-
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.
Trade Week - Richmond Only
- Thread starter Smoking Aces
- Start date
The deal that i think would be fair is 6,10 for 2 and F2(28)
I STILL WOULDN'T DO IT, BUT IF IF IF IF WE WANT LALOR and FOS then it's a must.
If we can seriously get pick 2 and not give up 6 - boy oh boy wow wee. If we can get three of Lalor, FOS, Draper, Langford, Smith and Smillie - that is absolutely bananas.
6 for 2 is good
10 for F2(28) is very bad for us.
Forget about points. They have no relevance in assessing this trade
North want the trade. thF2 is useless to us trading out of a first round pick in a strong draft to get a mid second round pick in a weak draft, which, potentially, will move out into the mid 30s
North - again they are seeking this trade - need to come up with their 2025 first to get us interested
I didn't disagree with the trade due to pick value though as IT HAS NO RELEVANCE. You seem to think it has the most relevance based on your most recent trade suggestion. It has basically no relevance whatsoever, but you still stating that points value this and that, and then saying others are just using "fiction" even though what we are saying is much closer to reality than the crap you keep posting.
Points not relevant? How come no one has said this before!
OMG, 1 minute - I use pick value for "benchmarking".
Nek minnit - you come up with a ridiculous trade based on points value but taking nothing further into the discussion.
Firstly, 1 - you are using 2024 points value for the future pick, even though the points are worth significantly less - but you are using this as a guide for whats "fair" from a points value so you don't even know how to use the 2 indexes correctly.
Secondly - Everyone knows that the top picks in this draft are fairly even, so it comes down to pick preference (an intangible that you can't get from any points index). So as some of us have said before the "pick premium" if you want to use the index, will be much smaller than getting into the top 25 (which you called disgusting because again you only look at points instead of the intangible of the actual players available).
We wouldn't do this trade, not because of the pick premium paid (which on your ratings aren't much, but would be greater if you actually used the right index) but because those 2 picks IN THIS DRAFT, are better than what we would expect out of 2 (a marginal increase on 6 - ie. we get to choose our top pick, rather than choosing from the leftovers) vs the move from 10 (in a strong draft) to a mid to late 2nd in what seems like a weaker draft. The reason why we would turn this down (much like the previous one with North) isn't because of draft pick value, but BECAUSE THOSE INTANGIBLES THAT YOU CAN'T VALUE ARE WORTH MORE TO US THAN ANY PICK VALUE DIFFERENCE.
I honestly almost thought he was trolling with that latest pick trade hypothetical
Essendumb should’ve held onto 9 they’d have got 2 late firsts for it
Last edited:
It's a guide and an overall estimate. These trades you can't win in every pick otherwise nothing would happen . We win on one and lose on the other and it averages out. I personally wouldn't do it, but the poster i quoted wanted to do 6 and 10 for 2 only which is no deal.
Sorry if you can't comprehend. People that can't comprehend normally think everything is crap to them so they apply Strawman tactics and make up or add irrelevant information to the debate. If it was irrelevant as you're saying then why do the AFL clubs use it? There are other criteria and factors list managers use also as you've stated, but they also use this where it may come into play.
Last edited:
Firstly, 1 - you are using 2024 points value for the future pick, even though the points are worth significantly less - but you are using this as a guide for whats "fair" from a points value so you don't even know how to use the 2 indexes correctly.
Dude i was using the calculator as guide so don't stress over trivialities Strawman. I was quoting a poster if you'd been following the thread where he/she said we may need to give 6 and 10 for 2 which i disagreed on. It wasn't my ridiculous trade i was actually juicing it up on what he quoted. You seem to have a personal vendetta against me or suffer poorly in following discussions. Either way I'm glad I'm living rent free inside your Head. lol
Secondly - Everyone knows that the top picks in this draft are fairly even, so it comes down to pick preference (an intangible that you can't get from any points index). So as some of us have said before the "pick premium" if you want to use the index, will be much smaller than getting into the top 25 (which you called disgusting because again you only look at points instead of the intangible of the actual players available).
This is nonsense bc historically it's proven to be false so i don't believe you. People pretty well say this every year, yet a poster earlier put up how the early picks are rarely even. Again you missed that post.. Stick to the topic as the disgusting trade was a massive differential and the reality is we gave them equivalent to 20 and 24 for 20 in return. Stop the nonsense and stop dribbling rubbish everywhere . You need to follow the conversation and stick to what's being discussed. That trade has been done to death now and we lost out on it.
You need to cut the personal attacks out and debate amicably as this isn't a points scoring competition.
Last edited:
5 pages discussing the points value of picks. Time to shut this thread down and open it up and again in 2 weeks time.
I don’t want it to out do the Tambling thread.
I don’t want it to out do the Tambling thread.
Maybe the next person who mentions points should be banned until after the draft?
