Picks 17&19 Upgrade

[Tim H]

How high a pick could we trade picks 17&19 for.Maybe we could end up with Gibbs/Hansen, Gibbs/Leunburger or Gibbs/Jetta

 

[SimmoiISaGUN6]

From my understanding we cant trade pick 17 as it is a Priority Pick

 

[blangerang]

From my understanding we cant trade pick 17 as it is a Priority Pick

Didn't the Dockers trade their priority pick to Hawthorn for Croad/Mcpharlin? So PP can be traded

 

[C4[2]Yo`DooR]

Didn't the Dockers trade their priority pick to Hawthorn for Croad/Mcpharlin? So PP can be traded

The rules were changed to prevent that from happening again.

PP's can't be traded.

 

[BlackGoanna]

How high a pick could we trade picks 17&19 for.Maybe we could end up with Gibbs/Hansen, Gibbs/Leunburger or Gibbs/Jetta

Wouldnt get a high pick (top 5) anyway - for same reason we want to trade it

 

[kensington]

Would Hawthron be willing to trade their first rounder for thornton and our pick 19? And consequently is it worth it for us?

 

[Nightwolf]

Would Hawthron be willing to trade their first rounder for thornton and our pick 19? And consequently is it worth it for us?

No...

 

[Funkalicous]

No...

Agreed. Thornton's worth more than a 1st round upgrade.
Either we get a top 10 pick for him or 2 top 20 picks.

 

[blangerang]

Agreed. Thornton's worth more than a 1st round upgrade.
Either we get a top 10 pick for him or 2 top 20 picks.

2 months ago you were saying how it is unfair that Thornton is being played as a KPP and that he should be a 2nd,3rd tall defender. Why would any club offer a top 10 pick for a third tall

 

[Funkalicous]

2 months ago you were saying how it is unfair that Thornton is being played as a KPP and that he should be a 2nd,3rd tall defender. Why would any club offer a top 10 pick for a third tall

If you're gonna quote me, show me the receipt.

I don't believe I said that.

 

[murph#3]

Would Hawthron be willing to trade their first rounder for thornton and our pick 19? And consequently is it worth it for us?

i'd take that in a flash, but no hawthorn are arguably the smartest team when it comes to drafting and rebuilding and they WONT offer us that.

 

[HBF]

Agreed. Thornton's worth more than a 1st round upgrade.
Either we get a top 10 pick for him or 2 top 20 picks.

Do you think that's realistic Funky, especially considering the talent in this years draft?

 

[Funkalicous]

I think people get overexcited from the draft. From what I've seen, all the cream goes early (top 5), and every other pick thereafter is a gamble. Sure you get your guns, but you get twice as many duds, and plenty more fringe players.

Sydney have exploited this overexcitement to great effect. People laughed at them for giving up a 1st rounder for Melbourne's Jolly, and now look at him. Sydney now have a 10 year ruckman that is extremely vital to their team's structure. The same thing will happen with Thornton. He is not only a good young player, he also fills a position that is difficult to fill.

Look at the 2001 super draft. For all the hype and attention it has received, how many players can you say are better fullbacks than Bret Thornton?
Polak? Maguire? Roberts-Thompson? I could argue that Thornton is better than all those players.

In fact, out of the top 20 that year, these are the only players I'd consider better than Thornton:

1 Luke Hodge
2 Luke Ball
3 Chris Judd
4 Graham Polak
5 Xavier Clarke
6 Ashley Sampi
7 David Hale
8 James Bartel
9 Luke Molan
10 Sam Power
11 Richard Cole
12 Brent Reilly
13 Nick Del Santo
14 Ashley Watson
15 Barry Brooks
16 Rick Ladson
17 James Kelly
18 Shane Harvey
19 Jason Gram
20 Daniel Elstone

Only 5 are better than Thornton. That means that 3 quarters of the top 20 in a super draft have turned out no better than Thornton.

Would any of you guys accept one of those lesser names for Thornton? I doubt it, especially considering the important role T-Bird has in our team.

My point:
You don't give up a young gun for a 'may or may not be a gun' draft pick. That's not fair compensation.

 

[trueblue_91]

I think people get overexcited from the draft. From what I've seen, all the cream goes early (top 5), and every other pick thereafter is a gamble. Sure you get your guns, but you get twice as many duds, and plenty more fringe players.

Sydney have exploited this overexcitement to great effect. People laughed at them for giving up a 1st rounder for Melbourne's Jolly, and now look at him. Sydney now have a 10 year ruckman that is extremely vital to their team's structure. The same thing will happen with Thornton. He is not only a good young player, he also fills a position that is difficult to fill.

Look at the 2001 super draft. For all the hype and attention it has received, how many players can you say are better fullbacks than Bret Thornton?
Polak? Maguire? Roberts-Thompson? I could argue that Thornton is better than all those players.

