 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
| Post subject: Time to Reflect on our Recruiting Gambles |  |
|
So over the past 5 years, we have gambled a lot on elite talent and we gave up quite a bit to get it.
Treloar, 2 picks. We swapped Adams for Shaw. We gave away players to get picks that ended up netting blokes like Grundy. I think we gave up some good cattle to get the pick that got Scharenberg, and gave up picks to get Aish. To get Beams back we gave up two picks (even though die to oputr circs it was really only 1). Obviously, getting Crisp, De Goey and Greenwood for 4 of Beams Prime years was a masterstroke. I
On balance, i think that if you get a great player as a result of a trade, you look back on it as a win and its hard to argue with the results of our hard work.
The club copped a lot of criticism from us at the time, especially when we were weakened in the short term as a result of those trades.
Anyone still think our strategy wasn't totally inspired?
_________________
Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
 |
Rd10.1998_11.1#36
rd10.1998_11.1#36
Joined: 18 Jul 2018
Location: Sevilla, Spain
|
|
|
|
|
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Rd10.1998_11.1#36 wrote: | | At least one member seems to think that a. We haven’t won a premiership yet and b. He could have done better at the trade table |
name names!
_________________
Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Let’s keep the Beams trade simple.
Pies gained - Beams, pick 41, pick 44
Lions gained - pick 18 ( 2018 FIRST ROUND ) pick 56 and our 2019 FIRST ROUNDER
Nothing more, nothing less. People seem to think that because we picked up Quaynor in the first round, we got a free hit. Quaynor was a bargain by way of an accumulation of late picks for points, some of which came from the Beams trade )
By example, had we not traded for Beams, we could have still got Quaynor, Kelly AND kept our 2018 first rounder ( presumably for either Stocker or Collier - Dawkins who were still there ) And wait there’s more, we could have still have our 2019 first round pick had we not traded for Beams.
This could have easily be done by trading out our future second and third round picks for the 2018 points that were needed ( particularly with Kelly going a bit later than expected )
So for me given the choice of Beams or the other above outcome, I would have kept our two first rounders intact.
However, I get the quick fix and how people find it easier to see an immediate return than the speculation and development that comes with a high draft pick.
Beams is 30 next year, has already missed two of a possible nine games this year and doesn’t have a lot of good footy left in him.
I would keep the two early draft picks every time over a 30 year old who is prone to missing games.
F W I W, I’m ok with Treloar. |
|
|
|
|
Boogie Knights
Joined: 18 Sep 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^^^ The premiership window opened with our rise to grand finalists last season. Getting Beams back removes the flyscreen enabling the Magpie to swoop through unimpeded.
Waiting several years for a couple of late first rounders that as we can see by the list of mid season draft hopefuls, are no sure thing, does not fit that window.
There is merit to both avenues, but when the 2019 premiership cup is held aloft, only one of them will seem meritorious... |
|
|
|
|
piedys 
Heeeeeeere's Dyso!!!
Joined: 04 Sep 2003
Location: Resident Forum Psychopath since 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies2016 wrote: | By example, had we not traded for Beams, we could have still got Quaynor, Kelly AND kept our 2018 first rounder ( presumably for either Stocker or Collier-Dawkins who were still there )
And wait there’s more, we could have still have our 2019 first round pick had we not traded for Beams.
|
Stocker looked a likely type for Carlton last Saturday, but we need to keep our eyes on the prize.
Need Beams to hold together for two more seasons, while the window is wide open.
Should he disintegrate, and we fail to claim a flag, then we can call "bust".
It will be an interesting couple of years ahead....
_________________
M I L L A N E 4 2 forever |
|
|
|
|
Invigoration
Joined: 22 Sep 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies2016 wrote: | Let’s keep the Beams trade simple.
Pies gained - Beams, pick 41, pick 44
Lions gained - pick 18 ( 2018 FIRST ROUND ) pick 56 and our 2019 FIRST ROUNDER
Nothing more, nothing less. People seem to think that because we picked up Quaynor in the first round, we got a free hit. Quaynor was a bargain by way of an accumulation of late picks for points, some of which came from the Beams trade )
By example, had we not traded for Beams, we could have still got Quaynor, Kelly AND kept our 2018 first rounder ( presumably for either Stocker or Collier - Dawkins who were still there ) And wait there’s more, we could have still have our 2019 first round pick had we not traded for Beams.
This could have easily be done by trading out our future second and third round picks for the 2018 points that were needed ( particularly with Kelly going a bit later than expected )
So for me given the choice of Beams or the other above outcome, I would have kept our two first rounders intact.
