HoneyBadger35
They're not going to pick him, Mitch.
- Aug 11, 2011
- 28,140
- 79,221
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Moderator
- #1,669
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: Sydney v Port Adelaide - 7:40 / 7:10 Fri
Squiggle tips Swans at 57% chance -- What's your tip? -- Teams on Thurs »
LIVE: Geelong v Brisbane Lions - 7:30PM Sat
Squiggle tips Cats at 54% chance -- What's your tip? -- Teams on Thurs »
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Prelim Finals
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
AFLW 2024 - Round 4 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Unless you need points to match on an academy or father son kid, best forgetting about points values when looking at trades.P.S. Being UK-based means there's a lot of catching up each morning in trade week so can someone give me a quick primer on why Melbourne gave up two additional picks just to move up from 33 to 27?
Seems like a dud move from Melbourne's perspective.
It really shows how skewed the draft points calculator gets once it's 1 v 3, 2 v 4, 1 v 4 etc.
The pick calculator actually has 33 + 43 + 53 roughly equal to pick 14, which is clearly not the case but I would have thought Melbourne could get up to around pick 20 to 22 with those three picks.
Looks like we're doing the same as Collingwood.Yes only the amount of picks vs list spots . Afl changed it after the first year of points
Think it was GWS in the first year kept auctioning off their picks for points upgrades and took a dozen picks in and effectively got all their 5 academy players for 3 original picks .
Collingwood last year didn't sign any of their OOC players until after the draft so they could take lots of picks for daicos .
That's why we might get a good trade for Robertson. They get points but also a list spot
The points system definitely gets skewed massively when the difference in the quantity of picks is two or greater.Unless you need points to match on an academy or father son kid, best forgetting about points values when looking at trades.
I'd be guessing band 4, End of second round.If it was a free agency pick on the reported contract it'd be band 3 and we'd have pick 21....
AFL system is truly *ed.
Simmo is that you?No everyone is wrong except me.
This is a good point and actually means the PSD threat means something to Port now.Given North will have the cap space and their feelings towards Port about now, they’ll take him
FYI we won't be able to trade our F2 if we send our F1 for JHF as expected.
On SM-G975F using BigFooty.com mobile app
I think it was the North F2 acquired by Port in the JHF trade being mentioned ..
Geez Gov kicked that ball like a bag of flour.
How many list spots will you have ?Looks like we're doing the same as Collingwood.
20 is way too much and we can't give 26 to Port as that was the original source.Is it a possibility that we somehow get Marshall or Georgiades out of this Rioli trade rather than the pick 33?
Would most likely require an addition of pick 20/26.
5 I think.How many list spots will you have ?
I'm running with the theory Eagles have a side deal with Brisbane (15) or Essendon (22) for their pick lined up, so are chasing points in the Rioli trade.
Ports current 33 & 43 equivalent to pick 20 in points. Might be packaged up for Essendons pick.
Or throw in our 38, points equivalent to pick 10. Swap for Brisbane's 15.
Go to draft with 2, 15, 20, & 26 or 2, 20, 22, 26 & 38.
Could it just be, and stay with me here, that instead of an FU to WC...Ports actually trying to find a way to help satisfy WC and still do the JHF trade?
I know people hate the points thing, but they do now have more draft capital to play with after that trade
This could be the case. Port have been quiet on what they intend to trade for Rioli and certainly since the weekend all questions put to them have been about JHF. Aside from WCE supporters no one else has much interest in the Rioli tradeCould it just be, and stay with me here, that instead of an FU to WC...Ports actually trying to find a way to help satisfy WC and still do the JHF trade?
I know people hate the points thing, but they do now have more draft capital to play with after that trade
20 is way too much and we can't give 26 to Port as that was the original source.
So you need 3000+ points in 5 picks ?5 I think.
Two things to remember:
Number 1.
Port *ed us over in the Ebert deal we were offered a second and a third for Ebert and our 45. Then Port did a sneaky deal and traded for a lower pick third rounder than what we thought we were getting, Port said and rightly so, that they never stipulated WHICH third we were getting, more fool us because we assumed it was a higher 3rd and then Port trumped us by trading in a lower third. We ended up with picks 28 and 47 for Ebert and 45.
Number 2.
Sure rather than pick 27 = 703 points
Port generously give us:
pick 48 = 302 points
pick 54 = 220 points
pick 56 = 194 points
Total points = 716 points
Port feel chuffed because they actually offer us more points to use in the draft......wow.... "what guys they are" as we are better off points wise.
There is a reason people hate the points system.
You can only ever judge a Club on its history of trading with you as to an indicator as to what they may do going forward, and the fact that they have stiffed us before, does nothing to quell my concerns that they are doing so again.