List Mgmt. Trade and F/A - Part 3

[swoop42]

I'm not sure there is a "go-home" factor with McDonald. He's said he doesn't care where he goes and that he aims to be a 1 club player.

That's been mentioned before but personally I wouldn't be reading to much into it.

At present he's just a teenager excited about the prospect of living out his dream but once the grind starts, the setbacks happen, other clubs come calling then his outlook will become more pragmatic than the romanticised view he currently has on what it means and takes to be an AFL footballer.

 

[jackcass]

Seems to have come as a pretty big surprise to Treloar!!!

Think you are being very generous to the club. If they had real designs on moving Treloar and Phillips earlier they stand condemned for such late action completely negating the chance for a reasonable outcome. Then there is the whole topic of giving 3 players very generous contracts then 12-24 months later deciding you want to move them on mid contract with little warning.

How do they reconcile that without admitting to a monumental stuff up? They can’t.

Nah, I'm not sure when that determination to move them came, but they were definitely willing to see them off, as demonstrated in their actions the previous year.

I think the earlier contract stuff was a consequence of the "keep the list together" mentality post 2018 and the subsequent decision to trade Beams. I think that mentality changed post the Cats final. As they say, a week is a long time in footy.

I'm not claiming to be right, but I'm trying to be just a little more pragmatic about it. Helps that these 3 aren't even in the top 4 players I'm saddest to see depart this off-season. That'd be Langers, Shaz, Broomy and Atu.

 

[Chief]

Get on it

 

[jackcass]

Without trying to shadow you today if their are more quality sliders in round 3 and 4 that means there are more poor picks in round 1 and 2. Hope we don't jag them. Reef might have gone up the board if he had played in 2020 but he could have also drifted. Be a bit more of a lottery for everyone this year. It may be the 2021 draft is the real beneficiary of this. An unnamed recruiter in the HS today said he believed the 2021 picks 30-40 next year would be like the 11-20 this year. Hope he is wrong.

I think it's more the lack of exposure to so many in the pool, either due to injury or COVID.

The 2021 draft pool has long been lauded as very deep. The point of difference with this years pool is the depth of quality talls.

 

[OhioCatsfan]

Magpie supporters....I'm an American that fell in love with the game almost 5 years ago, and last December, I began a podcast on the game. Over the last couple of weeks, I conducted interviews with supporters of many club, including Collingwood, and would like to invite you to take a listen to the episode with the Pies supporter that I interviewed. I hope you enjoy it. Thank you in advance, and cheers!

 

[sr36]

The 2021 draft pool has long been lauded as very deep. The point of difference with this years pool is the depth of quality talls.

Yep, unfortunately we butchered the trades. I suspect the plan was to get a pick to take a highly rated one, a middling one and maybe a speculative one at the end of the draft. But alas poor Ned.

 

[Boris the Contradiction]

Have there been any updates on negotiations with the Dogs? It's all gone a bit quiet.

 

[magpies42]

I can’t see how we are going to trade our way into a good position this draft and without compromising our position next year.

 

[sr36]

I can’t see how we are going to trade our way into a good position this draft and without compromising our position next year.

The rationale is that Nick Daicos is highly rated and thus next year's first will need to be traded anyway - otherwise it will get used matching a bid for him.

 

[jackcass]

Yep, unfortunately we butchered the trades. I suspect the plan was to get a pick to take a highly rated one, a middling one and maybe a speculative one at the end of the draft. But alas poor Ned.

I'm more ambivalent. To me the main difference between talls taken early and talls taken later is their capacity to play seniors year 1. It's unusual though for them to significantly impact in that 1st year so it's only a marginal benefit. Naughton and Lukosius probably the recent exceptions. Generally you're looking at year 2 or 3 at best.

 

[jackcass]

The rationale is that Nick Daicos is highly rated and thus next year's first will need to be traded anyway - otherwise it will get used matching a bid for him.

