List Mgmt. COLLINGWOOD Trade and F/A Discussion 2023

[stormskye]

Zero Hanger article on Gresham's potential move also mentions Saints interest in Bergman and now Pies and Bumbers also interested in Bergman.

I rate Bergman but I wouldn’t have him as a need atm considering he will commanding $

 

[Go Woods]

Watched Gresham closely tonight, again I don't see how he would make us better if we were to be interested in him.

 

[stormskye]

Watched Gresham closely tonight, again I don't see how he would make us better if we were to be interested in him.

Our interest is to make Carlton pay to much for a crab

 

[ThePheonix]

Yup, we are still paying the price of that horrible trading with beams etc. it’s amazing we’ve recovered somewhat well but our biggest issue is a lack of young elite talent and also the capital to add it given our current ladder position. Port aced that 2018 draft.

Giving away future first round picks is like playing Russian Roulette, just pray we don’t end up on the bottom of the ladder.

When we did it again for the Nick Daicos draft year it just blew me away, we never learn. It was a huge risk vs little reward, for me it was never worth it.

 

[Fat Jesus]

Giving away future first round picks is like playing Russian Roulette, just pray we don’t end up on the bottom of the ladder.

When we did it again for the Nick Daicos draft year it just blew me away, we never learn. It was a huge risk vs little reward, for me it was never worth it.

We had no option but to give it to GWS.
In return we gained a couple of players and points needed in the draft for Nick.

 

[sr36]

Giving away future first round picks is like playing Russian Roulette, just pray we don’t end up on the bottom of the ladder.

When we did it again for the Nick Daicos draft year it just blew me away, we never learn. It was a huge risk vs little reward, for me it was never worth it.

I don't mind the concept of future trading, but that was the most crazy trade ever. Even if we won the flag the following year, a future pick 18 for pick 25 and 28 in the most speculative draft we'll ever see was a shit deal.

 

[ThePheonix]

We had no option but to give it to GWS.
In return we gained a couple of players and points needed in the draft for Nick.

Yeah my brother tried to explain this to me also, though after seeing last year’s draft I wondered how did Brisbane do it without trading picks?

 

[sr36]

Yeah my brother tried to explain this to me also, though after seeing last year’s draft I wondered how did Brisbane do it without trading picks?

We barely got any points for Nick from that swap - I think we ended up with one third rounder for Nick points.

 

[Jen2310]

We barely got any points for Nick from that swap - I think we ended up with one third rounder for Nick points.

Yeah it was never really about points for nick, but more trying to make up for the players we lost. Even if it backfired given those players are no longer at the club

 

[Fat Jesus]

No one expected us to finish 17th.
So GWS got pick 2. Get over it

 

[sr36]

Yeah it was never really about points for nick, but more trying to make up for the players we lost. Even if it backfired given those players are no longer at the club

It always reaked of Eddie's car salesmenship to me. The fans are furious because we've dumped Treloar and Stepho, let's give them a big draft haul to keep them happy. 5 of the top 31. And then stories fed through preseason that they're the most exciting draft crop we've had.

 

[sr36]

No one expected us to finish 17th.
So GWS got pick 2. Get over it

I'm not judging it by pick 2. The point is that the deal wasn't worth pick 18.

 

[Fat Jesus]

I'm not judging it by pick 2. The point is that the deal wasn't worth pick 18.

The point is it was done for a reason.

 

[sr36]

The point is it was done for a reason.

PR? Or was there actually a list management reason? I could never see one.

 

[ThePheonix]

No one expected us to finish 17th.
So GWS got pick 2. Get over it

That’s what I mean by Russian Roulette, it’s always possible, is it worth the risk?

Don’t know, maybe it was the Beams’ deal that caused a snowball effect?

 

[LuckyLee]

Himmelberg excellent today in GWS win. 19 possessions and 10 marks - the most of any player in the match. He would fit in beautifully at Collingwood.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[unplugged]

Himmelberg excellent today in GWS win. 19 possessions and 10 marks - the most of any player in the match. He would fit in beautifully at Collingwood.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Who would he replace as a defender in next weeks line-up for us? Murphy or Frampton?

 

[Scodog10]

It's because of what Scout said on EBnW last year. It's persisted on.

