Oppo Camp Non Giants AFL discussion

[Giant Strides]

... they've just handed Carlton a massive leg up for the next 15 years, and set themselves back massively ...

 

[PaythePerryman]

It's truly a terrible trade. I wonder why they think they need to do it. To secure Baker?
Or is the talent they want at 3 perhaps too much of a flight risk?
Could be a combo of things

 

[Giant Strides]

You have to wonder whether there's an element of too-strong old-club links there too - 2 former Richmond staff trading with their old club ... promises made to the player and club to "look after them"?

 

[captainMyCaptain]

ATM pick 3 and 12 are just numbers and every chance the player taken at pick 12 is just as good or even better then player taken at 3.

 

[Giant Strides]

ATM pick 3 and 12 are just numbers and every chance the player taken at pick 12 is just as good or even better then player taken at 3.

Statistically that's not true. Significantly higher % likelihood historically that pick #3 plays more games and has a longer career than #12. Also, 3.5 times more likely for #12 to be a bust than #3 to be a bust.

It doesn't mean that #12 cannot be better in any single draft ... but not every chance.

 

[PaythePerryman]

Statistically that's not true. Significantly higher % likelihood historically that pick #3 plays more games and has a longer career than #12. Also, 3.5 times more likely for #12 to be a bust than #3 to be a bust.

It doesn't mean that #12 cannot be better in any single draft ... but not every chance.

Yeah I wouldn't be backing that in.

I'm actually astounded that WCE are doing this trade...for two guys who are 27 and probably not in their next push for a flag ...meanwhile compromising their next generation

 

[dlanod]

ATM pick 3 and 12 are just numbers and every chance the player taken at pick 12 is just as good or even better then player taken at 3.

There's definitely not every chance. Since 2001, the average pick 3 has played 50 games more than pick 12 in the same year. Only eight of those years has seen pick 12 play more games than pick 3, and four of those are 2017-2020 which could still change (though Fogarty is probably safe over Dow at this point).

Historical Results for AFL Draft Pick 3 - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

Historical Results for AFL Draft Pick 12 - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

 

[Giant Strides]

West Coast should have taken #14 for Barrass. Traded #14 to Sydney for #19 & #22. Traded #19 to Tigers for Baker (apparently they promised Tigers a first round pick ... #19 is closer to true value). Owies was going to be delisted; otherwise, their #63 would have done it to give Carlton some points.

That would have kept them with #3 and #22 + Baker + Owies instead of just #12. Diabolical trading!

 

[captainMyCaptain]

There's definitely not every chance. Since 2001, the average pick 3 has played 50 games more than pick 12 in the same year. Only eight of those years has seen pick 12 play more games than pick 3, and four of those are 2017-2020 which could still change (though Fogarty is probably safe over Dow at this point).

Historical Results for AFL Draft Pick 3 - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

Historical Results for AFL Draft Pick 12 - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

But that's in drafts where there is a clear top 5. While in this draft there is a very even top 20.

 

[GWS Goose]

... they've just handed Carlton a massive leg up for the next 15 years, and set themselves back massively ...

Im not sure its all that bad.
If the draft is as deep and even as they say it is, 12 will stil be a very good player., they bring in Baker and Owies and whoever 12 is versus whoever 3 is.

 

[Orange crush]

Im not sure its all that bad.
If the draft is as deep and even as they say it is, 12 will stil be a very good player., they bring in Baker and Owies and whoever 12 is versus whoever 3 is.

Yeah it not flash but not too horrible …. Blues traded out of next year as well so a lot of eggs in one basket for them

 

[captainMyCaptain]

West Coast should have taken #14 for Barrass. Traded #14 to Sydney for #19 & #22. Traded #19 to Tigers for Baker (apparently they promised Tigers a first round pick ... #19 is closer to true value). Owies was going to be delisted; otherwise, their #63 would have done it to give Carlton some points.

That would have kept them with #3 and #22 + Baker + Owies instead of just #12. Diabolical trading!

Agree with your points with Barrass. But there was still a chance Baker could have ended up at freo, and as a delisted free agent Owies might not have gone with west coast.

But my overall point is in a super even draft pick 3 for 12 isn't a big deal.

 

[dlanod]

But that's in drafts where there is a clear top 5. While in this draft there is a very even top 20.

Maybe in theory, but if you look at the various rankings and there's a pretty consistent top handful available at pick 3 and none of them will be there at pick 12.

Smith, O'Sullivan, Lalor, Smillie, Langford, Reid and Draper are generally all in that top 10. West Coast now isn't going to grab any of those unless they're really lucky, they'll be looking at the second level options.

The only thing I can think of is that they're doing the trade back and grab a local theory that they did previously to target Bo Allan, but that's pretty short sighted.

 

[Giant Strides]

To each their own (views), no worries with that. And clearly there are a few here who wouldn't be unhappy with what Weagles have just done. And I do agree that it will only be clear in 10 years time as to whether it worked for them or not.