Agreed, but I think the point others are trying to make is.

1. The difference between 17 and 21 in a shallow draft is negligible.

2. The plan may be to trade both of these picks anyway, and given point 1, we just wanted to get the deal done ASAP.

Let's see what happens.

Hmm... Yes very deep Tommi

But true!

Don't have a huge issue with the Fish deal. Would have preferred just one of those picks in the 20s rather than the pick swap but no biggie for me.
Getting back to Dow, I note Geelong are playing hardball with Port re Esava. No he's out of contract, we have zero bargaining power, lets just let him go for pretty much nothing.

And if you remove the actual players who will be drafted , as you have, then you are correct. But from what we have done I assume Austin and Co. don't see much if any difference between the quality of player we will draft with those picks and if correct then we have turned one player into two. A win in my opinion. However like all drafting we won't know if ity was a good move until 2 -4 years down the track

A player who isn't best 22 in a team that made the prelims is going to a team that won 3 games.

Improves both teams IMO.

_________________
"One of my favorite philosophical tenets is that people will agree with you only if they already agree with you. You do not change people's minds." - Frank Zappa

My biggest concern is that we’re eroding our depth. Dow will go for peanuts, Fisher is gone and to my mind both will be more serviceable than the 2 picks. I’m worried about the durability of the guys we’ve resigned too.
Also, we’ve turned one player and one pick into 2 picks, I’m not sure how he turned one pick into two players.

Anyway, we’ll see what happens.

My biggest concern is that we’re eroding our depth. Dow will go for peanuts, Fisher is gone and to my mind both will be more serviceable than the 2 picks. I’m worried about the durability of the guys we’ve resigned too.
Also, we’ve turned one player and one pick into 2 picks, I’m not sure how he turned one pick into two players.

Anyway, we’ll see what happens.[/quote]

Lack of depth and durability of players are a major concern of mine. DC did well to get back on the park and string games together but can he sustain it? Jack M did well too but that calf wont go away. Ditto Marchy, ditto Gov. The list goes on. Even some of our younger players such as C.Durdin and showing an inability to consistently stay on the park. Cripps is heavily banged up and the style of game he plays isn't sustainable for him to play into his 30s. Even the great Sam Walsh has 2 delayed starts to the season in a row and Cerra's hammys continue to be a concern. Be really needing the likes of Jack Carrol and Jackson/Jaxon? Binns to step up.

I’m ok with the Fisher trade. Think it reflects fair market value for a solid depth player. Ideally it would have been pick 25 straight up but the move back from 17 to 21 seems fair to me given it values him around pick 30 on the draft index. Other depths players around the competition are going for less. Austin has a pretty good eye for talent beyond the first round so let’s see what he does if we do in fact go to the draft with those two picks.

In terms of eroding depth, it’s of course true that losing Fisher and Dow does erode our depth but this is also par for the course for clubs with good lists. We’ve been picking off depth from better clubs for years and now the shoe is on the other foot. The hope would be that the next tier of players who are on lesser contracts can step up to fill the void - eg Binns, Cowan, etc. This is what the good clubs historically have been able to do. Also worth noting that neither of the boys were picked for our 3 finals and in fact Boyd off a 2-3 month spell from the seniors was picked above Fisher as a small defender.

With LOB, Ed, Fish and Paddy all out he door, I'm wondering if we look at a few DFAs over summer. Would make sense to bring in a couple of foot soldiers.


Maybe a mid season draft spot to help cover inevitable injuries


Sent from my SM-A336E using Tapatalk

This is from Forty3 on BF;

My understanding is the two picks we acquired and maybe a bit extra would be used to net GC F1 and Hollands.
We don't want F1 picks for next year, so our F1 and GC F1 for pick 8 and future points.
It's far from a done deal but it's a possibility.
GC currently have just over 4,000 points in value, Jed will cost them 2,000 alone and they have 3 more players they want to net from their academy.

I don't buy into the 'not wanting a first rounder next season'. Next years draft crop is reportedly a high-end talent midlfield bonanza and there's every chance the Camporeale boys aren't in first round calculations. AFAIAC they played an exhibition match and did well. There's really no need to give up your first and while the conversations have to take place this season, nothing needs to be done until next year.