However, I get the quick fix and how people find it easier to see an immediate return than the speculation and development that comes with a high draft pick.
Beams is 30 next year, has already missed two of a possible nine games this year and doesn’t have a lot of good footy left in him.
I would keep the two early draft picks every time over a 30 year old who is prone to missing games.
F W I W, I’m ok with Treloar. |
To elaborate a bit more, first rounder in 2018 actually ended up being pick 21 post FA compensation & academy picks - so it was a 2nd rounder in any other year pretty much. Neither of Stocker or Dawkins were available at pick 21.
Trade for Beams ends up being;
Out: Pick 21, pick 56 and currently pick 17 (2019)
In: Beams, pick 41, pick 44.
A lot depends on the quality of this draft and what we achieve while Beams is on the list.
Personally I would've preferred scrapping together a bit more equity and going after Wingard instead, but it is what it is.
_________________
Brown re his GF omission:
"It’s not about me & it never has been. It’s about the team & it’s about Collingwood & it’s about the 22 other blokes out there on the park. That’s all that matters to me"
Last edited by Invigoration on Tue May 14, 2019 1:52 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Boogie Knights wrote: | ^^^ The premiership window opened with our rise to grand finalists last season. Getting Beams back removes the flyscreen enabling the Magpie to swoop through unimpeded.
Waiting several years for a couple of late first rounders that as we can see by the list of mid season draft hopefuls, are no sure thing, does not fit that window.
There is merit to both avenues, but when the 2019 premiership cup is held aloft, only one of them will seem meritorious... |
B K, I can’t wait to be proven wrong. Nothing would give me more joy.
I’m not against trading for premiership tilt, I just think we paid overs.
My main concern is more about the evenness of the competition rather than Beams unquestioned talent.
We haven’t had the same team appear more than once in the last three G Fs.
There is a lot that needs to go right to play in a GF, let alone win one.
Beams probably helps us for three years to win a GF.
I just wish he was five years younger. Then I would be ok with the trade. |
|
|
|
|
Croat_Pie
Joined: 18 Sep 2018
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies2016 wrote: | Let’s keep the Beams trade simple.
Pies gained - Beams, pick 41, pick 44
Lions gained - pick 18 ( 2018 FIRST ROUND ) pick 56 and our 2019 FIRST ROUNDER
Nothing more, nothing less. People seem to think that because we picked up Quaynor in the first round, we got a free hit. Quaynor was a bargain by way of an accumulation of late picks for points, some of which came from the Beams trade )
By example, had we not traded for Beams, we could have still got Quaynor, Kelly AND kept our 2018 first rounder ( presumably for either Stocker or Collier - Dawkins who were still there ) And wait there’s more, we could have still have our 2019 first round pick had we not traded for Beams.
This could have easily be done by trading out our future second and third round picks for the 2018 points that were needed ( particularly with Kelly going a bit later than expected )
So for me given the choice of Beams or the other above outcome, I would have kept our two first rounders intact.
However, I get the quick fix and how people find it easier to see an immediate return than the speculation and development that comes with a high draft pick.
Beams is 30 next year, has already missed two of a possible nine games this year and doesn’t have a lot of good footy left in him.
I would keep the two early draft picks every time over a 30 year old who is prone to missing games.
F W I W, I’m ok with Treloar. |
I agree with you re Beams.
I guess I was in the minority because I didn't really want him back and I think so far this season, I think he's been disappointing. |
|
|
|
|
Pies2016
Joined: 12 Sep 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Invigoration wrote: | | Pies2016 wrote: | Let’s keep the Beams trade simple.
Pies gained - Beams, pick 41, pick 44
Lions gained - pick 18 ( 2018 FIRST ROUND ) pick 56 and our 2019 FIRST ROUNDER
Nothing more, nothing less. People seem to think that because we picked up Quaynor in the first round, we got a free hit. Quaynor was a bargain by way of an accumulation of late picks for points, some of which came from the Beams trade )
By example, had we not traded for Beams, we could have still got Quaynor, Kelly AND kept our 2018 first rounder ( presumably for either Stocker or Collier - Dawkins who were still there ) And wait there’s more, we could have still have our 2019 first round pick had we not traded for Beams.
This could have easily be done by trading out our future second and third round picks for the 2018 points that were needed ( particularly with Kelly going a bit later than expected )
So for me given the choice of Beams or the other above outcome, I would have kept our two first rounders intact.
However, I get the quick fix and how people find it easier to see an immediate return than the speculation and development that comes with a high draft pick.
Beams is 30 next year, has already missed two of a possible nine games this year and doesn’t have a lot of good footy left in him.
