Pick 25 wasted ??

[Scodog10]

found this old thread and the comments are making me laugh. Oh how good of a steal this was to get Billy for pick 25!!!

I don't agree with that. We also had 47 that year which was used to trade in Yagmoor and 50.

In hindsight a steal would have been 47 for Elliott and keeping 25 for say Brad Hill.

Was is it a good deal? Yes. A steal? No. IMO.

 

[TradeDraft]

I don't agree with that. We also had 47 that year which was used to trade in Yagmoor and 50.

In hindsight a steal would have been 47 for Elliott and keeping 25 for say Brad Hill.

Was is it a good deal? Yes. A steal? No. IMO.

We might of Drafted Elliot at 25 IF we kept that Pick

 

[Bard]

I'd rather have Elliott than have not had him at risk of him not being available at 25 or 47....

 

[Apex36]

I don't agree with that. We also had 47 that year which was used to trade in Yagmoor and 50.

In hindsight a steal would have been 47 for Elliott and keeping 25 for say Brad Hill.

Was is it a good deal? Yes. A steal? No. IMO.

I have a hard time believing GWS would have given away Elliott for 47. (He was a pre-listed player wasn't he?)

 

[jackcass]

In hindsight I think it was still quite a good deal. We'll never know if Clarke or Elliott was the primary objective but either way, Elliott at pick 25 is a good get.

Clarke didn't work out but we'll also never know how much of that was the impact of the Addisons (???) disease he's subsequently been diagnosed as having. If he'd able to re-establish his AFL career we'd all be extremely happy that this deal got done.

 

[Stifler's mom]

Re: Did we get screwed?

With players like Morris and others being easily given up, it makes me think that maybe Elliott is a lot better for an an unknown quantity that we give him credit for. If we wanted a small forward, we would have had a good look at Saad and others, but opted for Elliott. I guess we just have to put our trust in Hine and Co.

Faith repaid!

 

[ksardog]

Elliott is potential all australian. Pick 25 was a steal for him in hindsight, even tho he may hav orinally been the steak knives in the deal.

 

[Old Spice]

Given the types of players available before and after 25 this trade turned out to be an absolute steal.

Unless someone has some definitive mail on ALL other clubs recruiting intentions re Elliot then it's just a massive wankfest. We locked him in and it was gold-dust. If this was an episode of Colombo the titles would have run longer than the show.

 

[IQ3]

It was a D.Hine special

 

[Bay Pie]

I believe we rated Elliott in the 25 to 30 range anyway.

Giving up pick 25 for a player of his quality has turned out to be a steal.

 

[jackcass]

I believe we rated Elliott in the 25 to 30 range anyway.

Giving up pick 25 for a player of his quality has turned out to be a steal.

He'd played a couple of VFL games as the 23rd player from memory so we probably appreciated what we were getting when we drafted him.

 

[THATSGOLD]

Elliott has the value of a top 10 pick today.

 

[Anzacday]

Elliott has the value of a top 10 pick today.

Agreed.
I don't care how the deal was structured and who we coulda shoulda got - the kid's a jet

 

[Scodog10]

I have a hard time believing GWS would have given away Elliott for 47. (He was a pre-listed player wasn't he?)

It's not really relevant to my point though. I'm just saying that pick 25 for Elliott wasn't a steal just good value at the time. I then said that I'd have considered pick 47 for him a steal.

Whether that would have got the deal done is another matter and one we can only speculate on. My speculation would lean towards no.

We might of Drafted Elliot at 25 IF we kept that Pick

How would we do that if we'd already traded for him?

 

[Kirby]

I'm not sure the point of arguing any of this.

He was a great pick up at 25 whatever way you look at it.