The GCS Pick 4 Thread

[manny100 1,010]

Latest is that Grundy prefers the Swans for lifestyle balance.

In any case even if we go for GC pick 4 they will likely want most of our 2024 picks plus a future 1st. Maybe we get to keep the 30's pick.

The bulldogs alleged offer at 10 and 17 is hard to trump.

GC on raw non pushed back picks already have around 4,500 points up their sleeve plus whatever they get for trade outs. They also get a whopping 20% discount on the bids they make.

I suspect after trade outs they will be almost be able to use the bulldogs pick 17 to trade for a future pick and use pick 10 to trade to say us for extra points. We would likely pay overs in later picks.

GC are in an unprecedented position.

 

 

[Sydney_Demon 1,175]

2 hours ago, manny100 said:

Latest is that Grundy prefers the Swans for lifestyle balance.

In any case even if we go for GC pick 4 they will likely want most of our 2024 picks plus a future 1st. Maybe we get to keep the 30's pick.

The bulldogs alleged offer at 10 and 17 is hard to trump.

GC on raw non pushed back picks already have around 4,500 points up their sleeve plus whatever they get for trade outs. They also get a whopping 20% discount on the bids they make.

I suspect after trade outs they will be almost be able to use the bulldogs pick 17 to trade for a future pick and use pick 10 to trade to say us for extra points. We would likely pay overs in later picks.

GC are in an unprecedented position.

I'm not really understanding this. Our picks 15, 24 & 34 are worth marginally more than 10 & 17 so why would the Bulldogs offer be hard to trump? Either trade would be a 400 net point gain for Gold Coast. Of course 15, 24 & 34 are premised on us finishing 4th and that could change. All the picks will be pushed back 1 if North gets an extra pick for Ben McKay which seems likely. That will of course change all the calculations. 

There are so many unknowns at the moment but Melbourne currently has 4317 points total which has us only behind West Coast with 5337 and North with 4421. Gold Coast has 4191 points which also puts them ahead of Melbourne as they will get to use most of them with a 20% discount applied. But they're not competing against Melbourne because they will use their points to get their 3 Northern Academy players (4,203 points required on Cal Twomey's currently predicted positions). Whichever way you look at it Melbourne is well-positiomed to move up.

[adonski 9,144]

Points will be the easy part for the Suns.

They'll want the more compelling 2024 offer. At this stage you'd want the Dogs 2024 first rounder rather than ours. 

Edited September 14, 2023 by adonski

[manny100 1,010]

1 hour ago, Sydney_Demon said:

I'm not really understanding this. Our picks 15, 24 & 34 are worth marginally more than 10 & 17 so why would the Bulldogs offer be hard to trump? Either trade would be a 400 net point gain for Gold Coast. Of course 15, 24 & 34 are premised on us finishing 4th and that could change. All the picks will be pushed back 1 if North gets an extra pick for Ben McKay which seems likely. That will of course change all the calculations. 

There are so many unknowns at the moment but Melbourne currently has 4317 points total which has us only behind West Coast with 5337 and North with 4421. Gold Coast has 4191 points which also puts them ahead of Melbourne as they will get to use most of them with a 20% discount applied. But they're not competing against Melbourne because they will use their points to get their 3 Northern Academy players (4,203 points required on Cal Twomey's currently predicted positions). Whichever way you look at it Melbourne is well-positiomed to move up.

Talk is GC will put 10 on the table and get way overs when they on trade it. There is a fairly good chance of a highly rated player being there. Our 2023 1st rounder not so attractive.

We are still in with a chance for pick 4 but we may have to throw in our future 1st with some of our 2023 picks. We will also get picks for Grundy and anyone else who bails.

I think the AFL will have to restrict the discount to one player per draft per club.

 

[Dockett 32 1,213]

23 minutes ago, manny100 said:

Talk is GC will put 10 on the table and get way overs when they on trade it. There is a fairly good chance of a highly rated player being there. Our 2023 1st rounder not so attractive.

We are still in with a chance for pick 4 but we may have to throw in our future 1st with some of our 2023 picks. We will also get picks for Grundy and anyone else who bails.

I think the AFL will have to restrict the discount to one player per draft per club.

 

We have or will have a good hand in a draft that goes deep. Why bet the bank?

Hope we don’t get sucked.

[Stiff Arm 4,412]

36 minutes ago, Dockett 32 said:

We have or will have a good hand in a draft that goes deep. Why bet the bank?

Hope we don’t get sucked.

