23 hours ago, Good Lord George said:

I'd suggest we can. What you can't do is trade and then regain the same pick on the night. 

So, GWS can't trade pick 6 for, say, 14 and 17, use 14 on green then trade pick 6 back in for 17 and a future first.

 

I don't really like the idea of clubs being able to trade after a bid has been made but it does mean someone like GWS, if they don't trade for a higher pick before hand, won't get an extra top 10 pick.

As an example (I'm not sure what the points work out at), if Sydney bid at 5, GWS can trade 6 for 14 and 17 and use 14 on Green. They then get Green and a kid at 17. If they trade up to 4 or 5 and get in front of the bid they get a pick 4 or 5 and then Green with their other picks. I know which I prefer.

In that situation, GWS' 17 would get pushed back a number of spots. Even with 20% discount, 14 on its own wouldn't be enough points to match a bid at 5. If by chance we bid at 3, they might need both 14 and 17 to match. 6 on its own could be enough. Wed need to be careful to judge him worth 3 in case GWS pass.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think a club without enough picks left to match the points for a bid could be made to use the following year's pick value in their 1st pick to make up the difference.

21 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

In that situation, GWS' 17 would get pushed back a number of spots. Even with 20% discount, 14 on its own wouldn't be enough points to match a bid at 5. If by chance we bid at 3, they might need both 14 and 17 to match. 6 on its own could be enough. Wed need to be careful to judge him worth 3 in case GWS pass.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think a club without enough picks left to match the points for a bid could be made to use the following year's pick value in their 1st pick to make up the difference.

Correct. A club can go into points deficit for the next year up to the value of pick 18 the last 1st round pick.

53 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

In that situation, GWS' 17 would get pushed back a number of spots. Even with 20% discount, 14 on its own wouldn't be enough points to match a bid at 5. If by chance we bid at 3, they might need both 14 and 17 to match. 6 on its own could be enough. Wed need to be careful to judge him worth 3 in case GWS pass.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think a club without enough picks left to match the points for a bid could be made to use the following year's pick value in their 1st pick to make up the difference.

Yep, like I said I hadn't calculated the points. It was more the example. I can see a situation unfolding where a club will trade more than the points value of pick 6 to GWS just to get pick 6, either because the really rate a player or werent going to use those picks. Again, just an example but you can see why GWS would rather trade up then use this "loophole".

17 hours ago, Deecisive said:

there is a lot of good players being picked up by GWS and Sydney through their academy programs. What exactly is melbourne doing in this space?

We obviously are not doing enough.  Alice Springs (our zone) has not been a good zone lately.  It’s probably similar to the Kimberley in WA, lots of talent. The Kimberley zone has seen lots of talent drafted recently.  Alice none.

On 11/8/2019 at 8:59 AM, spirit of norm smith said:

It’s all quite funny given it used to be about young blokes getting excited about going to an AFL club.  

Now it’s mathematical algorithms and actuarial studies is a prerequisite.  AFL gone mad.  Trade players and picks.

Keep the picks as picks.  No live trading for me.  

But isnt that what they do in the states??  Therefore we have to do it also.

17 minutes ago, demonzz said:

But isnt that what they do in the states??  Therefore we have to do it also.

do the states have father/son, academies, point values and 20% discounts?

On 11/9/2019 at 6:48 PM, Deecisive said:

there is a lot of good players being picked up by GWS and Sydney through their academy programs. What exactly is melbourne doing in this space?

Pretty sure we picked up Toby Bedford last year from our 'academy'? Could be wrong tho...

I must be old or just plain stupid or both which maybe correct but I have no idea what is going on with this stuff. Will just wait until after the event and see who we get trusting they will be great players going forward.

11 hours ago, Watson11 said:

We obviously are not doing enough.  Alice Springs (our zone) has not been a good zone lately.  It’s probably similar to the Kimberley in WA, lots of talent. The Kimberley zone has seen lots of talent drafted recently.  Alice none.

Assuming the talent levels are similar I think the big difference is that talented juniors from the Kimberley have a pathway through Perth and WAFL/WA juniors and things like schools and programs like Clontarf. AFL clubs and academies are likely the benefit of years of hard work.

Again, not claiming to be an expert but what's the pathway for a kid from the Alice region? Is Alice Spring's still a troubling town that you want to keep kids away from? Is the NT program working (recent draft results say no)? The solution might be getting the most talented kids in schools in Adelaide.

My prediction:

GWS don’t offer enough to trade pick 3. We bid on Green. GWS choose to match, but trade pick 6 to Geelong for later picks but more points. GWS then try to work a trade with Freo for their leftover picks, to use on Henry, getting pick 10.

20 minutes ago, Mach5 said:

My prediction:

GWS don’t offer enough to trade pick 3. We bid on Green. GWS choose to match, but trade pick 6 to Geelong for later picks but more points. GWS then try to work a trade with Freo for their leftover picks, to use on Henry, getting pick 10.

Will they have leftover picks to trade with Freo? Surely they are all used to match the pick 3 bid?

 

1 hour ago, whelan45 said:

Will they have leftover picks to trade with Freo? Surely they are all used to match the pick 3 bid?

