Mega Thread 2018 Trade Period Discussion part 2! (cont. in Part 3 - link in OP)

[FR0GGY]

Picks 68 and 73 which we would have no intention of using are the very definition of peanuts.

But we have robbed from next year?
Seems an odd play.

 

[azza77]

Picks 68 and 73 which we would have no intention of using are the very definition of peanuts.

Nah I know, Im not angry at about it, just doesn't make much sense. I would have thought pick 72 was more than enough to get the deal done.

I've had a few question marks over our ability to negotiate at the trade table. A measly deal like Stengle's raises a few questions imo

 

[relapse]

how many list spots do we have? could it be that a big pick swap trade is about to go down and we need some extra picks to take to the draft (ie if we traded out and ended up with 1 or 2 top end picks, did we still need another 3 or 4 picks to fill our list?)

Well off the main list are McGovern, Dear, Gibson and Hampton, we've added McAdam and Stengle. We have two spots left on our list currently, unless we later delist Cheney.

Surely we have to be planning some list swaps because picks 16 and 21 are complete surplus to our needs at this point.

 

[Tex200]

But we have robbed from next year?
Seems an odd play.

Academy points for GCS + releasing Francou - let's see if we've buttered them up enough for a charge at 3

 

[FR0GGY]

Academy points for GCS + releasing Francou - let's see if we've buttered them up enough for a charge at 3

One can only hope!

 

[Tex200]

Massive overs for Horlin-Smith, the bloke is a complete spud, would be worth pick 70+

He is a good pick up for GCS.

Won't set the world on fire on field - but will play a key role in driving cultural change.

Outstanding character and leader

 

[FR0GGY]

Academy points for GCS + releasing Francou - let's see if we've buttered them up enough for a charge at 3

Do we possibly need academy points for next year or is that the following year?

 

[Horseflee]

Deal with GC was flat

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[The Texan]

Academy points for GCS + releasing Francou - let's see if we've buttered them up enough for a charge at 3

2 and 3.. All our picks plus next years 1st.. Plus Francou


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Stiffy_18]

Nah, in the grand scheme of things it doesn't honestly matter. My point being is why are we having to go around and muster up picks for a rookie who's played 2 games, given the other trades that have unfolded so far this period.

It's pointless arguing, but in comparison is what you could call massive "overs" if 68 and 73 are in fact the deal, for what we are getting.

Its not really overs if its something we are not planning on using. Its like having an old rusty washing machine and an old rusty microwave sitting in the shed, collecting dust and not getting used. One of your mates says I will give you this little portable radio that you want to have in your shed for that washing machine and the microwave. You would do it!

Paying overs is subjective term. Its not if you are not planning to usie the picks and it might help the other team. Its not worth haggling over or wasting time on. It reminds me of people complaining that we gave up pick 92 or whatever it was last year for Sam Gibson when we could have picked him up for free. Really?!

 

[Anzacpaul]

Academy points for GCS + releasing Francou - let's see if we've buttered them up enough for a charge at 3

 

[NikkiNoo]

But we have robbed from next year?
Seems an odd play.

I think this is leading to us being able to use our future first if you look at this post - https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...nal-draft-order-based-on-2018-ladder.1206928/

It hasn't been updated with that future fourth coming back in, but if we are sending our two late picks to Richmond and then send us Stengle and their future third, it means we can trade our future first out.

 

[phill5158]

Is there any talk about us also getting Chol from Richmond as well, not well known but seems to have potential and wouldn't lose much having him on the list.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[crows dude]

Well off the main list are McGovern, Dear, Gibson and Hampton, we've added McAdam and Stengle. We have two spots left on our list currently, unless we later delist Cheney.

Surely we have to be planning some list swaps because picks 16 and 21 are complete surplus to our needs at this point.

Signorello as well to come off

 

[Vader]

But we have robbed from next year?
Seems an odd play.

It does seem strange...

It can't be about points for Academy selections, because 4th round picks just aren't worth that many points. They start at 207 (pick #55) and go down to 19 (#72). They're worth even less once compensation picks get added, moving the start of the 4th round closer to pick #60.

I thought pick #82 would be enough for Stengle. Pick #72 should definitely get the job done, and is arguably paying overs. I don't see any reason at all why Adelaide would need pick #68.

The only thing I can think of is that we're planning on trading up, with one of our earlier picks, and this gives us some leverage to trade with in the later rounds. Maybe?

