Patrick Dangerfield

[Fat Tony 5,231]

This exactly the reason why it staggers me that people won't give up our early pick(s) for Dangerfield. Even at pick 3 it's absolutely no certainty to get a great player. Most of those guys are good players, but not one of them is amongst the cream of the competition (as Dangerfield is). Hill and Martin come close.

Imagine if we had picks 2 and 3 and picked up the equivalent of Lachie Hansen and Chris Masten?

(The quote above comes from the Peter Jackson thread on the main board but my reply clearly relates to Dangerfield)

I wouldn't trade both #2 and #3 for Dangerfield unless we got something significant back in return. Reasoning:

• High draft picks have significant optionality value. You cannot value a draft pick by just by taking the median player at that pick. Although the hit rate is low, many of the best players in the competition were very high picks (Buddy, Roughead, Hodge, Pendlebury, Judd, Pavlich, Riewoldt etc). These are players that those clubs built a side around and then helped attract players to the club.
• Our 'premiership window' needs to be seen as five years from now and Dangerfield will be 29 then. (This is not saying I wouldn't go for him at all, but it needs to be considered.)
• We could potentially get Dangerfield as a free agent next year. (In fact, we should become a more appealing prospect for him then because he would get to play alongside Brayshaw and McCartin.)
• Adelaide will deal Dangerfield for slightly less than is worth (i.e. #3 and Toumpas) if they think he is leaving next year. They won't entertain a trade if they think he will stay.
• 2 Tyson type deals gives more bang for our buck than a single Dangerfield deal.
• Just because our previous recruiting teams produced poor results doesn't mean Taylor & co. will luck out.

[demon-4-life 467]

Ablett compromised because of Father/Son. Would've gone high. Obviously there are great players from a range of picks.

Looking at the Player Ratings on the AFL website.

Ablett Compromised

Pendlebury Pick 5

Selwood Pick 7

Dangerfield Pick 10

Griffin Pick 3

Harvey Pick 46 (about 1000 years ago)

Sloane Pick 44

Franklin Pick 5

Fyfe Pick 20

Boak Pick 5

Top 10 players in the comp rating-wise and 7 of them are top 10 picks.

I count 6. Unless you decided to throw in Ablett just to try and sway your argument.

[What 18,810]

I just saw an article with quotes from Mark RIcciuto saying that they wont rule out trading Dangerfielkd

I was pretty shocked he said that, as theres literally no reason to say it unless you know for sure hes gone otherwise why would you risk upsetting your superstar with a statement like that?

I am now sure he will be traded and the deal is likely already agreed to, the question is to which club?

[Lampers 563]

Ablett compromised because of Father/Son. Would've gone high. Obviously there are great players from a range of picks.

Looking at the Player Ratings on the AFL website.

Ablett Compromised

Pendlebury Pick 5

Selwood Pick 7

Dangerfield Pick 10

Griffin Pick 3

Harvey Pick 46 (about 1000 years ago)

Sloane Pick 44

Franklin Pick 5

Fyfe Pick 20

Boak Pick 5

Top 10 players in the comp rating-wise and 7 of them are top 10 picks.

It's a myth that Ablett would've been a very high pick. He was projected to be around 20-30 range if he wasn't father-son eligible. So Geelong still got him at a discount, but he was never thought to be a top 5 or 10 prospect.

[DubDee 25,884]

Ablett compromised because of Father/Son. Would've gone high. Obviously there are great players from a range of picks.

Looking at the Player Ratings on the AFL website.

Ablett Compromised

Pendlebury Pick 5

Selwood Pick 7

Dangerfield Pick 10

Griffin Pick 3

Harvey Pick 46 (about 1000 years ago)

Sloane Pick 44

Franklin Pick 5

Fyfe Pick 20

Boak Pick 5

Top 10 players in the comp rating-wise and 7 of them are top 10 picks.

So out of the 10 best players in the league, only 1 of them was a top 4 pick.

what are we even worried about with trading both pick 2 and 3?! get rid of 'em!

