Recruiting AFL Trade & Free Agency XII - 💰💰💰

[Lore]

Quick links: Player Contract Status | Draft Watch 2023 | AFLW Draft, Trade & Sign

The embedded resources below are kept up to date by the trade board mods (as much as possible – we are human after all). Enjoy!

Spoiler: 2024 Draft Order

 

[Armoooo]

If you bid at 8, we just trade into the Future 1st (Clubs are queuing up for a lesser pick), even your fans have suggested they would trade their F1 for it. Just means we likely get 2 1st next year instead of 2 this year

The majority of our fans are hoping that's what you'd do. They even want to include pick 27 to make it happen.

However it seems the consensus on this board is that this wouldn't be the best option available to you. If you did it straight for a first you wouldn't be able to match Kakos bid. So there basically two parts to it, you'd need to find a way to bring in as much value as you can for 9 in the future and you'd also need to get another top 30 pick to match Kako, whether these came to you in one deal or multiple.

I'm personally not as excited about the prospect of trading 27 and our future first for 9 as most of the saints board as I think there's a chance our future first could be as high as 4 or 5 if a few things don't go our way next year. I also don't buy into the narrative that next year's draft is worthless because of academy players.

 

[eth-dog]

The majority of our fans are hoping that's what you'd do. They even want to include pick 27 to make it happen.

However it seems the consensus on this board is that this wouldn't be the best option available to you. If you did it straight for a first you wouldn't be able to match Kakos bid. So there basically two parts to it, you'd need to find a way to bring in as much value as you can for 9 in the future and you'd also need to get another top 30 pick to match Kako, whether these came to you in one deal or multiple.

I'm personally not as excited about the prospect of trading 27 and our future first for 9 as most of the saints board as I think there's a chance our future first could be as high as 4 or 5 if a few things don't go our way next year. I also don't buy into the narrative that next year's draft is worthless because of academy players.

I mean we still have other players up for grabs. A pick in the 40's and two in the fifties are enough to cover a Kako bid before our pick.

 

[Keystone agony]

I'd rather trade him for a pick in the 50s.

If hes not causing chaos off field in a really bad way ala a worse Oliver

Then that is horrible business for a 42 goal forward that is contracted

 

[Armoooo]

I mean we still have other players up for grabs. A pick in the 40's and two in the fifties are enough to cover a Kako bid before our pick.

That's what I meant when I said that you need to achieve those two goals, whether it is in a single trade or multiple.

You might trade some combination of Shiel, Laverde and Stringer for enough picks to bundle up with 30.

If you want a future first for the pick, you're probably going to struggle to find a better bet than the saints. We missed out on bottom 5 this year by less than 1%. Adelaide and Gold Coast below us could easily rise, Melbourne could have a dead cat bounce and West Coast, North and Richmond wouldn't do the trade.

I'm a bit confused now, I thought you guys hated the idea of 27 and our future first for 9. Now it seems like you're advocating for a worse deal?

 

[jdstorm]

Moneyball is the application of sabermetrics based on a low budget. In that sense it doesn't apply to AFL because of the salary cap. It also scales up. The Red Sox used the same principles to buy the more expensive players with even better stats and won the World Series, or so the legend goes.

As a principle Moneyball for AFL is really about putting a complimentary set of players together to execute a style of play / system. We don't see it that often because there is so little variation in how the game is played. Interestingly enough we've seen it from Hawthorn twice, now. We've seen it with Roos at Sydney and probably Hardwick at Richmond, too.

Where there would be space for a sabremetrics-like analysis is having a look at cap spending and working out where to spend big, and if there are any patterns. Most obvious would be that paying money to a ruck has probably worked once (i.e. Gawn in 2021). I suspect that talls are generally overrated, as good as they look on paper. There is my hobby horse, the possession accumulators. Having more than 3 guns mids is likely overrated.

This years hawks team is a good example of a moneyball list. Bog average at most positions but finding success due to having a well put together list. Particularly having useful synergies. Aka traits across players whose benefits compound rather then having a singular impact.

it’s why teams are prioritising running power, kicking efficiently, intelligent ball use, interceptors and speedy Small forwards

 

[eth-dog]

That's what I meant when I said that you need to achieve those two goals, whether it is in a single trade or multiple.

You might trade some combination of Shiel, Laverde and Stringer for enough picks to bundle up with 30.

If you want a future first for the pick, you're probably going to struggle to find a better bet than the saints. We missed out on bottom 5 this year by less than 1%. Adelaide and Gold Coast below us could easily rise, Melbourne could have a dead cat bounce and West Coast, North and Richmond wouldn't do the trade.

