Farewell to Our First Pick in 2020

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,137]

12 minutes ago, olisik said:

Goodwin going all in on his job. 2020 picks are useless to him  if he can’t get some wins on the board in 2017.

Nothing to do with Goodwin trying to save his job - this is a long term deal.  Bringing in another highly rated 17/18 year old will do little for our prospects next year.  The real benefits of this, if we draft well, will be in 4 - 5 years from now.

You keep going on about Goodwin being in a panic and trying to save his job, but this deal has little short-term value.

 

If we trades these picks tomorrow for two 27 year olds, then you might have a point... but that hasn't happened yet.

[Kent 2,574]

1 minute ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

Nothing to do with Goodwin trying to save his job - this is a long term deal.  Bringing in another highly rated 17/18 year old will do little for our prospects next year.  The real benefits of this, if we draft well, will be in 4 - 5 years from now.

You keep going on about Goodwin being in a panic and trying to save his job, but this deal has little short-term value.

 

If we trades these picks tomorrow for two 27 year olds, then you might have a point... but that hasn't happened yet.

Yet is the point.

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,137]

Just now, Kent said:

Yet is the point.

So let's get snooty when it actually happens, rather than having meltdowns like in the 'Petracca requests trade to Geelong' thread..

 

 

[Pates 9,536]

It’s a very bold play, basically backing ourselves in to be back in the top 8. I would’ve liked a later pick back just to have as a little bit of currency at the end of the draft. 

But I’ll say this, we aren’t playing a safe option. We are going in saying next year that will be a late first found pick. 

[olisik 4,060]

19 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

Nothing to do with Goodwin trying to save his job - this is a long term deal.  Bringing in another highly rated 17/18 year old will do little for our prospects next year.  The real benefits of this, if we draft well, will be in 4 - 5 years from now.

You keep going on about Goodwin being in a panic and trying to save his job, but this deal has little short-term value.

 

If we trades these picks tomorrow for two 27 year olds, then you might have a point... but that hasn't happened yet.

Like trading away the rights to Ben King for Steven May-esque trades?

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,137]

1 minute ago, olisik said:

Like trading away the rights to Ben King for Steven May-esque trades?

Last year we traded away a 23yo key forward for a 26yo key defender.

Nothing to do with this years deal and Goodwin’s job was not under any threat at all.  No panic.  No trying to ‘save his job’.

[Nasher 33,047]

3 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

I don't get this logic.

You'd rather us pick once in the first round and once in the second round, than twice in the first round, because you want "depth"?

We can create "depth" by bringing two top 10 kids onto our list.

It’s definitely weird logic. We could have not traded second rounders for the likes of Hibberd and Melksham, and played draft lotto instead and *maybe* (I’d say 1 in 10 chance) got a player of their quality, and not had two players in their prime who played critical roles in a team that reached a preliminary final. I’m struggling to see how that’s better.

[spirit of norm smith 12,828]

What picks do we still have in 2020? 
Gone 1st, 2nd and 4th round MFC Picks trades out  

Currently have

future hawks 2nd round

MFC 3rd round 

future Freo 4th round 

[Axis of Bob 10,155]

The logic is that we now have credibility that we will take Green at 3, since we can get the player we want at 8 anyway. So we are forcing GWS to trade with us for pick 3.

I think this means that we'll trade pick 3 for pick 6 plus effectively what we traded to North for pick 8.

So the end result at the end will be that we’ll have traded pick 3 for picks 6 and 8.

Edited October 15, 2019 by Axis of Bob
Typos

[dworship 3,342]

3 hours ago, FireInTheBelly said:

Pick 8 is our 2nd pick. We can use a 3rd pick in any later round where we have a pick. The draft doesn't stop until all clubs are done. We can do a rookie upgrade in round 6, 7, 8, or whenever our 3rd pick falls. If we had more list spots available we could even choose players in round 9, 10, or 11.

I assume you're looking at the AFL's indicative draft order as a guide? That only goes up to round 5, but that's not the end of the draft if clubs are still making picks.

E.G. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_AFL_draft

In which draft round to Jarrod Garlett get picked by Carlton?

We can go to the draft with these 2 first rounders. I think it's likely we will be looking for a further trade, however we don't technically have to.

