Splitting Draft Pick 3

[DistrACTION Jackson 8,734]

What about 3 for 6 and a player... with some change back 

[Demonland 72,192]

 

[Demonland 72,192]

St Kilda need it for all the trading they'll be doing. 

[whatwhat say what 22,755]

freo have said they want two first rounders for brad hill - well there ya go, there's two first rounders!

[AaronDaveyChipsAndGravey 390]

3 minutes ago, Collar-Jazz-Knee said:

What about 3 for 6 and a player... with some change back 

I like this. Pick 3 for 6 and someone like Zac-Langdon I wouldnt mind at all. Really just hinges on how the Giants view their chances of getting Tom Green with just pick 6 now

[Redleg 40,925]

12 minutes ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

freo have said they want two first rounders for brad hill - well there ya go, there's two first rounders!

I don't understand this, Freo could have taken 6 and done the same deal with GWS, unless they are trying to showoff to their fans.

[Redleg 40,925]

17 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

Is that the end of us splitting now?

[Ted Lasso 19,518]

Could we split with the Cats? 3 for 14, 17 and 24 

so we'd go to the draft with 14, 17, 21, 24 and 30 potentially for Frost 

[whatwhat say what 22,755]

1 minute ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

Could we split with the Cats? 3 for 14, 17 and 24 

so we'd go to the draft with 14, 17, 21, 24 and 30 potentially for Frost 

i would be pretty unimpressed if we did that

[Clintosaurus 7,846]

Reckon Adelaide will bid for Green with Carlton's pick. I would do 3 for 6 and a player - Caldwell would be first choice. Kemp with 6 = HAPPY DAYS!!!!

[TRIGON 4,783]

FWIW the AFL Draft Pick Value Calculator has Trading out pick 3 as the equivalent value of GWS pick 6 and then pick 37. Of course what the calculator can't take into account is the impact of us potentially bidding on Green.

[Redleg 40,925]

31 minutes ago, Collar-Jazz-Knee said:

What about 3 for 6 and a player... with some change back 

That guarantees GWS the 2 players they want after GC obvious 2.

[Clintosaurus 7,846]

2 minutes ago, Redleg said:

That guarantees GWS the 2 players they want after GC obvious 2.

They will get them anyway. Might as well get something from it happening.

[Demonland 72,192]

29 minutes ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

freo have said they want two first rounders for brad hill - well there ya go, there's two first rounders!

They were asking for 2 first rounders. One this year and one next year. However that was the old negotiation trick of asking for the moon before dialing it back.

[Ted Lasso 19,518]

17 minutes ago, Clintosaurus said:

Reckon Adelaide will bid for Green with Carlton's pick. I would do 3 for 6 and a player - Caldwell would be first choice. Kemp with 6 = HAPPY DAYS!!!!

I wonder if we could convince them to give us pick 6 and Jeremy Finlayson for pick 3

[Redleg 40,925]

2 minutes ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

I wonder if we could convince them to give us pick 6 and Jeremy Finlayson for pick 3

Could have got him last year for about 40.

[Ted Lasso 19,518]

Just now, Redleg said:

Could have got him last year for about 40.

Yeah, every year there seems to be a player we don't go for and i can't work out why. this year it's Dougal Howard.

[whatwhat say what 22,755]

2 minutes ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

Yeah, every year there seems to be a player we don't go for and i can't work out why. this year it's Dougal Howard.

we really don't need any more key defenders

[Wiseblood 24,637]

22 minutes ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

Could we split with the Cats? 3 for 14, 17 and 24 

so we'd go to the draft with 14, 17, 21, 24 and 30 potentially for Frost 

One of those picks would head west for Langdon you would say.

I'm not sure the above does it for me though.  I think, at this stage, I'd rather take three to the draft.  The picks that the Cats have are a little low and, now that GWS have made that trade, there isn't anyone we can do a decent swap with from what I can see.

[Ted Lasso 19,518]

3 minutes ago, whatwhatsaywhat said:

we really don't need any more key defenders

Dougal Howard is a clear upgrade on Oscar McDonald though. 

[whatwhat say what 22,755]

4 minutes ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

Dougal Howard is a clear upgrade on Oscar McDonald though. 

nah

[Demon3 2,541]

12 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

One of those picks would head west for Langdon you would say.

I'm not sure the above does it for me though.  I think, at this stage, I'd rather take three to the draft.  The picks that the Cats have are a little low and, now that GWS have made that trade, there isn't anyone we can do a decent swap with from what I can see.

Use pick 3 - get the third best player in the pool (Young for me). Add Langdon and AT, possibly a Jenkins / Butler type and other picks for the draft to go for pace. Its a good refresh, add them to fit players, second year draftees and get on with business. 

[AshleyH30 566]

Interestingly, with Sydney holding Pick 5, they will almost certainly bid for Green. GWS now hold Pick 6 and will need to jump ahead of Sydney if they want a top 10 pick and Green. The problem for GWS is that if the rumours are true that Sydney have approached us about Pick 3, they will have to outbid Sydney for our pick to prevent Sydney bidding on Green and making Pick 6 Null and Void.

Edited October 10, 2019 by AshleyH30

[drdrake 3,163]

GWS would want to try and get our pick 3 to ensure no one bids for Green.  How about Pick 3 for Bonar and pick 6, we might need to throw in a late pick for points but I reckon GWS would want to remove any club from bidding for Green, means they basically get the 2 players that would be top 10 picks for 12 and 18, massive win for them

We walk away from Trade week with Langdon, Bonar, Tomlinson pick 6 and what ever we get for Frost.

 

[Colm 2,154]

53 minutes ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

Could we split with the Cats? 3 for 14, 17 and 24 

so we'd go to the draft with 14, 17, 21, 24 and 30 potentially for Frost 

Cats could be an option I guess. Really want to get a top 10 pick though. If they could swap 17&24 into a good pick in the top ten then it would be more appealing