Why we should never, ever trade away future draft picks...

[boydogs]

Double post

[FrediKanoute]

I think that you trade the future with caution, especially where the future value is very uncertain. That's not to say you don't do it. If the Dogs were on the cusp of a GF and were a Barry Hall - trading the 2008 pick in 2007 to get Barry which wins you a flag in 08 and 09 is exactly what you should be doing - yes you are stuffed going forward, if the time is now you do it.

The Pies big issue is that they have completely misread their list - top up players aren't going to get them to the big dance any time soon.

[Sedat]

Great thread. It is critical for clubs to know exactly where they are at in their development cycle, otherwise the trading of future picks can be a disaster waiting to happen.

With those players in their mid to late 20's who are 'name' players, I'd much prefer to go the free agency route to ensure future talent is still coming through to the club. Charlie Dixon is a classic case of over-paying for a player in this age bracket who has never shown consistency deserving of the eventual draft pick investment - it also shows Port having an inflated opinion of their list. Dixon reminds me of Jade Rawlings in terms of the outlay needed to secure the services of a player who has done very little in the position they were secured for.

Treloar is a slightly different case in that his talent level and age profile would justify the investment of future picks, but only if the club knows where they are at in their development cycle. Clearly Collingwood think they are contending for top 4 (and top 8 at the very least) this year, which would justify the cost outlay to secure Treloar's services. That value proposition diminishes rapidly if they finish 13th-16th.

[Sedat]

Double post

[soupman]

The Pies big issue is that they have completely misread their list - top up players aren't going to get them to the big dance any time soon.

Tbf Treloar and Aish are as much long term investments as they are players for now. It isn't like Collingwood loaded up on 30 year olds North style.

[1eyedog]

Great thread. It is critical for clubs to know exactly where they are at in their development cycle, otherwise the trading of future picks can be a disaster waiting to happen.

With those players in their mid to late 20's who are 'name' players, I'd much prefer to go the free agency route to ensure future talent is still coming through to the club. Charlie Dixon is a classic case of over-paying for a player in this age bracket who has never shown consistency deserving of the eventual draft pick investment - it also shows Port having an inflated opinion of their list. Dixon reminds me of Jade Rawlings in terms of the outlay needed to secure the services of a player who has done very little in the position they were secured for.

Treloar is a slightly different case in that his talent level and age profile would justify the investment of future picks, but only if the club knows where they are at in their development cycle. Clearly Collingwood think they are contending for top 4 (and top 8 at the very least) this year, which would justify the cost outlay to secure Treloar's services. That value proposition diminishes rapidly if they finish 13th-16th.

I'm not sure Collingwood believe they are top 4. I think Bucks is a realist and knows he needs to get them to the finals but he also realises they have a young list and need to plan for life post Swan (32) and Pendlebury (28). Collingwood believe that Treloar will be an out and out gun and paid overs to get him, plenty of teams do that. Aish could be anything as well and was expected to go around 4-6 in the draft. If I was a Collingwood supporter I wouldn't be unhappy getting Treloar and Aish for what they gave up, at least they've got two players who are young, gifted and will come through the system at an age profile inline with a large percentage of their list. There are plenty of misses in the 20s as well.

[chef]

I'm not sure Collingwood believe they are top 4. I think Bucks is a realist and knows he needs to get them to the finals but he also realises they have a young list and need to plan for life post Swan (32) and Pendlebury (28). Collingwood believe that Treloar will be an out and out gun and paid overs to get him, plenty of teams do that. Aish could be anything as well and was expected to go around 4-6 in the draft. If I was a Collingwood supporter I wouldn't be unhappy getting Treloar and Aish for what they gave up, at least they've got two players who are young, gifted and will come through the system at an age profile inline with a large percentage of their list. There are plenty of misses in the 20s as well.

Pert was saying a March that they believe they are are top 4 side and expect to snag a flag over the next 3 seasons.

[Happy Days]

Question - is there any protection that can be placed on the traded future picks? Eg, saying that you'll trade a "future pick" without a specified year, but rather your next first round pick that falls outside of the top 10?

[bulldogtragic]

Question - is there any protection that can be placed on the traded future picks? Eg, saying that you'll trade a "future pick" without a specified year, but rather your next first round pick that falls outside of the top 10?

I'm pretty sure at this stage it's only the following years draft picks.

[1eyedog]

Pert was saying a March that they believe they are are top 4 side and expect to snag a flag over the next 3 seasons.

Not the first time a senior football manager / CEO / President has gone off at the mouth prior to the commencement of the season. If they believe that they're delusional. If they believe that Treloar and Aish will be the difference between finals / no finals they are insane. I think they could be top 4 in 3 years but with the exception of Moore they're lacking in the big man department.

They'll also need Scharenberg and Reid to stay on the park.

[Twodogs]

Collingwood have to say the occasional stupid thing or make the odd outrageous statement because their supporters demand it. I have no doubt that Pert was just preaching to the masses, he knows that hey aren't in contention for at least a couple of years but their supporter base don't want to hear it. Whether it's the right thing to be giving people false hope is open to question but it's only Collingwood supporters. If they knew anything about football then they wouldn't be barracking for Collingwood...

[Sedat]

Collingwood have to say the occasional stupid thing or make the odd outrageous statement because their supporters demand it. I have no doubt that Pert was just preaching to the masses, he knows that hey aren't in contention for at least a couple of years but their supporter base don't want to hear it. Whether it's the right thing to be giving people false hope is open to question but it's only Collingwood supporters. If they knew anything about football then they wouldn't be barracking for Collingwood...

I reckon they genuinely thought they were in with a shot at top 4 this year - they have spent the last couple of years shedding the older players and stockpiling young talent and made fast starts in both 2014 and 2015 before falling in a hole. Those years were their '1 step back' years and 2016 was going to be their '2 steps forward' year. Where they've come unstuck is that they overrated players who performed well in a small sample size (eg: Crisp in 2015, Greenwood for Norf in 2014), they overrated the talent of the youth on their list (eg: De Goey, Oxley, Maynard but they've all still got time to come good), they missed some howlers at the top end of the draft (Scharenberg, Freeman) and they've overrated the capacity of older players to rediscover lost form (Cloke).

They also haven't planned for the rule changes, and are painfully light on for leg speed and kicking skills (Freeman would have helped here but was always injured and is now at St Kilda). The lower rotations have hurt them - this was a great strength of theirs previously with the likes of Swan who could run redline in short bursts. All adds up to their current predicament, where they still use a 30yo Pendles to fill every hole on the ground - he's a gun but he isn't going to get better or quicker.

Oh, and Bucks may well not be able to coach. Wasn't a mistake to move Malthouse on, but to replace him with someone unproven and without adequate experience at multiple clubs or coaching his own side was a big error of judgement.

[1eyedog]

Collingwood have to say the occasional stupid thing or make the odd outrageous statement because their supporters demand it. I have no doubt that Pert was just preaching to the masses, he knows that hey aren't in contention for at least a couple of years but their supporter base don't want to hear it. Whether it's the right thing to be giving people false hope is open to question but it's only Collingwood supporters. If they knew anything about football then they wouldn't be barracking for Collingwood...

Smorgo did the same thing a few years back.

[always right]

Gordon posed the question at the bulldogs family day this year......"Is this the best bulldogs list ever?"

Presidents talk the club up.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

looks like the afl journo's are making use of forums for their work again

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-04-1...or-giant-draft