Splitting Draft Pick 3

[Red and Blue realist 2,026]

42 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

So back on topic if we are stuck with pick 3, then the Giants have picks 12 and 18 or 19. That's not enough to do a deal IMO. I think we'd ask them to get future picks or players involved to bump that pick 18 up at least to pick 10.

The Giants run of finals success has hurt the chances of splitting the pick.

It has hurt the chances of potentially splitting with them, won't mean we won't be getting creative somehow. This year Freo will need later picks for their NGA guy, next year the Dogs have a very highly rated kid coming through. So next years picks could certainly be in play.

For instance offering the Dogs our 1st next year for their 1st this year and a couple of this years 3rds. Then we could package up our 3 3ds for Langdon, while keeping our 2nd. 

[Lucifers Hero 36,983]

GCS priority package makes the split of #3 interesting. 

GWS have #12 and #18. Their 2020 1st round pick will also be quite high.  Hard to find value in there.

However, GCS have 1, 2, 15 and 21.   They may also have pick #9 if they get it from Carlton for Jack Martin.  In 2020 they will have their natural 1st round pick (guessing #1 to #3) and 2020 mid round priority: pick #11.

I would be looking to split #3 with GCS:  2019 pick #15 this year (if they get it) plus 2020 #1 to #3 next year?  Or if they get #9 from Carlton this year - that plus their #11 next year.  Or some other combo.

The point is GCS provide much more fertile ground to max the value of our #3.  Or it will force GWS to up the ante for it. 

[AaronDaveyChipsAndGravey 390]

7 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

GCS priority package makes the split of #3 interesting. 

GWS have #12 and #18. Their 2020 1st round pick will also be quite high.  Hard to find value in there.

However, GCS have 1, 2, 15 and 21.   They may also have pick #9 if they get it from Carlton for Jack Martin.  In 2020 they will have their natural 1st round pick (guessing #1 to #3) and 2020 mid round priority: pick #11.

I would be looking to split #3 with GCS:  2019 pick #15 this year (if they get it) plus 2020 #1 to #3 next year?  Or if they get #9 from Carlton this year - that plus their #11 next year.  Or some other combo.

The point is GCS provide much more fertile ground to max the value of our #3.  Or it will force GWS to up the ante for it. 

All interesting propositions, however I still don’t think splitting pick 3 into 2 makes a whole lot of sense this year. If we could turn it into a few 1st round picks next year when a few more players may come onto the market then it could be a decent idea however will come under enormous scrutiny especially if it goes up in smoke. But in reality those picks this year dont look like being valuable trade currency as there doesnt appear to be many of any worth shopping around that would suit our needs.

If anything, splitting pick 3 allows other clubs to bully and hold us to ransom over players that shouldnt be worth that much. Freo especially would see a middle of the range 1st round pick as “value” for Langdon. Or if we were looking at a bigger fish, clubs would be demanding both. 

Regardless of todays news, pick 3 is still no slouch and would seem difficult to stuff up. 

[dazzledavey36 48,637]

My personal opinion,

Out: pick 3, Future 2nd round pick.

In: Pick 11, Pick 18 and Xavier O' Halloran/Jye Caldwell from GWS giants. 

[Red and Blue realist 2,026]

14 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

GCS priority package makes the split of #3 interesting. 

GWS have #12 and #18. Their 2020 1st round pick will also be quite high.  Hard to find value in there.

However, GCS have 1, 2, 15 and 21.   They may also have pick #9 if they get it from Carlton for Jack Martin.  In 2020 they will have their natural 1st round pick (guessing #1 to #3) and 2020 mid round priority: pick #11.

I would be looking to split #3 with GCS:  2019 pick #15 this year (if they get it) plus 2020 #1 to #3 next year?  Or if they get #9 from Carlton this year - that plus their #11 next year.  Or some other combo.

The point is GCS provide much more fertile ground to max the value of our #3.  Or it will force GWS to up the ante for it. 

So comparing the 2 potential offers for pick 3 (allowing for 2 potential academy & F/S bids before pick 15):

GWS have 13 & 21 - so would have to offer up either players or future picks, but they have academy kids coming through next year as well.

GC have 17 & 22 - and don't really have any players they could attach, so would either need additional picks this or next year. Maybe that was why they got give the mid first next year, so it's on-traded?

Hopefully it just means GWS have to put up a better player.

[Lord Travis 10,141]

Splitting the pick with GWS would be a [censored] trade.

Suns want Billy Stretch? Pick 3 + Stretch for Pick 2. Gets Billy where he wants to go, They get mature talent and for only a one pick downgrade. Make it happen Dees. Go [censored] yourselves AFL.

[dazzledavey36 48,637]

2 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

Splitting the pick with GWS would be a [censored] trade.

Suns want Billy Stretch? Pick 3 + Stretch for Pick 2. Gets Billy where he wants to go, They get mature talent and for only a one pick downgrade. Make it happen Dees. Go [censored] yourselves AFL.

Gold Coast would laugh at us.

GWS need an early pick for Tom Green.

[Lord Travis 10,141]

4 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Gold Coast would laugh at us.

GWS need an early pick for Tom Green.

GWS can find it elsewhere then unless they’re gonna add a gun player to the trade. Picks 13+19 isn’t anywhere near enough.