If only we knew where we'd finish next year. Bottom 4 and burning that 1st round pick on Daics would hurt, but top 4 and it seems a reasonable price to pay for a kid projected to go in the top few and using it would likely mean we'd still get to use the 2x 2nd round picks we currently have on-board as well. Polish up the crystal ball will you.

 

[partypie]

Hine will be beside himself.

He'll definitely be all pent up going into the draft with all of the non-elite pathway talent on offer this year - ie. everyone from Victoria and pretty much everyone else I guess, given that nobody played much more than local footy in 2020.

Now let's flash forward for a sneak peek at what the Collingwood recruitment team draft night bunker might look like after the bell rings to signal the end of proceedings late on Wednesday evening...

 

[magpies42]

The rationale is that Nick Daicos is highly rated and thus next year's first will need to be traded anyway - otherwise it will get used matching a bid for him.

I strongly disagree with the idea that we need to trade it. We can trade it next year for a gun player, we can trade it for other picks next year...further more it will likely be worth more than what we anticipate.

I think also there is no guarantee that if we get pick 8 that we don’t then lose our second pick 14 or 16 to a Reef bid so we really haven’t achieve much.

I keep hoping there is a greater purpose or strategy at play, but I really hate how we’ve ended up in such a poor position and with such a poor draft hand!

 

[sr36]

I strongly disagree with the idea that we need to trade it. We can trade it next year for a gun player, we can trade it for other picks next year...further more it will likely be worth more than what we anticipate.

I think also there is no guarantee that if we get pick 8 that we don’t then lose our second pick 14 or 16 to a Reef bid so we really haven’t achieve much.

I keep hoping there is a greater purpose or strategy at play, but I really hate how we’ve ended up in such a poor position and with such a poor draft hand!

Yeah, definitely should keep it until next year, unless a good trade cones along. It's bloody ahrd to know what a good trade will look like though when you factor in Reef bids and the potential to burn a decent pick on matching for him.

 

[Gone Critical]

I strongly disagree with the idea that we need to trade it. We can trade it next year for a gun player, we can trade it for other picks next year...further more it will likely be worth more than what we anticipate.

I think also there is no guarantee that if we get pick 8 that we don’t then lose our second pick 14 or 16 to a Reef bid so we really haven’t achieve much.

I keep hoping there is a greater purpose or strategy at play, but I really hate how we’ve ended up in such a poor position and with such a poor draft hand!

Have to say I like that thinking. With the uncertainty around this draft and the supposed strength of 21 it would seem wise to wait. Especially if 2020 turns into a poor year and we have something like a 5-8 pick it should be easy enough to trade for a much better price than we would receive in 2020

 

[TradeDraft]

 

[manicpie]

I strongly disagree with the idea that we need to trade it. We can trade it next year for a gun player, we can trade it for other picks next year...further more it will likely be worth more than what we anticipate.

I think also there is no guarantee that if we get pick 8 that we don’t then lose our second pick 14 or 16 to a Reef bid so we really haven’t achieve much.

I keep hoping there is a greater purpose or strategy at play, but I really hate how we’ve ended up in such a poor position and with such a poor draft hand!

If we have two second round picks next year can we trade one or both of them for picks this year?, because I tend to agree that next years first will be much more valuable to us next year than this?

 

[Darkyprotector]

I can't see Essendon passing up Reid or Cox
They really need a key forward and at least one more back
I also think Adelaide will take Granger Barras
Therefore if we can slot north into our plans and look at this
North pick 11, 39 and 71 for
Pick 16 and next years first
This outcome
Gives us reef and two first ROUNDERS 11 and 18
Points with discount
39 65 66. 68 71 75

Great outcome for both clubs

 

[soreplums]

The rationale is that Nick Daicos is highly rated and thus next year's first will need to be traded anyway - otherwise it will get used matching a bid for him.

Unless there is a player that we have a hard on for, I’d keep the pick to trade into 2022 draft

 

[Soups]

I can't see Essendon passing up Reid or Cox
They really need a key forward and at least one more back
I also think Adelaide will take Granger Barras
Therefore if we can slot north into our plans and look at this
North pick 11, 39 and 71 for
Pick 16 and next years first
This outcome
Gives us reef and two first ROUNDERS 11 and 18
Points with discount
39 65 66. 68 71 75

Great outcome for both clubs

At what pick do you think Adelaide is taking DGB?

