Jump to content

Tim Harrington's cautious approach to the mini-draft

Featured Replies

  On 12/10/2011 at 09:50, Axis of Bob said:

Imagine if we actually got one of those picks. RobbieF's response is either:

a- we overpaid (after getting O'Meara)

b- we got the dud one (after getting Crouch).

You're stuck in the 70s when we sucked, RF. And you want to be there.

Jeez you got it wrong again bobby.

I would have loved to have picked up either but we didn't; I would have been quite happy with Crouch if we missed out on O'Meara.

That clear enough for you?

Come back to me if you need any clarification sponge bobby.

 
  On 12/10/2011 at 09:43, Nasher said:

Weird post. What, in your eyes, would've been a good effort then? The only alternatives I see are paying above what we thought was reasonable, or just not bothering at all - who's to say Adelaide/GC would've put in the offers they did unless there was some pressure coming from us? I'm really battling to see where Harrington and team went wrong here.

1. Harrington was quite open about making a serious play for the mini-draft.

2. In his role he would have known what the main competition - GC and anyone else with a compo pick- would be prepared to offer.

3. He states today we had a bale out position which we were not prepared to go past.

4. Despite what some say on here, I don't believe it was any secret what GC, in particular were prepared to offer. Gunston walked out on Adelaide some time back, meaning that they would also be able to improve their position through that trade.

5. I can only assume that with all this information he genuinely believed that we were never a realistic chance based on what we were prepared to offer and his sole aim was to make the other clubs bid what he felt were overs. (If so - fair enough).

6. My opinion - with Viney already in the bank, why would we not trade away both compo picks and 12 if necessary to pick one of the two players who are universally acknowledged as the being top 3 or 4 in this draft if eligible. Our compo picks are most likely going to be somewhere between 10 and 16 when they eventually fall, depending on when others use theirs. Pick 12 this year is more like an early 20's pick given the concessions already granted to GWS in terms of the 17 year olds they took last year. So, in reality, we would have been sacrificing two mid to late first rounders and an early second rounder in a normal year for pick 1 or 2. That's what I would have done. Might have been wrong, but gee, it would have been exciting. That would have been a good effort.

  On 12/10/2011 at 09:43, Nasher said:

Weird post. What, in your eyes, would've been a good effort then? The only alternatives I see are paying above what we thought was reasonable, or just not bothering at all - who's to say Adelaide/GC would've put in the offers they did unless there was some pressure coming from us? I'm really battling to see where Harrington and team went wrong here.

They didnt I suspect. That was stage one. I would think that there are possibly three parts to this week. There would be the straight out deals, such as Gunston. Someting for something, but aside from the min-draft. Then theres the deals involving teh mini draft and theyll be done by tomorrow. After this theres the other deals. Some coulndt be assessed until the fallout is known. Anyhows I sense were in there somewhere in stage 3

 
  On 12/10/2011 at 09:57, warren dean said:

1. Harrington was quite open about making a serious play for the mini-draft.

2. In his role he would have known what the main competition - GC and anyone else with a compo pick- would be prepared to offer.

3. He states today we had a bale out position which we were not prepared to go past.

4. Despite what some say on here, I don't believe it was any secret what GC, in particular were prepared to offer. Gunston walked out on Adelaide some time back, meaning that they would also be able to improve their position through that trade.

5. I can only assume that with all this information he genuinely believed that we were never a realistic chance based on what we were prepared to offer and his sole aim was to make the other clubs bid what he felt were overs. (If so - fair enough).

6. My opinion - with Viney already in the bank, why would we not trade away both compo picks and 12 if necessary to pick one of the two players who are universally acknowledged as the being top 3 or 4 in this draft if eligible. Our compo picks are most likely going to be somewhere between 10 and 16 when they eventually fall, depending on when others use theirs. Pick 12 this year is more like an early 20's pick given the concessions already granted to GWS in terms of the 17 year olds they took last year. So, in reality, we would have been sacrificing two mid to late first rounders and an early second rounder in a normal year for pick 1 or 2. That's what I would have done. Might have been wrong, but gee, it would have been exciting. That would have been a good effort.

Well thought out response can't disagree with that at all. I posted early in the piece that I was happy we weren't being vocal in the 17 year old draft and that we had sealed the leaks meaning anything we did would have been behind closed doors, then lo and behold we announce our intentions. Someone mentioned that when you go to an auction for a house you have a point where you stop, and that's true, but you don't get involved if you have no intention of buying the house and you don't attend the auction if you don't have enough to buy it anyway or it's going to sell for more than you are prepared to pay.

