List Mgmt. 2013 Trade / Draft / Free Agency

[Manimal_Dunstan]

Brissy get screwed there. Polec and Longer for pick 14?

I think so.

Saints Pick 18 > Longer
Port Pick 14 > Pick 18 & Polec

 

[Jack Stevens]

I think so.

Saints Pick 18 > Longer
Port Pick 14 > Pick 18 & Polec

So we give up pick 18 for a previous number 8 draft pick, and Port only give a 4 pick downgrade for a previous number 5 draft pick... Pelch and co. won't let this happen, surely.

 

[cotter101]

I think so.

Saints Pick 18 > Longer
Port Pick 14 > Pick 18 & Polec

I think that was in a Rucci article? We all know he is a spud of the highest order.That guy has just written about 100 different trade scenarios this trade period. His stuff is 95% guess work.

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

I think that was in a Rucci article? We all know he is a spud of the highest order.That guy has just written about 100 different trade scenarios this trade period. His stuff is 95% guess work.

I think it was, i should have taken more notice of that haha..

 

[TS74]

I think so.

Saints Pick 18 > Longer
Port Pick 14 > Pick 18 & Polec

Absolute steal for Port if that deal goes through... Who does Rucci follow... That's right, Port doesn't he!!

 

[zutroy]

18-22 (15), 23-25 (9), 26-29 (6), 30+ (6) as of the start of the afl season next year. (including dal santo, mcevoy and saad out - bruce, delaney, longer, curren in)

forgot savage, so add him in at 23-25 for 10 (he'll be 23 before round 1)

 

[TheLastEmperor]

Absolute steal for Port if that deal goes through... Who does Rucci follow... That's right, Port doesn't he!!

Take it with a grain if salt. He's confused himself with the Gold Coast third party deal as well. There's suppose to be an in principle deal with Port & GC (14 for 20 & 27) where Port trade 20 or 27 to Brissy for Polec. Rucci somehow has pick 20 at Brissy already and then giving it to Port with Polec for 14. I think he was pissed when he wrote it.

 

[Sheeza69]

ST KILDA
The Saints have been big players. Nick Dal Santo is out as a free agent (St Kilda had to agree not to act on a clause in his contract which could have allowed them to keep him) and they got in pick 25 as compensation.
Traded 24-year-old ruck Ben McEvoy to Hawks for pick 18 and midfielder Shane Savage. Saints will now trade for 20-year-old ruck Billy Longer this week from Brisbane - the Lions will want a first round draft pick for him (the Saints have picks 3 and 18) but St Kilda will probably try to do the deal for either of picks 24 or 25.
Sam Fisher has been the subject of interest from GWS but is likely to remain at Seaford.
Key defender Luke Delaney will go to the Saints either for a late draft pick or as a delisted free agent. St Kilda also trying to secure Giants key defender Josh Bruce. No trade negotiatied so far and the Saints may try to walk him through the pre-season draft.


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/clubbyclub-guide-to-the-trade-period-20131020-2vv57.html#ixzz2iGLtt54P​

 

[tbarker]

I think that was in a Rucci article? We all know he is a spud of the highest order.That guy has just written about 100 different trade scenarios this trade period. His stuff is 95% guess work.

Massive spud .

It will be polec for 14 and some later pick for PA to use on an upgraded rookie ( making it up on guesswork as an ode to the ninja turtle.)

 

[tom1197]

would people be happy with,
McEvoy for Longer/Savage ???

 

[Ducky Tie]

would people be happy with,
McEvoy for Longer/Savage ???

It's probably an even deal from our POV. I'd be happier with Dumont/Crouch/Dunstan, Acres/Taylor/Gardiner/slider and Savage for McEvoy and pick 24 though.

 

[MightySaint]

would people be happy with,
McEvoy for Longer/Savage ???

It's a massive win for us based on potential. Longer should end up far better than Hickey who our hierarchy clearly rates above McEvoy.

 

[tom1197]

i know it would never happen but,
would you do Steven for pick 1#

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

i know it would never happen but,
would you do Steven for pick 1#

no. because yes Boyd will be a gun but plenty of KPP talent next year apparently.

 

[hayes]

i know it would never happen but,
would you do Steven for pick 1#

I would not.

 

[Defacto]

i know it would never happen but,
would you do Steven for pick 1#

nope

 

[Periphery]

i know it would never happen but,
would you do Steven for pick 1#

 

[ike2112]

At this point it's projected we end up with picks 3, 18, 19, 59 & 95 (41 for Bruce & 77 for Delaney). The good picks inside 20 we will use, no problems there. Then one further pick for Curren and we'll be all done IMO.

It may work out we swap 59 AND 18 for Fremantle's pick 17,or something of the like. Not bad for both clubs especially if 59 ends up being Freo's 3rd pick in the draft. They may just go for it.

