Would you trade the number 1 pick? Jackets wouldn't

No. I dont think it had anything to do with it.

Far out this thread has gone crazy.

  1. We donā€™t know how many of the top bunch Dodoro and Keane rate. They might actually see 1 standout or 2 or 3. Just because ā€œthe internetā€ canā€™t split a few, doesnā€™t mean that our recruiting team havenā€™t split them.

  2. We donā€™t know how hard Dodoro and Keane tried to sell #1. It probably depends on their answer to 1. But you also need to make it appear to be worthy, so you canā€™t sell it too hard, even if you want to sell it. Especially if you want to get ā€œoversā€

  3. Picks 3+16 that GWS did with Brisbane may never have been available to us, and even if it was we might not have rated the 16th best player in the draft as materially different to 29 anyway. If we thought there were 1 or 2 standouts at the top that could have been a massive loss from our point of view.

  4. The proposed ā€œ2 shots in the top 10ā€ that we were going to be able to pick up if we sold this thing hard enough were very possibly not there. As Ants has shown, in terms of points 4+8 wasnā€™t really a goer from GCS. What other 2 in 10 options were likely to have worked and been available to us? And then which of these (if there were any) would have been good value to us?

  5. I am certain that an ā€œinternet forum favouriteā€ will be there somewhere in the later part of the top 10, and another will go between 16 and 20 and weā€™ll be having this same ā€œdiscussionā€ again. Please remember that ā€œinternet forum favouriteā€ != Dodoro and Keaneā€™s preference (in many cases), and we wonā€™t be able to judge the final result of this trade and draft period for 5+ years.

Far out this thread has gone crazy.
  1. We donā€™t know how many of the top bunch Dodoro and Keane rate. They might actually see 1 standout or 2 or 3. Just because ā€œthe internetā€ canā€™t split a few, doesnā€™t mean that our recruiting team havenā€™t split them.

  2. We donā€™t know how hard Dodoro and Keane tried to sell #1. It probably depends on their answer to 1. But you also need to make it appear to be worthy, so you canā€™t sell it too hard, even if you want to sell it. Especially if you want to get ā€œoversā€

  3. Picks 3+16 that GWS did with Brisbane may never have been available to us, and even if it was we might not have rated the 16th best player in the draft as materially different to 29 anyway. If we thought there were 1 or 2 standouts at the top that could have been a massive loss from our point of view.

  4. The proposed ā€œ2 shots in the top 10ā€ that we were going to be able to pick up if we sold this thing hard enough were very possibly not there. As Ants has shown, in terms of points 4+8 wasnā€™t really a goer from GCS. What other 2 in 10 options were likely to have worked and been available to us? And then which of these (if there were any) would have been good value to us?

  5. I am certain that an ā€œinternet forum favouriteā€ will be there somewhere in the later part of the top 10, and another will go between 16 and 20 and weā€™ll be having this same ā€œdiscussionā€ again. Please remember that ā€œinternet forum favouriteā€ != Dodoro and Keaneā€™s preference (in many cases), and we wonā€™t be able to judge the final result of this trade and draft period for 5+ years.

Great post!

Gee Iā€™m glad Iā€™ve been overseas until the last few days. I would have gone mad trying to read blitz all that time.

No we didnā€™t exciting trades in Omeara or Patton but we have a ā– ā– ā– ā– ā– ā–  exciting hand in the draft. You canā€™t beat the excitement that high draft bring. We basically have a shot at a guaranteed 100-gamer plus 2 shots at players who could become integral parts of best 22 for the next decade.

For no.1 I still just like the idea of McCluggage. Smart footballers is what you want. I havenā€™t really heard or read too much about his contested ball game which is very important but to me he just sounds like another smart footballer who we can bank on to slot alongside Heppell, Zerrett and Parish.

Nothing is guaranteed. Thatā€™s pretty much my entire argument.

So no one actually knows what we were trying to do yet still they believe they could've done better.

Typical.

Dodoro was asked if Pick 1 was on the table and responded no offers had been made. I wouldā€™ve preferred he be out there shopping it aggressively.


Riolio, just because Dodoro states offers for the number 1 pick will be considered doesnā€™t means he coughs it up for the first offer of a packet of crisps and a 67 Valiant hubcap.
It means come to us with an offer we could not possibly refuse.
Still guessing.

Of course itā€™s ā– ā– ā– ā– ā– ā– ā–  guessing. If I think we could have done better but have no proof, Iā€™m not somehow in a less defensible than someone who says we couldnā€™t have done better who has no proof. Itā€™s just opinions and your positive one is no better backed by evidence than my negative one.

Itā€™s more the fact itā€™s been repeated over and over. If it was available it wouldā€™ve been good. It wasnā€™t so why dwell on it?

