7 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

See even Henry is keen to join the Dees.

Looks a good fit in Dees colours. 

10 minutes ago, Pates said:

Looks a good fit in Dees colours. 

With a big Maxx jammed down the front....

Edited October 28, 20195 yr by buck_nekkid

 

So let me get this straight.

We have two 10 picks.This Liam Henry kid is a top 10 talent.  He is the exact type of player we need.

But we cant get him thanks to another [censored] rule the AFL manufactured that has ruined the draft. What the [censored] is this NGA garbage?

Scrap father sons, scrap academies, scrap anything that compromises the draft.  Until this happens it is nothing short of comical.

 

3 hours ago, JakovichScissorKick said:

 

So let me get this straight.

We have two 10 picks.This Liam Henry kid is a top 10 talent.  He is the exact type of player we need.

But we cant get him thanks to another [censored] rule the AFL manufactured that has ruined the draft. What the [censored] is this NGA garbage?

Scrap father sons, scrap academies, scrap anything that compromises the draft.  Until this happens it is nothing short of comical.

 

Well argued RR.

17 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

Well argued RR.

 

Still have no idea what RR is, but thanks anyway.

Having re-watched all available u18 championships i'm now a Henry convert at 3.

Freo will no doubt match the bid but he is worth a try.

Easily one of the stand outs in the championships along with Jackson and a handfull (or maybe two) of others imv.

Ash also had a very good series.  More so than Young imv who was ok but not sure he gets involved often enough to impact often enough, especially from a run POV.   Not quite able to break free or get into space enough to receive and effect the contest if that makes sense.  Can do so don't get me wrong and very worthy of top 10 to 15.  Just not sure he is a clear No.3 after a full (and more considered/focussed) re-watch.

And i'm not saying pick Jackson at 8 either as im still not sure we can afford a third ruckman nor need one with a top 8 pick.  If i had more evidence he was a genuine forward prospect i would be alot more eager.

Is Jackson worth a top 10 pick for a team that is in need of a ruckman?  Hell yes.

Edited November 13, 20195 yr by Rusty Nails

I agree Rusty, I'm not sure exactly which way around but I'm thinking we bid on one of Green & Henry at 3 then the other at 4. If we land either of those two at 3 I will be very happy. A top class mid if GWS don't match and  if Freo don't, the best small forward in the draft who will be electric on field and has his head screwed on off it.

We can't lose either way, if they match we will have weakened the hand of 2 Clubs and still have the first live pick. Am I right in thinking we'll have potentially removed  pics 6&7 before our pick 8? What I need help with is the tactics either of those may use to downgrade their pics, would there be an advantage for them to do so other than ensuring those pics remain so we lose that advantage?

11 hours ago, 1 red eye 1 blue eye said:

I agree Rusty, I'm not sure exactly which way around but I'm thinking we bid on one of Green & Henry at 3 then the other at 4. If we land either of those two at 3 I will be very happy. A top class mid if GWS don't match and  if Freo don't, the best small forward in the draft who will be electric on field and has his head screwed on off it.

We can't lose either way, if they match we will have weakened the hand of 2 Clubs and still have the first live pick. Am I right in thinking we'll have potentially removed  pics 6&7 before our pick 8? What I need help with is the tactics either of those may use to downgrade their pics, would there be an advantage for them to do so other than ensuring those pics remain so we lose that advantage?

I could be wrong but my understanding is other clubs need to match our bid with the same number of points as what our bid is worth.

LH, DD, NS and others are much more in the know here and will be able to clarify  

9 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

I could be wrong but my understanding is other clubs need to match our bid with the same number of points as what our bid is worth.

LH, DD, NS and others are much more in the know here and will be able to clarify  

It's the amount of points of the pick used to bid minus a 20% discount from memory. So if we bid with pick 3, their pick 6 would be roughly sufficient.

The whole point of it for GWS (and any academy picks) is to trade into a pick BEFORE the bid comes so they get an extra player in and then match the bid using a combination of lowly picks to satisfy the points. It's a loophole that will likely be closed in future as clubs find new ways to take advantage of it each year and render the intended concept redundant. 

Edited November 14, 20195 yr by Lord Travis

1 minute ago, Lord Travis said:

It's the amount of points of the pick used to bid minus a 20% discount from memory. So if we bid with pick 3, their pick 6 would be roughly sufficient.

The whole point of it for GWS (and any academy picks) is to trade into a pick BEFORE the bid comes so they get an extra player in and then match the bid using a combination of lowly picks to satisfy the points. It's a loophole that will likely be closed in future as clubs find new ways to take advantage of it each year and render the intended concept redundant. 

