List Mgmt. Trade and F/A 2020 Cont’d

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shinboner1 said:
Doubt Collingwood would get as much as you think with a downgrade of pick 14 and 16, could see it maybe going to a 10 or 11.
No way you're getting something inside of the top 8 unless you're throwing in a 2021 first or 2nd.
If I was an essendon I would do 14,16 and 2021 first for pick 7 or 8 etc.
Click to expand...

So 3 first round picks for a pick 7 or pick 8? Woweee.

Next time, please use lube.
 
Scribe26 said:
You're saying that you'd rather have:

Pick 14, 16 & Daicos, Reef

Rather than:

Pick (3-6), Daicos, Reef


I'm trading 14 & 16 for a top 5 every single day of the week and twice on a Sunday.

Again, my father, who has early on-set dementia, understood this concept the first time I explained it to him.
Click to expand...
Hopefully your father pulled you up on your logic.

Your first scenario does not include anything we could trade our 2021 first for. It’s only “gone” as you put it, if we take it into the 2021 draft. This is the argument pro-Beams posters made, the pick would have been “gone” anyway because of Quaynor... well yes, but that doesn’t mean we were obligated to use it on Beams.

Your second scenario includes a top-five pick gained in part by the use of our 2021 first. So you see how you have your entire fist on the scales in your comparison.
 
stormskye said:
how is next years first just gone? The whole point of having access to a father son/academy is you can use that picks value in other areas. It’s not gone. You don’t just throw it out like it has no value...

I couldn’t disagree more with using 3 first rounders to move into the top 5.

talk about not learning from the past.

Jeremy Cameron a proven AFL elite forward took 3 firsts in a trade but second rounders were given back. Even this was overs and I would never give up 3, let alone for some unproven kid...
Click to expand...

I could be wrong, but I've never seen the club trade into a top 5 pick. Which past are you referring to?


Just for argument's sake, in hindsight, what would you have paid for the access to Buddy Franklin in the draft?

I'm obviously not saying we're going to draft Buddy Franklin, but let's have a look at his draft as an example.

Franklin went at number 5.

At 11, 14 and 16, were Adam Thomson, Angus Monfries and Adam Pattison.

Would you have traded Thomson, Monfries and Pattison for Franklin?

If you're recruiter comes to you and says "Look, there's some generational talent in the top 6 of this draft and a lot of speculative picks thereafter - get me in there and I can find you something special.", my thought is that you trust the guy to do his job.


If anything, history says that Derek Hyne is actually pretty good with high picks - and giving him access to a top-heavy draft is a very good idea.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Shinboner1 said:
Doubt Collingwood would get as much as you think with a downgrade of pick 14 and 16, could see it maybe going to a 10 or 11.
No way you're getting something inside of the top 8 unless you're throwing in a 2021 first or 2nd.
If I was an essendon I would do 14,16 and 2021 first for pick 7 or 8 etc.
Click to expand...
11 and 30 got pick 6 in 2013.

14 and 16 should comfortably do better than 10 or 11.
 
Chrispiesssss said:
I understand what you’re saying.

However, we haven’t had much first round talent. I think having a few shots at the draft board isn’t the worst thing for us atm.

We have only drafted 4 first round picks on our list from the 2010s.
Click to expand...

IMO, it’s a valid take that will receive a lot of support, but for me I’m taking a King (as a comparison) twin over three mid teens picks every day of the week. The stumbling block is clearly the 2021 pick and again there’s the busts and smokies element to this draft. Talent wise we’re no longer a contender, but we still sit in that 5-10 bracket which nets you a 10-15 pick on draft night (after FA and FS bids). If we start the year poorly though this trade period will be nightmare fuel for a horrendous season. That’s what the club would be weighing up and I can guarantee the three for one deal is on the agenda!

Who knows the happy medium might wind up as a two for one where we trade 16 and our 2021 1st to get into the top 10. It’s also worth remembering that clubs will think we’re on the slide so will come to us for that 2021 first meaning we have the whip hand. Only spit balling, but North might think we’re bottom 4 in 2021 so they part with 2 for that pick and 14. That leaves them with Stephenson, 11 and 14 this year plus in their own minds two top 5 picks next year. I mean that could be the case if we had someone competent in the drivers seat...
 
Scribe26 said:
I could be wrong, but I've never seen the club trade into a top 5 pick. Which past are you referring to?


