC
Basically said (paraphrasing) that he had no intention of using the PSD and he had never had to use it before but he has never finished 2nd last before either. (I feel he payed a straight bat to the question)
Really, I got the distinct feeling he’s made his offer and will just leave it with the WBD to take it or leave it. I felt he was quite flippant and confident about the whole deal.

That vacant list spot and subsequent draft pick may be quite valuable on draft night.
 

RobJD

Team Captain
Oct 1, 2021
365
293
AFL Club
Collingwood
The Tarrant/Coleman Jones has really Hurt Collingwood Chances
Not by much, just means they're likely to take him with PSD Pick 2 rather than getting him for 58 and having a go at someone else at PSD time - I'd prefer they got him for 58 as that then means we can target someone else at the PSD.
 

TMoney22

Premiership Player
Sep 15, 2010
3,106
2,715
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Utah Jazz, San Jose Sharks
Ok but it’s not our job to sort out your list needs.

Why didn’t you ask for a higher pick for Young?

Why are you asking for more than double for Lipinski than you did for Young?
Lapinski is wayyy better than Young. Young should have been traded for a pick upgrade and we would have been fine with that.
 

Crazy Tails

Premiership Player
Nov 30, 2006
4,432
5,086
Collingwood Heartland
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Is there any other teams?
If the mooted trade of Pies pick 27 for Tigers 38 & 40 comes to fruition the two clubs will definitely come to a solution.

If Dogs want 36 and Pies want to give 58 I reckon 43 in the middle would be fair.

If we can do the Lip to Dogs for 43 and then get 38 & 40 in from Tigers after that I'll be happy.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

PieLebo87

Hall of Famer
Sep 14, 2005
12,185
9,376
Endeavour Hills
AFL Club
Collingwood
If the mooted trade of Pies pick 27 for Tigers 38 & 40 comes to fruition the two clubs will definitely come to a solution.

If Dogs want 36 and Pies want to give 58 I reckon 43 in the middle would be fair.

If we can do the Lip to Dogs for 43 and then get 38 & 40 in from Tigers after that I'll be happy.
I thought the Doggies are holding out for pick 43, not pick 36. I still reckon it’ll be one of/both the picks in the 50s.
 

cecil

Club Legend
Feb 28, 2010
1,794
2,032
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
I think this will more likely end up a pick upgrade rather than a straight swap as we will be limited with list spots. We will basically just say get us 2-300 points, and because both teams picks will be eaten up it won't matter too much what picks they are.
 

Bay Pie

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 28, 2006
11,336
6,960
QLD
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
LA Lakers,NE Patriots,Liverpool FC
We can’t trade pick 36 to WBD as it’s their pick. You’re not allowed to trade a clubs pick ‘directly’ back to them. Happy to be corrected on this.

Pick 27 should in no way be traded. Keep it for draft night, in case of an out of no where NM pick one bid on Nick Daicos. If no bid at one, flick pick 27 for a 2022 2nd rounder which restores a pick in each round of the 2022 draft.

WBD do not need this trade to get Darcy points. They easily trade pick 23 for 2 picks gaining the 244 points needed for the expected bid at pick 2.

No news is good news as far as the Pies go. He’s uncontracted.
 

Northernsoul74

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 19, 2016
14,540
24,161
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
We can’t trade pick 36 to WBD as it’s their pick. You’re not allowed to trade a clubs pick ‘directly’ back to them. Happy to be corrected on this.

Pick 27 should in no way be traded. Keep it for draft night, in case of an out of no where NM pick one bid on Nick Daicos. If no bid at one, flick pick 27 for a 2022 2nd rounder which restores a pick in each round of the 2022 draft.

WBD do not need this trade to get Darcy points. They easily trade pick 23 for 2 picks gaining the 244 points needed for the expected bid at pick 2.

No news is good news as far as the Pies go. He’s uncontracted.
You’re forgetting list spots. We can’t just keep splitting picks.
 

cecil

Club Legend
Feb 28, 2010
1,794
2,032
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
We can’t trade pick 36 to WBD as it’s their pick. You’re not allowed to trade a clubs pick ‘directly’ back to them. Happy to be corrected on this.

Pick 27 should in no way be traded. Keep it for draft night, in case of an out of no where NM pick one bid on Nick Daicos. If no bid at one, flick pick 27 for a 2022 2nd rounder which restores a pick in each round of the 2022 draft.

WBD do not need this trade to get Darcy points. They easily trade pick 23 for 2 picks gaining the 244 points needed for the expected bid at pick 2.

No news is good news as far as the Pies go. He’s uncontracted.
Pretty sure we can take 36 back. It's just that you can't do it during live trading during the same draft. I'd say it's 36 for Lipsinki and 52.
 

Bay Pie

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 28, 2006
11,336
6,960
QLD
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
LA Lakers,NE Patriots,Liverpool FC
You’re forgetting list spots. We can’t just keep splitting picks.
I’m not sure how many list spots you have but you only currently have 4 picks. If you only have 4 list spots, thus 4 picks in the draft, once the bid is received on draft night, I’m sure you can then split pick 23 for whatever you want, knowing whatever picks/points are left over from the bid match, will be realigned to your vacant list spots. If it’s a Richmond trade, they obviously need the list spots to take the relevant picks to the draft.
 

