GWS to get pick 1

[bergholt]

The point is pet hasn't proved anything at afl level.
Cameron has.

Exactly. Petracca is a potential AFL star, but Cameron is a certified AFL level star. Why take a risk on Petracca if that's the choice?

[PJ]

The point is pet hasn't proved anything at afl level.
Cameron has.

Exactly. Petracca is a potential AFL star, but Cameron is a certified AFL level star. Why take a risk on Petracca if that's the choice?

Cameron hasn't played in a while does anyone know what the injury was?

I think the risk on Petracca would be reasonably low comparatively but if Cameron was available you'd have to take the chance and go for mids with other picks or wait til next year.

[plugger66]

LOL

still cant see the forest for the trees.
can you not see we are in the box seat right now???

the worst case is we get Pet with pick one
the best case is we get Pet with pick one and throw coin at Cam next year and get him too

you can see those best and worst case scenarios?

Or if Cameron wants out this year you grab him while you can. Wait and he my not want out. Lets be honest here though, we aren't getting Cameron this year or next but if GWS want Petracca we are more hope this year than next. I think you are struck up a tree.

OK
I guess the pelch has already said to u we aren't getting Cameron.
Did he elaborate on our draft strategy??
Anything u can share that you've been told from the powers that be?

He said he told you BJ will stay. 100% sure and then he said the same about Dal. Good record.

[plugger66]

Get treated now. And stop making things up. Its emotive but wrong.

I probably do need treatment on various levels Pluggs, but not on the above.

What is in my previous post that you see as factually wrong? Maybe have another read of the quoted posts from Matt and Skep, and the points that they are making...?

Why would we look at any trade involving our number one pick... unless said trade improves our situation?

No 'swaps'! No 'win/win'! Only a big win... for our beloved club! Or no trade!


Our club holds the whip hand here! Screw any other club!

Don't know nuthin...

You're still being far too harsh on yourself though Pluggs.

No knowledge. Yep imagine only getting Cameron for pick one when we could have Petracca.

[skeptic]

The point is pet hasn't proved anything at afl level.
Cameron has.

Exactly. Petracca is a potential AFL star, but Cameron is a certified AFL level star. Why take a risk on Petracca if that's the choice?

But you're holding something that's potentially better then that... That trade doesn't represent the value

The bottom line is that we don't know how any of this turns out. Cameron could do a knee, Petracca could be a dud, pick 3 could be the best player of all time... We're not dealing with known factors

The pick IMO, represents more value than what u'd trade it for

[bergholt]

The point is pet hasn't proved anything at afl level.
Cameron has.

Exactly. Petracca is a potential AFL star, but Cameron is a certified AFL level star. Why take a risk on Petracca if that's the choice?

But you're holding something that's potentially better then that... That trade doesn't represent the value

The bottom line is that we don't know how any of this turns out. Cameron could do a knee, Petracca could be a dud, pick 3 could be the best player of all time... We're not dealing with known factors

The pick IMO, represents more value than what u'd trade it for

"Represents"? No, it's worth what you can get for it. That is: your choice of player in the draft; or what you can trade it for. Cameron is of more value than any player in the draft. That's not IMO, that's objective given the risk that a newly drafted player doesn't work out at AFL level.

So the only reason not to grab Cameron (if he was available) is if something was going to be traded which exceeds his value. Multiple first round picks, or a Tom Mitchell-quality player plus first round picks. Mitchell alone wouldn't exceed Cameron value for mine. I can't imagine another club doing such a massive deal for #1 but who knows?

Anyway, it's a moot point. As plugger says, I doubt Cameron is actually on the table. But if he is you have to take him and walk away smiling.

[plugger66]

The point is pet hasn't proved anything at afl level.
Cameron has.

Exactly. Petracca is a potential AFL star, but Cameron is a certified AFL level star. Why take a risk on Petracca if that's the choice?

But you're holding something that's potentially better then that... That trade doesn't represent the value

The bottom line is that we don't know how any of this turns out. Cameron could do a knee, Petracca could be a dud, pick 3 could be the best player of all time... We're not dealing with known factors

The pick IMO, represents more value than what u'd trade it for

Petracca could be a dud because we haven't seen him play at AFL level but I notice you didn't suggest Cameron could be a dud because we now that isn't true. You had to say what if he does a knee. Well that applies to every player in the AFL but not every player is a dud and we the known is Cameron isn't a dud and has already been AA after 3 years of footy. We get excited with Stanley and he is no where near him after 6 years of footy. Its a no brainer that you take the star while you can and if these 2 big ifs are true then we must deal. The 2 ifs are Cameron wants out and GWS want pick one. Next year neither of them maybe on the table. Pick one is overrated as far as people saying you cant trade it. When was the last star pick one? We know Cameron is a star. Anyway Im doubting Cameron wants out but im not doubting GWS want pick one. I can see us taking their pick plus a couple of younger unproven players. Don't like it but it seems that's Pelchen way.

