Prediction Possible pick swaps

[LukeParkerno1]

and we will bid. You can put your house on it

Yep. Behind Rowell he'd be almost no1 on our board.

 

[Crow till I die]

All this talk re GWS. It is almost inconceivable that they do any further pick trade before draft night, unless melbourne are very willing to do so before hand. There will be deals agreed with both melbourne and also adelaide and maybe even sydney that could be put into play on the night

Yep. Behind Rowell he'd be almost no1 on our board.

Your club won't get the chance to drop a bid. Adelaide and Sydney are apparently the only 2 other clubs to visit Green at his place. Adelaide are very well known for bidding on academy kids they like and the club likes Green. If GWS and Melbourne don't cut a deal, Green will be bid on by Adelaide at 4 you could almost put your house on it. GWS would actually be better off trading back down the order to get more points to cover a bid. Maybe they could even look to trade their 2020 1st for a 20's pick this year to make sure

 

[LukeParkerno1]

All this talk re GWS. It is almost inconceivable that they do any further pick trade before draft night, unless melbourne are very willing to do so before hand. There will be deals agreed with both melbourne and also adelaide and maybe even sydney that could be put into play on the night

Your club won't get the chance to drop a bid. Adelaide and Sydney are apparently the only 2 other clubs to visit Green at his place. Adelaide are very well known for bidding on academy kids they like and the club likes Green. If GWS and Melbourne don't cut a deal, Green will be bid on by Adelaide at 4 you could almost put your house on it. GWS would actually be better off trading back down the order to get more points to cover a bid. Maybe they could even look to trade their 2020 1st for a 20's pick this year to make sure

Could see the Crows bidding. Either way it's a moot point, he'll be at GWS. Looks a ready to go inside bull.

Pick 6 would be plenty with the 20% discount to almost match it straight out.

 

[Crow till I die]

Could see the Crows bidding. Either way it's a moot point, he'll be at GWS. Looks a ready to go inside bull.

Pick 6 would be plenty with the 20% discount to almost match it straight out.

yeah that is on the money. I would not have a problem, if the crows traded pick 4 for GWS pick 6 + their 2020 1st (maybe with a late pick swap in their favor ie their 59 for our 49 or even 40 for 28 to help with points)

 

[B4Bear]

How? You do know the first round pick next year almost becomes redundant from GWS if they enter into deficit.

So how about we allow the remainder of the clubs to bid on players and go into deficit. Like I said, a rort.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

So how about we allow the remainder of the clubs to bid on players and go into deficit. Like I said, a rort.

You mean like every other club can with NGA academy selections

 

[Pykie]

This going into deficit next year is a rort. You either have the picks and points this year, or you don't.

Gives a massive leg up to clubs getting acadamy prospects.

It is ******* over the rest of the competition for a few, and it sucks.

Agreed. It's a stupid situation, especially with the amount of leverage and opportunity clubs now have to trade picks and already a 20% discount included.

If you can't match the bid with points in that particular draft, the player is drafted to the bidding club.

Simple.

 

[B4Bear]

You mean like every other club can with NGA academy selections

Which not every club has every year. It is not comparable in the slightest.

 

[FreeAgent1]

This going into deficit next year is a rort. You either have the picks and points this year, or you don't.

Gives a massive leg up to clubs getting acadamy prospects.

It is ******* over the rest of the competition for a few, and it sucks.

I think it was either extremely close or happened with Quaynor and the Pies....

Academies are a leg up- I agree with the sentiment though there should be a cap of deficit and if you can’t match that you can’t draft them.

 

[Andre the Giant]

Which not every club has every year. It is not comparable in the slightest.

It really is comparable, we don’t have high level Academy kids every year either.

Even the rules for NGA are shambolic, they should just call it the AEFH (Appease Eddie Free Hit).

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Or 8 from the Dees for 14 and 32. I would do that if Kemp was gone at 8. Use 3 on Young. Sorry GWS you miss out.

Like that deal.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

not sure about that. I'd imagine there would be afew clubs willing to pay a premium for pick 6. Geelong have been open about wanting a top end pick and you never know, Port might be sniffing as they have shown a willingness to spend big to trade up if they want a player

Geelong will pay a premium but i think they want flanders and think he might go at 4 or 5. We would probably pay more of a premium for that than 6 but you never know.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

This going into deficit next year is a rort. You either have the picks and points this year, or you don't.

Gives a massive leg up to clubs getting acadamy prospects.

It is ******* over the rest of the competition for a few, and it sucks.

If it works the way I think it does then I kinda disagree. Say you go into deficit 500 points and finish 8th. Your pick 10 was 1395 DVI points, but with a 500 point penalty is now worth 895 points. This means you pick 10 is now pick 21. Might be worth doing or not worth doing depending on the draft but wouldn't call it a rort. The fact no one has done it yet says there's probably not a huge advantage in it

 

[nurries]

This going into deficit next year is a rort. You either have the picks and points this year, or you don't.

