Play Nice Hypothetical Pick 1 Trade Poll: Pick 1 for Picks 2 & 15 --- Pick 1 & F1 (WCE) for Picks 2 & 3 --- Something else?

[Lore]

And of course, I will remind you all to review the rules of the trade board, in particular:

• No trolling – in addition to the obvious, we have a ban on troll nicknames such as Norf, West Coke, etc similar to the main board, because this type of language is inflammatory and creates more issues than it solves. Keep it civilised or take it elsewhere, such as the Bay or your club board, or whoever will have you really
• Don't be a pest – this includes derailing the thread with off-topic stuff, or trying to starve it of oxygen through proof by assertion/argument ad nauseam, aka filibustering
• Personal attacks – should go without saying but stick to the point, no name calling, no insinuations about someone's intelligence, abilities or other attributes

 

[Johnny Bananas]

I think pick 1 for picks 2, 15 and 17 would be fair. West Coast can then go get three WA boys: Curtin, Tholstrup and Collard.

 

[JGreezy]

Exactly.

What North are offering is what the Eagles would get from any other Club if Reid wants to return back to Victoria in a year or two.

Eagles are better off keeping him.

Tell me, who would be offering WC two top 3 draft picks to get Reid in a year or two?

Say that he nominates Collingwood. What are they offering that is even close to two top 3 picks?

What are they offering that is even close to pick 2 by itself?

 

[bzparkes]

I think pick 1 for picks 2, 15 and 17 would be fair. West Coast can then go get three WA boys: Curtin, Tholstrup and Collard.

The next person to suggest trading back, just to only take WA kids, may end up feeling the wrath of my credit card and get a perma ban.

Early Xmas present for chief, I guess...

 

[bh90210fan]

I think pick 1 for picks 2, 15 and 17 would be fair. West Coast can then go get three WA boys: Curtin, Tholstrup and Collard.

Norths charity picks aren’t worth a snatch full of snow

 

[buttox]

While he seems a great young talent the price is too high. I hope we don't trade for pick 1.
Best of luck at West coast. I prefer the picks we have now.

 

[Blackas87]

Most likely but i think WCE want McKercher if they don't take Reid and he will only be available at pick 2 or 3.

You think they want McKercher?

 

[buttox]

The next person to suggest trading back, just to only take WA kids, may end up feeling the wrath of my credit card and get a perma ban.

Early Xmas present for chief, I guess...

I think this applies to north just as much as you guys. Why should north trade the chance to fill multiple holes on our list for one great talent. It's a silly idea. 15,17 and 18 I could see being moved for better picks but that won't involve you guys.

 

[stallon]

You think they want McKercher?

Who else would the eagles want?

 

[Blackas87]

Who else would the eagles want?

Reid, Duursma, Nick Watson?

 

[stallon]

Reid, Duursma, Nick Watson?

I thought we were talking about pick 2, so Reid wont be here.
Watson is a grub no thanks.
Duursma is less of a need, need midfielders, and Mckercher is the best in draft

 

[Blackas87]

I thought we were talking about pick 2, so Reid wont be here.
Watson is a grub no thanks.
Duursma is less of a need, need midfielders, and Mckercher is the best in draft

Yeah that’s what you want.

I quoted someone saying “I think” West Coast want Mckercher.

Think is not knowing anything. Has there been any draft intel in West Coast wanting Mckercher.

There’s been draft intel on what Hawthorn, the Bulldogs and Geelong are looking at with there too 10 picks. Haven’t heard anything regarding West Coast and Mckercher.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

2 & 3 for 1 is such a monumental overpay that really has no chance of happening. North have said that they will be drafting two picks in the top 3. I think that can be ruled out, just like North's offer of 4 late firsts.

If it is just a repeat of "2 & 3 or its not happening" then there probably isn't much to discuss here.

I think that the reality is that something around 2 + the value of pick 8-10 is the middle ground that could satisfy WC. Whether and how the clubs get to that is another story.

Its possible but this draft falls off after the first 10 or so so im not sure you could trade up for eg i dont see geel or gws taking 15 and 17 for 7/8
Wbd arent trading back after going up nor are melb. So i dont think nm can make that work.

Wce arent doing 1 for 2 and 15 and 17 after knocking back hawks offer.

Realistically the only deal that will get it done is 1 for 2 and 3 (maybe wce send something small like a r2 back). If nm arent prepared to do that 1 wont get traded.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

They’re (WC) trying to turn two of Norths picks into 8. Leaving them with 2 & 8.

Geelong have already said no to that deal. They arent trading 8 unless wce offer their fr1.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Accept it? You guys put it to us when we asked about pick 8! That’s the deal of the century for you guys, we’d be mad to accept it. Time will tell I guess.

