List Mgmt. 2016 Free Agency/Trades/Draft thread Part 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Can redhorse give us the draft year of said fish/fox?

As another poster mentioned, are all 3 targets, or are we after 1 of them?

Are the other 2 notables or moneyball type players? (eg our Seeds/Hampton dice roll)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Reading through the posts on here and one name that i saw was jarrod pickett. Has disappeared really since being drafted. Ooc aswell. Gws have an abundance of these types and would trade him imo. Not part of their best 22 but can play, has extreme talent and pace. Pretty sure hes been injured for extended periods in the last 2 years, but would be worth our first and gws would accept a pick in the late teens from what we saw withorourke to hawks 2 years ago.
I liked him in his draft year but i wouldn't give up our 1st rounder now.
 
Jed Anderson was not traded for a first round pick. He was part of multiple pick swaps that valued him in the late 30s.

Try to look at it from the club's overall manoeuvring for picks position, and not each individual player's perceived worth in trades:

Selections before academy and father/son bidding: 15, 26, 28, 46, 67, 79
Selections after bidding: 21, 31, 33, 43

North's first activity in the trade period was the Anderson deal - they gave away a 1st (15) and a 3rd round (54) and requested two 2nd round picks (38 & 40) back in the process - for use in future trades during the period.

From here, North knew GC and Brisbane were going to come in for Dan Currie and Ryan Bastinac respectively, and they did..

GC gave North pick 53 for Currie, a pick North knew full well they were never actually going to use in the draft, so by your logic that would suggest Currie was valued by North in the trade at.... actually, nothing..... correct? He was virtually "cleared off the books" so to speak.

Brisbane then came in with the extra 1st they received for Jack Redden (17) and a 2nd (26) in exchange for Ryan Bastinac, two 2nd rounders (38 & 40 - the picks Hawthorn gave them) and a future 3rd rounder.

So the picks they received in return for Anderson were nothing more than a barganing chip to ensure Brisbane would hand over their 1st and 2nd in the deal (replacing the 1st they handed over for Anderson) as Brisbane's Academy bidding process was solely dependant upon having enough points available for Schache, Hipwood, Keays and Mathieson.

With the introduction of Academy bidding, it muddied the waters as to viewing individual players' worth in potential deals, especially due to the frequency at which other non-Academy clubs dealt with those Academy clubs. It has now become a rat-race of clubs trying to jostle for prized earlier picks the Academy clubs hold less value for. The AFL created this mechanism and now frowns upon it, which inevitably led to the tinkering process we're now seeing.

Don't be fooled by an individual club's transactions in the marketplace, recruiters have an eye on the bigger picture in every deal they undertake, now more so than ever before.

Those picks Hawthorn handed over in the deal were nothing more than required bargaining chips used to satisfy Brisbane's points requirements and secure replacement earlier round picks, the only pick North handed over to the Hawks that held any currency or relevance was their 1st round pick (15), thus valuing Anderson as much.
 
If you remember Grigg was also killed by the Sub rule, and he was dropped last year with alot here like myself saying he shouldnt have been.
He has had a good year in the SANFL and if we had more injuries he would have got a go.

He will be off to Carlton next year.
Grigg wasn't "killed" by the Sub rule, he was the biggest beneficiary of it.

At the start of last year, Adelaide had a policy of not wanting to have the same player as sub for consecutive games. The reason for that was fairly obvious - they usually only got to play about 1/4 of the game, and the selectors didn't want them to lose form & match fitness. As a result, Lyons and Grigg started the season by swapping positions - they alternated between sub & SANFL. Without the sub rule in place, Lyons would have played more of those games and Grigg would have spent more time in the SANFL.

I still think he'll be playing for Norwood next year. Can't see him attracting too much attention from the other AFL clubs, not even Carlton.
 
3 lines in the water for the one fish IMO
Seems to me that that particular phrase would represent 3 clubs and one player. I think what would make more sense would be one line in the water, hoping one of three fish bites.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Phil Davis left for coin, Bock left for coin, Tippett left for coin....it's about bloody time we landed someone for coin!!
Tippett went to Sydney because they offered him big coin. I'm not so convinced that's the reason he left Adelaide in the first place. I think it just determined where he ended up once the decision to leave had already been made.
 
I think our recruiters have shown themselves to be a fair bit better than Ports.
This post is history in the making - the first time you've ever posted anything positive about the AFC and the way that it is run. Congratulations!
 
was it redhorse who said parker to the crows would happen this off season?

Cant remember if it was redhorse but my recollection was that we were into him in a big way and that if we didn't get him during the end of 2015 trade period we were likely to get him in 2016 trade.

Not sure if there was anything definitive about all that though. Regardless I think what ever is posted here about trades needs to be taken in the context that information and situations can change.

Just because it didn't happen doesn't mean is all bull. Situation could be at a point in time said player indicates he wants to come but for whatever reason changes his mind. Likewise it could be all rubbish.

Too many people get worked up about information posted about the 200kg Tuna we are chasing. You can either believe it, don't believe or take it with a grain of salt.
 
Cant remember if it was redhorse but my recollection was that we were into him in a big way and that if we didn't get him during the end of 2015 trade period we were likely to get him in 2016 trade.

Not sure if there was anything definitive about all that though. Regardless I think what ever is posted here about trades needs to be taken in the context that information and situations can change.

Just because it didn't happen doesn't mean is all bull. Situation could be at a point in time said player indicates he wants to come but for whatever reason changes his mind. Likewise it could be all rubbish.

Too many people get worked up about information posted about the 200kg Tuna we are chasing. You can either believe it, don't believe or take it with a grain of salt.

as i said its all a bit of fun, but it would be nice if there was an element of truth and not just straight out trolling.
parker to the crows was straight out trolling.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top