“We Will Be Trading Aggressively”

[ytpme]

This was stated by John Worsfold earlier this year. Can anyone see it happening?

Currently we have only 3 positions vacant….they are spoken for by 3 valuable early picks. It is assumed that Graham is likely to move on, providing one more position.

Two possible movers, in Staker and Mackinley, have been re-signed, and thereby considered valuable.

Hansen and Embley, two suggested possibles, are clearly protected and loved species.

What potential or scope does WCE have to be aggressive? Seaby? Jones, Waters, or any of the upcoming young brigade? Persuade Fletcher to retire and pay him out and make another vacancy?

Apart from Kerr I can see little, if any, scope for aggressive trading. Can you?

 

[andrew_embley]

No chance at all.

Historically we arn't that sort of club. Woosha and co. aren't the agressive trading types either.

Will be reactive to our player requests (i.e. Judd leaving, Kerr maybe), rather than overly pro-active.

 

[SS_Fury]

if kerr signs, expect a boring one from us

trade jones or waters? nooooooooo bingooooooooo

 

[beatlesmith]

not this year. Waters needs to prove himself, and solve his kicking woes, otherwise he may be traded next year. All he really has going for him atm is toughness.

 

[SS_Fury]

toughness is exactly why i rekon woosh would not want to see him go.

 

[MaxHunt]

If we keep our players as it is i would expect us to go for

2 - Rich (would prefer NickNat)
18 - Small forward type player
20 - outside Mid

However with the extra picks we have i wouldn't be surprised to see us striking a few deals to upgrade pick 20 rather then letting them go to waste.

 

[Total_Juddshanks]

Going on previous years, I reckon 'trading aggressively' in West Coast speak means 'Jaymie Graham AND a second round draft pick'.

If we were dinkum, we'd think long and hard about Seaby, Hunter, Embley, Hansen and Rosa for starters.

Hawthorn are living proof of the benefits of that model- Thompson, Everitt, Hay, Rawlings, Jacobs (and Fremantle's Croad shemozzle ) were the brave calls which built their premiership side- all of the above looked like having decent footy left in them when they were shown the door.

 

[Makka]

toughness is exactly why i rekon woosh would not want to see him go.

Agree. It was that sort of toughness that helped win us the 06 premiership with both Waters and Chick. I'd like a rock or two in amongst our marshmallows!

 

[ytpme]

Agree with you TJ, though not with Hunter, and I have good vibes about Rosa...he was improving rapidly before being cut down.

 

[eagles06]

Fletch and Wirra free up 2 spaces on the senior list when they go onto the Veterans list

 

[beatlesmith]

Fletch and Wirra free up 2 spaces on the senior list when they go onto the Veterans list

but those 2 spots are taken by wilkes and davis

 

[killerEagle]

No chance at all.

Historically we arn't that sort of club. Woosha and co. aren't the agressive trading types either.

Will be reactive to our player requests (i.e. Judd leaving, Kerr maybe), rather than overly pro-active.

I think now would be the perfect time to trade aggressively following the "Hawthorn model". With the next few drafts totally compromised by the expansion teams having a plethora of first round picks this year would be invaluable.

I would rate the untouchable players as Cox, Glass, McKinley, Masten, Ebert and Priddis (I know Priddis might be controversial but his ball winning abilities make him a definite keeper in my book).
Everyone else should be fair game as trade bait at the right price. If we could snare a few picks inside the top 30 in addition to what we already have that would be absolute gold. Short term pain for long term gain

 

[ytpme]

I would rate the untouchable players as Cox, Glass, McKinley, Masten, Ebert and Priddis (I know Priddis might be controversial but his ball winning abilities make him a definite keeper in my book).
Everyone else should be fair game as trade bait at the right price. If we could snare a few picks inside the top 30 in addition to what we already have that would be absolute gold. Short term pain for long term gain

I agree, but with every new pick worth keeping, another vacancy must be produced...this is the problem!

 

[zero]

If we were dinkum, we'd think long and hard about Seaby, Hunter, Embley, Hansen and Rosa for starters.

i would look seriously at trading seaby, if the plan is to take nicknat.

hes talented and will most likely flourish in the number one spot, and ruckmen always get more value as good ones are are fairly rare.

 

[Eagle87]

but those 2 spots are taken by wilkes and davis

I have said before and will repeat. Is there a compelling reason to upgrade Davis?

I like Davis, but assuming he can stay on the rookie list another season, why do we need to upgrade him?

I wouldnt think he is in our best 22 (or best 28) next year - while promising he isnt yet established in any way - and another year on the rookie list where he can always be upgraded for the inevitable long term injury wouldnt hurt.

