I’m talking about the priority pick due to Cochrane & Walker pushing our pick back.
We should be pushing for discounts on matching over a 2026 priority pick we have to trade.
So trade our future Bewick pick? Won’t happen.
2 Likes
Where did I say trade our future pick?
I think the suggestion is we would get GC future first back along with Walter for pick 19, which is….highly unlikely imo.
2 Likes
I hope youre right that we have some level of nga/father son benefits next season beyond Bewick which might give us a back door way to attaining genuine talent as only getting Bewick when the list has infinite gaps of talent is only going to continue prolonging a painful rebuild.
Agree that as part of any assistance package that we should be asking for discounts on nga/father sons for the next 2-3 seasons as well as ask for more picks.
1 Like
Where we going over the next 2/3 years? Get 50 games into this line up, Along with some talented experienced FA’s.
Prior Reid KPD
Farrow Redman Roberts
Duursma Robey Martin
Kako Durham ADW
Huss May Caddy
Ruck Sharp Tsatas
Int: Caldwell Bewick
KPD - Ridley? Mckay? Hayes? Draft Trade In
Wing - Cox? Clarke? Draft Trade in
Ruck - Bryan? Wright Vigo? VH Trade In
Expendables
Parish, Langford, Merrett, McGrath,
Keepers for now.
El hawli Johnson Gerryn
Minimal coin but can come in and play a role
Setterfield Fiorini
IDK’s
Perkins (New coach could unlock him)
Nguyen Artemis
If not listed above - delist over next 2 years
McMahon, Gresham, Guelfi, Unwin, Jones etc.
I did the numbers on this for a podcast I was a guest on recently, and next year is going to be a nightmare if we don’t add some serious draft capital. Essentially, if we were to finish 15th (we may well be worse than that, I know), we would start with picks 8, 30, 49 etc. (due to Tassie’s picks existing).
In that scenario, we couldn’t match a bid on Bewick at pick #1 (even with deficit). We’d be in deficit at a picks 2 or 3 bid, and would see our pick 30 slide back from a bid at 4 onwards. Of course, if we were to finish better than 15th, those numbers become increasingly bad (ie. if we finished 13th, we couldn’t match a top 3 bid and would be in deficit for bids at 4 and 5).
If Darwish and Rodan then attracted bids inside 40, we’d find it almost impossible to match.
It’s worth remembering, Tassie could take up to 8 players from this pool prior to the draft, meaning all of our club tied kids will get bidded on earlier than their actual ranking.
Essentially, we’re going to need at least one more future first, and it’s preferable to not be Hawthorn’s as that will likely be 21-25. We may need to look at trading a ‘28 pick into the ‘27 draft and hope we spike on the back of five decent draft hauls (2023-2027).
5 Likes
Do we think that Bewick would be bid on that high though?
The other option is that we trade with Tasmania. They must trade pick 5, 7, 11 and 13…… and I’m thinking about players like Parish, Redman or Langford who are on front loaded long term deals, so I’d imagine Tasmania would splash the cash to entice them.
Getting Bewick is definitely not impossible, if we’re willing to negotiate with Tasmania.
1 Like
How has the AFL not accounted for the dilution in true pick value when accounting for points required to match bids on kids when everyones true pick value has been forcibly diminished with Tassie entering. Bemusing.
Unless we finish bottom where we get pick 2 we are effectively locked out of the true top end talent yet again. Much like this year.
edit* granted we are all hoping Bewick becomes that true top end talent next year.
2 Likes
Further diluted by the pre selections and mini draft picks.
If we finish bottom of the ladder this year and next year, I think we would have a good argument next year for some serious compensation from the AFL. As it would be two years in a row where we have finished with the spoon and not had access to the number 1 pick.
But the AFL are going to have a lot of head aches next year with the draft being so compromised, complicated and contentious. Even trying to trade for players is going to be messy.
I am hoping that the AFL tweaks the point values next year.
2 Likes
With a comp pick this year from an early bid, potentially some AFL assistance, Merrett, Ridley and others gone I think we will have some draft capital to move to 2027 and set ourselves up.
Rosa has been very good in these scenarios so far so I’m sure he’s already thinking ahead.
3 Likes
Trading our second rounder and the matching-bid-priority pick should net us at least two more 2027 first rounders.
If he’s the fifth best talent, and the top four are all pre-selected by Tassie …
I do think we’ll find a way to get more draft picks into next year though. Was more just highlighting that there’s some work to be done.
2 Likes
The reason is that because Tassie have to trade picks out, they need to have some bargaining power. Otherwise clubs will low-ball them knowing they need to trade them out or lose them.
Ensuring the points are attached gives those picks greater value for the other clubs.
That only matters for the handful of clubs with FS or NGA prospects. For everyone else they don’t care about points attached.
I suspect it has far more to do with the AFL wanting to phase out both systems entirely.
1 Like
I know some clubs (Port and Dons) were arguing to have the points value of their natural selection in play for 2027 due to Tassie coming in to make it fairer. Has that been ruled out yet by the league or still an option?
It would make sense surely otherwise clubs that have a top rated talent in these drafts are at even further disadvantage matching bids than any other year in history.
1 Like
Port seem to be the only club pushing for it. From how it sounds, the AFL isn’t budging right now.
1 Like
We should be pushing for it hard.
1 Like
The AFL has clarified that despite the protests of Port and Essendon, Tassie’s picks will retain their value.
2 Likes
Sad face emoji