 

I think so.

They have a good haul there already in case Green makes it past pick 6. If they trade 6 for more picks, they’ll have an excess.

3 hours ago, Mach5 said:

My prediction:

GWS don’t offer enough to trade pick 3. We bid on Green. GWS choose to match, but trade pick 6 to Geelong for later picks but more points. GWS then try to work a trade with Freo for their leftover picks, to use on Henry, getting pick 10.

Could see that happening. Also wouldn't rule out Gold Coast with picks 15 and 20 and them wanting to get another early first round selection.

4 hours ago, whelan45 said:

Will they have leftover picks to trade with Freo? Surely they are all used to match the pick 3 bid?

 

From my calcs if GWS split picks with Geel or GC both picks will be needed to match bid and they will get something in the 30’s back. Doesn’t leave them with much to get pick 10 from Freo

GWS will get more points by splitting but will also hand a competitor pick 6. If it is Geelong this could hurt them, GC less so. I hope they just cop it sweet and pony up pick 6 when the times comes. 

Trading out picks on draft night to maximise points for academy bids might bring a layer of intrigue but it is a bad look for the sport. It will only get worse from here. 

 

I wonder if the gentlemen’s handshake agreement of “you give us this pick and we will promise not to bid on X player that you want” happens or if there is too much mistrust? 
I’d love to be on the inside of the Melbourne tent on draft night just to see what goes on. 

2 hours ago, Pulp Fritschon said:

From my calcs if GWS split picks with Geel or GC both picks will be needed to match bid and they will get something in the 30’s back. Doesn’t leave them with much to get pick 10 from Freo

GWS will get more points by splitting but will also hand a competitor pick 6. If it is Geelong this could hurt them, GC less so. I hope they just cop it sweet and pony up pick 6 when the times comes. 

Trading out picks on draft night to maximise points for academy bids might bring a layer of intrigue but it is a bad look for the sport. It will only get worse from here. 

 

Agree, the scenario af GWS trading 6 for 15 and 20 gives them 2024 points. They need 1787 to match a bid from us at pick 3, so they get 237pts change or pick 53.

So it's 6 for 15 and 20 for Green and 53.

Edited November 11, 20195 yr by Fifty-5

And then GWS will also still have picks 40, 59, 60, 80 and then add 53.

Dont know the points value, but wouldn’t be surprised to see them parlay this bunch of picks into one earlier pick.

(to be honest, thought they had more in the 2nd round, but obviously not)

2 hours ago, Mach5 said:

And then GWS will also still have picks 40, 59, 60, 80 and then add 53.

Dont know the points value, but wouldn’t be surprised to see them parlay this bunch of picks into one earlier pick.

(to be honest, thought they had more in the 2nd round, but obviously not)

Be very surprised if those picks could turn into anything early.

I don't think we will trade with GWS. They will hope we don't bid and then trade with Adelaide I feel. If we do bid, they may even trade pick 6 for a future first rounder. My only query on this option would be whether they would have enough points to match the minimum requirement to match a bid? And if they did, would they still then need to draft 2 further players at the end of the draft to meet the minimum requirement?

4 hours ago, whelan45 said:

Be very surprised if those picks could turn into anything early.

I don't think we will trade with GWS. They will hope we don't bid and then trade with Adelaide I feel. If we do bid, they may even trade pick 6 for a future first rounder. My only query on this option would be whether they would have enough points to match the minimum requirement to match a bid? And if they did, would they still then need to draft 2 further players at the end of the draft to meet the minimum requirement?

I do too, on checking the picks they have.

However they add up to the value of pick 19, and will be wasted if not used on Green.
Could GWS package those picks and next year's 1st rounder for 10 maybe? It is Bell we're talking about.
Much more likely 22.

5 hours ago, whelan45 said:

Be very surprised if those picks could turn into anything early.

I don't think we will trade with GWS. They will hope we don't bid and then trade with Adelaide I feel. If we do bid, they may even trade pick 6 for a future first rounder. My only query on this option would be whether they would have enough points to match the minimum requirement to match a bid? And if they did, would they still then need to draft 2 further players at the end of the draft to meet the minimum requirement?

Yes I think GWS best strategy:

We bid on Green, they trade 6 to GC for 2020 mid 1st round priority pick and say 15 this year and cover the bid with 15 and their later picks.

We don't bid on Green, they trade 6 and next year's 1st for 4 and select ahead of the bid.

The fate of picks 3 to 10 has been speculated on except pick 5 held by Sydney.  Nor have they been linked to a player in the top 10 except as a bidder for Green.  So I wouldn't be surprised that if GWS match a bid on Green then Sydney trade #5 out.  Who to and for what?  To Freo for 10 and 22?  With 5 Freo take Jackson, another player at 7 and get ahead of the game for Henry.  To the Cats for 14, 17?  Sydney also have 25 and 32 - a nice set of picks to take to the draft or extract max value from another team wanting to move up the draft.

Its too quiet on the Sydney front I reckon!!  They are a wild card in the top 10!  Especially, if their target player(s) are in the low to mid teens!  

Edited November 13, 20195 yr by Lucifer's Hero