It would suit the AFL and their telecast if Melbourne was to bid on Green (and I hope they do.)

Jackson is no certainty at pick 3.

1 minute ago, Roger Mellie said:

FMD They're going to drag out the first round for 2 1/2 hours?

That's scaling new heights in dull for the AFL.

Lucky we have two picks to break up all that excitement.

Two days it beggars belief. I will just tune into Demonland around 10.00 tonight. That way all that excitement won't get to me.

12 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

I think you will find the phantoms you are referring to are the ones with the 'likely' pick orders taken in to account BA once the media had some wind of who (roughly) was likely to bid for whom and also after the pick swaps were settled (approx Nov onwards).

Most of the phantoms prior to that (October and earlier) based on pure rankings had him in the top 3 or 6 draftees.

Someone correct me if im wrong but from my understanding the only reason they are saying he will go that low on draft night is because they believe we are going to fail to bid on him with 3 when that is the exact thing we should be doing.

Failing to bid with the bid before their No.4 then allows GWS an extra free hit in the top 10 with their No.4 pick.   The other clubs won't bother after that as the only bid that would really effect GWS is the one that forces them to use their pick 4...ie; the no.3 pick ....ours.

Any bid after ours cant come till pick 5, the Swans, which will mean nothing as GWS can just match the bid with their next pick, pick 40 (plus the rest i assume), and also go in to deficit for 2020 assuming they don't have enough points to match a bid at 10 or wherever.

Why wouldn't other clubs pick Green if he was best available at the spot.  It means GWS will have to use more of their picks for points and if they don't match the bid the other club gets Green who is best available.  It's a no lose situation for the bidding club. 

We won't bid on Green because we want Jackson and we suspect GWS won't match.  Sure we deny them a pick but we miss the player we want.  That's just dumb.

10 minutes ago, Dante said:

Maybe the recruiters pick the correct players but the club fail to develop them?

Of course nothing is guaranteed, but if the club the right system in place, there is a lot more chance the players will develop.

For better or worse Dante I cannot get the famous Lucas out of my mind. Now there was a first round key forward selection that no amount of development would have changed. Just a crap selection from day 1.

Trade pick 3 to freo for pick 7 & 8

9 minutes ago, Roger Mellie said:

FMD They're going to drag out the first round for 2 1/2 hours?

That's scaling new heights in dull for the AFL.

Lucky we have two picks to break up all that excitement.

5 minutes a pick for at least 21 picks, it has to run for 105 minutes. And I think it should. Add in 15 minutes of introductions and you get 2 hours. Plus a wrap at the end.

Unfortunately to make it great tv you need 3 things:

1. Excellent HD highlights package

2. Draft experts with knowledge and presentation skills. Ideally 2 of them to bounce off each other.

3. An interviewer with skills and kids with charisma and stories to tell.

 

11 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

Why wouldn't other clubs pick Green if he was best available at the spot.  It means GWS will have to use more of their picks for points and if they don't match the bid the other club gets Green who is best available.  It's a no lose situation for the bidding club. 

We won't bid on Green because we want Jackson and we suspect GWS won't match.  Sure we deny them a pick but we miss the player we want.  That's just dumb.

Not at all BB.  Winning a bid on Green at  3 lands us a top 5/6 player in the draft (according to all the experts) but more than likely forces GWS to use pick 4 to take him (assuming they want him).  They then miss out on using pick 4 on another player and we then get to pick up Jackson if he slips through to 10 or if someone else nabs him early others could slip through like a Young or an Ash.

Imagine securing Green and Ash in this draft and still having a chance at say Taylor, Kozzy, Rivers or Schoenburg.

If they do counter our bid we get Jackson anyway and potentially Ash or someone who slips through unexpected like a Young or a Kemp as we've taken GWS's bonus pick away.

That's a fabulous result in any recruiting language.

Edited November 27, 20195 yr by Rusty Nails

2 hours ago, poita said:

Weideman in particular with his size should be crashing packs and knocking blokes over, but he plays like he has the build of Fritsch or Hannan.

Until this year Weideman pretty much has been the build of Fritsch...just taller.

1 minute ago, Rusty Nails said:

Not at all BB.  Winning a bid on Green at  3 lands us a top 5/6 player in the draft (according to all the experts) but more than likely forces GWS to use pick 4 to take him (assuming they want him).  They then miss out on using pick 4 on another player and we then get to pick up Jackson if he slips through or if someone else nabs him early others could slup through like a Young or an Ash.

Imagine securing Green and Ash in this draft and still having a chance at say Taylor, Kozzy, Rivers or Schoenburg.

That's a fabulous result in any recruiting language.

Rusty we want Jackson (by all accounts).  If we select him it's because we want him.  If we want Green we'll bid on him.  Our primary objective is to get the best player (by our judgement).  We are not going to bid on Green just to stop GWS getting one more player.  One more good player to GWS is like coals to Newcastle.

