Welcome Welcome to Adelaide: Alex Neal-Bullen - Traded for Pick 28

[AFC979810]

Right so when we traded pick 5 for Rankine we didn't factor in anything about what he would be four years into the future

We traded pick 5 for Rankine in 2022 and signed him to a 3 year deal - all because we were planning for 4 years into the future.

Chess not Checkers right. You would fit in well with Mathew Nicks and the coaching staff.

 

[AFC979810]

Sorry, for a minute I thought you were meaning we are looking to trade in a 29 year old Petracca from Melbourne for a mid 20's pick and got your spelling wrong and used ANB instead - as you raised D Jarmans name and I thought you would be using a comparable name for comparable pick although Petracca is not quite D Jarman level as good as he is.

Just thought that trading in a 29 year old for a mid 20's pick was criminal given they would only play for 3 years.

 

[Scorpus]

We traded pick 5 for Rankine in 2022 and signed him to a 3 year deal - all because we were planning for 4 years into the future.

Chess not Checkers right. You would fit in well with Mathew Nicks and the coaching staff.

Haha sure. Had no plans or idea what Rankine would be doing beyond those three years

And Gold Coast didn't factor it in either

 

[AFC979810]

Haha sure. Had no plans or idea what Rankine would be doing beyond those three years

And Gold Coast didn't factor it in either

Yup.

All about planning for 4 years in advance. Smart.

Not much changes in 2 years - so always smart to plan 4 years out....

All the smart coaches aren't worried about 2025,2026,2027 - its all a focus on 2028 now!

 

[Scorpus]

Yup.

All about planning for 4 years in advance. Smart.

Not much changes in 2 years - so always smart to plan 4 years out....

All the smart coaches aren't worried about 2025,2026,2027 - its all a focus on 2028 now!

So what you are saying is list managers shouldn't plan for 4 or more years into the future.

That's certainly an interesting opinion

 

[AFC979810]

So what you are saying is list managers shouldn't plan for 4 or more years into the future.

Well depends on their plan. 95% of the time they shouldn't be planning that far out. Too much can happen year on year.

Now if you are a North or West Coast - then yes you can certainly make decisions based on the fact you wont be competing for at least 3 years....

But sport changes far too quickly to be making decisions solely based on 2028.

The most you should be planning is 2 -3 years out and you should be adjusting yearly - as professional sports moves extremely fast.

For example - look at Hawthorn. Their 3 year plan from the 2024 season to the beginning of the 2025 season should be vastly and completely different.

Making important list management decisions based on 4 years down the track is as stupid as most of what you write.

That's certainly an interesting opinion

Mate - if its contradictory to yours I think its a solid opinion.

Tell me more about announcing Brisbane can't make the Grand Final after round 1?!?!?!

 

[ams4crows]

Giving up 25 in this draft is a mistake, a 29 year coming home for compassionate grounds should not be a high second rounder. This is future 3rd territory with a F4th coming back type stuff

Our list manager is ****ing stupid if he gives up 25 for ANB

 

[Scorpus]

Well depends on their plan. 95% of the time they shouldn't be planning that far out. Too much can happen year on year.

Now if you are a North or West Coast - then yes you can certainly make decisions based on the fact you wont be competing for at least 3 years....

But sport changes far too quickly to be making decisions solely based on 2028.

The most you should be planning is 2 -3 years out and you should be adjusting yearly - as professional sports moves extremely fast.

For example - look at Hawthorn. Their 3 year plan from the 2024 season to the beginning of the 2025 season should be vastly and completely different.

Making important list management decisions based on 4 years down the track is as stupid as most of what you write.

Pretty clueless to believe list management don't plan four years into the future.

When drafting players, you reckon clubs are taking players to have an impact in years one to three? Or are they thinking about much further into the future?

When clubs hand out four year or longer contracts they aren't thinking about what that fourth year looks like?

