Mega Thread 2018 Trade Period Discussion part 2! (cont. in Part 3 - link in OP)

[Bicks]

I assume you mean the picks 1’s and yes I agree we may have gone differently. Rendell has publicly said we had Kruezer ahead of Cotchin/Dangerfield and Watts ahead of Davis. We’ve shut up shop a little since the Rendell days though, so hard to know.

No doubt we’ll draft better players with picks 4 and 5 than picks 8 and 13. But that’s not the comparison. To trade to that position we’re giving up 8, 13, 16, 21 and probably then some. Does the difference between having, for example, 4 and 5 vs 8 and 13, make up for losing 16, 21...

Our game requires 22 players in a side, 38-40 on a senior list. Are you better off with 4-5 superstars and the rest average role players, or a more even team/squad?

It’s an interesting debate, no easy answer, and no doubt depends on the quality of your recruiting and development team. I don’t have the answer, I just don’t think we need to get our knickers in a knot if Port trade up and we don’t.

And that's why we should back Hamish in 100% if he thinks trading up is the way to go and the the same goes if he thinks we're giving too much up in comparison to how he rates others in this draft apart from the big 4 SA lads. In Hamish we trust.

 

[Mismatched]

And that's why we should back Hamish in 100% if he thinks trading up is the way to go and the the same goes if he thinks we're giving too much up in comparison to how he rates others in this draft apart from the big 4 SA lads. In Hamish we trust.

Absolutely

 

[Draft Bored]

And that's why we should back Hamish in 100% if he thinks trading up is the way to go and the the same goes if he thinks we're giving too much up in comparison to how he rates others in this draft apart from the big 4 SA lads. In Hamish we trust.

Totally agree.

I don't subscribe to the idea that the first round is a lottery when your recruiters and development team are at the top of their game. Yes when you average it out across all teams, but not when a team consistently nails it year after year with their first round pick. Not many other recruiters would have had Doedee in the first round.

This draft is being touted as the best top 20 since 2001, so lets look back at that draft. 8 could get you a Bartel or Dal Santo - but 3 could get you a Hodge or Judd. Assuming Ogilvie and co rank one of the SA kids in that top 3 we would be stupid not to chase.

I'd also be interested to know when Ogilvie last ranked an SA kid in the top 3.

12 years ago I suspect... Cooney 03 / Griffen 04 / Gibbs 06.

 

[Mismatched]

Everyone hammers on about how top draft picks have failed to deliver, at least compared to those picked 5-10 positions afterwards.

For me, I'd be interested to see the analysis go a little deeper, see how teams that have finished in the top 8 and that have managed to get a top 5 odd pick have managed to develop the player. I can't help but think half the reason these guys fail to deliver is because of the environment being poorer and the teams being worse at developing talent along with protecting it - big reason they're down there to begin with and why a few teams have stayed down there for so long.

All this talk about picks in particular spots succeeding/failing yet nothing is said about how teams develop talent which is just as important, if not more. Look at some of the top clubs over the past years and how their young guys have come in and performed, almost from the get go. For me it's because they come into such a structured system and have competent players around them, they can be eased into it and left to develop so much better than the likes of how Melbourne threw Watts to the wolves for example.

A pick 4/5 would be nice but for mine, if we're trading up it should be to get Lukosius and Rankine. Get us an elite KP talent along with a guy that can dance on the field and more likely to have a more 'instant' impact. Ticks two boxes - I'm not sure if we get them after the GC picks so if we can't find a way to get them then I'm more inclined to just go in with the picks we have (to be fair, I haven't seen the talent so the hype is just the same as the large majority on here).

The only issue I have with getting x4 guys in the top 20 odd is I imagine it could be difficult to blood them all in the next couple of years (given past history) and if they don't get games early then teams will come knocking and we might see one get away. Not the end of the world, but pooling these picks to get the very top end talent would be a massive get imo.

Yeah good points, there’s also the question of how much has recruiting/development advanced in the past 5 years, vs 10 years vs 20. How really relevant is data on drafting that is 5-10 years old?

Re your last point, this is one argument I’ve brought up previously for trading up. No point bringing in 4 high draft picks if you can’t give them adequate exposure. But this then opens up the discussion of would we then be better off trading 16 and 21 for future picks though? Instead of upgrading 8 and 13...