Bay Pie

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 28, 2006
11,336
6,960
QLD
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
LA Lakers,NE Patriots,Liverpool FC
Pretty sure we can take 36 back. It's just that you can't do it during live trading during the same draft. I'd say it's 36 for Lipsinki and 52.
I can’t see us doing that as it takes us below the 2,400 points needed for a pick one bid. That was our main goal for this trade period to avoid impacting our 2022 1st rounder, hence why we sorted it on day one when we could have done better, if we held fire for a bit.

The melts on the Collingwood board if that did happen would be funny though.
 

Apex36

Hall of Famer
Mar 26, 2014
33,134
63,041
AFL Club
Collingwood
Pretty sure we can take 36 back. It's just that you can't do it during live trading during the same draft. I'd say it's 36 for Lipsinki and 52.
Not a chance. We won’t make a trade that compromises our hand enough that we can’t match a bid at pick 1 on Daicos if it eventuates.
Pies have already done the work to get their points, the dogs can do some work and make some extra pick trades after the fact if we give up a couple of later picks to you guys.
 

cecil

Club Legend
Feb 28, 2010
1,794
2,032
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Not a chance. We won’t make a trade that compromises our hand enough that we can’t match a bid at pick 1 on Daicos if it eventuates.
Pies have already done the work to get their points, the dogs can do some work and make some extra pick trades after the fact if we give up a couple of later picks to you guys.
A couple of later picks? This would be less points. About the equivalent of pick 52 itself, so only about 40 points more than 55.

It would also drop your total points from 2593 to 2337. So even with a bid at pick 1 (which is looking unlikely) a deficit of 63 points wouldn't affect your 2022 first rounder unless you finished in the top 8.

The only potential complicating factor is you would need 7 open list spots to use all the picks you have, and I have no idea if that is possible.

Anyway, that means that Lipinski and 52 for 36 would:
* Mean you still have enough points for a pick 1 bid for Daicos without affecting your 2022 first rounder
* Mean we still only need 4 list spots to match a bid for Darcy at Pick 2 (any more and we would need to delist both Stef Martin and Mitch Wallis)
 

Gone Critical

Moderator
Mar 11, 2007
13,240
19,480
Abbotsford
AFL Club
Collingwood
Tom Phillips was a salary dump. He was otherwise worth more than Pick 65.

I say this being completely genuine - Lipinski will play every game for you next year. He's a good player. He's not just a stopgap for those other players - it's more likely that next time the Pies are competing for finals, Lipinski will play a part of that. A lot of focus in this thread is on his lack of pace and poor defensive efforts, and not enough on his beautiful kicking and movement in congestion with ball in hand. There is a lot of upside to Lipinski, I just don't see him finding a role in our side given the fact our midfield already contains multiple players who are not particularly fast (Libba, Dunkley, Macrae) or poor defensively (Smith, Treloar). That doesn't mean he isn't an AFL quality player, it's just that he needs to move somewhere that he can have the opportunity to showcase his talent.
I think thats fair and he will be a role player in the mould of a Tom Phillips (probably a little behind Tom overall). Can play a lot of AFL footy but not a star. Start of the week I was thinking a pick in the 40's sounded fair. Can see it might end in the 50's (53,58). No one will get screwed and no one will win big. He seems a classic AFL journeyman in the making, a player we all need filling out as list but not that hard to find.
 

Apex36

Hall of Famer
Mar 26, 2014
33,134
63,041
AFL Club
Collingwood
A couple of later picks? This would be less points. About the equivalent of pick 52 itself, so only about 40 points more than 55.

It would also drop your total points from 2593 to 2337. So even with a bid at pick 1 (which is looking unlikely) a deficit of 63 points wouldn't affect your 2022 first rounder unless you finished in the top 8.

The only potential complicating factor is you would need 7 open list spots to use all the picks you have, and I have no idea if that is possible.
And you just answered the reason why we won’t give up 36. Opening up 7 list spots completely and utterly compromises our list. I’m aware that you guys have the same issue and that’s why you want the earlier pick, but frankly, that’s not Collingwoods problem. We can provide you with points, it’s up to the dogs to get another party involved or orchestrate a separate trade if you need those points condensed in to less picks.
Anyway, that means that Lipinski and 52 for 36 would:
* Mean you still have enough points for a pick 1 bid for Daicos without affecting your 2022 first rounder
* Mean we still only need 4 list spots to match a bid for Darcy at Pick 2 (any more and we would need to delist both Stef Martin and Mitch Wallis)
Except as you said, we’d have to open 7 list spots. Why would we do that just so you guys don’t have to? Especially since we can just grab Pat in the PSD if a deal isn’t reached?
 

cecil

Club Legend
Feb 28, 2010
1,794
2,032
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
And you just answered the reason why we won’t give up 36. Opening up 7 list spots completely and utterly compromises our list. I’m aware that you guys have the same issue and that’s why you want the earlier pick, but frankly, that’s not Collingwoods problem. We can provide you with points, it’s up to the dogs to get another party involved or orchestrate a separate trade if you need those points condensed in to less picks.

Except as you said, we’d have to open 7 list spots. Why would we do that just so you guys don’t have to? Especially since we can just grab Pat in the PSD if a deal isn’t reached?
Yeah I looked at Footy wire and it seemed you may have the spots, but as I said I'm not sure myself.

Sounds like everyone is on the same page with the value in a points perspective, it's just list spots. I can see two later picks and Lynch being traded to Hawthorn for an earlier selection which may help.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad