If Freo pull off a coup and pinch Cloke, compo picks will be headed Collingwood's way.

http://www.heraldsun...f-1226344152734

Still wouldn't really affect us since Collingwood are a monty to finish much higher (except pushing back our 2nd round pick).

If Freo pull off a coup and pinch Cloke, compo picks will be headed Collingwood's way.

http://www.heraldsun...f-1226344152734

Still wouldn't really affect us since Collingwood are a monty to finish much higher (except pushing back our 2nd round pick).

If Freo pull off a coup and pinch Cloke, compo picks will be headed Collingwood's way.

http://www.heraldsun...f-1226344152734

Still wouldn't really affect us since Collingwood are a monty to finish much higher (except pushing back our 2nd round pick).

Interesting article - I wonder who "leaked" this little beauty.

While our form at the moment implies pick 3 in the draft. Should we get o a roll in the 2nd half of the season, it would look like there would be no way of pushing Jack back to the second round.

If so, what would we do re first four picks (i.e. trade for No#1 U17, experienced hands)?

Edited May 2, 201213 yr by PaulRB

While our form at the moment implies pick 3 in the draft. Should we get o a roll in the 2nd half of the season, it would look like there would be no way of pushing Jack back to the second round.

If so, what would we do re first four picks (i.e. trade for No#1 U17, experienced hands)?

I'd still try and get Dangerfield or someone of similar ilk. Maybe a Whitecross.

So I would go for experience rather than the 17 year olds.

Good thinking - there's a few kinks - GC gets too good a deal - I think they get the U17 pick for free. One of the hurdles in coming up with a good fair deal is that GWS, GC and MFC have specific picks and to get the trade mix right is not always easy. The fair value might be a half a round upgrade but if you don't have those picks then you can't do the deal. Working the U17 picks in gives another dimension.

BTW, it's great to see you suggest a practical a scenario ...

Yeah i thought about that after i posted. I thought that in that scenario that GC should probably shoot gWS a 2nd rounder as well

so then it goes

MELB Give: Draft pick #3

Melb Get: first Pick 17yr old (Viney can now be used with 2nd rounder)

GWS Give: Both 17 yr olds

GWS Get: Draft pick #2 and 2nd round draft pick

GC give: Downgrade 1 draftpick(2 to 3) and a 2nd rounder

GC get: second pick in 17yr old draft

I'd still try and get Dangerfield or someone of similar ilk. Maybe a Whitecross.

So I would go for experience rather than the 17 year olds.

I disagree.

I think we actually have a lot of the cattle already on the list, just yet to realise their potential, and we need to keep investing in youth for later.

I disagree.

I think we actually have a lot of the cattle already on the list, just yet to realise their potential, and we need to keep investing in youth for later.

I have said this plenty of times but the kids need help, we need some bodies in there.

I have faith in the kids we have, as I believe in the MFC Youth False Economy and I want to address that quickly.

Yeah i thought about that after i posted. I thought that in that scenario that GC should probably shoot gWS a 2nd rounder as well

so then it goes

MELB Give: Draft pick #3

Melb Get: first Pick 17yr old (Viney can now be used with 2nd rounder)

GWS Give: Both 17 yr olds

GWS Get: Draft pick #2 and 2nd round draft pick

GC give: Downgrade 1 draftpick(2 to 3) and a 2nd rounder

GC get: second pick in 17yr old draft

Turn that 2nd rounder into a decent GC kid that is happy to move to Blacktown, give us the second rounder from GC and we are set.

I think it is a better deal for GWS who wouldn't give a 17 year old for a second round pick (which is essentially the deal here) and GC pay a deserving price for their forunate place in this trade.

We get a sweetener for bringing this fantastic deal to everyone and we all leave happy.

Eg.

MELB Give: Draft pick #3

Melb Get: first Pick 17yr old (Viney can now be used with 2nd rounder) and Pick 23ish

GWS Give: Both 17 yr olds

GWS Get: Draft pick #3 and Lynch/Gorringe/Tape/whoever

GC give: Lynch/Gorringe/Tape/whoever and Pick 23ish

GC get: second pick in 17yr old draft

Edited May 2, 201213 yr by rpfc

Not sure Dangerfield or Whitecross are the mature-bodied older heads I'd be hoping for.

I'd go for a player 26+ with plenty of years behind them, who will assist the kids as they gradually over a few years slide into an off-field role.

