Analysis Trading future picks

[dct66]

In the last 3 years, we’ve traded just 1 player & that was Hickey just 1.5 months ago. This can be viewed 2 ways - we either have great kids that want to stay or we have an abundance of s**t kickers that we’ve put up for trade & no one wants them.

I believe we’ve been trying to stay ahead of the curve by picking up top end talent with 2-3 yrs development at a cheaper rate by trading the 2nd & 3rd rounders. The Hawthorn trade in 2016 will show its real value in the next 2 years as Long, Battle & Clark hit their straps & mature. Compare that to Hawthorn who technically gave up those 3 players & then another 2nd rounder just to get Jaeger O’Meara. I’m so so glad we didn’t head down that road

Obviously Freeman was a bust, but Steele & Austin look pretty good, especially my boy Jack who looks like he’ll be a star.

As for next year, I’m not so fussed with our picks as we could have some talented guys OOC that may want to leave which will give us picks. But on the other hand, we may be blessed by our academy kids being guns (Biggie looks a ripper) & we then aren’t so reliant on having top end picks, so we can trade them for lower picks - Sydney-esque.

On face value:
2016 2nd for Freeman - bust
2016 picks 10 & 68 for Long, Battle & 2017 1st (Clark) - obscenely good
2017 2nd for Steele - obscenely good
2018 2nd & 3rd for Clav & Austin - good
2019 2nd for Hanners - good

We’re doing well with our futures trading & im stoked we finally addressed our primary weakness this year by bringing in a gun senior leader type in Hanners. I was a huge knocker on him at the start, but he’s an impressive speaker & believe the midfield group will really lift with him around

Great analysis Rors but I wouldn't be too critical of Hawthorn. Perhaps they have a (sightly) different philosophy to us in that they would rather trade their top picks for someone who has been in the system for quite a few years rather than take the chance on a kid who may not develop. Look at the sorts of players they have brought in over the past decade.

2008 - Stuart Dew significant role in 2008 Premiership
2009 - Josh Gibson - 3 x Premiership player
2009 - Shaun Burgoyne - 3 x Hawthorn Premiership player
2010 - David Hale - 3 x Premiership player
2011 - Jack Gunston - 3 x Premiership player
2012 - Brian Lake - 3 x Premiership player
2012 - Matthew Spangher - 2014 Premiership player
2012 - Jonathan Simpkin (Free Agent) - 2013 Premiership player (+ 2013 VFL Premiership player)
2013 - Ben McEvoy - 2 x Premiership player
2014 - James Frawley (Free Agent) - 2015 Premiership player
2014 - Jonathan O'Rourke - 2018 VFL Premiership player
2015 - no significant trade
2016 - Tom Mitchell - 2018 Brownlow Medallist
2016 - Jaeger O'Meara - ?
2016 - Ty Vickery (Free Agent) - bust
2016 - Ricky Henderson (Free Agent) - ?
2017 - Jarman Impey - ?
2018 - Darren Minchington (Free Agent) - ?
2018 - Tom Scully - ?
2018 - Chad Wingard - ?

I haven't done an in-depth analysis but they tend to bring in young players as rookies and then elevate with later draft picks if they show some promise. And I'm not saying they haven't taken younger players with higher draft picks because they have but they have a trend of bringing in players with previous AFL experience.

To a certain extent Melbourne after 20 years of endless high draft picks they now have a good mixture with the addition of Bernie Vince, Jake Melsham, Michael Hibberd, Jordan Lewis and Jake Lever.

Essendon (Saad, Smith, Stringer and now Shiel), Collingwood (Aish, Greenwood, Mayne, Varcoe, Treloar, Howe, Hoskin-Elliott plus Dwayne Beams and Jordan Roughead), Geelong (Dangerfield, Henderson, Tuohy, Scott Selwood, Ablett plus Gary Rohan and Luke Dalhaus) and Richmond (Houli, Prestia, Nankervis, Caddy plus Tom Lynch) show similar behaviour. And when was the last time Sydney developed a key forward (Lockett, Hall, Tippett [oops], Franklin).

I'd love to see a serious analysis of how teams have faired since trading came in. I don't think we have done badly. Dempster and Schneider come to mind and were great additions and we almost got there.

Hopefully in the next few years we can look back at our trades/free agents that helped us get that elusive second premiership (Bruce, Membrey, Hannebery, Roberton, Kent, Austin, Carlisle, Steele, plus ???)

 

[Rors]

Great analysis Rors but I wouldn't be too critical of Hawthorn. Perhaps they have a (sightly) different philosophy to us in that they would rather trade their top picks for someone who has been in the system for quite a few years rather than take the chance on a kid who may not develop. Look at the sorts of players they have brought in over the past decade.

