Roast Why Derek?

[TradeDraft]

Took a deep breath and decided to agree with Jmac - there's a lot of crap on this thread - more like uninformed hysteria.

1. Yes Hine hasn't got every past selection "right" - do we sack him for that? [I'm not prepared to give up on Sier just yet]

2. Give Murray a break.

3. How many posters know the complexities of gaining / losing points in trades etc? (for sure I don't)

4. Trading is not the same as recruiting. I suspect coaches play a far greater role in trading.

5. How many posters have sat in on the list mngt, 2018 game plan, drafting etc .. whatever, mtgs at the club?

6. Trade period must be judged in conjunction with the draft and final list

7. The test is how the new list performs next year

Nice to Live in a Fantasy Land

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Nice to Live in a Fantasy Land

Is it crowded in there Dave?

 

[Anzacday]

Brett Anderson‏ @BAndersonSEN 16h16 hours ago
Brett Anderson Retweeted Collingwood FC
Pies effectively paid pick 45 for Murray.
Ain’t finding anything like him at that pick (or even earlier) in this draft.
They’ve done well.

 

[Snoop Dog]

I just read Hine's comments and it's actually a bit bewildering. Put aside that he actually just calls people d&*kheads who dont agree with him what he says doesn't make sense.

Issue 1

It aint about Sam Murray lets hope he turns out to be a good player. Its about what you have paid for him. Its a guy that was a rookie listed player and you have paid more him than Carlton did for a bloke who played in the Geelong finals campaign and was pretty solid.

Issue 2

On this years final standings it works out to be pick 38. He calls it a late 40's pick so in effect Collingwood would have to finish much higher and the Swans much lower for that to be the case.

Issue 3

How do you get into a better position in 2018 by giving up a 2nd rounder and getting a 3rd rounder back. If you have kids in the Academy or F/S you won't earlier picks so you can take players before the Academy kids are likely to be called. None of our Academy kids at this stage look likely to be pre pick 24-28 (where our pick might be).

Its a joke and he thinks he can play everyone for a fool. Swans have landed a 'marlin' here.

 

[CFC2010]

I just read Hine's comments and it's actually a bit bewildering. Put aside that he actually just calls people d&*kheads who dont agree with him what he says doesn't make sense.

Issue 1

It aint about Sam Murray lets hope he turns out to be a good player. Its about what you have paid for him. Its a guy that was a rookie listed player and you have paid more him than Carlton did for a bloke who played in the Geelong finals campaign and was pretty solid.

Issue 2

On this years final standings it works out to be pick 38. He calls it a late 40's pick so in effect Collingwood would have to finish much higher and the Swans much lower for that to be the case.

Issue 3

How do you get into a better position in 2018 by giving up a 2nd rounder and getting a 3rd rounder back. If you have kids in the Academy or F/S you won't earlier picks so you can take players before the Academy kids are likely to be called. None of our Academy kids at this stage look likely to be pre pick 24-28 (where our pick might be).

Its a joke and he thinks he can play everyone for a fool. Swans have landed a 'marlin' here.

 

[BPikkers]

We could have had Saad.

This is like giving your wife $100,000 to buy a car and she comes back with a Holden Astra and no change.

How could we have Saad? He cost more than Murray.

 

[BPikkers]

At least Aish Trade made more Scence then This Murray One

He cost us a crap load more. In fact, we are probably melting on this situation because of the 1 less 2nd round pick we had because of it.

 

[BPikkers]

I just read Hine's comments and it's actually a bit bewildering. Put aside that he actually just calls people d&*kheads who dont agree with him what he says doesn't make sense.

Issue 1

It aint about Sam Murray lets hope he turns out to be a good player. Its about what you have paid for him. Its a guy that was a rookie listed player and you have paid more him than Carlton did for a bloke who played in the Geelong finals campaign and was pretty solid.

Issue 2

On this years final standings it works out to be pick 38. He calls it a late 40's pick so in effect Collingwood would have to finish much higher and the Swans much lower for that to be the case.

Issue 3

How do you get into a better position in 2018 by giving up a 2nd rounder and getting a 3rd rounder back. If you have kids in the Academy or F/S you won't earlier picks so you can take players before the Academy kids are likely to be called. None of our Academy kids at this stage look likely to be pre pick 24-28 (where our pick might be).

Its a joke and he thinks he can play everyone for a fool. Swans have landed a 'marlin' here.

Gleeson doesn’t seem to agree. He did use the term ‘bolter’ for the kid we are looking to take.

 

[Crazy Tails]

Gleeson doesn’t seem to agree. He did use the term ‘bolter’ for the kid we are looking to take.

Bolter or Balta???

 

[CFC2010]

Gleeson doesn’t seem to agree. He did use the term ‘bolter’ for the kid we are looking to take.

