Prediction Possible pick swaps

[Senor M]

Yep I agree. Personally still think GWS will end up trading down from six to get the points and future picks as they go if a trade with Melbourne cant be arranged and that scenario seems more likely. I think Freo with speculation growing around Henry could end up offering our pick ten and our future second for pick 6. From there GWS could do another trade with Geelong and trade pick 10 for 17 and 24 from Geelong. They could then do another trade where they 17 for 26 and 27 from North into 27 and a future GWS third for 33 and a future second from essendon. That would leave them with enough points for Green and two bonus second rounders by my count.

GWS Traded Picks 12 & 18 for Pick 6 in the first place--- trading UP to get a top end talent BEFORE a bid came in on Green. Why would GWS' then trade Pick 6 back down for LESS value than Pick 12 & 18 baffles me.

 

[sherrif]

GWS Traded Picks 12 & 18 for Pick 6 in the first place--- trading UP to get a top end talent BEFORE a bid came in on Green. Why would GWS' then trade Pick 6 back down for LESS value than Pick 12 & 18 baffles me.

Then get unbaffled. Its not hard. The plan for gws was to get pick 3 to move ahead of a green bid. To their surprise even with an offer pf 6 and a future first melbourne said no. It would be stupid for them to not trade down and look at points. If they do the trade I said then they basically get 14, 17 and a future second which is more in trade value then the original pick 6 for 12 and 18.

 

[TryAnHit]

GWS Traded Picks 12 & 18 for Pick 6 in the first place--- trading UP to get a top end talent BEFORE a bid came in on Green. Why would GWS' then trade Pick 6 back down for LESS value than Pick 12 & 18 baffles me.

If its not possible? To get in before green

Atleast they gave themselves a shot now

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

The AFL needs to go back to the system of doing bidding before the trade period because this system of trading before the bids come in to manipulate (which I acknowledge the Dees have benefitted from before, largely in 2015 where we improved our picks by colluding with GWS and GC) is nothing short of a farce. Should be made to do it with the picks (inc. 'future' picks traded in the year before) you have at the end of the season rather than being able to manipulate the system by which some clubs have use for the nominal value of picks rather than the arbitrary points value and thus clubs (all 18 of them) with F/S, NGA and NA prospects can needle a tapestry of 'win-win' trades to make sure they maximise the value of their picks by getting their man as well as other picks etc. To some extent clubs can try to trade a year in advance to have more/fewer points but that's still better than how blatantly corrupt it is now.

 

[Clems Knee]

The AFL needs to go back to the system of doing bidding before the trade period because this system of trading before the bids come in to manipulate (which I acknowledge the Dees have benefitted from before, largely in 2015 where we improved our picks by colluding with GWS and GC) is nothing short of a farce. Should be made to do it with the picks (inc. 'future' picks traded in the year before) you have at the end of the season rather than being able to manipulate the system by which some clubs have use for the nominal value of picks rather than the arbitrary points value and thus clubs (all 18 of them) with F/S, NGA and NA prospects can needle a tapestry of 'win-win' trades to make sure they maximise the value of their picks by getting their man as well as other picks etc. To some extent clubs can try to trade a year in advance to have more/fewer points but that's still better than how blatantly corrupt it is now.

Blatantly corrupt? How?
Why should a team have to bid before they know who else is still available? That doesn’t make sense.

There has certainly been gaming of the systems of points and bidding, and of trading for future picks in order to hide picks. But that’s not corruption.
And the AFL has tinkered the system over the years to stop the gaming where a club benefits too much.

It was father-son first for basically free. Geelong set up a dynasty by benefitting from it.
For a while the NSW scholarships gave clubs a free hit: Taylor Walker springs to mind. Pick 75!
Then the northern academies came in, which stopped the other clubs gaming the system, and gave those clubs a chance to grow the game.
Bidding on academy players and father-sons came in to stop the free hit, so at least a good player would cost a pick in the same round. But a grand finalist could pick up a top three player with pick 18, and it needed further tightening up.
Points bidding came in, and top players had to be paid for in point equivalents. An improvement, but clubs found a way to stockpile low picks for points.
The AFL then limited the number of picks to the number of available places, which has reduced the stockpiling.
Future picks were introduced to make trading easier among the clubs, and to enable clubs who have been nurturing an academy or father son player an ability to muster the points. Live trading was brought into enable clubs to be more flexible in how they built their lists.
That led to clubs like Sydney and West Coast gaming the system to hide the points and bring them back later in the draft. It’s just another evolution in the process that has seen improvement over the years. The AFL is responding by tightening up the rules again: no returns of picks in trades between clubs, each pick trade must be close to points value.

My point is that the clubs will always try to find a way to benefit from the rules and the AFL will always find ways to respond and close the loopholes. It’s not corrupt. It’s evolution.

 

[THE_GUN]

Sucks to be Richmond

Nobody wants to trade with you

 

[Cobwebs]

Sucks to be Richmond

Nobody wants to trade with you

Give you pick 97 for Dusty.