Gives a massive leg up to clubs getting acadamy prospects.

It is ******* over the rest of the competition for a few, and it sucks.

I agree with you. But what also sucks is that the AFL changed the F/S rule to make it fairer after a lot of teams like Geelong benefitted greatly from old the rules. Newer teams didn't even get a look in and now have to bid on their F/S players instead of getting them for basically ****all

 

[Lach72]

Freo have a couple of 2020 seconds (ours and Melbourne's).

Anyone have multiple picks in the 20's this year they might swap?

 

[eastfreo75]

Richmond in a similar position.
Pick 19 , then 3 picks around 40, then pick 56 then 70-odd.
It depends on how many 'live' picks we plan on using. If only 3, then I could see us offering pick 56 + 2 of ~40 for Freo's pick 22, which they would otherwise use on Liam Henry points. We could afford to be generous to make it a win-win.
Otherwise it looks like trading 56 & ~40 for future picks to a club like Saints, West Coast, Melbourne or Collingwood who would find them handy this year.
Brisbane & Adelaide having a similar range of picks to Richmond and may have similar strategies, but depends on how many picks each club wants to use.

Fremantle issue is the number of available spots on the list.

We need to trade 22 for two picks.

 

[Peel67skin]

All this talk re GWS. It is almost inconceivable that they do any further pick trade before draft night, unless melbourne are very willing to do so before hand. There will be deals agreed with both melbourne and also adelaide and maybe even sydney that could be put into play on the night

Your club won't get the chance to drop a bid. Adelaide and Sydney are apparently the only 2 other clubs to visit Green at his place. Adelaide are very well known for bidding on academy kids they like and the club likes Green. If GWS and Melbourne don't cut a deal, Green will be bid on by Adelaide at 4 you could almost put your house on it. GWS would actually be better off trading back down the order to get more points to cover a bid. Maybe they could even look to trade their 2020 1st for a 20's pick this year to make sure

Any chance of placing one dollar and get back 10 dollar if GWS don't move up pick 6. Happy to play five dollar and if impossible happen get 50 dollar back.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Freo have a couple of 2020 seconds (ours and Melbourne's).

Anyone have multiple picks in the 20's this year they might swap?

24 or 36 this year for equivalent value next year I think the cats would consider strongly. 20 OOC next year + 2 confirmed 2020 retirees. Likely turn over 10 list spots minimum

 

[Lach72]

24 or 36 this year for equivalent value next year I think the cats would consider strongly. 20 OOC next year + 2 confirmed 2020 retirees. Likely turn over 10 list spots minimum

24 for Melbourne's second I would do in a flash...after we get the Henry bid sorted.

I'm assuming that 10 is going for Henry.
If we could grab Stephens, then Henry, then perhaps Rivers/Ruscoe/Sharp,even Gould if his testing puts people off

 

[CatToTheFuture]

24 for Melbourne's second I would do in a flash...after we get the Henry bid sorted.

I'm assuming that 10 is going for Henry.
If we could grab Stephens, then Henry, then perhaps Rivers/Ruscoe/Sharp,even Gould if his testing puts people off

Guess it depends how they see Melbourne finishing

 

[Crow till I die]

Any chance of placing one dollar and get back 10 dollar if GWS don't move up pick 6. Happy to play five dollar and if impossible happen get 50 dollar back.

They are going to try no doubt at all. Their problem seems to be that it will cost them big time to trade with Melbourne or Adelaide as both clubs have them over a barrel - Melbourne hold the whip hand but if they are not interested and have their eye on a player other than Green, then the crows come into play for a possible deal. If it involves pick 6 and their 2020 1st, there has been a lot of talk that they may not have enough points to match a bid if Sydney go at pick 5 if they have traded out next year's 1st rounder. They are in a tight spot and maybe need to give up on the idea of another top 5 player this year and trade back down to protect their assets going forward. It will be interesting to see how it plays out on draft night

Edit: either way, if they want Green he is theirs no matter what

 

[replicant]

Fremantle issue is the number of available spots on the list.

We need to trade 22 for two picks.

I'd offer 32 and 44 for your 22 if i was Sydney. It gives you guys 101 extra points, and moves us up. Other teams may have better options though, like crows 28 and 37 (gives you 315 points). But crows lost a few players, so may need their picks more than they need to move up (or at least i hope so!).

