Player Watch Izak Rankine Part II - Welcome to Adelaide

[Cap]

So our mods are short asses like our short ass mids?

It wouldn't surprise me

 

[FNeighbourhoodSpiderman]

Yes. The hand wringing and teeth gnashing is totally unnecessary.

What isn't getting mentioned enough is what really would have happened if Rankine had been put through the PSD

If the answer to that question is that the claims that a team like West Coast really would have picked Rankine up before us (and been able to afford him in their cap), then we had far less leverage than we think.

However, if that was all smoke, and we were always going to get him in the PSD even if GC didn't accept our trade proposal, then it appears as though we overpaid

We did not overpay based on Rankine's talent - definitely has the potential to be the top small forward in the game, and could be an incredibly damaging mid too.

We overpaid based on the likely leverage we had (which was even higher when you consider that we were the only team Rankine could go to because of all the draft capital Port gave away lost in the JHF and Rioli deals), and also based on what other clubs are paying for similar talents

Port are basically getting JHF (still considered a generational talent by many - potential to be in the mid/fwd superstar bracket in the Dusty/Petracca/Fyfe mold - only real knock is attitude thus far) AND Rioli (who is in the top small forwards in the comp if he can recapture his best form - he was one of WC's best players in their finals series and GF the year they won it) for 8, their future first (which will very very likely be outside the top 10 next year), and steak knife picks

Even the Freo Jackson deal - Freo are giving up 13, another future first (which will likely be around the same mark or later), and a second. Some might look at that as overpaying, but if that future pick ends up being pick 15+ after academy (GC already have one off the top of my head in Jed Walter) and FS picks next year - there's a big difference between those picks and a second rounder, and pick 5. And, they are still getting an ex pick 3, ruck/KPP, rising star, and a premiership player, which no doubt added to his trade value where this wasn't the case for Rankine (which was more based on having 'a break out year of good production', having potential, and being an ex pick 3)

Even look at Brisbane - they traded their 15 for 21 to bank more points for Ashcroft without giving two sh*ts about what Bulldogs thought. And they STILL might get Dunkley (who is 25 and just won their best and fairest).

This is the sort of attitude we should have had.

We gave up pick 5 - the highest pick for any traded player this draft period (not taking into account deals like West Coast and North who gave up picks 1 and 2 for other high picks back) (and this is just my subjective opinion - I think there was a clear group of 6 or 7 players at the top of this year's draft who combined potential with production - making a pick in the top 6/7 even more valuable).

The reason as far as I'm aware that we gave Gold Coast what we did is that we wanted to 'act in good faith'.

We could very easily have traded down to 9 to 15 (based on how many teams were trading firsts this year, and probably still will), picked up something extra (like a late extra first, or early extra second), and still given GC a 1st plus a third as a sign of 'good faith'.

So, as far as I'm concerned, if we were always getting Rankine in the PSD, this trade was an utter overpay for no reason.

If there was a risk we weren't getting him in the PSD though, this deal was about a par.

It's a pretty straightforward case.

In the AFL, you have to be elite with everything you do if you want to get ontop and stay ontop. You can't just be good or okay.

If we had the top position in these talks, we left something on the table. We weren't elite, and the positions of those who made this deal should be reviewed in my opinion.

 

[Cap]

I was wondering the same thing…

Look I'm going with likely.

They seem to be McHenry fans

 

[Southerntakeover]

I'm not disagreeing with you, I agree we should have focused on some bigger mids.

However, we have, what we have.

So do you see improvement in our mids for 2023 , or do you see the 2nd half of the showdown as the norm ( in high pressure games)

Is there basis to think our midfield improves more than theirs? This was before JHF.

It's a good illustration game I think because Fogarty was on. But he starved in that second half.

Only so much forwards can do.

 

[Mr_Moogle]

Rankine was smart making it 3 years only. Gives him enough time left over to go elsewhere when he realises he doesn't want to spend the rest of his career losing.