 

[Mego Red]

The AFL needs to go back to the system of doing bidding before the trade period because this system of trading before the bids come in to manipulate (which I acknowledge the Dees have benefitted from before, largely in 2015 where we improved our picks by colluding with GWS and GC) is nothing short of a farce. Should be made to do it with the picks (inc. 'future' picks traded in the year before) you have at the end of the season rather than being able to manipulate the system by which some clubs have use for the nominal value of picks rather than the arbitrary points value and thus clubs (all 18 of them) with F/S, NGA and NA prospects can needle a tapestry of 'win-win' trades to make sure they maximise the value of their picks by getting their man as well as other picks etc. To some extent clubs can try to trade a year in advance to have more/fewer points but that's still better than how blatantly corrupt it is now.

Nah, this is the best the system has been.

They'll keep tweaking it, but it's much better than in the past.

I'd personally like to see some of the discounts waived, but it's certainly not corrupt. That's a crazy overreaction.

 

[sregit]

Give you pick 97 for Dusty.

Melbourne could have drafted him twice but chose not to do so.

 

[Cobwebs]

Melbourne could have drafted him twice but chose not to do so.

We had an aversion to chop sticks at the time, but with Bennell joining our training squad we are becoming a little more worldly. Cheers.

 

[Senor M]

We had an aversion to chop sticks at the time, but with Bennell joining our training squad we are becoming a little more worldly. Cheers.

I think the Dees were more interested in Machetes around the years that Dusty was drafted

 

[Marc_Remillard]

So your saying you wouldnt trade 3 for 1 and 20 lol

So you're saying that you can 100% guarantee gc will finish last next year?

lol indeed

 

[TryAnHit]

So you're saying that you can 100% guarantee gc will finish last next year?

lol indeed

I mean isnt it obv thats the risk. If it was 100% then gc wouldn't trade

 

[THE_GUN]

Give you pick 97 for Dusty.

Nah your team had their chance to pick Dusty ..................................... Remember

 

[DangerSloane]

It's a great trade. Geelong would love pick 8. You seem to be dirty on Melbourne, is it because Harley Bennell decided that we are a better club to be at than you cats?

If Bennell is choosing your club I'd be more concerned than if he didnt.

 

[DangerSloane]

Sucks to be Richmond

Nobody wants to trade with you

Unfortunately being really good means you get crappy draft picks.
Can we swap? We take the flag and you take the draft picks?

 

[Marc_Remillard]

I mean isnt it obv thats the risk. If it was 100% then gc wouldn't trade

That's not what you stated in the post I was replying to

 

[Cobwebs]

If Bennell is choosing your club I'd be more concerned than if he didnt.

Going to surprise everyone this man. Got a kid and grown up by all reports. Bargain at the price or was worth a shot if he breaks down again. Great upside.

 

[DangerSloane]

Going to surprise everyone this man. Got a kid and grown up by all reports. Bargain at the price or was worth a shot if he breaks down again. Great upside.

Last I heard "got a kid and grew up" it was Ben Cousins. How did that turn out?

Worst again is cousins didnt have about 32 calf injuries under his belt.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Look he's a throwaway pick, you don't lose much for a 1 year deal

 

[DangerSloane]

Look he's a throwaway pick, you don't lose much for a 1 year deal

Except you might lose a big chunk of culture.
All for the possibility that he plays 4 games without tearing his calf.

No thanks.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Except you might lose a big chunk of culture.
All for the possibility that he plays 4 games without tearing his calf.

No thanks.

Or he might not...

People said the same about Pickett...

You back your culture in!

 

[DangerSloane]

Or he might not...

People said the same about Pickett...

You back your culture in!

Pickett who?

I dont know of any player that has had the consistent injuries and off-field issues that Bennell has.
In fact its hard to find a player with EITHER the injuries or off-field issues.

That and he hasnt played AFL in what 5 years?

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Pickett who?

I dont know of any player that has had the consistent injuries and off-field issues that Bennell has.
In fact its hard to find a player with EITHER the injuries or off-field issues.

That and he hasnt played AFL in what 5 years?

Marlion Pickett....was great in the GF

Honestly you are analysing this way too much. Think of your last 3-4 spots being on absolute fillers, I mean you blokes have enough! You take a gamble and go for the hoe run with Bennell, the talent is there. Worth a punt.

 

[DangerSloane]

Marlion Pickett....was great in the GF

Honestly you are analysing this way too much. Think of your last 3-4 spots being on absolute fillers, I mean you blokes have enough! You take a gamble and go for the hoe run with Bennell, the talent is there. Worth a punt.

Marlion Pickett had no history of 5 years worth of calf injuries.

Lets face it, if im over-analysing what are the other 15 or 16 clubs that aren't interested doing? Are they over-analysing too?

Really as a club I wouldnt be willing to risk anything at all to have him on the list.

At this stage the reward is almost impossible, whereas the risks are very real.