List Mgmt. Trade and F/A - Part 3

[TakingThePies]

Check the date, If you think I'm wrong, ignore me and leave it be.. unfortunately certain immature people on here.. just can't help themselves.

 

[Quicky]

Someone thats developed footy at the age of 26 and took on as an experiment vs someone who's had a footy in their hand since around 5-6, played the levels of footy and been drafted.

None of that means anything. It's fluff. I still haven't read anyone put up a coherent argument about why Weid is a good trade target nor how he offers more than Cox.

 

[Jen2310]

Check the date, If you think I'm wrong, ignore me and leave it be.. unfortunately certain immature people on here.. just can't help themselves.


View attachment 1230172

Given we are that into him, you'd think we would have done the work long ago. Not much longer now he will make his intentions clear

 

[Go Woods]

It was the year before Logan. It was the Rowell draft and I thought we were aiming to get Pick 1, which would have been him.

Oh yes, it was to

 

[partypie]

I think most clubs would bid on a player if thats who they would want. The integrity of the system works better that way also. For us in this instance its better if Daics drops but I suspect he will be the first mane called.

Maybe Good Horse can neigh in with the inside word on the odds of the prodigal young colt sired by the legendary champion Macedonian Marvel being first past the post on grand National Draft day?

 

[Dead Eye Didak]

I think most clubs would bid on a player if thats who they would want. The integrity of the system works better that way also. For us in this instance its better if Daics drops but I suspect he will be the first mane called.

So you think North, who want Horne, will deprive Horne getting recognised as the number 1 pick, plus get the NAB portfolio?
I don't think North will call Daicos, l expect GC to at 3....

 

[Soups]

So you think North, who want Horne, will deprive Horne getting recognised as the number 1 pick, plus get the NAB portfolio?
I don't think North will call Daicos, l expect GC to at 3....

Happened last year…

 

[Dead Eye Didak]

That’s what I’m thinking.
If Daicos is Number 1 on their draft board…they select him.
I’m prepared for a Pick 1 match.
Anything lower (after pick one) is a bonus (in terms of matching points required).

Make completely no sense for them to, and deprive the player they know they can get in Horne, being classified the number one pick. Considering Daic's has committed to Collingwood on a 4 year deal already.

 

[Dead Eye Didak]

Happened last year…

It did, but l feel North will want their player to be recognised as the number 1 pick. It will be good for their club, and marketing to prospective members.

 

[Jen2310]

Happened last year…

Crows did have another motive in bidding, but yes if a player is #1 on your board, you bid
What if North have Horne at #2 or #3 do you not bid on Daicos just because you know you're not getting him?

But if its neck in neck, then sure, go for Horne. Give him the #1 title.

 

[Scodog10]

So you think North, who want Horne, will deprive Horne getting recognised as the number 1 pick, plus get the NAB portfolio?
I don't think North will call Daicos, l expect GC to at 3....

Roos’ plans for No.1 pick firm; out-of-favour Power tall on rival clubs’ radar: Trade Whispers

Roos’ plans for No.1 pick revealed; out-of-favour Power tall on rival clubs’ radar: Trade Whispers

www.google.com.au

I think GC has the right of it when referencing the integrity of the draft. Also as Collingwood supporters surely we know better than most that buying in to something like him slipping to 3 is setting ourselves up for disappointment? Especially when he is clearly the best kid in the draft…

 

[Dead Eye Didak]

Crows did have another motive in bidding, but yes if a player is #1 on your board, you bid
What if North have Horne at #2 or #3 do you not bid on Daicos just because you know you're not getting him?

But if its neck in neck, then sure, go for Horne. Give him the #1 title.

Depends on how North want to market it to their membership base, particularly prospective members. Do they market Horne, for example, as the number 1 player in the draft?

 

[Dead Eye Didak]

Roos’ plans for No.1 pick firm; out-of-favour Power tall on rival clubs’ radar: Trade Whispers

Roos’ plans for No.1 pick revealed; out-of-favour Power tall on rival clubs’ radar: Trade Whispers

www.google.com.au

I think GC has the right of it when referencing the integrity of the draft. Also as Collingwood supporters surely we know better than most that buying in to something like him slipping to 3 is setting ourselves up for disappointment? Especially when he is clearly the best kid in the draft…

Hopefully North change their thinking!!!

 

[Jen2310]

Depends on how North want to market it to their membership base, particularly prospective members. Do they market Horne, for example, as the number 1 player in the draft?

True. Its a conversation they'd need to have with those involved in the decision process.

