They included it in this media release from last week
but it wasn’t in their original trade and draft dates article. Who can fathom why they would include it in one but not the other?
I got this.
GOVERNANCE.
1 Like
The consistency with which they omit things like this or make things vague really makes you wonder if they are just useless or deliberately misleading. I’m conflicted about which one I think it is. There is plenty of evidence to support either option
History in the making as Cats and Pies trade picks
Pies need draft points for NGA prospect Isaac Quaynor
COLLINGWOOD has completed a pick swap with Geelong to strengthen its chances of nabbing both Isaac Quaynor and Will Kelly in this year’s draft.
It is the first-ever trade completed outside the traditional exchange window, with the AFL this year enabling clubs to swap draft picks until 2pm on Friday, November 16. Clubs will also be able to trade on draft night for the first time.
The Cats sent selections 59 and 60 to the Pies for No.51, delivering Collingwood 45 more points on the AFL Draft Value Index to match any bid on Oakleigh Chargers teammates Quaynor and Kelly.
INDICATIVE DRAFT ORDER Your club’s latest picks
Quaynor looks a sure-fire first-round draft pick – likely anywhere from outside the top 10 to 18 – while Kelly, the son of 1990 premiership player Craig, is expected to be taken within the 15-25 range.
Kelly’s brother Jake is also on Adelaide’s list. He is taller than his older sibling at 193cm and looms as a key defender at AFL level.
Quaynor, who excels at half-back, is in the Magpies’ Next Generation Academy, qualifying because his father hails from Ghana, in West Africa.
TOMORROW’S HEROES Isaac Quaynor
Collingwood now has picks 41, 44, 57, 59, 60 and 93, with Geelong preparing to take selections 12, 50, 51, 70 and 87 into the draft.
Seems like they’ll have to do more to get both.
Sort of. They can go into points debt, and it can’t affect their 2019 first round pick regardless of how high the bid is because they already traded that out. Worst case they lose their second round pick next year if bids come in quite high for both.
Edit: which, yes, is more. So you’re entirely right.
1 Like
Oh, right.
I’d taken the 80% into account but not the points debt.
Seems like there’s not much excuse to be trumped on academy players.
There’s really not. The giants have not matched on a few academy players, but only because they had so many that they didn’t care (eg Mutch).
Well, here’s the latest official explanation. So it’s “2 first round picks in the previous 4 years” with the restrictions if you don’t meet it being you can’t trade the current year’s first round pick, I guess? That’s actually quite straightforward.
Edit: as always, you can’t help but imagine this all might be clearer if the “Determination for the trading of future draft selections” document referred to in the article was actually just on the ■■■■■■■ AFL site somewhere.
2 Likes