I would keep the two early draft picks every time over a 30 year old who is prone to missing games.
F W I W, I’m ok with Treloar. |
To elaborate a bit more, first rounder in 2018 actually ended up being pick 21 post FA compensation & academy picks - so it was a 2nd rounder in any other year pretty much. Neither of Stocker or Dawkins were available at pick 21.
Trade for Beams ends up being;
Out: Pick 21, pick 56 and currently pick 17 (2019)
In: Beams, pick 41, pick 44.
A lot depends on the quality of this draft and what we achieve while Beams is on the list.
Personally I would've preferred scrapping together a bit more equity and going after Wingard instead, but it is what it is. |
My bad. Stocker at #19 and Collier - Dawkins at # 20 and we did drift out to # 21 on the night. And right now they are nothing more potential while Beams is an established talent.
I just think that had we stayed with two cracks at late first rounders ( 2018 and 2019 ) our recruiting team would have likely got one right.
We will never know but if Beams does play in a premiership, then the argument is forever settled. |
|
|
|
|
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Invigoration wrote: | | Pies2016 wrote: | Let’s keep the Beams trade simple.
Pies gained - Beams, pick 41, pick 44
Lions gained - pick 18 ( 2018 FIRST ROUND ) pick 56 and our 2019 FIRST ROUNDER
Nothing more, nothing less. People seem to think that because we picked up Quaynor in the first round, we got a free hit. Quaynor was a bargain by way of an accumulation of late picks for points, some of which came from the Beams trade )
By example, had we not traded for Beams, we could have still got Quaynor, Kelly AND kept our 2018 first rounder ( presumably for either Stocker or Collier - Dawkins who were still there ) And wait there’s more, we could have still have our 2019 first round pick had we not traded for Beams.
This could have easily be done by trading out our future second and third round picks for the 2018 points that were needed ( particularly with Kelly going a bit later than expected )
So for me given the choice of Beams or the other above outcome, I would have kept our two first rounders intact.
However, I get the quick fix and how people find it easier to see an immediate return than the speculation and development that comes with a high draft pick.
Beams is 30 next year, has already missed two of a possible nine games this year and doesn’t have a lot of good footy left in him.
I would keep the two early draft picks every time over a 30 year old who is prone to missing games.
F W I W, I’m ok with Treloar. |
To elaborate a bit more, first rounder in 2018 actually ended up being pick 21 post FA compensation & academy picks - so it was a 2nd rounder in any other year pretty much. Neither of Stocker or Dawkins were available at pick 21.
Trade for Beams ends up being;
Out: Pick 21, pick 56 and currently pick 17 (2019)
In: Beams, pick 41, pick 44.
A lot depends on the quality of this draft and what we achieve while Beams is on the list.
Personally I would've preferred scrapping together a bit more equity and going after Wingard instead, but it is what it is. |
Hmm, I don't get it. How could we get Quaynor and keep our 2018 1st round pick? He was bid on before pick 21 (our first), so we would have used it.
We were comitted to Quaynor so our 2018 1st round pick was spoken for. We either trade it or use it on Quaynor. Trading was a no brainer, it would have been nuts not to, that's the whole advantage of the academy/nga system. We still brought in a 2018 first round player.
Was Beams too old? No, not when we are in win now mode. It's a tough comp, if we don't improve we go backwards. And as above we only forwent the signing of one somewhat higher end draftee, not two.
Was Beams the right fit? Not for me. Just as an example, Walters at a similar age would have been perfect. I don't think Beams addresses any of our weaknesses. Another option would have been to chase a younger player (Ed Langdon one example). The Quaynor "free hit", and it was that, gave us a decent trade hand. Only decent though, pick 21 and expected 15-18 don't net you too much.
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: Elwood
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies2016 wrote: | Let’s keep the Beams trade simple.
Pies gained - Beams, pick 41, pick 44
Lions gained - pick 18 ( 2018 FIRST ROUND ) pick 56 and our 2019 FIRST ROUNDER
Nothing more, nothing less. People seem to think that because we picked up Quaynor in the first round, we got a free hit. Quaynor was a bargain by way of an accumulation of late picks for points, some of which came from the Beams trade )
By example, had we not traded for Beams, we could have still got Quaynor, Kelly AND kept our 2018 first rounder ( presumably for either Stocker or Collier - Dawkins who were still there ) And wait there’s more, we could have still have our 2019 first round pick had we not traded for Beams.
This could have easily be done by trading out our future second and third round picks for the 2018 points that were needed ( particularly with Kelly going a bit later than expected )
So for me given the choice of Beams or the other above outcome, I would have kept our two first rounders intact.