Ah yes the cozy discount to keep the interstate coffers bolstered LT.  Forgot avout that thanks.

Seems like a rediculously biased system.

 Without trading down and including the discount, Freo can use 10 & 22 (slightly over the discounted points requirement...is that allowed?  I assume yes) or 7 & 58 (again slightly over) to counter a bid from us using pick 3 for Henry.

11 hours ago, 1 red eye 1 blue eye said:

I agree Rusty, I'm not sure exactly which way around but I'm thinking we bid on one of Green & Henry at 3 then the other at 4. If we land either of those two at 3 I will be very happy. A top class mid if GWS don't match and  if Freo don't, the best small forward in the draft who will be electric on field and has his head screwed on off it.

We can't lose either way, if they match we will have weakened the hand of 2 Clubs and still have the first live pick. Am I right in thinking we'll have potentially removed  pics 6&7 before our pick 8? What I need help with is the tactics either of those may use to downgrade their pics, would there be an advantage for them to do so other than ensuring those pics remain so we lose that advantage?

Just published:  Live pick trading rules

The answer to your question therein is: 

"The Giants could move on their first selection (Pick 6) in return for later selections, which would aid their second selection (Pick 40) in matching a bid. They could then look to leapfrog back into the top 15 after completing a deal with another club, following the closure of the loophole with the same club.

Another option would be to wait until (after) the player has been bidded on, with teams able to make a live trade to downgrade while on the clock, allowing for lower selections to be used to match bids".

The advantage to them is getting the Academy player on the cheap and getting another player in the draft.  Once Freo or GWS trade out their pick (6/7)the club holding those picks drafts a player, Freo and GWS take Henry/Green on points when bid.  So our pick 8 becomes the 10th pick in the draft. 

I am of the same view as other posters that once an Academy or F/S player has been bid on a club should not be allowed to trade out their next pick(s).  There are more than enough advantages for those clubs as it is getting some of the best players year after year.

 

Just now, Rusty Nails said:

Ah yes the cozy discount to keep the interstate coffers bolstered LT.  Forgot avout that thanks.

Seems like a rediculously biased system.

 Without trading down and including the discount, Freo can use 10 & 22 (slightly over the discounted points requirement...is that allowed?  I assume yes) or 7 & 58 (again slightly over) to counter a bid from us using pick 3 for Henry.

Not entirely sure but I think picks need to be used in sequence for Academy players so if Freo hold 7 and 10 when Henry is bid on those picks are used.  Any surplus points remaining gives them another pick further down the draft.

1 minute ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Not entirely sure but I think picks need to be used in sequence for Academy players so if Freo hold 7 and 10 when Henry is bid on those picks are used.  Any surplus points remaining gives them another pick further down the draft.

Ok so they can't pick and choose but will receive equivelant balance points as a lower extra pick.  Interesting.  A bid for Henry at 3 might throw the cat amongst the Docker's pigeons, especially if they are eager (hoping) to land both Henry & Jackson with their 7 & 10.  Worth bidding even if we don't land him then.

I'll be very surprised if we bid Henry at 3 or 4.  He wasn't mentioned by Taylor at either 3 or 8 in the Road to the Draft interview. Jackson, Young and Green, then Kemp and Robertson IIRC.

16 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

Ok so they can't pick and choose but will receive equivelant balance points as a lower extra pick.  Interesting.  A bid for Henry at 3 might throw the cat amongst the Docker's pigeons, especially if they are eager (hoping) to land both Henry & Jackson with their 7 & 10.  Worth bidding even if we don't land him then.

If Melb use pick 3 to bid on Henry Freo have to use 7 to match. While pick 3 has a value of 2234 points and pick 7 is 1644 with the 20% discount (1787 points) Freo will have to use pick 10 to get the remaining 143 points meaning pick 10 will move out 12ish.

Edited November 14, 20195 yr by Grimes Times

1 minute ago, Grimes Times said:

If Melb use pick 3 to bid on Henry Freo have to use 7 to match. While pick 3 has a value of 2234 points and pick 7 is 1644 with the 20% discount Freo will have to use pick 10 to get the remaining points meaning pick 10 will move out 12ish.

Or as the AFL have recently declared, Freo could simply trade out 7 and/or 10 if he was bid on at 3 and use later points to get him. It's arguably a cheating method, but permitted

1 hour ago, Fifty-5 said:

I'll be very surprised if we bid Henry at 3 or 4.  He wasn't mentioned by Taylor at either 3 or 8 in the Road to the Draft interview. Jackson, Young and Green, then Kemp and Robertson IIRC.