Geelong could easily miss finals in 2024 and will have a lot of future retirements in 24. They arent interested in having less 2024 picks they want more of them. The deal wont happen in the form you have proposed it.

 

[year of the cat]

Accept it? You guys put it to us when we asked about pick 8! That’s the deal of the century for you guys, we’d be mad to accept it. Time will tell I guess.

What’s your evidence for that? Find it hard to believe.

 

[JGreezy]

Its possible but this draft falls off after the first 10 or so so im not sure you could trade up for eg i dont see geel or gws taking 15 and 17 for 7/8
Wbd arent trading back after going up nor are melb. So i dont think nm can make that work.

Wce arent doing 1 for 2 and 15 and 17 after knocking back hawks offer.

Realistically the only deal that will get it done is 1 for 2 and 3 (maybe wce send something small like a r2 back). If nm arent prepared to do that 1 wont get traded.

As much as it hurts to compliment Geelong, I think that they would get more value out of multiple picks. There are good players back there to be found. They'll draft like Philactides, Murphy and Schoenmaker or something and they'll all be as good as pick 8.

2 and 3 for 1 isn't a realistic trade, at all. It's a fantasy. North have said it isn't happening and it would be a huge overpay.

I think that WC could have some motivation to get a future A grade mid in McKercher along with a couple more first round talents to boost their rebuild.
North have no motivation to trade two top 3 talents for one and there's no logic to that proposal.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

As much as it hurts to compliment Geelong, I think that they would get more value out of multiple picks. There are good players back there to be found. They'll draft like Philactides, Murphy and Schoenmaker or something and they'll all be as good as pick 8.

2 and 3 for 1 isn't a realistic trade, at all. It's a fantasy. North have said it isn't happening and it would be a huge overpay.

I think that WC could have some motivation to get a future A grade mid in McKercher along with a couple more first round talents to boost their rebuild.
North have no motivation to trade two top 3 talents for one and there's no logic to that proposal.

Tbh those 3 players are examples of why this draft drops off after the first 12 or so they have major ? From my end (especially schoenmaker). I think we would pick other players if we had 15.
In most drafts say 15 and 17 for 8 isnt bad but in this one its average. Reading between the lines geelong want extra 2024 picks if they trade 8 it will be out into 24 not a trade back. I think the furthest we would trade back would be adel at 10 or melb at 11 (as thats about where the tier 1 talent drops off) if we are offered the right futures as an incentive.
I doubt north or wce are getting 8 off us unless they offer a future 1st (which they wont do).

I agree 2 and 3 for 1 is overpay but i dont see any other realistic viable trade (as i said no one in the 4-8 group is trading back as you proposed) that will satisfy wce so they will just take reid at 1.

 

[Jibroni]

how about 6,11,F1 for our F1?

Thats like asking would you take Pick 25 for O Allen.

 

[Blackas87]

Its possible but this draft falls off after the first 10 or so so im not sure you could trade up for eg i dont see geel or gws taking 15 and 17 for 7/8
Wbd arent trading back after going up nor are melb. So i dont think nm can make that work.

Wce arent doing 1 for 2 and 15 and 17 after knocking back hawks offer.

Realistically the only deal that will get it done is 1 for 2 and 3 (maybe wce send something small like a r2 back). If nm arent prepared to do that 1 wont get traded.

Personally I wouldn’t trade Reid for picks 2 and 3 myself.

Reid looks as close a future star a prospect can get. While majority of first round picks including top 5 just turn out to be solid AFL players.

Mckercher and Duursma may end up stars but likely I reckon solid players.

 

[Barrybran]

As much as it hurts to compliment Geelong, I think that they would get more value out of multiple picks. There are good players back there to be found. They'll draft like Philactides, Murphy and Schoenmaker or something and they'll all be as good as pick 8.

2 and 3 for 1 isn't a realistic trade, at all. It's a fantasy. North have said it isn't happening and it would be a huge overpay.

I think that WC could have some motivation to get a future A grade mid in McKercher along with a couple more first round talents to boost their rebuild.
North have no motivation to trade two top 3 talents for one and there's no logic to that proposal.

The logic is the amount of top end talent you already have. Add another two midfielders? What are you doing with the others that will be playing VFL? There is merit to North taking one of those top two picks and trying to get ahead of the pack for the likes of O'Sullivan and Wilson, who will arguably do more for your team than the players you'll have to sell for 50 cents on the dollar in 2-3 years time.

Likewise, additional players for us is a great idea - if we already have our core in place, which we don't. We need to build that core. That is why the price is 2 & 3 for 1. Will they be the only pieces? No. But they are the pieces we want if we're going to part with pick 1.

