List Mgmt. Collingwood Trade and FA

Remove this Banner Ad

If McGuane gets a bid in Rnd 1 next year and we match with multiple later picks. That counts as us taking a first round pick doesn’t it?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Yes
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Think the biggest question surrounding our F1 is, do Collingwood think mcguane will improve to the point where he is likely to attract a first round bid.
One of the factors with the change of Dvi is that your picks won't drop as far if you go into deficit. Clubs will find it harder to match and will be more willing to go into deficit
 
If McGuane gets a bid in Rnd 1 next year and we match with multiple later picks. That counts as us taking a first round pick doesn’t it?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Yes
But you can't do that next year. Match with junk picks. Its gonna be 2nd and 3rd rounders. No picks over 50 will contain points, and very little points attached to points from 40 onwards.
 
Wonder how hard it will be for Collingwood to match a first round bid with only second and third round picks under the new system next year.
We'll need multiple 2nds and 3rds to get it done. But it will get done.
 
I guess we could have opted not to bring any free agents in and just go backwards next year.


True but TW Sherrin makes a good point. IE, Bobby is making noises about wanting more money etc. He now goes to management and says, well, you are paying the Perryman, now pay me.

It's a balancing act i think. The best possible result from this trade is Perryman plays over and above what he has done so far at GWS and becomes one of our top 5 players. Then no qualms at all about the money. I know we have a good culture going ATM but I think it's a dangerous precedent.
 
If Port are looking for a small forward they should divert from Richards to Ned McHenry. DFA now so no trade needed. Already in SA, has a lot more exposed form than Richards and same age.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
It would be extremely poor form from a club to chase a player, make them a lucrative offer and then rescind said offer. They’ve made a commitment by offering him a deal, no way they turn around now and say “nah actually we’re getting this guy that just got delisted instead”.
 
Think the biggest question surrounding our F1 is, do Collingwood think mcguane will improve to the point where he is likely to attract a first round bid.
I think all the worry about making sure we have the points for Mcguane next year is unnecessary. Correct me if I'm wrong but there has never an instance where a team had to pass on a F/S or academy player because they couldn't come up with points. There will always be mechanisms to get them, we don't need to be pulling levers this year based on guestimates for next year
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Think the biggest question surrounding our F1 is, do Collingwood think mcguane will improve to the point where he is likely to attract a first round bid.
He’s already regarded as a first round prospect, his improvement from here will simply make him a top 5-10 prospect.
 
No it is costing 2 first round picks and Noble no matter how you try and sell it
Hi Seedsfan. It certainly looks that way on face value, but it may becmome clearer if you consider this.

Collingwood holds Noble and future 1st.

We trade Noble for 12.

We trade 12 and future 1st for Houston.

End result-:

Collingwood now has Houston.

Collingwood no longer has Noble and future 1st
 
No it is costing 2 first round picks and Noble no matter how you try and sell it
If noble is being traded for one of those first rounders in the first place then it’s basically Noble and a first for Houston.

Bizarre logic to claim anything else.
 
How are we getting pick 12 in that scenario?

I think we'd do deals that turn Noble, Richards and a future first into Houston and be very happy if it was possible.
That’s the only circumstance the F1 and Noble for 12 works. I still wouldn’t do it, but you can at least justify it because it would take 2 1sts to get Houston if we had both.
 
Hi Seedsfan. It certainly looks that way on face value, but it may becmome clearer if you consider this.

Collingwood holds Noble and future 1st.

We trade Noble for 12.

We trade 12 and future 1st for Houston.

End result-:

Collingwood now has Houston.

Collingwood no longer has Noble and future 1st
And it still costs two first round picks and Noble no matter how you try and sell it
 
I think all the worry about making sure we have the points for Mcguane next year is unnecessary. Correct me if I'm wrong but there has never an instance where a team had to pass on a F/S or academy player because they couldn't come up with points. There will always be mechanisms to get them, we don't need to be pulling levers this year based on guestimates for next year
But clubs usually plan for their F/s bids a year in advance. So they will try to execute as many trades as they can in prior trade period to get the necessary points banked up, so that they are not exploited by teams during the required draft year.
 
Does anyone else have the gut feeling that Carlton will cave and pay through their nose just to ensure that he doesn't land at Collingwood?
Yes I posted yesterday that if we get pick 12 (now 13) Carlton will panic and cough up this and next years firsts.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. Collingwood Trade and FA

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top