This thread will be legendary when it’s all said and done with all the carrying on. Yes their will be a stand off but the trade will get done at the end of the day
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Confirmed Bailey Smith: 4-way trade: B. Smith (WB) & pick 45 to Geel / pick 38 to Carl / Macrae (WB) to StK / pick 17 & Kennedy (Carl) to WB
- Thread starter Pleasedontfail11
- Start date
- Tagged users None
The twisties were USED? Christ that’s grim.
Based on recent live trading a 2nd rounder is worth moving up 1 or 2 spots in the 1st round. 2 x 2nds would be closer to the mark.
At last year’s draft teams used better second round picks just to move from 11 to 10 and 18 to 17.
Last edited:
- Aug 18, 2018
- 31,838
- 54,142
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Kako is good for sure but academy kids slip. Gulden went in the 30s and everyone knew he was a gun. Maybe it's different because clubs spent more time on him thinking he was available this year but I think it's 50/50
I probably view Geelong's first next year as being worth a lot more than most here too because I'm not going with the recency bias people have from seeing us in a prelim. We had a good injury run this year and finished 3rd, we had a bad one last year and finished 12th. Bailey Smith is good but I don't think covers the depth we are losing and our structure requires an uncomfortable number of 34 year olds to perform.
I think everyone has a reasonable opinion based on their view of their club, I just think some are panicking a bit.
- Aug 18, 2018
- 31,838
- 54,142
- AFL Club
- Geelong
One or two spots in the top ten sure but in this draft I think the incentive to move up will be diminished by the depth available. Others may disagree.
- Aug 18, 2018
- 31,838
- 54,142
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Yeah but last years draft is not this years draft
The year before last the Hawks gave up a second and a third to move from 27 to 18 and the year before that Port gave up a second to move from 14 to 12…
- Aug 18, 2018
- 31,838
- 54,142
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Yeah true but these are different drafts and I can't see a great deal of difference driving the value change here compared to what there was then. Year before last single digit picks were being thrown away as steak knives so depth can change dramatically.
I think when you can go back a number of years and the value is that consistent its telling us something.
What are you referring to here?
- Aug 18, 2018
- 31,838
- 54,142
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Yeah but drafts aren't aren't the same.
referring to the draft the Bowes trade was in. Where does Jhye Clark or Rueben Ginbey sit in this draft? Because it's not the top 10
Using live trades to gauge the value of a pick is a bit disingenuous. Clubs give up better picks than they would during the trade period because they're trading for a very specific player that's still available in the draft.
Essendon didn't trade us a second rounder to move up one spot last year because they wanted the privilege of having a top ten pick, they did it because they wanted to pick Nate Caddy and were willing to offer a second round pick to ensure they got him. They'd have never offered such a deal before the draft.
Essendon didn't trade us a second rounder to move up one spot last year because they wanted the privilege of having a top ten pick, they did it because they wanted to pick Nate Caddy and were willing to offer a second round pick to ensure they got him. They'd have never offered such a deal before the draft.
Haha c’mon man the Bowes trade? You can’t put that debacle up against years of actually relevant evidence to the contrary.
What you’re suggesting in valuing picks by trades that didn’t happen rather than what they were actually traded for is disingenuous. Weird way of looking at it.
So we take him with our R1 in the draft, sweet.
- Aug 18, 2018
- 31,838
- 54,142
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Forget the trade, look at the names, which incidentally is why the pick was available in the first place.
threenewpadlocks
Brownlow Medallist
If Geelong don't pay up, Dogs fans would be fine with this, because we understand that it's far more risky for Geelong than Geelong fans are pretending than it is, even with their fans' confidence in situations like this. What you suggest isn't smooth at all, with a multitude of possibilities (however unrealistic, it's not zero), that either involve Smith not making his way to Geelong or otherwise Smith making his way to Geelong but in a way that's harmful to Smith and Geelong's relationship.
And to maximise your trade haul, you have to be sincere in your willingness to walk away.
Pencil case
Team Captain
- Sep 13, 2024
- 473
- 941
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Geelong’s list management team would be sweating buckets if this happened, along with losing (further) respect from player managers etc for trading in poor faith.
Geelong won’t let it come to that you’d think, neither will Dogs, but the threat is very real.
Hopefully whatever happens, it gets done on Monday and both clubs can be somewhat satisfied.
Pretty sure you have more to lose on both fronts tbh
Clark has been a disappointment but at the time it was being compared to the Selwood pick. That draft wasn’t viewed as so poor as to render top 10 picks steaknives, like you suggested. The Bowes deal was only done because they desperately needed his $1.6M off their books and sold the farm to do it. It’s basically useless as a guide for the cost to trade up from say 20 to 12 in any other scenario.
All I was suggesting is clubs are more open to trading second rounders to move up one or two slots when they know they'll be getting a specific player through a live trade than they would to just get a pick. That said, list vacancies and academy and F/S stuff can distort the value of picks during trade week as well. Dees traded 14, 27 and 35 for 11 last year but that was because they were only using two picks in the draft. We did similar in 2022, we only used two picks and traded several picks to Brisbane for their Ashcroft points so we could get a better pick to trade for Ollie Henry.
FWIW, I've been reluctantly fine with giving up two firsts all along. I'm also not trying to say our R1 and R2 are exactly equal to Dan Hanneberry's pick 12 valuation either (also not sure why anybody cares about Hanneberry's opinions either but this thread seemed to suddenly get a bit nasty after that was posted, like pick 12 had somehow now became Smith's exact value).
- Aug 18, 2018
- 31,838
- 54,142
- AFL Club
- Geelong
The selwood comparison was only ever at how hard he cracked into the contest. No one seriously thought he'd be an actual selwood replacement. There is a reason the suns were happy to lose it.
The point is that every draft is is a completely different set of players and the numbers mean different things in different years. Bo Allen will likely be around the first we give you but I don't think he's any worse than Ginbey (pick 9)
Yeah the known quantity gives teams more certainty but I think likewise teams also hold picks until the draft to see who is available or trade for a premium, rather than trade before. Although I think it’s been pretty consistent in terms of what those picks in that range are valued at trade wise, in or outside of live trading.
threenewpadlocks
Brownlow Medallist
So the Dogs agree to Geelong making this statement. Then what?
Geelong don't offer a first round pick and offer a second round pick, because if they refuse to trade, they miss out on a second round pick.
Geelong don't offer a second round pick and offer a third round pick. A third round pick is more than nothing, so the Dogs would miss out on a third-round pick if they rejected every trade.
Clearly Geelong think there is some element of loss of not executing a trade, otherwise they would literally offer the barest minimum possible in a trade, because why would they pay more for something that they'd be guaranteed to get anyway?
Once you answer that question you can see how the premise of what you're proposing is stupid.
Purely from a maximising their own trade haul standpoint, Dogs have to be sincere with their risk of losing nothing and use the leverage of Smith not smoothly going to Geelong in a trade against Geelong.
The Suns traded that pick for nothing for cap reasons, not because they thought the last 50 players in the draft weren’t worth drafting. It’s so far removed from a normal valuation of a draft pick that the trade has zero value as a comparison to almost any other trade. It’s just irrelevant here.
There are years of drafts and numerous trades that indicate the value of picks in this range are relatively consistent, despite varying perceptions of the depth and quality of those individual drafts.
- Aug 18, 2018
- 31,838
- 54,142
- AFL Club
- Geelong
At the end of the day we're talking about a 6-7 pick drift in a flat quality curve. Respect your opinion but I don't think you're getting shafted to the degree dogs fans are insinuating.
Similar threads
