Traded Luke Jackson [Traded with #44 and #67 to Fremantle for #13, F1 and F2]

[poshman]

I don't think it'd be 3 first round picks. not if one of them is a decent top 5 pick. I would've preferred 1 pick in the top 5 then the trash Freo dished up. Thankfully, we got pick 7 out of it but still, with a talent like Jackson we should've been able to net a top 5 pick or top 3 pick minimum.

I guess the real test will be seeing how Ginbey and Hewett develop.

We could only give what we had, and you got that. A pick 7 and 13. He hasn't had a breakout year yet.

I think he has the potential to be a top ten player in the league, there is long way to go to get there. We didn't recruit a brownlow medal winning, norm smith winning Judd.

 

[danster168]

Of course you don't.. It was said a lot. You are talking about Jackson like he had Judd level exposed form. At the time you were repeatedly told there was a strong chance we would drop and we dropped significantly.

Could he turn into a brilliant player worth what we paid in a trade? Yes.
Could he turn into a bargain for us? That is a bigger hill to climb, but, there is a chance.
Could you have gotten the best of the trade in the long run? Possibly.

When looked at in isolation both sides probably wanted more. It is usually a sign of a relatively fair trade.

Personally, I hope he stays as second ruck as he hasn't got the strength to go with the big boys but can wreak havoc with licence to roam.

He's already made the AA squad as a 21 year old ruck, and become one of your best players. Not much more you could really ask for. And we got Matt Jefferson and Caleb Windsor out of the trade. With a 50% bust rate for all first round picks, it's essentially Caleb Windsor for Jackson. A big net win for you

 

[WilloTree]

I don't remember this. but there's finishing lower and there's finishing low. Jackson should've netted a top 5 pick and another in the top 10.

Why? That's not his value.

 

[danster168]

Why? That's not his value.

Absolutely that's his value. And that's exactly what you'd want if you on-traded him now.

 

[WilloTree]

Absolutely that's his value. And that's exactly what you'd want if you on-traded him now.

No. His value is what was traded. Value is determined by what someone will pay.

There's really no point just picking a value out of the air.

You don't go into Woolworths and say: "That towel is worth 3 bucks - that's it's value" when the tag says $8.99

 

[poshman]

He's already made the AA squad as a 21 year old ruck, and become one of your best players. Not much more you could really ask for. And we got Matt Jefferson and Caleb Windsor out of the trade. With a 50% bust rate for all first round picks, it's essentially Caleb Windsor for Jackson. A big net win for you

Ah so you are writing off your own draftees one year in... Just making the AA squad doesn't equal the value of the trade. You got the picks. We got Young and Serong at 7 and 8. If you drafted poorly that has no bearing on the trade. It is a reflection on you (going super early on writing players oof) and the clubs drafting.

 

[danster168]

Ah so you are writing off your own draftees one year in... Just making the AA squad doesn't equal the value of the trade. You got the picks. We got Young and Serong at 7 and 8. If you drafted poorly that has no bearing on the trade. It is a reflection on you (going super early on writing players oof) and the clubs drafting.

big difference between pick 8 and pick 15 (Jefferson)

 

[poshman]

Absolutely that's his value. And that's exactly what you'd want if you on-traded him now.

Your logic is so flawed it is ridiculous.

If you buy a stock today, you pay the price as valued today. If that value drops, or increases, the value at time of trade is still the same.

Also, we may want that as a price, but someone has to be willing to pay it. I am not sure he has shown enough to trade a pick 3 and 7 as exchange.

 

[danster168]

No. His value is what was traded. Value is determined by what someone will pay.

There's really no point just picking a value out of the air.

You don't go into Woolworths and say: "That towel is worth 3 bucks - that's it's value" when the tag says $8.99

dude, you said Jackson wasn't going to help your team now or in the future. You said that. Clearly no idea about value when it's staring at you in the face.

Your statement about value sounds cool but doesn't apply to the afl sadly. Value's a thrown out the window when a player is out of contract. When the player essentially nominates a club to go to as well as when a club only has certain picks to give. A lot depends on what a club can pay. Nothing to do with worth.

 

[poshman]

big difference between pick 8 and pick 15 (Jefferson)

You got a top ten and another first rounder. Which, is something I said was a high likelihood of happening.

You continue to obfuscate and move the goal posts.

Initially I responded to a nonsense claim that all freo posters were saying he wasn't worth the first and your projected late first. At the time, I and others told you many times we were a chance to fall, like Melbourne did. So your first claim was incorrect. The rest has been equally as nonsensical.

 

[danster168]

Your logic is so flawed it is ridiculous.

If you buy a stock today, you pay the price as valued today. If that value drops, or increases, the value at time of trade is still the same.

Also, we may want that as a price, but someone has to be willing to pay it. I am not sure he has shown enough to trade a pick 3 and 7 as exchange.

Hypothetically, if Jackson was on the open market today and had all 17 clubs wanting his services, he'd be getting 3 first rounders, comfortably.

Hell the dees offered 3 first rounders for Bailey Humphrey.

 

[poshman]

Hypothetically, if Jackson was on the open market today and had all 17 clubs wanting his services, he'd be getting 3 first rounders, comfortably.

