Maybe we could look to being in a future 1st from a team who is imploding?
Oh, wait…
1 Like
Don’t worry guys. Next year is YEAR 1 of our new 3 YEAR plan. Which is part of our 8 YEAR OVERARCHING PLAN 20.0 that we are a couple years into. The past 2 years are actually irrelevant now. Ka-ching baby, too easy!
We’re entirely focussed on the draft now and bringing in young talent… sort of? I guess? Kako is apparently the be all end all? The club clappers on Blitz have determined that shipping Stringer off for a pick in the 50s means that our saviors Vozzo, Barham and Brad have begun a rebuild and only now are we actually serious and we haven’t been able to understand the 10D chess that they’ve been playing for 2 years now.
And in a couple years we’re gonna also keep a lot of this draft capital at the same time as we are apparently focussed on bringing young draft talent in, so that it can help get Harley Reid in, I mean c’mon, everyone knows everyone will be trying, because he’ll definitely pick us and not literally any other team that actually has a more then 1% chance of actually doing anything in the next decade or just stay at WC, but also every other club will be trying the same, especially Geelong who he barracks for and always seem to get anyone they want - but we will get him easy and he will save us and turn us around and save this Administration.
And if that doesn’t work then I’m sure we’ll come up with a new # YEARS PLAN with the years of that plan to be determined at a later date.
The clappers and other external supporter groups connected with the clubs propaganda machine has now and will continue to deem this to be the case until a new plan is released by our overlords, and then this current plan will no longer matter because there will be a NEW PLAN.
You know, I might’ve actually fallen for it all to be honest. Well that is if it wasn’t for mediocre mid-table North Melbourne Coach Brad Scott being the one coaching the team and having the biggest say in team selections.
4 Likes
That’s more about luck. Yeah you need to have some, when it comes to list management…… but the club also needs to take charge at some stage.
Clubs have historically traded out of the top 5, if a good deal comes along…… or the player they want is projected to come later.
But sitting on our hands is what Dodoro has been the master of (and over paying average players from other clubs to come to us).
Someone give centipede a cuddle. Gonna be ok my many-legged friend.
5 Likes
Yep holding our current draft is still ok but I’m assuming that Kako will go somewhere in the teens, meaning we say goodbye to 31 as well as 28 alone only covers a bid from 23 onwards.
We won’t have any trouble finding clubs after mid 2nd rounders this year so they’ll be easy enough to trade out for overs, the main challenge is then being able to use whatever we get for those picks to trade back in again on the night.
eg Richmond may not want to take 8 picks (1, 6, 10, 11, 18, 20, 23 & 24) and Syd have NGA kids next year so they may also be willing to part with 19 or 22 if it means getting 2 x F2s.
1 Like
The “clappers” believe whatever it is you want to disagree with so it makes you feel superior, right? That’s how it works?
2 Likes
Ok then, so what do you suggest the club does instead of prioritising the draft for the next 2-3 years?
3 Likes
Just so we’re clear, you know that you only have to use your next pick, not necessarily the picks in sequence, right? IE, if Kako is bid on at 15 and we have 28, 28 is gone but then we can tally up the remainder of points needed using our later picks instead of 31.
1 Like
Hmmm are you sure? You may be right, I just never thought that to be the case - has anyone else done that before?
100% certain.
Only your next pick needs to be used. We’d be mad to use 28 and 31 to match Kako unless absolutely necessary. That’s why it was important for us to get all those later picks from the Dees. We use them and preserve as many of our seconds as we can.
1 Like
I legit didn’t realise that. In which case yeah of course, definitely we’d protect 31 and use later picks instead. I can’t recall anyone doing that before, maybe I just missed it.
It’s common AF and all clubs do it. They’d be silly not to. But stress less. There were rules in the bidding system that I only learnt a few weeks ago so you’re all good.
Now I’m confused.
1 Like
If this is in fact true then why did the pies use 38, 40, 42 and 44 to match Daicos and not 45 and 49 which they also had? Same for dogs using 34, 42, 43, 44 and 45 for Darcy
Key words being ‘if necessary.’
If we don’t trade anything, we’ll use 28 and then the backend ones.
Not sure of the ins and outs of those bids but I imagine the reason they used the higher picks was because 45 and 49 didn’t have enough points value to reach the quota.
You make up the quota of points any which way you can but you must use your next available.
I’m willing to be convinced but I’ve never noticed any examples of that happening in a draft and can’t find anything online saying it’s the case
1 Like
Riiight I see, so in our case because our later picks will give us enough points to match, we can choose to use those instead.
But say we only had picks 28, 31 & 53, we wouldn’t have the option to keep 31 if 53 didn’t get us the remaining points we need (on top of 28).
1 Like
With someone like J Davey, do we still have to delist and re draft him as a rookie? Or can we just place him on the rookie list without delisting him?
Yep. We use our next available ('cos that’s the rule) and then we use the later picks provided they equal enough points. The flaw in the academy and f/s picks is that you get them cheap as chips to the point of absurdity (watch what we pay for Kako and what Brissy pay for Ashcroft). Clubs have been exploiting this for ages but there’s a shuffling of the value of the points coming into effect next year which will somewhat close the loophole.
Technically, yes you would. If you fall short, the amount of points you’re short get deducted from your first round pick next year. I think they call it ‘going into deficit’ but it’s not a great strategy as it moves your first rounder next year down the order.
In that instance, your best course of action would depend on how short you are/how short you think you’re gonna be. You could trade players for picks to accumulate points or trade future picks for current ones. You could split 31 (606 points) into, say, 35 and 45 (869 points), which is another trick that clubs have been using due to the AFL points system being so incredibly flawed.