I'm a bit confused now, I thought you guys hated the idea of 27 and our future first for 9. Now it seems like you're advocating for a worse deal?

We're open to all options. Still, in a perfect world we have the pick this year. And I think you guys are bluffing as far as the bid goes, the side I'm most worried about is Richmond at pick 6 (read: 7 after Ashcroft).

In the end I think it'll come through on draft night. No need to do the trade before then, and we probably spend our time talking to clubs who might want to trade forward and work out the best deal for us in the month and a half between the close of trading and the draft.

 

[Keystone agony]

The majority of our fans are hoping that's what you'd do. They even want to include pick 27 to make it happen.

However it seems the consensus on this board is that this wouldn't be the best option available to you. If you did it straight for a first you wouldn't be able to match Kakos bid. So there basically two parts to it, you'd need to find a way to bring in as much value as you can for 9 in the future and you'd also need to get another top 30 pick to match Kako, whether these came to you in one deal or multiple.

I'm personally not as excited about the prospect of trading 27 and our future first for 9 as most of the saints board as I think there's a chance our future first could be as high as 4 or 5 if a few things don't go our way next year. I also don't buy into the narrative that next year's draft is worthless because of academy players.

We are going to get some points for Stringer, Shiel and maybe even Laverde

We can also live trade pick 31 on the draft night for better points

Id be asking for an F1 and F2 for 9 instead of a current 2nd

 

[fairbump_playon]

Essendon has flagged considerable interest in Stone, a 189cm goal kicker, who has overcome five hamstring injuries and disc and arthritis problems in his back.


Oh Jesus

W
T
A
F

“Overcome”

“Arthritis”

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

Every year I hear the money ball phrase bandied about especially at this time of year. Money ball has nothing to do with finding bargain basement players for no purpose other than being cheap. It is based on sabre metrics (statistical analysis) where teams will overlook certain statistics (flaws) in light of a clear advantage that suits the teams structure which should come at a lower cost. for the A’s it was on base percentage. The closest thing to a moneyball team was Hawthorn in the late 00s when it discovered a clear advantage of picking left footed good kicking players to suit its game plan. That’s money ball also the As money ball strategy is so overrated the success of the As was to do with the 3 hof pitchers that were acquired before money ball. None of the players associated with money ball actually went on to decent careers apart from swisher who was traded to the Yankees.

Finally! Someone who actually understands moneyball on BF.

 

[Wahooti Fandango]

Essendon has flagged considerable interest in Stone, a 189cm goal kicker, who has overcome five hamstring injuries and disc and arthritis problems in his back.


Oh Jesus

W
T
A
F

He'll fit right in.

 

[eth-dog]

Salary changes things … but our finances are in good order

I have no reason not to believe you but it's more of a way for you guys to keep cap space open for anything you might want at the end of next year whilst we get the better picks we want this year

If you give them 2 years each, Stringer maybe a million dollar contract and Shiel 1.2, if we cover the salary of what we were paying next year (400k for Stringer and let's say around 600 for Shiel), it allows you to spread your 600k's worth on each over 2 years and pay only 300k each year.

 

[justlookingaround]

 

[TheUnicorn]

View attachment 2136486

 

[Duckworth]

That's what I meant when I said that you need to achieve those two goals, whether it is in a single trade or multiple.

You might trade some combination of Shiel, Laverde and Stringer for enough picks to bundle up with 30.

If you want a future first for the pick, you're probably going to struggle to find a better bet than the saints. We missed out on bottom 5 this year by less than 1%. Adelaide and Gold Coast below us could easily rise, Melbourne could have a dead cat bounce and West Coast, North and Richmond wouldn't do the trade.

I'm a bit confused now, I thought you guys hated the idea of 27 and our future first for 9. Now it seems like you're advocating for a worse deal?

Here's how it will work.
We won't do anything until draft night. Our preference is to take our Pick 9 - then match a bid for Kako later on. Draft over. We will have a contingency planned lined up.

If Saints do an early spite bid on Kako, we will trade into next year with another club. St Kilda won't gain any benefit by bidding. The question of who blinks first will come on draft night - but all Essendon has to do is sit back and wait.

 

[Vindicater]

Would North be interested in something like

#9 and our future 1st

For

#2 and #44

Allows them to keep a pick in the range of Armstrong, Tauru and Shanahan who suit their needs far more than the talent at #2 and giving them extra capital next year to attack a trade period for an elite player.