Lack of depth and durability of players are a major concern of mine. DC did well to get back on the park and string games together but can he sustain it? Jack M did well too but that calf wont go away. Ditto Marchy, ditto Gov. The list goes on. Even some of our younger players such as C.Durdin and showing an inability to consistently stay on the park. Cripps is heavily banged up and the style of game he plays isn't sustainable for him to play into his 30s. Even the great Sam Walsh has 2 delayed starts to the season in a row and Cerra's hammys continue to be a concern. Be really needing the likes of Jack Carrol and Jackson/Jaxon? Binns to step up.[/quote]

I understand your concern and fears

And here is the deal…….what you’re worried about is what might happen

And we proved to ourselves this year is that if you give guys like Hollands, Cowan and Kemp a go you can still win games. We have evolved. We have a system and culture that sets us up

This thread reminds me of why I spar with Surrey most years

I’ve sometimes wondered whether Surrey is Adrian Dodoro as the propensity to overrate our own players is very much present.

If Fisher was a best 22 player then why did he play only 12 senior games this year when uninjured?

This is not Fisher of 2018 when he was gifted games and in a thin list was probably best 22.

Put it this way, I’m thinking we’re selling him before his value drops more given he would only play if we had a few injury problems.

_________________
"A good composer does not initiate. He steals."

- Igor Stravinsky

I have come to understand Surrey as our resident hoarder. He never wants to take out any of our rubbish.

Personally, I think the concern for depth is warranted especially given the players we have that are injury prone and the contested style we solely play, mainly due to the lack of foot skills and speed.
The best thing we can do is add more speed and better skilled players (especially in the midfield) and then we won't have to play as much contested football each game, which in turn would give us better longevity for the more injury prone players come finals time IMO.

As an example, Honey would definitely disagree with such a statement.

From The Age

Why Carlton was content to give up pick 17 in the Fisher trade
By Peter Ryan

Some Carlton supporters have been wondering why Carlton were happy to give up pick 17 as part of the Zac Fisher deal to get North Melbourne’s picks 21 and 25 in return.

Both clubs entered the deal valuing Fisher around pick 30, but the Kangaroos did not have that pick as they held pick 21 (too high) and pick 44 (too low).

Once Dylan Stephens went to North, they had picks 21 and 25 as part of their deal with the Swans.

Carlton knew they were likely to get the player they are keen on at either pick 17 or pick 21 (which is still in the first round) in the national draft.

They also know pick 21 can be highly rated as the first pick of the second night of the national draft.

The Blues also have the potential twin father-son Camporeale brothers available in next year’s draft and may need to strike a deal to get Elijah Hollands from Gold Coast while, for North Melbourne, pick 17 gave them five picks inside pick 18, a huge haul as they look to get pick No.1.

In the end, the deal using academy points as a guide valued Fisher as worth about pick 30.

Regards Cazzesman

_________________
Ricky Gervais - “Everyone has the right to hold whatever beliefs they want. And everyone else has the right to find those beliefs f***ing ridiculous.”

Brilliantly fed article. Come the end of the trade period, it might prove to have a slight problem with the logic.
Well I believe there is at least one issue with one fact in that article already but I’m sure most wouldn’t pick it up.

Wgas what another journo thinks, again we bend over during trade

I think the Fisher deal was ok. But didnt feel the need to drop back spaces in the 1st round. North are being a charity case now and are being gifted 1st rounders. No one did that for us.

Why should be look after poor Dow and just letting him go. He had a one year deal there for him to sign. And chose not to take it.

It’s a business and why should we help SOS and the saints ? As i said would rather let him leave for nothing than be a push over.

Why did we let Stocker and Setterfield go for nothing. We invested a lot in both those players. Other teams would not do this. Name me one that has over the last few years? And dont say Acres because we gave up a 3rd rounder for him.

I know Dow is out of contract but so are so many other players ie Ratagalea from Geelong but they are wanting overs for him. They are not saying let him go to look after him. But we do that time and time again.

Let’s see how we bend over for Elijah Hollands now. We will just cough up the 2nd round. Wish we let North just cough up the second round without upgrading their 1st.