I like Salopek - can't even get a game in the SANFL 1sts at the moment, in spite of his talent.

Turn that 2nd rounder into a decent GC kid that is happy to move to Blacktown, give us the second rounder from GC and we are set.

I think it is a better deal for GWS who wouldn't give a 17 year old for a second round pick (which is essentially the deal here) and GC pay a deserving price for their forunate place in this trade.

We get a sweetener for bringing this fantastic deal to everyone and we all leave happy.

Turn it into Caddy to Essendon, then Ryder to GWS...

Turn it into Caddy to Essendon, then Ryder to GWS...

would be tough orchestrating a 4 way deal behind the scenes in finals season though, especially if Essendon are competing.

Not sure Dangerfield or Whitecross are the mature-bodied older heads I'd be hoping for. I'd go for a player 26+ with plenty of years behind them, who will assist the kids as they gradually over a few years slide into an off-field role. I like Salopek - can't even get a game in the SANFL 1sts at the moment, in spite of his talent.

Yeah, Salopek is solid. I believe he is a RFA from memory.

would be tough orchestrating a 4 way deal behind the scenes in finals season though, especially if Essendon are competing.

Yes, and I would attempt to keep it to the three teams with an interest in completion of the trade:

We want Viney in the second round.

GWS wants a good price for the 17 year olds.

GC wants a 17 year old.

Pure Game Theory - if all interested parties are rational we should get a deal done.

Well done, olisik.

Turn that 2nd rounder into a decent GC kid that is happy to move to Blacktown, give us the second rounder from GC and we are set.

I think it is a better deal for GWS who wouldn't give a 17 year old for a second round pick (which is essentially the deal here) and GC pay a deserving price for their forunate place in this trade.

We get a sweetener for bringing this fantastic deal to everyone and we all leave happy.

Eg.

MELB Give: Draft pick #3

Melb Get: first Pick 17yr old (Viney can now be used with 2nd rounder) and Pick 23ish

GWS Give: Both 17 yr olds

GWS Get: Draft pick #3 and Lynch/Gorringe/Tape/whoever

GC give: Lynch/Gorringe/Tape/whoever and Pick 23ish

GC get: second pick in 17yr old draft

I dont know if the bolded is asking to much on our behalf?

I would say that to GWS for the 2nd 17yo which is well unders

OUR sweetener is getting viney for a second rounder when he is a top 5 pick

or if you want to look at it this way the 1st 17yo pick for our second rounder which is super cheap.....

much in the same pick 3odd and 22 for 17yo and Viney

i would say GC give up a worse player as those guys would be relatively untouchable at this stage

Edited May 2, 201213 yr by Jordie_tackles

Yes, and I would attempt to keep it to the three teams with an interest in completion of the trade:

We want Viney in the second round.

GWS wants a good price for the 17 year olds.

GC wants a 17 year old.

Pure Game Theory - if all interested parties are rational we should get a deal done.

Well done, olisik.

Send it off to Toddy .....(as long as DW approves of course!)

Yeah i thought about that after i posted. I thought that in that scenario that GC should probably shoot gWS a 2nd rounder as well

so then it goes

MELB Give: Draft pick #3

Melb Get: first Pick 17yr old (Viney can now be used with 2nd rounder)

GWS Give: Both 17 yr olds

GWS Get: Draft pick #2 and 2nd round draft pick

GC give: Downgrade 1 draftpick(2 to 3) and a 2nd rounder

GC get: second pick in 17yr old draft

That's pretty good - nice work, would take some topping, I think everybody wins big.

These teams would need to be fools not to start unofficial trade talks during the finals series.

Wouldn't be surprised to see some deals signed off in day 1 of trade talks

I dont know if the bolded is asking to much on our behalf?

Yeah I am greedy...

In that scenario GC keep a top 3 and get a 17 year old for a 2nd round pick, and I think GWS would want more...

I don't think we can appease with picks so bring a player into the mix.

But I do believe it is a sound theory that olisik has put forward.

The only player not vested massively is GWS as they may think they can get a better package than Pick 3 and 23ish.

The teams behind us may offer 5 and 6 and that break our happy little triumvirate.

Yeah I am greedy...

In that scenario GC keep a top 3 and get a 17 year old for a 2nd round pick, and I think GWS would want more...

I don't think we can appease with picks so bring a player into the mix.

But I do believe it is a sound theory that olisik has put forward.

The only player not vested massively is GWS as they may think they can get a better package than Pick 3 and 23ish.