 

[Mutineer]

What isn't getting mentioned enough is what really would have happened if Rankine had been put through the PSD

If the answer to that question is that the claims that a team like West Coast really would have picked Rankine up before us (and been able to afford him in their cap), then we had far less leverage than we think.

However, if that was all smoke, and we were always going to get him in the PSD even if GC didn't accept our trade proposal, then it appears as though we overpaid

We did not overpay based on Rankine's talent - definitely has the potential to be the top small forward in the game, and could be an incredibly damaging mid too.

We overpaid based on the likely leverage we had, and also based on what other clubs are paying for similar talents

Port are basically getting JHF (still considered a generational talent by many - potential to be in the mid/fwd superstar bracket in the Dusty/Petracca/Fyfe mold - only real knock is attitude thus far) AND Rioli (who is in the top small forwards in the comp if he can recapture his best form - he was one of WC's best players in their finals series and GF the year they won it) for 8, their future first (which will very very likely be outside the top 10 next year), and steak knife picks

Even the Freo Jackson deal - Freo are giving up 13, another future first (which will likely be around the same mark or later), and a second. Some might look at that as overpaying, but if that future pick ends up being pick 15+ after academy (GC already have one off the top of my head in Jed Walter) and FS picks next year - there's a big difference between those picks and a second rounder, and pick 5. And, they are still getting an ex pick 3, ruck/KPP, rising star, and a premiership player, which no doubt added to his trade value where this wasn't the case for Rankine (which was more based on having 'a break out year of good production', having potential, and being an ex pick 3)

Even look at Brisbane - they traded their 15 for 21 to bank more points for Ashcroft without giving two sh*ts about what Bulldogs thought. And they STILL might get Dunkley (who is 25 and just won their best and fairest).

This is the sort of attitude we should have had.

We gave up pick 5 - the highest pick for any traded player this draft period (not taking into account deals like West Coast and North who gave up picks 1 and 2 for other high picks back) (and this is just my subjective opinion - I think there was a clear group of 6 or 7 players at the top of this year's draft who combined potential with production - making a pick in the top 6/7 even more valuable).

The reason as far as I'm aware that we gave Gold Coast what we did is that we wanted to 'act in good faith'.

We could very easily have traded down to 9 to 15 (based on how many teams were trading firsts this year, and probably still will), picked up something extra (like a late extra first, or early extra second), and still given GC a 1st plus a third as a sign of 'good faith'.

So, as far as I'm concerned, if we were always getting Rankine in the PSD, this trade was an utter overpay for no reason.

If there was a risk we weren't getting him in the PSD though, this deal was about a par.

It's a pretty straightforward case.

In the AFL, you have to be elite with everything you do if you want to get ontop and stay ontop. You can't just be good or okay.

If we had the top position in these talks, we left something on the table. We weren't elite, and the positions of those who made this deal should be reviewed in my opinion.

Rankine was never going to the PSD, that was just another of this boards fantasies...

 

[rabidcrow]

Only the crows board could be negative about using 5 on Rankine

Agree our mid isn’t up to scratch yet , hopefully it comes

Like Rachele and Rankine as part of mid mid though

Can we get aggressive and make moves to draft a mid in teens ? Couple likely types , That’s dream from here for me but not sure we will do it

Who are the likely types to you. Did some reading through the draft profiles - so haven’t seen much of the players - but George and Humphrey appear to the best options apart from Phillipou for us. George maybe around pick 23 - unless we trade up

Otherwise Keeler probably the best bet


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[FR0GGY]

Rankine was never going to the PSD, that was just another of this boards fantasies...

You just have to make it real enough for GC to think so

 

[baaaallllll]

Rankine was never going to the PSD, that was just another of this boards fantasies...

We have to remember that we also need to deal with these clubs each year. If you are going to bend someone over then it is likely they will get the opportunity to bend you over at some stage and say remember when you bent us over. I.e. Carlton bent us over for Gibbs, so we got them back with McGovern. It sets a precedence.

 

[FNeighbourhoodSpiderman]

Rankine was never going to the PSD, that was just another of this boards fantasies...