That's not quite correct.
Before compensation was sorted, and with the follow-up part of the Hawks trade unconfirmed, we had:
3 (our 1st rounder)
17 (from Hawthorn)
21 (our 2nd rounder)
37 (our 3rd rounder)
55 (our 4th rounder)

Then the compensation picks were adding, bumping many of our picks later, and giving us the Dal pick:
3 (our 1st rounder)
18 (from Hawthorn, now a pick later due to Dale Thomas comp)
24 (our 2nd rounder, now 3 picks later due to Thomas, Buddy and Sylvia comp)
25 (our comp pick for nudging club legend NDS out of the door)
41 (our 3rd rounder, now 4 picks later due to Thomas, Buddy, Sylvia and Dal comp)
59 (our 4th rounder, now 4 picks later as above)
This is the official position as of right now, and hence this is all we can offer in trade right now.

At this point I should note Pelchen's comments;
i) Initially we were told the club had assessed the draft and felt the top 20 were of similar depth and talent to other years. Other clubs have made reference to there being maybe 5-6 players in a higher tier, then up to 20 are all a mix, with Garlett as the gamble someone might take.
ii) The clubs aim was therefore to secure 3 picks within that top 20, to ensure we got 3 of the likely solid AFL players and boost the list rebuild.
iii) Following the Dal 'deal', Pelchen said that the club were very pleased having 4 picks inside the top 25, but looked forward to (ie. very confident of) achieving the aim of 3 picks inside the top 20 - which officially right now we do not have.

Therefore, it looks very likely we are either:
a) Going to package picks in some way that turns 3, 18, 24 and 25 into 3 picks that are in the top 20. I do not see us dropping back from 3 any further than 5, as we'd miss out on one of those top tier players.
I think Boyd, Scharenberg, Aish, Kelly and Billings are the clear choices for top 5 (who knows what order) and I think unless our scouts have found issues we don't know about with three of them and GWS pick the other 2, we would be mental not to pick one of these five. For what it's worth I think GWS are obsessed with Boyd and Scharenberg, and both us and another club are mad for Kelly, so GWS is putting out these Kelly stories so they can try and get even more compensation. eg. If they got a later pick plus 3 for us to get 2, so we can secure Kelly and they take Scharenberg anyway...
b) Most of us believe that included in the Big Boy trade was a pre-agreed swap of our 2nd rounder (24) for the Hawks comp pick (now 19), and a swap of our 4th rounder (59) for their 3rd rounder (56). That would obviously be the best situation for us as it involves not giving up anything more at this point, for a pick upgrade.

If we did a) then our final positions are anyone's guess. My preference is to cut a deal with Port and Stanley as I see him as a coach's nightmare as he doesn't seem to be good at the things a big man should, and his strengths are in things which haven't enabled him to become a solid AFL player yet. But it could be anything really if there's another trade of picks out there.

However if the rumours are true, and if I am honest I don't feel confident on it, then we are going to end up with:
3 (our 1st rounder)
18 (Hawthorn's 1st rounder)
19 (from Hawthorn, their Buddy comp, traded for pick 24, our 2nd rounder, as part of McEvoy trade)
25 (our comp pick for nudging club legend NDS out of the door)
41 (our 3rd rounder)
56 (Hawthorn's 3rd rounder, traded for pick 59, our 4th rounder, as part of McEvoy trade)

We're likely to add only 6 players to our list (not including the Curren elevation). So if we do pick up Bruce, Delaney and Longer as the club intends... and we don't trade any other players out as the club has said they intend not to... then we are only going to use 3 draft picks. And our stated aim was 3 picks in the top 20. So it's going to have to be:
25 for Longer
41 for Bruce
56 for Delaney
3 top picks
Curren elevated with later pick

As I say I am worried about whether the swap of 24 for 19 is on. If you were a Hawks fan looking at it, Bailey wasn't exactly key to the Hawks, they just needed an above average ruckman knowing that during rest periods Hale is probably top 3 as 2nd ruckman in the league. So yeah they needed to find a replacement, but in this situation they would have given up two first round picks for him, and then essentially swapped Savage for pick 24. That's a big giveaway for someone who is not actually key to your side, and will be maybe your 16-17th best player. I'd be angry at that if I was a Hawks fan.
But the one thing that gives me some confidence, is that Pelchen is clever in his public messages. He is seriously pushing the '3 picks in top 20' as an aim for him to achieve. And the words he used in the last announcement was that he was strongly confident. He's setting this aim for himself remember, so has the opportunity to make himself look good by picking an aim that he knows he can achieve. Therefore, why would he say 'strongly confident' of meeting that aim which him or Bains have repeated 3 or 4 times, unless he was pretty much dead-cert to make it? That makes me think he knows something we don't, and that 3 picks inside top 20 is almost a guarantee. And the obvious one is the Hawks trade rumour. So lets hope it is true, or if it is not it is something even better.

 

[Studbuddy]

i know it would never happen but,
would you do Steven for pick 1#

 

[tom1197]

Why does everyone have pelchen as their DP?

 

[Sunshine Saint]

ike2112 Fantastic Post Great summary of where we are with picks.

 

[cooperrules]

Why does everyone have pelchen as their DP?

its pelican.

 

[goodie23]

Why does everyone have pelchen as their DP?

To give North Melbourne fans the wibblies

 

[saintguy]

Apart from the likely deals for Bruce, Delaney and longer does anyone think we will do anything else this week?

 

[felsty]

I would love for us to work in Brisbanes pick 7 somehow with the longer deal without giving away pick 3