When clubs trade out a player, they don't care about what output they might lose in 5 or 6 years, especially for young players? And they don't factor that into what they ask in return?

Come on.

Mate - if its contradictory to yours I think its a solid opinion.

Tell me more about announcing Brisbane can't make the Grand Final after round 1?!?!?!

From the guy that just tried to compare the Jarman trade to Neal-Bullen to justify using pick 25

Stones and glass houses and all of that

 

[George Kramer]

Are we winning a flag in the next 3 years? No, so you don’t use valuable draft pick and risk missing out on a 10 year player that could help when the list is ready.

 

[Danger in Texas]

Pretty clueless to believe list management don't plan four years into the future.

When drafting players, you reckon clubs are taking players to have an impact in years one to three? Or are they thinking about much further into the future?

When clubs hand out four year or longer contracts they aren't thinking about what that fourth year looks like?

When clubs trade out a player, they don't care about what output they might lose in 5 or 6 years, especially for young players? And they don't factor that into what they ask in return?

Come on.

Well depends on their plan. 95% of the time they shouldn't be planning that far out. Too much can happen year on year.

Now if you are a North or West Coast - then yes you can certainly make decisions based on the fact you wont be competing for at least 3 years....

But sport changes far too quickly to be making decisions solely based on 2028.

The most you should be planning is 2 -3 years out and you should be adjusting yearly - as professional sports moves extremely fast.

For example - look at Hawthorn. Their 3 year plan from the 2024 season to the beginning of the 2025 season should be vastly and completely different.

Making important list management decisions based on 4 years down the track is as stupid as most of what you write.

You’re probably both right

When coming into an off-season, you’d think clubs plan who/what picks they decide are worth bringing in, and how the present and future value of their current assets stack up, against what they are looking to trade in. Whether a team is in, or going in/out of a contending window determines whether they put emphasis on mainly buying or selling

But those plans can easily change in 12 months - Hawthorn a good example here, as you’d think they’d have thought they would still mostly be in pick accumulation mode for this off-season, this time 12 months ago. Now, they’re ahead of schedule and have put emphasis on spending picks/cap space on filling holes with quality players. In some cases, they might overpay beyond wha they’re worth (Battle isn’t worth 900k in a vacuum, but is to the Hawks, given their needs). They still have a good young core, so they aren’t shooting themselves in the foot down the road, but are improving how they’ll stack up for the next few seasons

 

[Cromulant]

Are we winning a flag in the next 3 years? No, so you don’t use valuable draft pick and risk missing out on a 10 year player that could help when the list is ready.

By that logic, bottom end clubs shouldn't ever trade picks for senior players to help them climb the ladder.

Not super logic

 

[Danger in Texas]

Are we winning a flag in the next 3 years? No, so you don’t use valuable draft pick and risk missing out on a 10 year player that could help when the list is ready.

I mean, you wouldn’t have said the Pies would be winning a flag in 2 years in 2021, either. But a change of coach, player development and multiple list upgrades later, and here we are

But yes, a LOT does need to improve for us to get to that point ourselves. Cumming/ANB are a small step in the right direction (not going to put Luko in the same category, given what we may need to give up to get him)

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

And if he produces at his current level at 29,30,31 - then he more than justifies us using pick 25.

That doesn't usually happen for most players!

Why should we pay overs for a player who has walked out of his club for family reasons & not a huge priority for us?

 

[Cromulant]

That doesn't usually happen for most players!

Why should we pay overs for a player who has walked out of his club for family reasons & not a huge priority for us?

I keep reading this "not a high priority" theory.

Good quality senior players are ALWAYS welcome

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I keep reading this "not a high priority" theory.

Good quality senior players are ALWAYS welcome

Our highest priority is the midfield, a ruckman & Smith replacement.

It's madness to spend our 2nd round pick on a solid player whose best years are behind him when we are rebuilding, not playing off for a flag!

 

[Cromulant]

Our highest priority is the midfield, a ruckman & Smith replacement.

