I know it's early and we're not yet thinking about who we will draft, what pick we will have etc.. but Dee-luded's reply in another thread go me thinking that far ahead and wondering...

Would it be worth trading whatever our top pick is this year for either a ruck or full forward should there be a half decent one available?

The things that come up are:

-Draft picks will be worth a lot more this year due to the concessions, so some of the teams that are currently performing well may look to improve their draft position thinking about the distant future

-Either of those positions strengthened will improve our forward structure (see the "Full Forward" thread)

-We will probably lose a bit of experience at the end of the year with delisitings and retirements, and there's no point having a whole team of 19-22 year olds

There's already some interesting talk about Gray and Boak, but who else is out of contract?, and who knows who may chose to move on from their current club.

I've loved the way we've drafted the last couple of years, but my gut feeling is that's enough, let's get a bit more of a mix going.

Thoughts?

Yeah, look how well that theory worked with Brisbane and Collingwood this year.

Or rather, look at those 2 teams and the trade for experienced players that we were involved in less recently.

Or the trade with Carlton.

There is room to trade for experience, but when it involves your first round pick it is generally a bad idea.

Considering we'll end up with pick 10, 12 or 14 and we got Grimes & Gysberts around then, it is a dicey proposition.

(although we also got Dunn, Bell and Nick Smith around then, but I think the science of drafting has been honed since then)

Yeah, look how well that theory worked with Brisbane and Collingwood this year.

Or rather, look at those 2 teams and the trade for experienced players that we were involved in less recently.

Or the trade with Carlton.

There is room to trade for experience, but when it involves your first round pick it is generally a bad idea.

Considering we'll end up with pick 10, 12 or 14 and we got Grimes & Gysberts around then, it is a dicey proposition.

(although we also got Dunn, Bell and Nick Smith around then, but I think the science of drafting has been honed since then)

Don't forget...

LUKE MOLAN AT PICK 9

How could any demon supporter?

But to me he doesn't count. That wasn't a normal pick; it was a monumental stuff up by CAC and then horrendous luck for the poor boy to boot.

How could any demon supporter?

But to me he doesn't count. That wasn't a normal pick; it was a monumental stuff up by CAC and then horrendous luck for the poor boy to boot.

Just think, Nicky Dal was taken with pick 13 that year

I know it's early and we're not yet thinking about who we will draft, what pick we will have etc.. but Dee-luded's reply in another thread go me thinking that far ahead and wondering...

Would it be worth trading whatever our top pick is this year for either a ruck or full forward should there be a half decent one available?

The things that come up are:

-Draft picks will be worth a lot more this year due to the concessions, so some of the teams that are currently performing well may look to improve their draft position thinking about the distant future

-Either of those positions strengthened will improve our forward structure (see the "Full Forward" thread)

-We will probably lose a bit of experience at the end of the year with delisitings and retirements, and there's no point having a whole team of 19-22 year olds

There's already some interesting talk about Gray and Boak, but who else is out of contract?, and who knows who may chose to move on from their current club.

I've loved the way we've drafted the last couple of years, but my gut feeling is that's enough, let's get a bit more of a mix going.

Thoughts?

'stuie', stay the course mate, otherwise we'll run the risk of neither here Nor there. We can't speed up the time it takes for a young Gem to find their feet, they take as long as they take.

So trading IN, at this point won't speed us to a flag, Not unless we bring in Pavlich & Ablett jnr, & Ryder, & Goodes.

I think your right in as much as we'll probably do some trading this year in & out, but not the early picks please.

IMO we could trade for some leadership types to fill the missing age brackets, ( a S Burgoyne type), players that will add experience but won't necessarily pinch the spots from the kids, players that can add depth & competition for spots.

I know it's early and we're not yet thinking about who we will draft, what pick we will have etc.. but Dee-luded's reply in another thread go me thinking that far ahead and wondering...

Would it be worth trading whatever our top pick is this year for either a ruck or full forward should there be a half decent one available?

The things that come up are:

-Draft picks will be worth a lot more this year due to the concessions, so some of the teams that are currently performing well may look to improve their draft position thinking about the distant future

-Either of those positions strengthened will improve our forward structure (see the "Full Forward" thread)

-We will probably lose a bit of experience at the end of the year with delisitings and retirements, and there's no point having a whole team of 19-22 year olds

There's already some interesting talk about Gray and Boak, but who else is out of contract?, and who knows who may chose to move on from their current club.