Playing games with you're draft picks and bidding will find you out.  If Green is as good as you say some will bid on him early.  If not he's not rated by others as he is here.

10 minutes ago, Ugottobekidding said:

Trade pick 3 to freo for pick 7 & 8

Don't think we can because we traded them  8

2 minutes ago, rjay said:

Until this year Weideman pretty much has been the build of Fritsch...just taller.

Except that (according to the MFC website) Weid weighed 13 kgs more than Bailey at the start of 2019 ?

2 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

Except that (according to the MFC website) Weid weighed 13 kgs more than Bailey at the start of 2019 ?

Check the height difference 'Rusty'...

Reckon that might account for the 13kgs

Weid for his height hasn't had the build to crash packs hard, it's not for want, the kid does have a go.

Just hasn't had the weight to throw around.

1 minute ago, Baghdad Bob said:

Rusty we want Jackson (by all accounts).  If we select him it's because we want him.  If we want Green we'll bid on him.  Our primary objective is to get the best player (by our judgement).  We are not going to bid on Green just to stop GWS getting one more player.  One more good player to GWS is like coals to Newcastle.

Playing games with you're draft picks and bidding will find you out.  If Green is as good as you say some will bid on him early.  If not he's not rated by others as he is here.

Well that would be an extremely poor call on the club's behalf if that is the case BB we will agree to disagree on that strategy.

The only other club that will bother to test GWS with an early bid is Sydney BB and they will lose as by that stage GWS will have used their pick 4 to take a bonus pick from the top 10.  Meaning they only have to match with their rubbish picks from 40 down.

After the Swans you are correct, why would anyone else bother knowing the same outcome is forthcoming.

5 minutes ago, rjay said:

Check the height difference 'Rusty'...

Reckon that might account for the 13kgs

Weid for his height hasn't had the build to crash packs hard, it's not for want, the kid does have a go.

Just hasn't had the weight to throw around.

T-Mac only 4kgs heavier rjay.  Does ok hitting the packs i reckon.  Too big and next thing you'll be arguing us D'landers forced him to put on too much weight and that's slowed him down!

Edited November 27, 20195 yr by Rusty Nails

11 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

5 minutes a pick for at least 21 picks, it has to run for 105 minutes. And I think it should. Add in 15 minutes of introductions and you get 2 hours. Plus a wrap at the end.

Unfortunately to make it great tv you need 3 things:

1. Excellent HD highlights package

2. Draft experts with knowledge and presentation skills. Ideally 2 of them to bounce off each other.

3. An interviewer with skills and kids with charisma and stories to tell.

 

I think they'll struggle on all three. I also think live coverage of the draft appeal is pretty limited to footy tragics and there's nothing wrong with that. The AFL should give up on  its lame attempts to broaden the appeal with bells and whistles.

I'll be on the edge of my seat at the kick-off, when Gil runs through the riveting draft rules.

1 minute ago, Rusty Nails said:

T-Mac only 4kgs heavier rjay.  Does ok hitting the packs i reckon.  Too big and next thing you'll be arguing us D'landers forced him to put on too much weight!

Oh well, I guess he's no good then 'Rusty'...another bust.

Should have delisted him.

2 minutes ago, rjay said:

Oh well, I guess he's no good then 'Rusty'...another bust.

Should have delisted him.

Too costly rjay.  Another year to run.  Club's already taken a big hit.  Looks like the club is starting to have a few concerns also.  Earlier they said we are backing in T-Mac and Weid to go around again in 2020 as our two talls but are now chasing a ruckman who they believe can play as a tall forward in the draft.

Edited November 27, 20195 yr by Rusty Nails

9 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

Well that would be an extremely poor call on the club's behalf if that is the case BB we will agree to disagree on that strategy.

The only other club that will bother to test GWS with an early bid is Sydney BB and they will lose as by that stage GWS will have used their pick 4 to take a bonus pick from the top 10.  Meaning they only have to match with their rubbish picks from 40 down.

After the Swans you are correct, why would anyone else bother knowing the same outcome is forthcoming.

So in a nutshell

• you say we should bid on Green to deny GWS an additional pick even if we rate Jackson higher.
• I say we should just take who we want and let the cards fall.

There are 16 other clubs as well as GWS Rusty, we need to be the best we can be, not sacrifice outselves for the whole competition.

Anyway I've had my say.

20 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

So in a nutshell

• you say we should bid on Green to deny GWS an additional pick even if we rate Jackson higher.
• I say we should just take who we want and let the cards fall.

There are 16 other clubs as well as GWS Rusty, we need to be the best we can be, not sacrifice outselves for the whole competition.

Anyway I've had my say.