It's madness to spend our 2nd round pick on a solid player whose best years are behind him when we are rebuilding, not playing off for a flag!

Would rather a solid, known quantity to help what I believe is a list with plenty of talent already. Is it a little overs ?? Yeah probably, but it's hardly the disaster people are saying it is.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Would rather a solid, known quantity to help what I believe is a list with plenty of talent already. Is it a little overs ?? Yeah probably, but it's hardly the disaster people are saying it is.

The whole point of this is it would be overs for a player whose best years are behind him & who is walking out of his club.

You only play overs if you are chasing a player of high need for a shot at the flag.

The club are complete idiots if this is the trade.

 

[Cromulant]

The whole point of this is it would be overs for a player whose best years are behind him & who is walking out of his club.

You only play overs if you are chasing a player of high need for a shot at the flag.

The club are complete idiots if this is the trade.

I'd doubt it's the full trade TBH, but if we can bring a guy in who has good years left in him and helps us push back into the 8 then I'm ok with it.

Walking out of his club ?? I mean have you seen what's going on at Melbourne

 

[Danger in Texas]

Our highest priority is the midfield, a ruckman & Smith replacement.

It's madness to spend our 2nd round pick on a solid player whose best years are behind him when we are rebuilding, not playing off for a flag!

Midfield - gotta be pick 4 (most, if not all in-their-prime mids of the ilk we need are pie in the sky)
Smith replacement - Cumming

It'd be a better idea in the long run to spend 25 to get, or trade up to get Dodson - but even then, you'd think he won't be ready until his 4th season, by which point Daws/Hinge/Keays will be going out of their prime, and ROB will be beyond cooked (with a stop-gap possibly playing in his place for one or two years)

If 25 is wedded onto ANB - which is a disappointing, but not end-of-the-world result, provided we can get some change back (still hoping it can be an F2) - I'd look to grab a 22yo-ish ruck from another club next off-season, and probably draft one next year, too. If Nicks is sticking around in 2025, we won't be making great strides anyway, so it doesn't really matter if ROB is still around or not

 

[Cromulant]

Midfield - gotta be pick 4 (most, if not all in-their-prime mids of the ilk we need are pie in the sky)
Smith replacement - Cumming

It'd be a better idea in the long run to spend 25 to get, or trade up to get Dodson - but even then, you'd think he won't be ready until his 4th season, by which point Daws/Hinge/Keays will be going out of their prime, and ROB will be beyond cooked (with a stop-gap possibly playing in his place for one or two years)

If 25 is wedded onto ANB - which is a disappointing, but not end-of-the-world result, provided we can get some change back (still hoping it can be an F2) - I'd look to grab a 22yo-ish ruck from another club next off-season, and probably draft one next year, too. If Nicks is sticking around in 2025, we won't be making great strides anyway, so it doesn't really matter if ROB is still around or not

I don't think Nicks survives next year if we miss the 8 with a softer draw.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I'd doubt it's the full trade TBH, but if we can bring a guy in who has good years left in him and helps us push back into the 8 then I'm ok with it.

Walking out of his club ?? I mean have you seen what's going on at Melbourne

The point is he is walking out of his club, yet you want to pay overs.

It's madness!

Want to give away our picks like confetti...

 

[Cromulant]

The point is he is walking out of his club, yet you want to pay overs.

It's madness!

Want to give away our picks like confetti...

It's pick 25, not 10

 

[Danger in Texas]

I don't think Nicks survives next year if we miss the 8 with a softer draw.

Surely Nicks is gone by 2026, anyway

Either we miss the eight next year and Nicks is sacked, or we scrape into the first week of finals next year, then plummet with a harder draw in 2026

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

It's pick 25, not 10

No shit.

He's not worth pick 25 which is valuable in this draft.

You want to pay overs for a player walking out of his club!

 

[Cromulant]

No shit.

He's not worth pick 25 which is valuable in this draft.

I think you're getting way too emotional on such a minor issue