Just for argument's sake, in hindsight, what would you have paid for the access to Buddy Franklin in the draft?

I'm obviously not saying we're going to draft Buddy Franklin, but let's have a look at his draft as an example.

Franklin went at number 5.

At 11, 14 and 16, were Adam Thomson, Angus Monfries and Adam Pattison.

Would you have traded Thomson, Monfries and Pattison for Franklin?

If you're recruiter comes to you and says "Look, there's some generational talent in the top 6 of this draft and a lot of speculative picks thereafter - get me in there and I can find you something special.", my thought is that you trust the guy to do his job.


If anything, history says that Derek Hyne is actually pretty good with high picks - and giving him access to a top-heavy draft is a very good idea.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t even trade 3 first rounders for Cameron like geel did and they got picks back.

given our recent history of just throwing away multiple picks on players, and list needs I’d much prefer we have 14, 16 and get another with next years first if possible. IF there was a player we belived a steal in top 10 and we could trade up with two picks then maybe, but not 3. No way.

I still see value in this draft at those picks and believe we can grab atleast 3 list needs. Even if we got to pick 2 somehow there’s no guarantee McDonald is there. To many eggs in one basket for me. But that’s just my opinion and you and others differ 👍.

3 first rounders was a record for Cameron who’s a proven star, to me it’s just insane to do it for an unproven kid.
 
Shinboner1 said:
Doubt Collingwood would get as much as you think with a downgrade of pick 14 and 16, could see it maybe going to a 10 or 11.
No way you're getting something inside of the top 8 unless you're throwing in a 2021 first or 2nd.
If I was an essendon I would do 14,16 and 2021 first for pick 7 or 8 etc.
Click to expand...
I get the feeling you're right. That's pretty much what GWS had to do last year to get their early pick. Jeez these early picks are overvalued.
 
pies 4 ever said:
No.1 You are rude and condescending with your comments about your fathers Dementia.
No 2 You do realize that we can trade next years first into this years draft and, as we have, 2 x 2nd, 1 x 3rd & 1 x 4th rounders have sufficient points for N Daicos. As a matter of fact we can also trade either our extra 2nd or our 3rd in to this years draft, if we are confident that (a) we can get more point by what we trade out next year or (b) we can go into deficit if we want to (not recommended).
(3) So we can have 14, 16, trade value for our 2021 1st (say pick 10) & either 2nd or 3rd in this years draft if we want.
(4) We could probably get a Cox or Reid (KP talls), Ford or Perkins Mids), McInnes, Callow/Baldwin (KPF) & N. Daicos, and probably a late pick.
Click to expand...

The point is to get into the top 3 of this draft.

I'm aware of other scenarios. Thanks.
 
unplugged said:
Yes it can work against you (you fall to sh*t Adelaide style and get a top 5 pick), but: Let other clubs "hope" or predict that you're going to go backwards. Let them think it's potentially good value. And then either perform similarly to 2020 or improve. It's the risk both parties take.

Let's face it, at the end of 2019 no one would've suspected Geelong's first round pick would be tied to 2nd place. And vice versa not many would've truly expected the value of GWS' Pick.
Click to expand...

Risk is not worth the reward in my opinion.
 
Scodog10 said:
IMO, it’s a valid take that will receive a lot of support, but for me I’m taking a King (as a comparison) twin over three mid teens picks every day of the week. The stumbling block is clearly the 2021 pick and again there’s the busts and smokies element to this draft. Talent wise we’re no longer a contender, but we still sit in that 5-10 bracket which nets you a 10-15 pick on draft night (after FA and FS bids). If we start the year poorly though this trade period will be nightmare fuel for a horrendous season. That’s what the club would be weighing up and I can guarantee the three for one deal is on the agenda!

Who knows the happy medium might wind up as a two for one where we trade 16 and our 2021 1st to get into the top 10. It’s also worth remembering that clubs will think we’re on the slide so will come to us for that 2021 first meaning we have the whip hand. Only spit balling, but North might think we’re bottom 4 in 2021 so they part with 2 for that pick and 14. That leaves them with Stephenson, 11 and 14 this year plus in their own minds two top 5 picks next year. I mean that could be the case if we had someone competent in the drivers seat...
Click to expand...
I think clubs will consider us a chance to plummet, but they'd have to be mug punters to be confident enough to bet on it with an asset like pick 2.
 
Chrispiesssss said:
Okay, thanks for being rude again.

Your method gives us 3 first round players.

My method:

Pick 14
Pick 16
Reef
Pick 11 (2021 1st rounder) used this year
Daicos

So my method gives us 5 first round picks, yours gives us 3.

5 is better than 3.
Click to expand...
Is it though? Let’s say you have 5 lottery tickets. One of them is a better than 1 in 2 chance of winning (Daicos), one is 1 in 10 (Reef). 2 more are 1 in 10, and one is 1 in 5 (assuming that our 2021 nets a top 10).
Would you trade two 10% chance tickets and the one 20% chance ticket for another ticket with a better than 50% chance of winning big?

That’s what this draft is about. Listening to recruiters talk at the moment it seems like the top 5 are all really top tier, but you could almost put a blanket over 6-25 because of the lack of exposure this year. Any Vic kid taken outside that top tier seems to be a real lottery chance. Your method of getting more tickets for more chances is valid, but so is the method of reducing your tickets for a higher chance of winning with an early ticket.

At the end of the day, if we were in North’s position in a total rebuild and needed as much talent in the door as possible I’d probably take the 5 kids. In our current position, I’m more inclined to take the 3 with the higher chance of winning the jackpot.
 
sr36 said:
I think clubs will consider us a chance to plummet, but they'd have to be mug punters to be confident enough to bet on it with an asset like pick 2.
Click to expand...

Trading futures in the 1st round is a mugs game regardless yet we continue to see it anyway. I guarantee there’ll be a club desperate for that pick and the real questions are whether:

A) it’s the right club (it’s a pointless exercise if it’s say St Kilda or Carlton)
B) we can capitalise on it.

I reckon we’ll be fine with A, but B... Too many variables are at play for the black and white views some have, IMO.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Apex36 said:
Is it though? Let’s say you have 5 lottery tickets. One of them is a better than 1 in 2 chance of winning (Daicos), one is 1 in 10 (Reef). 2 more are 1 in 10, and one is 1 in 5 (assuming that our 2021 nets a top 10).
Would you trade two 10% chance tickets and the one 20% chance ticket for another ticket with a better than 50% chance of winning big?

That’s what this draft is about. Listening to recruiters talk at the moment it seems like the top 5 are all really top tier, but you could almost put a blanket over 6-25 because of the lack of exposure this year. Any Vic kid taken outside that top tier seems to be a real lottery chance. Your method of getting more tickets for more chances is valid, but so is the method of reducing your tickets for a higher chance of winning with an early ticket.

At the end of the day, if we were in North’s position in a total rebuild and needed as much talent in the door as possible I’d probably take the 5 kids. In our current position, I’m more inclined to take the 3 with the higher chance of winning the jackpot.
Click to expand...
What you're saying is valid, but the idea that the early picks are 5 times more likely to make it than the teens picks doesn't, but then again this draft may be different as some of the top picks have exposed 2020 senior form, whilst most in teens don't, so the teens picks are riskier than normal.
 
Scribe26 said:
The point is to get into the top 3 of this draft.

I'm aware of other scenarios. Thanks.
Click to expand...
I went back and added this to my post, I probably should have posted it by itself
"(5) Just for the record which of these would you pay 3 x 1st round picks for.
2009 Scully, 2010 Swallow, 2011 Patton, 2012 Whitfield, 2013 Boyd, 2014 McCartin, 2015 Wietering, 2016 McGrath, 2017 Raynor, 2018 Walsh."

PS Your example of Franklin was the exception rather than the rule.
 
BEEG said:
Guys why would we trade next years 1st when lets face it we have no idea where it will come in.

I have no doubt we can trade it next year for the following years draft.
Click to expand...
A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
 
Scodog10 said:
Trading futures in the 1st round is a mugs game regardless yet we continue to see it anyway. I guarantee there’ll be a club desperate for that pick and the real questions are whether:

A) it’s the right club (it’s a pointless exercise if it’s say St Kilda or Carlton)
B) we can capitalise on it.