Allows us to have the pick of the elite talent that best suits us (Smith or Draper would be great) and gives us #44 to help with Kako. Basically swapping our first next year for Kako this year.

 

[BrunoV]

Essendon has flagged considerable interest in Stone, a 189cm goal kicker, who has overcome five hamstring injuries and disc and arthritis problems in his back.


Oh Jesus

W
T
A
F

I didn't know about the back stuff.

 

[Sporno 4 Pyros]

That's what I meant when I said that you need to achieve those two goals, whether it is in a single trade or multiple.

You might trade some combination of Shiel, Laverde and Stringer for enough picks to bundle up with 30.

If you want a future first for the pick, you're probably going to struggle to find a better bet than the saints. We missed out on bottom 5 this year by less than 1%. Adelaide and Gold Coast below us could easily rise, Melbourne could have a dead cat bounce and West Coast, North and Richmond wouldn't do the trade.

I'm a bit confused now, I thought you guys hated the idea of 27 and our future first for 9. Now it seems like you're advocating for a worse deal?

I actually don’t mind 27 and your F1 for 9 if we can also word up Freo (11 preferably) or GWS to buy back into this years first round on draft night (it’s some of the unrealistic suggestions from your board that makes me roll my eyes)

 

[doug85]

Would North be interested in something like

#9 and our future 1st

For

#2 and #44

Allows them to keep a pick in the range of Armstrong, Tauru and Shanahan who suit their needs far more than the talent at #2 and giving them extra capital next year to attack a trade period for an elite player.

Allows us to have the pick of the elite talent that best suits us (Smith or Draper would be great) and gives us #44 to help with Kako. Basically swapping our first next year for Kako this year.

It’s been reported that norf are only interested in sliding back a few spots. So probably not

 

[ant555]

Would North be interested in something like

#9 and our future 1st

For

#2 and #44

Allows them to keep a pick in the range of Armstrong, Tauru and Shanahan who suit their needs far more than the talent at #2 and giving them extra capital next year to attack a trade period for an elite player.

Allows us to have the pick of the elite talent that best suits us (Smith or Draper would be great) and gives us #44 to help with Kako. Basically swapping our first next year for Kako this year.

Not sure they are looking for a F1 to split.

 

[Keystone agony]

Would North be interested in something like

#9 and our future 1st

For

#2 and #44

Allows them to keep a pick in the range of Armstrong, Tauru and Shanahan who suit their needs far more than the talent at #2 and giving them extra capital next year to attack a trade period for an elite player.

Allows us to have the pick of the elite talent that best suits us (Smith or Draper would be great) and gives us #44 to help with Kako. Basically swapping our first next year for Kako this year.

Acc to trade radio reports North dont want to move back any further than 6

Let alone give up 44 aswell to be further back

 

[Cold Sober]

will someone think about the 42 goals

obviously not, we are pushing away one of our only positives.

 

[jdstorm]

obviously not, we are pushing away one of our only positives.

Are we? Jakes 1.7 goals a game isn’t that much more then the Guelf at 1.1 and he plays defense.

So to replace those goals you only need to find a .6 goal per game at another position (say by not playing Martin at HB or Kako over Menzie) and your a more potent team in both directions

 

[Keystone agony]

Are we? Jakes 1.7 goals a game isn’t that much more then the Guelf at 1.1 and he plays defense.

So to replace those goals you only need to find a .6 goal per game at another position (say by not playing Martin at HB or Kako over Menzie) and your a more potent team in both directions

I dont necessarily think your looking at it the right way

Sure maybe Martin, Kako, Caddy, HJ, 2MP, Davey could have better years and kick more goals

But why not couple that with Stringer aswell. Stringer makes us a better side there is no doubting that

I was all for trading Stringer but im expecting a combined worth of about pick 30-35 in return.... otherwise i dont see the point. Id rather get another 35-40 goals from him next year and see if he can still be playing in 2027 (3 years)

If its just for pick 50 ill be asking for Dodoro back

 

[Cup_o_Jobe]

Stringer is part of what makes our forward line leak like a sieve. He'll do much better at the Giants where blokes like Daniels can pressure and tackle to cover his hands on hips schtick.

 

[Keystone agony]

Stringer is part of what makes our forward line leak like a sieve. He'll do much better at the Giants where blokes like Daniels can pressure and tackle to cover his hands on hips schtick.

Crazy to think we were like the 5th most for i50 tackles

I think the issue is we dont have Daniel, Jones, Bedford ect

We have Gresham