 

[partypie]

I can't see Essendon passing up Reid or Cox
They really need a key forward and at least one more back
I also think Adelaide will take Granger Barras
Therefore if we can slot north into our plans and look at this
North pick 11, 39 and 71 for
Pick 16 and next years first
This outcome
Gives us reef and two first ROUNDERS 11 and 18
Points with discount
39 65 66. 68 71 75

Great outcome for both clubs

That's a horrible outcome for us Darky, considering that we pretty much already have the points to match a Reef bid if he gets past pick 16, which will end up being pick 19 or maybe 20 anyway if the bids go where we'd hope they would, but in any case with pick 14 we'd still miss out on Reid, Cox and probably even Chapman (although he isn't what we need as a third tall / intercept defender).

Our future first this year would be more than a fair trade imo for what will be pick 14 coming from North after bid matches for JUH, Campbell and Jones. I'd even go as far as to say they'd have to send us back their future 4th round pick to even it up.

 

[Jelly Bean]

I thought I'd read that Adelaide would not bid on JUH at #1 because they wanted to honour their #1 pick with this accolade and the nice little bonus that goes with it. If they bid then their pick will be #2 and not get the bonus from NAB, I assume.

Um, okay, but then my comment still holds true - if someone wants Logan McDonald they need pick 1.

 

[Jelly Bean]

If we end up needing to use our first pick on Reed AND having our second first round pick pushed back at all, that is another massive failure of our recruiting team, as we could have just got Reef for late junk picks and used the value in 14 (18) and 16 (20) somehow else.

 

[TradeDraft]

If we end up needing to use our first pick on Reed AND having our second first round pick pushed back at all, that is another massive failure of our recruiting team, as we could have just got Reef for late junk picks and used the value in 14 (18) and 16 (20) somehow else.

More Proof how Shit the Trade Period Was.

They did nothing at all to put us in a Better Situation in the Draft

 

[Apples]

Have to say I can't buy that. Most of the players you list were part of the normal list turnover every club does. Every year the cap refreshes as players depart. We did something very different. They were 'the sh-t is about to his the fan, we stuffed our planning and we need to burn a few players quickly' type decisions

All the stuff coming out of the club is propaganda, "we are positioning ourselves to strengthen via the draft", "we want to be in a better position to pursue free agents" etc. If there had even been minor truth to the bs we would have been planning and organising towards those ends well before time and got a much better deal.

Why we were so late to our own firesale remains unknown. Needs an explanation. There was no specific targeting. We just have let the cap problem fester, someone or everyone has been asleep at the wheel and we have to make hasty decisions. Result is we have burned A grade talent and our best junior and will struggle to get anyone near the talent of either Treloar or Stephenson from the 2019/20 drafts. Just a simple stuff up.

The propaganda the I hate the most is we loaded up going for the gold and this was the result. BS. Tiges, Cats, Eagles have injected A grade talent into their list in the last few seasons via trade or FA, we did with Treloar seasons ago. Good manangement would make this compatible with maintaining a list and not having a firesale. All these top clubs were going for it, loading up, we are the only one who messed that up and sold valuable assets way below value.

Thats what the club needs to own and a few more should fall on their sword.

I have no evidence, but just a hunch that there is much we don't know. We were told there were no real salary cap problems by Ned and then a few days later the opposite from Bucks. I reckon Treloar and Stevo had such personal issues that the club decided to bite the bullet. Perhaps it should be kept quiet; it wouldn't serve anybody's interests to humiliate the players. Walsh gave an insight with his back-hander to Stephenson though.

Again, no evidence, but the whole thing appears so very amateurish that I don't buy it. It just seems impossible that all of our administrators didn't see salary-cap problems coming. It might become clear in a year or two and we'll all have to reassess our positions.