Thinking ahead to 2024 draft...(and beyond)

[lazzadesilva]

^^^^
Totally agree with you. Collingwood must seriously engineer something to significantly improve their draft hand. Otherwise we are doomed to be left behind by the other clubs.

[Presti35]

^
Trading Joe, Reef, Fin may get us into the second round.

But yes, I'd feel a lot better if we had a couple picks in the late teens/early 20s.

[Magpie Russ]

Trading Joe, Reef, Fin may get us into the second round.
But yes, I'd feel a lot better if we had a couple picks in the late teens/early 20s.

I'd feel a lot better if we had a couple of players in their late teens/early 20s.

[Jen2310]

Our picks now currently: 33, 48, 51

<mod edit - Thanks Jen, page 1 now updated and gives link to Draft order / points table>

[Pies2016]

There are so many options to dramatically improve our current draft hand, it’s endless.
Forget players being traded IN for a minute because anything can happen between now and last day of trade period. You need to get your draft picks sorted first, so as to establish the leverage available to then trade in.
Potential moves up the draft order could include trading our future first rounder ( F1 ) for any of Richmond’s, Suns or Dockers or 2024 first round selections. The Swans currently with #18 and #19 and Saints ( with the Battle compensation) may also be in the mix. These are all teams currently with so much prime 2024 draft capital, they will likely look to also set themselves up a future first rounder down the track.
Nobles request to be traded to the Suns couldn’t be a better club to deal with. They struggle to attract mature age talent and have a history of paying overs in order to do so ( we’re lucky Noble is contracted or would be in less of a bargaining position ) They also have so many quality draft picks and that’s not including the likely exit of Lukosuis, that haggling over draft picks is the last thing they need to concern themselves with. They also have a young list, so prioritising youth with early draft picks is no longer their focus. Their current pick 12 becomes a real target as part of the Noble trade. Trading Noble plus a couple of later 2024 ( or 2025 ) picks, could be enough to secure the Suns pick 12 or alternatively, Noble and not much more for their # 20.

OUT - Noble and potentially a couple later 2024 draft picks + our F1
IN - EITHER #12 or #20 + another pick in the late teens ( #16 - #19 ? )
I’m not saying this is what we will do but there is no reason to believe we can’t get significant representation in this draft IF that’s the way the club wish to go.
Once again, there’s no such thing as a free lunch, so buying into this draft does come at a cost but trading out of our F1 does become an easier decision with young McGuane being earmarked in 2025.
Personally, I think whether we choose to move on our F1 or not becomes the entire cornerstone to our 2024 draft strategy.

[LaurieHolden]

@Pies2016 re the F1st, I suspect you're right.
It'd create certainty and if GCS are willing to meet that request, we'd end up with our highest top 10 pick since we bundled into #4 to secure Naicos and an organic #13 in 2018 to secure IQ.
Our last organic top 10 pick was #6 in 2017.
I get the feeling though that if we're indeed into Houston (2027 UFA) from Port, that's where the GCS pick will end up. I can't imagine we could tally enough via organic picks to satisfy Port without Richards and a decent pick rolled into the mix.

[Jen2310]

I'd suggest the only reason we'll trade out F1 is to get back into this draft.
You'd have to find the right club though, as everyone wants to get into the top 30 of this draft class.

[Pies2016]

^^^
Totally agree with that thinking. And that’s why I have us receiving something around 20 odd in this years draft for our future first rounder. Collingwood would have to give up a few spots in next years draft order in order to make it worthwhile for a club to trade out in this years first round. The Suns and Tigers will have so many early picks, they would be almost irresponsible to not put something away for the future, so it’s more about whether our offer beats any others on the table.

[piffdog]

While I am on board with potentially trading next year's first rounder, I am already bracing for the revisioninst " I told you so" from the punditry. Is it just me or has there never in the history of football been so much rear view mirroring about "Collingwood can't do anything this trade season because they already gave away their first rounder...". Sick of hearing it. It is what it is and it was done 12 months ago. Its another version of "##makes obvious statement about footy##, we know this". I dont follow the footy media to hear back "what we already know"...

