Man I/we should copyright my threads. They could at least recognise WOOF.
Printable View
On topic it's too simplistic to say you should never trade future picks. In fact the perceived value of draft picks far outweighs the value of players once selected.
Look at some of the recent high picks, Tom Boyd was unanimous pick #1, now you have "experts" saying you wouldn't trade a valuable first round pick for him. When Melbourne gave up pick 2 for pick 9 and Dom Tyson they were criticized for giving up a certain superstar in pick 2 for pick 9 and some no name dud, ignoring completely that Tyson was the guaranteed superstar you wouldn't lose by giving up pick 3 only 3 years earlier. Aish was supposed to be the player you'd give up a gun for to get an early enough pick snare him, then 2 years later isn't worth 2 second round picks.
Using our club, we could've traded our future first round pick every year from 2005 to 2008 and been in no danger of missing out on a good player in doing so. Draft picks are only as valuable as the selection you make with them, and often that selection doesn't work out.
Good thread, and it poses a question that in my view won't be answered for a few years, and then not answered again for another few.
Teams which make bold decision like the Pies did need to be prepared to offer up something reasonable in the forward year for trade to find themselves in the late first round or early second round if they want to keep their lists improving. I guess that means just like any recruiting strategy, giving away forward picks needs to be viewed as part of a long term recruitment strategy. Due to their age Aish and Treloar weren't going to pay immediate dividends and just like us, having them develop with other young players developing is the real pay off.
I always think predictions on form, aside from a few clearly pox teams, this early in the season are irrelevant. Collingwood in bad form attracts the same level of hyperbole as Collingwood in good form and after four rounds this is no different.
I'm not addressing the OP strictly, but on Collingwood, they are on track to have now given up picks 5 & 23 this year (7 & 26 last year for Treloar & Aish). Treloar now looks to have cost picks 5 & 7. I think that makes this trade the most expensive from a pick/player perspective behind only The Judd Deal.
That's a really huge impediment and hit for them being able to rebuild effectively. GWS get another top 5 picks from Collingwood, plus probably a first rounder for McCarthy, plus their natural first rounder and any other decent trades. That's up to another 4 first rounders for GWS this year.
That's turned into a silly price to pay for Trealor. I rate Trealor but not two first round picks worth. That's Judd at his peak price.
Yep, taking the names out, Carlton gave up pick 4 (of one year) followed by pick 3 (later year) and pick 20. Treloar costs picks 5 & 7. I think Judd at his peak is worth more than the pick 20 which separates the two trades. Arguably, both could have or did stunt the clubs rebuild. A part from that, handing GWS two top 7 picks isn't doing the rest of us any favours.
Treloar is an absolute jet but A grade mids can be found outside the top 10 generally - look at Sydney's group for example (Parker, JK, Hannebery all guns and no where near the top 10 in their draft years). Giving away 2 of them is a huge cost in terms of opportunity. What else could they have returned with those picks. Perhaps 2 players of Treloar's quality. Perhaps they turn it into a key forward they're crying out for?
Obviously they'll get great service from Treloar but for his type of player, the cost will end up too great.
Dangerfield - Picks 9, 28 & Dean Gore
Treloar - Picks 5 & 7
If Tom Boyd is irresponsible trading because of the salary component, the Adam Treloar trade is irresponsible for giving up more than the Dangerfield trade and just less than the Judd trade. So let's see Barrett line up Collingwood, Eddie & Treloar.
Collingwood are locked in their final ladder spot, virtually now. So this is the cost:
Treloar: Pick 7 2015, Pick 7 2016
Aish: Pick 26 2015, Pick 28 2016
It's somewhat more about perceived value for Collingwood because they knew what the potential downside was for them when they made the deals.
I think Brisbane have come up short (again) on this deal for Aish and of course GWS have come up trumps (again) on the Treloar deal.
The GWS strategy of drafting so many youngsters in their early years will continue to generously fund them going forward if clubs are prepared to use their credit card to acquire their talent.
I'd still be very cautious about trading future picks for players.