Mega Thread 2019 List Management, Free Agency & Trade thread #2

[SufferingS8INT]

Not having the trade capital hasn't exactly stopped St Kilda going after players this season.

We have the trade capital, and obviously a plan. All our deals not with Peter Bell will get done.

 

[Dale147]

Next years draft is going to be compromised, so future picks need to be first round, second reluctantly.

 

[raffrox]

Yeah I agree it would be a struggle to get it done but definitely possible once Steven and Bruce are traded. Biggest issue for us is not shooting ourselves in the foot for next year ie Ben King.

To be honest I'm a bit sick of hearing about King next year. Zac Jones isn't going to change the world and Ryder is in the tail end of his career. Howard has upside but is not going to come cheap from a salary or trade perspective.If the saints are planning this then chasing 5 players in one trade period with significant cap space involved is just a bit weird.

 

[SufferingS8INT]

Brad Hill is a much surer bet then a 19 year old KPP.

How do you know what Bell wanted? All we know for sure is that it was more then Pick 6, and Fremantle sources were claiming that their position was close to St Kilda's before the Saints walked out. Pick 6 and something else doesn't sound like it fu**s you over, given you get Hill for it. Unless the Saints bit off way more then they can chew and are reliant on getting overs for every player they trade out and unders for every player they trade in to accomplish what they wanted to, in which case I'd blame your list managers for ******* you over.

We did offer pick 6 and something else... it was on the table! So obviously it involves another first round DP otherwise we wouldn’t be having this convo. We tried to get the deal done but are now prioritising someone else (not sure who, perhaps Bonar from GWS)

 

[Bastyy]

Next years draft is going to be compromised, so future picks need to be first round, second reluctantly.

2nd round picks to those clubs with NGA players will be worth something

 

[SufferingS8INT]

To be honest I'm a bit sick of hearing about King next year. Zac Jones isn't going to change the world and Ryder is in the tail end of his career. Howard has upside but is not going to come cheap from a salary or trade perspective.If the saints are planning this then chasing 5 players in one trade period with significant cap space involved is just a bit weird.

Lol cap space is not an issue. If your sick of hearing about King already you should go off the grid because it will dominate the news for the next 12 months (unless he moves this year )

 

[Purple_Turtle]

We did offer pick 6 and something else... it was on the table! So obviously it involves another first round DP otherwise we wouldn’t be having this convo. We tried to get the deal done but are now prioritising someone else (not sure who, perhaps Bonar from GWS)

Pick 6 and what else though? Pick 6 and we give something back? Sounds a bit off. Pick 6 and a future third instead of a future second?

You seem pretty convinced that you offered a great deal for someone who wasn't in the room. Also, if you were actually close and stormed out regardless then I find it hard to believe that the Saints walked into the room with good faith.

 

[kingswood71]

We tried to get the deal done but are now prioritising someone else (not sure who, perhaps Bonar from GWS)

Then why are you here on this board??....maybe go to the GWS board to discuss Bonar??

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

What did most peeps want here before we started out, I think a lot said 6 and Acres, lets take that into consideration when we make our demands. I think some of us are getting carried away in the trade week shenanigans forgetting Hill is very very good but not the greatest thing since sliced bread like I've seen in a few suggestions on here. From the top of my head, only Taylor can lay claim to wanting basically two top picks with a 2nd back prior to trade season

I flat out refuse to believe that they offered 6 and a future 2nd, for multiple reasons I've pointed out repeatedly

If we need to get over the initial offer, I'll believe 6 and a future 3rd.

So what do we think is acceptable now.

In this draft, I see the following scenarios as better than 6 and a 3rd and acceptable and I'd rank in order of likelihood
a) 10/12, Acres, a 2nd with a 3rd going back
b) 10/12, 13 and a future 2nd going back
c) 10/12, 13 and a future 3rd going back
d) 10/12 and a future 1st with a future 2nd going back

I think most of us would have taken any of these scenarios at the start of the trade period and called it overs, think about what you'd expect for Hill if he was uncontracted - I would think 8-12 with a sweetner depending on where that pick landed.

Thoughts?

 

[Puregold]

I think the Saints are going to need a player to help get king in in the next trade period.
I see the dockers getting 12 (or 10) + 2020 first rounder for Hill and possibly a future second round (I would give up ours as I think we will finish above Melbourne next year).

