A question about GC and Jack Martin

[Deestroy All 14,266]

Just wondering if someone can tell me why GC traded pick 2 for Jack Martin? I have watched FA junior footy this year so I have no idea how talented he is, however I just wonder a bit about trading pick 2 for the best 17 year old and waiting a year, rather than draft the 2nd best 18 year old now.

Is Martin that much better than Toumpas?

Could be a stupid question, but I have my moments.

[Guest José Mourinho]

Stockpiling "pick 2's worth" of players off the list for another year works in GC's favour, whilst they need to trim their list and spots are scarce.

It gives them another year to evaluate the talent they already have in hand.

I'd say Martin is in a similar mould to Harley Bennell, but probably going to be better.

Intrinsically damaging player.

[timD 994]

DA, what I have heard is that (sort of like Jose said), it spaces out the age of their list a bit and that JM is a perfect Scott Clayton player (I think he is there recruiter) - skinny, quick and sublimely skilled.

[Nasher 33,617]

I wondered the same thing, so figured it had to be something logistical given the talent available in this draft. It differs from Hogan in that there doesn't seem to be an equivalent player to Hogan in the draft this year.

[Demon Disciple 12,390]

I wondered the same thing, so figured it had to be something logistical given the talent available in this draft. It differs from Hogan in that there doesn't seem to be an equivalent player to Hogan in the draft this year.

The best KPF's in this draft are Stringer and Mason Shaw. Shaw was behind Hogan playing for WA this year, whilst Stringer is recovering from a horrific injury (he might even be available come pick 20).

GC would like the idea of spreading the age of their new draftees coming in, even if it is only an extra year (gives them greater balance). There are also big advantages in bringing a kid in a year early, in that they have an extra years development at an AFL club.

[RalphiusMaximus 6,100]

I believe Martin is rated very highly also. He could well have gone no.1 next year, which would make it a bargain for GC to get him at 2 this year instead.

[beelzebub 23,389]

No, GC want to stagger the ages a little

[Alcho Dee 269]

No, GC want to stagger the ages a little

I would put someone born in 1994 in the same age group as someone born in 1995.

But from this year's draft Crouch, O'meara, Danniher, Viney...have already been picked out.

So this years no.2 could have been no.4 if crouch and O meara were still in the mix.

Could you say they traded Jack Martin for what normally would have been a no.4 draft pick???

Am I talking any sense here or have I had one to many cab sav's?

[demonchris 162]

I would put someone born in 1994 in the same age group as someone born in 1995.

But from this year's draft Crouch, O'meara, Danniher, Viney...have already been picked out.

So this years no.2 could have been no.4 if crouch and O meara were still in the mix.

Could you say they traded Jack Martin for what normally would have been a no.4 draft pick???

Am I talking any sense here or have I had one to many cab sav's?

Makes perfect sense.

[beelzebub 23,389]

Ill clarify..they want to stagger where some of the ages and contracts fall. they dont want all starting finishing at the same times. By picking martin hell finish a year later than anyone from the draft this year

its a kind of stockpiling. They ( GWS ) wont get the same look in next year to the draft etc.

Edited October 29, 2012 by belzebub59