Perhaps my communication skills aren't what they were. We don't have a 3rd pick at the moment do we?

[Kent 2,574]

54 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

So let's get snooty when it actually happens, rather than having meltdowns like in the 'Petracca requests trade to Geelong' thread..

 

 

Sure snooty won't describe my feelings

[FireInTheBennelly 4,022]

8 minutes ago, dworship said:

Perhaps my communication skills aren't what they were. We don't have a 3rd pick at the moment do we?

If we have to make a 3rd pick, yes, we have a 3rd pick. If we wanted to delist JKH and Stretch right now, we could have another 2 picks on top of that. We can keep on picking draftees in as many rounds as we like (list spots permitting) until we either pass, or upgrade whatever rookies we wish.

Put it this way. Have we traded out our 6th round pick? Have we traded any other picks in rounds after that?

The draft does not end after 5 rounds.

[deanox 8,502]

49 minutes ago, olisik said:

Like trading away the rights to Ben King for Steven May-esque trades?

Supporters 2017-2018: Goodwin's a terrible coach, he plays Oscar McDonald, who's terrible, and his game plan sucks!

Goodwin: learns about key rule changes that will affect his team's game plan, due to a weakness in his playing roster and takes proactive steps to fill that hole by trading in an opposition captain and trading out a player with currency, but who is also a future flight risk and under an injury cloud.

Supporters 2019: Why did you trade away drafting opportunities? You only care about short term results!

[Engorged Onion 9,214]

2 minutes ago, deanox said:

Supporters 2017-2018: Goodwin's a terrible coach, he plays Oscar McDonald, who's terrible, and his game plan sucks!

Goodwin: learns about key rule changes that will affect his team's game plan, due to a weakness in his playing roster and takes proactive steps to fill that hole by trading in an opposition captain and trading out a player with currency, but who is also a future flight risk and under an injury cloud.

Supporters 2019: Why did you trade away drafting opportunities? You only care about short term results!

Bravo @deanox

[dworship 3,342]

2 minutes ago, FireInTheBelly said:

If we have to make a 3rd pick, yes, we have a 3rd pick. If we wanted to delist JKH and Stretch right now, we could have another 2 picks on top of that. We can keep on picking draftees in as many rounds as we like (list spots permitting) until we either pass, or upgrade whatever rookies we wish.

Put it this way. Have we traded out our 6th round pick? Have we traded any other picks in rounds after that?

The draft does not end after 5 rounds.

"If we have to make a 3rd pick, yes, we have a 3rd pick" Please tell me what pick number that would be? Oh and by the way we do have to make a 3rd pick according to the Rules

"If we wanted to delist JKH and Stretch right now, we could have another 2 picks on top of that."  I thought that would just mean we had 2 more spots on our list to fill.

There was a reason I quoted the rules at the end of my original post and perhaps I've miss-interpreted them, can you help me out by letting me know the section of the rules that allow the scenarios in bold.

[FireInTheBennelly 4,022]

1 minute ago, dworship said:

"If we have to make a 3rd pick, yes, we have a 3rd pick" Please tell me what pick number that would be? Oh and by the way we do have to make a 3rd pick according to the Rules

"If we wanted to delist JKH and Stretch right now, we could have another 2 picks on top of that."  I thought that would just mean we had 2 more spots on our list to fill.

There was a reason I quoted the rules at the end of my original post and perhaps I've miss-interpreted them, can you help me out by letting me know the section of the rules that allow the scenarios in bold.

Oh man.

Please tell me what pick number that would be? Oh and by the way we do have to make a 3rd pick according to the Rules At this stage it would be our 6th round pick. I can't tell you exactly what number that would be as most teams will have passed by then, so it could potentially be around the 70s. If you are desperate for me to give you an exact number, as it stands it would be pick 97, AKA the 2nd pick of round 6. And yes, I'm well aware we need to make 3 picks, as per the rules.

I thought that would just mean we had 2 more spots on our list to fill. Yes we'd have 2 more list spots to fill whichever way we wish to fill them. Draft rounds 7 and 8 if we were that way inclined, or DFAs, PSD etc.

Why are you insisting the draft ends after 5 rounds? That is simply not the case, and has never been the case. Go through the rules again if you like and highlight where it says the draft ends after 5 rounds. When you don't see that anywhere in the rules, ask yourself this question. Have we traded our 6th round selection? No. We can use a pick in the 6th round!

