2022 Draft Thread

[Scoop]

People don't want to believe that Geelong are the best in the business but they are.

We aren't far behind them if we stay on this source for the next five years.

But ten years of success with 2 flags and missing the finals once is exceptional. And they've had the same strategy. The underplayed part of this is the surf coast becomes an attractive option for players to move. Where Jez Cameron is, Freshwater Creek, it's. 20 minutes outside of Torquay which has just about everything you need day to day. It's the perfect landing spot for families. If you've made most of your cash already, you can take a bit less and live the lifestyle.

They've taken advantage of everything they have in the region.

 

[FitenFitenWin]

I'd take Bowes and pick 7 in a heartbeat. We so rarely get access to a top 10 pick - in particular, in a way that doesn't involve trading out major assets. I reckon we can get it done in a way that gets us Taranto and Hopper - judging by some of the scenarios outlined. But if we can't - I'm still of a preference for one of Taranto and Hopper and keeping this or next year's first round pick. A couple of the scenarios in that outcome would be to get Taranto and picks 7 and 12 this year or Taranto, pick 7 this year and next year's first. Hooley dooley - that's a huge win.
I'm not fussed with the Bowes contract - we'd renegotiate that so that our payments scheduled to him would suite our list needs. Taking into consideration the retirements of Cotch, Jack, Edwards, Caddy, Lambert and probably Tarrant, Aarts and some lesser lights over the next two years - they'll be plenty left for the likes of Bolton, Balta and the rest.

 

[bullus_hit]

What are you talking about?

We had space for Logue, didn't we? Is it not possible to use that cap space for Bowes?

 

[bullus_hit]

Who is the player? Who do GWS want. Will the player go there. Do we have the salary cap space. Logue chose North because we weren’t offering him much.

Soldo as a starting point.

 

[spook]

We had space for Logue, didn't we? Is it not possible to use that cap space for Bowes?

Yes, if you extended Bowes' contract a couple of years to smooth it out (we supposedly offered Logue 450) but what does that have to do with Hopper and Taranto? To get Bowes and pick 7, pick 19 would have to be involved and that leaves us with little to get Taranto and Hopper. If we don't get them our window closes and Shai considers his options. If we did still get them it'd take at least pick 12 and next year's first - and if we did the Bowes deal first GWS would be after pick 7.

Let's say we somehow manage all that. Where does Bowes play? No room in the midfield with Hopper and Taranto coming in, and Ross and Sonsie needing games. He's been HBF the last couple of years but wouldn't get a game there for us - he can't get one there for the Suns and they're crying out for a HBF in the absence of Weller and Powell. Yet still they preferred Markov. So you'd have Bowes on your list either for two years on stupid money or four years, in both scenarios likely playing a fair bit of reserves.

The only way this works is if Port gets end of first round compo for Amon, Graham decides to go to Port and we get that pick. Bowes could maybe play Graham's (Lambert's) role. He'd be competing with Ross and Sonsie.

So, it'd be Graham to Port for an end of first-rounder (best we could possibly get for him). Then the Norf pick 19 (20-22 by the time it's used) for Bowes and 7. 12 for Taranto. Next year's first for Hopper (we'd have to do these first or pick 7 would have to be involved). Leaving us with a bulging cap, pick 7or 12, and an end of first-round pick. No first-rounder next year. This is all blue-sky, best-case scenario, and assuming GWS doesn't dig in and make us pay more than one pick for TT and JH.

We're committed to TT and JH. Have to get those done. That's the first priority. The Bowes thing has just come up. Geelong can gazump us with trade value by a spot, and can probably offer him a better contract deal. And with so many imminent retirements, a better chance of claiming a senior berth.

I'd love to have pick 7, though.

 

[spook]

Even if we managed all that, there's fair potential for resentment and disharmony as other have pointed out. It doesn't even have to be based on truth - it would be pretty easy for our players to assume their beloved future captain was forced out to accommodate this Suns reserves spud on mucho moola.

 

[daniel30]

Taking on Bowes & grabbing pick 7 (to go with pick 12) is such a low ball risk I can't believe there's so much resistance. Even if you don't rate the draftees you could probably pay for Taranto and keep your existing picks intact.

I get you Bully , but I think the salary is the issue for me unless we move on some experience players.

 

[Tortured Tiger]

Soldo as a starting point.

