Traded Pick swap: Gold Coast trade #27 to Geelong for a 2021 R3 pick (Melb)
- Thread starter Lore
- Start date
- Tagged users None
gaz love x
All Australian
- Oct 6, 2019
- 831
- 2,008
- AFL Club
- Geelong
-last year they traded a known commodity (Sharp) for a pick the AFL reserved the right to take away (2020 pick 11) in a compromised draft
-this year they trade a pick they won't use (30+ after NGAs etc) in a draft where recruiters haven't seen players play much for a pick likely to be about 10 picks further back next year (a draft generally rated as being stronger than this year's, even before you consider a bunch of late-blooming 19 year olds who miss out this year because of the lack of footy)
-if anyone else offered a better deal they would have taken it
Is it too much to ask people to use their brains for even one second? There's a reason no one else offered more, most clubs probably value an early third rounder next year higher than a late second rounder this year. It made sense for us to make the trade because we didn't have a pick before 51... Last year's trade was good for us on paper but GC were smart to do the trade because if they did sufficiently well this season the AFL could have taken the pick away. And in the end having the pick just allowed GWS to ask for more for Cameron
-this year they trade a pick they won't use (30+ after NGAs etc) in a draft where recruiters haven't seen players play much for a pick likely to be about 10 picks further back next year (a draft generally rated as being stronger than this year's, even before you consider a bunch of late-blooming 19 year olds who miss out this year because of the lack of footy)
-if anyone else offered a better deal they would have taken it
Is it too much to ask people to use their brains for even one second? There's a reason no one else offered more, most clubs probably value an early third rounder next year higher than a late second rounder this year. It made sense for us to make the trade because we didn't have a pick before 51... Last year's trade was good for us on paper but GC were smart to do the trade because if they did sufficiently well this season the AFL could have taken the pick away. And in the end having the pick just allowed GWS to ask for more for Cameron
The trade is for a pick GCS won't use so they exchanged it for a pick they may use in a stronger draft. Makes sense to me. Perhaps other clubs could have bid more if it is such an issue.
Bell said we would have matched any bid on Henry, even a very high one. One then assumes Carlton also rated him highly and that is why they bid for him at 9. If he wasn't rated highly by us and Carlton made a high bid for a player they didn't rate just to be dicks, then they could have been "stuck" with him if we decided not to match.
Peel67skin
Norm Smith Medallist
- May 21, 2017
- 8,387
- 3,941
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
- Other Teams
- Liverpool
- Banned
- #157
Corruption is quite normal in sport . Especially you have Sportsbet .
Let's not pretend AFL is such a clean sport compare to other code .
* Gamble responsibility. Stephenson .
Drug cheat run in spots.
- Banned
- #161
Clubs that struggle to attract/retain players they want.
The context of the conversation was Sydney saying that you should receive a free pick if someone bids on your academy player and you chose not to match. He reckons it will stop clubs making early bids on your academy player. I argue that the fact that a player might not be matched if you bid too high and you don't really want them, is sufficient disincentive, without having to give a free pick to clubs who only cough up garbage low picks anyway to match usually top 10 players. As very few clubs are going to have access to meaningful academy players soon, it was just another Sydney self interest suggestion.
Sos couldn't get anyone he wanted by his pick i.e Serong and Henry so he traded out to get Kemp iirc who dropped because of an ACL.
- Banned
- #164
I'd say North have struggled to attract marquee talent and Brisbane had an issue retaining younger players. Both expansion clubs have had their struggles in that regard.
Do you not accept that some clubs are more attractive destinations than others?
That's seems like a pretty uncontroversial statement to me.
Strange example considering North just "attracted" Atu Bosenavulagi (Collingwood Magpies, 2021), Aidan Corr (GWS Giants, 2025), Jaidyn Stephenson (Collingwood Magpies, 2025) and Lachie Young (Western Bulldogs, 2021) - and Brisbane Nakia Cockatoo (Geelong Cats, 2022), Joe Daniher (Essendon Bombers, 2023), Not to mention their Brownlow medalist.
I'd hazard a guess that the myth that there are 'attractive' or 'destination clubs' has been proven a falsehood so many times I'm surprised it's still even mentioned.
- Banned
- #166
Can you read?
I referred to North's struggles to attract marquee talent. I'm talking about established A-graders. Not Bosenavulagi, Corr, Young. Why even bring them up like that makes a point?
And the reference to Brisbane was in the past tense i.e. "had an issue".
Are you trying so hard that you overlooked this?
Of course some clubs are more attractive than others. It doesn't mean it's set in stone or unchangeable. But at any given time, some clubs are better equipped to bring in established talent than others. That's "a myth", is it?
Last edited:
