Roast Why Derek?

[loki04]

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

and then telling you its ok because you can trade your next years pie for your sons sausage roll.

 

[Kynge of Begrem]

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

 

[DaVe86]

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.

Awesome post, and shows there is a bit more science to it.

I'm still no convinced trading the 2nd round pick was the way to go though. I would've preferred to have it so going into next year we would have more flexibility about how we tackle it.

 

[loki04]

Typical Collingwood supporter...sheesh.

 

[TKiL]

Hine cannot be operating as a Lone Ranger - surely he'll need the club's imprimatur to act / make decisions - so, questions are:

1. Does the Club / Hine/ FD / List mngt c'ttee etc understand how the trade rules, points, academy stuff etc etc work? Answer has to be Yes, because if the ans is No, might as well pack up now.

2. Does the Club / Hine etc apply the rules, points etc to the best advantage of the Club? Only those who sit in on list mngt, game plan, player development mtgs etc would really know the answer to that.

3. Does the Club / Hine etc select the best players? - (need to distinguish between trading and drafting). Seems to fair to say we've had a few misses recently in both trading and drafting.

If posters need to bag Hine mercilessly, then you're also bagging the FD (putting aside Gubby's drive by shooting of last year). Other than pointing out the player selections that patently didn't work, much of the criticism directed at Hine (therefore the club) is probably off target because it's a complex business and we don't have the inside info.

 

[gerryg400]

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

On what basis can you say that? More clearly, how are you able to say what Sydney would have agreed to?

 

[Quicky]

When did Hine start managing the list? We used to have such a hard edge in these trades. Pragmatic but hard. Remember the Ball deal?

To me I think Hine is a fantastic recruiter but a flawed list manager. I very much hope he stays on in a revised role in recruiting. He's bloody good at that.

The club has already made that call and dealt with the issue. If Hine isn't cool with that, fair enough, but we wouldn't have been able to keep him on in the list manager role given the poor value we have gotten for players coming in or going out the past two off seasons.

 

[loki04]

On what basis can you say that? More clearly, how are you able to say what Sydney would have agreed to?

On the basis that is what we should of had as a final generous offer. If we don't get him big flipping deal walk away.

You can draft his type by the dozen if not this year then next. If you think he is going to be the difference in winning a flag in 2018 or not you are kidding yourself.

 

[Pleasedontfail11]

People blowing up aren’t bagging Murray, we get that it’s recruitment based on a type of player. We are blowing up because we’ve just been robbed blind by giving up a 2nd rd pick next year to the Swans for a player who hasn’t played a single game of AFL and has average stats at NEAFL level.

Carlton paid pick 58 for Darcy Lang, a guy who has played some good games for Geelong, at AFL level. We got 105 for Marley Williams, again a guy who has played good games at AFL level. Then our halfwit footy department pays what is going to be the equivalent of pick 45 next year.

Even if he becomes a good player we still paid way too much. It’s utterly embarrassing. This should’ve been a pick 70 something trade.

The only way to get this guy this year was to trade for him. Who knows he might be a gun let's see how he goes before we say 'we payed way to much'. We payed way to much for Pendlebury as well.

 

[loki04]

When did Hine start managing the list? We used to have such a hard edge in these trades. Pragmatic but hard. Remember the Ball deal?

To me I think Hine is a fantastic recruiter but a flawed list manager. I very much hope he stays on in a revised role in recruiting. He's bloody good at that.

The club has already made that call and dealt with the issue. If Hine isn't cool with that, fair enough, but we wouldn't have been able to keep him on in the list manager role given the poor value we have gotten for players coming in or going out the past two off seasons.

Even when he wasn't list manager he was heavily involved in securing trade targets.

 

[loki04]

The only way to get this guy this year was to trade for him. Who knows he might be a gun let's see how he goes before say we payed way to much. We payed way to much for Pendlebury as well.

Reality is we won't know the real cost of this for 5 years, at which point the 2018 draft pool will be starting to come into the 50 game mark.

 

[swoop42]

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.

My 1st trade scenario is based on us giving our 3rd round pick in the 2018 draft straight up for Murray instead of what eventually transpired.

The club or Sydney were I assume unwilling to use or accept pick 38 this season.

So now we have picks 25 and 63 in the 2018 draft (assuming we finish 12th) and make a live selection like you suggested.

We now receive a bid on Holt-Fitz at pick 30 which is worth 432pts.

We still have pick 61 worth 137pts to cash in so need an additional 295pts which you rightfully point out is the equivalent of pick 48 a 3rd round selection with the other option being multiple picks of lesser value (hasn't the AFL tightened the rules in regards to the trade of "junk" selections to gain points).