[skeptic]

was also going to say that Cameron might not be a good fit for us... sometimes players just don't gel...

got lazy though

[plugger66]

was also going to say that Cameron might not be a good fit for us... sometimes players just don't gel...

got lazy though

Couldn't that again apply to every player. There is one big difference between Petracca and Cameron. One is AA at AFL level and the other has never played at AFL level. They are both young and we do know, baring injury that Cameron has around 8-10 years of footy in him. We don't know if Petracca has any. Obviously he probably will but it is an unknown. Skeptic we are likely to take Petracca but we also shouldn't rule out trading the pick especially as it seems like a pretty poor draft which happens quite regularly.

[gringo]

The point is pet hasn't proved anything at afl level.
Cameron has.

Exactly. Petracca is a potential AFL star, but Cameron is a certified AFL level star. Why take a risk on Petracca if that's the choice?

But you're holding something that's potentially better then that... That trade doesn't represent the value

The bottom line is that we don't know how any of this turns out. Cameron could do a knee, Petracca could be a dud, pick 3 could be the best player of all time... We're not dealing with known factors

The pick IMO, represents more value than what u'd trade it for

Petracca could be a dud because we haven't seen him play at AFL level but I notice you didn't suggest Cameron could be a dud because we now that isn't true. You had to say what if he does a knee. Well that applies to every player in the AFL but not every player is a dud and we the known is Cameron isn't a dud and has already been AA after 3 years of footy. We get excited with Stanley and he is no where near him after 6 years of footy. Its a no brainer that you take the star while you can and if these 2 big ifs are true then we must deal. The 2 ifs are Cameron wants out and GWS want pick one. Next year neither of them maybe on the table. Pick one is overrated as far as people saying you cant trade it. When was the last star pick one? We know Cameron is a star. Anyway Im doubting Cameron wants out but im not doubting GWS want pick one. I can see us taking their pick plus a couple of younger unproven players. Don't like it but it seems that's Pelchen way.

I guess what Pelchen thinks is that every player comes with risk of not working out. For every Buddy and Roughy there is a Beau Muston or Beau Dowler.

In 2005 the draft went 1 Mark Murphy who is pretty high quality, 2 Daisy Thomas- star, 3 Xavier Ellis- good player, 4 Josh Kennedy -WCE star, 5 Pendlebury-star, then also in the top 10 there was Jarrad oakley- Nicholls, Beau Dowler and Marcus Drum. It's a lottery and if you have 2 or 3 players from high in the draft you increase the likelihood of getting a Pendles rather than risking just getting a JON. Picking up pick 3 and a couple of potential kids who GWS took and developed is probably the lower risk way of building the list but you also risk missing out on a Pendlebury and getting 2 or 3 average players.

[plugger66]

The point is pet hasn't proved anything at afl level.
Cameron has.

Exactly. Petracca is a potential AFL star, but Cameron is a certified AFL level star. Why take a risk on Petracca if that's the choice?

But you're holding something that's potentially better then that... That trade doesn't represent the value

The bottom line is that we don't know how any of this turns out. Cameron could do a knee, Petracca could be a dud, pick 3 could be the best player of all time... We're not dealing with known factors

The pick IMO, represents more value than what u'd trade it for

Petracca could be a dud because we haven't seen him play at AFL level but I notice you didn't suggest Cameron could be a dud because we now that isn't true. You had to say what if he does a knee. Well that applies to every player in the AFL but not every player is a dud and we the known is Cameron isn't a dud and has already been AA after 3 years of footy. We get excited with Stanley and he is no where near him after 6 years of footy. Its a no brainer that you take the star while you can and if these 2 big ifs are true then we must deal. The 2 ifs are Cameron wants out and GWS want pick one. Next year neither of them maybe on the table. Pick one is overrated as far as people saying you cant trade it. When was the last star pick one? We know Cameron is a star. Anyway Im doubting Cameron wants out but im not doubting GWS want pick one. I can see us taking their pick plus a couple of younger unproven players. Don't like it but it seems that's Pelchen way.

