I haven't followed the draft super closely this year, didn't expect I'd need to, classic MFC stitch up, but from what I've read about the probable order etc it feels like the type of players we need more aren't expected to go at pick 3, so wouldn't it make more sense to split it? I know 'best available' is the old tune, but 1 x best available vs 2 x best fit makes it not so clear surely?

Instead of ending up with another inside mid type, or more depth at the defensive end, we could possibly split pick 3 and end up scoring say Stephens, Weightman and then Pickett (2nd round), which could totally change our dynamic going forward. Is that a genuine possibility?

 

Edited October 13, 20195 yr by Lord Nev

Young intercepting is something that i think should really appeal, outside of his kicking if you look at the Tigers backline, they're all guns at peeling off and taking intercept marks and then punishing teams. 

Young and Lever when he's up and going could be serious weapons in that way.

Plus the fact he's a beautiful kick is a huge bonus.

Split it and hopefully 3 of Kemp, Stephens, Weightman or Taylor.

15 minutes ago, Pates said:

My thoughts are if we’re splitting the pick then I’d look for a return of a top 10-15 pick and a player that is either walk up best 22 or bloody close and on the up (preferably will skill and pace in the package). Going to the draft with two lower first round picks is a lottery whereas pick 3 (while still a bit of a lottery) is giving us the 3rd crack at the best talent. 

Best 12 rather than best 22.  Before injuries are factored in.

The whole best 22 often includes C or D graders if we're being specific to our team,  Pates.

So I'd prefer that player that you have envisaged to be a player that we know can perform to a more than decent level.  Undroppable (?)

Along the lines of Tomlinson or Langdon but perhaps better. 

My reasoning is that with injuries factored in our last 6 players picked really aren't good enough and those ranked from 12 - 16 have usually got some sort of issue. 

And when injuries are factored in we're more talking top 10 in terms of a trade involving pick 3 and a return of a pick between 10 & 15 (as you've described)

Edited October 13, 20195 yr by Macca

5 minutes ago, Macca said:

Best 12 rather than best 22.  Before injuries are factored in.

The whole best 22 often includes C or D graders if we're being specific to our team,  Pates.

So I'd prefer that player that you have envisaged to be a player that we know can perform to a more than decent level.  Undroppable (?)

Along the lines of Tomlinson or Langdon but perhaps better. 

My reasoning is that with injuries factored in our last 6 players picked really aren't good enough and those ranked from 12 - 16 have usually got some sort of issue. 

And when injuries are factored in we're more talking top 10 in terms of a trade involving pick 3 and a return of a pick between 10 & 15 (as you've described)

Yep true, best 22 is a bit vague. I guess where I’m coming from with saying that is that it might be a 19-20 year old who’s on the up and border of being a walk up but has the upside to expect to jump almost straight in.

But equally I see what you’re saying and a playing of Tomlinson/Langdon’s standing, that would walk into our top 15 players, would be of more value to us right now. Depends on needs though, if we’re getting a younger developing player that has the attributes we’re after (and the talent) then is he worth more than say a 24-26 year old who has attributes that we’re not as desperate for?

25 minutes ago, Pates said:

Yep true, best 22 is a bit vague. I guess where I’m coming from with saying that is that it might be a 19-20 year old who’s on the up and border of being a walk up but has the upside to expect to jump almost straight in.

But equally I see what you’re saying and a playing of Tomlinson/Langdon’s standing, that would walk into our top 15 players, would be of more value to us right now. Depends on needs though, if we’re getting a younger developing player that has the attributes we’re after (and the talent) then is he worth more than say a 24-26 year old who has attributes that we’re not as desperate for?

Upside along with a pick around the 10 -12 mark (for pick 3) but we don't want another Dom Tyson type.  Dom gave his all and at times he was more than handy but not handy enough to keep (ultimately)

Above all else we are screaming out for good decision makers possessed with excellent skills.  And a functional forward line.

Our best (Oliver,  Brayshaw & Harmes) struggled (in real terms) this season.  That may have had a lot to do with the opposition sweating on the recipients of Gawn's taps* but again,  it's a real issue.

 

*Taps to advantage (from Gawn) this year compared to 2018?  Anyone know?  DeeSpencer?  Rusty?  Pates?

More so 'Taps to advantage with a clean possession to advantage"  (that outcome (in total) was one of the main reasons we won 16 games in 2018 - in my opinion)

Edited October 13, 20195 yr by Macca

I think we’ll take pick 6 + (?) for 3, and take Weightman at 7. I just hope (?) is something decent. Would GWS’s future 1st rounder be enough, which we could try to on trade for another pick this year, in the lead up to the draft?

7 minutes ago, Dees247 said:

I think we’ll take pick 6 + (?) for 3, and take Weightman at 7. I just hope (?) is something decent. Would GWS’s future 1st rounder be enough, which we could try to on trade for another pick this year, in the lead up to the draft?

Heavily dilluted draft next year so not sure next years first rounder is enough 

7 minutes ago, Demon Forever said:

Heavily dilluted draft next year so not sure next years first rounder is enough 

Maybe the pick and/or a player then. Or maybe GWS will trade picks with others. I still believe GWS will end up with our 3.

I voted split. 
The higher 1st rounder is reserved for injured, 192cm key position turned mid Kemp, the next Bont

The 2nd first rounder is for best available. 