No, the draft is apparently about 30 deep. After that is drops off significantly. Expecting only about 60 players picked

But yes, atm we have a good hand

Edited September 14, 2023 by Stiff Arm

[Sydney_Demon 1,175]

2 hours ago, Dockett 32 said:

We have or will have a good hand in a draft that goes deep. Why bet the bank?

Hope we don’t get sucked.

The problem is 5, 15, 24, 34 are likely to end up something like 7, 21, 30, 40 if they're not traded. That's because North will likely get an extra pick for Ben Mackay plus get access to Ryley Sanders using points (7ish), Gold Coast will take Academy players at say 2, 9, 12,  Western Bulldogs Jordan Croft Father/Son in the 11-14 range (although he may not nominate), Hawthorn Will McCabe Father/Son at 18. That might improve slightly if GC trade in picks 10 & 17 from Western Bulldogs and use one or both of them rather than on-trade. That's the reason why this draft in particular you want to trade out those mid-range selections. Now for Gold Coast they would be worth more because they would be using the points before those selections are pushed back so far (GC would value them at 15, 24, 34 because they would largely be used on Jed Walter at 2), Melbourne would value them at 21, 30, 40 because if they didn't trade them they would eventually be pushed back 6 spots. 

[godees 647]

At the very least we should be looking to trade 5 into 4, if GC favour trading the pick to the dogs.

[Sydney_Demon 1,175]

1 hour ago, godees said:

At the very least we should be looking to trade 5 into 4, if GC favour trading the pick to the dogs.

Maybe we should be looking to trade up to 2 or 3 (or 1). North will probably have picks 2, 3, 16, 39, 53, 59, 76 and West Coast 1, 19, 35, 38, 54, 57, 75. If we're looking to trade up from 5 then why would we give up anything significant to move up one position? Unless of course there's a specific player Melbourne are interested in that might be available at 4 (likely to end up 6) rather than 5 (likely to end up 7).

[drdrake 3,037]

The GC could also be ruthless and not trade, why should they give a pick to another club to enable them to strengthen their list.  Be happy to lose it for one of their 3 first round players they will get from their academy 

[Slartibartfast 15,761]

1 hour ago, drdrake said:

The GC could also be ruthless and not trade, why should they give a pick to another club to enable them to strengthen their list.  Be happy to lose it for one of their 3 first round players they will get from their academy 

Because they are trying to beat 17 other teams, not one.  You maximise your own list and let others look after themselves.

[drdrake 3,037]

So let's arm the bulldogs or Melbourne with a pick 4 to help them bring in top 10 talent, especially bulldogs who have a father son that is also expected to be first round

Edited September 15, 2023 by drdrake

[Fat Tony 4,403]

15 hours ago, manny100 said:

Talk is GC will put 10 on the table and get way overs when they on trade it. There is a fairly good chance of a highly rated player being there. Our 2023 1st rounder not so attractive.

We are still in with a chance for pick 4 but we may have to throw in our future 1st with some of our 2023 picks. We will also get picks for Grundy and anyone else who bails.

I think the AFL will have to restrict the discount to one player per draft per club.

 

The discount and the points table needs addressing. The points table runs out to around pick 70 and the average number of players getting drafted recently is around 50.

[Sydney_Demon 1,175]

23 hours ago, drdrake said:

The GC could also be ruthless and not trade, why should they give a pick to another club to enable them to strengthen their list.  Be happy to lose it for one of their 3 first round players they will get from their academy 

22 hours ago, drdrake said:

So let's arm the bulldogs or Melbourne with a pick 4 to help them bring in top 10 talent, especially bulldogs who have a father son that is also expected to be first round

Gold Coast will do whatever they think will enhance their list the most. They definitely won't make a call that they won't trade with Melbourne or Western Bulldogs just because those teams are half-decent. Of course they could hang onto 4 (or 5, as it will probably be) but why would they? What they need is points plus an enhanced draft hand for 2024 so they will definitely trade if the offers received are better in points equivalent than 4/5. I can't see them not taking the Acadedy boys unless another club makes a ridiculously high bid because Gold Coast get a 20% points discount. GC most definitely will get offers because a number of clubs will be keen to trade up (especially as all the picks below about 18 currently are likely to be pushed back 5 or 6 positions).  

[Sydney_Demon 1,175]

20 hours ago, Fat Tony said:

The discount and the points table needs addressing. The points table runs out to around pick 70 and the average number of players getting drafted recently is around 50.