 

[partypie]

Happened last year…

As has been mentioned previously there was a strategic aspect to Adelaide's bid as they knew the Doggies had their eyes on Rowe as well, so the pick 1 bid took the Doggies completely out of the draft. It's a different situation this year, as a bid at picks 1, 2 or 3 will take us out of the remainder of the top 40 picks in the draft, regardless of where the bid is matched.

All up it's one less reason for North or GWS to bid and gives us at least a little hope, as if there were actually a prospect of taking one or more first or second round pick(s) off the table for us that we may have otherwise retained with a later bid then it would be guaranteed that a bid would come at pick 1, because removing another club from the first couple of rounds entirely with an earlier bid is just smart business on draft day.

 

[Scodog10]

Hopefully North change their thinking!!!

Fingers crossed. Out of interest if the roles were reversed what would you do? I’m 100% placing bids on both Darcy and Daicos and the order would primarily come down to who it’s going to inconvenience more. Basically I’m a dick and I think there’s more to be gained from that than giving the guy that isn’t the best player in the draft the notoriety of being number 1.

 

[Apex36]

Happened last year…

Yeah it’s not really a convincing argument given it’s already happened is it?

 

[The Royal Sampler]

It is a bit silly when you think that we’ve been deathriding the Dogs’ pick all year, and I think their 1-point win the other day cost us something in the order of 47 points…

… whereas Daicos merely copping a bid at #2 instead of #1 saves us 340 points! LOL.

Really we should start a “deathriding the draft” thread.

 

[unplugged]

It would make the whole situation all that much more intriguing if a bid on your F/S meant you could say no but then get that next pick anyway.

 

[partypie]

It would make the whole situation all that much more intriguing if a bid on your F/S meant you could say no but then get that next pick anyway.

What the "Kinnear Beatson" solution? What a shitty, greedy typically COLA-starved Sydney Swans idea that was, in terms of jumping up the draft order if someone bid for an academy prospect you weren't willing (or able) to match on - even if you were top 8, top 4, or actually won the flag.

 

[sr36]

Make completely no sense for them to, and deprive the player they know they can get in Horne, being classified the number one pick. Considering Daic's has committed to Collingwood on a 4 year deal already.

My understanding is that they do a basic psychological profile of these kids. If I was them, I'd use that to help predict whether being the number 1 pick will help or hinder him - for some the expectations seems to be detrimental.

 

[Dead Eye Didak]

My understanding is that they do a basic psychological profile of these kids. If I was them, I'd use that to help predict whether being the number 1 pick will help or hinder him - for some the expectations seems to be detrimental.

That's a good point. The pressure of number 1 is obviously greater, then being the number 3 pick. Alot less expectations, l guess!!

 

[unplugged]

What the "Kinnear Beatson" solution? What a shitty, greedy typically COLA-starved Sydney Swans idea that was, in terms of jumping up the draft order if someone bid for an academy prospect you weren't willing (or able) to match on - even if you were top 8, top 4, or actually won the flag.

I knew that was his idea, and when I first read it I absolutely hated it.

Obviously no matter when a bid comes for Daicos were going to match it... and all clubs know that.

But say if GWS bid on Darcy, imagine if the Bulldogs said no and let them have him on the basis that they could swoop in with Pick 3 and take Callaghan or someone else they potentially rate higher.

I guess Beatson's solution/theory was that a club would need to be dead certain that their bid was true, not just trying to force a club's hand.

 

[Couch Coach]

It's interesting that both Brisbane and GC are likely going to need to delist then rookie players to open up the required 3 list spots for the draft this year. I wonder if there are other clubs in the same boat? They've removed the rule where you can automatically re-rookie without going through the rookie draft. That may present us additional opportunities holding pick 2. I wonder if there'll be anyone of interest?

Hmm Ely Smith?

 

[partypie]

I knew that was his idea, and when I first read it I absolutely hated it.

Obviously no matter when a bid comes for Daicos were going to match it... and all clubs know that.

But say if GWS bid on Darcy, imagine if the Bulldogs said no and let them have him on the basis that they could swoop in with Pick 3 and take Callaghan or someone else they potentially rate higher.

I guess Beatson's solution/theory was that a club would need to be dead certain that their bid was true, not just trying to force a club's hand.

Well the club bidding has to be certain that their bid is "true" because if it's not then they end up with a player picked arguably earlier than they should have been, ahead of potentially better prospects. No need for any further bid protection for a club with a F/S or academy prospect than that.