  On 12/10/2011 at 10:08, RobbieF said:

Well thought out response can't disagree with that at all. I posted early in the piece that I was happy we weren't being vocal in the 17 year old draft and that we had sealed the leaks meaning anything we did would have been behind closed doors, then lo and behold we announce our intentions. Someone mentioned that when you go to an auction for a house you have a point where you stop, and that's true, but you don't get involved if you have no intention of buying the house and you don't attend the auction if you don't have enough to buy it anyway or it's going to sell for more than you are prepared to pay.

Unless the people who buy this house also want the house that you really want, and forcing them to buy this one at an inflated price then means you get your preferred house on the cheap......


  On 12/10/2011 at 09:57, warren dean said:

1. Harrington was quite open about making a serious play for the mini-draft.

2. In his role he would have known what the main competition - GC and anyone else with a compo pick- would be prepared to offer.

3. He states today we had a bale out position which we were not prepared to go past.

4. Despite what some say on here, I don't believe it was any secret what GC, in particular were prepared to offer. Gunston walked out on Adelaide some time back, meaning that they would also be able to improve their position through that trade.

5. I can only assume that with all this information he genuinely believed that we were never a realistic chance based on what we were prepared to offer and his sole aim was to make the other clubs bid what he felt were overs. (If so - fair enough).

6. My opinion - with Viney already in the bank, why would we not trade away both compo picks and 12 if necessary to pick one of the two players who are universally acknowledged as the being top 3 or 4 in this draft if eligible. Our compo picks are most likely going to be somewhere between 10 and 16 when they eventually fall, depending on when others use theirs. Pick 12 this year is more like an early 20's pick given the concessions already granted to GWS in terms of the 17 year olds they took last year. So, in reality, we would have been sacrificing two mid to late first rounders and an early second rounder in a normal year for pick 1 or 2. That's what I would have done. Might have been wrong, but gee, it would have been exciting. That would have been a good effort.

All true

Im still keen on a few players around the 12 mark however, Greene, Buntine, Paine and Mckenzie sound like they could be worth the pick

And when we have 3 first round picks anything is possible, we could land 2 pretty good players with them through trades, however unlikely this may be

  On 12/10/2011 at 10:16, Dr. Mubutu said:

Unless the people who buy this house also want the house that you really want, and forcing them to buy this one at an inflated price then means you get your preferred house on the cheap......

Have you ever bought a house, good doctor? I must say I've bought a few in my time and I've very rarely come across the same people even though it's in the same area and a similar house. Each one is generally unique and has it's own set of bidders.

If I go to an auction with the intention to buy then I need a point that I won't go past. If you don't then you are only screwing yourself.

But, it doesn't mean that I don't want the house. It just means that there are also other houses that represent value and will offer better value than the original when the price of the original gets too high. If someone is willing to pay too much for the house then you walk away .... disappointed, but satisfied that you kept your head.

If you just want to win the auction then, in effect, you lose.

The 17yos aren't the only options. We have the best hand in the next draft, which is alleged to be incredible. Alternatively we have the best hand for the next 17 yo draft if we want to participate.

 
  On 12/10/2011 at 10:18, Jordie_tackles said:
All true Im still keen on a few players around the 12 mark however, Greene, Buntine, Paine and Mckenzie sound like they could be worth the pick And when we have 3 first round picks anything is possible, we could land 2 pretty good players with them through trades, however unlikely this may be

Greene would be a very good get I reckon, if he's still there that is.

  On 12/10/2011 at 10:21, RobbieF said:

Have you ever bought a house, good doctor? I must say I've bought a few in my time and I've very rarely come across the same people even though it's in the same area and a similar house. Each one is generally unique and has it's own set of bidders.

Well in this case, you can only have 18 bidders, ever, for ANY 'house', so I'm sure we'll see some of the same people at auction from time to time.


  On 12/10/2011 at 10:16, Dr. Mubutu said:

Unless the people who buy this house also want the house that you really want, and forcing them to buy this one at an inflated price then means you get your preferred house on the cheap......

yep..its like any auction. You go there with real intents . You go with an eye to the market, but on teh day bidders can get carried away. The intrinsic value of the bidded item hasnt really changed just the emotion of some of those desiring the outcome of their choice.

You dont really know though what an auctionwill do until it starts.. all prior considerations are supposition. It then gets trumped by reality.

Its all a game.

I think this thread is premature.

How can we judge the use of the picks when we havent got to the end of Draft week yet.

