17 hours ago, BAMF said:

 Fully agree on what you are saying, but I cannot see Sydney giving up thier 2021 first rounder.

I've done the rough maths and they only need to cover around 376 points. They are much more likely to offer their future 2nd as a trade to a club and get burner picks back in exchange.

This would still be a great deal for the club giving up late picks.

Mahoney has come out publicly and said we might be moving up the draft.

I found it strange that he would say this and think that there is a potential plan in place already depending on how the draft plays out.

Personally, I think our plan was to bundle 19, 28 and 50 up to move up the draft. It's about 1800 points or the equivalent of pick 6 (we would have to pay overs so would likely get pick 10-14). I cannot figure out who would need points bad enough to do it though.

Cal Twomey's article has freo wanting to take 4 picks in the draft. They only have 2 inside 55 at the min(11&32). If we trade 50, 28 and 19 for picks 32 and 11 it may be a great deal for all parties. The points work out exactly the same. Even if we make it 18 instead of 19. We get a much better first round, still get our end of first round/ start of second round and our 3rd pick in 32 is still a very good pick. They still stay in first round or start of second, improve their second round pick and get an extra pick (50) to help them fill list spots. Winner winner. 

 

18 hours ago, BAMF said:

 Fully agree on what you are saying, but I cannot see Sydney giving up thier 2021 first rounder.

I've done the rough maths and they only need to cover around 376 points. They are much more likely to offer their future 2nd as a trade to a club and get burner picks back in exchange.

This would still be a great deal for the club giving up late picks.

Mahoney has come out publicly and said we might be moving up the draft.

I found it strange that he would say this and think that there is a potential plan in place already depending on how the draft plays out.

Personally, I think our plan was to bundle 19, 28 and 50 up to move up the draft. It's about 1800 points or the equivalent of pick 6 (we would have to pay overs so would likely get pick 10-14). I cannot figure out who would need points bad enough to do it though.

I haven't quite got my head around the exact permutations, but if Sydney are risking damaging their first round pick next year, perhaps they'd be interested in:

Sydney's 2021 first and third round for picks 19, 50 plus our 2021 second.

Or similar.

Yes, they lose their 2021 first, but it was going to be damaged anyway. So they get another clean 2nd rounder to go with theirs, plus some extra points this year.

9 hours ago, deanox said:

I haven't quite got my head around the exact permutations, but if Sydney are risking damaging their first round pick next year, perhaps they'd be interested in:

Sydney's 2021 first and third round for picks 19, 50 plus our 2021 second.

Or similar.

Yes, they lose their 2021 first, but it was going to be damaged anyway. So they get another clean 2nd rounder to go with theirs, plus some extra points this year.

Yes that works well. Good thinking and hopefully an option on the table.  

10 hours ago, Colm said:

Cal Twomey's article has freo wanting to take 4 picks in the draft. They only have 2 inside 55 at the min(11&32). If we trade 50, 28 and 19 for picks 32 and 11 it may be a great deal for all parties. The points work out exactly the same. Even if we make it 18 instead of 19. We get a much better first round, still get our end of first round/ start of second round and our 3rd pick in 32 is still a very good pick. They still stay in first round or start of second, improve their second round pick and get an extra pick (50) to help them fill list spots. Winner winner. 

 

Winner winner DRAFT Dinner!!!!

11 hours ago, Colm said:

Cal Twomey's article has freo wanting to take 4 picks in the draft. They only have 2 inside 55 at the min(11&32). If we trade 50, 28 and 19 for picks 32 and 11 it may be a great deal for all parties. The points work out exactly the same. Even if we make it 18 instead of 19. We get a much better first round, still get our end of first round/ start of second round and our 3rd pick in 32 is still a very good pick. They still stay in first round or start of second, improve their second round pick and get an extra pick (50) to help them fill list spots. Winner winner. 

 

This is brilliant.  Hope Josh Mahoney reads this forum (or already has that trade scenario in his notebook).