Of couse we have to factor in the F/S selection of Kelly that Hine mentioned. We may need to acquire another 3rd pick to cover his points also.

Generally I'd agree 3rd round picks are easy to come by and yet we've just gone through a whole trade period and weren't able to land an extra pick of quality in the draft of 2017 or 2018 outside what we are currently debating.

Clubs are either keen to keep top 50 picks in a super draft year and/or do not like the players we floated enough at the price we wanted.

Of course other variables are at play also like where a bid ends up coming for Holt. It could well be prior to any pick that would have been ours anyway and we've obviously taken an educated gamble both the bid and selection will be in the same ball park. That could yet backfire.

Of course young Kelly might have a great season in 2018 and suddenly be in line for a bid inside the top 36. He may flop.

Normally I'd suggest giving away our 2019 second round pick as an easy option to gain points for the 2018 draft but with Lynch on the horizon that could yet come into play so I wouldn't want to be relying on it.

Lynch might well be a causal affect on our decision yesterday as if he selects us and Gold Coast match. That deal will take up significant time more than likely and we don't want to spread ourselves to thin when trying to land him with an appropriate deal all the while juggling multiple other trades in desperation for points.

At the end of the day both sides of the argument make some valid points and their are endless variables at play but I get the feeling we've decided to put in place measures now that should see us land a couple of likely types with a minium of trade fuss next season and allow ourselves the ability to concentrate fully on the main prize of Lynch.

 

[10571z]

Anyone figured out what he was going on about in that interview in regards to points?! Who do we need them for?

 

[sr36]

In fairness to Dekka, he has been so busy scouting that he hasn't seen any AFL since round 6. Seeing as Bucks got reappointed, he thought we must have finished pretty high on the ladder and Sydney were clearly last. So Pick 30 for Pick 37, Pick 70 and Murray was too good to pass up.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

The only way to get this guy this year was to trade for him. Who knows he might be a gun let's see how he goes before we say 'we payed way to much'. We payed way to much for Pendlebury as well.

Pendlebury was a totally different case. He came through to the draft via the TAC. Murray has been on an AFL rookie list for 2 years. Murray' might' be a gun, but you'd think after 2 years playing in the NEAFL, people would surely have recognised the guy as having exceptional talent rather than noting that his possession count was considerably lower against the better lower grade teams. The Swans must love dealing with us. Nick Davis for a latish 2nd round pick, Schauble pick 34 (admittedly got us Leon Davis), Rhys Shaw for pick 46, and now this gift of a 2nd round pick for a rookie. They must think we are the most bend-overable team in the AFL. And all without the need for lubrication. We must have the loosest sphincter of any team in the AFL.

 

[PhiloBeddoe]

You can’t blame us for being cynically considering our history in the past five years.

What are your thoughts on the stupidity of that comment? As soon as I read it Pelchen loses all credibility because for it to be a 10 pick gap we need to win the premiership and Sydney miss the 8. That isn’t happening!

I think there’s been hysteria yes, but on the back of last year it doesn’t phase me. If there was one thing we needed to do as a club this trade period it was to not get burnt on a deal to earn back some trust...

Edit: thinking on it a bit further Pelchen doesn’t actually know what the deal was. For him to think it was a circa 10 pick downgrade he must have thought we got Sydney’s 2018 2nd back not their third. Makes a lot more sense under that scenario. What a pelican

My initial response was WTF? but I realised that I don't follow draft strategy due to swaps, compensation picks and points so he may be onto something. The whole thing does my head in. Looking at it today, for his scenario to be close, we'd have to swap ladder positions. That sound right?

All I know is that I have too many questions to fly into here and vent my spleen. Hysteria only phases me when the comments aren't backed up by anything that helps me understand why it was so bad beyond it being a second round pick.
These are my questions.
1) How will Murray turn out?
2) What if we trade into the second round for a pick close to the given one due to ladder position but Murray has turned into a solid contributor? Is that still acceptable?
3) How will these kids that we're looking at turn out?
4) How does the points system work?
5) How will the team go next year?
6) Are people just pissed because we paid a second rounder for a player that hasn't played a game at senior level and not much else?

 

[Toecrusher]

Respect for Hine is seriously lacking too. The thread title is wrong.

Ahh, Dekker deserves the gift of respect, while the rest of us have to earn it?

What we're really lacking here is an adequate explanation of why the trade went this way. If we are after FS (Ned jr) and Academy promotion with our pick after the first round next year, it's based on points and probably doesn't matter, but this hasn't been communicated too well to the supporters. All we see is trades that don't pass the logic test.

 

[Toecrusher]

Anyone figured out what he was going on about in that interview in regards to points?! Who do we need them for?

