No, not a metaphor, but interesting turn of events.

Pick No.2 on the table: Dees looking to 'split' their top selection

Makes sense to get 2 decent players who have had a few seasons rather than an 18 year old.

Not a shock really, I wonder if we'd look at getting 2 first round picks - say trade with GWS who have picks 11 & 13 at the moment. Or will we try and use it to get a player plus a later first round pick?

For example:

- Ben King plus pick 17 back from GC

- Langdon plus pick 6 from Freo, we might need to give a 4th rounder as well 

Pick 3 and 39 for 9 (for Coniglio) and pick 12 from GWS 

This is very much a 'shake the tree and see what falls out' scenario.

Would only do this if GC get the priority pick - otherwise we should just take Rowell or Anderson (too good not to take).  We need to get some top end kids onto this list.  We have not had ONE rising star nomination in the last three seasons, which says it all really.  

Good idea. We need experienced players right now. 

5 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Good idea. We need experienced players right now. 

I agree with you there.

7 minutes ago, DemonLad5 said:

Pick 3 and 39 for 9 (for Coniglio) and pick 12 from GWS 

Coniglio is a free agent

Fishing trip.  Throw out the bait and see what bites.  We can assess the offers and go from there- see how badly others want to move up.

we have no fs or academy players we want to split a high draft pick for, so we could look for player plus pick, or picks.  Going on points system, we could get Langdon plus Freo first rounder and change.  We have quite well with these approaches before - moving up or down to get what we want - so hopefully we can make the most of it again

Here is my scenario...

3+21 to Sydney for 5 + Papley (values Papley approx pick 12) 

5 + 57 (1927 points) to WCE for 15 & 23 (2060 points) (WCE will want a higher pick to pip Freo in the Kelly deal) 

23 to Freo for Langdon 

Take 15 to the draft 

Overall:

In: Papley, Langdon, P 15

Out: 3, 21 & 57

I'm all for swapping back but I'm not sure on the options. I suspect they'll at least want to remain in the top 10 

7 & Langdon for 3? Might be the most likely

5 & Papley for 3 and a 3rd round pick. I'd like this but I don't think he wants to come to us

I just don't see what clubs can offer us on the top 10 that makes it worth it. 

1. Gold Coast

2. Gold Coast

3. Melbourne

4. Adelaide

5. Sydney

6. St Kilda

7. Fremantle

8. North Melbourne

9. Carlton

10. Port Adelaide

11. Hawthorn

------------------------------------------------------------

12. Greater Western Sydney (tied to Essendon)

13. Western Bulldogs

14. Greater Western Sydney

15. West Coast

16. Brisbane (tied to Collingwood)

17. Richmond

18. Gold Coast (tied to Brisbane)

19. Geelong

didn't work too well with Tyson and Salem v Josh Kelly.

It's the conservative approach for a desperate team which as usual we are.

Frankly we have known for a long time that we will be picking in the top ten so there is no excuse for not having a very detailed plan going forward. The fact that we have pick 2 or 3 should make it easier

4 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

It's the conservative approach for a desperate team which as usual we are.

Strange view. I feel like the conservative approach is taking what you have and picking the top rated player available. This is taking a risk, taking what you have and gambling that you can turn it into more

3 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

didn't work too well with Tyson and Salem v Josh Kelly.

It's the conservative approach for a desperate team which as usual we are.

Frankly we have known for a long time that we will be picking in the top ten so there is no excuse for not having a very detailed plan going forward. The fact that we have pick 2 or 3 should make it easier

Might have been the plan all along, and from everything I've read the top 2 picks are set then it's a bit of a blanket over the next 10 or so guys. While there are some that have been talked about heavily on here, Ash and Young, there are others such as Kemp, Serong, Robertson, Stephens etc, who could be just as good. So a drop down the order might suit if we can get other assets in. 

Just take it to the draft unless you can bring in an established star or combination of needed role players.

it's fun to say 'Splitting the Pick' with an NZ accent

go on, try it!

1 hour ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Not a shock really, I wonder if we'd look at getting 2 first round picks - say trade with GWS who have picks 11 & 13 at the moment. Or will we try and use it to get a player plus a later first round pick?

For example:

- Ben King plus pick 17 back from GC

- Langdon plus pick 6 from Freo, we might need to give a 4th rounder as well 

 

I'd hazard a guess that it indicates a few different things:

- we're not that fussed about the quality of the draft as it progresses (you could throw a blanket over the top 10-20 after the first couple)
- we'll have plenty of list spots to fill, as opposed to just taking the minimum 3 picks
- we're targetting GWS' picks in the teens, and are aware of the value of an early selection to them with Tom Green as a likely top 5-10 academy selection
- I'd still be gunning for them to throw in a Xavier O'Halloran along with 11 & 13
- We need picks/assets to facilitate the planned moves we have in store

You'd reckon GWS would love to get a pick ahead of anyone bidding for Green, and just as happy to dispose of those first rounds picks for a collection of 'points picks' later in the draft.