In fact, out of the top 20 that year, these are the only players I'd consider better than Thornton:

1 Luke Hodge
2 Luke Ball
3 Chris Judd
4 Graham Polak
5 Xavier Clarke
6 Ashley Sampi
7 David Hale
8 James Bartel
9 Luke Molan
10 Sam Power
11 Richard Cole
12 Brent Reilly
13 Nick Del Santo
14 Ashley Watson
15 Barry Brooks
16 Rick Ladson
17 James Kelly
18 Shane Harvey
19 Jason Gram
20 Daniel Elstone

Only 5 are better than Thornton. That means that 3 quarters of the top 20 in a super draft have turned out no better than Thornton.

Would any of you guys accept one of those lesser names for Thornton? I doubt it, especially considering the important role T-Bird has in our team.

My point:
You don't give up a young gun for a 'may or may not be a gun' draft pick. That's not fair compensation.

I'd have Hale and Gram better than thornton imo.

But good point. After this i definantly believe thornton is worth a first rounder considering not everyone makes it and Thornton still has 150+ games still to play.

 

[blangerang]

2 months ago you were saying how it is unfair that Thornton is being played as a KPP and that he should be a 2nd,3rd tall defender. Why would any club offer a top 10 pick for a third tall

Some of you guys said it I can't really be arsed looking for who

 

[murphster]

I think people get overexcited from the draft. From what I've seen, all the cream goes early (top 5), and every other pick thereafter is a gamble. Sure you get your guns, but you get twice as many duds, and plenty more fringe players.

Sydney have exploited this overexcitement to great effect. People laughed at them for giving up a 1st rounder for Melbourne's Jolly, and now look at him. Sydney now have a 10 year ruckman that is extremely vital to their team's structure. The same thing will happen with Thornton. He is not only a good young player, he also fills a position that is difficult to fill.

Look at the 2001 super draft. For all the hype and attention it has received, how many players can you say are better fullbacks than Bret Thornton?
Polak? Maguire? Roberts-Thompson? I could argue that Thornton is better than all those players.

In fact, out of the top 20 that year, these are the only players I'd consider better than Thornton:

1 Luke Hodge
2 Luke Ball
3 Chris Judd
4 Graham Polak
5 Xavier Clarke
6 Ashley Sampi
7 David Hale
8 James Bartel
9 Luke Molan
10 Sam Power
11 Richard Cole
12 Brent Reilly
13 Nick Del Santo
14 Ashley Watson
15 Barry Brooks
16 Rick Ladson
17 James Kelly
18 Shane Harvey
19 Jason Gram
20 Daniel Elstone

Only 5 are better than Thornton. That means that 3 quarters of the top 20 in a super draft have turned out no better than Thornton.

Would any of you guys accept one of those lesser names for Thornton? I doubt it, especially considering the important role T-Bird has in our team.

My point:
You don't give up a young gun for a 'may or may not be a gun' draft pick. That's not fair compensation.

Great example Funky you have sold me

 

[HBF]

1 Luke Hodge
2 Luke Ball
3 Chris Judd
4 Graham Polak
5 Xavier Clarke
6 Ashley Sampi
7 David Hale
8 James Bartel
9 Luke Molan
10 Sam Power
11 Richard Cole
12 Brent Reilly
13 Nick Del Santo
14 Ashley Watson
15 Barry Brooks
16 Rick Ladson
17 James Kelly
18 Shane Harvey
19 Jason Gram
20 Daniel Elstone

Only 5 are better than Thornton. That means that 3 quarters of the top 20 in a super draft have turned out no better than Thornton.

I'd say that Reilly, Kelly and Gram would be just ahead of Thornton.

 

[Funkalicous]

I'd say that Reilly, Kelly and Gram would be just ahead of Thornton.

Gram gets cheap possies from the backline, Kelly is struggling to stay in the team, and Reilly wouldn't know the meaning of consistancy. But regardless of that, good talls are more important than good smalls. There's no way I'd be putting any of them infront of Thornton.

 

[HBF]

Gram gets cheap possies from the backline, Kelly is struggling to stay in the team, and Reilly wouldn't know the meaning of consistancy. But regardless of that, good talls are more important than good smalls. There's no way I'd be putting any of them infront of Thornton.

They would all be at least equal with T-Bird. Don't get me wrong, i'd much rather have T-Bird at Carlton than not, but IF he doesn't want to be there then he can bugger off.

 

[len_jet]

They would all be at least equal with T-Bird. Don't get me wrong, i'd much rather have T-Bird at Carlton than not, but IF he doesn't want to be there then he can bugger off.

I disagree we need to make him want to stay... if its about money throw some at him, within reason of course. Obviously we need to make him realise that loyalty is a good thing and that leaving now is a gutless cowards way out. Perfect example is Hird who is playing on despite a shocking year by the Bombers... in other words just cause the team is down dont go deserting us now!