- Aug 17, 2009
- 6,316
- 7,385
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Did we overpay for Daniel? And by how much. Seems to be 3 main schools of thought:
1. Brady!!!! (shakes fist) - Caleb rated anywhere between "utter shit", "put a fork in him" and "kinda okay, but worth pick 69"
2. Yeah we definitely overpaid, but better to overpay and as part of the four additions for our 3 picks it's acceptable.
3. This is good work. If we did overpay it wasn't by much.
(I think option 2 might be the majority on here)
A lot obviously turns on what happens with pick 25, and there's been a lot of prognostications and discussions about the history of the pick. I've got no ****ing idea about the draft, barely know who the big prospects are let alone who is a candidate for the ~30th best player drafted. But for the purposes of hindsight heroes and comparison with Daniel's service, I did have a couple of thoughts:
But that sounds a bit boring, as opposed to putting your balls on the line and telling me who is the gun we should have picked if we had retained our 2nd round pick. Obviously if they get taken earlier you can revise your nomination. Go!
1. Brady!!!! (shakes fist) - Caleb rated anywhere between "utter shit", "put a fork in him" and "kinda okay, but worth pick 69"
2. Yeah we definitely overpaid, but better to overpay and as part of the four additions for our 3 picks it's acceptable.
3. This is good work. If we did overpay it wasn't by much.
(I think option 2 might be the majority on here)
A lot obviously turns on what happens with pick 25, and there's been a lot of prognostications and discussions about the history of the pick. I've got no ****ing idea about the draft, barely know who the big prospects are let alone who is a candidate for the ~30th best player drafted. But for the purposes of hindsight heroes and comparison with Daniel's service, I did have a couple of thoughts:
- Not fair to simply tie it to whoever the Bulldogs' (or whoever ends up with it) pick, we could have picked anyone not already taken.
- By the same token, not fair to say that whichever player taken after this pick turns out to be a gun is the one that invalidates the Daniel deal. Fair to say the history of NM drafting after the first round is not illustrious.
But that sounds a bit boring, as opposed to putting your balls on the line and telling me who is the gun we should have picked if we had retained our 2nd round pick. Obviously if they get taken earlier you can revise your nomination. Go!