I've been patient with you insisting your communication skills are the problem. They aren't. Your understanding of the situation is incorrect.

FWIW though, I hope you are correct that we are still looking to trade in a player for our current suite of picks.

[Nascent 7,200]

 

9 minutes ago, dworship said:

"If we have to make a 3rd pick, yes, we have a 3rd pick" Please tell me what pick number that would be? Oh and by the way we do have to make a 3rd pick according to the Rules

"If we wanted to delist JKH and Stretch right now, we could have another 2 picks on top of that."  I thought that would just mean we had 2 more spots on our list to fill.

There was a reason I quoted the rules at the end of my original post and perhaps I've miss-interpreted them, can you help me out by letting me know the section of the rules that allow the scenarios in bold.

It appears you missed my post earlier on the topic so I will post it here again.

5 hours ago, Nascent said:

They changed the rules a few years ago that allows a rookie upgrade to count as a selection. In 2016 we only took Mitch Hannan and Dion Johnstone and then upgraded Wagner to the senior list. As someone else as stated, rounds are infinite until all positions on the list are filled or clubs pass and choose to take more rookies. Think its the clubs choice of 40 senior and 4 rookies, 39 senior and 5 rookies, or 38 senior and 6 rookies.

At the moment we have picks 3 and 8. If need be will have a selection in the 6th round which starts in the 90's as it stands. This will most likely come into the high 60's/low 70's by the time clubs pass on selections and academy picks are used.

 

From the AFL rules 2017 page 63/64.

10.10 Inclusion of Rookie List Player onto Primary List

(a) Prohibition – Playing in AFL Competition 64 A Player included on a Club’s Rookie List shall not play for the Club in the AFL Competition except for the Pre-Season Competition. (Refer also Rule 5.7) (b) Primary List

(b) Primary List A Club may apply to the AFL to transfer a Player or Players from its Rookie List onto its Primary List: (i) on the day when its Primary List is lodged with the AFL prior to the National Draft Selection Meeting under Rule 6.1 by lodging with the AFL the form prescribed in Schedule 1 as Form 33. In which case, the Club shall forfeit its last selection or, if more than one player, its last and each previous draft selection at the National AFL Draft Selection meeting.

 

[FireInTheBennelly 4,022]

10 minutes ago, Nascent said:

 

It appears you missed my post earlier on the topic so I will post it here again.

 

From the AFL rules 2017 page 63/64.

10.10 Inclusion of Rookie List Player onto Primary List

(a) Prohibition – Playing in AFL Competition 64 A Player included on a Club’s Rookie List shall not play for the Club in the AFL Competition except for the Pre-Season Competition. (Refer also Rule 5.7) (b) Primary List

(b) Primary List A Club may apply to the AFL to transfer a Player or Players from its Rookie List onto its Primary List: (i) on the day when its Primary List is lodged with the AFL prior to the National Draft Selection Meeting under Rule 6.1 by lodging with the AFL the form prescribed in Schedule 1 as Form 33. In which case, the Club shall forfeit its last selection or, if more than one player, its last and each previous draft selection at the National AFL Draft Selection meeting.

 

No Nascent I didn't miss your post. That's a different issue altogether.

Essentially it means if we were to upgrade a rookie, that would be our last pick in the draft. So at this point, in the 6th round we must make a pick, either a new draftee, or a rookie upgrade.

If people think we really only have 2 draft picks in this years draft, they better get on the phone to Mahoney immediately and let him know, as he's come out and said we're taking them to the draft. If we do that, according to a few on here, we'll be in breach of the 3 draft pick rule. What's the penalty?

If Mahoney is purely posturing for a better trade, he should probably realise that all other clubs would know we'd be in breach of the rules and they may only offer us a 4th and 5th round pick for our first rounder, which we'd be forced to take.

Can you see how ridiculous this is getting?

[Nascent 7,200]

1 minute ago, FireInTheBelly said:

No Nascent I didn't miss your post. That's a different issue altogether.

Essentially it means if we were to upgrade a rookie, that would be our last pick in the draft. So at this point, in the 6th round we must make a pick, either a new draftee, or a rookie upgrade.

