The 2021 Great Big Consolidated Trade & Draft thread

[Lazza]

Why take the risk if (as I've already said) "you've decided you want someone else"? Imagine the uproar on here if we had a crack at somebody else's father/son with our pick one and ended up with that player when we just thought we were being "smart". And don't kid yourself that all "top" picks are equal. It's not that long ago that St Kilda took McCartin and left Melbourne with the Petracca dregs - how's that looking?

I get that but I feel that all clubs are constantly improving with the exact science involved in getting it right. However bad luck, errors, injuries and unseen/unimaginable circumstances can all derail the best laid plans of all clubs. Technically every draft pick is a risk in varying degrees.

[Boot]

Exactly, there is no point in trying to be too smart by half and calling someone's bluff as you only run the risk of not getting the player you wanted and had the chance to get.. All teams would be crazy to not simply call out who they think the best player is available who's characteristics best suit their needs at the time. That's not only demonstrating integrity but also the smart way to operate a drafting situation.

[mattdally]

IF we had kept pick #2 it would have gone like this.

#1 North - Horne-Francis
#2 Collingwood - Darcy - Dogs match it
#3 Collingwood - Next best player in the draft
#4 Gold Coast - Daicos? - Pies match it

Giving away pick #2 has cost us a potential gun.

[Pies2016]

^ ^ ^
All correct points about the Kangas decision to pick J H F first. The other aspect involved in picking J H F first, is the likely financial gains that come with marketing him as the best U19 kid in the country. They have freely and unashamedly spruiked this kid as the best player in the draft. On the back of that promotion, they would look pretty silly picking Daicos before him.
Interesting to see Twomey and Sheehan still rate Daicos as #1 but J H Fs preliminary final in SA N F L certainly bridged the gap.

[jackcass]

IF we had kept pick #2 it would have gone like this.

#1 North - Horne-Francis
#2 Collingwood - Darcy - Dogs match it
#3 Collingwood - Next best player in the draft
#4 Gold Coast - Daicos? - Pies match it

Giving away pick #2 has cost us a potential gun.

Nah. If we'd kept pick 2 you could almost guarantee a North bid on Daicos. To do anything but that would dilute the options available to them at their pick 20 as it'd slide to 21. Even if it's by only 1 player, strategically silly to allow it.

[WhyPhilWhy?]

IF! IF we had known our pick would be #2.

[jackcass]

^ ^ ^
All correct points about the Kangas decision to pick J H F first. The other aspect involved in picking J H F first, is the likely financial gains that come with marketing him as the best U19 kid in the country. They have freely and unashamedly spruiked this kid as the best player in the draft. On the back of that promotion, they would look pretty silly picking Daicos before him.
Interesting to see Twomey and Sheehan still rate Daicos as #1 but J H Fs preliminary final in SA N F L certainly bridged the gap.

If we still held our 1st round pick I doubt North would have engaged the media in the same way they did.

[MJ23]

IF we had kept pick #2 it would have gone like this.

#1 North - Horne-Francis
#2 Collingwood - Darcy - Dogs match it
#3 Collingwood - Next best player in the draft
#4 Gold Coast - Daicos? - Pies match it

Giving away pick #2 has cost us a potential gun.

Id argue that IF we had pick 2, North would absolutely bid on Nick so that a competitor didn't get two of the best 3 kids in the draft instead of one.
Id argue that it would not have been a gamble we were prepared to take and would have looked to trade it anyway.
Also, we now have two kids with a year under their belt and Lipinski for the value of the no 1 pick and Im all good with that.

[stui magpie]

^ ^ ^
All correct points about the Kangas decision to pick J H F first. The other aspect involved in picking J H F first, is the likely financial gains that come with marketing him as the best U19 kid in the country. They have freely and unashamedly spruiked this kid as the best player in the draft. On the back of that promotion, they would look pretty silly picking Daicos before him.
Interesting to see Twomey and Sheehan still rate Daicos as #1 but J H Fs preliminary final in SA N F L certainly bridged the gap.

Couple of other things.
The kid wants to be called at No 1.
North genuinely rate him as the best, so why not take him there
North has never had a first pick before, they want to leverage it.
There are also financial rewards for the player picked at 1

[RudeBoy]

If your aunty had wheels.....

[stui magpie]

^

She'd be the town bike?

[Charlie Oneeye]

IF we had kept pick #2 it would have gone like this.

#1 North - Horne-Francis
#2 Collingwood - Darcy - Dogs match it
#3 Collingwood - Next best player in the draft
#4 Gold Coast - Daicos? - Pies match it

Giving away pick #2 has cost us a potential gun.

Nah. If we'd kept pick 2 you could almost guarantee a North bid on Daicos. To do anything but that would dilute the options available to them at their pick 20 as it'd slide to 21. Even if it's by only 1 player, strategically silly to allow it.

Not only that, the world could be a different place if we had retained pick 2.

Before the Draft :
I would have nominated Daics if I was North. Especially knowing the kid is worth it, and is a Pies supporter's dream. After all, It's not just 400 points they are messing us up with, it's a top 3 pick they are denying us.

We could be saying : Pies should have picked up MacRae last year, but may gave up a bird in the hand for SFA.


But overall, who cares ? Who would prepare for a bottom 2 finish ?


Then after the draft :
I told you So! We were forced to use the pick on Daicos, and we could have had MacRae too.

[MatthewBoydFanClub]

IF we had kept pick #2 it would have gone like this.

#1 North - Horne-Francis
#2 Collingwood - Darcy - Dogs match it
#3 Collingwood - Next best player in the draft
#4 Gold Coast - Daicos? - Pies match it

Giving away pick #2 has cost us a potential gun.

Id argue that IF we had pick 2, North would absolutely bid on Nick so that a competitor didn't get two of the best 3 kids in the draft instead of one.
Id argue that it would not have been a gamble we were prepared to take and would have looked to trade it anyway.
Also, we now have two kids with a year under their belt and Lipinski for the value of the no 1 pick and Im all good with that.

It's all water under the bridge now. We know we're getting Nick Daicos. We got one of the best available mids in the draft last year in MaCrae as well as our academy player in McInnes and got a top 10 selection in Henry for which we had to sacrifice this year's first round selection pick. When all is said and done I don't think we could have done any better than we have done to extricate ourselves from the mess we got ourselves into by overpaying on the contracts of Treloar, Stephenson and Phillips.

[Boogie Knights]

We can now put to bed any thoughts on picking up Brander.

Heading to GWS on a 4 year deal.

[mattdally]

The deal wasn't great.

We gained picks 24 and 30 plus future 2021 4th rounder tied to Geelong (which we traded for pick 44 - McCreery) for pick 2.

No one is doing that deal with the Giants before this draft.

Would you sacrifice two of McCreery, Poulter and McMahon for pick 2 in this year's draft? That's what we're left with.