Opinion Trade Aggressively

[Fred Ziffel]

Or he walks into the the PSD if Melbourne's demands are totally over the top and we offer him a $3.0mil 1 yr contract like Taylor suggested.

He is being rated as a once in a generation player. Some prick would snatch him from us.
It is far too risky.

 

[Superkoops]

We've been picking endurance footballers for a while in anticipation of the number of rotations going down. His endurance is poor. But he's so good at reading the play he doesn't do unnecessary running. I'd love to have him in the team, and it's a miss. But getting him would go against the philosophy of a hard running team which is what our list is built on.

Nice post. This is really what I was trying to say. Draft Howler wasn't my wording but Freo were made aware of McGovern like all draftees and I don't care that 15 other clubs overlooked him I only care about Freo and his contested marking has always stood out. I can see why he was overlooked as you say, just wish he wasn't.

But what has it given us in the past?

Say we paid what North wanted for Black last week? This place would have been in uproar.

Would you have felt better just because we did something?

And what if he turned out to another in a long line of our KPF busts? What have we gained?

I'd prefer the club to go full balls out at undeniable talent and miss out, than pay overs for someone who MIGHT come good, but probably won't.

It's a pretty classic managerial risk management model that we are following of late.

Brilliantly put. Freo had a fair and appropriate limit and stuck to their guns, good on them. They put their eggs into the one basket but fell short - and sounds like the other party had their earmuffs in.

There was an article about Carlton's terrible drafting and trading between 2008 and 2012. One way or another each of their first picks have all gone and then they pick up the likes of Andrejs Everitt and Liam Jones in recent years.

 

[Grape Bear]

Let's not forget that we have a Fyfe contract to negotiate in 2017, too.

 

[TheMcManusNose]

But what has it given us in the past?

Say we paid what North wanted for Black last week?

This place would have been in uproar.

Would you have felt better just because we did something?

And what if he turned out to another in a long line of our KPF busts? What have we gained?

I'd prefer the club to go full balls out at undeniable talent and miss out, than pay overs for someone who MIGHT come good, but probably won't.

It's a pretty classic managerial risk management model that we are following of late.

Without wanting to keep beating the ex-horse...

To answer the question - I wouldn't have felt better just because we did something, rather I would have felt better because we would have had another opportunity to trial someone in that position. Same way I don't think either the Gumbleton trade or the Sylvia signing were bad ideas, I would do them again in the context of the time. We would have gained another lotto ticket in the great draft/development lottery. And that's what I think a fundamental component of talent identification is: pure dumb luck. If you throw enough shit at a wall some of it will stick. Equally you can apply that argument to Apeness and Taberner - that we need to give them the opportunity to stick. And I would agree. But I think there are more free KPF 'spots' in the Freo side, the Peel side and the Peel ressies side where you can give players the opportunity to do so.

In terms of the specific example of Black, no I would not like to have paid North's alleged price. However the only reports we have of such things are 3rd hand. Whether the report of us 'cooling on Black' is related to asking price or simply the direction we want to take isn't something we can be definitive about. If it'the latter i'm disappointed, if it's the former I understand and the point is a bit moot. However, I look at the moment of someone like Walker, who has moved away from his home state without specifically requesting a trade, who cost Brisbane a 2016 3rd - a pick they may not even use next year. If not Black, there's a trade I think we should have been in on. For all I know we were, but in the context of our trading history i'm leaning towards no. As you point out, we may be gun shy in that respect. Personally, I don't think going balls out for the definite talent is mutually exclusive with going for guys who might work out. Certainly not paying overs is a consideration, but it's examples like Walker (and Jenkins, and Lynch) that suggest to me you don't necessarily have to.

 

[Lach72]

From Lloyd's interview it seems he doesn't believe trading is worthwhile to bring in people to the back end of the list...

Black's game I saw this year were absolutely appalling...horrible...
I wouldn't have given more than a 3rd round for him.

 

[Allikat]

I'm one of the few that's happy with what we did in the trade period. The only person that was available and an upgrade to the list was McCarthy who we went as hard as reasonable for. No one else that was available e.g. Black, was an upgrade on the few talls we already have. Honestly a random draft pick up in the 50's can show as much promise as Black.

 

[apparentlydead]

I'm one of the few that's happy with what we did in the trade period. The only person that was available and an upgrade to the list was McCarthy who we went as hard as reasonable for. No one else that was available e.g. Black, was an upgrade on the few talls we already have. Honestly a random draft pick up in the 50's can show as much promise as Black.

You're far from alone sister.

 

[Square Peg]

I'm one of the few that's happy with what we did in the trade period. The only person that was available and an upgrade to the list was McCarthy who we went as hard as reasonable for. No one else that was available e.g. Black, was an upgrade on the few talls we already have. Honestly a random draft pick up in the 50's can show as much promise as Black.

I agree, Bennell was the one we needed most and we got him, and we didn't pay the ridiculous overs requested for Cam or Black

 

[Nickos66]

I would be confident in saying we are planning for these two players right now.
We are probably a chance of Cameron next year which would require our first round pick or a quality player.
Jess Hogan would take at least two 1st rounders which we could organize with utilizing 2017 & 2018 picks plus player(s).
This means going for Cam in 2016 and Jesse in 2017. I would say it is impossible to get both these Boys in the same year.

It'll also be impossible to get them in concurrent years as per the AFL policies on trading 1st rounders, hence my post. We've traded 1 already as of the 1st year of inception of these new rules, which now means we can only trade 1 more 1st rounder in the next 3 years.

I foresee there will be much heartache.. and then the inevitable hindsight warriors to come in the near future.

 

[Purple Jesus]

I agree, Bennell was the one we needed most and we got him, and we didn't pay the ridiculous overs requested for Cam or Black

Agreed, we now have far and away the scariest midfield in the comp - super deep also.

 

[Fred Ziffel]

It'll also be impossible to get them in concurrent years as per the AFL policies on trading 1st rounders, hence my post. We've traded 1 already as of the 1st year of inception of these new rules, which now means we can only trade 1 more 1st rounder in the next 3 years.

I foresee there will be much heartache.. and then the inevitable hindsight warriors to come in the near future.

I think you are allowed to trade your 1st pick in the current draft but restriction applies to forward trading of 1st round. IE; we can use pick 1 in 2017 and 1st pick 2018. In 2018 we would not be able to forward trade pick 1 of 2019 but we could use it (2019) as a trade in that year.

 

[Nickos66]

I think you are allowed to trade your 1st pick in the current draft but restriction applies to forward trading of 1st round. IE; we can use pick 1 in 2017 and 1st pick 2018. In 2018 we would not be able to forward trade pick 1 of 2019 but we could use it (2019) as a trade in that year.

That's one interpretation of it that i'd love to favour. I hope you're right.