Preview 2023 National Draft Preview Thread [currently: #2, #14 (PA), #19 (PP) #40, #52, #60]

[zoomba23]

View attachment 1694434

Saw the pic and thought this quote was direct from Harley's mouth. Tbf it's probably not too far off what he's thinking

 

[The Nostradamus]

Yes.

Son of Saul (Josh's brother and a bit of a local footy legend in the North)

Saul is good mates with Boomer and the Caddy's are big North supporters as most on here would know (never helped us with Josh though...)

Yep and nate caddy is best mates with cooper growing up together

 

[FootySmartSimpson]

What is N.Caddy’s vertical like? If it is good, combined with his reach it might just do.

 

[kool kangas]

Saw the pic and thought this quote was direct from Harley's mouth. Tbf it's probably not too far off what he's thinking

North need to offer our 2 first round picks for this kid ...... and even match something from another club if possible.

 

[Harris 10]

What would a club want back from GWS to take on Josh Kelly contract?
It’s an awful deal that expires at end of 2029 and is presumably really good money for a fair chunk of those years.

They currently have 4 and 5 in the upcoming draft.


We really screwed them into doing that deal.

 

[zoomba23]

North need to offer our 2 first round picks for this kid ...... and even match something from another club if possible.

Disagree. We don't so much have one large hole in the list that needs filling as multiple smaller holes. Watson's just about a lock at this stage and there is surely someone else who'll be in the top 15 (Poort aren't finishing top 3 no matter what anyone says) who fits another need, such as a pacy winger type, key forward or quick two-way defender

 

[Lomas]

What would a club want back from GWS to take on Josh Kelly contract?
It’s an awful deal that expires at end of 2029 and is presumably really good money for a fair chunk of those years.

They currently have 4 and 5 in the upcoming draft.


We really screwed them into doing that deal.

I think that ship has well and truly sailed. Do we want to be carrying that contract in 3 years, even if we front end it some?

 

[Harris 10]

I think that ship has well and truly sailed. Do we want to be carrying that contract in 3 years, even if we front end it some?

Personally, I don’t.
Just think that’s the one GWS would most like to get rid of and interested in what it would take. That’s why I asked the question.

 

[Lomas]

Personally, I don’t.
Just think that’s the one GWS would most like to get rid of and interested in what it would take. That’s why I asked the question.

Fair enough. I think that salary dumps for players will be for second tier, third tier with max three years in contract. Probably two. If we end up being able to just purchase picks that would be a better option to deal with GWS

 

[ohmygewd]

Ok so trading into this year in the 1st round wouldn't matter then. Could be an option to get a young kid in 12 mths earlier I guess.
I'm not sure I'm sold on doing it this year as we're likely to be bottom 4 next year so it'd have to be a top 5 pick at least this year or a top 10 this year and early 2nd this year or next year perhaps, depending if we have somebody we want like a Caddy or Wilson and want to get them badly.
Might depend on McKay compo as well. Not much point doing it if we have another top 10 pick or can force a trade to get better than an end of 1st.

Like l said, the AFL make it complicated and restrictive in an effort to ensure clubs still have selections in current and future drafts mainly in the 1st round & 2nd round...you trade future 2nd and 3rd but you can't trade your future 1st & vice versa, you can trade your future 1st but you can't a future 2nd - you can only trade 1 year future (unlike the NBA where you trade up to 4 years into the future).

Port tried to trade their future 1st & 2nd in one trade and AFL knocked it so thats how the whole mega trade of JHF and Pick 1 came about.

I understand the scenario you pose...would WCE trade their likely No.1 pick for our late 1st rounder, say our 3rd rounder and future 1st? That would be no because they only hold 1x1st round pick whilst we hold 2...no value for them.

I could give you an NBA scenario that they might be interested but unless you can trade your pick on draft night, l'll just give you a headache

 

[desie]

Any idea how tall Saul is?

Better call him.

 

[roos_fanatic08]

What would a club want back from GWS to take on Josh Kelly contract?
It’s an awful deal that expires at end of 2029 and is presumably really good money for a fair chunk of those years.

They currently have 4 and 5 in the upcoming draft.


We really screwed them into doing that deal.

Clubs would be willing to trade for Kelly, even on big coin. Don’t think a player of his caliber would end up being a salary dump, even though he isn’t justifying over a mill per year.

 

[Harris 10]

Clubs would be willing to trade for Kelly, even on big coin. Don’t think a player of his caliber would end up being a salary dump, even though he isn’t justifying over a mill per year.

He’s contracted to end of 2029, he’s 29 going into next season with 6 years left. The deal was 8mil over 8 years reportedly, I doubt any of it was front loaded because of their salary cap situation.

It’s a crippling contract for a club that has to pay overs to keep players and isn’t competing for flags or even finals.

I reckon they’d be delighted if they could move him on.

