The Pick 1 Thread

[rpfc 27,692]

18 hours ago, old55 said:

 

I think when you're rebuilding and need everything then drafting "best available" makes perfect sense. But when you're contending and have got most areas covered then drafting for need has its place.

Trade in if that’s the case. They’re kids. Take who is next on your board

[Colm 1,557]

10 hours ago, No10 said:

Wasn’t my suggestion.

However, I think it highly likely this will happen, but with p17 or 18 also included from North.

But the question is if McKercher or Duursma are worth it?

I rate Mckercher very highly and think he would be a great pick for us. My concern is if we trade up to get him we are paying massive overs that we won’t get back if he chooses to join the Tassie team. We have already paid overs to get pick 11 and would be doing the same to get to pick 3. 
I assume the AFL will give the Tassie team access to one out of contract player from Tassie at each team(same thing applied to Suns and GWS) and that the compensation will be whatever they decide is market value. 

[old55 21,874]

41 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Trade in if that’s the case. They’re kids. Take who is next on your board

Who are these KPs to trade for? Dan McStay and Ben McKay are the best players to move in the past two years. The best player to move next year will be Harry Petty - out!

We have a rare chance for a contending team to draft a quality KP early, I don't think we should reach and ignore someone clearly better but we won't have to with Curtin or O'Sullivan.

[old55 21,874]

2 hours ago, bing181 said:

North need as many of the best players as possible. I just don't think they're going to move from 2 and 3. That's an incredibly strong hand for a team rebuilding.

Reid and Sanders or McKercher and Duursma - it's a nice choice to have ...

[H_T 2,941]

Dogs and Hawks - Not sure where they sit on their draft choices but wondering if they’d be interested in improving their 2nd picks. 
we could offer 6,42 to improve to pick 4 (Hawks) or pick 5 (Dogs). 
Dogs might be interested - by improving their 2nd pick 6 places (pick 48). Hawks probably won’t want to budge with their 2nd (44). But they also have 47,49. They could be interested in an upgrade to 42. 
 

4 & 11 or 5 & 11 could be seen as more attractive (with F1) to West Coast and could ensure Curtin for them in exchange for pick 1. 

[RyanD 240]

6 minutes ago, H_T said:

Dogs and Hawks - Not sure where they sit on their draft choices but wondering if they’d be interested in improving their 2nd picks. 
we could offer 6,42 to improve to pick 4 (Hawks) or pick 5 (Dogs). 
Dogs might be interested - by improving their 2nd pick 6 places (pick 48). Hawks probably won’t want to budge with their 2nd (44). But they also have 47,49. They could be interested in an upgrade to 42. 
 

4 & 11 or 5 & 11 could be seen as more attractive (with F1) to West Coast and could ensure Curtin for them in exchange for pick 1. 

You are definitely having a laugh.

[demoncat 661]

I’m personally happy to go all chips in on pick 1 by offering 6, 11 and F1 although I’m doubtful that would get it done

But I wouldn’t be keen on giving up 6 and 11 for anything less such as North’s pick 3 and a later first rounder 

To me, it seems like Reid is the clear number 1 pick and then there is a group of 6 or so players in the next bracket (Walters, Duursma, McKercher, Watson, Curtin, Sanders) and then another group before a more significant drop off (Caddy, O’Sullivan, Read, Windsor, Leake, Rodgers and potentially Wilson)

I’d happily take one of each group with 6 and 11 and don’t think it’s worth over paying to move up slightly in either - particularly as we already moved from 14 to 11 to get into the second tier

 

Edited October 19, 2023 by demoncat

[H_T 2,941]

8 minutes ago, RyanD said:

You are definitely having a laugh.

No, not really. I’m trying to analyze what Lamb stated - that we could look to improve picks a little. And part of that is helping clubs what they might want. 
4,5 & 6 not a lot of difference, still going to get a quality player. 
But these clubs have a massive drop off for their next pick. 

Would they consider moving up several spots for their next pick and fall back one on their first? 