Hyperthetically what if it turns around and BP and TH get a Boak or a Gaff....etc. We will be starting a thread lucky we held on to the priority picks to snare these guys!

Lets wait till the end of the week comes around before we lynch the Bloke!

Also if you think this is a solely Tim Harrington decision without BP, Neeld, Craig, Scwab, Lion being involved in the decision making I think you're kidding yourself!

  On 12/10/2011 at 10:21, RobbieF said:

Have you ever bought a house, good doctor? I must say I've bought a few in my time and I've very rarely come across the same people even though it's in the same area and a similar house. Each one is generally unique and has it's own set of bidders.

And thats where houses and players diverge. We have clubs all after very similar things in a very confined market. Bound to attract a few familiar faces at different bargaining tables.

I would never buy a house from Sheedy.

  On 12/10/2011 at 10:22, Axis of Bob said:
If I go to an auction with the intention to buy then I need a point that I won't go past. If you don't then you are only screwing yourself. But, it doesn't mean that I don't want the house. It just means that there are also other houses that represent value and will offer better value than the original when the price of the original gets too high. If someone is willing to pay too much for the house then you walk away .... disappointed, but satisfied that you kept your head. If you just want to win the auction then, in effect, you lose. The 17yos aren't the only options. We have the best hand in the next draft, which is alleged to be incredible. Alternatively we have the best hand for the next 17 yo draft if we want to participate.

If you pay $50k or even $100k more for a house it's al forgotten in 5 or 6 years down the track, you just look back and thank you lucky stars that you got in when you did as the prices in the area have increased dramatically since you moved in.

Of course you can be conservative and miss out every time, then tell all your friends how lucky they are to have a house whilst you're still renting and probably always will because the price increases ensure you will never be able to buy.


  On 12/10/2011 at 10:08, RobbieF said:

Well thought out response can't disagree with that at all. I posted early in the piece that I was happy we weren't being vocal in the 17 year old draft and that we had sealed the leaks meaning anything we did would have been behind closed doors, then lo and behold we announce our intentions. Someone mentioned that when you go to an auction for a house you have a point where you stop, and that's true, but you don't get involved if you have no intention of buying the house and you don't attend the auction if you don't have enough to buy it anyway or it's going to sell for more than you are prepared to pay.

I'm sorry Robbie. But i'm not sure what your point is with this post.

What are you saying? That we shouldn't have announced our intentions earlier this week?

That you should only go to a house auction if you think you have enough cash and that no one will bid higher than you?

Im not trying to troll. I just generally cannot understand your point.

  On 12/10/2011 at 10:30, SloonieMcFloonieloone said:
I would never buy a house from Sheedy.

I wouldn't even sell him one.

  On 12/10/2011 at 10:26, Jacked Up said:

I think this thread is premature.

How can we judge the use of the picks when we havent got to the end of Draft week yet.

................................................

Dang you ...ya just upped and went and spoiled all the fun some of the MFCSC ( or whatever its called ) worrywarts were having.!! Bad robot !!

I would sell him one, it will be termite infested and be insulated with feces.

  On 12/10/2011 at 10:31, RobbieF said:

If you pay $50k or even $100k more for a house it's al forgotten in 5 or 6 years down the track, you just look back and thank you lucky stars that you got in when you did as the prices in the area have increased dramatically since you moved in.

Of course you can be conservative and miss out every time, then tell all your friends how lucky they are to have a house whilst you're still renting and probably always will because the price increases ensure you will never be able to buy.

So if I don't overspend on a house im going to be renting forever?


  On 12/10/2011 at 10:08, RobbieF said:

Well thought out response can't disagree with that at all. I posted early in the piece that I was happy we weren't being vocal in the 17 year old draft and that we had sealed the leaks meaning anything we did would have been behind closed doors, then lo and behold we announce our intentions. Someone mentioned that when you go to an auction for a house you have a point where you stop, and that's true, but you don't get involved if you have no intention of buying the house and you don't attend the auction if you don't have enough to buy it anyway or it's going to sell for more than you are prepared to pay.

