List Mgmt. 2016 Trade/FA Thread 2.0: Ahern (pg168); Hrovat (pg252); Williams (pg270)

[tiltraise]

Or like, Dear for 69.

We may need 69 though either as part of a trade or as an actual selection in the draft.

 

[tiltraise]

Let's not downgrade our first rounder for players who have never played an AFL game and have had 2 recos or players who were taken in the 50s a few years ago and have 'dominated' a bush league comp.

Why are you afraid to downgrade our first rounder?

 

[Route57]

I briefly went through the last few days of his tweets and North are disproportionately represented; that is, there are more tweets on us than any other team. And he seems to be a bit frustrated that we're not giving him anything, hence we are "hesitant to commit" and chasing Zaharakis ...

It's probably Damo.

Yeah, I just really hope the north team are in fact sticking to a unique plan, and I understand we will never know etc.. but I guess it's hard for fans to believe otherwise just because we were previously associated with questionable players

 

[Bojan KantKick]

Why are you afraid to downgrade our first rounder?

Because I want us to take some good selections in the draft. If we are downgrading our first rounder, let's do it for some real quality.

 

[tiltraise]

Because I want us to take some good selections in the draft. If we are downgrading our first rounder, let's do it for some real quality.

We can still take good selections in this draft a few spots lower its very even beyond the top 6 or so. In fact its quite likely we would pick the same player at 11 or 13. If thats the case why not utilize the latent currency by dropping down a few spots?

As for trading for real quality it seems likely this isnt going to happen in this trade period.

 

[adrenalinjunkie]

If this is the case we'll happily take Scrimshaw at 11. I think 11 sets us up to pick one of the sliders from that top group.

But ideally we'd have a trade that can get us another pick around the mark. However, we have no players of real currency though apart from Goldy.

Exactly mate. Scrimshaw at 11 would be just massive for us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[adrenalinjunkie]

So you want me to stay lol

We have our eyes firmly on the Sherrin on this board. And they don't deviate.

Not till we win another flag anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rooboys Rool]

Surely our next 3 moves are this:

1. 2017 2nd to GWS for Ahern & Pickett.

2. 2017 1st & 3rd , 32, 33 & Black to the Suns for 8, 22, 24, 28

3. Hansen to Dogs for Hrovat

Go to draft with: 8,11,22,24,28 in addition to Ahern, Pickett & Hrovat

Looks good. But unfortunately if you trade next year's first pick you can't trade anymore future picks. (But you can trade multiple future picks if the first pick isn't one of them.)

 

[Bojan KantKick]

We can still take good selections in this draft a few spots lower its very even beyond the top 6 or so. In fact its quite likely we would pick the same player at 11 or 13. If thats the case why not utilize the latent currency by dropping down a few spots?

As for trading for real quality it seems likely this isnt going to happen in this trade period.

I want us to move up, not down. Only move back to 15 if we get another 1st rounder as well. Don't move back for the sake of it and don't move back for players like Harry Dear ffs. Ahern will be a late pick anyway. Joyce isn't an idiot.

 

[king rising]

Ahern will be a ripping get for us. By all accounts his attitude to rehabilitation has been first class and i believe he will be a special talent for us come 2018. get around him.

last thing i'll say, be prepared for more deals (separate from Hrovat)

 

[tiltraise]

I want us to move up, not down. Only move back to 15 if we get another 1st rounder as well. Don't move back for the sake of it and don't move back for players like Harry Dear ffs. Ahern will be a late pick anyway. Joyce isn't an idiot.

The thing is we need more picks not less. Trading up gets us less whilst down gives us more.

 

[Rooboy 96]

The thing is we need more picks not less. Trading up gets us less whilst down gives us more.

do you want 4 average ins or 1 very good 2 average and 1 very speculative? trading down may even make the 4 average, 2 average and 2 speculative depending on who we select.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

The thing is we need more picks not less. Trading up gets us less whilst down gives us more.

We have a team full of B-C graders minus Goldy and Tarrant. I'd rather get 1 A grader in this draft than 2 more B graders.

 

[tiltraise]

do you want 4 average ins or 1 very good 2 average and 1 very speculative? trading down may even make the 4 average, 2 average and 2 speculative depending on who we select.

The suggestion in question was 11 to 13 not sure that equates to very good down to average.

Regardless top 40 or so of this pool look to be average+ in terms of quality so im looking to get more picks in that zone not less.

And considering we may have more delistings coming id prefer to keep the very speculative to a minimum.

 

[tiltraise]

I'd rather get 1 A grader in this draft than 2 more B graders.

