List Mgmt. Collingwood Academy Kids

[3rdMan]

Quaynor plays taller than his height - aerially he will take intercept marks, he can elevate and spoil but also has the strength 1v1. I'd imagine he would have grown this year. He looks more like 185cm than 180cm, but I guess we'll find out with measurements going into next year what he has grown to.

Balta played mostly ruck this year, so the piece is somewhat misleading about Quaynor manning him but he may well have for periods when Balta rested forward in that game maybe 20% of the time.

Overall, while I wouldn't trust Quaynor on a 194cm type like Balta, he could take an undersized key forward or a more mobile 193cm type, the way he plays.

Thanks. Sounds like an enticing prospect.

 

[Knightmare]

At the Moment where would you say Quaynor would possibly go?

Where in the draft would you rate him at this point KM? And do you think he has the tools to bolt up the draft boards next year?

It's a year out. But if next years draft happened today. Third round onwards. Can maintain that position over the next 12 months with solid play.

Hey Knightmare do you have any info on Will Kelly? What kind of player is he? Is he a good prospect?

Only played the one TAC Cup game and was quiet.

One to wait until next year on to see if he becomes relevant.

What would you say his early draft range is looking like or is it to early to tell? I think Hines recent theory was swapping a second rounder with a third as part of the Murray trade to get an academy player with the 3rd?

With a year of football to play until next years draft, it's unrealistic, even if I saw, Quaynor looks like he may be worth around a 3rd round choice, for things to be the same 12 months from now. You can't make such a calculation accurately based on a trade of future picks. Things change in 12 months, and with Quaynor one of the older players in next years draft as a January birthday, others may pass him by, or he may have an exceptional year. Who knows?

Early days, all that matters is he looks draftable.

 

[Darkyprotector]

I prefer to think of it as a clarification of roles. Absolutely I trust Hine over any poster on this board, not disrespect intended.

 

[Apex36]

I've just got the fire pit going, you can gather me a beer if you like.

I’d rather gather one for myself

 

[jmac70]

I’d rather gather one for myself

I was going to offer you one of mine, and you know I don't drink cheap beer.

 

[Apex36]

I was going to offer you one of mine, and you know I don't drink cheap beer.

I’m aware of that, but I think we have different tastes. You’re keen on an IPA iirc?

 

[jmac70]

I’m aware of that, but I think we have different tastes. You’re keen on an IPA iirc?

I'm keen on everything except wheat beer

 

[Apex36]

I'm keen on everything except wheat beer

I’ll take a golden or pacific ale then thx

 

[Crazy Tails]

I like the sound of this Quaynor kid for no other reason than his name sounds like he could be a character in a Star Wars film!

 

[Boris the Contradiction]

I like the sound of this Quaynor kid for no other reason than his name sounds like he could be a character in a Star Wars film!

I came in here to say he sounded like a character in Futurama!

 

[Snoop Dog]

So Snoop, explain to me how Journo's, previous List Managers, Hine himself, (presumably) the Club, all got it wrong regarding this being a fair and reasonable trade, yet the ONLY people who believe we got duded are anonymous people on Social Media.
If you were confronted with any other situation where those two sides line up that way, who would you consider had the better expertise

(and please mate, none of this "just my opinion" bullshit because none of the negatively is being is being portrayed that way, it is being expressed as fact...and you are way better than to fall into that crap)

Good post / fair play.

I actually like the recruitment of Sam Murray as have watched him before and love his speed and aggression but I am concerned about what we had to give up for him. Have a look at the list below of some of the trades I pulled out and worked out the effective pick the acquiring club paid (using this years ladder finish). For mine it at least makes you wonder why we paid what we did for him. Also think about it versus what we gave Jarrod Witts to Suns for (circa pick 45'ish from memory).

Jarmen Impey - effectively pick 25
Jack Watts - pick 31

Sam Murray - effectively pick 40 (Collingwood traded in pick 70 (39 points) + Swans pick 48 in 2018 (302 points) and gave back pick 24 in 2018 (785 points) equating to net gain of 444 points to Swans or effective pick 40.

Hayden Crozier - effectively pick 42
Brendan Ah Chee - effectively pick 57
Harley Balic - pick 66
Aaron Young - Pick 71

I also didnt quite understand his commentary. In effect he said something like "if you followed the draft in any depth it was about acquiring picks for 2018 for use with F/S (eg boy Kelly) or NGA players (Quaynor etc). To me that doesnt make sense as you picked up an extra pick in this draft and have had points deducted off next years draft.

Now granted Sam was a contracted player and if we wanted him and that was the price we had to pay so be it but against other trades the Swans certainly got value for him. Certainly cannot remember a rookie listed player ever garnering that sort of selection.

 

[Apex36]

Good post / fair play.

I actually like the recruitment of Sam Murray as have watched him before and love his speed and aggression but I am concerned about what we had to give up for him. Have a look at the list below of some of the trades I pulled out and worked out the effective pick the acquiring club paid (using this years ladder finish). For mine it at least makes you wonder why we paid what we did for him. Also think about it versus what we gave Jarrod Witts to Suns for (circa pick 45'ish from memory).

Jarmen Impey - effectively pick 25
Jack Watts - pick 31

Sam Murray - effectively pick 40 (Collingwood traded in pick 70 (39 points) + Swans pick 48 in 2018 (302 points) and gave back pick 24 in 2018 (785 points) equating to net gain of 444 points to Swans or effective pick 40.