He was put up as a possibility by one journalist, I haven't seen a report that has said he wanted to go anywhere else, let alone GWS.

 

[thomas the tiger]

I did hear Gold Coast were expecting a pick back as well. Eg pick 7 And Bowes for pick 19

That would limit us with Taranto and hopper and keeping pick 7.

 

[DavidSSS]

Geelong method has been right up there as the best performed overall ( can't believe I just wrote that ).
20 years of virtually constant finals 4 Premierships.
They've got home grown players, they've got trade ins, they've got bugger all early draft picks, they've got a side full of nursing home pensioners. Yet year after year they finish in the top few teams n year after year they hammer on the premiership door.

There's five other clubs besides the Moggies since 2000 had a multi flag winning effort. Brisvegas, Sydaknee, Wet Coke, Hawforn, Tigers. None of these clubs has performed so consistently well, some have been bloody ordinary at various times during this period.

Now I need to take a hot shower, gargle pine o clean n scrub myself with disinfectant.

Just shows there are many ways to succeed. I suspect it is less the strategy you follow than how well you implement the strategy.

DS

 

[Leysy Days]

Geelong are frontrunners for Bowes, they clearly see the benefits that I'm outlining. Whoever gets pick 7 will be beautifully placed & I will be watching these developments with added interest now that the PRE crowd have made their collective feelings known.

I mentioned Grundy because most people here dismissed him due to age, the same people are now hailing Geelong's approach as the holy grail, which is it?

Until the Geelong interest comes from the clubs Leysy would hold fire on Geelong being keen. It's purely Sam Edmunds so far who gets plenty wrong.

Grundy is simply a poor fit for us for a number of reasons. Age only a small factor why Leysy isn't keen.

 

[DavidSSS]

Geelong are frontrunners for Bowes, they clearly see the benefits that I'm outlining. Whoever gets pick 7 will be beautifully placed & I will be watching these developments with added interest now that the PRE crowd have made their collective feelings known.

I mentioned Grundy because most people here dismissed him due to age, the same people are now hailing Geelong's approach as the holy grail, which is it?

Geelong's response, or at least their rumoured response, would be in the context of their list, possible retirements and their salary cap. Yes, we are losing a couple of players who would have been on good money, and Geelong are likely to be in the same situation. Also, both clubs are paying some decorated veterans lower money. But Geelong are not trying to bring in 2 well credentialed players in Tarranto and Hopper, we are. That has an impact on our ability to carry a player who's salary is high but they are not likely to be in our best 22. Plus there are the ramifications of maybe trading out another player as mentioned above.

This all has to be seen in the context of everything else which is going on. If we were only taking 1 of Hopper and Tarranto, or if we weren't bringing in players from other clubs who will get a good salary, then the Bowes and Pick 7 deal would be looked at very differently.

DS

 

[Cooper O'Reilly]

I'd take Bowes and pick 7 in a heartbeat. We so rarely get access to a top 10 pick - in particular, in a way that doesn't involve trading out major assets. I reckon we can get it done in a way that gets us Taranto and Hopper - judging by some of the scenarios outlined. But if we can't - I'm still of a preference for one of Taranto and Hopper and keeping this or next year's first round pick. A couple of the scenarios in that outcome would be to get Taranto and picks 7 and 12 this year or Taranto, pick 7 this year and next year's first. Hooley dooley - that's a huge win.
I'm not fussed with the Bowes contract - we'd renegotiate that so that our payments scheduled to him would suite our list needs. Taking into consideration the retirements of Cotch, Jack, Edwards, Caddy, Lambert and probably Tarrant, Aarts and some lesser lights over the next two years - they'll be plenty left for the likes of Bolton, Balta and the rest.

We’ve committed to both Taranto and Hopper and we will honour that commitment. It’s who we are, and to do anything else would make it harder to convince players to commit to us in the future.

Whatever else we do during the trade and draft period we will get Taranto and Hopper

 

[bullus_hit]

We’ve committed to both Taranto and Hopper and we will honour that commitment. It’s who we are, and to do anything else would make it harder to convince players to commit to us in the future.

Whatever else we do during the trade and draft period we will get Taranto and Hopper

You could equally say that getting Bowes makes those trades a truckload easier, GWS not satisfied with our opening gambit by the sounds of things. Bobby Hill done, Bruhn still quite some negotiating to be done.

