Mega Thread 2011/12 Trade/Draft/Delist Megathread - Mid-Trade-Week edition

[Miguel Sanchez]

Re: All things Trade Week

Upgrade Hams. Forgot about that.

Why did we haggle for pick 49 from Port then? Just to piss on it?

By the way, we had no vet listed players. We had 6 rookies so its impossible for us to have 6 rookies + 2 vetlisted as there is only 6 spots on a rookie list.

Glass and Embley were on the vets list. As Phil said, you can have 8 rookies/vets. Freo for example had one vet (Grover) and seven rookies (Sibosado, Lower, Pearce, Shepheard, Roberts, Bucovaz, Ruffles)

You're not going too well today!!

 

[sTeeL]

Re: All things Trade Week

To trade for Josh Hill perhaps? .....

If we werent going to use pick 45 why not just trade that instead of haggling for pick 49 as well.

Wikipedia still shows at 6 rookies which is what I thought initially. When I thought it was 6 and wiki backed it up, why would I assume it was wrong?

 

[sTeeL]

Re: All things Trade Week

A quick look shows it is meant to be 6 but has been expanded by two due to the introduction of GWS/GCS till the end of next year.

 

[larrikin]

Re: All things Trade Week

If we werent going to use pick 45 why not just trade that instead of haggling for pick 49 as well.

Wikipedia still shows at 6 rookies which is what I thought initially. When I thought it was 6 and wiki backed it up, why would I assume it was wrong?

Port wanted the upgrade - 49 to 45.

 

[Forget the Stats]

Re: All things Trade Week

If we werent going to use pick 45 why not just trade that instead of haggling for pick 49 as well.

Wikipedia still shows at 6 rookies which is what I thought initially. When I thought it was 6 and wiki backed it up, why would I assume it was wrong?

I'd say it's because port wanted it as part of the Ebert trade so we needed to swap it so we could use it to get Hill.

 

[Coledinho]

Goodbye Coniglio my sweet prince.

 

[pantskyle]

The Ebert decision really threw us off guard. I think we had plans before hand and that went sideways once he walked out.

 

[swannies]

Goodbye Coniglio my sweet prince.

The Ebert decision really threw us off guard. I think we had plans before hand and that went sideways once he walked out.

I'm inclined to agree with this, based on what I was told was happening down at Swans.

So plan B, C or even D it is.

 

[Mattman93]

So after all that, the trade we've been expecting for about 4 days finally goes through?

 

[Keys]

I'm inclined to agree with this, based on what I was told was happening down at Swans.

What was that?

I don't know why anyone's surprised at us having a quiet trade week - in recent years we only ever seem to be involved if a player wants to leave and usually only trade for picks.

If anything I'm surprised we picked up Josh Hill as he now joins Josh Kennedy as the only player on our list that spent time on another AFL list. Given Hill's size I guess we are looking for him to play Eberts HFF role as he doesn't look to be a true crumbing forward.

 

[Coast_Watch]

Yes, we have to delist 3, but we have already effectively delisted 2. Whether Hill arrives or not is irrelevant to the fact we have removed those 2. I agree on the Dalz or Wilson most likely gone, maybe both?

Who are the 2 players we have "effectively de-listed"? BJ is de-listed (retirement). Ebert is traded, but replaced by Hill - Ebert does not count as a "de-list" as his senior list slot is taken up by Hill. It is my understanding that we are required to have 3 senior list slots available in order to enter the ND - to be filled either by new draftees or rookie promotions. At this stage, we have a full list with the exception of BJ's old slot. We need to de-list a further two players. Upgrading Hams would be considered as part of the ND process (but FFS please don't promote Hams!). I am getting tired of this . . .

 

[Obeanie1]

Waylen Manson kicked a lazy 8 goals last weekend for Waratahs up here in the AFLNT. Would have been a ripper game, Tahs v Tiwi Bombers with the final margin 7 points with the Tiwi's coming back from 40 points behind.

Reported that Fevoloa will be lining up for the Tahs to keep fit and keep his name in the papers for the right reasons. Its freakin hot up here ATM so if he wanted to shed about 20kgs quick it should only take 1 or 2 games.

 

[Keys]

Who are the 2 players we have "effectively de-listed"? BJ is de-listed (retirement). Ebert is traded, but replaced by Hill - Ebert does not count as a "de-list" as his senior list slot is taken up by Hill. It is my understanding that we are required to have 3 senior list slots available in order to enter the ND - to be filled either by new draftees or rookie promotions. At this stage, we have a full list with the exception of BJ's old slot. We need to de-list a further two players. Upgrading Hams would be considered as part of the ND process (but FFS please don't promote Hams!). I am getting tired of this . . .

The bit you bolded is right. With Hill coming in we only have one vacant spot on our list when we need a minimum of 3.

We'll use picks 23 and 28 obviously and will then either upgrade a rookie (Hams) or use pick 63 in the draft.