I guess what Pelchen thinks is that every player comes with risk of not working out. For every Buddy and Roughy there is a Beau Muston or Beau Dowler.

In 2005 the draft went 1 Mark Murphy who is pretty high quality, 2 Daisy Thomas- star, 3 Xavier Ellis- good player, 4 Josh Kennedy -WCE star, 5 Pendlebury-star, then also in the top 10 there was Jarrad oakley- Nicholls, Beau Dowler and Marcus Drum. It's a lottery and if you have 2 or 3 players from high in the draft you increase the likelihood of getting a Pendles rather than risking just getting a JON. Picking up pick 3 and a couple of potential kids who GWS took and developed is probably the lower risk way of building the list but you also risk missing out on a Pendlebury and getting 2 or 3 average players.

Based on your example we would have got Pendlebury if we wanted him. I am not suggesting we swap pick one for 2 players that haven't done anything at AFL plus pick 4, which it will be, Im suggesting that Pelchen seems to like multiple players. I wouldn't swap pick one for that but I would in heartbeat for a proven AFL star or one that shows enormous potential like a Mitchell.

[gringo]

The point is pet hasn't proved anything at afl level.
Cameron has.

Exactly. Petracca is a potential AFL star, but Cameron is a certified AFL level star. Why take a risk on Petracca if that's the choice?

But you're holding something that's potentially better then that... That trade doesn't represent the value

The bottom line is that we don't know how any of this turns out. Cameron could do a knee, Petracca could be a dud, pick 3 could be the best player of all time... We're not dealing with known factors

The pick IMO, represents more value than what u'd trade it for

Petracca could be a dud because we haven't seen him play at AFL level but I notice you didn't suggest Cameron could be a dud because we now that isn't true. You had to say what if he does a knee. Well that applies to every player in the AFL but not every player is a dud and we the known is Cameron isn't a dud and has already been AA after 3 years of footy. We get excited with Stanley and he is no where near him after 6 years of footy. Its a no brainer that you take the star while you can and if these 2 big ifs are true then we must deal. The 2 ifs are Cameron wants out and GWS want pick one. Next year neither of them maybe on the table. Pick one is overrated as far as people saying you cant trade it. When was the last star pick one? We know Cameron is a star. Anyway Im doubting Cameron wants out but im not doubting GWS want pick one. I can see us taking their pick plus a couple of younger unproven players. Don't like it but it seems that's Pelchen way.

I guess what Pelchen thinks is that every player comes with risk of not working out. For every Buddy and Roughy there is a Beau Muston or Beau Dowler.

In 2005 the draft went 1 Mark Murphy who is pretty high quality, 2 Daisy Thomas- star, 3 Xavier Ellis- good player, 4 Josh Kennedy -WCE star, 5 Pendlebury-star, then also in the top 10 there was Jarrad oakley- Nicholls, Beau Dowler and Marcus Drum. It's a lottery and if you have 2 or 3 players from high in the draft you increase the likelihood of getting a Pendles rather than risking just getting a JON. Picking up pick 3 and a couple of potential kids who GWS took and developed is probably the lower risk way of building the list but you also risk missing out on a Pendlebury and getting 2 or 3 average players.

Based on your example we would have got Pendlebury if we wanted him. I am not suggesting we swap pick one for 2 players that haven't done anything at AFL plus pick 4, which it will be, Im suggesting that Pelchen seems to like multiple players. I wouldn't swap pick one for that but I would in heartbeat for a proven AFL star or one that shows enormous potential like a Mitchell.

I agree, he likes to spread the risk of picking up a spud by turning 1 pick into two picks not too far away from the original. I think he'd do a good GWS kid and a top 4 pick gladly. Mitchell would want a sweetener as well as he's got heaps of potential but he's not there yet. Cameron would be a no brainer as he's a proven performer and his value is probably at least pick one as he's another potential Wayne Carey.

[matrix]

he wants out

look either way we are in the best spot arent we
cant wait for trade week and the draft

[citywest]

We all have different views and ideas. I still reckon that because GWS desperately want pick 1 we should take advantage of that. Pick 1 in return for picks 4 and 20 plus Jacksch (spelling?), I would be very happy with. Or Pick 1 for their first second and third picks, I probably would take that too. Pick 1 for Cameron I wouldn't do. I would rather take Petracca in that instance and develop Spencer White.

[Dave McNamara]

he wants out

look either way we are in the best spot arent we
cant wait for trade week and the draft

Yep, wants out, and back to civilization. The Junction will do him just fine.


