Dees considering big trade plays

[Grouse]

Just saw Cal Twomey on the AFL site stating that the Dees have offered up both of next year’s first round picks to try and land someone inside the top 6 this year but as of yet there have been no takers. A lot of talk around Phillipou going top 6 now.

Do you think it's him the Dees are chasing?

Fascinating stuff. 

 

[Matt]

We’re offering more picks, than just the two 1st’s as well

Edited November 22, 2022 by Matt

[Matt]

If we used everything we got for Jackson, to get a GUN, I would be happy to do it

Edited November 22, 2022 by Matt

[Nascent]

Suspect it would be for Ginbey.

[Lord Nev]

 

[Lord Travis]

Hate this if true. Two firsts from a strong draft isn't worth compromising for this weaker draft. If anything, trade two future firsts for one future first tied to a likely lowly team like Hawthorn or North.

If we aren't landing a Cadman or Sheezel to add to our front half, then it's not worth compromising for. Those two players will go pick 1-3, so we'd need to land a pick 1-3, which we won't. Hoping the list management team aren't going down this path.

[Matt]

1 minute ago, Lord Nev said:

 

What’s your take LN?

[DubDee]

Why would a team trade pick 4 for two future picks likely to be around 14 and 16?  I guess we must be throwing in a 2nd rounder

I back the recruiters. They would know how good a pick 6 would be in their view.

[DubDee]

The teams in the top 5 must be wondering who the heck we want so badly!

are they missing out on the next Bont or Clarry?

[Docs Demons]

1 minute ago, DubDee said:

Why would a team trade pick 4 for two future picks likely to be around 14 and 16?  I guess we must be throwing in a 2nd rounder

I back the recruiters. They would know how good a pick 6 would be in their view.

Yep we got to trust the back room people in that they know allot more than us mere supporters. Must have something in mind and if it doesn't work out then we still go into next years draft with a pretty good hand.

[Nascent]

4 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Why would a team trade pick 4 for two future picks likely to be around 14 and 16?  I guess we must be throwing in a 2nd rounder

I back the recruiters. They would know how good a pick 6 would be in their view.

Pick 13 would have to be included as well I would imagine otherwise I can't see a team even entertaining it for a top 5 pick.

[Lord Nev]

6 minutes ago, Matt said:

What’s your take LN?

I've got absolutely no idea this year! haha I've gradually faded out from watching the draft as we've gotten better as a team. The only goss I heard is that we were keen to get more under 22 year olds on board I believe to improve the quality of that next gen but also balance out some of the contracts we've done and are yet to do.

[durango]

Don't panic as we have not done a deal and it is all conjecture at this stage and some clubs who have been approached may be embellishing the truth.

[whatwhat say what]

love this

targeting a high end mid would seem to be the clear priority, which i 100% agree with

get it done, tim lamb

[The heart beats true]

I never understand the theory that one draft year is worth holding out for. Is the difference really going to mean that a pick 5 this year would only be a pick 20 next year? I seriously doubt it.

The most rewarding thing for a young player with talent is being in a highly professional system for a year. 

Get ‘em in. Show ‘em how it’s done. See what they can do. A bird in the hand and all that.

[DubDee]

8 minutes ago, The heart beats true said:

I never understand the theory that one draft year is worth holding out for. Is the difference really going to mean that a pick 5 this year would only be a pick 20 next year? I seriously doubt it.

The most rewarding thing for a young player with talent is being in a highly professional system for a year. 

Get ‘em in. Show ‘em how it’s done. See what they can do. A bird in the hand and all that.

Agree. and it can mean many things. Often a strong draft is referred to by recruiters as solid talent extending into the 30's rather than tapering off at the teens.  Every draft there are guns. Going all-in for targeted players that we want is fine by me.  has worked so far. Most other teams are late to the party when it comes to aggressive pick trading

[Matt]

At least we’re not going to die wondering

[dazzledavey36]

Wardlaw and Sheezel is my pick in who we'd be trying to nab.

[durango]

There is never a guarantee that a recruit will turn out to be a Clayton Oliver or a Colin Sylvia or a Luke Jackson or a Jack Watts or a Jack Trengrove or a Luke Molan or a Lucas Cook they were all high picks but some got there and others fell by the wayside for one reason or another.

2 high end draft picks may mean both work or only 1 makes it in Clayton draft we had 2 picks and one turned out a near bust had we recruited Curnow or Mckay we may have won the premiership in 2022 as well, but hindsight is a wonderful thing.

I know we are better at recruiting now but JT picked Sam Weideman which I questioned at the time and 2021 we picked Bowey,  Laurie and Rosman on limited exposure.

Looking at his record it is very good but sometimes coaches have an input into the selection and help getting it wrong, the year Luke Molan was selected the recruiters wanted del Santo but coaches wanted a backman and again in hindsight this was wrong.

In 2020 North picked Tom Powell and injury ruined his development, some times you cannot help bad luck.

[RedLegs23]

6 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Wardlaw and Sheezel is my pick in who we'd be trying to nab.

Sheezel would be a dream

[DeeSpencer]

JT has:

- made a bold move for Oliver
- offered what would’ve been the Jacko pick for Zak Butters
- drafted Jacko
- made a really bold move for Pickett
- made solid moves for Bowey and JVR at the back of the first rounds

The case against is Weid and to a lesser extent Laurie. Although they were both the second players picked and didn’t seem specific targets like Pickett was.

Strength of the drafts doesn’t matter because there’s no guarantee a team does a deal for a top prospect next year. It might be picks 8 and 12 but no one will give us 5 next year.

If you’ve found someone you think is a special prospect and is gettable you don’t care that next year has equally special prospects. 

[Redleg]

20 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

If you’ve found someone you think is a special prospect and is gettable you don’t care that next year has equally special prospects. 

Correct.

[12345_54321]

1 hour ago, Matt said:

We’re offering more picks, than just the two 1st’s as well

The extra pick he speaks of is 37. We’ll take 13. 

[drdrake]

Get in front of Geelong, steal the player they want.  

[Lord Travis]

35 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Wardlaw and Sheezel is my pick in who we'd be trying to nab.

Cadman and Sheezel would be the right options for us, as we need forward half players who hit the scoreboard. Cadman is pick 1, so he's out of reach. Sheezel will go pick 3-4, so we need to do the trade with North to get one of their pick and a handshake they won't take him with the other one if the pick traded to us is the latter pick.

If you were North, would you trade pick 3/4 for two future first picks in the teens and a future second in the thirties?

It honestly seems like a poor trade for both parties. I'd be angry giving up that much as a Melbourne supporter. And as a North supporter I'd be angry at trading away a top 5 pick. Maybe that means the trade works after all? I'm stumped! If we don't get Cadman or Sheezel though, then trading up seems a fruitless and costly endeavour.