If people think we really only have 2 draft picks in this years draft, they better get on the phone to Mahoney immediately and let him know, as he's come out and said we're taking them to the draft. If we do that, according to a few on here, we'll be in breach of the 3 draft pick rule. What's the penalty?

If Mahoney is purely posturing for a better trade, he should probably realise that all other clubs would know we'd be in breach of the rules and they may only offer us a 4th and 5th round pick for our first rounder, which we'd be forced to take.

Can you see how ridiculous this is getting?

I agree with everything you've said now and previously. My quote was in reference to dworship to try and enlighten him as it appears he is misunderstanding the situation.

[FireInTheBennelly 4,022]

2 minutes ago, Nascent said:

I agree with everything you've said now and previously. My quote was in reference to dworship to try and enlighten him as it appears he is misunderstanding the situation.

Sorry mate, I misinterpreted.

You had me confused as you'd 'liked' an earlier explanation of mine, so I thought you agreed with me. Thanks for the assist

[titan_uranus 22,208]

1 hour ago, Axis of Bob said:

The logic is that we now have credibility that we will take Green at 3, since we can get the player we want at 8 anyway. So we are forcing GWS to trade with us for pick 3.

I think this means that we'll trade pick 3 for pick 6 plus effectively what we traded to North for pick 8.

So the end result at the end will be that we’ll have traded pick 3 for picks 6 and 8.

This could well be it.

Jon Ralph has tweeted that GWS wants pick 3 and will give us pick 6 and GWS' 2020 first round pick.

I'm wary of buying into anything Jon Ralph says but given he seemed to have the news of our trade with North first, maybe he has a credible source.

[Beetle 4,279]

5 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

This could well be it.

Jon Ralph has tweeted that GWS wants pick 3 and will give us pick 6 and GWS' 2020 first round pick.

I'm wary of buying into anything Jon Ralph says but given he seemed to have the news of our trade with North first, maybe he has a credible source.

If this happens and we manage to go into the draft with 6, 8 (possibly a fourth rounder included) and get back into the the first round next year for pick 3, it will be a massive win for Mahoney and his team.

[Axis of Bob 10,155]

It just makes sense. Reports are that we want Weightman and GWS could argue that we wouldn’t use pick 3 to bid on Green in case we are forced to take him. So they argue that we will accept pick 6 plus something of lowish value to get it done because otherwise it may hurt us. 

Now we can go to GWS with complete impunity and say “pay up, because we’re definitely bidding for Green and will happily take him unless you give us something seriously valuable in return, or else you’re pick 6 disappears trying to match the bid”.

It’s exactly the reason why you can’t look at trades in isolation. North may be getting overs for their trade, but it’s coming from GWS, not us.

Mahoney is an excellent trader. Pragmatic and very creative.

Edited October 15, 2019 by Axis of Bob

[dworship 3,342]

40 minutes ago, Nascent said:

 

It appears you missed my post earlier on the topic so I will post it here again.

 

From the AFL rules 2017 page 63/64.

10.10 Inclusion of Rookie List Player onto Primary List

(a) Prohibition – Playing in AFL Competition 64 A Player included on a Club’s Rookie List shall not play for the Club in the AFL Competition except for the Pre-Season Competition. (Refer also Rule 5.7) (b) Primary List

(b) Primary List A Club may apply to the AFL to transfer a Player or Players from its Rookie List onto its Primary List: (i) on the day when its Primary List is lodged with the AFL prior to the National Draft Selection Meeting under Rule 6.1 by lodging with the AFL the form prescribed in Schedule 1 as Form 33. In which case, the Club shall forfeit its last selection or, if more than one player, its last and each previous draft selection at the National AFL Draft Selection meeting.

Congratulations Nascent that is exactly what I posted originally, ie the Club must FORFEIT it's last selection in promoting a rookie, problem is our last selection is currently #8

 

[Pates 9,536]

11 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

This could well be it.

Jon Ralph has tweeted that GWS wants pick 3 and will give us pick 6 and GWS' 2020 first round pick.

I'm wary of buying into anything Jon Ralph says but given he seemed to have the news of our trade with North first, maybe he has a credible source.

I’d be trying to squeeze another pick out of them, say a late 2nd rounder or 3rd rounder (not sure what they have left).