So the bombers want to trade heavily...but....

[Daytripper]

Cole wasnt a 17 year old kid when drafted. He was a fat lazy slob with a proven track record.

For example I've never bagged Essendon for recruiting Kepler Bradley. With kids you win some and you lose some. The more kids you draft the more chance you have of success. If you fill the list with fat slobs, you minimise the win/loss chances from drafing kids.

All that said, Cook's only 19 years old and progressing reasonably well.

20 actually. Been on the list for three years and five games.

Progressing well though.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

In regards to this post how can you possibly say that the 4 places we made up had no bearing on whether or not we would have landed Dempsey?

Fair enough, it was a guesstimate on my behalf.

Assuming the Richards trade was reasonable (and assuming he really wanted to leave the Bombers). But having three picks in the top 25, Essendon blew a chance to really capitalise by blowing the last of those three picks on Cole.

 

[kelvin_sheedy]

I wonder if the bombers regret trading Teddy Richards. The guy has been our best player this season and has really found another level.

Not one bit.

I think at best he's only a good average player that will struggle to be part of a premiership side.

We got Dempsey out of the trade and just watch this boy go in the next few years.

 

[Longy413]

Fair enough, it was a guesstimate on my behalf.

Assuming the Richards trade was reasonable (and assuming he really wanted to leave the Bombers). But having three picks in the top 25, Essendon blew a chance to really capitalise by blowing the last of those three picks on Cole.

It's a guess though.

We could have taken Lonergan with the Cole pick.
Lucy with Lonergan's pick and Hocking with the Lucy pick and ended up in the same spot.

 

[Daytripper]

Fair enough, it was a guesstimate on my behalf.

Assuming the Richards trade was reasonable (and assuming he really wanted to leave the Bombers). But having three picks in the top 25, Essendon blew a chance to really capitalise by blowing the last of those three picks on Cole.

Which could have been Ryan Cook. Have you seen the players drafted 10 spots directly after that as well ?

There aren't any champions there.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

20 actually. Been on the list for three years and five games.

Progressing well though.

He was the youngest draftee of his draft year, being picked up as a seventeen year old. Last year was his first real season - and Pies being strong he played just a handful of games. Picked up 18 possessions in his only game so far this year, doing well agiainst Stanton. He's progressing well.

No rule says that you had to choose him, anyway. There are thirty players picked at 23 or below that would be more effective in 2008 than Richie Cole.

 

[Aussie Assault]

Funnily enough, their players that will attract the most interest at the trade table are the ones they won't want to get rid of.

If they want a 'top 10 pick for player trade', they'll have to part with (& convince another club to go along) one of Lloyd, Lucas, Fletcher, McVeigh, Gumbleton or Ryder. The 3 stalwarts are old now and wouldn't attract the interest that matches their quality, but there's no chance of any of them being traded anyway, and there's no point in trading a promising former high draft pick to potentially draft another one, that's just stupid.

Assuming Essendon finished where they are now and won only 4 games, they'd have picks 4, 20, 24, 40 & 56. If they are active at the trade table, they will be more likely to trade a player like Monfries, Lovett, Welsh etc. (ie of use) and a pick for a pick or picks. E.g. Player + 40 for 25, or player + 24 for 15 & 45 etc.

Most sensible post in this thread.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

There aren't any champions there.

Not ready-made. They are 20-21 year olds.

In modern football you have to build teams, not buy them.

Just have a look at the number of promoted rookies in the AFL. Essendon seems to be down on numbers of promoted rookies and successful late picks by comparison to most other teams.

 

[yaco55]

Hawthorn has performed extremely well in recent trades, but people dont understand that they drafted for ' needs' rather than the best available player.

Hawthorn was courageous enough to draft for needs with first round picks eg; key position players in the first and second round, when conventional trading is that you draft the best available player in round 1 and 2 and then draft for need.

Good luck to them.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

It's a guess though.

We could have taken Lonergan with the Cole pick.
Lucy with Lonergan's pick and Hocking with the Lucy pick and ended up in the same spot.

So you wasted an opportunity to pay more for Lonergan than what he was worth????? Woudl picking him up a round earlier make him a better player???

 

[Longy413]

He was the youngest draftee of his draft year, being picked up as a seventeen year old.

Ryan Cook is that good, he's the youngest draftee of his draft year despite being born before Patrick Ryder.

 

[Daytripper]

He was the youngest draftee of his draft year, being picked up as a seventeen year old. Last year was his first real season - and Pies being strong he played just a handful of games. Picked up 18 possessions in his only game so far this year, doing well agiainst Stanton. He's progressing well.

I think you missed those 4 possessions against Hawthorn last match. Don't worry, every one else did too.

No rule says that you had to choose him, anyway. There are thirty players picked at 23 or below that would be more effective in 2008 than Richie Cole.

30 players........
Have you seen that draft from pick 25 and beyond ?

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

30 players........
Have you seen that draft from pick 25 and beyond ?

All better than Richard Cole. Better the devil you dont know.

 

[bomba4eva]

All better than Richard Cole. Better the devil you dont know.

Stop before you further humiliate yourself.

 

[Big Red is back]

Who on their list would be worth a top 5 pick or a top 10 pick???

Lloyd? No.
Lucas? Great player but is 30 yo and only has a few years left. No
Fletcher? Retiring soon.
Hille? No.
Stanton? Possibly top 10. Debatable.
Monfries?. Been disappointing. No

Really struggling with this one because obviously Knights won't want to give away a Paddy Ryder or Gumbleton because they are the future.

So who's left?

Why trade Stanton he is a high quality 22 year old mid... what are u looking to replace him with ... a high quality mid... oh they already have one

 

[Longy413]

So you wasted an opportunity to pay more for Lonergan than what he was worth????? Woudl picking him up a round earlier make him a better player???