2008 - Stuart Dew significant role in 2008 Premiership
2009 - Josh Gibson - 3 x Premiership player
2009 - Shaun Burgoyne - 3 x Hawthorn Premiership player
2010 - David Hale - 3 x Premiership player
2011 - Jack Gunston - 3 x Premiership player
2012 - Brian Lake - 3 x Premiership player
2012 - Matthew Spangher - 2014 Premiership player
2012 - Jonathan Simpkin (Free Agent) - 2013 Premiership player (+ 2013 VFL Premiership player)
2013 - Ben McEvoy - 2 x Premiership player
2014 - James Frawley (Free Agent) - 2015 Premiership player
2014 - Jonathan O'Rourke - 2018 VFL Premiership player
2015 - no significant trade
2016 - Tom Mitchell - 2018 Brownlow Medallist
2016 - Jaeger O'Meara - ?
2016 - Ty Vickery (Free Agent) - bust
2016 - Ricky Henderson (Free Agent) - ?
2017 - Jarman Impey - ?
2018 - Darren Minchington (Free Agent) - ?
2018 - Tom Scully - ?
2018 - Chad Wingard - ?

I haven't done an in-depth analysis but they tend to bring in young players as rookies and then elevate with later draft picks if they show some promise. And I'm not saying they haven't taken younger players with higher draft picks because they have but they have a trend of bringing in players with previous AFL experience.

To a certain extent Melbourne after 20 years of endless high draft picks they now have a good mixture with the addition of Bernie Vince, Jake Melsham, Michael Hibberd, Jordan Lewis and Jake Lever.

Essendon (Saad, Smith, Stringer and now Shiel), Collingwood (Aish, Greenwood, Mayne, Varcoe, Treloar, Howe, Hoskin-Elliott plus Dwayne Beams and Jordan Roughead), Geelong (Dangerfield, Henderson, Tuohy, Scott Selwood, Ablett plus Gary Rohan and Luke Dalhaus) and Richmond (Houli, Prestia, Nankervis, Caddy plus Tom Lynch) show similar behaviour. And when was the last time Sydney developed a key forward (Lockett, Hall, Tippett [oops], Franklin).

I'd love to see a serious analysis of how teams have faired since trading came in. I don't think we have done badly. Dempster and Schneider come to mind and were great additions and we almost got there.

Hopefully in the next few years we can look back at our trades/free agents that helped us get that elusive second premiership (Bruce, Membrey, Hannebery, Roberton, Kent, Austin, Carlisle, Steele, plus ???)

Hawthorn are a good example of staying ahead of the ‘dip’ by trading out their late first round picks for established top end players when high up the ladder to avoid the dreaded drop off & then rebuild.

By no means was I being critical of them, my point was more that given where we were at, trading pick 10 & 3 2nd rounders to get O’Meara would have been ludicrous. And he didn’t want to come to us anyway.

The way I see it, Hawthorn are just doing what Geelong are doing - Topping Up.

That’s why I find it ridiculous that the media are hyping up this Hawthorn “12 week rebuild” like it’s something new that no one has ever done or tried. They are just topping up because they know how long it takes to climb back up the ladder & also know that their own fans are the most fair weather fans in the game.

To add: No one has mentioned that their 2 first round picks used in 2015 are both no longer at the club (Burton - Port; Lovell - delisted), on top of wasting pick 19 in 2014 on Jono O’Rourke

They are just like every other club - they have hits & they have misses. The difference is that they have the best coach in the game & that is better than having any player

 

[Impatient Saint]

In the last 3 years, we’ve traded just 1 player & that was Hickey just 1.5 months ago. This can be viewed 2 ways - we either have great kids that want to stay or we have an abundance of s**t kickers that we’ve put up for trade & no one wants them.

I believe we’ve been trying to stay ahead of the curve by picking up top end talent with 2-3 yrs development at a cheaper rate by trading the 2nd & 3rd rounders. The Hawthorn trade in 2016 will show its real value in the next 2 years as Long, Battle & Clark hit their straps & mature. Compare that to Hawthorn who technically gave up those 3 players & then another 2nd rounder just to get Jaeger O’Meara. I’m so so glad we didn’t head down that road

Obviously Freeman was a bust, but Steele & Austin look pretty good, especially my boy Jack who looks like he’ll be a star.

As for next year, I’m not so fussed with our picks as we could have some talented guys OOC that may want to leave which will give us picks. But on the other hand, we may be blessed by our academy kids being guns (Biggie looks a ripper) & we then aren’t so reliant on having top end picks, so we can trade them for lower picks - Sydney-esque.