Let's say we send you 1, 37 & F3 for 2 & 3. That puts you out of pocket a second rounder. It's not a deal you should take but what if you offered Sydney 18 & 37 for 12 & 55, or 18, 37 & F3 for 13 & 40? 2 & 3 sounds great if you have a use for them but what if you had 1, 12, 15 & 17 instead of 2, 3, 15, 17 & 18?

On it's own, 2 & 3 for 1 is a terrible deal but you can do so much more with that deal than stockpiling midfielders.

Edit: you wouldn't have 3. Back to the drawing board on that one. Stick with 3 & 15 for 6 & 11.

 

[JGreezy]

Tbh those 3 players are examples of why this draft drops off after the first 12 or so they have major ? From my end (especially schoenmaker). I think we would pick other players if we had 15.
In most drafts say 15 and 17 for 8 isnt bad but in this one its average. Reading between the lines geelong want extra 2024 picks if they trade 8 it will be out into 24 not a trade back. I think the furthest we would trade back would be adel at 10 or melb at 11 (as thats about where the tier 1 talent drops off) if we are offered the right futures as an incentive.
I doubt north or wce are getting 8 off us unless they offer a future 1st (which they wont do).

I agree 2 and 3 for 1 is overpay but i dont see any other realistic viable trade (as i said no one in the 4-8 group is trading back as you proposed) that will satisfy wce so they will just take reid at 1.

I think that the dropoff after pick 10 is being overrated and some of the best players in the draft will be taken in the 10-20 range.

 

[uncleoatmeal]

As much as it hurts to compliment Geelong, I think that they would get more value out of multiple picks. There are good players back there to be found. They'll draft like Philactides, Murphy and Schoenmaker or something and they'll all be as good as pick 8.

2 and 3 for 1 isn't a realistic trade, at all. It's a fantasy. North have said it isn't happening and it would be a huge overpay.

I think that WC could have some motivation to get a future A grade mid in McKercher along with a couple more first round talents to boost their rebuild.
North have no motivation to trade two top 3 talents for one and there's no logic to that proposal.

For transperancy I'd want 2,3 for Reid or at least 2,6,15. I understand why both parties aren't budging as well, makes total sense.

I think Reid's marketing value at north is being undersold here though. Since Carey I cant remember wanting to tune in to a North game to watch an out and out star play. I'm not saying North havent had great players in that time since Carey but from a watchability perspective, a little lacking. For instance I'd tune in just to watch a Stevie J, Toby Greene, Ablett, Dusty, Buddy, Cyril etc.

Just wondering what your thoughts are on that element of the value of a trade?

 

[Johnny Bananas]

The next person to suggest trading back, just to only take WA kids, may end up feeling the wrath of my credit card and get a perma ban.

Early Xmas present for chief, I guess...

Cool, then I'll create a new account each day to message you more proposals for trading back and taking WA kids.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I think that the dropoff after pick 10 is being overrated and some of the best players in the draft will be taken in the 10-20 range.

I would be very surprised by that but time will tell.
People i know who work in recruiting at afl clubs tell me they think the pool is very spec picks after the first dozen or so and i tend to agree.

 

[JGreezy]

The logic is the amount of top end talent you already have. Add another two midfielders? What are you doing with the others that will be playing VFL? There is merit to North taking one of those top two picks and trying to get ahead of the pack for the likes of O'Sullivan and Wilson, who will arguably do more for your team than the players you'll have to sell for 50 cents on the dollar in 2-3 years time.

Likewise, additional players for us is a great idea - if we already have our core in place, which we don't. We need to build that core. That is why the price is 2 & 3 for 1. Will they be the only pieces? No. But they are the pieces we want if we're going to part with pick 1.

Let's say we send you 1, 37 & F3 for 2 & 3. That puts you out of pocket a second rounder. It's not a deal you should take but what if you offered Sydney 18 & 37 for 12 & 55, or 18, 37 & F3 for 13 & 40? 2 & 3 sounds great if you have a use for them but what if you had 1, 12, 15 & 17 instead of 2, 3, 15, 17 & 18?

On it's own, 2 & 3 for 1 is a terrible deal but you can do so much more with that deal than stockpiling midfielders.

Edit: you wouldn't have 3. Back to the drawing board on that one. Stick with 3 & 15 for 6 & 11.

North needs more talent. We won 3 games last year. Wardlaw looks great but has big question marks over his iniuries. LDU has been regularly injured. Thomas could leave next year.

McKercher fills a big need in the midfield in terms of his running and Duursma isn't a midfielder. Watson would also fill a need as a small forward.

At the end of the day, North have said that they aren't doing it.