 

[Cooper O'Reilly]

You could equally say that getting Bowes makes those trades a truckload easier, GWS not satisfied with our opening gambit by the sounds of things. Bobby Hill done, Bruhn still quite some negotiating to be done.

As I said Bully, we’ve committed to them and will get them. How that gets done is open to conjecture at this point.

I do agree with an earlier poster that any deal for Bowes would have to be done after these deals otherwise GWS will demand pick 7. Pick 7 plus paying Bowes salary is just too high a price I think

 

[eZyT]

Taking on Bowes & grabbing pick 7 (to go with pick 12) is such a low ball risk I can't believe there's so much resistance. Even if you don't rate the draftees you could probably pay for Taranto and keep your existing picks intact.

For a second i thought 'yeah, pay for Hopper with the bowes pick 7 - theres an idea'

But if hopper is on $650k and bowes is playing 2nds for $650

Then hopper is effectively on $2.6m for 2 years isnt he???

That does not stack up.

Dont get me wrong, bowes can play a certain way. I just dont reckon its ours. He could be a starting mid at geelong. Prob not, but he could.

GC are world leaders at dispensing good players

 

[bullus_hit]

For a second i thought 'yeah, pay for Hopper with the bowes pick 7 - theres an idea'

But if hopper is on $650k and bowes is playing 2nds for $650

Then hopper is effectively on $2.6m for 2 years isnt he???

That does not stack up.

Dont get me wrong, bowes can play a certain way. I just dont reckon its ours. He could be a starting mid at geelong. Prob not, but he could.

GC are world leaders at dispensing good players

How about framing it in these terms - we missed Logue on 450k a year, we can now use that fat to get Bowes and stretch the deal out to resemble the Logue offer. The latest news indicates he's owed 550k a year for the next couple, make it a 3 year contract and pay him 450k, Bowes then gets a bit more security & the opportunity to resurrect a flailing career.

As I said Bully, we’ve committed to them and will get them. How that gets done is open to conjecture at this point.

I do agree with an earlier poster that any deal for Bowes would have to be done after these deals otherwise GWS will demand pick 7. Pick 7 plus paying Bowes salary is just too high a price I think

That I agree with, can't give them a sniff otherwise they will be on our case.

 

[TigerMasochist]

Having witnessed the RFC go from cellar dweller to powerhouse I don't feel any need or inclination to copy Geelong or any other team for that matter, the steps for sustained dominance have already been put on display. You don't go & change your formula because a team won a flag after a decade trying.

Considering we didn't make finals last yearn barely fell into the eight this year. I wouldn't be calling that sustained dominance. We had a massive four year burst with some mediocrity before n after that burst. All possible recruitment options should be on the cards every single year n then decisions need to be made as to what best suits those needs going forward.

Last year we grabbed a bunch of kids with early picks, this year we look to be bolstering a mid field that's ageing and struggling with a couple of peaking quality mids. Next year ??? Who knows at this point in time.

 

[eZyT]

How about framing it in these terms - we missed Logue on 450k a year, we can now use that fat to get Bowes and stretch the deal out to resemble the Logue offer. The latest news indicates he's owed 550k a year for the next couple, make it a 3 year contract and pay him 450k, Bowes then gets a bit more security & the opportunity to resurrect a flailing career.

Its good creative thinking,

And ive seen Bowes live play several dynamic centre clearance games .........

In the VFL.

Im not writing him off; being out of favour at GC can be unrelated to ability. He can play.

And in time, trading cap space will become normal.

But for now, for me,

Its an emphatic NO

But yes, he could easily be another berry/ah chee/brodie.

As an aside, GC delisted 4 blokes this year who had approximately 10 years at the club between them,

For zero (0) games.

 

[tigersnake]

How about framing it in these terms - we missed Logue on 450k a year, we can now use that fat to get Bowes and stretch the deal out to resemble the Logue offer. The latest news indicates he's owed 550k a year for the next couple, make it a 3 year contract and pay him 450k, Bowes then gets a bit more security & the opportunity to resurrect a flailing career.

The issue for me is cap space, there are other issues but thats the main one. Yes he might come good, probably won't but might. And even if he does come good, he won't be that good. Half a mill-odd for 2 or 3 years=odd is significant and could easily be the difference between retaining a good player, maybe 2, and not.