Who is Gleeson?

 

[SnakePlisskin]

Brett Anderson‏ @BAndersonSEN 16h16 hours ago
Brett Anderson Retweeted Collingwood FC
Pies effectively paid pick 45 for Murray.
Ain’t finding anything like him at that pick (or even earlier) in this draft.
They’ve done well.

Isn’t it next years draft though?

 

[BPikkers]

Who is Gleeson?

Sorry was it Gleeson on radio with KB this morning who explained why the Pies traded down from the 2nd to 3rd round?

 

[CFC2010]

Sorry was it Gleeson on radio with KB this morning who explained why the Pies traded down from the 2nd to 3rd round?

The reporter?

 

[swoop42]

I just read Hine's comments and it's actually a bit bewildering. Put aside that he actually just calls people d&*kheads who dont agree with him what he says doesn't make sense.

Issue 1

It aint about Sam Murray lets hope he turns out to be a good player. Its about what you have paid for him. Its a guy that was a rookie listed player and you have paid more him than Carlton did for a bloke who played in the Geelong finals campaign and was pretty solid.

Issue 2

On this years final standings it works out to be pick 38. He calls it a late 40's pick so in effect Collingwood would have to finish much higher and the Swans much lower for that to be the case.

Issue 3

How do you get into a better position in 2018 by giving up a 2nd rounder and getting a 3rd rounder back. If you have kids in the Academy or F/S you won't earlier picks so you can take players before the Academy kids are likely to be called. None of our Academy kids at this stage look likely to be pre pick 24-28 (where our pick might be).

Its a joke and he thinks he can play everyone for a fool. Swans have landed a 'marlin' here.

I initially thought along the same lines as you but upon further investigation (which I've posted in the Murray thread, give it a read) I can see why we've made this decision.

A lot of variables are still in play in terms of finishing position next season and where a bid for Holt might come but we obviously rate him and have taken the option that will see us most likely not have to trade in extra picks for points to secure Holtz and Kelly.

Basically Holtz will end up being our second round selection next year and Kelly a 3rd.

Now we most certainly could have retained that 2nd round pick for a possible live selection prior to a bid for Holtz but in doing that we would have need to secure additional points in trading for multiple 3rd rd selections or another 2nd in order for us to not suffer significant deficit in the 2019 draft.

If we had and used pick 25 on a live selection and a bid for Holtz came at 30 we'd now need to find 432pts to match and remember in this scenario we had traded our 3rd round selection for Murray instead.

If a bid for Murray came at 20 however then we'd have to use pick 25 anyway so no live selection but we would be 41pts in credit.

Under the situation we are now in and with a bid at 20 we'd use our pick 43 and Sydney's 50 (in this example we finish 12th, Sydney 5th) that would lead to a 64pt deficit so a slightly worse result.

People remember that just as we would have had to trade in picks for points to get Holtz and possibly a live selection at pick 25 nothing will stop us doing that same scenario and using them in next years draft as a live selection if we so desire.

I imagine the critical reason we took the decision we did we now have more control over what stratergy we can take into next years trade period and shouldn't be in a position where we need to conduct a fire sale of players because we need to find points.

Basically we have made this decision on the basis that we value Holtz as a second round selection, we expect a bid will come in that round and he's now already paid for as is Kelly most likely.

 

[piesman1985]

33

He did nothing Grand Final day and where was he when we really needed him in 2011? oh yeah injured yet again


Like you wouldn't have Hannebery over of bye bye Beams LOL

Pretty easy to say that nine years later. Beams was a bloody good pick up for Pick 29. Have a look at the draft and see some of the players taken ahead of Beams who did nothing. May have had a quiet 2010 GF but still remains a Collingwood Premiership player

 

[OniAu]

We have done some ridiculous trades last few years, people are angry because this is another one

- Mayne
- Williams to Roos for a late pick
- Witts to GC for a late pick
- Wells ( whilst I love him and he is absolute talent , he cant get on the park consistently enough, our club resigned to the fact that would occur - his 3 years ? was too many)

Now we go and pay for a second rounder or third rounder for a rookie listed player? Makes no sense at all when we let Marley and Wiits go for next to nothing and they both had AFL experience , Murray is a massive punt and no sure thing no matter how much you want to sugar coat the trade.

 

[DraftBalta]

Pretty easy to say that nine years later.

Pretty easy to forget it's been almost that long since he's nailed a star, if it hadn't been for Grundy falling 15 places he'd have a giant donut next to his name for that period

 

[TKiL]

Nice to Live in a Fantasy Land

Edit:
Anything but fantasy - just putting a bit of rationality in a nearly out of control thread

 

[wicksy]

How could we have Saad? He cost more than Murray.

