Tiger Poll- Draft or Trade

[tigerman]

I have always believed that the best way to sustained success is by by drafting youth, and building a winning culture, much the same as Geelong has done.
Obviously a Chris Judd type trade is a given, but i much prefer that we draft players that may have been overlooked like Nason, Webbereley and Nahas, as opposed to trading for players from other afl clubs who haven't quite made it, for what ever reason.

 

[Total Tiger]

Happy to trade if it's for an under 21 year old who can't get an opportunity at their club. I'm thinking of someone who is on a top 4 side's list who just can't break into a senior team. They would have to have the prospect of playing for us for 10 years plus.

 

[DeathNinthandTaxes]

Best available regardless of method.

 

[tigerman]

Happy to trade if it's for an under 21 year old who can't get an opportunity at their club. I'm thinking of someone who is on a top 4 side's list who just can't break into a senior team. They would have to have the prospect of playing for us for 10 years plus.

Weller and Morrison still haunt me on that basis, although they were 22 and 23 repectively.

 

[Tigers of Old]

Best available regardless of method.

I'll go with that, however my preference is to go to the draft.

 

[premiers2011]

Best available regardless of method.

+1

 

[Bill James]

Draft in -Trade out. Schulz trade was a good trade. Most of our in trades are duds.

 

[jamo]

Good players are never traded.

Good players ask to be traded.

 

[Baloo]

Keep drafting until we're at a point where we can trade to fill in the missing spots. At the moment we have too many wholes to start using trades to plug them.

 

[Herr_Tiger]

Stock up on excellence and take it from there

 

[thejinx]

Smart list management is about utilising every opportunity to better the list.

Sticking to just one method, and ruling out all the other possible options is naive and irresponsible.

Sure, draft all you can, but if the right trade appears, you have to at least consider it.

 

[U2Tigers]

Smart list management is about utilising every opportunity to better the list.

Sticking to just one method, and ruling out all the other possible options is naive and irresponsible.

Sure, draft all you can, but if the right trade appears, you have to at least consider it.

:clap :clap :clap

 

[geoffryprettyboy]

Neither trading or drafting will guarantee anything, the last 30 years proves this. There is more to it than just these two alone.

 

[IanG]

Draft as the fundamental platform from which everything else is built.

 

[Tigerfan]

I am generally a 'draft' man

but the regard and love for Dangerfield from some respected posters makes me open to the idea.

it's all about "will the guy at pick 4 be better than dangermouse?"

I don't think he went top 5 in his draft (not sure, haven't looked) but he's obviously come on well.

So why didn't we take him when we had the chance?

it's stupid if we always end up trying to get the player that we overlooked three years before.

I also agree with 'we missed that guy, we can't have everyone, let's draft the next gun!'

 

[daoula]

I would trade our second pick for either Travis Baok or Pat Dangerfield, then target the other by tempting the $$$ into the PSD.

 

[NZtiger]

After last year's performance, which has produced some positive early signs, hit the draft again I say!

 

[The Cotch]

I would trade our second pick for either Travis Baok or Pat Dangerfield, then target the other by tempting the $$$ into the PSD.

Can't have your cake and eat it too. We both know that won't happen.

 

[Willo]

I am generally a 'draft' man

but the regard and love for Dangerfield from some respected posters makes me open to the idea.

it's all about "will the guy at pick 4 be better than dangermouse?"

I don't think he went top 5 in his draft (not sure, haven't looked) but he's obviously come on well.

So why didn't we take him when we had the chance?

it's stupid if we always end up trying to get the player that we overlooked three years before.

I also agree with 'we missed that guy, we can't have everyone, let's draft the next gun!'

Dangerfield was pick 10 in the 2007 National Draft, Dirtydog.
We took Cotchin at pick 2 and Rance at pick 18 (PP)

 

[GoodOne]

I am generally a 'draft' man

but the regard and love for Dangerfield from some respected posters makes me open to the idea.

it's all about "will the guy at pick 4 be better than dangermouse?"

I don't think he went top 5 in his draft (not sure, haven't looked) but he's obviously come on well.

So why didn't we take him when we had the chance?

it's stupid if we always end up trying to get the player that we overlooked three years before.

I also agree with 'we missed that guy, we can't have everyone, let's draft the next gun!'

Problem is you almost always pay over the odds for star recruits.