I agree with you. Personally I'm fine with GC getting access to all their players but maybe the 20% points discount could only apply for the 1st player they take? I also agree that the points scale needs to be adjusted. There's a reasonable (but still inadequate) percentage drop off at the top but it flattens out very early. e.g. Pick 20 is only about 35% less points than Pick 10. When the general thought is that it would take Pick 4 plus Pick 5 at least to get Pick 1 there's something wrong as Pick 1 is 3,000 points and Picks 4 & 5 combined are 3912. According to the table Pick 1 is worth the equivalent of a combined Pick 8 & 9. Seriously!

[BDA 20,048]

We should trade aggressively to get this pick. Take 4 and 5 to the draft and let JT work his magic. Get some top end talent in to address some list gaps. 

[ElDiablo14 3,055]

7 minutes ago, BDA said:

We should trade aggressively to get this pick. Take 4 and 5 to the draft and let JT work his magic. Get some top end talent in to address some list gaps. 

We'll probably need immediate impact players (i.e. can start in Rd 1 next year), who are those players in this year's draft?

[Bonkers 914]

6 minutes ago, ElDiablo14 said:

We'll probably need immediate impact players (i.e. can start in Rd 1 next year), who are those players in this year's draft?

I'm not much of a follower of the U18's but to me it looks like Watson and Duursma are two players who could have an immediate impact on the way we move the ball and convert our chances forward of centre. Of course that is speculation as they may not turn out to be the players that their potential is showing. We could look at the free agency market for some top up talent, I'm not sure who is available there that will fill a list need. We obviously need another marking tall forward, but like others have mentioned so do many other teams and whether there is any player available I don't know.  

[MurDoc516 1,304]

26 minutes ago, ElDiablo14 said:

We'll probably need immediate impact players (i.e. can start in Rd 1 next year), who are those players in this year's draft?

If Petty and Smith are going forward and Tomlinson is out then O'Sullivan can start basically day 1. Best Key Defender in the draft.

His Allies teammate McKercher will fall between pick 4 and 5. Quick outside midfield with a tidy left foot, reminds me of Shuey. Again, comparing to who we have, he could easily start.

Edited September 16, 2023 by MurDoc516

[Stiff Arm 4,412]

1 hour ago, BDA said:

We should trade aggressively to get this pick. Take 4 and 5 to the draft and let JT work his magic. Get some top end talent in to address some list gaps. 

They will prob end up as  7 and 8 after charity hand outs

[Sydney_Demon 1,175]

Well at least Melbourne now have picks 5, 13, 24, 32, 87 & 4459 points to play with. And one of Gold Coast's picks went slightly backwards (their Pick 31 going into the Finals is now Pick 34 as it's tied to GWS' finishing position). Both these developments will help us in our attempts to trade up to Pick 4.

[DeeSpencer 23,126]

On 9/16/2023 at 11:01 AM, ElDiablo14 said:

We'll probably need immediate impact players (i.e. can start in Rd 1 next year), who are those players in this year's draft?

1 - Reid (yes)
2 - Walter NGA
3 - Duursma - maybe, VFL form wasn’t good and needs muscle and a role to play. Potentially too light for wing, too flaky defensively for half forward in year 1.
4 - McKercher - yes, but to what extent? He’ll be ready to play but probably struggles to impact at half forward and can’t lock midfield minutes. Yes for years 2/3 tho.
5 - Watson - maybe, he’s so small, will earn games but with what impact?
6 - Curtin - yes, will effectively be a tall back flanker from day 1
7 - Sanders - yes to playing, no to meaningful impact is my guess, like most top mids it’s years 2/3/4 more than year 1.
8/9/10 - Caddy, Read, O’Sullivan - doubtful to all 

Rumour is North’s recruiters want to bid on Read and I think that’s correct, he’d be close to my 2nd rated player in the draft. Plus a compo pick for McKay

Suddenly you’re trading for 7 to go with 8.

If it’s to take one of Watson or Sanders to go with one of the talls or a winger/flanker from the next group then forget about it. 

No point selling multiple first rounders and change to draft outside the elite bracket of talent. 

Edited September 17, 2023 by DeeSpencer

[Demons11 6,404]

On 9/16/2023 at 11:01 AM, ElDiablo14 said:

We'll probably need immediate impact players (i.e. can start in Rd 1 next year), who are those players in this year's draft?

I don’t necessarily agree with this, we have a top end team and have the luxury of letting kids develop in the 2’s rather than throwing them to the wolves.  We have all seen how playing kids to early, can hinder their development.  I’m also thinking that our picks can potentially be used on a ready made player and not kids but time will tell 

Edited September 17, 2023 by Demons11

[BDA 20,048]

This thread has gone very quiet. I’d like to think we go hard for this pick. Bring in some top end talent to bolster the list. 

[manny100 1,010]

I think we will go very hard and even throw in next years 1st rounder in an offer.