I've loved the way we've drafted the last couple of years, but my gut feeling is that's enough, let's get a bit more of a mix going.

Thoughts?

IMHO it all depends on where you think you are in the cycle and when your "window of opportunity" will open up ... as to what strategy you might under take.

Swabby might have given a few clues away today on Whiteboard Wendesday ... which is well worth watching if you get a chance.

However, that all said. Strategies should always be flexible as more information comes to hand.

The trouble with trading is that anybody tradeable and tradeworthy is likely to be offered much more by GC than we can afford. Unless there's a "niche" player who fits our needs in a way that wouldn't be so appealing to a side starting out. Hard to see where, though.

We're far enough away that a young kid can still play a role when we're a contender.

We're not close enough to top up.

I guess I'm really just wondering when our time to stop planning ahead and actually start progressing at a rate is. I know it's a long haul, but when does the time come for us to say, ok we have enough young talent, let's start getting them ready to take their shot. Just starting to feel like we will forever be rebuilding to no end.

i think we try and grab Shaun Hampson from the blues, just rotate him and Jamar between the ruck and forward line similar to what the bombers do with Ryder and hille

How could any demon supporter?

But to me he doesn't count. That wasn't a normal pick; it was a monumental stuff up by CAC and then horrendous luck for the poor boy to boot.

A monumental stuff up that Molan was beset with injuries?? Laughable.

That's like saying we recruited Chris Judd but he fell under a bus. Poor recruiting.

No idea.

A monumental stuff up that Molan was beset with injuries?? Laughable.

That's like saying we recruited Chris Judd but he fell under a bus. Poor recruiting.

No idea.

Uh... YOU have no idea.

It was a monumental stuff up because CAC chose for needs rather than best available and he has admitted as much after the fact.

Injuries only compounded his mistake.

Sydney have traded for needs and have a great track record.

If the right player was there....say Dawes or Anthony, i'd like us to go for them.

Not sure what they'd be worth though.

i think we try and grab Shaun Hampson from the blues, just rotate him and Jamar between the ruck and forward line similar to what the bombers do with Ryder and hille

They rejected Ports first rounder last year adn Warnock is looking like he isn't the real deal so migh be harder to get him from Carlton unless he wants to leave

Sydney have traded for needs and have a great track record.

If the right player was there....say Dawes or Anthony, i'd like us to go for them.

Not sure what they'd be worth though.

Sydney had players like O'Loughlin and Hall at their peaks and under Roos have topped up at that time. However, their stars are ageing or retired. The difficulty with the Swans is that be trading so much they have sacrificed developing young players with their quality picks. As a consequence now their stars are gone they will be continually spak filling their list and will at best continue as a 7 - 13 spot side because they will never develop the list to seriously challenge again...at least under the existing salary/trade/draft rules.

I would not touch Anthony with a 20 foot pole. Front runner with no commitment. And given how flaky Cloke is up forwwrd, the Pies wont let Dawes walk.

Being kind to Jack Anthony there Rhino.

The kid is a headcase with a bit of talent.

I'm not even sure he'd get a game in our forward line as is, let alone once Watts develops and Jurrah &Petterd regain fitness.

They rejected Ports first rounder last year adn Warnock is looking like he isn't the real deal so migh be harder to get him from Carlton unless he wants to leave

i was not aware of that, that pretty much rules him out, especially after what we got for McLean

I guess I'm really just wondering when our time to stop planning ahead and actually start progressing at a rate is. I know it's a long haul, but when does the time come for us to say, ok we have enough young talent, let's start getting them ready to take their shot. Just starting to feel like we will forever be rebuilding to no end.

We'll know we have enough talent when that talent "arrives" in real terms out onfield, performing at a high level week in week out.

We should never give away our future ever again by trading early picks because of impatiens.

Or impatience, even.

I don't think you ever stop planning for the future.

To me, no team ever reaches the point where they should just go all out to "top up" instead of drafting for future years.

What did Schwab term it?

"A game never won?"

Trading early picks for players at our stage of our development is ludicrous.

AFL rules state that we STILL have to take 3 players in the National Draft, so trading early picks only leaves us with later picks to use and given the concessions to GC17 that only means even later picks!

Trading early picks should only be used as a last resort when we are well and truly in our premiership window. ie. we just lost a Preliminary Final because we didn't have an effective stopper, crumber etc. or, we trade two early picks for one better one to guarantee securing a that will be still there is the draft.