Who knows how highly we rated him.

We might have rated him highly enough to take him that early.

Lucy was rated as a top 20 chance before the draft, we needed a tall defender. We might have taken him there.

Taking Cole was a punt that was worth the risk and we are in no worse shape, in fact we're in the same position, for having taken that risk.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Which could have been Ryan Cook. Have you seen the players drafted 10 spots directly after that as well ?

There aren't any champions there.

Picked up after 25 and prgressing well:

Garrick Ibbotson
Ben McKinley
Trent West
Bernie Vince
Sam Gibert
Rhan Hooper
Alipate CArlile
Andrew Swallow
Ryan GAmble
Loel Patful
Matthew Stokes
Clint Bartram

And in the rookie draft:
Ryan JAckson
Angus Graham
JAson Roe
Rd Lower
Todd Grima
Matthew Priddus
Stephen Gilham
Cheynee Stiller
Ben McGlynn
Ed Barlow

.....not to mention those who are still yet to deliver.

Not a bad draft year when you look at it properly. Theres 22 players as a minimum who would fit the Essendon list right now and be better options than Richie Cole. And thats not counting 3 or 4 Collingwood players - just to remove any allegations of bias.

 

[MarkT]

The motivation for recruiting Richard Cole was the free Mark McVeigh to play in the midfield because at the time he was our only option as a small backman to play on the likes of Brad Johnson, Jeff Farmer etc.

Mark Johnson had lost his ability to match guys on the lead and was playing forward. Andrew Welsh didn't have the pace to go with them.

Mark McVeigh had the skills and toughness we needed in the midfield.

Richard Cole was seen as a replacement for McVeigh.

In the end, Slattery developed and took the spot Cole was earmarked for.

We didn't actually lose out on anything in drafted Richard Cole.

You have failed to recognise this.

The only thing we lost out is having an extra pick in the draft, but delisting Cole we got that pick anyway. Albeit two years later in Hocking (rookie promotion) or Bellchambers (our last pick in the draft). Right now, we have the same net result from a list management point of view, a young developing player on our list, regardless of whether or not we took Cole.

And I happen to think Hocking and Bellchambers will be better players than Cook. Although it's unlikely we would have taken Cook with that pick.

Richard Cole stayed with Beverley Night before being drafted.
Essendon were going to draft Cole.
Collingwood got in first – possibly as much as anything because they thought Essendon might pull one over the comp.
Collingwood didn’t realise Essendon’s days of quality drafting were gone.
Collingwood were drafting poorly at the time.
Cole got plenty of chances but couldn’t make it. He was a dud and by the time he left Collingwood surely everyone knew it. In his last year at Collingwood Cole was pathetic. He was fat and disinterested but he was never much chop before that anyway.
Essendon still thought he could play.

Board members should not get involved.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Who knows how highly we rated him.

The 2005 draft tells us how high Essendon and every other club rated him.

 

[MarkT]

Couldn't keep Richards.
We traded him rather than losing him.
Got Dempsey and Lonergan, win.

Cole pushed McVeigh into the midfield.
Cole injured pushed Slattery into the backline.

Win.

Please prove otherwise.

It’s in the Sheedy sacking and it’s in the ladder.

You fall down the ladder due to poor list management. Admittedly it harder from up the ladder but them’s the breaks.

 

[Roughouse]

Does Mcveigh suffer from depression? Has he got a dodgy knee?
Corect me if I'm wrong but Hawthorn only put up big name damaged goods aside from Croad who was just in average form.

Caveat Emptor

 

[Longy413]

The 2005 draft tells us how high Essendon and every other club rated him.

No it doesn't.

We might have rated him as the 20th best player in the draft.
But we didn't have a pick until when he was taken.

The 5th highest rated player doesn't get drafted at pick 5.

It’s in the Sheedy sacking and it’s in the ladder.

You fall down the ladder due to poor list management. Admittedly it harder from up the ladder but them’s the breaks.

We are in no worse position for having traded Richard Cole.

He was a player we needed, we come out the other end with a promoted rookie from the same draft and are in the same net position.

Murphy and Allan (although good for a while), Zantuck, Salmon I'll wear.
Our 1998-2001 drafting I'll wear.

But not Cole, he was young, we needed his type, we took a punt. We aren't any worse for having him.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

We are in no worse position for having traded Richard Cole.

And Collingwood is on no worse position for having traded Mal Michael for Jarrad Molloy.

It even sounds convincing if you say it fast enough.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I'd also suggest that as handy as Mal Michael has been for the Bombers, he was also another waste of a draft pick at a time when the club should have been looking at youth.

Of course that spot was opened up artificially when Ramanaskus was inexplicably allowed to be dropped to the rookie list, making him the oldest and most experienced premiership winning rookie in the history of the game.

But thats another story.

 

[Longy413]

And Collingwood is on no worse position for having traded Mal Michael for Jarrad Molloy.

It even sounds convincing if you say it fast enough.

Best Case Scenario - We drafted an 18 year old kid in 2005 who is still developing and hasn't cemented a position in our started side as per those drafted post pick 23.

Worst Case Scenario - Cole spends two years at Essendon, is delisted. Delisting him opens a spot on the list to promote a rookie. A rookie taken in 2005 who is the same age as the 2005 draftees and is developing.

Mal Michael is a better footballer than Jarrad Molloy.

Heath Hocking is a developing footballer that has filled the position opened up by Cole, that if we had not drafted Cole would be filled by another developing kid that no one can guarantee would be better or worse because we don't know who that kid is.

So how are we in a worse spot?

We aren't. We still have the same number of young players on our list that we would if we didn't trade for Cole.