This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.
Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
This is a Collingwood Bulletin Board - use this forum for general, Pies-related topics. For other footy topics, use Nick's Other AFL forum, and for non-footy sporting topics please use Nick's Sports Bar. For non-sporting topics please use the Victoria Park Tavern.
neil wrote:McStay just no a very poor forward
Kruger looks to injury prone
Degoey leaving would/might get an ear;y pick possibly same as Daniher pick 5
Use pick 5 to get a genuine KPF
Add our own first round pick and consider that vs McSay
Don’t want to burst your bubble but anything near pick 5 isn’t likely because a significant component of the compensation will be based on Collingwoods ladder position.
IF we should fall into the eight ( likely ), it’s going to be much closer to somewhere between 10 - 12. You’re right about Daniher but the Bombers finished lowly in 2020. Conversely, Franklin went to the swans and the Hawks got pick 19 as compensation because they were winning flags every year.
Ronnie McKeowns boots wrote:Fogarty at Adelaide would be cheaper and have a higher celling, although he could easily bust as well...would still prefer over a 29 year old with 11 goals for the year
He's not a free agent. Would cost us draft picks
"You must be a parking ticket, cuz you got fine written all over you" Glen Quagmire
^DeGoey is a restricted free agent. If another club offers him $200,000 a year more than we’re prepared to offer and he takes up that offer, I don’t see why heads need to roll. Free agency puts the ball in DeGoeys court, not the clubs. Business is business and the rules are the rules. Even a snowflake will tell you that.
^Don’t think this is technically correct (but happy to be set straight). You will be rewarded a first/end of first/second etc pick based on the value of the contract and the players age etc. (AFL has a formula apparently). this is the part that is a bit of a black box. Obviously then if you finish last and you lose a gun and get a first round pick then you get it straight after your first pick (1) so would get pick #2 as compensation. Maybe this is what you’re saying - but the value of the contract comes first and then where your trade picks are coming is second.
I do agree that it seems unlikely though. To get pick 5 we would have to finish low enough to qualify for pick #4 (14th) and then see a player leave as a free agent on a big enough contract to warrant first round compensation (pick #5). It would be unlikely one of our players would leave on such a lucrative contract and I hope we don’t finish as low as 14th…
Maybe though, we could take our first pick (let’s say that comes in around 9-10) and package it up with a compensation pick which comes at the end of the first round (say 18-20) and that might get us into the #5-7 range perhaps. Would be able to check the points attached to verify. Actually just checked - as an example, pick 4 has the same points as pick 12 and 25 combined.
Pep wrote:Can't we match the deal and force a trade?
Surely if the compo was/would be pick 12, we could get a better return via trade scenario?
As a restricted free agent, if we match the offer, he is contractually obliged to stay ( unrestricted is different ) The point is, unless both parties want to continue the “ partnership “, then Collingwood wouldn’t bother to match the offer anyway.
There’s no trade involved in free agency unless Collingwood took a free agent. Then Collingwood may look to trade DeGoey as a preference but the trade would be unders because the club DeGoey is going to isn’t there to do Collingwood any favours when they don’t have to because he’s a free agent anyway. Hope that explains it.
piffdog wrote:Don’t think this is technically correct (but happy to be set straight). You will be rewarded a first/end of first/second etc pick based on the value of the contract and the players age etc. (AFL has a formula apparently). this is the part that is a bit of a black box. Obviously then if you finish last and you lose a gun and get a first round pick then you get it straight after your first pick (1) so would get pick #2 as compensation. Maybe this is what you’re saying - but the value of the contract comes first and then where your trade picks are coming is second.
I do agree that it seems unlikely though. To get pick 5 we would have to finish low enough to qualify for pick #4 (14th) and then see a player leave as a free agent on a big enough contract to warrant first round compensation (pick #5). It would be unlikely one of our players would leave on such a lucrative contract and I hope we don’t finish as low as 14th…
Maybe though, we could take our first pick (let’s say that comes in around 9-10) and package it up with a compensation pick which comes at the end of the first round (say 18-20) and that might get us into the #5-7 range perhaps. Would be able to check the points attached to verify. Actually just checked - as an example, pick 4 has the same points as pick 12 and 25 combined.
The size of the contract is very important but the calculation of pick 10 - 12 has already been put forward by those who are smarter than me. Those pick outcomes are based on the likely scenario of something like $800,000 a year and us just scraping into the eight. The likelihood of both happening are fair and reasonable right now.
And yes, bundling up two first rounders in the teens should easily net a top 10 pick PROVIDED you can find a buyer. The clubs decision on bundling them up would be based on single priority target vs depth of draft. We also have three third rounders, so moving into the pointy end of the second round shouldn’t be a problem either if that’s the way they want to go ( which is very likely the moment Will Ashcroft chooses to nominate the Lions as an F / S prospect )
Quote: As a restricted free agent, if we match the offer, he is contractually obliged to stay ( unrestricted is different ) The point is, unless both parties want to continue the “ partnership “, then Collingwood wouldn’t bother to match the offer anyway.
There’s no trade involved in free agency unless Collingwood took a free agent. Then Collingwood may look to trade DeGoey as a preference but the trade would be unders because the club DeGoey is going to isn’t there to do Collingwood any favours when they don’t have to because he’s a free agent anyway. Hope that explains it.[/quote]
