 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
thebaldfacts
Joined: 02 Aug 2007
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| donuts wrote: | The below scenarios are based purely on the draft pick allocated to ladder positions after the completion of finals. They do not account for future trading of picks, free agency draft pick compensation etc. Here are a few scenarios that could be played out with regard to the Murray Trade.
Worst Case Scenario 2018
Sydney 1st : 3rd Round Selection (pick 54) = 220 Points
Collingwood 18th : 2nd Round Selection (pick 19) = 948 points
Collingwood also receives pick 70 in 2017 draft = 39 points
Points Difference = 728 Points between 2nd and 3rd round pick swap, less 39 points for current pick 70 = 689 points. This roughly equates to pick 28 for Sam Murray. Not ideal.
Best Case Scenario 2018
Sydney 18th : 3rd Round Selection (pick 37) = 483 Points
Collingwood 1st : 2nd Round Selection (pick 36) = 502 points
Collingwood also receives pick 70 in 2017 draft = 39 points
Points Difference = 19 Points between 2nd and 3rd round pick swap, less 39 points for current pick 70 = -20. This equates to no pick at all for Sam Murray. Perfect!
More realistic Scenario based on Ladder positions at the end of 2017 Finals Campaign
*this is based on no trading of future picks (as Collingwood have no 2nd round pick this year), compensation picks given to clubs (Rocky, Motlop etc) therefore pushing draft picks back
Sydney 5th: 3rd Round Selection = (pick 32) = 584
Collingwood 13th 2nd Round Selection (pick 24) = 785
Collingwood also receives pick 70 in 2017 draft = 39 points
Points Difference = 201 Points between 2nd and 3rd round pick swap, less 39 points for current pick 70 = 162.
This roughly equates to pick 59 (158 points). Seems realistic considering we receive a player.
Now, I’m no mathematician, and if I have got the numbers and calculations above wrong, then feel free to constructively fix it, I’m just trying to give a little perspective on the whole issue.
The thing is, this trade cannot be truly judged until a few things occur.
Firstly, where we finish next year. Worst vs Best Case scenario is a marked difference (pick 28 (IN POINTS ONLY) vs. nothing).
Secondly, and more importantly, if Sam Murray adds to our list/game play, plays 22 games (and hopefully finals) etc, then and only then, can we see the true value of what we gave up to bring him in.
Attached is the Points Values for each draft pick |
Thanks Donut.
Only issue is that in your realistic scenario, Sydney's 3rd round would be 50 not 32, so the points differential would be greater and hence the cost to us would equate to a higher draft pick than 59.
How does that change the equation. |
|
|
|
 |
masoncox
masoncox
Joined: 31 Aug 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| The issue is the points system only applies to father/son or talent academies. The vast majority probably over 90 % of kids in the draft the points are not relevant. Will a bargain f/s or academy kid surfaces next year .....who knows. There are many ways we could have traded for points without involving our second round pick. |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: Elwood
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| All's forgiven CFC if we land Tom Lynch next year. Please don't disappoint me. |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| masoncox wrote: | | The issue is the points system only applies to father/son or talent academies. The vast majority probably over 90 % of kids in the draft the points are not relevant. Will a bargain f/s or academy kid surfaces next year .....who knows. There are many ways we could have traded for points without involving our second round pick. |
We weren't trading "for" points.
We were trading for a player we wanted using a pick which would (we strongly believe) have been eaten up for points next year.
And could we have done it without involving our second pick? Doubtful, otherwise you expect we would have. That's the deal that Sydney would accept.
If what Hine says is true and that our 2nd pick next year would have been used for points, then this deal is fine, absolutely nothing to complain about.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | | masoncox wrote: | | The issue is the points system only applies to father/son or talent academies. The vast majority probably over 90 % of kids in the draft the points are not relevant. Will a bargain f/s or academy kid surfaces next year .....who knows. There are many ways we could have traded for points without involving our second round pick. |
We weren't trading "for" points.
We were trading for a player we wanted using a pick which would (we strongly believe) have been eaten up for points next year.