 

[GreyCrow]

Re your last point, this is one argument I’ve brought up previously for trading up. No point bringing in 4 high draft picks if you can’t give them adequate exposure. But this then opens up the discussion of would we then be better off trading 16 and 21 for future picks though? Instead of upgrading 8 and 13...

But we know the answer, I'm just not sure our club trusts the players over those already in the role.

Someone posted the over 30s list and some of this development has to happen in the seniors. The timing is critical so there is a seamless transition rather than a speed bump

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

Totally agree.

I don't subscribe to the idea that the first round is a lottery when your recruiters and development team are at the top of their game. Yes when you average it out across all teams, but not when a team consistently nails it year after year with their first round pick. Not many other recruiters would have had Doedee in the first round.

This draft is being touted as the best top 20 since 2001, so lets look back at that draft. 8 could get you a Bartel or Dal Santo - but 3 could get you a Hodge or Judd. Assuming Ogilvie and co rank one of the SA kids in that top 3 we would be stupid not to chase.

I'd also be interested to know when Ogilvie last ranked an SA kid in the top 3.

12 years ago I suspect... Cooney 03 / Griffen 04 / Gibbs 06.

The flaw here is that in order to get pick 3 we need to give up 8 and 13. So would you give up both Bartel and Dal Santo for Judd. It’s a no from me.

 

[Perthcrow23]

Looking at from a pure business view you buy low for high return. Adelaide have had more picks come to us purely from players we "buy" to get a greater return from if and when we "sell" . We have a great history recently of turning round ones into two round ones, lower picks into round ones etc. If we take 4 early picks and at sone point "sell" say two of these speculative shares, hamish will most likely return a gross return of 4 first rojnd picks. Giving us a net profit of two first round picks. Therefore it can be said from a business perspective that we possibly hold 5-6 first round picks. Continue the trend and hold 60% of capital and return a net profit of 50% on the rest and our draft hands become increasingly stronger over the extended period of time. Lever, mcgovern, cameron, possibly danger all fall into this theory. We become a much stronger team through this business model if we take out the emktion of "losing" players and view it more as profit return.

I say keep the picks we have and continue to return a profit over the next five years. Even if players like doedee leave, will return two 1st round picks almost everytime due to the development we manage on our "investment".

 

[NTRabbit]

The flaw here is that in order to get pick 3 we need to give up 8 and 13. So would you give up both Bartel and Dal Santo for Judd. It’s a no from me.

Or after Sydney matches a bid on Blakey at pick 5/6, we're giving up 9 and 14 for 3, or Luke Molan and Ashley Watson for Judd.

 

[70lethal]

Or after Sydney matches a bid on Blakey at pick 5/6, we're giving up 9 and 14 for 3, or Luke Molan and Ashley Watson for Judd.

Hamish's record inside the top 30 would suggest we end up Bartel, Dal Santo, Kelly and Stevie J.
Isn't this the perfect case study not to trade up.
1200 games 950 goals between them.

Truthfully we would expect a Sam Mitchell or more likely a Hamish special Dane Swan to be taken earlier

Geelong nailed this year to the point of picking Carrazzo in the rookie draft who went on to play 194 games for Carlton.

 

[NTRabbit]

Again, Hamish isn't some kind of magician - as much as he's well earned reputation around the league as one of the best, by finding great value finding star defenders and forwards late in the draft, solid 150 game workmen above the odds in the middle rounds, and some good 200 game support act types with our teen picks, he hasn't pulled a single superstar midfielder out of the draft for us since Patrick Dangerfield in 2007, and a one in a million shot with Sloane out of the third round in 2008. If it were possible to just pick James Bartel and Nick Dal Santo out of the draft with picks in the teens every year, he'd have done it already.

If you want the superstars you have to have the picks for them, and as Hamish knows that better than anyone, it's why he's pushing for the upgrades.

 

[Tex Danger]

Our 8 & 16 for the Saints 4 is a fair deal but we’d have to pay more prob. Anyone else think that plus future pick swap would be about right though get the deal done?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Not necessarily future but 21 for 28 this year more likely.

