-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
What would we give up to get #1 or #2 draft pick?
- Thread starter johnson2richo2003
- Start date
we have no players that are dispensible that have any value,
throwing a group of average hacks together (hall, tiva, chaffey etc) with some average players like Roden, Hartigan will only give you similar type rejects from other clubs - some might suit other teams better but you never really increase in talent
the only wy to get ahead is trade marguee players for low draft picks - we dont have many of these that we would think of trading,
we wouldnt trade Richo, Lids, Tambling, Bowden - thses are the only guys that would give us much
the others like cogs, petts, tuck are not worth enough to give up
that leaves us with using what draft picks we get to get the best available player
throwing a group of average hacks together (hall, tiva, chaffey etc) with some average players like Roden, Hartigan will only give you similar type rejects from other clubs - some might suit other teams better but you never really increase in talent
the only wy to get ahead is trade marguee players for low draft picks - we dont have many of these that we would think of trading,
we wouldnt trade Richo, Lids, Tambling, Bowden - thses are the only guys that would give us much
the others like cogs, petts, tuck are not worth enough to give up
that leaves us with using what draft picks we get to get the best available player
Tango said:
In the end you'll probably be proven correct (if only because I doubt that we'll bother to offer a deal made up of those second rung of players attractive enough). That said, if someone was crazy enough to offer us a top ten pick for Richardson at this stage of his career - I'd take it in a heartbeat!!! (and I'm sure I'm not the only one that would).
Let's get back to the Esserden rumour. They put it about for a reason. Esserden will trade down their first round selection for a couple of reasons.
This is my take:
The very best player available in 2006 may not go at #1. He may go a lot lower that #3. It's a draft with a dozen or more boys eligible for #3 status but no clear #1. Bryce Gibbs is a dood type but I, for one think a player like Proud may belt him next year. Gumbleton is a basketballer and Hansen is a backman. Riewoldt may be better than then all. Leuenberger is a ruckboy- all clubs are wary.
Trading down selection #1 could be a very wise move.
Adrian Dadoro, as I have posted and I believe proven, is the worst recruiting manager in recent history. He is a proven leper. The Esserden panel has reached the same conclusion as I have (see above) and has decided to take the pressure off by trading down. If they take Gibbs at #1 they may rue it but if they take say, Akermanis and J.Selwood they will profit.
Think about it.
It's a draft full of first round selections. My summation (above) is mainstream IMO. It's what the panels are thinking.
If Esserden's duds are trumping it, it's either obvious or wrong. I think the former.
This is my take:
The very best player available in 2006 may not go at #1. He may go a lot lower that #3. It's a draft with a dozen or more boys eligible for #3 status but no clear #1. Bryce Gibbs is a dood type but I, for one think a player like Proud may belt him next year. Gumbleton is a basketballer and Hansen is a backman. Riewoldt may be better than then all. Leuenberger is a ruckboy- all clubs are wary.
Trading down selection #1 could be a very wise move.
Adrian Dadoro, as I have posted and I believe proven, is the worst recruiting manager in recent history. He is a proven leper. The Esserden panel has reached the same conclusion as I have (see above) and has decided to take the pressure off by trading down. If they take Gibbs at #1 they may rue it but if they take say, Akermanis and J.Selwood they will profit.
Think about it. It's a draft full of first round selections. My summation (above) is mainstream IMO. It's what the panels are thinking.
If Esserden's duds are trumping it, it's either obvious or wrong. I think the former.
Dyere, you have a point with the bummers, but i dont think that Aker would be in the equation, he is in the twighlight of his career and will soon become a flashy hfwd flanker or pocket fwd (dangerous yes) but hardly what the bombers need
bombers need a hard running mid with pace and a tall
i do think that they may offer the #1 pick, but maybe to adelaide or port to see the homegrown boy (gibbs) go home for a couple of solid vics that want to come back,
Port you have Salopeck and throw in a tall (Brogan) plus Ports first pick (9 - 3) for #1
or Adelaide you have Knights, Bode, Mattner (the list is endless) & a tall plus pick (16) for #1
bombers need a hard running mid with pace and a tall
i do think that they may offer the #1 pick, but maybe to adelaide or port to see the homegrown boy (gibbs) go home for a couple of solid vics that want to come back,
Port you have Salopeck and throw in a tall (Brogan) plus Ports first pick (9 - 3) for #1
or Adelaide you have Knights, Bode, Mattner (the list is endless) & a tall plus pick (16) for #1