12 hours ago, Colm said:

Cal Twomey's article has freo wanting to take 4 picks in the draft. They only have 2 inside 55 at the min(11&32). If we trade 50, 28 and 19 for picks 32 and 11 it may be a great deal for all parties. The points work out exactly the same. Even if we make it 18 instead of 19. We get a much better first round, still get our end of first round/ start of second round and our 3rd pick in 32 is still a very good pick. They still stay in first round or start of second, improve their second round pick and get an extra pick (50) to help them fill list spots. Winner winner. 

 

I'd be amazed if Freo would drop 7 places in the first round to move up for 4 in the 2nd and add a very speculative pick 50.

I get the points work, but that doesn't really come into play if they are using all the picks to draft, and not to match an Academy pick.

18, 19 and 50 for 11 and 32 is more likely needed to get them to bite, which I think is too much for us. 

I like the idea of using one of our first rounder to buy back into next years first round. Either Syd or Collingwood, if we can manage it. But an end of first and late 3rd round isn't likely to do it for us. Deanox's option a few posts above may be our best bet.

1 hour ago, Pickett2Jackson said:

Hope Josh Mahoney reads this forum

I wouldn't be betting on it.

1 hour ago, Mickey said:

I'd be amazed if Freo would drop 7 places in the first round to move up for 4 in the 2nd and add a very speculative pick 50.

I get the points work, but that doesn't really come into play if they are using all the picks to draft, and not to match an Academy pick.

18, 19 and 50 for 11 and 32 is more likely needed to get them to bite, which I think is too much for us. 

I like the idea of using one of our first rounder to buy back into next years first round. Either Syd or Collingwood, if we can manage it. But an end of first and late 3rd round isn't likely to do it for us. Deanox's option a few posts above may be our best bet.

Hmm...

Collingwood have another Daicos father/son next year who is going to go top 10. They won't mind if they are in deficit going into next year as thier first rounder will go towards him.

They might be willing to give up their first round pick if we could give them some points back in return and cut their deficit this year.

15 hours ago, Colm said:

Cal Twomey's article has freo wanting to take 4 picks in the draft. They only have 2 inside 55 at the min(11&32). If we trade 50, 28 and 19 for picks 32 and 11 it may be a great deal for all parties. The points work out exactly the same. Even if we make it 18 instead of 19. We get a much better first round, still get our end of first round/ start of second round and our 3rd pick in 32 is still a very good pick. They still stay in first round or start of second, improve their second round pick and get an extra pick (50) to help them fill list spots. Winner winner. 

 

Wishful thinking.

They may want four picks in the draft but as if they're going to do a deal like that to get one extra speculative pick in the 50's. That's without mentioning that this is most speculative draft year we'll have seen due to covid and one heavily compromised due to academy and father/son players.

A melbourne supporter trade if ever I've heard one.

 

Edited November 22, 20204 yr by JimmyGadson

1 hour ago, BAMF said:

Hmm...

Collingwood have another Daicos father/son next year who is going to go top 10. They won't mind if they are in deficit going into next year as thier first rounder will go towards him.

They might be willing to give up their first round pick if we could give them some points back in return and cut their deficit this year.

Will they be in deficit? I didn't think they had a highly rated kid this year. 

If they trade their 2021 first for, say, our 18 and future second, then they are doing what we've done the last few years; move their first forward a year. Then they can use lesser picks for Daicos next year, without their first being eaten by an early bid.

Oh, and we get to deathride them next year, which would be fun 

3 hours ago, Mickey said:

I'd be amazed if Freo would drop 7 places in the first round to move up for 4 in the 2nd and add a very speculative pick 50.

I get the points work, but that doesn't really come into play if they are using all the picks to draft, and not to match an Academy pick.

18, 19 and 50 for 11 and 32 is more likely needed to get them to bite, which I think is too much for us. 

I like the idea of using one of our first rounder to buy back into next years first round. Either Syd or Collingwood, if we can manage it. But an end of first and late 3rd round isn't likely to do it for us. Deanox's option a few posts above may be our best bet.