Hell the dees offered 3 first rounders for Bailey Humphrey.

Ah so you are going back to your rubbish logic of what you think he would be worth today.

He wasn't worth that at the time of trade.

I own 10.62 Bitcoin. I think they are worth $85k ea. Does that make them worth that price?

 

[Paracleet]

Why are people still engaging with that peanut?

 

[poshman]

Why are people still engaging with that peanut?

Good point. He is so nonsensical I am exiting the thread.

 

[danster168]

Good point. He is so nonsensical I am exiting the thread.

I am not sure what we are getting with Jackson. I have been consistent with that all season. Now he is here I hope we find a position for him that works. Not overly confident in that though. Obviously I hope he ives up tp the hype.

just keeping you accountable.

 

[danster168]

Why are people still engaging with that peanut?

yeah, the peanut who said Jackson was a gun when freo fans were saying he had shown nothing and was only a 2nd ruck.lol. yeah...

 

[WilloTree]

dude, you said Jackson wasn't going to help your team now or in the future. You said that. Clearly no idea about value when it's staring at you in the face.

Your statement about value sounds cool but doesn't apply to the afl sadly. Value's a thrown out the window when a player is out of contract. When the player essentially nominates a club to go to as well as when a club only has certain picks to give. A lot depends on what a club can pay. Nothing to do with worth.

I stated he didn't address a need.

It's not the same thing as not 'going to help the team'. More talent always helps the team.

If you go into Woolworths for a towel and you buy an air fryer while you are there, you still use the air fryer right? Even though you need a towel as well. My goodness. Why am I explaining this?

 

[danster168]

I stated he didn't address a need.

It's not the same thing as not 'going to help the team'. More talent always helps the team.

If you go into Woolworths for a towel but you buy an air fryer while you are there. You still use the air fryer right? Even though you need a towel as well. My goodness. Why am I explaining this?

You said he doesn't fit a need now or in the future. How can you say that for a guy that is 21 years old? Good players fit every teams needs.

 

[freo_leo29]

I don't think it'd be 3 first round picks. not if one of them is a decent top 5 pick. I would've preferred 1 pick in the top 5 then the trash Freo dished up. Thankfully, we got pick 7 out of it but still, with a talent like Jackson we should've been able to net a top 5 pick or top 3 pick minimum.

I guess the real test will be seeing how Ginbey and Hewett develop.

You literally got pick 5 from us lol

edit: because I don't want to engage with ya crap after this, I'll chuck the link in for the provisional order at the end of the 2023 season AKA what you received from us The indicative National Draft order at the conclusion of the 2023 AFL season

Linking that now so i don't have to reply later

 

[danster168]

You literally got pick 5 from us lol

edit: because I don't want to engage with ya crap after this, I'll chuck the link in for the provisional order at the end of the 2023 season AKA what you received from us The indicative National Draft order at the conclusion of the 2023 AFL season

Linking that now so i don't have to reply later

yeah, which became pick 7.

 

[WilloTree]

You said he doesn't fit a need now or in the future. How can you say that for a guy that is 21 years old? Good players fit every teams needs.

Yes. That's what I wrote above. Maybe re-read the post?

 

[JackOutback]

WCE need everything. Not just mids. Plus Jackson is essentially a mid anyway.

Simply put, it was the wrong time. Yes, West Coast need players in every position, yes Jackson is a gun and I'd love to have him, but they needed to maximise their draft picks to restock, not throw a couple of high picks at one player. And premiership winnings teams start with midfielders, no matter how good players in other positions are. There'd be no point having Jackson if he had no one to tap to.

 

[danster168]

Simply put, it was the wrong time. Yes, West Coast need players in every position, yes Jackson is a gun and I'd love to have him, but they needed to maximise their draft picks to restock, not throw a couple of high picks at one player. And premiership winnings teams start with midfielders, no matter how good players in other positions are. There'd be no point having Jackson if he had no one to tap to.

I don't completely disagree. But you did throw away a couple of high picks to take Harley Reid though, right? You could've split the picks but chose to take the highly touted Reid.

 

[JackOutback]

I don't completely disagree. But you did throw away a couple of high picks to take Harley Reid though, right? You could've split the picks but chose to take the highly touted Reid.

No, we used a singular pick, the highest pick, to take the best player available. Yes, we could have split 1 into two lesser picks, but by their very nature, are less valuable. Jackson would have cost us that 1 and probably something else reasonably high. The price was too much for the position we're in and the position Jackson fills.

 

[Monsterdarlz]

Luke Jackson

9

Luke Jackson

Age

23

Ht

199cm

Wt

102kg

Pos.

F/R

Career

Season

Last 5

D

8.3

2star

K

3.3

1star

HB

5.0

4star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

3star

G

0.3

3star

D

8.3

2star

K

3.3

1star

HB

5.0

3star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

2star

G

0.3

3star

D

8.3

3star

K

3.3

2star

HB

5.0

4star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.0

3star

G

0.3

3star

is an interesting analyst
On paper 5 plus 15 is overs
However I’d take Jackson over Windsor and Jefferson personally.

Goes to show that drafting/ trading isn’t an exact science