Please don't stoop to their level.
List Mgmt. 2016 List Management: Contracts, Trading, Drafting, Academy
- Thread starter coniglio_number1
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Please don't stoop to their level.
coniglio_number1
Norm Smith Medallist
- Thread starter
- #102
Neale fills no need for us
Tongue in cheek comment. I see we are still a little sensitive about their antics. It will get worse before it gets better. Until they land Sunshine and/or Hogan they will be unbearable come later in the year.
Glen Buterol
Norm Smith Medallist
- Mar 15, 2016
- 6,008
- 17,995
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Pure hypothetical, what do you think Whitfield is worth in a trade.
Determinant
Moderator
- Jan 9, 2012
- 7,478
- 6,831
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Other Teams
- St Kilda
- Moderator
- #105
He is extremely unlikely to be traded, if he were on the table I don't believe saints would have a player suitable (not one worth it, just not one wanting to come to Sydney whom the giants would rate). A pick 1 wouldn't be enough either and saints wont have that this year.
ie I believe it's a deal you couldn't do, even if he was available
Glen Buterol
Norm Smith Medallist
- Mar 15, 2016
- 6,008
- 17,995
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Future picks surely come into it? It's what helped the Pies get Treloar over the line, who is more valuable than Whitfield IMO.
- Jan 17, 2013
- 8,160
- 9,513
- AFL Club
- GWS
We wouldn't get pick 1 for Lachie.
You are ignoring the fact that Whitfield does not want to leave.
Glen Buterol
Norm Smith Medallist
- Mar 15, 2016
- 6,008
- 17,995
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
It's only a hypothetical. We are discussing his trade value on our board & wanted to get an opinion from yours.
Determinant
Moderator
- Jan 9, 2012
- 7,478
- 6,831
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Other Teams
- St Kilda
- Moderator
- #110
It's what we drafted him with, and he has 3 years development in him, he would be a lock in any AFL team and would be able to play better in most than he has been with us, pick 1 isn't enough
Determinant
Moderator
- Jan 9, 2012
- 7,478
- 6,831
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Other Teams
- St Kilda
- Moderator
- #111
Treloar wanted out, 450k vs 800k is what motivated him, Lachie doesnt want out
- Jan 17, 2013
- 8,160
- 9,513
- AFL Club
- GWS
I disagree. He hasn't physically developed as you would expect. Eg. Kelly was taken a year later, has developed more physically and is having more impact on games. Pick 1 is for a Cameron or Fyfe.
Determinant
Moderator
- Jan 9, 2012
- 7,478
- 6,831
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Other Teams
- St Kilda
- Moderator
- #113
If you honestly believe pick one buys Fyfe or JC you so overvalue the pick it's funny
My point is that what the player wants will affect the value at any trade negotiation.
Glen Buterol
Norm Smith Medallist
- Mar 15, 2016
- 6,008
- 17,995
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
The hypothetical obviously included he requested a trade otherwise I wouldn't be discussing what his value would be. Anyway we're doing circle work here.
Please.... Your own board's thread on trade and list management is legendary for its delusions and hypotheticals. We could never hope to compete. This thread is for sensible discussion. Where just not at your level it can mess to such things.
- Nov 23, 2015
- 13,387
- 20,858
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Moderator
- #117
Nothwithstanding the previous comments ... the Saints' board is always good value for a chuckle ... so -
GWS put a price of 2 first round picks on Treloar (who would have been presumably the equivalent of a top 5 pick originally), who was out of contract, and it ended up as 2 firsts plus a fourth round pick with a second round pick going back. McCarthy, with 2 years left on contract, was allegedly 2 first round picks, but rejected (presumably due to value beyond trade & time left on contract.)
So, Lachie is a #1 draft pick, never out of the team except for injury, now with 54 games and likely to be about 70 by season's end. Possibly hasn't hit the heights we would have liked, but a really talented outside runner nonetheless, and in time we'd expect him to be very very good. I reckon that GWS would ask for 2 first round picks (this year + a future pick) as a starting point, no question. Then it would be up to Saints to negotiate from there - possibly down to first + second round picks or a second round GWS pick going back. I understand an argument that Whitfield is an outside mid versus Treloar's inside value, so not worth as much. But, I don't think that GWS would make it easy for Saints like they did with Plowman for the Blues - Lachie W is highly valued and a first team fixture. Not going to be cheap, and I wouldn't think a single first round pick would do it (or equivalent in points). And I don't think the threat of PSD would hold much - Lachie strikes me as the honourable type.
And having just had a quick look at the Saints' discussion, I'd be doubtful that GWS would be willing to package Jack Steele and Lachie for a cheap package deal. They'd definitely be worth more separate. Points for academy kids are already assured, so GWS won't be desperate to sell at any price.
Have at it!
GWS put a price of 2 first round picks on Treloar (who would have been presumably the equivalent of a top 5 pick originally), who was out of contract, and it ended up as 2 firsts plus a fourth round pick with a second round pick going back. McCarthy, with 2 years left on contract, was allegedly 2 first round picks, but rejected (presumably due to value beyond trade & time left on contract.)
So, Lachie is a #1 draft pick, never out of the team except for injury, now with 54 games and likely to be about 70 by season's end. Possibly hasn't hit the heights we would have liked, but a really talented outside runner nonetheless, and in time we'd expect him to be very very good. I reckon that GWS would ask for 2 first round picks (this year + a future pick) as a starting point, no question. Then it would be up to Saints to negotiate from there - possibly down to first + second round picks or a second round GWS pick going back. I understand an argument that Whitfield is an outside mid versus Treloar's inside value, so not worth as much. But, I don't think that GWS would make it easy for Saints like they did with Plowman for the Blues - Lachie W is highly valued and a first team fixture. Not going to be cheap, and I wouldn't think a single first round pick would do it (or equivalent in points). And I don't think the threat of PSD would hold much - Lachie strikes me as the honourable type.