 

[liz]

There is a maximum deficit that GWS (or any club can go into). It's set at the amalgamated picks in rounds 1-4 that the premier would be awarded - ie picks 18, 36, 54, 72. (I have no idea whether that gets adjusted down a pick in each round to allow for the fact that Gold Coast have already been awarded an extra pick in the first round of next year's draft. I don't suppose that situation was anticipated when the rules were drawn up.

If GWS are successful in trading up to draft another player before Green (or even if they don't trade up but no bids come on Green before their existing pick 6), the deficit they go into will be less than the maximum allowed, so there will be no reason they can't do it. It will wipe out their pick 40 (and any other late picks they hold this year) and then the remaining deficit will come off their first round pick next year. If they've traded that pick out in order to trade up, I am not entirely sure what happens but I think it comes off their second round and subsequent round picks. So it would largely wipe them out of next year's draft too unless they acquire more earlyish picks next year by trading out players or through FA compensation if they were to lose a Cameron or Whitfield. So if they were to do this - ie trade out next year's first round pick to secure an extra pick in the top 5 this year - they are essentially trading most of next year's picks for that additional choice this year. Whether that is "wise" or not I guess depends on their views of who they might obtain in this year's top 5 compared to their assessment of next year's draft and where their picks are likely to be. They'll almost certainly go deep into the finals again unless they have an absolutely awful injury crisis, so those picks next year will fall late in each round. If they are doing it because there's a particular player they have in mind - say a Luke Jackson because they really want a good young ruckman - it makes more sense than if they are just after one of the midfielders. None of those stand out as being particularly different to those available most years in the draft.

It could be that they're doing it just because they can - ie being clever for the sake of being clever. They've got the savvy Quayle on their staff, so you'd think that's unlikely, but you never know.

Or they could be doing it because of an obsession with drafting players with high picks, and effectively what they are doing is packaging all their picks next year into a top 5 pick this year, something they'd be very unlikely to achieve via a trade with another club. Other clubs generally aren't amenable to giving up picks at the very pointy end of the draft for a raft of later ones. If so - and it's only a suggested possibility, not a claim that they are - I question their obsession with drafting players with top draft picks, especially midfielders. They've already got such a stacked midfield that it's hard for players to break in, even if they are good enough to at another club. They already have Caldwell from last year waiting in the wings, and have just essentially given away Bonar for nothing. Maybe that's because they've realised he hasn't lived up to his pre-trade hype, but had he played more games, they might have gotten more of a return for him.

High draft picks also come with a sense of entitlement and expectation that they will get to play senior footy early in their careers. They seem to become "more homesick" than players drafted later if they don't get opportunities. And clubs have to given them fatter contracts that they haven't yet earned because they believe there will be plenty of demand for their services. (Again, see Bonar. If he hadn't been signed on such a handsome contract that his football hadn't earned, they might again have received more of a return for him in a trade).

Furthermore, they already have so much top (and "entitled" talent) that it might explain why, thus far, what they have delivered has been less than the sum of its parts. They have five or six absolute stars on their list, but even their second and third tier talent would be considered A grade at most other clubs (the likes of Davis, Ward, Haynes, the up and coming Taranto and Hopper, et al). Less heralded players have come in and actually improved them - players like De Boer, Lloyd, Daniels - because these guys don't mind being role players. Arguably they need more of these in their team, not fewer, if their top grade talent is to be as effective as it can. Richmond have demonstrated how four or five absolute top rung players can be very effectively supported by a whole host of "lesser" role players - players who are loyal beyond their pay grade and don't mind doing the dirty work. The Hawthorn teams of the three-peat were similarly a mix of stars and lots of solid role players. I could argue that the Swans team of 2012 contained pretty much 22 "role players" (some more central and talented than others, but probably no-one viewed in the same light that Cameron, Greene, Coniglio, Kelly, Whitfield are in the current Giants outfit).

 

[B4Bear]

If it works the way I think it does then I kinda disagree. Say you go into deficit 500 points and finish 8th. Your pick 10 was 1395 DVI points, but with a 500 point penalty is now worth 895 points. This means you pick 10 is now pick 21. Might be worth doing or not worth doing depending on the draft but wouldn't call it a rort. The fact no one has done it yet says there's probably not a huge advantage in it

It gives you an extra option that is not available to everyone. It is a risk mitigation strategy. If you think next years draft is weak or compromised (like 2020 is supposed to be), and you can effectively spend next years points this year.

Then if needs be with a 20% discount for next year if you have another academy chance.

Total rort set up by the AFL for their special needs clubs.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

It gives you an extra option that is not available to everyone. It is a risk mitigation strategy. If you think next years draft is weak or compromised (like 2020 is supposed to be), and you can effectively spend next years points this year.

Then if needs be with a 20% discount for next year if you have another academy chance.

Total rort set up by the AFL for their special needs clubs.

It does give an extra option, but that option is going to often be the wrong one.