Wouldn’t really want to gamble on our 1st for their 2nd. 2nd for 3rd ok

 

[baldandbroke]

Looking at from a pure business view you buy low for high return. Adelaide have had more picks come to us purely from players we "buy" to get a greater return from if and when we "sell" . We have a great history recently of turning round ones into two round ones, lower picks into round ones etc. If we take 4 early picks and at sone point "sell" say two of these speculative shares, hamish will most likely return a gross return of 4 first rojnd picks. Giving us a net profit of two first round picks. Therefore it can be said from a business perspective that we possibly hold 5-6 first round picks. Continue the trend and hold 60% of capital and return a net profit of 50% on the rest and our draft hands become increasingly stronger over the extended period of time. Lever, mcgovern, cameron, possibly danger all fall into this theory. We become a much stronger team through this business model if we take out the emktion of "losing" players and view it more as profit return.

I say keep the picks we have and continue to return a profit over the next five years. Even if players like doedee leave, will return two 1st round picks almost everytime due to the development we manage on our "investment".

No. No. No.
Irrelevant. Irrelevant. Irrelevant.

We want to win the premiership.

 

[Morning_Fog]

What do you care what other people say about CrocMedia? You seem to be the social justice warrior here.

Because this is a discussion forum?

 

[Morning_Fog]

The common theme here seems to be 'everyone I disagree with is a social justice warrior' and points out the ridiculousness of the term.

The common theme?

Or just this specific topic?
Common implies plenty of different subjects or have you jumped the gun.

 

[FR0GGY]

Even better if we manage to get 4, 13 & 21 by cashing in our 2019 r1 pick. Gives us a chance to get one of the SA-3 or Smith, and two elite midfielders. And it cuts off Poot from heading us (or makes them really bleed to do so) as a bonus. If the earlier picks do come on the market, gives us a potential pathway to it.

This, and when some gun wants to go home next year we’ll get a first rounder back again.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Ch7 news reporting Mayes to pear , didn’t go into details of what for

Whoooo-hoooooo!!!!!

 

[footy4ever]

The flaw here is that in order to get pick 3 we need to give up 8 and 13. So would you give up both Bartel and Dal Santo for Judd. It’s a no from me.

Same, except for when Jimmy and Dal want to go home after 2 years.

 

[Crowbots are dead]

Looking at from a pure business view you buy low for high return. Adelaide have had more picks come to us purely from players we "buy" to get a greater return from if and when we "sell" . We have a great history recently of turning round ones into two round ones, lower picks into round ones etc. If we take 4 early picks and at sone point "sell" say two of these speculative shares, hamish will most likely return a gross return of 4 first rojnd picks. Giving us a net profit of two first round picks. Therefore it can be said from a business perspective that we possibly hold 5-6 first round picks. Continue the trend and hold 60% of capital and return a net profit of 50% on the rest and our draft hands become increasingly stronger over the extended period of time. Lever, mcgovern, cameron, possibly danger all fall into this theory. We become a much stronger team through this business model if we take out the emktion of "losing" players and view it more as profit return.

I say keep the picks we have and continue to return a profit over the next five years. Even if players like doedee leave, will return two 1st round picks almost everytime due to the development we manage on our "investment".

The so called football media experts never look at this to determine how good a club is at doing this. Happy to focus on the value we loose but never talk about the value we create from virtually nothing. Happy for us to continue to fly under the radar.

 

[Iron]

Have we ever had a better chance at a better hand before?

Problem for us has always seemed to be the talent ceiling. Lack of A+ grade talent. We should be chomping at the bit for a taste of that on our list, not concerning ourselves with sensible commerce.

Just my opinion.

 

[footy4ever]

Thank god for that

Not a need for us

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

Except what have Port got cooking with Brisbane? Pick 5 involved? Or has that gone already in the short time I’ve been ignoring BF?

 

[WaynesWorld19]

 

[WaynesWorld19]

 

[Horseflee]

Today will be a show

Looking forward to how it unfolds


On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[hey shorty]

Except what have Port got cooking with Brisbane? Pick 5 involved? Or has that gone already in the short time I’ve been ignoring BF?

I'd doubt it has much to do with picks, rather them just getting a player in. He wants to come home on compassionate grounds so I'd imagine Brisbane would almost let him walk.

I dont mind him as a player, but as others have said he isnt really a need for us. He would replace Pittard easy enough though.

 

[NTRabbit]

Whoooo-hoooooo!!!!!

Missing piece?