2021 Draft Thread

[bullus_hit]

I think people need to relax a bit, the aim of this draft is to secure three A graders & failing that three core players. To effectively build a list we need to be adding 3 players every draft. If these picks in the twenties manage to unearth one player then I think we've done ok (presuming our top 20 picks deliver). If the club wants to buttress the risk with an outside type then package two picks but certainly not three. It's all about the odds and to those concerned about a third rounder, don't be, there's always third rounders up for sale, usually cheap as well.

 

[mrposhman]

Yes, Geesook would have been up to their eyeballs in discussions. Its too much to pay though. We should have held our nerve and traded on the night when players slipped to 38 & 40 and multiple clubs starting coming for them. We could have got Future 2nd rounders for each.

Lets see if any of that comes true on draft night with those that hold picks in that area. I'd hasten to guess not.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Just had a quick look at the players drafted the past 5 years at picks 26,27,28. Geez it's a mixed bag at that point of the draft. No certainties to land good players with those picks. Just keeping it real, let's not get too excited.

 

[Redford]

You still haven't answered my question. Which specific picks ?

What are you talking about ? You package up the existing picks you have and/or deal with other clubs to get the right ones. In other words, what the three clubs ended up doing to transact with the Dogs. Off the top of my head, roughly, 26, 38 and a future 3rd would have had us right on target with what the Dogs received and would have left us with 7, 15, 17 and 28.

Now I’ll ask you again TT and how about you show me the courtesy of answering instead of avoiding. Would you have found an extra 17 points to get 17 instead of 27 ?

Do you think that would have been preferable ? Nobody’s panicking …nobody’s getting upset. Just pointing out it ended up being a sub optimal outcome. And you can’t deny that.

Pleasantly offset by the fact we received overs on the CCJ deal I’ll point out, and supporting the fact that nobody’s panicking.

Just that the packaging for 17 v 27 situation in its isolation didn’t work out for us.

 

[licatiger]

Maybe...just maybe... it's because other clubs were trying to get pick 27 and we needed to offer the best deal to get the trade over the line?

To make sense of the deal. Collingwood already had enough points to match a bid for Daicos, but it is irrelevant to Collingwood whether they use Pick 27 or Pick 38, 40, plus other picks. The incentive for Collingwood to do the deal was to get an additional pick in the 2022 draft. The incentive for Richmond was obviously an upgraded pick.

 

[Giardiasis]

26, 38 and a future 3rd doesn't beat what the dogs got and in any case we couldn't trade pick 38 until the FA window closed. I'm sure we tried hard to get Pick 17 but trading CJ at the time and dealing with the Tarrant situation made it harder. I still think we should wait and see what happens before we start criticising the club too much.

Also you can't just look at 17 vs 27 in isolation because getting Pick 17 might have meant we didn't get as good a deal for CJ.

 

[bullus_hit]

Just had a quick look at the players drafted the past 5 years at picks 26,27,28. Geez it's a mixed bag at that point of the draft. No certainties to land good players with those picks. Just keeping it real, let's not get too excited.

It's a pretty good draft in which to have those picks, so much unexposed talent that will drift, simply because others have more exposed form. The odds in that range are reasonable but certainly no guarantees. Shai Bolton & Sheds highlight the upside, a player like Menadue a good illustration of how things can go wrong. Just need to be smart about the type of player you are recruiting.

 

[King Kong]

It's a pretty good draft in which to have those picks, so much unexposed talent that will drift, simply because others have more exposed form. The odds in that range are reasonable but certainly no guarantees. Shai Bolton & Sheds highlight the upside, a player like Menadue a good illustration of how things can go wrong. Just need to be smart about the type of player you are recruiting.

x3 3rd rounders for a 10 spot rise in the draft. No one can tell me that's good business. Its a complete f up on Blair's behalf.

 

[Scoop]

Five picks inside 30, let's stop stuffing about and get four mids and a mid-forward.

Would be happy with Matthew Roberts in the 26,27,28 range. Looks like he's slipping but he'd be a good get if he's around.

 

[FistFullOfDollars]

Yes, Geesook would have been up to their eyeballs in discussions. Its too much to pay though. We should have held our nerve and traded on the night when players slipped to 38 & 40 and multiple clubs starting coming for them. We could have got Future 2nd rounders for each.

There are usually only around 60 picks made in the entire draft. I don't think any club will be trading a future 2nd for a picks beyond 35.