 

[roos_fanatic08]

He’s contracted to end of 2029, he’s 29 going into next season with 6 years left. The deal was 8mil over 8 years reportedly, I doubt any of it was front loaded because of their salary cap situation.

It’s a crippling contract for a club that has to pay overs to keep players and isn’t competing for flags or even finals.

I reckon they’d be delighted if they could move him on.

Didn’t realise he still had 6 years of that contract remaining. A salary dump would make sense for them if they couldn’t find any suitable suitors.

If we were to take it on, I’d cram it all into 4 years heavily front loaded, so it doesn’t impact our future cap and ability to pay the likes of LDU & Sheez. But we’d have to get pick 5 and a future 2nd or 3rd round pick with it.

Kelly is a good footballer, but he never quite reached the level that everyone thought he would when we were throwing stupid money at him.

 

[Lomas]

Didn’t realise he still had 6 years of that contract remaining. A salary dump would make sense for them if they couldn’t find any suitable suitors.

If we were to take it on, I’d cram it all into 4 years heavily front loaded, so it doesn’t impact our future cap and ability to pay the likes of LDU & Sheez. But we’d have to get pick 5 and a future 2nd or 3rd round pick with it.

Kelly is a good footballer, but he never quite reached the level that everyone thought he would when we were throwing stupid money at him.

We’d almost have to lose McKay to make that anywhere near palatable.
The. Kelly would possibly be on the biggest single year contract of all time.

 

[roos_fanatic08]

We’d almost have to lose McKay to make that anywhere near palatable.
The. Kelly would possibly be on the biggest single year contract of all time.

We are struggling to get to the floor of the salary cap at present.

We’d be easily be able to keep McKay and pay Kelly stupid amounts.

 

[Lomas]

We are struggling to get to the floor of the salary cap at present.

We’d be easily be able to keep McKay and pay Kelly stupid amounts.

Yeah, bloody sad isn't it. I still think that the financial commitment and risk is too much for a single top five pick which, if things go well, just increases the salary cap pressure in 4 years.

 

[Harris 10]

Didn’t realise he still had 6 years of that contract remaining. A salary dump would make sense for them if they couldn’t find any suitable suitors.

If we were to take it on, I’d cram it all into 4 years heavily front loaded, so it doesn’t impact our future cap and ability to pay the likes of LDU & Sheez. But we’d have to get pick 5 and a future 2nd or 3rd round pick with it.

Kelly is a good footballer, but he never quite reached the level that everyone thought he would when we were throwing stupid money at him.

Yeah, that why I raised it.
It’s just an awful deal for years to come, as I said it’s crippling.

If we took it on I’d want their first and the Tigers first this year for Kelly and the Port pick.

Then as you say, front load the hell out of it.

 

[Lomas]

Yeah, that why I raised it.
It’s just an awful deal for years to come, as I said it’s crippling.

If we took it on I’d want their first and the Tigers first this year for Kelly and the Port pick.

Then as you say, front load the hell out of it.

For what it is worth, I'd leave a little bump at the end in anticipation of the next salary cap increase.

 

[R00StaR]

What would a club want back from GWS to take on Josh Kelly contract?
It’s an awful deal that expires at end of 2029 and is presumably really good money for a fair chunk of those years.

They currently have 4 and 5 in the upcoming draft.


We really screwed them into doing that deal.

Their picks 4 and 5 with Ports first going back to them to take on Kelly.
Its a much bigger ask taking Kelly's contract than Bruhn's.

 

[FootySmartSimpson]

Their picks 4 and 5 with Ports first going back to them to take on Kelly.
Its a much bigger ask taking Kelly's contract than Bruhn's.

Are you telling me in the (fanciful) situation North would give up 2-3 million and enter the draft with approximately 2, (3), 4, 5?

What would be the best way to maximise this draft hand?

 

[Lomas]

Are you telling me in the (fanciful) situation North would give up 2-3 million and enter the draft with approximately 2, (3), 4, 5?

What would be the best way to maximise this draft hand?

Hold out for the straight on the flop?

 

[shinboner magic]

In the rare scenario we had 2 and 3.

I'd probably try the trade with West Coast, we take Reid and Watson and they still get Curtin at #3.

It might cost us the Port pick and then some change back to us, but that would be a game changing return imo.

It's the only scenario in which I'd trade up for Reid, if it still meant we could get Watson.

Something like

Pick #1 and WCE F2

for Pick #3 and Port R1

and the gentleman's agreement that Curtin or Edwards go to #3.

Watson is a need and looks good but we need talls at both ends

 

[Shermanator]

For what it is worth, I'd leave a little bump at the end in anticipation of the next salary cap increase.

 

[Lomas]

Watson is a need and looks good but we need talls at both ends

As much as I usually go in to bat for the little blokes, I'd rather go a tall.