It's like my wife buying an Astra for $100,000 and giving me a pie as change.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

Ah Collingwood fans, never change.

 

[No SPIN]

GC were throwing away draft picks yesterday. Why didn’t we get involved.

They were looking for a downgrade of 2 so they could get Weller and something else. We could’ve offered 6 and next years 3rd for pick 2 and GC probably would’ve taken it.

In principle you are right with being creative.
That's why I'm very happy we are bringing in Ned Guy, I expect him to be a far more creative deal maker than Hine.
Hine should never have been asked to do this role as he is a square peg in a round hole - being fast on your feet, and a highly creative negotiator is not his strong suit.

 

[Crazy Tails]

The fan backlash over the Murray transaction obviously lead to Hine having to justify (to an extent) the selection.

Irrespective of his justification what he did do (which is unusual for him) was give away our future intentions when it comes to prospective F/S etc.

In the past we haven't given any public guarantees on F/S picks but here he has pretty much conceded that we are going to have to give up relatively early picks next year to land the F/S and academy prospect we want.

It is either PR spin or we have just given away our hand for two of our picks next year.

 

[Anzacday]

I initially thought along the same lines as you but upon further investigation (which I've posted in the Murray thread, give it a read) I can see why we've made this decision.

A lot of variables are still in play in terms of finishing position next season and where a bid for Holt might come but we obviously rate him and have taken the option that will see us most likely not have to trade in extra picks for points to secure Holtz and Kelly.

Basically Holtz will end up being our second round selection next year and Kelly a 3rd.

Now we most certainly could have retained that 2nd round pick for a possible live selection prior to a bid for Holtz but in doing that we would have need to secure additional points in trading for multiple 3rd rd selections or another 2nd in order for us to not suffer significant deficit in the 2019 draft.

If we had and used pick 25 on a live selection and a bid for Holtz came at 30 we'd now need to find 432pts to match and remember in this scenario we had traded our 3rd round selection for Murray instead.

If a bid for Murray came at 20 however then we'd have to use pick 25 anyway so no live selection but we would be 41pts in credit.

Under the situation we are now in and with a bid at 20 we'd use our pick 43 and Sydney's 50 (in this example we finish 12th, Sydney 5th) that would lead to a 64pt deficit so a slightly worse result.

People remember that just as we would have had to trade in picks for points to get Holtz and possibly a live selection at pick 25 nothing will stop us doing that same scenario and using them in next years draft as a live selection if we so desire.

I imagine the critical reason we took the decision we did we now have more control over what stratergy we can take into next years trade period and shouldn't be in a position where we need to conduct a fire sale of players because we need to find points.

Basically we have made this decision on the basis that we value Holtz as a second round selection, we expect a bid will come in that round and he's now already paid for as is Kelly most likely.

Easy for you to say

 

[loki04]

I initially thought along the same lines as you but upon further investigation (which I've posted in the Murray thread, give it a read) I can see why we've made this decision.

A lot of variables are still in play in terms of finishing position next season and where a bid for Holt might come but we obviously rate him and have taken the option that will see us most likely not have to trade in extra picks for points to secure Holtz and Kelly.

Basically Holtz will end up being our second round selection next year and Kelly a 3rd.

Now we most certainly could have retained that 2nd round pick for a possible live selection prior to a bid for Holtz but in doing that we would have need to secure additional points in trading for multiple 3rd rd selections or another 2nd in order for us to not suffer significant deficit in the 2019 draft.

If we had and used pick 25 on a live selection and a bid for Holtz came at 30 we'd now need to find 432pts to match and remember in this scenario we had traded our 3rd round selection for Murray instead.

If a bid for Murray came at 20 however then we'd have to use pick 25 anyway so no live selection but we would be 41pts in credit.

Under the situation we are now in and with a bid at 20 we'd use our pick 43 and Sydney's 50 (in this example we finish 12th, Sydney 5th) that would lead to a 64pt deficit so a slightly worse result.

People remember that just as we would have had to trade in picks for points to get Holtz and possibly a live selection at pick 25 nothing will stop us doing that same scenario and using them in next years draft as a live selection if we so desire.

I imagine the critical reason we took the decision we did we now have more control over what stratergy we can take into next years trade period and shouldn't be in a position where we need to conduct a fire sale of players because we need to find points.

Basically we have made this decision on the basis that we value Holtz as a second round selection, we expect a bid will come in that round and he's now already paid for as is Kelly most likely.

No if we kept pick 2 to go "live" the only pick we needed to trade in to match our current predicament is a 2018 3rd rounder. Which are not hard to come by in reality.

If we wanted Murray likely pick 37 this year would of got it done, even then that's generous for a untried rookie.

 

[loki04]

Ah Collingwood fans, never change.

What are you? a Carlton fan? above it all? lul.