They might do 11 for 18 & 19

6 minutes ago, Pollyanna said:

They might do 11 for 18 & 19

Is that enough for us? We should wait for the draft and see if we want to trade up IMO. 

I guess it all depended on how JT sees things. Mahoney has talked about us moving up which has me thinking there’s someone that they might have their eye on.( maybe Cox). 
If we are keen on a player that would probably be gone before pick 18 then perhaps 18&19 for 11 & 32. Even if we throw in 50. 

1 hour ago, Pollyanna said:

They might do 11 for 18 & 19

 

1 hour ago, Fat Tony said:

Is that enough for us? We should wait for the draft and see if we want to trade up IMO. 

I'm not a draft guru by any means, and have very little knowledge of this year's crop. But I wouldn't do that unless there was a standout player at 11. I'd back Taylor to pick two at 18 and 19 than 1 at 11.

But trading 18 and future second (lets say it becomes 28) for the Pies first (which realistically could be 6-10) would be a great get.

No chance I'd be trading both 18 & 19 for a single better pick. 19 + 28 on the other hand would be fine if they have a specific target. 

Edited November 22, 20204 yr by adonski

1 hour ago, Fat Tony said:

Is that enough for us? We should wait for the draft and see if we want to trade up IMO. 

 

9 minutes ago, adonski said:

No chance I'd be trading both 18 & 19 for a single better pick. 19 + 28 on the other hand would be fine if they have a specific target. 

I absolutely agree Tony that trading up would depend on a specific target being available at the pick on the night.

@adonski - if I offered you 19 + 28 which earlier pick would you be prepared to give in return? I think it's highly unlikely to deliver say 11.  "No chance" you'd be trading 18 + 19 for pick 1?

People are bringing up trading our future 2nd. We can’t do that, unless we trade in a future 1st.

4 minutes ago, Matt said:

People are bringing up trading our future 2nd. We can’t do that, unless we trade in a future 1st.

Which is why I've only mentioned it in a trade that brings in a future first. 

18 and future 2nd for pies future first. I don't know if they'd do it though

2 minutes ago, Mickey said:

Which is why I've only mentioned it in a trade that brings in a future first. 

18 and future 2nd for pies future first. I don't know if they'd do it though

Sorry, my bad

3 minutes ago, Matt said:

Sorry, my bad

Knowing our luck, the AFL will rule we need to be in possession of a future first before we can trade our future second... for a future first 

Carlton did 20, 21 for 11 and a future 3rd with the Dogs in 2015.

Dunkley and Kieran Collins for Charlie Curnow.  
 

That was a win win for both, apart from Curnow’s injuries 

18, 19, 50 for 11, 32 stacks up to me

21 minutes ago, Pollyanna said:

 

I absolutely agree Tony that trading up would depend on a specific target being available at the pick on the night.

@adonski - if I offered you 19 + 28 which earlier pick would you be prepared to give in return? I think it's highly unlikely to deliver say 11.  "No chance" you'd be trading 18 + 19 for pick 1?

Not sure why you're asking that question when we both know it'd never happen

Unless we’re set on Nik Cox then I don’t see us trading up the draft. He looks a player but I’m not sure he is worth the premium (or any other prospect for that matter) because I think we’ll have to trade out both 18 and 19. There are good players in our range that fill needs so my preference is to go with what we have. That said JM is the pick swap master so I wouldn’t rule anything out.

17 hours ago, adonski said:

Not sure why you're asking that question when we both know it'd never happen

The point is you said "No way" you'd trade 18 and 19 for a single pick - but of course you would for pick 1.  What about pick 3, pick 6, pick 9?  We've established what you are - we're just haggling over the price.

BTW, you proposed 19 + 28 for an earlier pick but you didn't say what you would be prepared to give if offered that deal.  I might give somewhere around 14 or 15 for that deal - how about you?