Youā€™re guessing that it wasnā€™t available is my point. Anyway, this thread will die its natural death over the next few days and we can all go fight about McGrath and McCluggage in the pick 1 thread, guessing about which one will be a better footballer.

Iā€™m just saying itā€™s hard to pass assessment when we dont know all the details! I havenā€™t said it was good or bad.

Spot on Soulnett, we are working ourselves into a frenzy on speculated scenarios

Far out this thread has gone crazy.
  1. We donā€™t know how many of the top bunch Dodoro and Keane rate. They might actually see 1 standout or 2 or 3. Just because ā€œthe internetā€ canā€™t split a few, doesnā€™t mean that our recruiting team havenā€™t split them.

  2. We donā€™t know how hard Dodoro and Keane tried to sell #1. It probably depends on their answer to 1. But you also need to make it appear to be worthy, so you canā€™t sell it too hard, even if you want to sell it. Especially if you want to get ā€œoversā€

  3. Picks 3+16 that GWS did with Brisbane may never have been available to us, and even if it was we might not have rated the 16th best player in the draft as materially different to 29 anyway. If we thought there were 1 or 2 standouts at the top that could have been a massive loss from our point of view.

  4. The proposed ā€œ2 shots in the top 10ā€ that we were going to be able to pick up if we sold this thing hard enough were very possibly not there. As Ants has shown, in terms of points 4+8 wasnā€™t really a goer from GCS. What other 2 in 10 options were likely to have worked and been available to us? And then which of these (if there were any) would have been good value to us?

  5. I am certain that an ā€œinternet forum favouriteā€ will be there somewhere in the later part of the top 10, and another will go between 16 and 20 and weā€™ll be having this same ā€œdiscussionā€ again. Please remember that ā€œinternet forum favouriteā€ != Dodoro and Keaneā€™s preference (in many cases), and we wonā€™t be able to judge the final result of this trade and draft period for 5+ years.

Well articulated frosty the best post in the entire thread

Nothing is guaranteed. That's pretty much my entire argument.

But can you guarantee that?

Far out this thread has gone crazy.
  1. We donā€™t know how many of the top bunch Dodoro and Keane rate. They might actually see 1 standout or 2 or 3. Just because ā€œthe internetā€ canā€™t split a few, doesnā€™t mean that our recruiting team havenā€™t split them.

  2. We donā€™t know how hard Dodoro and Keane tried to sell #1. It probably depends on their answer to 1. But you also need to make it appear to be worthy, so you canā€™t sell it too hard, even if you want to sell it. Especially if you want to get ā€œoversā€

  3. Picks 3+16 that GWS did with Brisbane may never have been available to us, and even if it was we might not have rated the 16th best player in the draft as materially different to 29 anyway. If we thought there were 1 or 2 standouts at the top that could have been a massive loss from our point of view.

  4. The proposed ā€œ2 shots in the top 10ā€ that we were going to be able to pick up if we sold this thing hard enough were very possibly not there. As Ants has shown, in terms of points 4+8 wasnā€™t really a goer from GCS. What other 2 in 10 options were likely to have worked and been available to us? And then which of these (if there were any) would have been good value to us?

  5. I am certain that an ā€œinternet forum favouriteā€ will be there somewhere in the later part of the top 10, and another will go between 16 and 20 and weā€™ll be having this same ā€œdiscussionā€ again. Please remember that ā€œinternet forum favouriteā€ != Dodoro and Keaneā€™s preference (in many cases), and we wonā€™t be able to judge the final result of this trade and draft period for 5+ years.

Too sensible for this thread. BAN!

I really think we screwed up here.

Weā€™re taking picks #1, #20 and #29 into the draft, and maybe #41.
If weā€™d done the Brisbane deal we could have been taking #3, #16, #20, #29 instead. If we donā€™t plan to take four picks and use #41, then that #29 could have been Melbourneā€™s 2017 second rounder instead.

So could have gone with #3, #16, #20, Stewart and start 2017 with an extra 2nd round pick to help with trades.

Sorry, but this was a missed opportunity.

What dealā€¦oh the one in your head.

So no one actually knows what we were trying to do yet still they believe they could've done better.

Typical.

Dodoro was asked if Pick 1 was on the table and responded no offers had been made. I wouldā€™ve preferred he be out there shopping it aggressively.


Riolio, just because Dodoro states offers for the number 1 pick will be considered doesnā€™t means he coughs it up for the first offer of a packet of crisps and a 67 Valiant hubcap.
It means come to us with an offer we could not possibly refuse.

It would have been worth it for that!

Just for you Riolio.
My old man is best mates with someone high within Gold Coast that will 100% know if they were interested in trading up for pick 1, and whether they offered anything.
Iā€™ll find out if they had any interest so we can put this one to bed.
FWIW I was a massive fan of turning 1 into 4 and 8 or 10, and disappointed we couldnā€™t do it.