And having just had a quick look at the Saints' discussion, I'd be doubtful that GWS would be willing to package Jack Steele and Lachie for a cheap package deal. They'd definitely be worth more separate. Points for academy kids are already assured, so GWS won't be desperate to sell at any price.
Have at it!
Last edited:
So lads, totally hypothetical but let's put it out there... I mean it is big footy eh?
So Neale is out of contract at the end of the year and hepell is a chance of leaving the bombers after this whole saga. Now I know it's much more likely they go to melb clubs but I'm here to speculate.
I totally realize that to gain a player like that we would lose another (probably Whitfield fits this scenario and I'm assuming he requests a trade or doesn't resign and is not 'shopped')
So my question? If it were a trade option who would you choose? Would you be interested at all?
Personally I think Hepell would do wonders for our contested possessions and clearances.
So Neale is out of contract at the end of the year and hepell is a chance of leaving the bombers after this whole saga. Now I know it's much more likely they go to melb clubs but I'm here to speculate.
I totally realize that to gain a player like that we would lose another (probably Whitfield fits this scenario and I'm assuming he requests a trade or doesn't resign and is not 'shopped')
So my question? If it were a trade option who would you choose? Would you be interested at all?
Personally I think Hepell would do wonders for our contested possessions and clearances.
Carlton sniffing around Marchbank? Id have thought they have raided you guys enough?
- Nov 23, 2015
- 13,387
- 20,858
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Moderator
- #120
Danny88, it's Bigfooty ... speculate away! Long way to catch most other boards, eh Sainters.
If, if, someone was leaving and either Neale or Heppell became an option, then yes, I think we should be interested. But a lot of factors to weigh up - $ cost, who's position does he effectively take, and hence who else might be pushed backwards and are we prepared to lose them? I'd also hope by season's end that we've looked at Hopper and Matty Kennedy and assessed their potential more closely. Unfortunately both Neale & Heppell are the same (or near) age group as our fifth year players, so we don't get any spread of ages. And who goes out of the team? Probably Toby Greene on current team list/form, with Steele, Hopper & Kennedy further back in the queue to replace Griffen when he retires in a few years. That might cost us a prized academy kid - are we prepared for that? (IMV though, we need to be absolutely clear-headed in our decision-making if it's going to improve our team.) But if we want to take the next step on the field, we do seem to need more clearances and my view would be Heppell would improve us for sure, and Neale too.
How the deal gets done would be the other point. Last year some of us would have traded Neale for Sunshine, but even if Neale wanted to leave, I doubt we'd get that from Freo now. But it might not cost us too much more, hard to tell. If it was Lachie Whitfield & he was happy to go to Bombers, then probably not too much of a trade imbalance (if any, given the Bombers' circumstances), and you never know, Heppell might want to get out of the limelight after the past few years. So, it probably is doable. My pragmatic view is that we've got the academy kids for this year's draft covered, so anyone who wanted to go back to Melbourne we'd be better off getting an experienced player to fill a deficiency than simply getting more draft picks.
If, if, someone was leaving and either Neale or Heppell became an option, then yes, I think we should be interested. But a lot of factors to weigh up - $ cost, who's position does he effectively take, and hence who else might be pushed backwards and are we prepared to lose them? I'd also hope by season's end that we've looked at Hopper and Matty Kennedy and assessed their potential more closely. Unfortunately both Neale & Heppell are the same (or near) age group as our fifth year players, so we don't get any spread of ages. And who goes out of the team? Probably Toby Greene on current team list/form, with Steele, Hopper & Kennedy further back in the queue to replace Griffen when he retires in a few years. That might cost us a prized academy kid - are we prepared for that? (IMV though, we need to be absolutely clear-headed in our decision-making if it's going to improve our team.) But if we want to take the next step on the field, we do seem to need more clearances and my view would be Heppell would improve us for sure, and Neale too.
How the deal gets done would be the other point. Last year some of us would have traded Neale for Sunshine, but even if Neale wanted to leave, I doubt we'd get that from Freo now. But it might not cost us too much more, hard to tell. If it was Lachie Whitfield & he was happy to go to Bombers, then probably not too much of a trade imbalance (if any, given the Bombers' circumstances), and you never know, Heppell might want to get out of the limelight after the past few years. So, it probably is doable. My pragmatic view is that we've got the academy kids for this year's draft covered, so anyone who wanted to go back to Melbourne we'd be better off getting an experienced player to fill a deficiency than simply getting more draft picks.
Maybe I am getting a little impatient, but Heppell for one of our other inside mids and something else would make a big difference in 2017. Maybe package of a couple that can't quite get a look into the 22, or in and out, plus steak knives? Think Barrett and Tomlinson? Heppell, Cogs and Ward feeding Shiel, Scully and Kelly...mmmmm...
Determinant
Moderator
- Jan 9, 2012
- 7,478
- 6,831
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Other Teams
- St Kilda
- Moderator
- #123
No.
We have Hopper, Kennedy and Barrett capable of equalling or surpassing Heppel, keep Lachie for his outside run and develope our own NSW talent for the inside grunt
I thought it was Richmond sniffing around Marchbank - or was it St Kilda? Or was it Whitfield? Maybe Tomlinson.
Somebody needs to do a spreadsheet or diagram. Keep track of which Giants players are going to which club at any given moment.
Might look something like.....
Anyway - this week it's Marchbank and Carlton. Can't wait 'til next week.
I'm talking now. Those kids are years away from being dominant inside mids. GWS need results now