And could we have done it without involving our second pick? Doubtful, otherwise you expect we would have. That's the deal that Sydney would accept.
If what Hine says is true and that our 2nd pick next year would have been used for points, then this deal is fine, absolutely nothing to complain about. |
The question then is: how good, really, are Quaynor, Kelly (et al.) going to be in a year's time? |
|
|
|
|
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| K wrote: | | AN_Inkling wrote: | | masoncox wrote: | | The issue is the points system only applies to father/son or talent academies. The vast majority probably over 90 % of kids in the draft the points are not relevant. Will a bargain f/s or academy kid surfaces next year .....who knows. There are many ways we could have traded for points without involving our second round pick. |
We weren't trading "for" points.
We were trading for a player we wanted using a pick which would (we strongly believe) have been eaten up for points next year.
And could we have done it without involving our second pick? Doubtful, otherwise you expect we would have. That's the deal that Sydney would accept.
If what Hine says is true and that our 2nd pick next year would have been used for points, then this deal is fine, absolutely nothing to complain about. |
The question then is: how good, really, are Quaynor, Kelly (et al.) going to be in a year's time? |
we had decided we were going to take Travis Cloke when he was 13 years old (and already much better than both his brothers).
we decided we were taking Darcy Moore, a long way out.
i suspect we've decided that these kids are going to be the goods.
hopefully this new kid can play the Sinclair role that we have been desperate for ever since Sinclair became cronically injured.
_________________
Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
|
think positive 
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Kinda deflating that we only got 1 player when we seem to need so much improvement in the team. Not too many draft players play first year, so have we only picked up one maybe ready player?
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: Elwood
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Reading between the lines we must have been following Sam Murray's career as a junior, but unable to draft him since he was a zone selection for Sydney. The way Hine spoke about him indicated a fair bit of intellectual investment had gone into him over the years in which case you can understand the desire of the club to trade for him, even having to pay a higher price for him, obvious from the paperwork waiting for the last day of trade to go through.
I must admit my first reaction was this guy comes from nowhere to make the NEAFL team of the year, so now CFC has to get their hands on him. I now think there was a clear strategy in the trade period to draft for a small defender who is able to break lines and Murray was available so the club made their play. No complaints here because I concede we have a weakness in the back half with Sinclair and Ramsay and the club sees Murray as the best option here.
So that's one hole we have plugged. On to the national draft and rookie draft to solve the other holes in our list which as everybody knows is our lack of KPP's. |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| K wrote: | | AN_Inkling wrote: | | masoncox wrote: | | The issue is the points system only applies to father/son or talent academies. The vast majority probably over 90 % of kids in the draft the points are not relevant. Will a bargain f/s or academy kid surfaces next year .....who knows. There are many ways we could have traded for points without involving our second round pick. |
We weren't trading "for" points.
We were trading for a player we wanted using a pick which would (we strongly believe) have been eaten up for points next year.
And could we have done it without involving our second pick? Doubtful, otherwise you expect we would have. That's the deal that Sydney would accept.
If what Hine says is true and that our 2nd pick next year would have been used for points, then this deal is fine, absolutely nothing to complain about. |
The question then is: how good, really, are Quaynor, Kelly (et al.) going to be in a year's time? |
That's a fair point but the beauty of this scenario is that if one of them has a development spike, then Collingwood will have the resources to trade back into an earlier round ( presumably the second )
Next year is a year for a lot of father / sons and academy players. I think most clubs will be looking to shuffle their picks around during next years trade period. I can't see a scenario unfolding where as long as we want these kids, we won't be able to make it happen. There aren't many that don't get to their destination when there is a 25% discount on offer to the academy or father/ son club.