He was mentioned by Taylor but more so in the context of splitting picks with teams that have academy prospects. 

10 minutes ago, Colm said:

He was mentioned by Taylor but more so in the context of splitting picks with teams that have academy prospects. 

I can't see any advantage in us trading with Freo at least.  8 for say their 10 leaves them having to cough up pick 60.  They have 58 but why would we bother?

If we were sure to land say Weightman with 10 and they gave us 22 assuming we were able to land another needed player (eg; Kozzie or Taylor) then maybe but is that even allowed (ie; a surplus of points at our end after the swap?).

50 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

I can't see any advantage in us trading with Freo at least.  8 for say their 10 leaves them having to cough up pick 60.  They have 58 but why would we bother?

If we were sure to land say Weightman with 10 and they gave us 22 assuming we were able to land another needed player (eg; Kozzie or Taylor) then maybe but is that even allowed (ie; a surplus of points at our end after the swap?).

Why wouldn’t it be allowed? We would be getting more points out of the deal but Freo would probably still end up with 3 top 10 players .(assuming nobody bids on Henry before 7)

Edited November 14, 20195 yr by Colm

3 minutes ago, Colm said:

Why wouldn’t it be allowed? We would be getting more points out of the deal but Freo would probably still end up with 3 top 10 picks.(assuming nobody bids on Henry before 7)

I posted it in another thread, but rules state clubs can't trade a pick back to the same slub it got it from. We gave Freo pick 22 as part of the Langdon trade, therefore we cannot receive it back. So 10+22 is not possible. They'd need to give us 10+something else (later picks or future picks?). It's made a pick split option with Freo very unlikely. GWS can't satisfy us without adding a player, which is no longer an option since trade period closed, so we likely won't pick split with them either.

We may bid on Henry with 8, but they'll match it and downgrade picks. Personally I would be happy to bid on Henry at 8, but not 3.

10 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

I posted it in another thread, but rules state clubs can't trade a pick back to the same slub it got it from. We gave Freo pick 22 as part of the Langdon trade, therefore we cannot receive it back. So 10+22 is not possible. They'd need to give us 10+something else (later picks or future picks?). It's made a pick split option with Freo very unlikely. GWS can't satisfy us without adding a player, which is no longer an option since trade period closed, so we likely won't pick split with them either.

We may bid on Henry with 8, but they'll match it and downgrade picks. Personally I would be happy to bid on Henry at 8, but not 3.

I though I saw on another thread that the rule was clarified to be that the pick swap cannot be connected to another, to try and stop what Sydney did last year, but as the Langdon deal has nothing to do with any future deal that we would be free to do a deal with Freo for pick 22. 

1 hour ago, Lord Travis said:

I posted it in another thread, but rules state clubs can't trade a pick back to the same slub it got it from. We gave Freo pick 22 as part of the Langdon trade, therefore we cannot receive it back. So 10+22 is not possible. They'd need to give us 10+something else (later picks or future picks?). It's made a pick split option with Freo very unlikely. GWS can't satisfy us without adding a player, which is no longer an option since trade period closed, so we likely won't pick split with them either.

We may bid on Henry with 8, but they'll match it and downgrade picks. Personally I would be happy to bid on Henry at 8, but not 3.

there is debate as to whether this refers just to within the nd or whether it includes Trade period + ND

if the former then we could trade back pick 22

33 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

there is debate as to whether this refers just to within the nd or whether it includes Trade period + ND

if the former then we could trade back pick 22

Won't be there prob at 8 

2 hours ago, 58er said:

Won't be there prob at 8 

maybe not, but i was really only talking about the trade-back rule

On 11/14/2019 at 1:09 PM, Lucifer's Hero said:

Just published:  Live pick trading rules

The answer to your question therein is: 

"The Giants could move on their first selection (Pick 6) in return for later selections, which would aid their second selection (Pick 40) in matching a bid. They could then look to leapfrog back into the top 15 after completing a deal with another club, following the closure of the loophole with the same club.

Another option would be to wait until (after) the player has been bidded on, with teams able to make a live trade to downgrade while on the clock, allowing for lower selections to be used to match bids".

The advantage to them is getting the Academy player on the cheap and getting another player in the draft.  Once Freo or GWS trade out their pick (6/7)the club holding those picks drafts a player, Freo and GWS take Henry/Green on points when bid.  So our pick 8 becomes the 10th pick in the draft. 

I am of the same view as other posters that once an Academy or F/S player has been bid on a club should not be allowed to trade out their next pick(s).  There are more than enough advantages for those clubs as it is getting some of the best players year after year.

 

Me after reading this one LH...