Not sure if it's correct, but on SEN this morning, they said we'd use the first round next year to pick a player (or trade for a Lynch maybe), the following picks woild be used for points for FS (Ned Jr) and an Academy player he thought was an Indian guy. If this is our approach, maybe it doesn't matter too much if it's a 2nd or 3rd round pick.

Anyone confirm Ned Jr being the right age, or heard of an Indian kid with some talent?

 

[DraftBalta]

Anyone confirm Ned Jr being the right age, or heard of an Indian kid with some talent?

That kid in Slumdog Millionaire was really talented... but their version of Eddie McGuire was just annoying

 

[CFC2010]

My 1st trade scenario is based on us giving our 3rd round pick in the 2018 draft straight up for Murray instead of what eventually transpired.

The club or Sydney were I assume unwilling to use or accept pick 38 this season.

So now we have picks 25 and 63 in the 2018 draft (assuming we finish 12th) and make a live selection like you suggested.

We now receive a bid on Holt-Fitz at pick 30 which is worth 432pts.

We still have pick 61 worth 137pts to cash in so need an additional 295pts which you rightfully point out is the equivalent of pick 48 a 3rd round selection with the other option being multiple picks of lesser value (hasn't the AFL tightened the rules in regards to the trade of "junk" selections to gain points).

Of couse we have to factor in the F/S selection of Kelly that Hine mentioned. We may need to acquire another 3rd pick to cover his points also.

Generally I'd agree 3rd round picks are easy to come by and yet we've just gone through a whole trade period and weren't able to land an extra pick of quality in the draft of 2017 or 2018 outside what we are currently debating.

Clubs are either keen to keep top 50 picks in a super draft year and/or do not like the players we floated enough at the price we wanted.

Of course other variables are at play also like where a bid ends up coming for Holt. It could well be prior to any pick that would have been ours anyway and we've obviously taken an educated gamble both the bid and selection will be in the same ball park. That could yet backfire.

Of course young Kelly might have a great season in 2018 and suddenly be in line for a bid inside the top 36. He may flop.

Normally I'd suggest giving away our 2019 second round pick as an easy option to gain points for the 2018 draft but with Lynch on the horizon that could yet come into play so I wouldn't want to be relying on it.

Lynch might well be a causal affect on our decision yesterday as if he selects us and Gold Coast match. That deal will take up significant time more than likely and we don't want to spread ourselves to thin when trying to land him with an appropriate deal all the while juggling multiple other trades in desperation for points.

At the end of the day both sides of the argument make some valid points and their are endless variables at play but I get the feeling we've decided to put in place measures now that should see us land a couple of likely types with a minium of trade fuss next season and allow ourselves the ability to concentrate fully on the main prize of Lynch.

Firstly can I give you 10/10 for your analysis and research on this topic.

I would now like to debunk your theory and subsequently Hine's logic.

Do you think Brisbane knows who they will choose with pick 1?

 

[jmac70]

Ahh, Dekker deserves the gift of respect, while the rest of us have to earn it?

What we're really lacking here is an adequate explanation of why the trade went this way. If we are after FS (Ned jr) and Academy promotion with our pick after the first round next year, it's based on points and probably doesn't matter, but this hasn't been communicated too well to the supporters. All we see is trades that don't pass the logic test.

Communication was given. Move on

 

[Scodog10]

My initial response was WTF? but I realised that I don't follow draft strategy due to swaps, compensation picks and points so he may be onto something. The whole thing does my head in. Looking at it today, for his scenario to be close, we'd have to swap ladder positions. That sound right?

All I know is that I have too many questions to fly into here and vent my spleen. Hysteria only phases me when the comments aren't backed up by anything that helps me understand why it was so bad beyond it being a second round pick.
These are my questions.
1) How will Murray turn out? He’ll be ok, IMO. My issue was price.
2) What if we trade into the second round for a pick close to the given one due to ladder position but Murray has turned into a solid contributor? Is that still acceptable? I think it’s acceptable that we recruited Murray, but that doesn’t really change whether we overpaid.
3) How will these kids that we're looking at turn out? Hopefully guns.
4) How does the points system work? It’s very complicated.
5) How will the team go next year? Probably middle of the road.
6) Ras people just pissed because we paid a second rounder for a player that hasn't played a game at senior level and not much else? Probably and I think that’s a more logical stand point than the justification Hine provided...

You got it about right re the 10 pick gap and we’d need to flip positions.

 

[Toecrusher]

Communication was given. Move on

Based on the amount of disgruntled supporters, it wasn't very effective.

 

[jmac70]

Based on the amount of disgruntled supporters, it wasn't very effective.

How many disgruntled supporters?

 

[left at home]

The fact this thread got to six pages is a disgrace.

It’s got ten now.