Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Pi wrote:Perhaps we should have a look at the Crows list; H was seen at Adelaide airport this morning, apparently he met with Sanderson.

Looking at Adelaides list there doesn't seem to be many players worth chasing that Adelaide would be prepared to part with who could improve our side.

Acquiring Jake Kelly as part of the deal would be a good story.

If Goldsack is going to go to Port, is it possible to sign and trade him with Lumumba?

Most likely Pick 8 will be used on Moore.

So wouldn't be trading our first round away.

suggest we go after a pick 20something pick and maintain our rebuild through the Draft. Remember we got Beams, Elliott and Broomy for 20something picks

Presti35 wrote:If Goldsack is going to go to Port, is it possible to sign and trade him with Lumumba?

Yes.

But that would kind of defeat the purpose of Free Agency, wouldn't it?

If Goldsack wants to go, he has a means of doing so with a minimum of fuss...

melliot wrote:Most likely Pick 8 will be used on Moore.

So wouldn't be trading our first round away.

suggest we go after a pick 20something pick and maintain our rebuild through the Draft. Remember we got Beams, Elliott and Broomy for 20something picks

We gave up our first round pick for Elliot (plus we had to take back Marty Clarke). Broomy was also a late teen pick (or 20 at worst). beams was a true 20 something pick. In this new age of professionalism early, a top 20 pick generally gets you a pretty decent player these days.

Tannin wrote:I voted "no" on the assumption that we will use our first round pick on Moore - in which case 8 -> 2 is completely pointless. If, by some miracle, we get Moore for our second-round pick, then sure: Harry + 8 is a fair swap for 2. And the reality is that Pick 8 is just as good for Melbourne as #2 - they will select a dud either way so what difference does it make?

I had heard that this years draft has no stand out player and that you could throw a blanket over the top dozen players. if that is correct, trading pick 2 for pick 8 plus something is not necessarily a wise strategy this year.

Maybe a swap for one J.Howe

E wrote:

melliot wrote:Most likely Pick 8 will be used on Moore.

So wouldn't be trading our first round away.

suggest we go after a pick 20something pick and maintain our rebuild through the Draft. Remember we got Beams, Elliott and Broomy for 20something picks

We gave up our first round pick for Elliot (plus we had to take back Marty Clarke). Broomy was also a late teen pick (or 20 at worst). beams was a true 20 something pick. In this new age of professionalism early, a top 20 pick generally gets you a pretty decent player these days.

Yes we traded Elliott and Clarke for pick 25(I think). And guess what? The established player was another flop and the young unknown becomes the star. Ultimately picking kids by using our better talent scouting is our go and far more often becomes greater value. Effectively we picked a kid with 20something.

Pick 20something will generally net a quality player.

Trading established players at this stage of our list management isn't IMO our go.

With free agency we can target our specific needs once our list is more developed in another year or two.

We'll slide further down the ladder next year. A mid ranked experienced player isn't going to stop this slide.

Would Lumumba for Mitch Clark get the job done?
They describe him as their best player along with Nathan Jones but he has legacy issues.

Albert Parker wrote:Would Lumumba for Mitch Clark get the job done?
They describe him as their best player along with Nathan Jones but he has legacy issues.

They know he won't be back there and are talking him up in hopes of increasing trade value.

It should get the job done, could be a win win could be a lose lose, both have issues though Clark would seem to have a few more, but more upside counters that.

Clark at his best IS everything we need, his aggression being number one on that list.

Museman wrote:

Albert Parker wrote:Would Lumumba for Mitch Clark get the job done?
They describe him as their best player along with Nathan Jones but he has legacy issues.

They know he won't be back there and are talking him up in hopes of increasing trade value.

It should get the job done, could be a win win could be a lose lose, both have issues though Clark would seem to have a few more, but more upside counters that.

Clark at his best IS everything we need, his aggression being number one on that list.

Melbourne get a good deal out of this (I hope they do anyway, even if they don't trade with us)

They get a reasonable player for one that retired.

It's like us swapping Nick Maxwell for Paddy Ryder.

Nah, its not but you get my drift.

I've thought log and hard about what to get for Lumumba.

I've decided in the end, if he goes I'll get him a farewell card and a bottle of rum.

stui magpie wrote:I've thought log and hard about what to get for Lumumba.

I've decided in the end, if he goes I'll get him a farewell card and a bottle of rum.

Personally I'd just tell him to make sure the door doesn't hit him on the way out.

Hang on, there have been trades like Wood for Pick 14, McLean for something ridiculous like 12 or something. O'Brien is twice the footballer than both. Would expect nothing less than a first round pick.

I voted "no" because I think we will be forced into spending our first round pick on Moore.

If it turns out that we only have to bid a 2nd rounder for the kid, then yeah sure... try and upgrade pick 8 into 2.