Opinion Pick 3 Versus Picks 12 & 14

[CoachB]

Is it worth adding Owies to the title or assigning him a draft value, we did after all trade him along with 12 and 14 for 3.

Owies was a salary dump, became steak knives, wouldn't assign any value.

 

[Blue__Balls]

I still don’t get why players that literally are not available to other clubs are added as an increase to the pick numbers, maybe later in the draft but not those projected to go in the first couple of rounds. They make zero difference to who you can actually pick.
It was pick 12 and 14 of live picks in the draft


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Well we're talking about who people would have taken if we'd kept our original picks.

So when reviewing the draft board to see which names were still available, they need to ignore everyone prior to Pick 15?

 

[SurreyBlue]

We had 12 and 14.

Ashcroft pushed them out to 13 and 15.
Lombard pushed them out to 14 and 16.
Kako pushed them out to 15 and 17.

I "concluded" them by them being the picks

West Coast and Richmond held our picks. Go figure.

 

[Arr0w]

Is it worth adding Owies to the title or assigning him a draft value, we did after all trade him along with 12 and 14 for 3.

By all "reports", Owies wasn't going to be offered a contract, so essentially he was a sweetener

We also gave up pick 73 and got back 63 and 68

Not sure any of those picks were critical to the deal

 

[Blue__Balls]

West Coast and Richmond held our picks. Go figure.

Happy to hand you the shovel, mate

West Coast live-traded 15 (originally 12) to Port.
Richmond traded 14 (became 17) to Freo in their Bolton deal.

 

[SurreyBlue]

Happy to hand you the shovel, mate

West Coast live-traded 15 (originally 12) to Port.
Richmond traded 14 (became 17) to Freo in their Bolton deal.

No shovel required - you can keep it. That does make more sense.

 

[Stamos]

Owies was a salary dump, became steak knives, wouldn't assign any value.

Owies was uncontracted, we didn't dump any salary.
But value ended up being about a 4th rounder, negligible.

 

[jj1978]

You just get the feeling from what was said, there were 5 key standout players in the draft and I suspect we had an inkling that our number 1 rated player was potentially dropping down the order a bit.

Also beyond the Campo boys we probably were looking at a using that 4th spot to get a defensive KPP and I further suspect the pool in that regards was pretty even-ish to await using a pick 38 (40) on.

I don't know what our real player cards order was, but it seems our ranking of the draft indicated picks 12+ for a bit was relatively evenish.

 

[CoachB]

Owies was uncontracted, we didn't dump any salary.
But value ended up being about a 4th rounder, negligible.

We dumped salary by telling him to move on and not resigning him. Any value in gilding the lily?

 

[Stamos]

We dumped salary by telling him to move on and not resigning him. Any value in gilding the lily?

By that measure the 4 senior players we delisted were salary dumps?

 

[Arr0w]

Berry and Reid the early breakaway leaders

 

[VainGlorious]

Berry and Reid the early breakaway leaders

Not many takers for Hynes though

Only elite company there

 

[CoachB]

By that measure the 4 senior players we delisted were salary dumps?

They were!

 

[Stamos]

They were!

No, that's not what the term means.

Jack Bowes was a salary dump.

 

[CoachB]

No, that's not what the term means.

Jack Bowes was a salary dump.

Many ways to skin the cat

 

[Blue__Balls]

They were!

In the context of what a "salary dump" is within the AFL, they were not, nor was Owies.

A salary dump is the trading of a contracted player for either significant unders, or by inducing another club with the offer of an improved draft position (pick or pick upgrade), to move the salary you would otherwise be forced to pay them.

If a player is uncontracted, there is no requirement to pay them anything, and as such trading or delisting them is not a salary dump.

 

[Bletch]

They were!

"Salary Dump" is a specific term for a rule change brought in in 2022. Jack Bowes deal was the first such trade. See:

Clubs allowed to ‘salary dump’ in a major change to AFL trade rules

A major policy change, allowing clubs to more easily dump the salaries of big-money players, could ignite next month’s AFL trade period.

www.theage.com.au

The AFL has made a major shift in player trading this year, officially allowing clubs to “salary dump”, or trade out players on big contracts for minimal draft return.

Such deals would previously have been blocked by the AFL. The change will allow clubs to more easily get a player’s contract off their books to ease the strain on their salary caps.

 

[CoachB]

"Salary Dump" is a specific term for a rule change brought in in 2022. Jack Bowes deal was the first such trade. See:

Clubs allowed to ‘salary dump’ in a major change to AFL trade rules

A major policy change, allowing clubs to more easily dump the salaries of big-money players, could ignite next month’s AFL trade period.

www.theage.com.au

Don't be so narrow minded guys..the term is broader than the original use. It means getting players off your list to create cap space. There are 100's of ways of executing this. Call it whatever you like.. the Owies trade was about making cap saving, changing the mix of small forwards, creating space for Moir and other developing players. The reality is zero trade value, $200 to $500k in cap space, depending on who you believe.

 

[Stamos]

Don't be so narrow minded guys..the term is broader than the original use. It means getting players off your list to create cap space.

No, it doesn't.
It's a term with a specific meaning.
You can't just come up with your own definitions and expect other people to adopt them.

 

[El Topo]

Absurd to apply a definition of salary dump that exculdes the trades that SOS made with GWS and the Cats in 2015 - 18

 

[GoBlues!]

Very happy with Jagga, HOF, Campos and H4 but for arguments sake (hoping we would have still had 38):

12.(15) Berry

14.(17) Reid

38->40. Harry O’Farrell
43. Ben Camporeale
54. Lucas Camporeale

This arrangement would get us all we wanted - small forward,outside mid run, KPD, mid bull and hbf/wing

But still none of them have “the moves like Jagga”

It comes down to Austins judgement of what’s better for the club:

Jagga and Charleson >>> Reid and Berry, or any other duo after picks 12, 14 imho.

 

[HyphensBack]

Don't be so narrow minded guys..the term is broader than the original use. It means getting players off your list to create cap space. There are 100's of ways of executing this. Call it whatever you like.. the Owies trade was about making cap saving, changing the mix of small forwards, creating space for Moir and other developing players. The reality is zero trade value, $200 to $500k in cap space, depending on who you believe.

I call it a Salary Crap

 

[bmaurizio]

Jagga moves with fineness in the circle, can’t be touched, I’m happy with his selection, my concerns are his light frame and kicking penetration.
Reckon we got good value form HOF , Comporeale lads and Charleson picks.

 

[Revenant1995]

For me, there are 2 parts to this. If there was a poll for 3 or 12 and 14, I'd vote 3. For the sake of this exercise, Berry and Trainor.

 

[ctwenty1]

Looking forward to this thread becoming even more totally meaningless in the years ahead

What’s done is done