Someone with better contacts than me give this to josh Mahoney. 

Trade pick 26 and 50 and billy stretch to the Gold Coast for pick 20 and pick 58. This then allows Gc to trade ah chee and 26 to bris for 21 and 34. 

Then I think we should bend gws over for pick 3. It makes sense they pay overs for it for what they gain overall with their academy pick. I also believe the players we are interested in are in the 5-25 range. 

Proposed trade:

We trade pick 3, future 4th round (attaches to freo) and pick 58 (they need points to match a bid for green)

we gain pick 6, future 1st round, future 2nd round.

We then use those future first, future second, and 20 to trade specifically for the players we actually want this year on draft night. 

We are only going to use 3 picks at the draft and hold one for the pre season draft. Make those 3 picks the ones we want. 

3 hours ago, Demanding Success said:

Split it and hopefully 3 of Kemp, Stephens, Weightman or Taylor.

Me thinks both Kemp and Stephens will be top 10, with Weightman top 15. Would need picks 6 and 9, I'd reckon, and no single club currently has picks like that.

Not sure we can do that only with 3 anyway.

Might need to add our 2020 1st rounder. Back ourselves to improve with the knowledge next year's draft has heaps of academy and f/s in the top 30. Our first pick could end up being pushed back 6-8 places as clubs match bids, but I'm just speculating. Could end up being pick 15 or later.

Which club could create 2 x top 10 picks this year, apart from GCS with 1 and 2?

Edited October 13, 20195 yr by Moonshadow

I would only split it with GWS and only if their pick 6 is involved. We need to remain in the top 10 of the draft. It’s been a while since we’ve had a top 10 pick and it hopefully will be a while again.

Our list is at risk of becoming unbalanced with age. We need to keep topping up with real quality in the bottom age bracket. 
Ideally GWS’ desperation for pick 3 helps us win the deal by getting a quality youngster as well. Then I think it’s a win win. 
 

If Essendon just say no to Daniher would Sydney entertain:

Pick 3 and 26 and next years 2nd Round for picks 5 and 9 (after the Papley trade)

This is predicated on the need Sydney has for academy selections next year

Or is it not enough on our side?

Edited October 14, 20195 yr by The Stigga

20 minutes ago, The Stigga said:

If Essendon just say no to Daniher would Sydney entertain:

Pick 3 and 26 and next years 2nd Round for picks 5 and 9 (after the Papley trade)

This is predicated on the need Sydney has for academy selections next year

Or is it not enough on our side?

The key is how much value pick 3 holds for GWS.
It's not that valuable to anyone else.

I think we're waiting for the proceeds of offloading Bonar, but the problem is that the interested clubs are being held up by other stalled trades, and also there's a general awareness that they need to offload him, so they're hanging out for a bargain.

Our best bet may be to actually take him ourselves, even if he pushes someone else out.

I think we have left the ball in GWS court here.

We would've said to them this is what we want for pick 3, take it or leave it.

It's in their best interest to get to pick 3 and not ours to trade it, we hold the upper hand here and I think we are going to get a very nice deal coming through.

4 minutes ago, Collar-Jazz-Knee said:

I think we have left the ball in GWS court here.

We would've said to them this is what we want for pick 3, take it or leave it.

It's in their best interest to get to pick 3 and not ours to trade it, we hold the upper hand here and I think we are going to get a very nice deal coming through.

Im hearing pick 3 for 6 and 11 and swaps of later picks

Edited October 14, 20195 yr by Demon Forever

Just now, Demon Forever said:

Im hearing pick 3 for 6 and 11

Would take that in a heart beat.

1 minute ago, Demon Forever said:

Im hearing pick 3 for 6 and 11

Do GWS have 6 and 11??

6 minutes ago, Demon Forever said:

Im hearing pick 3 for 6 and 11

So they get 11 from Hawks for Patton, Bonar and something/someone else?

Edit:  Maybe we give a future 2nd/3rd round to GWS which they pass to Hawks...

Edited October 14, 20195 yr by Lucifer's Hero

1 minute ago, Demon Forever said:

Im hearing pick 3 for 6 and 11

How are GWS getting 11? Currently held by Hawthorn....

3 minutes ago, Demon Forever said:

Im hearing pick 3 for 6 and 11 and swaps of later picks

This is the only acceptable trade of picks I would accept (providing a needed Player isn't involved). 

We shouldn't bend over to be nice. We're holding all the cards. 

1 minute ago, Collar-Jazz-Knee said:

How are GWS getting 11? Currently held by Hawthorn....

Hawthorn or Port?

 

1 minute ago, Demonland said:

This is the only acceptable trade of picks I would accept (providing a needed Player isn't involved). 

We shouldn't bend over to be nice. We're holding all the cards. 

Agree.

It would probably be something like 3 & 50 for 6 & 11, as GWS would need some additional points.

But that would be a great draft hand to go 6, 11 & 26 at the draft.

4 minutes ago, Collar-Jazz-Knee said:

Agree.

It would probably be something like 3 & 50 for 6 & 11, as GWS would need some additional points.

But that would be a great draft hand to go 6, 11 & 26 at the draft.

Not sure Hawks will give up 11 for just the two they are known to want:  Patton and Bonar.  They will want something/someone back.

Unless they are going to compensate GWS for the steal involving HWSNBN last year.