Might take a week or so.

Nothing is guaranteed. That's pretty much my entire argument.

There are a few ways of reducing or spreading risk.

You wanted to do it by spreading your investment, which makes perfect sense, but even moreso with the less detailed knowledge that you have about the investment.

Dodoro ā€œmayā€ have wanted to do it by gaining detailed knowledge regarding the investment opportunities, and then determining that there was one (or two) clear lower risk options.

Both valid, both depend on the information at hand, both can go awfully wrong, both unlikely to beat every other option possibly available to you.

I know that pretending weā€™ve got everyone else outsmarted is one of the core pillars of the Essendon Football Club but again, I donā€™t know what was gained by being coy about putting it on the market.

I also wonder if thereā€™s a larger discussion to be had about the value of one very high pick to the worst football club each year. Surely thatā€™s almost always of more benefit to the top clubs where the bottom clubs would almost always be better suited with multiple picks. We were the most unique wooden spoon team in league history though given the calibre of players we have coming back of course.

I know that pretending we've got everyone else outsmarted is one of the core pillars of the Essendon Football Club but again, I don't know what was gained by being coy about putting it on the market.

I also wonder if thereā€™s a larger discussion to be had about the value of one very high pick to the worst football club each year. Surely thatā€™s almost always of more benefit to the top clubs where the bottom clubs would almost always be better suited with multiple picks. We were the most unique wooden spoon team in league history though given the calibre of players we have coming back of course.


Isnā€™t that what priority picks are for?
I know that pretending we've got everyone else outsmarted is one of the core pillars of the Essendon Football Club but again, I don't know what was gained by being coy about putting it on the market.

I also wonder if thereā€™s a larger discussion to be had about the value of one very high pick to the worst football club each year. Surely thatā€™s almost always of more benefit to the top clubs where the bottom clubs would almost always be better suited with multiple picks. We were the most unique wooden spoon team in league history though given the calibre of players we have coming back of course.


Isnā€™t that what priority picks are for?
Sure, when a team is so far in the hole they need one. So perhaps teams that spend successive years in the bottom four being handed one pick before getting a priority pick would be better served by being given something better, sooner?
I know that pretending we've got everyone else outsmarted is one of the core pillars of the Essendon Football Club but again, I don't know what was gained by being coy about putting it on the market.

I also wonder if thereā€™s a larger discussion to be had about the value of one very high pick to the worst football club each year. Surely thatā€™s almost always of more benefit to the top clubs where the bottom clubs would almost always be better suited with multiple picks. We were the most unique wooden spoon team in league history though given the calibre of players we have coming back of course.

Can you stick your bottom lip out any further? Do you want the dummy stuck back in so you can spit it out again?

I know that pretending we've got everyone else outsmarted is one of the core pillars of the Essendon Football Club but again, I don't know what was gained by being coy about putting it on the market.

I also wonder if thereā€™s a larger discussion to be had about the value of one very high pick to the worst football club each year. Surely thatā€™s almost always of more benefit to the top clubs where the bottom clubs would almost always be better suited with multiple picks. We were the most unique wooden spoon team in league history though given the calibre of players we have coming back of course.

i donā€™t think we were.

We said it was on the table early, we said make us an offer and we will consider it. Iā€™m sure we through a few out to see if anything came up.

I also think you are forgetting that itā€™s not us sitting here with pick 1 being the only club with any clue of the value of exchanging it for two top ten picks. Every club knows that value hence why every club rejected that offer knowing they could either get something similar for less (GWS/Lions) or pick 1 just isnā€™t worth the exchange.

I think you are coming from a position of it was us that held on to it not knowing its value. When it was probably more like every other club didnā€™t see the worth in paying for it.

I know that pretending we've got everyone else outsmarted is one of the core pillars of the Essendon Football Club but again, I don't know what was gained by being coy about putting it on the market.

I also wonder if thereā€™s a larger discussion to be had about the value of one very high pick to the worst football club each year. Surely thatā€™s almost always of more benefit to the top clubs where the bottom clubs would almost always be better suited with multiple picks. We were the most unique wooden spoon team in league history though given the calibre of players we have coming back of course.


Isnā€™t that what priority picks are for?
Sure, when a team is so far in the hole they need one. So perhaps teams that spend successive years in the bottom four being handed one pick before getting a priority pick would be better served by being given something better, sooner?

The system was in place.

The clubs abused the system / made it work for them in a way the AFL was unhappy with.

The system was replaced by one where the AFL can do whatever they wanted.

AFL happy and any system that encourages tanking to reach a specific negative goal wonā€™t be coming back in anytime soon.