Not at all BB.  I'm saying bid on Green not that the club will.

As you say they know more and that will always be fall back position.

From what i watched in the Nats Green is the No.3 in this draft.  Bidding on him is a no brainer as we stand to win big time if we land him.  If GWS step in and say "oh no you don't" and take him with No.4 pick they obviously rate him just as highly.

Assuming GWS are forced to bid with 4 we win after anyway by taking Jackson with 3 (effectively at 4) but GWS don't get to snatch an extra top 10 pick in the draft, meaning that there's an extra player to be bid on by everyone.

That makes our top 10 pick even more valuable on the night (which we could use in a last minute deal) vs if we don't bid.  An extra bid up the order from a club using a bid on the extra player available also potentially might land us a more preferred player with our pick 28.

I would recommend you watch Green in the nats if you haven't already BB.  Very much a worthy pick at No.3 and will be a key in the GWS midfield for years to come after a few pre-seasons.  Assuming he doesn't cop a major injury.

Edited November 27, 20195 yr by Rusty Nails

19 minutes ago, Roger Mellie said:

I think they'll struggle on all three. I also think live coverage of the draft appeal is pretty limited to footy tragics and there's nothing wrong with that. The AFL should give up on  its lame attempts to broaden the appeal with bells and whistles.

I'll be on the edge of my seat at the kick-off, when Gil runs through the riveting draft rules.

They should have enough champs footage for the first round kids at least. 

If Fox could borrow Cal Twomey and pump up Matt Balmer and have them go head to head for a decade they’d have good tv. Instead both are babies in media terms and probably are years away from finding their voices as draft experts.

And the very skilled but still somewhat overrated Neroli Meadows has been let go. We’ll get perfectly nice interviews but it’s also some boring kids mostly. The background stories just don’t compare to those of NBA and NFL draftees.

2 hours ago, Greendale said:

Cal Twomey was just saying on the draft countdown that he had spoken to many recruiters about who they would take at pick 3, and about half of them would be going for Jackson. He's definitely a bolter, but perhaps not as unconventional as first thought.

Maybe they all want us to ignore Young by pumping up Jackson ?

Edited November 27, 20195 yr by John Demonic

2 hours ago, Greendale said:

Cal Twomey was just saying on the draft countdown that he had spoken to many recruiters about who they would take at pick 3, and about half of them would be going for Jackson. He's definitely a bolter, but perhaps not as unconventional as first thought.

Would need to know how many Cal considers is 'many'.

Hope he isn't including Caruso's view in that straw poll.

1 hour ago, Roger Mellie said:

FMD They're going to drag out the first round for 2 1/2 hours?

That's scaling new heights in dull for the AFL.

Lucky we have two picks to break up all that excitement.

 

2008 Draft first round took 2 minutes and 30 seconds.

 

 

what does first round mean? just first 18 picks, or first (original)18 plus f/s, academy picks ?

1 hour ago, Rusty Nails said:

From what i watched in the Nats Green is the No.3 in this draft.  Bidding on him is a no brainer as we stand to win big time if we land him.  If GWS step in and say "oh no you don't" and take him with No.4 pick they obviously rate him just as highly.

Assuming GWS are forced to bid with 4 we win after anyway by taking Jackson with 3 (effectively at 4) but GWS don't get to snatch an extra rop 10 pick in the draft, meaning that there's an extra player to be bid on by everyone.

That makes our top 10 bid even more valuable on the night (which we could use in a last minute deal).  An extra bid up the order also potentially might land us a more preferred player with our pick 28.

The assumption that GWS want Green so badly is the issue.  According to some reports they don't and will let us keep him. 

If they do want him badly, GWS can swap pick 4 (after our bid) for another club's 2020 first round pick and a swag of later 2020 picks.  Several clubs have 2 first round and multiple later round picks in 2020 which they could use to swap for #4 and stay within AFL rules eg Brisbane and maybe North). 

Or swap #4 for a club's 3rd/4th round picks this year and their 2020 first round pick.

So GWS use rubbish picks this year, go into deficit and get the extra first round player next year.  GWS may go into deficit but I read somewhere that swapped/traded in picks aren't used to make up a deficit; only natural picks.

So GWS won't be using #4 on Green no matter what we do.  The risk for us is we miss out on the player we really want.

The only difference if we bid is that Ash (or whoever) stays in the pool.

BTW, Sydney yesterday said they won't bid on Green at 5 and some phantom draft watchers see him sliding to our pick 10. 

I reckon most clubs have moved on from 'forcing' GWS to pay a 'fair' price because they have - GWS gave up 3 first round picks to get 4: 12 and 18 to saints for 6 then it and their 2020 first round pick to the Crows for 4. 

Other than who we take, where Green is called is one of the more interesting things in the draft.

Edited November 27, 20195 yr by Lucifer's Hero