[Colm 1,557]

7 minutes ago, demoncat said:

I’m personally happy to go all chips in on pick 1 by offering 6, 11 and F1 although I’m doubtful that would get it done

But I wouldn’t be keen on giving up 6 and 11 for anything less such as North’s pick 3 and a later first rounder 

To me, it seems like Reid is the clear number 1 pick and then there is a group of 6 or so players in the next bracket (Walters, Duursma, McKercher, Watson, Curtin, Sanders) and then another group before a more significant drop off (Caddy, O’Sullivan, Read, Windsor, Leake, Rodgers and potentially Wilson)

I’d happily take one of each group with 6 and 11 and don’t think it’s worth over paying to move up slightly in either - particularly as we already moved from 14 to 11 to get into the second tier

 

I kind of agree with you with the two tiers but feel there’s probably an area in the middle of both of them. I don’t think Caddy or O'Sullivan will be on the board at pick 11 so it creates the best available  versus needs debate. 
I think in a perfect world we get a top midfielder and key defender. The dogs are meant to be interested in both Sanders and Watson. If they go with Sanders do we pick Watson or O'Sullivan? There'll be no key defender available at our second pick. 

[jnrmac 19,508]

3 hours ago, bing181 said:

North need as many of the best players as possible. I just don't think they're going to move from 2 and 3. That's an incredibly strong hand for a team rebuilding.

We got Petracca and Brayshaw during our rebuild at 2 and 3

[demoncat 661]

Here is Cal Twomey’s most recent form guide: https://www.afl.com.au/news/1054452/cal-twomeys-phantom-form-guide-top-draft-prospects-october-ranking

[Stiff Arm 4,419]

Reckon it might be 11 and F1st for 7 or 8.

I'm hoping Lamby and Taylor are targeting O'Sullivan 

Imagine Sanders/Curtain and O'Sullivan...

[rpfc 27,692]

2 hours ago, old55 said:

Who are these KPs to trade for? Dan McStay and Ben McKay are the best players to move in the past two years. The best player to move next year will be Harry Petty - out!

We have a rare chance for a contending team to draft a quality KP early, I don't think we should reach and ignore someone clearly better but we won't have to with Curtin or O'Sullivan.

Who are these kids to select? I don’t know our board - You don’t reach even one position with picks in the top half dozen. 

Maybe we will trade for someone next year? Having another kid in a KP is not going to help us in 2024 so take the best available. 

[Gator 16,921]

Draft guru Mick Ablett said on SEN this morning that he thinks three clubs will be involved with the pick one move, i.e. West Coast, North and us.

If we can't get Reid I'd love to get Duursma by getting involved and somehow securing pick 3.

[Willy's Warriors 59]

3 hours ago, H_T said:

Dogs and Hawks - Not sure where they sit on their draft choices but wondering if they’d be interested in improving their 2nd picks. 
we could offer 6,42 to improve to pick 4 (Hawks) or pick 5 (Dogs). 
Dogs might be interested - by improving their 2nd pick 6 places (pick 48). Hawks probably won’t want to budge with their 2nd (44). But they also have 47,49. They could be interested in an upgrade to 42. 
 

4 & 11 or 5 & 11 could be seen as more attractive (with F1) to West Coast and could ensure Curtin for them in exchange for pick 1. 

Ahhh I do love trade period. 

Just in case this is serious - dogs traded 10, 17 and a F1 for pick 5, they are not going to move back for the sake of six places in the third round.  Particulary given those picks will be chewed up in the bid for Croft. 

Hawks have a father son at around 15-20ish (McCabe) so they need all their thirds for that too. They will have no interest in trading back.   

North also have too many first round picks to be interested in six.  They are more likely to want to package up their late first rounders (I think they have 17, 18, 19 or something like that) for picks 8 or 10.   They are better off sticking with 2 and 3 then splitting one of those picks for 6 and 11. 

It's pick 1 or taking our picks to the draft.  No other real option. 

Edited October 20, 2023 by Willy's Warriors

[Redleg 38,585]

2 minutes ago, Willy's Warriors said:

It's pick 1 or taking our picks to the draft.  No other real option. 

Or pick 3 and a lower first rounder.

[samcantstandya 967]

2 hours ago, demoncat said:

I’m personally happy to go all chips in on pick 1 by offering 6, 11 and F1 although I’m doubtful that would get it done

But I wouldn’t be keen on giving up 6 and 11 for anything less such as North’s pick 3 and a later first rounder 

To me, it seems like Reid is the clear number 1 pick and then there is a group of 6 or so players in the next bracket (Walters, Duursma, McKercher, Watson, Curtin, Sanders) and then another group before a more significant drop off (Caddy, O’Sullivan, Read, Windsor, Leake, Rodgers and potentially Wilson)

I’d happily take one of each group with 6 and 11 and don’t think it’s worth over paying to move up slightly in either - particularly as we already moved from 14 to 11 to get into the second tier

 

If we keep 6 then it'll be Curtain/Sanders if WCE take Reid I'm happy with that. Then we have 11 as well. Although I'd gladly take Reid.