Yikes, GWS could realistically have three picks in the early teens range, with their existing two, plus Coniglio compensation.

I wonder, in fantasy worlds, could we get all three?

Pick 2(3) out, pick 20(21) out, and some later points-picks thrown in. GWS Gets a top draftee and then can safely use their academy points to get Green, effectively finishing with two top-6 picks.

Meanwhile, we go from pick 2(3) and 20 to picks 11,12,15.

Obviously, since (with no real insight excpet the chatter) I'm reckoning this draft seems pretty even for the first round with lots of suitable options for us, I think this would be a spectacular move.

Also puts us in a great place for live pick trading on the night if we want a little boost by throwing in next years third rounder etc.

I should probabyl mention I'm not sold on Melbourne attending the Hill, Langdon etc auction.

3 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

You'd reckon GWS would love to get a pick ahead of anyone bidding for Green, and just as happy to dispose of those first rounds picks for a collection of 'points picks' later in the draft.

Yikes, GWS could realistically have three picks in the early teens range, with their existing two, plus Coniglio compensation.

I wonder, in fantasy worlds, could we get all three?

Pick 2(3) out, pick 20(21) out, and some later points-picks thrown in. GWS Gets a top draftee and then can safely use their academy points to get Green, effectively finishing with two top-6 picks.

Meanwhile, we go from pick 2(3) and 20 to picks 11,12,15.

Obviously, since (with no real insight excpet the chatter) I'm reckoning this draft seems pretty even for the first round with lots of suitable options for us, I think this would be a spectacular move.

Also puts us in a great place for live pick trading on the night if we want a little boost by throwing in next years third rounder etc.

I should probabyl mention I'm not sold on Melbourne attending the Hill, Langdon etc auction.

Excellent post. Please forward to the geniuses at the MFC.

11 minutes ago, Mach5 said:

 

I'd hazard a guess that it indicates a few different things:

- we're not that fussed about the quality of the draft as it progresses (you could throw a blanket over the top 10-20 after the first couple)
- we'll have plenty of list spots to fill, as opposed to just taking the minimum 3 picks
- we're targetting GWS' picks in the teens, and are aware of the value of an early selection to them with Tom Green as a likely top 5-10 academy selection
- I'd still be gunning for them to throw in a Xavier O'Halloran along with 11 & 13
- We need picks/assets to facilitate the planned moves we have in store

 

2 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

You'd reckon GWS would love to get a pick ahead of anyone bidding for Green, and just as happy to dispose of those first rounds picks for a collection of 'points picks' later in the draft.

Yikes, GWS could realistically have three picks in the early teens range, with their existing two, plus Coniglio compensation.

I wonder, in fantasy worlds, could we get all three?

Agree with both of these, as it is now the Giants would have picks 13, 15 & 16 (assuming GC get the PP and Cogs goes). They might hang onto one purely for points reasons, with Green expecting a bid in the first 6 or so picks, although if Tomlinson goes as well you'd assume it might be for a second, so roughly pick 35 or so.

Our pick 3 & 22 is overs in the draft pick point index, so then they should include a Bonar/O'Halloran/ZLangdon as well. 

We could then look at sending pick 15 plus 41 (our 3rd) to Freo for Langdon and pick 24, which still values him as a 2nd rounder, but would then give them access to early picks and points for matching their academy kid as well. 

So we'd end up with picks 13, 16 & 28 and Landgon plus Bonar/O'Halloran for picks 3, 22 & 41. 

1 hour ago, Demons11 said:

Coniglio is a free agent

He's restricted. GWS will match and force a trade

1 hour ago, Collar-Jazz-Knee said:

This is very much a 'shake the tree and see what falls out' scenario.

100 percent you have to put it out there and see what bites you get. Happens every year with club's who have decent picks

I might be in the minority here, but unless we are able to trade in a quality player, i'd rather we held onto pick 3 as opposed to 'splitting' it.

I know the draft is said to be top 2 then a bit of daylight to which you could throw a blanket over a number of kids, but having seen Hayden Young's kicking ability, i'd much rather bring him to the club than having to compromise and pick up any leftovers.

Edited August 27, 20196 yr by Demon Disciple

2 hours ago, GCDee said:

Here is my scenario...

3+21 to Sydney for 5 + Papley (values Papley approx pick 12) 

5 + 57 (1927 points) to WCE for 15 & 23 (2060 points) (WCE will want a higher pick to pip Freo in the Kelly deal) 

23 to Freo for Langdon 

Take 15 to the draft 

 

Overall:

In: Papley, Langdon, P 15

Out: 3, 21 & 57

Like it GCDee. 

Addresses 2 major problems and still leaves us with  a pick in the first round. 

Plus Langdon and Papley are still under 25 (pretty sure) 

Edited August 27, 20196 yr by Dee*ceiving