[Binmans PA 25,890]

At the risk of sounding like a broken record... trade pick 3 for Ben King.

[dazzledavey36 48,637]

2 minutes ago, A F said:

At the risk of sounding like a broken record... trade pick 3 for Ben King.

It's just sounding more and more that King wont be traded this year unfortunately. 

[Demon3 2,541]

6 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

GWS can find it elsewhere then unless they’re gonna add a gun player to the trade. Picks 13+19 isn’t anywhere near enough.

If we trade away pick 4 for a 13 & 19 then i give up. Lets just take pick 3 and be clever about other possible moves.

[Binmans PA 25,890]

Just as I was with Prestia, until it's no longer possible to get King, I'll keep believing. ?

[deebug 1,754]

Just now, A F said:

Just as I was with Prestia, until it's no longer possible to get King, I'll keep believing. ?

Yer another one in Prestia, that got away.

Since the AFL want to hand gc next years flag, i think they will pay King what ever he wants to stay at the leech's, i mean gc

[dazzledavey36 48,637]

15 minutes ago, deebug said:

Yer another one in Prestia, that got away.

Since the AFL want to hand gc next years flag, i think they will pay King what ever he wants to stay at the leech's, i mean gc

If we had Prestia we wouldn't have Oliver. Oliver is already a better player then Prestia.

Edited September 30, 2019 by dazzledavey36

[Binmans PA 25,890]

11 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

If we had Prestia we wouldn't have Oliver. Oliver is already a better player then Prestia.

Different year's weren't they?

[dazzledavey36 48,637]

Just now, A F said:

Different year's weren't they?

Yes you are correct.

My apologies.

[Wiseblood 24,636]

42 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

GWS can find it elsewhere then unless they’re gonna add a gun player to the trade. Picks 13+19 isn’t anywhere near enough.

I agree LT - Picks 13 and 19 isn't nearly enough.  It will all depend on how how badly GWS want the pick, and who we can pry from them who would be of value to us to do the trade.

Obviously we aren't getting any of their top end talent, but could we get a couple of players out of them for Pick 3?  We get 13+19, Hately and someone else (I could go through their list but I'll leave that to someone else) for our first pick and go from there.

Or, we may look at what GWS are offering and prefer to take pick three to the draft instead.

[Demon3 2,541]

23 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

I agree LT - Picks 13 and 19 isn't nearly enough.  It will all depend on how how badly GWS want the pick, and who we can pry from them who would be of value to us to do the trade.

Obviously we aren't getting any of their top end talent, but could we get a couple of players out of them for Pick 3?  We get 13+19, Hately and someone else (I could go through their list but I'll leave that to someone else) for our first pick and go from there.

Or, we may look at what GWS are offering and prefer to take pick three to the draft instead.

Take pick 3. I just dont think we will get the good end of the stick. Giants will not off load good talent to us, they will only sacrifice fringe players to go with basically 2 late first round picks. We will get laughed at now if we swap pick 3 unless sits for a bonafide star.

Edited September 30, 2019 by Demon3

[Born to Run 204]

Don’t we have pick 2? GCS have a mid round compo pick not pick 3?

[Superunknown 3,307]

2 minutes ago, Demon3 said:

Take pick 3. I just dont think we will get the good end of teh stick. Giants will not off load good talent to us, they will only sacrifice fringe players to go with basically to late first round picks. We will get laughed at now if we sawp pick 3 unless sits for a bonafide star.

This

[Big_Dee 18]

1 hour ago, Born to Run said:

Don’t we have pick 2? GCS have a mid round compo pick not pick 3?

No. Suns got priority pick 1. So they have pick 1 for finishing last and a pick from the AFL which is pick 2. Demons now have pick 3. 

[Demon Disciple 10,893]

You know i'd just about stomach the farce that the AFL dictated today..................if they come to the party big time when we eventually announce where our new training headquarters will be located (if that ever happens).

I hope that's what we also said to them when we were brought in to HQ only a month or 2 ago.

[DistrACTION Jackson 6,378]

If the Giants are desperate and offer pick 13,18 and Hately/Caldwell for pick 3 I'd probably take that.

Could then take the two quick players with those picks or someone who slides. Cody Weightman has been discussed as an electric small forward and Luke Jackson from WA is one who is a similar player to Grundy and may slide a bit as ruck men often do.

[DeeSpencer 23,057]

We've been awful quiet on getting shafted.

Obvious answer is the AFL has our nuts in a vice with cash.

Hopeful answer is part of the Suns rescue package was a quid pro quo with us. Could pick 3 for Ben King be the sweetener? (I doubt it but a man can dream).

[Engorged Onion 9,224]

8 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

We've been awful quiet on getting shafted.

Obvious answer is the AFL has our nuts in a vice with cash.

Hopeful answer is part of the Suns rescue package was a quid pro quo with us. Could pick 3 for Ben King be the sweetener? (I doubt it but a man can dream).

You are bang on @DeeSpencer, it's what is not said that matters at times. Some interpret our silence as getting shafted/bent over rah rah rah, - all clubs and all personel are part of an industry that is happy to look after all parties, even if appearances from the outside it does not look like it. 

The AFL still want Melbourne (read ALL teams) to be competitive due to TV rights...

It could be King, it may not be, and I guarantee that there is an agreement for something ie:, player, political, financial assistance, other , hence the carry on as usual stance.