[Nascent 7,775]

I'm not sure I can see North making a serious play for pick 1.

They've moved on 13 players and replaced them with 4 during the trade period. 2 weren't best 22 at their former clubs in Fisher and Stephens and the other two are key position players who have played 1 AFL game between them. One hasn't even been on an AFL list for 4 years.

They are going to need to bring in as much quantity as possible. Not sure it's in their best interests to burn 2-3 high end picks for one player.

They have a ripping midfield list full of potential. But they're setting themselves up for failure and I fear it will lead to more handouts next year.

[brendan 3,421]

6,11,F1 for pick 1 or just keep them I wouldn’t bother trying to get 2 or 3 pick 1 or keep what we got 

[Mach5 4,499]

5 hours ago, Gator said:

Draft guru Mick Ablett said on SEN this morning that he thinks three clubs will be involved with the pick one move, i.e. West Coast, North and us.

If we can't get Reid I'd love to get Duursma by getting involved and somehow securing pick 3.

Yes, as others have detailed in various threads, it looks like if we can’t get pick 1, we might make a play to get involved to help facilitate a 3-way trade for pick 1 to go to North, with us getting higher up the order for Duursma & WC being guaranteed of Curtin.

Assuming Curtin would be there at 6, something along the lines of:

Melb:   6, 11, F1   >    2, 17, 23

North:  2, 15, 17  >    1, F1

WC:      1, 23        >    6, 11, 15

I think we’d want to wait for them to come to us and participate reluctantly, so as to get more in return for the party agitating the trade.

I thought maybe we could even engage with Hawthorn to get them pick 1, but they’d need to throw in a F1 because their other assets aren’t great & anything they get in return this year might be consumed by matching a bid for McCabe.

[Ted Lasso 17,318]

I don't think we'd put ourselves into the position we will be in with a huge amount of cap space to spend and also trade out our future first, we will want the assets in the event we get a big name on the hook. 

I'd say it'll be one of two scenarios, 

1. we take 6 and 11 to the draft 

2. we trade 6 and 11 for a pick higher up the order for example 2, and take 2 and 42 to the draft 

[Clintosaurus 6,940]

I reckon we are going for Harley 

[bing181 8,359]

11 minutes ago, Clintosaurus said:

I reckon we are going for Harley 

I do too, but I don't see how we get there. I don't think any of the solutions proposed in this thread are going to be enough to get it done. The one slither of hope would be that Curtin could still be there at 6, and if that starts to seem likely, maybe they could be turned.

I also think we'd prefer 6 + 11 than 2 or 3 plus a late first round pick. Two bites at the cherry and all that.

[bing181 8,359]

In regards to North, I think Clarkson's comments were revealing after North won the last match and so dropped from 1 to 2 in the draft. He said that at the very top end of the draft you were going to get a really good young player no matter which pick it was. (or something like that). He didn't seem all that fussed to miss out on 1.

I think they'll hold their hand, not only because two picks is better than one, but because they already have a lot of good young mids and need key position players, which Reid isn't.

[Gator 16,921]

1 hour ago, Mach5 said:

Yes, as others have detailed in various threads, it looks like if we can’t get pick 1, we might make a play to get involved to help facilitate a 3-way trade for pick 1 to go to North, with us getting higher up the order for Duursma & WC being guaranteed of Curtin.

Assuming Curtin would be there at 6, something along the lines of:

Melb:   6, 11, F1   >    2, 17, 23

North:  2, 15, 17  >    1, F1

WC:      1, 23        >    6, 11, 15

I think we’d want to wait for them to come to us and participate reluctantly, so as to get more in return for the party agitating the trade.

I thought maybe we could even engage with Hawthorn to get them pick 1, but they’d need to throw in a F1 because their other assets aren’t great & anything they get in return this year might be consumed by matching a bid for McCabe.

North keep pick 3 ?

I doubt West Coast are doing that trade.  They'll want one of North's picks 2 or 3.