I reckon we’ll be fine with A, but B... Too many variables are at play for the black and white views some have, IMO.
Click to expand...
In the cold light of day once the sense of trade week tragedy has left, I can't see any team willing to bet heavily on us plummeting. Player wise we haven't lost that much, plus game plan wise the only way is up. We've lost one of our very good players, but with a bit of luck with injury, we'll add two back in - Howe and Steele. The other two we've lost were just currently role players. You'd essentially either be betting on this being an Adelaide camp type of scenario for our club or injuries.
 
sr36 said:
What you're saying is valid, but the idea that the early picks are 5 times more likely to make it than the teens picks doesn't, but then again this draft may be different as some of the top picks have exposed 2020 senior form, whilst most in teens don't, so the teens picks are riskier than normal.
Click to expand...
The odds I posted are largely irrelevant and not accurate. They were just to make a point.
 
The Royal Sampler said:
11 and 30 got pick 6 in 2013.

14 and 16 should comfortably do better than 10 or 11.
Click to expand...

That 11+30 for 6 trade looks incredible value compared with what seems to happen today. Interestingly though, 11 and 30 worked out significantly better than 6 - highlighting the risk of paying the heap more we'd have to in order to move up. I personally think clubs are ridiculously overvaluing the early picks.
 
Shinboner1 said:
I mean I'd be happy to give a late 2nd or 3rd in return but if you're only really going to be drafting 1-2 kids this year due to list cuts and restrictions then its a case of getting the earliest pick you can.
Click to expand...
Yep, for this reason, I think we've chosen the wrong draft to try to trade up into. Lower picks are less valuable than normal and higher picks are more valuable, becasue clubs will be willing to give up their lower picks that they're not going to use to move up a couple of places in the draft. And for some teams that includes picks in the 20s and 30s.
 
Shinboner1 said:
I mean I'd be happy to give a late 2nd or 3rd in return but if you're only really going to be drafting 1-2 kids this year due to list cuts and restrictions then its a case of getting the earliest pick you can.
Click to expand...

Who said we are only going to draft 1-2 kids?

We’ve been on record post trade period saying we really like this draft and are trying to get into it further. I can see us taking at least 3 picks and our NGA selection.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Matt_352 said:
Yeah but 14 and 16 and 2021 first for a Pick 2 is overs as it is lol
Click to expand...
Maybe but the ability to bring in a real franchise generational player for a club like Collingwood can't be understated this year.
Would go a long way to changing the opinion of a lot of the fanbase about the future of the club and direction its taking.
 
Shinboner1 said:
Maybe but the ability to bring in a real franchise generational player for a club like Collingwood can't be understated this year.
Would go a long way to changing the opinion of a lot of the fanbase about the future of the club and direction its taking.
Click to expand...
Even if we got Logan at 2 and he turned out to be amazing, would still not change my stance on Edward and Nafan
 
Matt_352 said:
Even if we got Logan at 2 and he turned out to be amazing, would still not change my stance on Edward and Nafan
Click to expand...
A lot of people would be very very happy if it happened though.
Finally you'd get that tall forward you've been wanting for years and years.
 
pies 4 ever said:
I went back and added this to my post, I probably should have posted it by itself
"(5) Just for the record which of these would you pay 3 x 1st round picks for.
2009 Scully, 2010 Swallow, 2011 Patton, 2012 Whitfield, 2013 Boyd, 2014 McCartin, 2015 Wietering, 2016 McGrath, 2017 Raynor, 2018 Walsh."

PS Your example of Franklin was the exception rather than the rule.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Hits and misses on all drafts etc. No one is disputing that.

For every Max King, there is three McCartins.

I imagine this is why AFL clubs spend money on talent identification.

If you trust your talent identification and a head of recruiting identifies a Lance Franklin in among a sea of McCartins, I'm of the opinion that you back that identification in and you do what you can to bring in a generational talent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

TradeDraft
List Mgmt. 2025 Trade/FA Thread
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
284
Views
16K
Jen2310
Jen2310
Exambolor
Autopsy Collingwood Past Trades Circular Discussion
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
Jelly Bean
Jelly Bean
Jen2310
List Mgmt. 2025 AFL Draft *F/S watch*
Replies
7
Views
773
Jen2310
Jen2310
SchuPie
Trade + FA targets 2024
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
148
Views
11K
Pedro
Pedro
Jen2310
  • Locked
List Mgmt. COLLINGWOOD Trade and F/A Discussion 2023
858 859 860 861 862
Replies
22K
Views
867K
Jen2310
Jen2310
J
Next Key Forward to be traded in
2
Replies
45
Views
4K
jakson68
J
Black_White
  • Poll
Game Day Grand Final 2024: Who Do You Want To Win and Why?
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
185
Views
5K
Tadpole
Tadpole

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top