 

[kane249]

Who are the 2 players we have "effectively de-listed"? BJ is de-listed (retirement). Ebert is traded, but replaced by Hill - Ebert does not count as a "de-list" as his senior list slot is taken up by Hill. It is my understanding that we are required to have 3 senior list slots available in order to enter the ND - to be filled either by new draftees or rookie promotions. At this stage, we have a full list with the exception of BJ's old slot. We need to de-list a further two players. Upgrading Hams would be considered as part of the ND process (but FFS please don't promote Hams!). I am getting tired of this . . .

Why wouldn't we want to upgrade Hams

Hams will give us more value then any other player we are likely to pick up at pick 60 odd

 

[Prem87]

Hope we pick up Manson, hopefully he lasts to our 2nd rookie pick.

 

[QS]

Goodbye TWR.. you served us well.. kinda.

 

[new breed]

So is October 24 the deadline for final delistings and team list management ...... I would imagine there will be a few nervous players ??

 

[swannies]

Who are the 2 players we have "effectively de-listed"? BJ is de-listed (retirement). Ebert is traded, but replaced by Hill - Ebert does not count as a "de-list" as his senior list slot is taken up by Hill. It is my understanding that we are required to have 3 senior list slots available in order to enter the ND - to be filled either by new draftees or rookie promotions. At this stage, we have a full list with the exception of BJ's old slot. We need to de-list a further two players. Upgrading Hams would be considered as part of the ND process (but FFS please don't promote Hams!). I am getting tired of this . . .

The bit you bolded is right. With Hill coming in we only have one vacant spot on our list when we need a minimum of 3.

We'll use picks 23 and 28 obviously and will then either upgrade a rookie (Hams) or use pick 63 in the draft.

Sorry, my understanding was there was a subtle rule change a couple of years ago where players traded in and rookie upgrades count as list changes, so you didn't have to make 3 additional changes you just needed to make 3 in total. So Ebert and Jones out is a movement of 2, therefore, if we choose to upgrade Hams, and have recruited Hill, we could, feasibly only take 1 pick in the draft. I still think we'll take at least 2, with possibly a 3rd to be used.

Now, my brain has been rather resembling mush of late, so I could be completely wrong and I probably rather expect it now.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Trades in don't count Swannies, but rookie upgrades do.

 

[Keys]

I didn't think a trade counted as a list change but don't say that with any certainty.

As I understood it used to be that you had to use a minimum of three selections in the draft plus any rookie upgrades with the recent change being that a rookie upgrade counted as one of the three selections.

 

[swannies]

Trades in don't count Swannies, but rookie upgrades do.

OK, but the 2 outs, count as 2 movements out, don't they?

I'll get there soon Coast Watch.

I didn't think a trade counted as a list change but don't say that with any certainty.

As I understood it used to be that you had to use a minimum of three selections in the draft plus any rookie upgrades with the recent change being that a rookie upgrade counted as one of the three selections.

Yep, told you my mental state was questionable.

 

[pantskyle]

PORT Adelaide says it wanted to do the right thing by West Coast in trading for young midfielder Brad Ebert, rather than picking him up through the pre-season draft.

Ebert was traded to the Power today, as part of a three-way deal which sent Port premiership veterans Chad Cornes and Dean Brogan to Greater Western Sydney.

The Power gave the Eagles national draft picks No.28 and No.49, in exchange for 21-year-old Ebert, who had wanted to return home to South Australia and the club where he has a strong family connection.

Cornes, 31, and Brogan, 32 - both unwanted by Port Adelaide - were bundled with national draft pick No.69 by the Power, in return for selection No.49 from the Giants, which was then used as part of the Ebert deal.

"Obviously, we had the option of forcing (Ebert) through to the pre-season draft, we could have maybe got him for less then," Power football manager Peter Rohde said."But Brad himself and we were keen to do the right thing by West Coast, we were keen to get him to our club as quickly as possible and start pre-season, so all those things come into it.

"Some people encouraged us to force him through to the pre-season draft and pick him up then, but I don't think that's good for the industry."

Oh please.


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/port-does-right-thing-by-eagles-in-brad-ebert-trade-deal/story-fn69a32t-1226168612637

 

[Keys]

Oh please.

Seems fair to me. They could have gone the PSD path had they really wanted to and pick 28 was the best they had to give.

We were never going to get pick 6.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

OK, but the 2 outs, count as 2 movements out, don't they?

Yep, so 2 more (minimum) to come to make way for Hill and the obligatory 3 draftees/upgrades.

 

[Marlin01]

Seems fair to me. They could have gone the PSD path had they really wanted to and pick 28 was the best they had to give.

We were never going to get pick 6.

I agree. I think Port's conduct was entirely fair. Ebert put us over the barrel by his actions and gave Port the opportunity to take him in PSD. I guess we'll never know whether GC/GWS would have taken him had he gone in the PSD, but I don't think they would have.