Perspective *Long*

[Kickett Punches Read]

I would never force Pav to leave! I have man love!

But if you said to him: mate thanks, you are the biggest legend of the club ever, and have done everything possible to try to make this club successful. If you want to go we will do everything possible to make it happen for you.

If he wants to be part of the rebuild (and then possibly miss out on the glory because his body is ****ed from being foreced to play in the centres when clearly he is one of the best forwards in the league) then bring it, as the club definitely will need some older heads around the club to protect the cubs as they grow...

I just think the club needs to be proactive in re-building the list, and needs to explore every option (and boy would it hurt when he kicks 15 goals on Dodd next season!).

It would also be a tremedous gesture from the club to its most loyal servant

like i said, i see your point, but i just cant see pav asking to leave now when he has been through so much with the club... personally i hope pav decides that coaching is his game once he retires, that way he never has to leave

 

[melbournedocker]

Terrific post Moo, it made for great reading.

Overall, I am really excited about where we are heading and am a firm believer that Harvey is the right person to move us forward. If I had seen this post last week, I would have been all positive after our effort vs Port. Unfortunately, witnessing that debacle on Sunday took the wind slighty out of my sails. lol

Lets just hope we get our draft picks right as some more quality youngsters to compliment what we already have would make for an exciting future.

 

[Sigwald]

Pav is one of the few true role models we have at the club. For the benefit and development of our kids it is of vital importance he stays. I would never ever trade him, unless he desperately wanted to leave.

If we take care of him and put him where he belongs (the forward line) there is no reason he can't captain an increasing successful side to its maiden premiership. We'll just have to walk the hard road that Moo so perfectly described.

Personally I consider 2008/2009 as our clean out years. We should be rid of most of the DA brigade next year and have sufficient kids to cover those that stay most of the time. Yes, we'll be inconsistent, but I predict we'll be exciting and full of potential as well. These two years were the last of the past, the next two are the first of the future.

 

[Stronzo]

Great OP Moo, you've once again highlighted what dumbarses Connolly and Schwab were.

I'll digress a little and share a story of Chris Bond who was kind enough to speak to my son and I when we were flying east in November last. He was a fantastic bloke and basically said that the next two years were going to be the toughest the club had faced. They were going to have to go to the draft very hard and plow all the resources into getting the right kids and fast tracking them as they club had missed the opportunity to refresh the list in the previous years. I think we are in good hands.

Cheers for the info. Good to know

 

[DockerShocker]

In theory, you're a flog.

Makes me laugh at all the morons jumping on here and suggest we trade our best 2 players (Pav/Sandi)... no club is going to ever be able to get their hands on 2x first round draft picks, nor hand over their first pick + a player... those days are over, so get on with your lives...

FFS, they are the franchise players that you build teams around. Trade them and we'll be worse off than we are now. Get rid of the deadwood first and then you'll see quality coming through. And we won't have to read or listen to the Chicken Littles of the world talking shit like they are now.

Pav deserves a priemership but sadly i don't think we can get 1 for him in time
Or can we? :I
Great post Moo
cleared my head a bit after sunday

 

[BeinPurplenGreen]

Bloody top post Moo, and the last line is duly noted.

Although I fear for the mental health of gravy and his ilk, another year like this might just push them over the edge.

* note to gravy and co. eat more cement..

Excellent post Moo - and I agree with young peppy that some need to harden up a bit for the even more painful days that are to come next season.

We traded 1st round draft picks for Stenglein (2005) and Chick (2003).

Pretty sure that North traded 1st round picks to Hawthorn for Hay and Thomson.

Geelong traded a 1st round pick for Ottens.

And I think Adelaide coughed up a first rounder for Carey.

That's off the top of my head - and may not be entirely correct.

Probably line ball between North and yourselves as to who made the biggest mistake, but the major beneficiary of those mistakes was Hawthorn who arguably won a premiership on the back of those trades.

Great points - when you think about it Hawthorn really did well from us and the Roos - basically set themselves up for a dip at the title. But they didn't make it sustainable, unlike Sydney during 2003-2008, Geelong or Brisbane, each of whom traded later round picks but over more years - meaning that their lists were just being tweaked each year, rather than wholesale re-builds.

All this is true, however does not excuse a ten goal belting from a team of daycare kids

Well said. Shocking list management isn't an excuse for lack of heart on field, nor for lack of attempts at changing game-day matchups.

I guess the difference is our first rounders were pick 6 (Bell trade), pick 1 (Croad, Mcpharlin) and pick8/13 (Tarrant) so all inside the top 10.
WC (Stenglein, Chick) and Sydney (Jolly) used later first round picks to get players that proved important in successful teams. North tried the same but it didn't work out.
Adelaide was the only other to trade a high first rounder for Carey - pick 4, which became pick 2 after Carlton got punished, was gained by trading Kane Johnson to Richmond. North used the pick to get Wells.

Interesting - there definitely seems to be more of a track record of success with later first round pick trades than with early first round pick trades - but IMHO that is because the teams with later picks in the first round have better lists already - so the trades are more of a top-up, rather than a re-build.

I'll digress a little and share a story of Chris Bond who was kind enough to speak to my son and I when we were flying east in November last. He was a fantastic bloke and basically said that the next two years were going to be the toughest the club had faced. They were going to have to go to the draft very hard and plow all the resources into getting the right kids and fast tracking them as they club had missed the opportunity to refresh the list in the previous years. I think we are in good hands.

Chris has done a great job so far, and he seems a top operator - hopefully we have yet more wins with our late ND and rookie picks this year.

 

[theGav56]

Actually Geelong traded 2 first round picks for Ottens who was an underperforming, injury prone ruckman. And it would be a pretty fair argument that they would not have won the Grand Final if they had not done that trade. That is good value.

Hawthorn traded Pick 10 for Croad (an underperforming KPP who was arguably damaged goods), which is something that few posters factor in when they discuss the entire Croad trade with our club, and while Croad did nothing in the Grand Final, he was instrumental in getting them there.

Yes we traded pick 6 for Bell, which netted the Roos Dylan Smith. We picked him up a couple of years later in the Rookie draft, and delisted him soon after that. I may be giving the recruiting staff too much credit (which I have never been accused of before), but if they had taken a look at the draft and thought pick 6 is not going to get a decent player, and decided it would make good trade value, then they did well.

A reasonable comparison could be made between games played by the players we recruited using draft picks and the players selected with those picks. I think we would be way out in front due to the fact that most players we have recruited in that manner have been consistently in our best 22, and the high number of failures that come through draft selections.

Another comparison could be made between the first rounders we have had versus the players we have traded first round picks for. That is, Drum, Murphy, Dunn etc versus Bell, Headland etc.

Those three batches of statistics may provide a bit of a perspective on the value of trading picks for proven players. What typically happens is that posters pick the eyes out of selections in the draft and say things like "we could have got James Hird at pick 80".

 

[Clay Davis]

Well, none of our trades were a win then, because we didn't win a premiership.