News Crows eye Walker, Jacobs

[Buzz/Sticks/bryce]

68 to go ..........

66. I'm eagerly anticipating Crows eye walker, Jacobs ii. Should be sometime

this afternoon. I expect pick 14 versus Bock pick will be resolved any moment

now.

 

[PooMonkey]

i dont quite share your optomism....

Also that it has been reported that the Crows are likely to use the Bock pick which means they wont be trading it...?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...ulldogs-hit-list/story-e6frf9jf-1225932022501

Adelaide, which received a pick at the end of the first round for Nathan Bock, is poised to use it now rather than bank it, even though that selection will be in the high 20s because of the compromised draft.

Crows second rounder will not get a deal done...

http://www.carltonfc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/4311/newsid/103451/default.aspx

Having developed the 22-year-old from his days as a rookie, the Blues will want the Crows to find them a suitable trade - be that from within their own ranks, by way of a draft pick or by getting other clubs involved.

If they can’t, Carlton appears prepared to look elsewhere or even let Jacobs walk to the national or pre-season drafts.

Can see a 3-way trade happening!

 

[Aphrodite]

66. I'm eagerly anticipating Crows eye walker, Jacobs ii. Should be sometime

this afternoon. I expect pick 14 versus Bock pick will be resolved any moment

now.

64 to go ...........

 

[Sin City]

So they're using the Bock compo pick, looks like you were wrong again Vader.

Pick 14

 

[Salaryman]

I've followed the kids pretty closely this year.....pick #28 is a good chance to nab a good midfielder........didn't they get Sloane with #30-odd???

Pick #28 won't get you a #1 ruckman for the next 8 years.

When you phrase it like that, I start to wonder what they'll throw in on top of pick #14.

 

[Vader]

So they're using the Bock compo pick, looks like you were wrong again Vader.

Pick 14

How is trading the pick not "using it"?

I've followed the kids pretty closely this year.....pick #28 is a good chance to nab a good midfielder........didn't they get Sloane with #30-odd???

Pick #28 won't get you a #1 ruckman for the next 8 years.

When you phrase it like that, I start to wonder what they'll throw in on top of pick #14.

Pick #28 won't get one.. yet pick #1 in the rookie draft just might (noting that this is where you originally drafted him back in 2007)?

The sad fact is that ruckmen are the highest of high risk commodities when it comes to drafting. Those who are outstanding juniors usually go in the top 10, but it's not at all unusual to find one in the rookie draft (Cox, Sandilands & Jacobs all started their careers as rookies). You can find a quality ruckman at any point in the draft - but you have to be very lucky.

 

[Salaryman]

exactly....all the more argument to jump on one that is developed and lay-down misere to make it ;-)

and you need one now, not in the 4-5 years it takes to develop one...(if you got lucky).

I'm not trying to set up an us versus them argument, but highlight that pick 14 (about 22 in a non-compromised draft) is about right for a young #1 ruckman who has been developed for 3-4 years and coming into his prime

 

[HARKER]

I'm not trying to set up an us versus them argument, but highlight that pick 14 (about 22 in a non-compromised draft) is about right for a young #1 ruckman who has been developed for 3-4 years and coming into his prime

Not sure why that is so hard to understand for some.

Irrespective of what some fans may think here, come round 1, Adelaide will be a better team for having Jacobs there.
I'd bet that Adelaide recruiting department may just feel that way also

 

[Vader]

exactly....all the more argument to jump on one that is developed and lay-down misere to make it ;-)

and you need one now, not in the 4-5 years it takes to develop one...(if you got lucky).

I'm not trying to set up an us versus them argument, but highlight that pick 14 (about 22 in a non-compromised draft) is about right for a young #1 ruckman who has been developed for 3-4 years and coming into his prime

Mumford landed pick #28 last year in a draft which was even more heavily compromised. He's a perfect comparison, given that Jacobs' development right now directly mirrors Mumford's at the end of 2009.

Jolly is one of the top 3 ruckmen in the league and he only cost Collingwood pick #14 (plus chump change), in the same badly compromised draft.

12 months earlier you paid pick #24 (and chump change) for Warnock, in a draft roughly comparable in depth with this one. That same Warnock is now widely rated as your 2nd best ruckman, behind Kreuzer and ahead of Jacobs.

There is no way on earth that Jacobs' value is any higher than pick 20. Indeed the Bock compensation pick is almost exactly perfectly fair value.

