The phantom draft on (Roar) has us matching doggies bid for Naish at pick 16 then getting Oscar Allen at pick 20 (although I thought we would lose that pick if we need to match and earlier bid?)
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Pick 17, 20 & 25
- Thread starter Tigertool
- Start date
year of the tiger said:
They have Sam Hayes #10 - Carlton (Ruckmam#10 is silly these days specially 1 that has no tank)
Hunter Clark -#19 gold coast (wow) He will be gone by weast coast #13
I would be suprised if Doggies bid on Naish, Thinking they would be looking at Richards
I’ve seen that scenario with Naish a lot. Which either means the Bulldogs have a leak and it’s out for us to deal with or there’s a lot of plagiarism with phantom drafts.year of the tiger said:
The_General said:
I think it originates from the Doggies paying a home visit to the Naish household
I think they would have a genuine interest but would have been at a later pick and not #9 or #16 as they would have bigger fish to fry there
But with Richmond having 3 picks immediately after the doggies #16 I have a feeling the doggies wont bother with a bid as they know Richmond will 100% match and all that would happen is just make richmond use their 1st of 3 picks - They would have 1 eye on next year with Rhylee West coming through.
Hoping no bids until #30
The_General said:
The draft show on Foxtel today with Johnston, Dickson and Ablett from AFL talent academy had us taking Naish with our first which I'd be very disappointed with and would, as a consequence, see the manipulation of our draft picks as a fail. They obviously think someone will bid on him early otherwise wouldn't suggest him at 17.
I reckon Bulldogs’ interest in Naish came from when they had #26. Now they don’t have any picks after ours until about round 5 so there wouldn’t really seem to be any point in them bidding, especially as they have their own f/s next year.
taking him without a bid? if so that show has no cred as there's no way known we take him until he's bid on. Only chance is if we use #25 on him as we don't want anyone else in the Draft.Blind Turn said:
turk-d-tiger said:
You would think it would be counterproductive in the long run, just hoping clubs hold back like they did with the GWS academy bids. If by some miracle we wind up with Balta, Allen, Miers/Taylor/Worpel & Naish I think we've nailed this draft. Also hoping Clavarino makes it through to the fourth round. Just feel he's being massively undersold.
The scenarios out there make getting Balta and Allen (or Brander) seems less likely than a snowflake surviving outside today.
If we want Naish, I think we're going to have to bid early, and then those who are behind us will take one or both of those guys.
With so many young outside mids on the list, and so few key talls on our list - I'd be almost passing on Naish if there's a KPP around and we have to match a bid.
If we want Naish, I think we're going to have to bid early, and then those who are behind us will take one or both of those guys.
With so many young outside mids on the list, and so few key talls on our list - I'd be almost passing on Naish if there's a KPP around and we have to match a bid.
I'm not critical of Naish Scoop - although I know others are. You're probably right about us stacking the decks to get him, it's a move that has signalled to the rest of the league we'll take him. I hope it doesn't hurt us with him being bid on too high. I really want to keep three picks in 25.
I am nervous of a list build that is decidedly unbalanced right now. I don't think we can rely on Chol, Garthwaite and C Moore to be our key backs\forwards in a few years. 100% strike rate with rookies and low picks is too low a probability for me. We need to start getting some numbers in, as key stocks are always longer term investments and much lower chances of success.
I am nervous of a list build that is decidedly unbalanced right now. I don't think we can rely on Chol, Garthwaite and C Moore to be our key backs\forwards in a few years. 100% strike rate with rookies and low picks is too low a probability for me. We need to start getting some numbers in, as key stocks are always longer term investments and much lower chances of success.
The_General said:
If we miss out on a tall in the top 25 then there's some chance Clavarino will be around. There's also McLean who is a ruck/forward. Both these guys will take time but they fill some very important list requirements.
The_General said:
You are damned either way, if you don’t make these moves to get him cheaper, the club looks unprepared. If you do, you signal like you said.
The list is unbalanced for footy from 2000-2015. The last two years, the flag winners have had a totally new balance. More mediums, less true talls. While I agree we need some quality, with free agency and the upside down trade market in play, these things can be fixed a lot quicker. We are blessed right now with Rance and Riewoldt bookending the ground and we do need the quality but it’s not diabolical. I’m all for getting Balta/Allen but I would still keep building the midfield. And Naish is a rock solid pillar. People talk of him competing wiht Mendue & Markov, for me it’s not even close. These two are flankers or wingers with blistering pace. Valuable for sure . But Naish is coming in with a far superior body of work and a larger more diverse midfield skill set. I just see something special.
Jonesracing82 said:
Sorry but where did it say without a bid??
I clearly wrote that they obviously believe someone will bid early thereby forcing us to bid.
Other clubs will bid on him if they clearly believe he's worth it. That's unfortunately feasible and that's why I would have kept our previous draft order. Can't convince myself that he'll last to 25. If so then that's probably all he's worth and we're all just romancing.
Blind Turn said:
Not sure I'm following your thought process BT. We had picks 15 and 17, if a bid came for Naish we'd have to use one of these picks to get him and only have one early pick left.
Trading out 15 for 20 and 25 means we now have three picks to play with, not two. If a bid comes for Naish it's easier to cover the bid and we still have two other picks within the top twenty five to play with.