What would be your strategy this trade/draft period?

My approach would be to start with the 2016-2019 drafts cascade that down to system fits and then role. That leaves me with:

• McGrath and Cumming from 2016,
• Clark from 2017,
• Sturt and Cameron (if he wants back) from 2018,
• Flanders and Georgiades from 2019

McGrath is class as a small defender who can rebound and it bugs me he doesn’t have the profile of Saad who he’s as good as. Cummins is more a rebound type which just fits with us. Clark needs a change of scenery and whilst I would be concerned injuries have knocked the top off his ceiling I still think there’s plenty there. Sturt needs a run at it, but he’s got talent and Cameron is an AFL footballer if he’s happy off field. Flanders is a strange one he’s talented and should be getting a look in up there, but something hasn’t clicked I’d only be throwing Frampton type picks around if he left to us. Georgiades is one to park for 2024 and plan around for 2025 as a forward. Yeah we’ve got Johnson, but Georgiades is better and younger.

I think we’re short a defender whether that be a KP or flex I’ll defer to the club and a look at those drafts tells me KPF’s are tough to find so I’d probably look hard at the Tom Lynch path.

Gun to my head I’d probably take a swing at T Lynch, Georgiades to be eased back in 2024 as a defender and throw a line at one of Flanders, Sturt or Cameron. For me if we’re chasing HH on good money I think I’d prefer Lynch on the same or similar money.

Edit: I left Bergman out because he’s basically a Maynard/ IQ clone. There’s nothing wrong with that whatsoever I would just prefer we bolster other areas of the field first as opposed to loading up again with another gun general defender.

 

[unplugged]

I don't like the idea of Georgiades. I know players come back well from knees a lot of the time but I can't help but feel like we've gone away from recruiting injury prone players the last couple of years, as well as delisting those who are

 

[Scodog10]

I don't like the idea of Georgiades. I know players come back well from knees a lot of the time but I can't help but feel like we've gone away from recruiting injury prone players the last couple of years, as well as delisting those who are

I’m not convinced we’ve done this because Kreuger was extremely injury prone before arriving, Draper arrived off injury and Howe has missed a lot of footy since Covid.

Whilst there’s a doubt there with his ACL I look at how the King’s have comeback post their’s and have confidence. In terms of being injury prone one ACL pales in comparison to the multitude of injuries Murphy had by 22yo, IMO.

 

[No SPIN]

That’s what I mean by Russian Roulette, it’s always possible, is it worth the risk?

Don’t know, maybe it was the Beams’ deal that caused a snowball effect?

Teams got “screwed” holding our picks, when we unexpectedly finished top 4 last year. We may unexpectedly benefit with Carlton finishing much lower this year by holding their second round pick.

Trading picks is an unpredictable business.

 

[manicpie]

Who would he replace as a defender in next weeks line-up for us? Murphy or Frampton?

Murphy by a mile

 

[Apex36]

Murphy by a mile

You’re kidding right? You’d really go with Moore/Himmelberg/Frampton over Moore/Himmelberg/Murphy..?

 

[cityslick1]

The point is it was done for a reason.

It was… twofold.
1. The pick was seen as virtually useless as it would be swallowed up in the drafting of Nick. And…
2. Could instead be used to bring in players earlier to help rebuild and fill the void left by the big departures.

It didn’t work though. We couldve still traded down the pick for something better in trade week once we knew what it was, and I had us missing finals, so was still in the cards to be a top 10 pick imo.

The players we picked up also failed, so it was a black mark on the recruiting and list management team, whichever way you look at it.
Bad judgement of where we would finish, what we could’ve done with that pick, and the judgement of talent that we ended up selecting.

Hard to foresee all of this, yes. But this is what these guys are paid a lot of money to do… be experts in this field. And I doubt more than 25% of other clubs would’ve done that deal

 

[Fat Jesus]

That’s what I mean by Russian Roulette, it’s always possible, is it worth the risk?

Don’t know, maybe it was the Beams’ deal that caused a snowball effect?

Ed and Ned Guy, perhaps Hine as well got us into a right royal mess. Especially the Beams deal and the big $ contracts given to Grundy, Stephenson and Treloar.

Wrighty and again Hine have got us looking forward to a better future.