 

[HARKER]

Mumford landed pick #28 last year in a draft which was even more heavily compromised. He's a perfect comparison, given that Jacobs' development right now directly mirrors Mumford's at the end of 2009.

Jolly is one of the top 3 ruckmen in the league and he only cost Collingwood pick #14 (plus chump change), in the same badly compromised draft.

There is no way on earth that Jacobs' value is any higher than pick 20. Indeed the Bock compensation pick is almost exactly perfectly fair value.

You've got to live in the now Vader.
Every year brings a new set of needs for each club.
Not sure you guys will be rubbing your hands next year for a speculative mid pick, when a bona fide ruckman that will make your mids immediately better, is on the table now.

No brainer for mine.

 

[Salaryman]

^^ this

 

[Sin City]

Mumford landed pick #28 last year in a draft which was even more heavily compromised.

It most definitely was not. What a load of rubbish.

 

[Vader]

You've got to live in the now Vader.
Every year brings a new set of needs for each club.
Not sure you guys will be rubbing your hands next year for a speculative mid pick, when a bona fide ruckman that will make your mids immediately better, is on the table now.

No brainer for mine.

Now you're getting into chicken & egg discussions. You can mount a fair argument that ruckmen are made to look better (or worse) than they are because of the quality of midfielders around them.

Carlton have Judd & Murphy, who are capable of making any ruckman look like a genius. Adelaide have Thompson and ... so it's no great surprise that our rucks don't look as great.

How much of Jacobs' reputed ability to win hitouts to advantage is brought about by Judd's genius at knowing where to be? Only time (and a change of environment) will tell.

 

[parrot]

Mumford landed pick #28 last year in a draft which was even more heavily compromised. He's a perfect comparison, given that Jacobs' development right now directly ....

Crows supporter, you're getting yourself all flustered by turning this trade into your own little personal battle. You're missing the point entirely. It doesn't matter what you think. It's no a debate, it's just a commentary on the current situation.

THIS is the situation as it stands:

1. Carlton have insisted on Pick 14 for Jacobs or No Trade.
2. Crows are in the process of deciding whether to proceed or not based on that cost.

That's it. Everything else is ready. He's happy to go to the Crows, has presumably passed the medical, and is delighted with the huge 1 mill+ contract you've offered him. It's up to your club to say yes or no now. If they say no, both clubs will move on and trade elsewhere. That's it. Easy.

BTW you still haven't told me what other ruck you think you'll get with your "Compo Pick".

 

[Vader]

It most definitely was not. What a load of rubbish.

Last year the AFL wiped out 1/3 of the entire draft class by changing the age eligibility rules. Effectively there were only 8 months worth of "new" draftees to choose from - and many of the best players (Toy, Matera, Keath) were amongst those eliminated.

This year we have a full 12 month class of new talent, but GC have taken 12x 17yo kids out of it before we begin. Only a handful of those taken would have been at the pointy end of the field.

There is no doubt at all that the 2010 draft is better than the 2009 draft, even allowing for the kids GC have already signed.

 

[Sin City]

Last year the AFL wiped out 1/3 of the entire draft class by changing the age eligibility rules. Effectively there were only 8 months worth of "new" draftees to choose from - and many of the best players (Toy, Matera, Keath) were amongst those eliminated.

This year we have a full 12 month class of new talent, but GC have taken 12x 17yo kids out of it before we begin. Only a handful of those taken would have been at the pointy end of the field.

There is no doubt at all that the 2010 draft is better than the 2009 draft, even allowing for the kids GC have already signed.

I see what you're on about but I think it'll have more effect on this years first round rather than last years. Either way GC are getting it way too good

The 2009 draft class was seriously underrated and has surprised a lot of people.

 

[Vader]

You've got to live in the now Vader.
Every year brings a new set of needs for each club.

You can't refute the evidence of similar trades in the recent past, so now the established "value" is going to magically change - just because it's us in search of a ruckman instead of Carlton, Collingwood or Sydney?

What a load of rubbish.

I've demonstrated 3 precedents which clearly indicate that Jacobs' value is somewhere in the mid-late 20s. That's not going to change just because you wish it to be so.

 

[HARKER]

How much of Jacobs' reputed ability to win hitouts to advantage is brought about by Judd's genius at knowing where to be? Only time (and a change of environment) will tell.