 

[Giardiasis]

x3 3rd rounders for a 10 spot rise in the draft. No one can tell me that's good business. Its a complete f up on Blair's behalf.

Doesn't look great, but I'd still caution wait and see and I'm conscious of the fact I don't know the ratings of the players we think are available at those picks.

 

[caesar]

Wonderful result. Bulldogs traded pick 17 and 75 (1025 points) for 23, 44, 45 (1524). They got significant overs. We could not compete with that offer. That's what happens with any type of market system.

Yes we paid overs for 27.....but that was always going to happen if we wanted to obtain an earlier pick. Reckon there may just be better value in what we did in any case.

And Bulldogs not finished yet they will turn that pick 23 for enough points for Darcy and a significant future pick as well. Pick 23 more valuable than the best we could have offered 26, (regardless of what overall points package offered up). Fact is someone SHOULD? pay more for pick 23 this year than 26.
The lowest future pick would have been a top priority for Pies and Bulldogs not just points for junk picks.

 

[bullus_hit]

x3 3rd rounders for a 10 spot rise in the draft. No one can tell me that's good business. Its a complete f up on Blair's behalf.

I'd just wait and see who we can get, in totality our draft hand is a truckload better than when we started, don't think you can simply highlight one trade and ignore the fact Richmond has the best hand in this draft and could even improve on that situation on draft night.

 

[bullus_hit]

Five picks inside 30, let's stop stuffing about and get four mids and a mid-forward.

Would be happy with Matthew Roberts in the 26,27,28 range. Looks like he's slipping but he'd be a good get if he's around.

His sprint time worries me, getting a Constable/Hately vibe but I haven't finished going over all the data so still in the frame.

 

[King Kong]

Trade Period Net Loss / Gain Summary:

In:
Tarrant, Pick 27, Future 2nd Round (tied to norf)

Out:
CCJ, Chol, Pick 42, Pick 47, Future 3rd (to Lollingwood), Future 4th (to norf).

That's a clear FAIL.

 

[Redford]

Wonderful result. Bulldogs traded pick 17 and 75 (1025 points) for 23, 44, 45 (1524). They got significant overs. We could not compete with that offer. That's what happens with any type of market system.

Yes we paid overs for 27.....but that was always going to happen if we wanted to obtain an earlier pick. Reckon there may just be better value in what we did in any case.

Yeah you say that AT but we were prepared to give up realistically 1500 points to get 27.

The difference is negligible in points but considerable in Draft order.

Given the options at 27, maybe it’ll work out for us. Who knows. But at a pure trade transaction level, it’s a bit of a cutting off our nose to spite our face situation as it’s turned out.

 

[mrposhman]

Trade Period Net Loss / Gain Summary:

In:
Tarrant, Pick 27, Future 2nd Round (tied to norf)

Out:
CCJ, Chol, Pick 42, Pick 47, Future 3rd (to Lollingwood), Future 4th (to norf).

That's a clear FAIL.

Not sure its a clear fail personally. Assuming the North pick is 20 and we finish 10th (I think we can do a lot better than that), then the net points gain is 445 or around Pick 39, so essentially Tarrant and 39 for Chol and CJ who both (or either) could have walked to the PSD.

If we manage to get back into the top 4, its Pick 31 and Tarrant for CJ and Chol.

 

[caesar]

I'd just wait and see who we can get, in totality our draft hand is a truckload better than when we started, don't think you can simply highlight one trade and ignore the fact Richmond has the best hand in this draft and could even improve on that situation on draft night.

And we have Nth's 2nd rounder next year, (finish bottom 5 and a pick under 25 beckons).

 

[nikolasmia]

Red of course is correct,

Clearly the deal for 17, is better than the deal we got for 27,

But it ain't over yet, The draft is 6 weeks away, and we are in a very strong position to do lots of stuff.

Lets see what plays out.

In Blair we trust

 

[Redford]

Not sure its a clear fail personally. Assuming the North pick is 20 and we finish 10th (I think we can do a lot better than that), then the net points gain is 445 or around Pick 39, so essentially Tarrant and 39 for Chol and CJ who both (or either) could have walked to the PSD.

If we manage to get back into the top 4, its Pick 31 and Tarrant for CJ and Chol.

It’s not a fail. On the whole the trade period has been a pass mark because of the CJ deal. Just that in isolation, the packaging of picks to move up was a bit of a fail.

Anyway let’s just get back to the Draft itself.