Spot on all points make sense and really all there is to it now is some of us would have gone for it and some of us wouldnt. I would have. The benefit of having an O'meara/Crouch down at the club with Viney having 2 pre seasons and 1 year of playing for Casey seniors while learning the ropes of Neelds gameplan to me would seem a huge advantage going into the 2013 season, you would be bringing in kids that were ready to go and pretty much you would know exactly what you were getting with these kids. The further down the pecking order of the draft the more unknown it becomes, yes you may strike a nugget of gold which is hard to strike (hope we do). but more often than not especially of more recent years as recruiting has gotten better the top end picks seem to be getting pretty bloody good. Murphy, Gibbs, Kreuzer, Watts, Natanui, Hill, Trengove, Martin etc some other muppett

  On 12/10/2011 at 10:33, UTAH said:
I'm sorry Robbie. But i'm not sure what your point is with this post. What are you saying? That we shouldn't have announced our intentions earlier this week? That you should only go to a house auction if you think you have enough cash and that no one will bid higher than you? Im not trying to troll. I just generally cannot understand your point.

What I'm saying is you don't bother going to an auction unless you are prepared to pay the price and you generally have an idea before you go what you will be up for.

For instance if you believe that a house will sell for $1m and you are only prepared to go to $800k then why bother. When you go to an auction you have to factor the spur of the moment bid as well so your limit must be what you are prepared to pay plus what your wife forces you to go to because she badly wants the house.

We knew that GC were going to put Pick 4 on the table it was well publicised and it was also well known that they would have to part with a compo pick. If we weren't prepared to match or better that then why would you put your hand up?

  On 12/10/2011 at 10:37, UTAH said:

So if I don't overspend on a house im going to be renting forever?

Is there a real estate thread on Demonland this conversation can take place, cos it's starting to stray away from draft talk metaphor into actual real estate talk.

Back to the topic at hand people. We didn't pay what we perceived to be overs on what is essentially an un-tried commodity. Simple.

So now we move back in with the parents, save some more money, and go out again and hit the market when the time is right for us!

There's your real estate analogy [censored]!

 
  On 12/10/2011 at 10:37, UTAH said:
So if I don't overspend on a house im going to be renting forever?

Probably.

You need to do the sums and work out the point where you may find renting to be better for you than overspending on a house.

As the old saying goes, there's more than one way to skin a cat.

To take the argument to extremes, would you have traded Watts for Crouch? Why/why not?

At what point would you have said that too much was too much? What would have been your ceiling price for O'Meara/Crouch?


Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Featured Content

  • CASEY: Footscray

    At twenty-four minutes into the third term of the game between the Casey Demons and Footscray VFL at Whitten Oval, the visitors were coasting. They were winning all over the ground, had the ascendancy in the ruck battles and held a 26 point lead on a day perfect for football. What could go wrong? Everything. The Bulldogs moved into overdrive in the last five minutes of the term and booted three straight goals to reduce the margin to a highly retrievable eight points at the last break. Bouyed by that effort, their confidence was on a high level during the interval and they ran all over the despondent Demons and kicked another five goals to lead by a comfortable margin of four goals deep into the final term before Paddy Cross kicked a couple of too late goals for a despondent Casey. A testament to their lack of pressure in the latter stages of the game was the fact that Footscray’s last ten scoring shots were nine goals and one rushed behind. Things might have been different for the Demons who went into the game after last week’s bye with 12 AFL listed players. Blake Howes was held over for the AFL game but two others, Jack Billings and Taj Woewodin (not officially listed as injured) were also missing and they could have been handy at the end. Another mystery of the current VFL system.

    • 0 replies
    Demonland
  • PREGAME: Brisbane

    The Demons head back out on the road in Round 10 when they travel to Queensland to take on the reigning Premiers and the top of the table Lions who look very formidable. Can the Dees cause a massive upset? Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Vomit
      • Like
    • 79 replies
    Demonland
  • PODCAST: Hawthorn

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 12th May @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect the Demons loss to the Hawks. Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show. If you would like to leave us a voicemail please call 03 9016 3666 and don't worry no body answers so you don't have to talk to a human.

      • Like
    • 31 replies
    Demonland
  • POSTGAME: Hawthorn

    Wayward kicking for goal, dump kicks inside 50 and some baffling umpiring all contributed to the Dees not getting out to an an early lead that may have impacted the result. At the end of the day the Demons were just not good enough and let the Hawks run away with their first win against the Demons in 7 years.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 326 replies
    Demonland
  • VOTES: Hawthorn

    After 3 fantastic week Max Gawn has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year award from Jake Bowey, Christian Petracca, Kade Chandler and Ed Langdon who round out the Top Five. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

      • Like
    • 32 replies
    Demonland
  • GAMEDAY: Hawthorn

    It’s game day and the Demons are chasing a fourth straight win as we take on the high flying Hawks at the G. After decades of being tormented by the Hawks the Dees will be keen to extend their 7 year dominance over Hawthorn.

      • Like
    • 471 replies
    Demonland