Tweet
I don't think it's a bad result for us. Both GWS and Melbourne have different needs than us. With Green going to GWS and with their haul from previous years, they don't need any other midfield bulls. Melbourne also don't need inside mids. Therefore, Jackson will go to either Melbourne or GWS. Young going to the other. We then have the pick of the midfielders.
-
-
Its a bad result for us because it guarantees GWS will match a bid from us on Green at pick 5 (they'll have already got the player they want before Green, assuming its not whoever Melbourne want!).
How's about we do a conditional pick swap with Melbourne, that goes like this: We swap our 5 (and something else) for their 3. Which we use to bid on Green. If GWS match (which kills their pick 4), then we then reverse the picks and Melbourne get pick 4, which is effectively pick 3 as they haven't lost a free pick. If GWS don't match, Melbourne get pick 5, after GWS. It's a risk for Melbourne, but may be worth it, depending on who they have their eye on?Comment
-
To be honest the prospect fills me with horror. It's not that I particularly want the Giants to do well, and if MFC do bid on Green the outcome will be fine for us (especially if the Giants choose not to match), but it's just the horror that comes with witnessing a car crash. From the moment GWS traded with port for pick 6 I have had a sense of foreboding about this for them. I knew they would have to trade up again and pay dearly to do it. They are really paying through the nose to execute their strategy. To shell out so much without even being assured of the result is excruciating. I pity the GWS fan.All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated, and well supported in logic and argument than others. -Douglas Adams, author (11 Mar 1952-2001)
Comment
-
I like it. I wonder if the AFL would sign off? Would require us committing to using the pick on Green and I suspect that would probably amount to draft tampering. Also, I am feeling less desperate to get Green given that we may well be able t get another mid the quality of Rowbottom with one of our picks 25 or 32 (or by trading for a higher second pick).All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated, and well supported in logic and argument than others. -Douglas Adams, author (11 Mar 1952-2001)Comment
-
If we bid on Green at 5 it would force GWS to burn pick 6 to match. I was not convinced they'd do that. This way its just GWS who'll pick a player before us rather than the Crows. Our draft position hasn't improved. Although you may be right that GWS will not go for a midfielder... but most on our wishlist aren't pure mids anyway.
There is still a lot of water to go under the drafting bridge until our turn comes around next Wednesday night.Comment
-
Many draft commentators have Green rated right up there with Anderson and Rowell. Certainly with Anderson. To say he is "not a pick 3" doesn't reflect what many draft commentators say.
If we had pick 3 through natural causes and Green were on the open market, he would be the obvious selection for us. A very highly rated, pure inside midfielder. He fills an obvious need, and the Swans have visited his home and came away impressed by him and his family.
I do agree that, given our actual draft position, trading purely for the purposes of thwarting GWS is daft. GWS would almost certainly match a bid at 3 - and maybe we will find out for sure if Melbourne does bid on Green. So we wouldn't land up with him regardless and it would cost a lot. The only value in doing so would be if the Swans are hot on the player that they believe GWS are interested in apart from Green. And especially if they thought Adelaide weren't interested in that player. That is the downside to the Swans of this draft move, but there are lots of ifs, buts and maybes to which we don't know the answers.
We didn't miss a move at all. The trade was always going to be significantly more valuable to GWS with Adelaide than with us. They are still not guaranteed it would work, given the Dees still loom at pick 3. But if they'd swapped with Sydney instead of Adelaide, the chance of Adelaide bidding on Green would remain.
It takes two parties to be willing to trade with each other, and our position wasn't as strong as Adelaide's.Comment
-
Champion Data rate him at 2 above Anderson.
"CHAMPION DATA SAYS: Green is the best contested ball winning junior ever recorded by Champion Data."Comment
-
I find it interesting just how all in, GWS are going in this draft. Firstly, they lose a lot of points with the pick swap. If they manage to win the premiership next year, then their pick 18 is worth 985 points. Alternatively, if things don't quite go to plan and they finish bottom of the eight, then their pick 11 is worth 1329 points. Both a big loss on the 283 points that they gain, from swapping this year's 6 to 4.
Also, if Green attracts an early bid, then they don't have the points to cover it, without going into debt. For instance, if we bid at 5, then with the 20% discount, they need to find 1502 points. Their picks 40, 59 & 60, tally up to 733 points. Which I assume means that they would owe 769 points next year. That could easily eat up their second and third round picks. Given that they've already traded that year's first and fourth round picks, that leaves them with the third round pick that they picked up from North.
Of course, if they win a premiership in the next couple of seasons, then they'll probably be hailed as geniuses. On the other hand, a few unforeseen injuries and retirements, and no premierships, then this year's tactics may come back to haunt them.Comment
-
We had to do the same with Mills as GWS are with Green
There are so many layers to the importance of Green going to GwS"be tough, only when it gets tough"
Comment
-
Not really. The Giants always had priority access to Green and ample draft currency to acquire him. The trading they have been doing has nothing to do with securing Green and everything to do with acquiring another top 5 player in addition to Green. The Swans traded down their first round pick in 2015 relatively early in trade week, gaining a few more points in the process. They never flirted with what the Giants are trying to do.
The Giants' tactics are only made possible by the extra teens pick they already had as a result of trading out Shiel last year. Without that, they wouldn't have had the currency to try and do what they have done. Whether the cost is worth the benefit is another matter. They must really like someone else in the top 5 this year. If we were talking about this a year ago, where the entire top 10 looked very strong, and a top five pick could have picked up a Rozee or Rankine or a King, it would have made a lot of sense. I'm not convinced that this year's top ten is anything like as exciting, outside of Rowell maybe. And Green.Comment
Comment