FWIW Matt Rendall (Adelaide National Recruiting Manager) was on SEN yesterday defending his comments about how GC17 and GWS will win the next 10 flags after 2014. Apart from his astute observation that GC17 will have 17 first round picks going into their second season while most other clubs take, well, 17 years to get that many first round picks.

What pricked up my ears though was what he said about this years draft. He said that if it included the 17 year olds taken be GC17 last year it would be THE BEST DRAFT EVER. He went on to say that there are plenty of fantastic 'top shelf' tall players coming through SA, and a lot of quality midfielders from Vic, but not quite up to the Scully, Trengove standard. The quality goes pretty deep, to about selection 20!! The top three players are vertually 'locked in' (Swallow is already taken at one apparently, Day, Bennell will go two and three) leaving a host of midfielders and KPP types available to share with GC17 for the teams finishing near the bottom of the ladder.

Have a listen . http://www.sen.com.au/audioplayer/Audio/Matt-Rendell,-Adelaide-Recruiting-Manager/554

We are currently in line for pick 10 at our current ladder position. Each spot up or down the ladder we move from here on will see us receiving the pick two above or below that, to as low as pick 4.

It stands to reason that even with all the picks GC17 and GWS are getting what is left is still better than nothing and those picks are still going to be distributed to the 16 other teams.

This year finishing down the ladder still has some upside in my opinion if the draft is that strong. We might just pick up that genuine KPP forward we need to complement JW.

So again, trading those picks for 'top up' or 'experienced' players is just ludicrous.

Go Dees

My sentiments exactly.

I'm quite excited by the fact we'll be able to replace Bell & PJ with a couple of young quality players.

IMO we are 2-3 years away from our premiership window. Trading our draft picks would be a very poor strategy.

There is a mountain of work to be done before we are at the stage of topping up with positional players.

And lets face it, our past record of top up players has not been very successful.

We may be more in a position now to pick best kpp as opposed to " best available "

Paging Gary Moorcroft ... Gary Moorcroft to the retirement village reception area ...

Trading early picks for players at our stage of our development is ludicrous.

AFL rules state that we STILL have to take 3 players in the National Draft, so trading early picks only leaves us with later picks to use and given the concessions to GC17 that only means even later picks!

Trading early picks should only be used as a last resort when we are well and truly in our premiership window. ie. we just lost a Preliminary Final because we didn't have an effective stopper, crumber etc. or, we trade two early picks for one better one to guarantee securing a that will be still there is the draft.

FWIW Matt Rendall (Adelaide National Recruiting Manager) was on SEN yesterday defending his comments about how GC17 and GWS will win the next 10 flags after 2014. Apart from his astute observation that GC17 will have 17 first round picks going into their second season while most other clubs take, well, 17 years to get that many first round picks.

What pricked up my ears though was what he said about this years draft. He said that if it included the 17 year olds taken be GC17 last year it would be THE BEST DRAFT EVER. He went on to say that there are plenty of fantastic 'top shelf' tall players coming through SA, and a lot of quality midfielders from Vic, but not quite up to the Scully, Trengove standard. The quality goes pretty deep, to about selection 20!! The top three players are vertually 'locked in' (Swallow is already taken at one apparently, Day, Bennell will go two and three) leaving a host of midfielders and KPP types available to share with GC17 for the teams finishing near the bottom of the ladder.

Have a listen . http://www.sen.com.au/audioplayer/Audio/Matt-Rendell,-Adelaide-Recruiting-Manager/554

We are currently in line for pick 10 at our current ladder position. Each spot up or down the ladder we move from here on will see us receiving the pick two above or below that, to as low as pick 4.

It stands to reason that even with all the picks GC17 and GWS are getting what is left is still better than nothing and those picks are still going to be distributed to the 16 other teams.

This year finishing down the ladder still has some upside in my opinion if the draft is that strong. We might just pick up that genuine KPP forward we need to complement JW.

So again, trading those picks for 'top up' or 'experienced' players is just ludicrous.

Go Dees

Well said i tend to agree, the gold coast will not take the "best available" as they will draft more on "needs" so there is great potentiol there too pick up a quality KPP that could possibly be a higher pick in any other year based on the "best possible" theory. Don't trade draft picks the game is based around youth more and more!