[The HuLK 139]

I`m hearing we are targeting Paddy, but next year free agency period. On thinking we get him for free without having to use up a pick. Would it be worth giving up a pick 2 or 3 (if Frawley compo is correct) which could be a 10 year player. Or wait a year and use pick 2 on a kid, pick 3 on a ready made player, then get Paddy as a free agent?

[drdrake 3,178]

If Danger wants to come to Melbourne, I don't really care what we give up for him as long as he comes. For all those worries about what we have to give up don't be we just need to get the deal done.

[drdrake 3,178]

I`m hearing we are targeting Paddy, but next year free agency period. On thinking we get him for free without having to use up a pick. Would it be worth giving up a pick 2 or 3 (if Frawley compo is correct) which could be a 10 year player. Or wait a year and use pick 2 on a kid, pick 3 on a ready made player, then get Paddy as a free agent?

Sorry Hulk, this is our only chance to get him, if he goes into free agency we have no chance at all. Free agency as it stands is all about stronger clubs getting stronger. The trade works this year, for Adelaide they will get better compensation by trading him to us, for us it rules out nearly every other club in the competition.

[cowboy_from_hell 2,390]

If it's to happen it will have to happen this year. We can pay danger what ever he wants but we can also meet Adelaide's demands for a appropriate trade. If he enters FA next year then hawthorn could use their buddy money and other clubs like Geelong and the pies could somehow make room for him.

[deanox 9,927]

This talk of "premiership window" is premature imo.

We need to build to be competitive asap and to challenge finals.

Once we have become competitive and have established and ingrained a football department culture which is of the standard required then we build for a premiership. That is when we can develop players we draft. That is when we worry about "premiership window".

It may well be that we are ready at the end of next year. But until then the focus is on improving the list to make us competitive and to change the culture.

Which is why I'm happy to pay over the odds with top picks on a proven performer and leader.

[Macca 16,972]

I'd trade both picks 2 & 3* for Dangerfield. That would have to satisfy Adelaide but we may be able to eke out a deal where we get their first round draft pick back. Don't count on it though. Maybe their 2nd round draft pick?

The other thing to remember is that he'll have other clubs chasing him as well. We can offer a good trade but don't underestimate the other clubs ... those clubs may be prepared to give up some talented players in order to get him.

The only thing that can be taken for granted is that we're at least in the running ... and, we'll probably have to pay overs.

In effect, Dangerfield is now involved in an auction. Any club would want him. He's a difference maker and unlike the lottery draft, you know what you're getting.

*Assuming we get pick 3 for Frawley.

[ChaserJ 5,096]

Agree. At the moment we have comparative advantage over any other suitors, we lose that next year.

I don’t think we could compete with other teams in a completely open market for Dangerfield.

Plus, if we get him now, he could be a selling point for other free agents we may be interested in next. Particularly any disgruntled Crows coming out of contract…

[The HuLK 139]

If Paddy noms us at the end of next year, there isn`t much that other teams can do.. Don`t underestimate how much the Goodwin factor will play. Very well respected by all Adelaide players. The Judd of Adelaide !

Edited September 24, 2014 by The HuLK

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

If Paddy noms us at the end of next year, there isn`t much that other teams can do.. Don`t underestimate how much the Goodwin factor will play. Very well respected by all Adelaide players. The Judd of Adelaide !

Mitch Clark nominated nominated Fremantle but came to Melbourne because Melbourne could do a deal with Brisbane that Fremantle couldn't.

Edited September 24, 2014 by Clint Bizkit

[Red and Bluebeard 2,084]

28. I've been counting.

The pedant in me says it is "only" 27 years since Robbie Flower retired (almost to the week this week), but that is still before the current occupant of number 2 was born ...

[bing181 9,240]

Top 10 players in the comp rating-wise and 7 of them are top 10 picks.

Yes, but say that list goes back over 10 years or so. So, out of the 100 top 10 picks from the last 10 years, 7 of them are now top 10 players in the comp. 7 out of 100.