Thats nice in theory however your making a lot of general statements and arent looking at the specific pool we are facing.

To get into the top tier of this draft imo we really need a pick in the first 6.

What is your plan to achieve this goal?

 

[Rooboy 96]

The suggestion in question was 11 to 13 not sure that equates to very good down to average.

Regardless top 40 or so of this pool look to be average+ in terms of quality so im looking to get more picks in that zone not less.

And considering we may have more delistings coming id prefer to keep the very speculative to a minimum.

how are you looking at gaining the other selections under 40?

your suggestion of 11 for 13 and Dear

would be as likely as Port's 9 for our 11 and Black, can you see that working?

 

[Rooboy 96]

with a bit of imagination we may even be able to do


and then trade 67 for Dear

 

[Bojan KantKick]

Thats nice in theory however your making a lot of general statements and arent looking at the specific pool we are facing.

To get into the top tier of this draft imo we really need a pick in the first 6.

What is your plan to achieve this goal?

Trade for a pick in the teens and package it with #11 to get a top 6 pick.

Alternatively, trade an old A grader for a top 6 pick or 2x top 10 in the case of GC.

Who says no to the following :

GC get Goldy and pick 11.
North get GC's 2 highest picks. Or some slight variation of that.

 

[tiltraise]

would be as likely as Port's 9 for our 11 and Black, can you see that working?

I dont like pick 9 for us in this pool so I wouldnt do that.

The main reason im trying to move 11 on is I dont like that part either.

 

[Rooboy 96]

Trade for a pick in the teens and package it with #11 to get a top 6 pick.

Alternatively, trade an old A grader for a top 6 pick or 2x top 10 in the case of GC.

Who says no to the following :

GC get Goldy and pick 11.
North get GC's 2 highest picks. Or some slight variation of that.

I don't think the rumour relating to Goldie has pushed the club to trade him, so I doubt very much he is on the table, these trade scenarios with Goldie are all good and fun for the trade period but I think they are just noise we should be blocking out.

 

[Rooboy 96]

I dont like pick 9 for us in this pool so I wouldnt do that.

The main reason im trying to move 11 on is I dont like that part either.

I do get what you are trying to do, but I don't think it is worthwhile unless we can gain a pick around 15 and another in the very early 20s, I would not bother moving back to gain Dear who in reality would hold less trade value then Mckenzie or Black.

 

[tiltraise]

Trade for a pick in the teens and package it with #11 to get a top 6 pick.

Alternatively, trade an old A grader for a top 6 pick or 2x top 10 in the case of GC.

Who says no to the following :

GC get Goldy and pick 11.
North get GC's 2 highest picks. Or some slight variation of that.

I dont mind trading Goldy out however I dont think GC want him and it seems unlikely anyone is willing to pay 2 1sts for him.

For mine GC want to shore up picks 3 + 4 then have a bunch of picks in the 20s as well as some 2017 picks to round it out.

If we traded Tarrant im confident we could get some high picks however is that something you want to do?

If we trade for a pick in the teens that costs us at least 1 player and/or a pick and then trading 2 picks for one means we suddenly start having to pick multiple selections in the 100s.

 

[Bojan KantKick]

I dont mind trading Goldy out however I dont think GC want him and it seems unlikely anyone is willing to pay 2 1sts for him.

For mine GC want to shore up picks 3 + 4 then have a bunch of picks in the 20s as well as some 2017 picks to round it out.

If we traded Tarrant im confident we could get some high picks however is that something you want to do?

If we trade for a pick in the teens that costs us at least 1 player and/or a pick and then trading 2 picks for one means we suddenly start having to pick multiple selections in the 100s.

GC would pay 2 firsts if one came went back to them.

Can't trade Taz. We need him and maybe Thommo to teach EVW, Nielsen and hopefully Durdin.

We know that GC ideally want players not picks.

 

[tiltraise]

I do get what you are trying to do, but I don't think it is worthwhile unless we can gain a pick around 15 and another in the very early 20s, I would not bother moving back to gain Dear who in reality would hold less trade value then Mckenzie or Black.

Yeah it was just a thought so I put it out there.

Ade has 13 and it seems to not quite be enough for Gibbs thus I was looking to improve it for them whilst picking up something for us.

Also worth noting 11 back to 13 is equiv to pick 63.

 

[Thewlis Dish]

I would not bother moving back to gain Dear who in reality would hold less trade value then Mckenzie or Black.

He would hold more value than both Black and McKenzie simply because untapped potential >> underwhelming AFL form. You'll always take the unknown quantity over the quantity that is known to be poor.

Come on mate, you surely don't believe what you post sometimes