What's the expanded point you are making

 

[FR0GGY]

We have to remember that we also need to deal with these clubs each year. If you are going to bend someone over then it is likely they will get the opportunity to bend you over at some stage and say remember when you bent us over. I.e. Carlton bent us over for Gibbs, so we got them back with McGovern. It sets a precedence.

I guess no one will deal with essendon any more.

 

[Mutineer]

Who are the likely types to you. Did some reading through the draft profiles - so haven’t seen much of the players - but George and Humphrey appear to the best options apart from Phillipou for us. George maybe around pick 23 - unless we trade up

Otherwise Keeler probably the best bet


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

How is George the best for us, he's a mercurial forward that did an ACL late in the season so plays no football next year, almost totally unproven as midfieler so in effect you think a medium forward (albeit potentially a very good one before the ACL) is a desperate need?

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Who are the likely types to you. Did some reading through the draft profiles - so haven’t seen much of the players - but George and Humphrey appear to the best options apart from Phillipou for us. George maybe around pick 23 - unless we trade up

Otherwise Keeler probably the best bet


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Take a look at Burgiel who has real speed and a good kick

Hollands was the other one but he’s prob elevated last 2 months

Magor from South Adelaide even though he’s more half forward at this point

 

[whoa_vardy]

Ever since I read Moneyball I have been crying out for an AFL team to try the same.
Crows strategy is looking similar - trade out first round picks for more proven youngsters in Rankine and Dawson.
You know what you are getting compared to someone like Jones and Macasey.
Unless you can get a top 3 pick that is most.lilely going to stay in Adelaide, the rest are way too speculative and risky.
It's a good deal for us I reckon.

 

[Mutineer]

What's the expanded point you are making

I don't need to expand on a fantasy that was never going to happen unless the Suns played hard ball...they didn't.

 

[CrowsB4hoes]

So Rankine 3 year deal around 700k

JHF a 6 year deal over 700k

Which player again is going to be under the most pressure?

 

[FNeighbourhoodSpiderman]

I don't need to expand on a fantasy that was never going to happen unless the Suns played hard ball...they didn't.

Ok

I didn't realise you were coming at it from a point of view where you weren't willing to have a proper discussion in good faith

I'm letting this discussion go with that being the case

 

[mtbkym]

Ok

I didn't realise you were coming at it from a point of view where you weren't willing to have a proper discussion in good faith

I'm letting this discussion go with that being the case

Proper discussions dont happen on BigFooty mate

 

[Mostyn]

You just have to make it real enough for GC to think so

Why would we want a player who's made a commitment to us to go to Essendon?

Just because of a couple of draft spots?

 

[FR0GGY]

Why would we want a player who's made a commitment to us to go to Essendon?

Just because of a couple of draft spots?

No club is picking a player who wants to go to a different state.
Name the last time it happened.

Couple of draft spots?

 

[Mostyn]

Ok

I didn't realise you were coming at it from a point of view where you weren't willing to have a proper discussion in good faith

I'm letting this discussion go with that being the case

essendon has expressed an interest in Rankine, and had already made him an offer

they also have $3m of cap space, according to the Age

and, of course, a preseason pick before the Crows.

 

[kirky]

So Rankine 3 year deal around 700k

JHF a 6 year deal over 700k

Which player again is going to be under the most pressure?

So does JHF get paid his two year initial salary in 2023 or does he go straight onto the $700k+pa from 2023 onwards?

 

[Mostyn]

No club is picking a player who wants to go to a different state.
Name the last time it happened.

Couple of draft spots?

Essendon had already made an offer to him. Their interest was clear and public.

Posters are saying they're unhappy with 5, but if we traded down and gave up 9 they'd be fine?

All so we could maybe grab a second round pick? That's the bounty that'd you'd be willing to lose him over? A 22 year old, who's once of the most exciting players to come from SA in years and an avowed Crows supporter?

 

[Mutineer]

So does JHF get paid his two year initial salary in 2023 or does he go straight onto the $700k+pa from 2023 onwards?

That original contract becomes null and void surely

 

[Slippery Pete]

Ha ha. More like...

That’s gold son.