List Mgmt. Collingwood Trade and FA

[stormskye]

We seem to love Bytel

That’s why I said it. If saints delist someone is says enough for me

 

[Johno9911]

If he wasn't nearly 29, then yeah. Rookie pick up at best, covers a hole if anyone goes down. He would have covered Checkers well this year. Hope fully we don't have to worry about Checkers next year.

Yeah absolutely - I am certainly not advocating for us going and picking up Hayes, however a similar nature player would've filled a few holes for us through the last 12-18 months, and in particular in 2024.

 

[cakewalk06]

Exactly right. And how is 20 a first rounder .. it ain't!!

the actual trade:

• Geelong gave up two middling 1st rounders (13 & 15), a 2nd rounder (20) in 2020 and a future 4th rounder (2021)
• Geelong received Cameron + two future 2nd rounders (one from GWS & one on-traded from Ess).

GWS finished 7th and Ess finished 8th in 2021 so Geelong received back picks 24 & 25 in 2021 draft in addition to securing Cameron, arguably the best forward in the game.

that might be close to the best trade value ever extracted in the history of the afl or perhaps a close run second to their trade with GCS, receiving Bowes + 7 in exchange for a 3rd rounder!!

Geelong
What Geelong Gave	What Geelong Got
						Jeremy Cameron	80 games		53 XG
Pick 13	Pick not used	1212 points	79 XG
Pick 15	Pick not used	1112 points	71 XG
Pick 20	Pick not used	912 points	66 XG
					2021R2 (Essendon) (estimate: pick 24)	Pick not used	785 points	56 XG
					2021R2 (Greater Western Sydney) (estimate: pick 27)	Pick not used	703 points	51 XG
2021R4 (Geelong) (estimate: pick 71)	Pick not used	29 points	5 XG
4 picks	0 players	0 games	3265 points	221 XG	2 picks	1 player	80 games	1488 points	160 XG

The frustrating thing about this at the time was that you just knew that if Cameron wanted a trade to Collingwood, we would have had to find a top 5 pick for starters.

 

[Markfs]

i think we should try to draft better players. I dont agree with the current strategy of drafting players who are incapable of playing AFL at senior level. While trading has overcome this policy to some extent, I think drafting unsuitable players is just not sustainable.

 

[LuckyLee]

Anyway, what number is Trac taking? 12?

No1, after we throw Lipinski in as steak knives.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[LuckyLee]

And so begins the sifting through the trash in the hope of finding treasure but really just finding more trash.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[ElliottsMaggies]

Hope we're not looking at him.

 

[KrispyKremePie]

Anyway, what number is Trac taking? 12?

17 for now and will change to 18 after we win our next premiership

 

[Jen2310]

COLLINGWOOD


Considered the frontrunner if Petracca were to want out of the Demons, according to The Herald Sun, and the club the superstar grew up supporting including calling Scott Pendlebury

10

Scott Pendlebury

Age

36

Ht

191cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

26.5

5star

K

13.2

5star

HB

13.3

5star

M

4.1

4star

T

4.9

5star

CL

4.9

5star

D

25.1

5star

K

12.3

5star

HB

12.9

5star

M

3.4

3star

T

2.3

3star

CL

3.6

4star

D

12.4

4star

K

7.6

3star

HB

4.8

4star

M

5.8

5star

T

2.6

4star

his “GOAT” on the Dyl & Friends podcast earlier this year. You can picture it, and heck, it’s been hard to ignore Pies fans clamouring for Petracca since trade talk first emerged. However, Collingwood’s capacity to pull off a blockbuster trade looks extremely unlikely given the reigning premiers are without its first-round pick following the Lachie Schultz trade. The Pies also don’t have any young players with any real trade value or ready-made stars that make sense for Melbourne or that Collingwood would realistically part ways with.

Current draft picks: 32, 2025 first rounder, 2025 second rounder

How every AFL club is placed to land Petracca... but great says there’s only one option

How every AFL club is placed to land Petracca as great identifies ‘only’ option

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[WakeUpPies]

We got a 2nd rounder for Grundy didn’t we? AND we still had to pay him. Our 2nd for Tracc should be fair.

 

[Jen2310]

We got a 2nd rounder for Grundy didn’t we? AND we still had to pay him. Our 2nd for Tracc should be fair.

Bit different, as we kinda pushed for him to move.

 

[BEEG]

This trade for Schultz hurts even more now.

Pick 9 we could have almost done it.

I don't blame Schultz at all.

 

[BEEG]

What club would swap a 1st with us.

This year for next?

Brisbane with Ashcroft as FS?

 

[JoinDate]

We got a 2nd rounder for Grundy didn’t we? AND we still had to pay him. Our 2nd for Tracc should be fair.

The 2 scenarios couldn't be further apart, Grundy was a salary dump, Demons want to keep Trac.

 

[iGNITER]

This trade for Schultz hurts even more now.

Pick 9 we could have almost done it.

I don't blame Schultz at all.

Agree on both points.