I'm also only trading that first rounder if we are very confident we would be otherwise using it on a FS or NGA next year. I know there are no certainties in life, but I dont want to be hearing the aforementioned dross again in 12 months.

I hope we wouldnt get anything worse than pick #20! To me that kind of implies we are making top 4 (giving us one of the last 4 picks in the draft) PLUS a discount because its next year. Now I hope we do that well, but we didnt even make finals in the current season...

[Pies2016]

^^^
@piffdog The revisionist stuff does my head in too but that’s the world some live in. Win some, lose some.
More importantly, if Collingwood do trade out their F1, one of the more interesting conversations would be where both parties see Collingwood finishing in 2025.
Having seen Port finish second and Freo tenth at the end of the home and aways, the competition has never been more even, so the provision to get your future trading right, will only become more difficult. Imagine how difficult it’s going to be when clubs can trade out two years in advance starting from end of 2025 season.
The reason I feel we wouldn’t get much better than # 20 for our F1 is because this is a better draft than next year and that’s been acknowledged already. If we are to secure # 20 ( example only ) in 2024 draft, then by rights Collingwood should be expected to offer something a little better from within their 2025 draft stockpile.
As I keep saying, the sweetener in the 2025 draft will at least be Tom McGuane, so it’s not like we won’t have a presence at the pointy end, even if we do trade the F1 out.

[neil]

Many posters are "we wasted this years draft by trading our first round pick quick lets trade our F1"

[MatthewBoydFanClub]

Many posters are "we wasted this years draft by trading our first round pick quick lets trade our F1"

Yes, here we are a year later having stuffed up last year's future number one draft pick and now we're saying, let's trade away next year's future first draft pick. Are we really so stupid?
We could have usurped Geelong and gotten Bailey Smith for next year. He's everything we need in our midfield, but no we got a 26 year old small forward from Fremantle last year which forced the hand of Ginnivan to seek another club (for nothing but that's another story) and Richards to want to leave. Meanwhile we don't have a key forward to replace Mihocek.
This comedy just goes on and one. Reminder folks, we were first last year after recruiting someone who knows how to play (Bobby Hill) and ninth this year with all the talk about which hack we can recruit from another club for Fly to perform miracles with.

[K]

While I am on board with potentially trading next year's first rounder, I am already bracing for the revisionist " I told you so" from the punditry. Is it just me or has there never in the history of football been so much rear view mirroring about "Collingwood can't do anything this trade season because they already gave away their first rounder...". Sick of hearing it. It is what it is and it was done 12 months ago. Its another version of "##makes obvious statement about footy##, we know this". I dont follow the footy media to hear back "what we already know"...
...

^^^
@piffdog The revisionist stuff does my head in too but that’s the world some live in. Win some, lose some.
More importantly, if Collingwood do trade out their F1, one of the more interesting conversations would be where both parties see Collingwood finishing in 2025.
...

Here's the rule I came up with.

Do not trade out your 1st-round pick for next year if you've just won the premiership.

Be open to trading out your 1st-round pick for next year if you've just finished bottom 4.


Reason? In the 1st case, everyone'll assume that means pick 18. Even though it's hard to go back-to-back!! For sure, your trading partner will claim "it's only pick 18". 'Cos it makes the deal look worse for them! But the reigning premier is just as likely to miss the 8 the next year. (Y'all know the examples now!!) So at best, the perception of the trade is equal to reality. At worse, the reigning premier is just screwing over themselves!

In the 2nd case, opposite applies.

[Rd10.1998_11.1#36]

we got a 26 year old small forward from Freemantle last year which forced the hand of Ginnivan to seek another club (for nothing but that's another story) and Richards to want to leave.

Seems a bit histrionic? Ginnivan still being a young smartarse at Dingley and thought Poort went after Richards, a second year player on 8 games, with a 4 year offer?

[rosspies]

Surely Collingwood isn’t allocating too much of our salary cap to veteran players this year and next. This strategy would allow us to offer higher salaries to key players like De Goey and Daicos in 2024 and 2025. Consequently, we should be able to afford a big-name recruit in the near future. If our administration isn’t managing this effectively, a review of their performance is necessary.