Wilkes is more problematic. I dont think he will be part of our long term backline as I think he is just a player, but he has likely done enough to stay on a list and we cant keep him rookied.

 

[Eagle87]

I agree, but with every new pick worth keeping, another vacancy must be produced...this is the problem!

I wonder if we will try for some 2 for one trades. Pick 36 and 52 for pick 25 (say) or even Hunter and Spangher (just as an example) for a top 20 pick. The first type reduce our total picks (as we wont use some anyway) but get us a better pick where the second sort opens up 2 list spots for one highish pick.

We need to use our first 4 picks (as you cant pass at 36 in a deep draft, its just too good a player to not pick) and we likely need to keep the PSD option open as we may get a decent experienced player there.

I would think the club may consider some 2 for 1 type deals for some of the kids or at guys like Hunter, Embley, Seaby who may have some currency in the right team.

 

[PRANKSTER666]

i would look seriously at trading seaby, if the plan is to take nicknat.

hes talented and will most likely flourish in the number one spot, and ruckmen always get more value as good ones are are fairly rare.

You can't trade Seaby and hope that Melbourne doesn't pickup NicNat.

We won't get much for Seaby so we may as well keep him even if we draft NicNat in case Cox gets injured.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

"Trading aggressively" may involve Woosha walking into the room, pounding on the table and yelling "Give us Pavlich, Palmer and pick 3 for pick 52 or I'll ****ing destroy you!"

 

[PRANKSTER666]

I wonder if we will try for some 2 for one trades. Pick 36 and 52 for pick 25 (say) or even Hunter and Spangher (just as an example) for a top 20 pick. The first type reduce our total picks (as we wont use some anyway) but get us a better pick where the second sort opens up 2 list spots for one highish pick.

We need to use our first 4 picks (as you cant pass at 36 in a deep draft, its just too good a player to not pick) and we likely need to keep the PSD option open as we may get a decent experienced player there.

I would think the club may consider some 2 for 1 type deals for some of the kids or at guys like Hunter, Embley, Seaby who may have some currency in the right team.

WCE only trade when a WA boy wants to come home or a Vic wants to leave. If Kerr signs we won't be active during the trade period it just isn't our style to trade off our players.

I'm guessing the only deal we will do is to trade 36 & 52 into something slightly better, i.e late 2nd round with a team that needs to increase their list.

 

[beatlesmith]

I have said before and will repeat. Is there a compelling reason to upgrade Davis?

I like Davis, but assuming he can stay on the rookie list another season, why do we need to upgrade him?

I wouldnt think he is in our best 22 (or best 28) next year - while promising he isnt yet established in any way - and another year on the rookie list where he can always be upgraded for the inevitable long term injury wouldnt hurt.

Wilkes is more problematic. I dont think he will be part of our long term backline as I think he is just a player, but he has likely done enough to stay on a list and we cant keep him rookied.

probably true, but i think we are rookie-ing one of our NSW scholarship players and maybe rookie-ing thomson. If we didn't upgrade davis, we would have to delist or not vet-list fletcher. Davis looks far more AFL ready than most of our kids, and i think he will compete with waters for the small/medium defender role in the next couple of years.
Wilkes is probably a safety net as we will probably delist/trade graham, and hunter will probably play FF from now on.

 

[MaxHunt]

Question: Do we have anything that Richmond want/need?

I say this because they are the team i most likely see as trading their 1st pick. They are young and on the rise and maybe be looking for some experienced players to fill some holes to take them to the next level. I.e Ruck department. Another pick in the top 10 would be gold.

Something like seaby + #18 for #9. for example only

 

[zero]

You can't trade Seaby and hope that Melbourne doesn't pickup NicNat.

of course we can, depending on the risk and reward.

if we fenegle a first round upgrade (like upgrading pick 18 into the 8-12 (or "yarran") range) for seabs then it might well be worth it, especially if the coaching team thinks sullivan can be used successfully as a backup just in case we dont get nicknat

 

[Cuzz09]

we wont trade aggresively.

Just business as usual.

 

[Quinz]

If Kerr signs, which I think he will, I wouldn't expect us to do much trading at all.

But as someone already said, perhaps we should look at the Hawthorn model, and really think about who we want to build a premiership team around, and if any of our players don't fit that model, shop them around.

 

[bodazoka]

You can't trade Seaby and hope that Melbourne doesn't pickup NicNat.

We won't get much for Seaby so we may as well keep him even if we draft NicNat in case Cox gets injured.

Unless you trade Seaby to Melbourne... They have allot of priority picks in the second round. I think pick 36+Seaby for 17-19 is a bargain for Melbourne.
Gives us #2, #17, #18, #20 (I think thats right).