Operation Get Tom Boyd - Done and dusted

[bornadog]

If we had pick 1` would you swap it for Boyd, Cooney and a pick in the 20's?

Plus Cooney doesn't come into any trade scenarios what so ever as he is a FA, if he wants to be anywhere but here(and that's an if) then he's going to walk to a club in a premiership window.

This ^^^

[Dancin' Douggy]

This little snippet has gone unnoticed....... from an article about Carlton's need to trade.
Blues need chopping block. By Jake Niall June 30. The Age

The Bulldogs met with the Giants recently and signalled strong interest in purchasing the rights to Boyd via the No.1 pick.
A Dogs-Giants deal wouldn't be difficult, because it would involve no more than the Dogs swapping from pick No.3 or 4 to pick No.1 (again, we assume the Demons aren't 18th).
The Dogs wouldn't need to part with as much, because pick three is worth far more than Carlton's eventual pick.


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-new...#ixzz2XkofJfSr

[Dancin' Douggy]

Ooops. I see it hasn't gone unnoticed. Anyway, interesting reading.

[bornadog]

This little snippet has gone unnoticed....... from an article about Carlton's need to trade.
Blues need chopping block. By Jake Niall June 30. The Age

The Bulldogs met with the Giants recently and signalled strong interest in purchasing the rights to Boyd via the No.1 pick.
A Dogs-Giants deal wouldn't be difficult, because it would involve no more than the Dogs swapping from pick No.3 or 4 to pick No.1 (again, we assume the Demons aren't 18th).
The Dogs wouldn't need to part with as much, because pick three is worth far more than Carlton's eventual pick.

The Giants wouldn't want just a straight swap, they are looking for quality ready made players. Who would they want from us -and they won't be getting Griffen.?

Higgins?, would they entertain pick three for pick one plus Higgins?

[LostDoggy]

Swap picks one and three and we throw in smith or wallis or both

[LostDoggy]

Swap picks one and three and we throw in smith or wallis or both

Problem is both those players fit into GWSs' category of inexperienced players...and noether are considered guns.

[LostDoggy]

Problem is both those players fit into GWSs' category of inexperienced players...and noether are considered guns.

Agreed but we wont part with Minson or Griffen so probably only our Boyd would be the only player they would want

[Greystache]

Problem is both those players fit into GWSs' category of inexperienced players...and noether are considered guns.

And neither have pace or good skills which is what GWS desperately need.

As the article says, if they don't want Boyd and we guarantee we will take him then they're not much worse off getting pick 3 than they are pick 1. We shouldn't sell the farm unless another club looks like usurping us to get Boyd. The chances are if we have pick 3 (behind GWS and Melbourne) then he'll be available at our selection anyway.

[Greystache]

Agreed but we wont part with Minson or Griffen so probably only our Boyd would be the only player they would want

Griffen is worth pick 1 on his own.

Him plus pick #3 in exchange for pick #1 is way way over the odds.

[bulldogtragic]

And neither have pace or good skills which is what GWS desperately need.

As the article says, if they don't want Boyd and we guarantee we will take him then they're not much worse off getting pick 3 than they are pick 1. We shouldn't sell the farm unless another club looks like usurping us to get Boyd. The chances are if we have pick 3 (behind GWS and Melbourne) then he'll be available at our selection anyway.

If that's the case, then a mid range player like Higgins or Smith should be enough for the upgrade.

[bornadog]

The chances are if we have pick 3 (behind GWS and Melbourne) then he'll be available at our selection anyway.

I think you have a good point here, both clubs don't need another big man. However, if Boyd is that good, why wouldn't you take him at pick 1 or 2.

To me its all a risk, and I wouldn't be paying over the odds for another tall that may be good at juniors but fails at senior football. We have had plenty of those.

[Greystache]

If that's the case, then a mid range player like Higgins or Smith should be enough for the upgrade.

The mid range player has to hold some value to them otherwise it adds nothing to the deal. Higgins is hardly ever on the park, and when he is he's inconsistent. I don't see the value from GWS' perspective.

Smith is more of what they have, sure he's better than the likes of Reid who gets some games, but if they're going to trade it would be for something mid range that fills a gap. JJ would appeal to them, but given our lists are similar we wouldn't let him go.

[Cyberdoggie]

I think you have a good point here, both clubs don't need another big man. However, if Boyd is that good, why wouldn't you take him at pick 1 or 2.

To me its all a risk, and I wouldn't be paying over the odds for another tall that may be good at juniors but fails at senior football. We have had plenty of those.

So I guess the key is that we finish lower than the saints? as I'm sure they would want a key forward to replace Kosi and Riewoldt.

After investing in Dawes, Clarke and Hogan, Melbourne won't go for a key forward, they need midfield clearance ability, someone like.......Olly Wines

If the Giants get Franklin they won't won't Boyd either. Franklin, Patton, Cameron and others there already.

Hopefully we don't have to do any deals, just have to make sure the saints finish higher than us.

[bulldogtragic]

The mid range player has to hold some value to them otherwise it adds nothing to the deal. Higgins is hardly ever on the park, and when he is he's inconsistent. I don't see the value from GWS' perspective.

Smith is more of what they have, sure he's better than the likes of Reid who gets some games, but if they're going to trade it would be for something mid range that fills a gap. JJ would appeal to them, but given our lists are similar we wouldn't let him go.

But if they don't want Boyd, then they are passing up a free player. Higgo or Smith for free isn't all that bad.

Outside the square, if they want Boyd and a pick 3 midfielder, subject to medical, Patton would be a great get with our first pick.

[Greystache]

I think you have a good point here, both clubs don't need another big man. However, if Boyd is that good, why wouldn't you take him at pick 1 or 2.

To me its all a risk, and I wouldn't be paying over the odds for another tall that may be good at juniors but fails at senior football. We have had plenty of those.

But if another club decided to do whatever it takes to get him then that situation changes. We need to make sure we read the play extremely well if we take that approach.

The best available approach regardless of list structure is a bad approach. All selections have a gamble element and to say that X player is definitely so much better than Y that even though we have an abundance of X and desperately need Y we can't possibly overlook X. It's just clubs taking the easy/short term view and recruiters drinking their own bath water thinking they have recruiting down to a science.

Every draft pick has some element of gamble. at least Boyd has dominated at underage level, that's not something that can be said of any of our other early draft pick talls, regardless of how early we selected them (eg Walsh at #4 and Grant at #5).