Pluggs and others, whilst I really really really want Petracca, my bottom line is that since we hold all the cards, we should not accept any deal that is not a win for us.

Any deal must be an improvement on holding the number one pick in a draft where one player (in the eyes of many clubs, which ultimately is all that matters, ie; perception is everything) is a very clear standout. After pick one it becomes quite even.

So we have what others want. We don't have to trade. They want to...

So any trade must see us improve our current position.
No swaps.
No sideways trades.
No like-for-like.

We come out better. They pay overs.

It's a sellers market, and we hold the key to the hot property that everyone wants.

But we don't have to budge.


Cameron will go into the 2016 PSD and we'll be in poll position to liberate him.
And hypothetically, if he stays, they can't keep/fit in all of Cameron, Patton, Boyd... nor a host of other very desirable young talents...

Patience Saintsationalists. We are building a dynasty. It will be very worth it.

[citywest]

Forget about the PSD. That's is just wishful thinking.

[matrix]

exactly
its why its the best spot to be in

only a complete nufty could stuff up this

[evo]

None of the GWS players will go to the PSD. GWS will work out deals with sides that have trades that suit them.

[matrix]

of course they wont

would be a hard choice
take the best in the draft
or (if a deal could be struck) take cameron

glad im not getting paid to do it
the backlash on here could see you to an early grave i reckon

[St Ick]

Do we have to get a pick in return? It's massively in our favour but what about Shiel and Cameron for pick one and Armo. Essentially it's saying Armo for Shiel, Cameron for pick one. To even it out I'd even consider chucking in pick 20.

It means we trade out of this years top end, but we are no guarantee to pick up to certified guns with any of our draft picks, even Petracca who is the top talent but I'm not convinced of his 'elite' qualities.

Thoughts?

[SideshowMilne]

Embarrassing tbh. Glad it's not on bigfooty.

[Old Mate]

Do we have to get a pick in return? It's massively in our favour but what about Shiel and Cameron for pick one and Armo. Essentially it's saying Armo for Shiel, Cameron for pick one. To even it out I'd even consider chucking in pick 20.

It means we trade out of this years top end, but we are no guarantee to pick up to certified guns with any of our draft picks, even Petracca who is the top talent but I'm not convinced of his 'elite' qualities.

Thoughts?

Never going to happen for a number of reasons. Cameron is worth pick 1 plus some, Shiel a top 5 pick and Armo a late 1st/early second rounder.

[saint6709]

Do we have to get a pick in return? It's massively in our favour but what about Shiel and Cameron for pick one and Armo. Essentially it's saying Armo for Shiel, Cameron for pick one. To even it out I'd even consider chucking in pick 20.

It means we trade out of this years top end, but we are no guarantee to pick up to certified guns with any of our draft picks, even Petracca who is the top talent but I'm not convinced of his 'elite' qualities.

Thoughts?

Never going to happen for a number of reasons. Cameron is worth pick 1 plus some, Shiel a top 5 pick and Armo a late 1st/early second rounder.

Also we shouldn't trade armo -IMO we could trade pick 1 plus billy longer plus joey and gwilt in a package to gws

[Old Mate]

Do we have to get a pick in return? It's massively in our favour but what about Shiel and Cameron for pick one and Armo. Essentially it's saying Armo for Shiel, Cameron for pick one. To even it out I'd even consider chucking in pick 20.

It means we trade out of this years top end, but we are no guarantee to pick up to certified guns with any of our draft picks, even Petracca who is the top talent but I'm not convinced of his 'elite' qualities.

Thoughts?

Never going to happen for a number of reasons. Cameron is worth pick 1 plus some, Shiel a top 5 pick and Armo a late 1st/early second rounder.

Also we shouldn't trade armo -IMO we could trade pick 1 plus billy longer plus joey and gwilt in a package to gws

Billy Longer requested a trade back to Vic from Qld, why would he agree to go to Sydney?

Gwilt is a free agent, why is he included in the trade when GWS can get him for free?

Cameron would likely cost us pick 1 and Armo alone. But Armo would have to agree with a trade there and GWS have more than enough mids. Armo wouldn't get a game.

This is why these complex trades never work, theres too much to go wrong. If we want to target players from GWS we are best to target the one at a time.

Offer pick 1 for Cameron
Offer pick 1 and 21 for Shiel and 4

The answer will most likely be no on both accounts so we go to the draft and get Petracca.

[borderbarry]

Gwilt is still a Saint until his contract expires, which I believe is after the trade period. He and Clint were not delisted. They were told they would not be getting another contract.