Official 2013 Collingwood Trade Talk

Remove this Banner Ad

It's 24ish - probably get pushed out to 26.

More than likely using it on Elliot Yeo
Wouldve said to throw that in but if your planning on trading it already doesnt matter.
Obviously no chance of knowing who the recruiters pick up but would you guys pass on Sheed, most people on here are hoping he slides to us.
 
Hine doesn't rate this draft, wouldn't be surprised at all to see pick 10/11 traded for someone like Ada,s

AND YOU BELIEVE ANYTHING HINE SAYS PRE-DRAFT.....................:cool:

re: the shaw/adams trade - as heater is still contracted, could the pies paying some of his contract with GWS topping it up help assist his decision ? eg turn $500k current into a $650k future with the pies paying $200k of it and GWS $450k.
 
This thread makes sense. If people dont make a new thread every article that comes out in the paper/they hear from SEN.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Wouldve said to throw that in but if your planning on trading it already doesnt matter.
Obviously no chance of knowing who the recruiters pick up but would you guys pass on Sheed, most people on here are hoping he slides to us.


Twomey and Quayle have Sheed sliding outside the top 10 on talent.

The idea behind securing 10 & 16 would be to get Sheed with 10 and then still have a 1st round pick
 
Twomey and Quayle have Sheed sliding outside the top 10 on talent.

The idea behind securing 10 & 16 would be to get Sheed with 10 and then still have a 1st round pick
This is why we'd prefer to have the back to back picks though at 10 and 11. We could get a more solid pick like a Crouch or a Sheed where you kind of know what you are going to get but probably not going to be a match-winner...then we can take a punt on an exciting X factor type.

Whereas if our picks are spread apart then you can't run the risk because you can't back who is going to be there in 5 picks time.

Over the past few years, we have had a significant strategy in getting back to back picks. We did this last year, and have done so in the past with picks in the 3rd round.
 
^^ fair enough

The idea came from a target we are looking at perhaps being a mid-teen selection.

As such, Pick 6 would be overs.

So you might be looking at taking someone in the mid teens? If you take that player and Hine doesnt rate him slider could fall to our pick and we dont have to give anything up :p
 
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

Hampson to the Tigers, Chapman are of interest to Carlton. Terry Wallet making my ears bleed with that voice and that's about it.
 
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

Hampson to the Tigers, Chapman are of interest to Carlton. Terry Wallet making my ears bleed with that voice and that's about it.
Hampson was a priority pick in the '06 draft so a bit of a let down for the club in terms of getting only Pick 28, but they have others to cover him.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Did we get Ned kelly's kid?


We won't know until nov 22 (draft day)

If no one drafts him then we can automatically take him as a rookie

edit* beaten by dubber :(

Based on his performances and the fact he is heavily linked with collingwood you'd think there is a pretty good chance he will make it through to us in the rookie draft
 
I thought the bidding was today for father sons? Hence McDonald from the Roos?

We Just Nominated him that IF he gets to the Rookie Draft then he can go Straight onto the Rookie List
 
This is why we'd prefer to have the back to back picks though at 10 and 11. We could get a more solid pick like a Crouch or a Sheed where you kind of know what you are going to get but probably not going to be a match-winner...then we can take a punt on an exciting X factor type.

Whereas if our picks are spread apart then you can't run the risk because you can't back who is going to be there in 5 picks time.

Over the past few years, we have had a significant strategy in getting back to back picks. We did this last year, and have done so in the past with picks in the 3rd round.

I really think it is more of a coincidence...

We got 18 last year because it was WC pick and Wellingham wanted to go to the eagles. It wouldn't have been a deliberate ploy to get a back-to-back pick. If someone offered 17 and Wellingham wanted to go there, I expect we would have taken it. Similarly with pick 20. We actually wanted pick 13 from Melbourne, but they traded it off to GWS as part of their Hogan deal, so we had to settle for pick 20. It was always going to be from Melbourne, and we would have prefered pick 13...

This year, the back to back is more a result of the AFL policy, obviously, than a decision to get back to back picks.
 
Pick 28 for Hampson...what the?
Must have more to do with getting Megan for marketing purposes.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Official 2013 Collingwood Trade Talk

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top