Obviously, if these kids drop off, we either pick someone else or their position in the draft slides down anyway and we have effectively invested less at their time of selection. |
|
|
|
|
Geek
geek
Joined: 06 Apr 2006
Location: Jacana
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| think positive wrote: | | Kinda deflating that we only got 1 player when we seem to need so much improvement in the team. Not too many draft players play first year, so have we only picked up one maybe ready player? |
Yeah that comes largely from not having a 2nd rounder to play with this year. We used it well though on WHE last year so I reckon we did ok. |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Geek wrote: | | think positive wrote: | | Kinda deflating that we only got 1 player when we seem to need so much improvement in the team. Not too many draft players play first year, so have we only picked up one maybe ready player? |
Yeah that comes largely from not having a 2nd rounder to play with this year. We used it well though on WHE last year so I reckon we did ok. |
Agree, it's easy to forget that we walk away with W H E in the pocket come draft day.
There aren't to many clubs who are happy to part with great players for anything less than market value ( and when they do, there is always an accompanying negative reason ) The best way we can secure the next Bont, Pendles, Dangerfield , Franklin, etc ( all between pick 4 and 10 ) is to go to the draft with your first rounder in tact and call out the next best player your recruiting people have identified. We could have made a play for Watts, Saad, Smith or whoever, give up our shot at picking up a potential star and then wait for us to come in late during the first round at best.
I'm quite looking forward to us picking the sixth best under 18 year old in the country. |
|
|
|
|
Dave The Man 
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Someville, Victoria, Australia
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I get a Feeling that when Hine likes someone he is happy to pay Overs to make sure they get to Collingwood
_________________
I am Da Man |
|
|
|
|
inxs88
Joined: 17 Aug 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Dave The Man wrote: | | I get a Feeling that when Hine likes someone he is happy to pay Overs to make sure they get to Collingwood |
James Aish says hello
_________________
I love the Pies, hate Carlscum |
|
|
|
|
pablo
Joined: 23 Sep 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| inxs88 wrote: | | Dave The Man wrote: | | I get a Feeling that when Hine likes someone he is happy to pay Overs to make sure they get to Collingwood |
James Aish says hello |
I can forgive him for Aish, top 10 draft pick, good first year, bad second year but that is common and never really settled at Brisbane. In hindsight, hasn't worked, but the deal made sense.
This latest deal is crazy and way overs.
Interesting that afl.com.au rated us equal last in this trade period.
We were ranked second last by our fans.
(http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-10-22/your-trade-verdicts-adelaidegws)
And while The Age is talking about the race between Essendon and Carlton toward a 17th flag, we have sycophants on here who blindly parrot that the club knows what it's doing! (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/the-race-for-afl-premiership-no17-between-essendon-and-carlton-has-resumed-20171020-gz4t4w.html)
As others have said, we are going into 2018 with the same list as 2017, a year we finished 13th. We have bolstered our recruiting department/list management, which yielded a negative outcome to date, i.e. overs for a rookie. We have appointed a couple of different assistants and that's about it. I maintain the club completed the trade to demonstrate to supporters it was doing 'something' not because the club knows what it's doing.
We have been for many years a club of mediocrity, willing to reminisce of the time we stuck it to the man as a working class club. As a man of Irish Catholic working class background and an ALP member, I love that stuff! But it won't win us our next Premiership - it is time for elite management, elite decision making, elite players (regardless of their socio-economics) and an utterly ruthless club. It's time to stand up to the AFL and demand explanations for apparent manipulations, latest was pick 19 to Geelong.
So very frustrated here, as you can probably tell!
Nevertheless, GO PIES! Just want the club to get where we all want it to be.
_________________
Go Pies!! |
|
|
|
|
ronrat
Joined: 22 May 2006
Location: Thailand
|
| Post subject: | |
|
o very frustrated here, as you can probably tell!
Nevertheless, GO PIES! Just want the club to get where we all want it to be.[/quote]
If we had of had number one pick and the draw Essendon had we would have made the 8. If the AFL is fair dinkum (and that is a big if) that is where we improve. If we keep getting crap draws then they should simply just rip into them and say our supporters will not accept it and you pricks will lose. You clubs, not the AfL. We won't go. If we play the bottom 5 twice as is supposed to be then I can live with it. But we know it won't happen. get rid of QB and only keep ANZAC day. Trust me, the rest of the teams will not want that fixture if we or Essendon are not involved. And while they are at it get of Nathan "Hanging judge" Burke .
_________________
Annoying opposition supporters since 1967. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