Hayden Crozier - effectively pick 42
Brendan Ah Chee - effectively pick 57
Harley Balic - pick 66
Aaron Young - Pick 71

I also didnt quite understand his commentary. In effect he said something like "if you followed the draft in any depth it was about acquiring picks for 2018 for use with F/S (eg boy Kelly) or NGA players (Quaynor etc). To me that doesnt make sense as you picked up an extra pick in this draft and have had points deducted off next years draft.

Now granted Sam was a contracted player and if we wanted him and that was the price we had to pay so be it but against other trades the Swans certainly got value for him. Certainly cannot remember a rookie listed player ever garnering that sort of selection.

Pretty sure Murray was uncontracted. He had another rookie contract offer available to him from the Swans, but afaik he hadn't signed it yet, which makes the price we paid all the more baffling.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

I like the sound of this Quaynor kid for no other reason than his name sounds like he could be a character in a Star Wars film!

That's very good.

Just for the name, I'm on board

 

[Couch Coach]

Certainly cannot remember a rookie listed player ever garnering that sort of selection.

Traded rookies:
Mumford Pick 28
Jenkins and 41 for 31

 

[Apex36]

Traded rookies:
Mumford Pick 28
Jenkins and 41 for 31

Correct. Having said that, both those players had exposed form at senior level, which Murray does not.

 

[Rohan25]

Also think about it versus what we gave Jarrod Witts to Suns for (circa pick 45'ish from memory

It was 44 and 62 which I think works out at equivalent to 35.

 

[Snoop Dog]

Traded rookies:
Mumford Pick 28
Jenkins and 41 for 31

Sorry maybe should have been clearer. When they were traded they had played senior footy, in Mumford case he played 18 games. Yeah he was officially on rookie list but had been elevated to play. I was referring to players who have come off a rookie without having played a senior game.

Apex36

 

[35Daicos]

Sorry maybe should have been clearer. When they were traded they had played senior footy, in Mumford case he played 18 games. Yeah he was officially on rookie list but had been elevated to play. I was referring to players who have come off a rookie without having played a senior game.

Apex36

Correct. Having said that, both those players had exposed form at senior level, which Murray does not.

Josh Jenkins did not play senior football for Essendon.

 

[Rohan25]

Sorry maybe should have been clearer. When they were traded they had played senior footy, in Mumford case he played 18 games. Yeah he was officially on rookie list but had been elevated to play. I was referring to players who have come off a rookie without having played a senior game.

Apex36

Will Sierakowski - traded to North for pick 58 in 2011 off Hawthorn's rookie list. I think Sam Murray will be good for us and will probably be a Round 1 bolter, but the Sierakowski trade was the precedent we should have pointed to.

 

[TradeDraft]

Good post / fair play.

I actually like the recruitment of Sam Murray as have watched him before and love his speed and aggression but I am concerned about what we had to give up for him. Have a look at the list below of some of the trades I pulled out and worked out the effective pick the acquiring club paid (using this years ladder finish). For mine it at least makes you wonder why we paid what we did for him. Also think about it versus what we gave Jarrod Witts to Suns for (circa pick 45'ish from memory).

Jarmen Impey - effectively pick 25
Jack Watts - pick 31

Sam Murray - effectively pick 40 (Collingwood traded in pick 70 (39 points) + Swans pick 48 in 2018 (302 points) and gave back pick 24 in 2018 (785 points) equating to net gain of 444 points to Swans or effective pick 40.

Hayden Crozier - effectively pick 42
Brendan Ah Chee - effectively pick 57
Harley Balic - pick 66
Aaron Young - Pick 71

I also didnt quite understand his commentary. In effect he said something like "if you followed the draft in any depth it was about acquiring picks for 2018 for use with F/S (eg boy Kelly) or NGA players (Quaynor etc). To me that doesnt make sense as you picked up an extra pick in this draft and have had points deducted off next years draft.

Now granted Sam was a contracted player and if we wanted him and that was the price we had to pay so be it but against other trades the Swans certainly got value for him. Certainly cannot remember a rookie listed player ever garnering that sort of selection.

When Hine wants a Player he gets him

 

[Snoop Dog]

Josh Jenkins did not play senior football for Essendon.

Didnt realise that.....thought he had.

Jenkins and #41 (412 points) for #31 (606 points).......effectively pick 56.

Anyway lets hope he is as good as those two blokes have been.

 

[Apex36]

Josh Jenkins did not play senior football for Essendon.

Fair enough. If it was a locked in 10 pick downgrade for Murray then I'd have no issue, but as it stands it could be anywhere from a 1-36 pick downgrade, and the odds are it will be a bigger rather than smaller downgrade given where the two clubs are currently at.

 

[DraftBalta]

Sam Murray - effectively pick 40 (Collingwood traded in pick 70 (39 points) + Swans pick 48 in 2018 (302 points) and gave back pick 24 in 2018 (785 points) equating to net gain of 444 points to Swans or effective pick 40.

If you use mid round points for 2018 (none of us have a crystal ball) it's roughly pick 48 for Murray

 

[35Daicos]

Fair enough. If it was a locked in 10 pick downgrade for Murray then I'd have no issue, but as it stands it could be anywhere from a 1-36 pick downgrade, and the odds are it will be a bigger rather than smaller downgrade given where the two clubs are currently at.

We'll obviously be keeping a close eye on not just the player next year but on his former club as well. I guess it really adds a bit of "fun" to the whole affair.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

When Hine wants a Player he gets him

True. Except for when he doesn’t.