IOW, yes, the top players are often top 10 picks - but it doesn't go the other way. Top 10 picks have a less than 10% chance of becoming top 10 players. Or, from the top 10 picks each year, around one of them will go on to become a top 10 player.

(willing to have my maths dissected!)

Edited September 24, 2014 by bing181

[45HG 1,539]

Call it 6 from 9 with a question mark then.

I'm by no means saying top picks are the prized possessions many (including myself) have thought previously, but I'm also wary of ignoring how many of the game's best players are top picks simply because there are good players who weren't top picks.

The reality is that only 10 players in any year can be top 10. Obviously that leaves much greater scope for quality players to come later in the draft (something like 80-100 players potentially).

The key is in us getting the right people in and bloody developing them properly for a change.

2 and 3 for Dangerfield would be sensational. If it were to include an extra player from our end to win back a pick 10 all the better.

Once you're on a list it doesn't matter where you were picked, you need as an AFL club to provide an elite environment which supports and expects players to reach their optimal level.

[45HG 1,539]

Yes, but say that list goes back over 10 years or so. So, out of the 100 top 10 picks from the last 10 years, 7 of them are now top 10 players in the comp. 7 out of 100.

IOW, yes, the top players are often top 10 picks - but it doesn't go the other way. Top 10 picks have a less than 10% chance of becoming top 10 players. Or, from the top 10 picks each year, around one of them will go on to become a top 10 player.

(willing to have my maths dissected!)

To follow that logic through, over the past 10 years only 3 of the games top 10 picks came from outside the top 10 - roughly 90 players per year selected outside the top 10. Making that about 900 players - only 3 of them in the top 10. Roughly .3% strike rate - much lower than 10!

(This post is only in direct response to Bing's and not an overall statement of the draft.)

[Fat Tony 5,231]

Mitch Clark nominated nominated Fremantle but came to Melbourne because Melbourne could do a deal with Brisbane that Fremantle couldn't.

Very different circumstances. Clark had to be traded. Dangerfield has the leverage of being a Restricted Free Agent and can walk to his club of choice if Adelaide don't match the contract.

[rpfc 28,440]

The extrapolation above is based on a very small sample.

Look at the best 6 clubs and where their best 6 players come from.

36 players - I am interested myself - will look it up when I get home...

Not to get ahead of my data there but The Teenage Lottery Draft of the AFL still allows for great talent to slip through...

[bing181 9,240]

To follow that logic through, over the past 10 years only 3 of the games top 10 picks came from outside the top 10 - roughly 90 players per year selected outside the top 10. Making that about 900 players - only 3 of them in the top 10. Roughly .3% strike rate - much lower than 10!

(This post is only in direct response to Bing's and not an overall statement of the draft.)

Yes, was going to add something along those lines!

Which would tend to support the "trade your picks" argument, given that the chances of actually ending up with a top 10 player are so low. Bird in the hand and all that.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Very different circumstances. Clark had to be traded. Dangerfield has the leverage of being a Restricted Free Agent and can walk to his club of choice if Adelaide don't match the contract.

I was thinking the end of this year, not next. My mistake.

[pitchfork 181]

ARGH.... our luck says this ends up a three way trade.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-09-24/beams-wants-to-go-home

http://www.collingwoodfc.com.au/news/2014-09-24/statement-dayne-beams

[chookrat 4,250]

There is a massive discrepency between the value of a top pick and the reality of what it is usually worth. In particular, people put so much emphasis on the gap between all the top picks when in reality it is very small.

The difference btw pick 1 and 10 is choice. It is interesting when clubs pick based on need v best available player.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

I`m hearing we are targeting Paddy, but next year free agency period. On thinking we get him for free without having to use up a pick. Would it be worth giving up a pick 2 or 3 (if Frawley compo is correct) which could be a 10 year player. Or wait a year and use pick 2 on a kid, pick 3 on a ready made player, then get Paddy as a free agent?

It's not a bad point BUT

-we would have less chance of getting him then because we wouldn't have leverage over other clubs

-it's a year WITHOUT him. Our club desperately needs to start winning and working up the ladder for a number of reasons