However, I get the quick fix and how people find it easier to see an immediate return than the speculation and development that comes with a high draft pick.
Beams is 30 next year, has already missed two of a possible nine games this year and doesn’t have a lot of good footy left in him.
I would keep the two early draft picks every time over a 30 year old who is prone to missing games.
F W I W, I’m ok with Treloar. |
You don't miss the opportunity to pick up any player, particularly one you know their past history, who when he gets the ball, will land it on your chest every time you call for it and who also when anywhere within a 30m arc of the goals, if he gets his hands on the ball will kick it through the goals. |
|
|
|
|
Invigoration
Joined: 22 Sep 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| AN_Inkling wrote: | | Invigoration wrote: | | Pies2016 wrote: | Let’s keep the Beams trade simple.
Pies gained - Beams, pick 41, pick 44
Lions gained - pick 18 ( 2018 FIRST ROUND ) pick 56 and our 2019 FIRST ROUNDER
Nothing more, nothing less. People seem to think that because we picked up Quaynor in the first round, we got a free hit. Quaynor was a bargain by way of an accumulation of late picks for points, some of which came from the Beams trade )
By example, had we not traded for Beams, we could have still got Quaynor, Kelly AND kept our 2018 first rounder ( presumably for either Stocker or Collier - Dawkins who were still there ) And wait there’s more, we could have still have our 2019 first round pick had we not traded for Beams.
This could have easily be done by trading out our future second and third round picks for the 2018 points that were needed ( particularly with Kelly going a bit later than expected )
So for me given the choice of Beams or the other above outcome, I would have kept our two first rounders intact.
However, I get the quick fix and how people find it easier to see an immediate return than the speculation and development that comes with a high draft pick.
Beams is 30 next year, has already missed two of a possible nine games this year and doesn’t have a lot of good footy left in him.
I would keep the two early draft picks every time over a 30 year old who is prone to missing games.
F W I W, I’m ok with Treloar. |
To elaborate a bit more, first rounder in 2018 actually ended up being pick 21 post FA compensation & academy picks - so it was a 2nd rounder in any other year pretty much. Neither of Stocker or Dawkins were available at pick 21.
Trade for Beams ends up being;
Out: Pick 21, pick 56 and currently pick 17 (2019)
In: Beams, pick 41, pick 44.
A lot depends on the quality of this draft and what we achieve while Beams is on the list.
Personally I would've preferred scrapping together a bit more equity and going after Wingard instead, but it is what it is. |
Hmm, I don't get it. How could we get Quaynor and keep our 2018 1st round pick? He was bid on before pick 21 (our first), so we would have used it.
We were comitted to Quaynor so our 2018 1st round pick was spoken for. We either trade it or use it on Quaynor. Trading was a no brainer, it would have been nuts not to, that's the whole advantage of the academy/nga system. We still brought in a 2018 first round player.
Was Beams too old? No, not when we are in win now mode. It's a tough comp, if we don't improve we go backwards. And as above we only forwent the signing of one somewhat higher end draftee, not two.
Was Beams the right fit? Not for me. Just as an example, Walters at a similar age would have been perfect. I don't think Beams addresses any of our weaknesses. Another option would have been to chase a younger player (Ed Langdon one example). The Quaynor "free hit", and it was that, gave us a decent trade hand. Only decent though, pick 21 and expected 15-18 don't net you too much. |
And yep, you are right. If we held our first rounder we were obliged to use it on IQ.
_________________
Brown re his GF omission:
"It’s not about me & it never has been. It’s about the team & it’s about Collingwood & it’s about the 22 other blokes out there on the park. That’s all that matters to me" |
|
|
|
|
Millane42
Joined: 18 Aug 2000
Location: Sydney
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Nathan Freeman pick 10 instead of Patrick Cripps Pick 13 (noting Sheed at 11 was always going to WC)
_________________
Most of my favourite bands start with "M" - Mars Volta, Mastodon, Megadeth, Metallica, Midnight Oil, Misfits...except King Gizzard and the Lizard Wizard ~ |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The biggest recent recruiting mistakes imo were getting Wells and Mayne. While Mayne has become a decent player, his massive salary and long contract, combined with the big dosh wasted on Wells, has left our club hamstrung in trying to bring in ready made talent.
Blind Freddy could see that Wells was injury prone and simply after a bigger pay cheque. As for Mayne's recruitment, he has proved to be a decent winger, but was unable to fulfill the role we recruited him for, that of a manic tackling forward.
Still, overall our club has done very well, especially when we consider the experimental recruitment of Cox and most recently the rookying of the mature aged Mihocek, who has been a revelation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