The teams behind us may offer 5 and 6 and that break our happy little triumvirate.

They cant break it if they dont know about it.

But then again GWS may think the same and just rather hold out until after the bidding. Which would also work in our favor as it may prevent them from bidding for viney if they are eye-ing off our pick #3

Yeah I am greedy...

In that scenario GC keep a top 3 and get a 17 year old for a 2nd round pick, and I think GWS would want more...

I don't think we can appease with picks so bring a player into the mix.

But I do believe it is a sound theory that olisik has put forward.

The only player not vested massively is GWS as they may think they can get a better package than Pick 3 and 23ish.

The teams behind us may offer 5 and 6 and that break our happy little triumvirate.

It's pick 2 to GWS which is massively valuable, they'd have 1 & 2

2 & 23 is quite possibly better than 5 & 6 which is the absolute best alternative they could get.

It's pick 2 to GWS which is massively valuable, they'd have 1 & 2

2 & 23 is quite possibly better than 5 & 6 which is the absolute best alternative they could get.

as Rpfc said though picks 2- 23 and a decent young kid from GC?

Of course, this all depends on us finishing 3rd last.

I think GC have to get a good deal out of it to be interested in participating.

And I doubt any other teams will come close to matching pick 3 plus a bit extra in such a strong draft.

Teams will only trade their picks for a really good deal.

- GWS at this stage would only be looking at top echelon talent, or mature players.

- GC to get a greater spread with the ages on their list, and securing more top echelon talent.

Maybe incorporating a good deal for the determined-to-come-home Caddy.

Sorry to spoil all the fun, but the clubs that finish below us have to elect whether or not they will take Viney before trade week, therefore all the arguments about trading away our first round pick for a 17 y.o. in order to get Viney with our second round pick are superfluous.

I wonder whether it would be worth offering GWS picks 4 and 12 (assuming we end up with those picks) in exchange for both of the 17 year olds. It's a big risk given the strength of the draft, but if we've already got Viney with our second round pick (which we will know about at the time) we could gain two great 17 year olds and still have the third best junior in the country. It may be the equivalent of upgrading pick 12 to a player of around the quality of pick 4 in exchange for a bit of risk.

I know that this draft is expected to be very strong, but I think that's a fair trade and could give us a little more time to free up space on our risk without having to clear out 5-6 players from our list.

Realistically, we're likely to go down to at least our 4th round pick in this draft (around pick 55-60) which will be the 6th player that we draft this year! If we use our 5th round pick, it will be 7 players who will have to move elsewhere! Where as if we draft the two 17 y.os we may have to free up space for 4-5 players each year.

Sorry to spoil all the fun, but the clubs that finish below us have to elect whether or not they will take Viney before trade week, therefore all the arguments about trading away our first round pick for a 17 y.o. in order to get Viney with our second round pick are superfluous.

Early on in this discussion it was noted by many, including myself, that these will be 'handshake' deals with GWS and GC.

Olisik's plan to involve the two 17 year olds left to draft is ingenious as it brings GWS into a position of reliance if we put our Pick 3 on the table - it means they cannot bid for Viney if they wish to grab Pick 3 during trade week.

The Gold Coast will be the ones who will take some coaxing but the involvement of both these clubs in the 17 year old draft by olisik is pure Game Theory - if you are attempting to protect Pick 3, bring the two teams in that can make you use that Pick 3 into an important deal that relies on that Pick 3 not being 'bidded' on.

*This scenario relies completely on the hypothetical of the Dees finishing 16th with GC and GWS in the last two positions.

Make the deal, then in trade period, when we go into the rooms with GWS, have nothing but a big meat pie and a peice of paper with Scullys name onit. Then as he goes for the pie, grab it, eat it and walk out without saying a word.

Justice

Then go on to draft pick 3 , 4 , 12, Viney, and a solid 3rd rounder

Make the deal, then in trade period, when we go into the rooms with GWS, have nothing but a big meat pie and a peice of paper with Scullys name onit. Then as he goes for the pie, grab it, eat it and walk out without saying a word.

Justice

Then go on to draft pick 3 , 4 , 12, Viney, and a solid 3rd rounder

You'd imagine the other teams involved would insist on having the paperwork drawn up, signed and dated as within the trade period, before agreeing to not nominate Viney.

That'd be the smart thing to do on their behalves.

Of course, they could also agree to this deal, then either party has a change of heart and pulls the rug out from under us.