Oppo Camp Non Giants AFL discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

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
 

Log in to remove this ad.

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.
 
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
 
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).

 
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!
 
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).


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

(Log in to remove this ad.)

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.
just confirming, I dont think it is a great trade, I just don't think it is terrible either.
 
Last edited:
Hotel nearby in The Hills seems to have footy highlights of the 2024 season playing on all screens across the venue the last Friday I was there and Thursday night this week.

Great to see.

I haven't seen it listed as a footy venue so not sure what the go is there or whether they always have footy playing across the season, will keep an eye out next season.

Seems to be chalk and cheese difference between crossing the Hills side of Old Windsor Road to this side of Old Windsor Road, really would like to see the gap narrowing soon rather than such a clear divide. Look to grow the footy interest this side, I say! :)

IMO it's already sort of there with the amount of Giants I see in my suburb, still, could be strengthened much more because none of the two venues in my immediate area haven't had any footy games playing that I've seen. Admittedly, I haven't frequented them enough so maybe they have but you sort of get a vibe when walking into a venue and seeing what's playing.
 
Gold Coast Suns - making the worst logo in football worser

Have they managed to put a foot right since joining the league?
It's awful.
They have done an amazing job with nurturing the Game in the Gold coast and the academy. But at AFL they have messed everything up
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Oppo Camp Non Giants AFL discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top