Mach5

3 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

It also cost us Adam Cerra because we didn't have a first round pick to satisfy Fremantle as we used it to trade up the previous year.

Cerra wanted to play for the Dees but we simply had no draft asset.

Zac Butters and Ben King are out of contract next year. Trade our future 1st on Monday night and you can kiss goodbye any attempts of nabbing either of these two.

I think our eggs will be in a Sean Darcy-shaped FA basket.

4 minutes ago, Demonsterative said:

JT does move unless he sees a talent worth moving for. His track record is worth trusting. 

Don’t think he’s been wrong yet.

Weideman is the example trotted out, but his pick was the relative steak knives in the deal with primary target being Oliver.

Even back in the Brayshaw/Petracca draft, we tried to move Trengove for Lever. 

55 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Imo we are still a chance to get Reid.

It all depends on the certainty of Curtin getting to our pick 6.

Roos and Dogs won’t take him, as Roos are still gun shy because of JHF and apparently want Zane and Coby and Dogs have too many talls.

The Hawks are the key to a Reid deal by not taking Curtin.

 

Which is maybe why we’re trying to work out a deal with Hawthorn for pick 4. 

7 hours ago, Vineytime said:

Watson any day of the week over Windsor, I’ve seen a lot of both of them play, don’t get the Windsor hype. 
Watson is elite in every way and worth trading up for IMO. 

I’d say we’re not expecting either of them to be the finished article right now, but that Windsor is equipped with relatively raw tools to be an impact player.

56 minutes ago, TheWiz said:

Sounds like we’ll need to make a “Visy Environmental Ambassador” for $500k pa type offer to get him back out!

Or a Costa/Gartland special on a large parcel of land out near Ceres.

Beatson from Sydney did allude to trading 12 to North for 17 & 18 being in the works, and it seemed predicated upon North finally giving up on pick 1.

2 hours ago, Jeremy said:

If we take Windsor over Curtin that is a massive call. We'll be desperate for a key defender sooner than we think, with May 32 and Petty bailing for the Crows. We already have Blake Howes waiting for a spot on the wing, are we spooked by the Jackson trade or do we genuinely rate Windsor higher than Curtin? If you were picking best available, surely it would have to be Curtin. 

Not sure what it is about Curtin that sets him apart. Seems very vanilla to me.

3 minutes ago, Redleg said:

If that's true, that the Eagles would trade F1 for Curtin,given how well they should know him, then we should be taking him if he is there at our pick. With Petty in some doubt to stay, it makes even more sense.

Selecting a player because another club is perceived as rating him highly makes absolutely no sense to me. 
 

Further, WestCoast’s List Management Dept is so adept, we are currently witnessing one of the worst sides on in the AFL era with little indication of an upturn. That they are rumoured to be shopping a F1 destined to be top 2 in the draft is another reason to doubt their judgment.

48 minutes ago, Nascent said:

There was an article yesterday stating we are unlikely to do a deal for West Coast's future 1st due to the risk of them rising next year with an injury free list. With 11 home games at Perth and a clean fit list, its definitely a gamble that we turn pick 6 into something significantly better a year later.

They would need to sweeten the pot for us significantly, starting with pick 23 and no return of our future 1st. Perhaps our future 2nd. Even then I don't like it.

 

It’d have to be an educated gamble with a sound understanding of next year’s draft crop composition and how it caters to our list needs. It wouldn’t be based on the vague hope that the top 5 is stronger next year (like it would be for me).

I think no matter how the cards fall, the 2 options of that 6 that would fall to us would be Sanders & Curtin, and I don’t think we’d prefer either over others available.

What I want to happen:

6&11 for 3&15. We take Duursma & Tholstrupp or Leake (but more likely Wilson).
North tries to bundle 2&11 for pick 1. 

What I predict:

6: Caddy

11: Leake

1 hour ago, deanox said:

From my understanding, Cal is wrong.

We can match a bid, but we have made a decision that we don't want to match a bid, because we would likely go into points deficit and would use a primary list spot if we matched, and we're seemingly not prepared to do that.

 

 

I’d think we can’t in Cal’s scenario because we’ve already committed that list spot to Turner, and if he’s not elevated we lose him.

5 hours ago, Salems Lot said:

Depends on the draftee of course.  A #6 KPP is less likely to play than a ready made Mid. 