Judd may be a part of that puzzle, but only a part.
His ruck work for a 22 year old has been nothing short of outstanding whether in the seniors or the 2s. this year
Not his fault that we also have Kreuzer and Warnock in our ruck department and as for hitouts to advantage, Jacobs leads the lot.
I've no control of what we'll get for Jacobs, but you won't be kicking yourself for having him there next year.

I don't expect a 0-6 start from Adelaide next year and whichever way you look at it, the short term gain will last you all of 8 years.

 

[Vader]

I see what you're on about but I think it'll have more effect on this years first round rather than last years. Either way GC are getting it way too good

The 2009 draft class was seriously underrated and has surprised a lot of people.

There's no doubt that a late 1st round selection in 2010 is not worth the same as a late 1st round selection in 2009, due to GC having 9 picks inside the first 15 (and thereby pushing everyone else's picks further back in the draft). However, if you think of things in terms of the selections themselves pick 28 in this draft is likely to be as good as or better than pick 28 in the 2009 draft.

 

[Silvagnis]

The 2008 and 2009 drafts aren't great as the 2010 draft, yet Talia, Davis, Young and McKernan are off limits.

LOL.

I love Adelaide's small town mentality that every player is a vein of gold just waiting to be tapped.

Blues to play hardball on Jacobs

Blues coach Brett Ratten said the club was willing to accommodate Jacobs and a couple of other Blues seeking a new club but it would not be walked over at the trade table.

“Well, the Gold Coast’s got the first pick [in the pre-season draft], so if we don’t get there, he might be going to the other side of the country,” Ratten said when asked if the Blues were prepared to play hardball with Adelaide on a trade for Jacobs.

“We’ve got a few boys that have indicated that they would maybe have a look outside the club.

“We won’t make any changes unless we get the right deals done there.”

“We value Sammy and we put four years [into him] and we put a development coach who was more of a ruck-specific coach in Matthew Capuano [on to help our ruckmen],” Ratten told afl.com.au.

“Sam’s had the tutoring of Matty Capuano, a premiership player himself, and he’s developed really quickly along the way.

“From a rookie-listed player, he’s gone and had 42 hit-outs or so on (Shane) Mumford in that final and really was one of the best players on the ground.

“We’d be really disappointed to lose Sammy, but at the end of the day, yeah he would like to go home. But if a trade’s not done, well we’ll have to see what can happen elsewhere.”

Blues to play hardball on Jacobs

 

[HARKER]

You can't refute the evidence of similar trades in the recent past, so now the established "value" is going to magically change - just because it's us in search of a ruckman instead of Carlton, Collingwood or Sydney?

What a load of rubbish.

I've demonstrated 3 precedents which clearly indicate that Jacobs' value is somewhere in the mid-late 20s. That's not going to change just because you wish it to be so.

O.K. don't get Jacobs then.
I'm sure you'll all be happy patting yourselves for the 18 year old you have playing in the reserves for the next year or two.

Have a good look at your team and identify your real needs and you may start to understand as to why your recruiting department may at least consider paying out a 14.
May not happen, but they will be talking about the possibility of having to do so. True?

 

[Vader]

Judd may be a part of that puzzle, but only a part.
His ruck work for a 22 year old has been nothing short of outstanding whether in the seniors or the 2s. this year
Not his fault that we also have Kreuzer and Warnock in our ruck department and as for hitouts to advantage, Jacobs leads the lot.
I've no control of what we'll get for Jacobs, but you won't be kicking yourself for having him there next year.

I don't expect a 0-6 start from Adelaide next year and whichever way you look at it, the short term gain will last you all of 8 years.

We wouldn't be trading for him if we didn't think that he'd improve our side. This is not in doubt.

I think Carlton will be fairly compensated. I just don't think you'll get everything you're hoping for, because I believe you're overstating his value - especially in comparison with recent precedents.

 

[WALL-e]

AGAIN...

GC have NO picks in the PSD.

 

[Salaryman]

You can't refute the evidence of similar trades in the recent past, so now the established "value" is going to magically change - just because it's us in search of a ruckman instead of Carlton, Collingwood or Sydney?

What a load of rubbish.

I've demonstrated 3 precedents which clearly indicate that Jacobs' value is somewhere in the mid-late 20s. That's not going to change just because you wish it to be so.

Jolly, Wood, Warnock, Seaby, Mumford......the average would work out to be somewhere between 20-22.


That's about pick #14 in a compromised draft.

 

[Sin City]

There's no doubt that a late 1st round selection in 2010 is not worth the same as a late 1st round selection in 2009

And it's about time you admitted it