Surely, we get something done. Future picks... Or even a club who purely needs points for F/S...

 

[frizzle]

i think we should try to draft better players. I dont agree with the current strategy of drafting players who are incapable of playing AFL at senior level. While trading has overcome this policy to some extent, I think drafting unsuitable players is just not sustainable.

I think it's too small a sample size to be definitive. I think if we draft more players incapable of playing AFL for the next 2 or 3 years we will have more data & can then say this strategy definitely doesn't work. I think your jumping the gun with your "we should draft better players" statement. Lets just wait & see.

 

[Jasper84]

But there's posters that justified us trading out a contracted VC Adams to a contender in Sydney for peanuts just because they offered him 3 years.

So all we have to do is offer Petracca 2 more years on top of his remaining contract and Melbourne will have to trade him for peanuts also because he wants to come to us...

That you put Adams in the same category as Petracca is ridiculous.

Adams gave almost 10 years of service to our club and despite missing the GF was a huge part of our premiership. Always a good move for the club to show a loyal servant the total disrespect of denying him a chance to extend his career. All so we can keep him against his will for one year and move two spots up the draft.

Didn't hear any complaints when Hawthorn let T Mitchell go for peanuts

 

[No SPIN]

i think we should try to draft better players. I dont agree with the current strategy of drafting players who are incapable of playing AFL at senior level. While trading has overcome this policy to some extent, I think drafting unsuitable players is just not sustainable.

Why would we be intentionally drafting players incapable of playing AFL?

 

[Dead Eye Didak]

Anyway, what number is Trac taking? 12?

Any other number besides 10, 30, 2, 35, 26, 22, 38, 5

No champion players or stalwarts of our club can give up their numbers. Everyone other number is up for grabs. I could see Trac running around in the number 3 guernsey....

 

[Hugg]

A weird example of the sort of player we should like at - without actually being the player we should look at.

Heading in to 2025, someone like Hayes would be an astute pick up for both a bit of ruck and key forward coverage. After the disaster of the last 2 years with rucks and forwards falling down around us, another cheap back up would not go astray imo.

For 2025 there's really only DC14 and Mason who you would comfortably pick in the ruck - and with Mason 34 next year, and starting to break down a bit body wise, we put a lot of our eggs in the DC14 basket. I do acknowledge we have Steene and Smit coming through, however it would be a tall ask to expect them to come in next season and impact consistently at AFL level.

Up forward we have Checkers, McStay and Kreuger as our main marking targets, and while I think that is a fine mix - both Kreuger and Mcstay's recent injury history does not fill me with much hope of getting 20+ games out of the pair of them.

In basic summary - I would not want us picking up Hayes, but someone on the outer at their club who could pinch in the ruck and up forward for us next year if required would certainly not be the worst recruitment this off season for us.

Smit looks promising

 

[Markfs]

I think it's too small a sample size to be definitive. I think if we draft more players incapable of playing AFL for the next 2 or 3 years we will have more data & can then say this strategy definitely doesn't work. I think your jumping the gun with your "we should draft better players" statement. Lets just wait & see.

i admire your patience but i sat looking at a list of players that we have drafted over the last decade and a lot of them havent played games. Wouldnt it have been better if they had played games? i know derek likes to target players that no one else wants but maybe there's something wrong with that strategy....dont get me wrong, i know derek is doing a great job. He's said that a number of times. I just feel uneasy...

 

[Markfs]

Why would we be intentionally drafting players incapable of playing AFL?

so we can win a premiership?....maybe you know what the strategy is. I can see why they do certain things like the recruitment of the browns and will kelly and the time that they kept them on the list. We've seen that at our local level when the coach picks his son in the team. However, that doesnt explain all the odd shaped players that come onto the list, the odd health issues, the backstories that are a little different. Maybe we're trying to broaden acceptance of the game....

I just think we should focus our drafting more on getting players who can play games at the senior level.

 

[Johno9911]

Smit looks promising

Agreed - but at 19 and very raw he will still need some time and development before he's ready to step up to the level.

Love his aggression and high energy around the ground!

 

[No SPIN]

so we can win a premiership?....maybe you know what the strategy is. I can see why they do certain things like the recruitment of the browns and will kelly and the time that they kept them on the list. We've seen that at our local level when the coach picks his son in the team. However, that doesnt explain all the odd shaped players that come onto the list, the odd health issues, the backstories that are a little different. Maybe we're trying to broaden acceptance of the game....

I just think we should focus our drafting more on getting players who can play games at the senior level.

Can you be specific- which players had odd shaped bodies or health issues.

 

[Scodog10]

But there's posters that justified us trading out a contracted VC Adams to a contender in Sydney for peanuts just because they offered him 3 years.

So all we have to do is offer Petracca 2 more years on top of his remaining contract and Melbourne will have to trade him for peanuts also because he wants to come to us...

You haven’t actually compared Adams to Petracca in a serious way here have you? We made out like bandits on the Adams deal because he’s added nothing to Sydney except cover for Mills. Petracca is a top 5 player in the game.