 

I’d imagine even a midfield draftee needs time to learn our gameplan, particularly their role within our defensive structures.

In particular I’m reminded of hearing Dermott Brereton talk about seeing Sanders play and (paraphrasing) how his biggest “obstacle” in performing at AFL level at the moment was that he was good and he knew he was good, but some time in a good system will drill that out of him fairly comfortably. Not a criticism of the player’s ability to “make it” but rather a general comment on things that could hold back a kid early in their career.

I can imagine a player in his stage of career may not be too keen to change location, and if he has managed his money throughout a long career, might prefer to retire than relocate to a new club.

45 minutes ago, ChaserJ said:

In a straight pick between Tholstrup & Wilson, who would you take @dazzledavey36 ?

Christ, no contest, Tholstrup every day. Wilson is a mid-2nd rounder.

Might as well get this one up, as there have been rumours of our interest.

Not much to add. I’m sure someone can link the obligatory highlights clip?

Currently seems like it’d be a reach for him at pick 11, but we’ve seen the same accusation levelled at JT/TL for selecting Pickett at 12 and that was a pure win for us.

1 hour ago, Mach5 said:

I’m not sure it’s that. I think clubs recruiting teams definitely see themselves as amateur (professional) sleuths, and try to dig up dirt to get an idea of what other clubs will do with their selections. I also think it’s our duty to obfuscate and conceal our true intentions, particularly after situations like when it appeared Geelong traded to immediately before our pick to gazump us on Holmes.

In addition, I think we take this approach (attempting to find out who over clubs will select) very seriously, particularly JT & TL with their investigative skills. I recall the draft video from the LJ/Pickett/Rivers draft when JT was supremely confident Riv would fall to us around 5 or so picks later, based on us knowing which players other clubs liked.

7 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

Do you think Lamb has such a reputation amongst his peers that the leaking of interests will actually turn things on their heads and make other teams rethink their strategy? 

I’m not sure it’s that. I think clubs recruiting teams definitely see themselves as amateur (professional) sleuths, and try to dig up dirt to get an idea of what other clubs will do with their selections. I also think it’s our duty to obfuscate and conceal our true intentions, particularly after situations like when it appeared Geelong traded to immediately before our pick to gazump us on Holmes.

23 hours ago, Salems Lot said:

Sincerely hope our #6 pick is in our best 22.

I thought we were past the days of drafting saviours?

Yes, yes, I know it’s not what you said, but I wouldn’t view it a fail if a pick 6 isn’t a lock for the 22 of a perennial finals side in his first year.

On 13/11/2023 at 14:21, Diamond_Jim said:

Another salary cap play as far as I read it. Assume it is just a one year deal but with Brown, McDonald and Melksham all likely to leave at the end of 2024 we certainly have a lot of spare salary cap for something

My guess? Darcy.

3 minutes ago, Nascent said:

Not saying this is the case, but perhaps leaking interest in Curtin and Tholstrup is a way of making the Eagles look at our offer for pick 1 again. 

"This is what you could be getting Eagles, wink wink, nudge nudge..."

I think there’s likely an element of subterfuge so that other clubs have no idea who we’re going to pick, thereby giving us options, with teams ahead of us having maybe a false sense of security their target will be still available if they trade with us to get us up the order, and teams behind us thinking they may need to trade up in the order to secure a target that we actually have no interest in.

It’s due diligence, but I also think there’s a healthy element of ducks & drakes to this.

A taller Burgoyne, he’s worth the price we’d need to pay for pick 2.

13 hours ago, adonski said:

Trade the pick to the Crows, they take Curtin and don't pursue Petty, 6D chess 

We then slip back a couple of picks to take CO who we convert into the gun key forward we’ve been after...

1 hour ago, Demonsterative said:

When you say “we”, exactly how many are there floating in and around your head? 
Your mis-projected anger and anti-social behaviour is mind boggling. The idea a media manager from a AFL club, or anyone for that matter, would sit down with you and give you the time of day is also mind boggling. 

Evidently you’d be quite surprised.

But you probably think we came out of the SEN incident smelling like roses?

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

lol. so that's the best you've got. some anonymous "media manager" who "rolled his eyes"?

[censored], you should get a job at the hun. you'd be in good company.

Keep fishing mate 🎣