On face value:
2016 2nd for Freeman - bust
2016 picks 10 & 68 for Long, Battle & 2017 1st (Clark) - obscenely good
2017 2nd for Steele - obscenely good
2018 2nd & 3rd for Clav & Austin - good
2019 2nd for Hanners - good

We’re doing well with our futures trading & im stoked we finally addressed our primary weakness this year by bringing in a gun senior leader type in Hanners. I was a huge knocker on him at the start, but he’s an impressive speaker & believe the midfield group will really lift with him around

Great post Rors. Its nice to see we are getting things right again at the club.

 

[stfan]

To me trades that we win are god like

Well that is a most positive way to look at it

 

[SaintsSeptember]

To me trades that we win are god like the Steele trade, but Trout and co traded picks for Hickey, Longer and Freeman who were all fails. The Hunter Clarke one will be a win if he's a gun and some of those guys that came in the trade end up good players. It's high risk and you want to make sure you get them right.

We all thought we'd bent Hawks over for Mc Evoy and traded our ruckman for Savage and Dunstan, in hindsight it hasn't quite ben the win we thought it was.

The trade itself was good. We could have got Crouch , Merrett and kept our original second for Nankervis.
It was our drafting which was iffy.
But Acres may still come good ( and if you don't think the pick swap was part of the trade you're dreaming ).

 

[gringo2011]

The trade itself was good. We could have got Crouch , Merrett and kept our original second for Nankervis.
It was our drafting which was iffy.
But Acres may still come good ( and if you don't think the pick swap was part of the trade you're dreaming ).

To me in a performance industry if the outcome is a fail the whole thing was poor. Like a guy who plays on and snaps at goal can be a premiership hero or a villain, only the winners are remembered. We stuffed that trade up so it was a bad call. If you aren't very good at drafting you should know your limitations.

 

[Smoke_Me_AKipper]

In the last 3 years, we’ve traded just 1 player & that was Hickey just 1.5 months ago. This can be viewed 2 ways - we either have great kids that want to stay or we have an abundance of s**t kickers that we’ve put up for trade & no one wants them.

I believe we’ve been trying to stay ahead of the curve by picking up top end talent with 2-3 yrs development at a cheaper rate by trading the 2nd & 3rd rounders. The Hawthorn trade in 2016 will show its real value in the next 2 years as Long, Battle & Clark hit their straps & mature. Compare that to Hawthorn who technically gave up those 3 players & then another 2nd rounder just to get Jaeger O’Meara. I’m so so glad we didn’t head down that road

Obviously Freeman was a bust, but Steele & Austin look pretty good, especially my boy Jack who looks like he’ll be a star.

As for next year, I’m not so fussed with our picks as we could have some talented guys OOC that may want to leave which will give us picks. But on the other hand, we may be blessed by our academy kids being guns (Biggie looks a ripper) & we then aren’t so reliant on having top end picks, so we can trade them for lower picks - Sydney-esque.

On face value:
2016 2nd for Freeman - bust
2016 picks 10 & 68 for Long, Battle & 2017 1st (Clark) - obscenely good
2017 2nd for Steele - obscenely good
2018 2nd & 3rd for Clav & Austin - good
2019 2nd for Hanners - good

We’re doing well with our futures trading & im stoked we finally addressed our primary weakness this year by bringing in a gun senior leader type in Hanners. I was a huge knocker on him at the start, but he’s an impressive speaker & believe the midfield group will really lift with him around

Great post mate!!

 

[SaintsSeptember]

To me in a performance industry if the outcome is a fail the whole thing was poor. Like a guy who plays on and snaps at goal can be a premiership hero or a villain, only the winners are remembered. We stuffed that trade up so it was a bad call. If you aren't very good at drafting you should know your limitations.

Yeah nah..
there's limits to everything.
According to your theory if we traded minchington for fyfe and the team didn't end up higher up the ladder it would be a fail.
The trade was the trade, and was ok.
The draft was the draft, we were ordinary.

 

[gringo2011]

Yeah nah..
there's limits to everything.
According to your theory if we traded minchington for fyfe and the team didn't end up higher up the ladder it would be a fail.
The trade was the trade, and was ok.
The draft was the draft, we were ordinary.

No the trade is still good in isolation if you get a better result. I don't think that's hard to follow. A good trade is one where you trade something out and the player/s you bring in are better than what you lost or at least break even.
Really the most successful trades aren't always obvious, players like Bruce and Membrey for what was given up are fantastic trades.

We were ridiculously unlucky to not get much out of trading McEvoy, Dal and Goddard. In hindsight we probably should have kept them and rebuilt around them. Bottoming out hasn't fast tracked the rebuild.

 

[saint66au]

No the trade is still good in isolation if you get a better result. I don't think that's hard to follow. A good trade is one where you trade something out and the player/s you bring in are better than what you lost or at least break even.
Really the most successful trades aren't always obvious, players like Bruce and Membrey for what was given up are fantastic trades.