 

[WaynesWorld19]

 

[big78sam]

I think this is leading to us being able to use our future first if you look at this post - https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...nal-draft-order-based-on-2018-ladder.1206928/

It hasn't been updated with that future fourth coming back in, but if we are sending our two late picks to Richmond and then send us Stengle and their future third, it means we can trade our future first out.

We gave away out future 4th for a pick this year. So as i read it we are less likely to trade our future 1st

 

[DJ75]

I think this is leading to us being able to use our future first if you look at this post - https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...nal-draft-order-based-on-2018-ladder.1206928/

It hasn't been updated with that future fourth coming back in, but if we are sending our two late picks to Richmond and then send us Stengle and their future third, it means we can trade our future first out.

I think this is actually what is happening. The deals let us get Stengle for very little, while also opening up the possibility of trading our future first round pick.
It's a smart move.

I don't expect us to trade for St Kilda or GC pick until just before the draft. I think once Stengle goes through we will be done.

Whatever we do, I want us to have multiple picks in this draft, not just one.

 

[Tex Danger]

I think this is leading to us being able to use our future first if you look at this post - https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...nal-draft-order-based-on-2018-ladder.1206928/

It hasn't been updated with that future fourth coming back in, but if we are sending our two late picks to Richmond and then send us Stengle and their future third, it means we can trade our future first out.

We didn’t get a future 4th we traded one away

Still, losing a 4th shouldn’t prevent trading a 1st

I’m sure the Stengel deal will be done soon so people can prob stop complaining about how it might pan out. Why complain about maybe 68 + 73 when if that means we get a 3rd or 4th back next year we haven’t paid much, only 2 picks we won’t use plus rebuilding next years stock

 

[SaltPeter]

We didn’t get a future 4th we traded one away

Still, losing a 4th shouldn’t prevent trading a 1st

I’m sure the Stengel deal will be done soon so people can prob stop complaining about how it might pan out. Why complain about maybe 68 + 73 when if that means we get a 3rd or 4th back next year we haven’t paid much, only 2 picks we won’t use plus rebuilding next years stock

We've already traded away a future 3rd in the McGovern deal

Seems a bit like they will consider a trade for future 2nd this year, but are intent on keeping next years first?

 

[Cap]

It does seem strange...

It can't be about points for Academy selections, because 4th round picks just aren't worth that many points. They start at 207 (pick #55) and go down to 19 (#72). They're worth even less once compensation picks get added, moving the start of the 4th round closer to pick #60.

I thought pick #82 would be enough for Stengle. Pick #72 should definitely get the job done, and is arguably paying overs. I don't see any reason at all why Adelaide would need pick #68.

The only thing I can think of is that we're planning on trading up, with one of our earlier picks, and this gives us some leverage to trade with in the later rounds. Maybe?

If you look at the NFL history, that is what happens a lot, teams swap late round picks from incremental movements or for a better late pick.

 

[Vader]

Was that teaching career longer, or shorter, than Kornes' fire fighting career?

 

[azza77]

Its not really overs if its something we are not planning on using. Its like having an old rusty washing machine and an old rusty microwave sitting in the shed, collecting dust and not getting used. One of your mates says I will give you this little portable radio that you want to have in your shed for that washing machine and the microwave. You would do it!

Paying overs is subjective term. Its not if you are not planning to usie the picks and it might help the other team. Its not worth haggling over or wasting time on. It reminds me of people complaining that we gave up pick 92 or whatever it was last year for Sam Gibson when we could have picked him up for free. Really?!

Nah Gibson deal as an example I was more than fine with, was all for it as a depth option. Again, I'm not whinging this deal just seems odd, and I struggle to understand why 72 wouldn't have been enough and we (supposedly) have needed to acquire more picks . Unless there is more to play out of course...

 

[ad victoriam]

Well off the main list are McGovern, Dear, Gibson and Hampton, we've added McAdam and Stengle. We have two spots left on our list currently, unless we later delist Cheney.

Surely we have to be planning some list swaps because picks 16 and 21 are complete surplus to our needs at this point.

With Stengle we have 36 players on the main list with Cheney and Signorella left to sign,
Rookie list we have 4 players with Hunter left to sign.
Unless we upgraded a rookie in Murthy, CEY, Wilson, which may happen but I have not heard anything about an upgrade it leaves us with 4 spots open on the main list.

We can like last year run with 6 rookies. and a main list of 38.

 

[Vader]

If you look at the NFL history, that is what happens a lot, teams swap late round picks from incremental movements or for a better late pick.

We can't use pick #68 in the draft as things currently stand, so we have to be planning on using it in a trade.