We were ridiculously unlucky to not get much out of trading McEvoy, Dal and Goddard. In hindsight we probably should have kept them and rebuilt around them. Bottoming out hasn't fast tracked the rebuild.

Unlucky, or unskilled at drafting or developing those we did draft? Not sure how much was bad luck and I guess we'll never know.

 

[The_Snake26]

The trade itself was good. We could have got Crouch , Merrett and kept our original second for Nankervis.
It was our drafting which was iffy.
But Acres may still come good ( and if you don't think the pick swap was part of the trade you're dreaming ).

I remember how much i wanted crouch that year. Bloke averaged 38 touches a game at tac level but was no good because he had no athleticism and was an average kick. I’m still upset about it. Wanted Dayle Garlett too tho so i guess it evened out

 

[Rors]

I think there’s a lot of hindsight heroes blowing a lot of hot air around.

I honestly do not remember anyone mentioning Zach Merrett’s name once during the draft thread of 2013. It was all about Kelly, Billings, Bont or Aish with pick 3 & with 18 & 19, there was Cripps, Acres, Dumont, Dunstan, Impey, Hartung

Ever go back & read old threads? It’s funny as *

 

[SaintsSeptember]

No the trade is still good in isolation if you get a better result. I don't think that's hard to follow. A good trade is one where you trade something out and the player/s you bring in are better than what you lost or at least break even.
Really the most successful trades aren't always obvious, players like Bruce and Membrey for what was given up are fantastic trades.

We were ridiculously unlucky to not get much out of trading McEvoy, Dal and Goddard. In hindsight we probably should have kept them and rebuilt around them. Bottoming out hasn't fast tracked the rebuild.

Bruce was a good trade. But he was a trade, prior to the draft someone was able to make the decision Josh Bruce is a bargain at pick 48 and pull the pin.
Membrey wasn't a trade , he was a player who was available if we had a spot on the list.

McEvoy was traded. Someone thought he was well worth giving up for Shane Savage, a pick and a pick swap in our favour. This was true.

If i sold my old Camira for $20 000 it would be an amazing good deal in my favour. ( I don't really have an old Camira )
If i gave the money to Fev to bet on sports and lost it all, it wouldn't make the original deal any worse.
It would still suck , because i have nothing to show for it, and i should sack Fev as a betting adviser.

Its kind of Ironic that we could end up with a better player from the pick we got from Hickey, than what we got for McEvoy.

 

[gringo2011]

Bruce was a good trade. But he was a trade, prior to the draft someone was able to make the decision Josh Bruce is a bargain at pick 48 and pull the pin.
Membrey wasn't a trade , he was a player who was available if we had a spot on the list.

McEvoy was traded. Someone thought he was well worth giving up for Shane Savage, a pick and a pick swap in our favour. This was true.

If i sold my old Camira for $20 000 it would be an amazing good deal in my favour. ( I don't really have an old Camira )
If i gave the money to Fev to bet on sports and lost it all, it wouldn't make the original deal any worse.
It would still suck , because i have nothing to show for it, and i should sack Fev as a betting adviser.

Its kind of Ironic that we could end up with a better player from the pick we got from Hickey, than what we got for McEvoy.

I get that analogy but footy trading isn't like selling your car for cash. It's more like getting a credit note to spend at a used car dealers on line where you don't get to see the cars up front.

 

[Baldur]

Never liked the concept of trading future picks. People undervalue future losses & overvalue present gains. Combine this with the risk of a clubs football dept spending the clubs future to keep their jobs. Too risky, never saw the need & binds the hands of any incoming administration.

Just about the only future pick trades I have no issue with are the ones where clubs swap their picks, say they swap next years second rounds for swapping a couple picks this year. Both clubs still have picks in that round next year & can do whatever they wanted with the rearranged picks in the present year. Best done during the draft.

While we are on swapping picks during the draft, did not see the point of it either, but was I wrong. Turned out to be useful & sensible.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I get that analogy but footy trading isn't like selling your car for cash. It's more like getting a credit note to spend at a used car dealers on line where you don't get to see the cars up front.

You do though, and we pay people to work out which ones are least likely to blow their transmission.

 

[Dr Spaceman]

You do though, and we pay people to work out which ones are least likely to blow their transmission.

Well a lot of our supporters have issues with our "Gears"

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Well a lot of our supporters have issues with our "Gears"

The coachwork was a bit rusty too.

 

[Sir Skid]

The club will no doubt be already talking to Bing about coming to join his bro at the Saints as soon as his first contract is up... if not before.
Better start saving a draft pick or 2.