To get King the Saints will have to cough up 2021 first + a player like Coffield, Clark or ...
In order to get back into the first round in 2020/2021 they can package up two 2020 second round picks for a late first round. They are going to have to give someone they value up to get King

 

[Quokka]

Yeah we didn’t call his bluff we just read the player knowing he would most likely reject our offer and ask for something overs. We put forward our best offer if it’s not enough so be it... move on

Speaking of moving on

 

[wahooo]

What did most peeps want here before we started out, I think a lot said 6 and Acres, lets take that into consideration when we make our demands. I think some of us are getting carried away in the trade week shenanigans forgetting Hill is very very good but not the greatest thing since sliced bread like I've seen in a few suggestions on here. From the top of my head, only Taylor can lay claim to wanting basically two top picks with a 2nd back prior to trade season

I flat out refuse to believe that they offered 6 and a future 2nd, for multiple reasons I've pointed out repeatedly

If we need to get over the initial offer, I'll believe 6 and a future 3rd.

So what do we think is acceptable now.

In this draft, I see the following scenarios as better than 6 and a 3rd and acceptable and I'd rank in order of likelihood
a) 10/12, Acres, a 2nd with a 3rd going back
b) 10/12, 13 and a future 2nd going back
c) 10/12, 13 and a future 3rd going back
d) 10/12 and a future 1st with a future 2nd going back

I think most of us would have taken any of these scenarios at the start of the trade period and called it overs, think about what you'd expect for Hill if he was uncontracted - I would think 8-12 with a sweetner depending on where that pick landed.

Thoughts?

I think out of those scenarios you'd have to take B or C.

Still not keen on Acres, don't think he'd add much. And I personally would prefer the two firsts in this draft over one 2019 first and a 2020 first.

 

[Joao]

Maybe. Bell said we would be very active, and there may be a few surprises. Ive seen neither yet.

The surprise is probably Menadue.

And to be fair, there has been like 5 trades and half of them were swaps.

 

[raffrox]

Lol cap space is not an issue. If your sick of hearing about King already you should go off the grid because it will dominate the news for the next 12 months (unless he moves this year )

Dominate next 12 months? Maybe in the Moorrabbin Herald.

 

[Purpletown]

Yes we would’ve had the GWS trade organised as a contingency plan. However our offer of 6 and a 2nd rounder was on the table and is more than fair trading, Bell refused our best offer, so we went to plan B. Nothing wrong with having a plan.

St Kilda may have a plan B but Freo also have a plan B. It would be fair to assume Freo's plan B is to keep their player who has two years left on his contract if the trade does not eventuate. This has been our stated position since the proposed trade was made public. Who said what etc is not in the public domain regardless of the hype being generated, time may tell what is true and what was off the mark.
Brad Hill will not (imo) tank and thus decrease his market value if this trade does not happen.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

I think out of those scenarios you'd have to take B or C.

Still not keen on Acres, don't think he'd add much. And I personally would prefer the two firsts in this draft over one 2019 first and a 2020 first.

They would be my preference as well

 

[Armoooo]

Marshall your best player?

You must not have watched much of us this year. He was playing at a Gawn / Grundy level all year.

Now he's only done this for one season, could regress next season. But if his 2019 is going to be the level he performs at going forward he is absolutely elite. Best player we've had since Roo.

 

[Dockernut]

What did most peeps want here before we started out, I think a lot said 6 and Acres, lets take that into consideration when we make our demands. I think some of us are getting carried away in the trade week shenanigans forgetting Hill is very very good but not the greatest thing since sliced bread like I've seen in a few suggestions on here. From the top of my head, only Taylor can lay claim to wanting basically two top picks with a 2nd back prior to trade season

I flat out refuse to believe that they offered 6 and a future 2nd, for multiple reasons I've pointed out repeatedly

If we need to get over the initial offer, I'll believe 6 and a future 3rd.

So what do we think is acceptable now.

In this draft, I see the following scenarios as better than 6 and a 3rd and acceptable and I'd rank in order of likelihood
a) 10/12, Acres, a 2nd with a 3rd going back
b) 10/12, 13 and a future 2nd going back
c) 10/12, 13 and a future 3rd going back
d) 10/12 and a future 1st with a future 2nd going back

I think most of us would have taken any of these scenarios at the start of the trade period and called it overs, think about what you'd expect for Hill if he was uncontracted - I would think 8-12 with a sweetner depending on where that pick landed.

Thoughts?

I wanted wayyyy overs or to keep Hill. Bell is playing it beautifully.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

I wanted wayyyy overs or to keep Hill. Bell is playing it beautifully.

Haha ok, I'm just trying to get everyone to realise the demands may be a little exorbitant and to remember what MOST of us were happy before the trade period started

 

[Jebus18]

You must not have watched much of us this year. He was playing at a Gawn / Grundy level all year.

Now he's only done this for one season, could regress next season. But if his 2019 is going to be the level he performs at going forward he is absolutely elite. Best player we've had since Roo.

Just WOW

 

[dont bowl there]

Haha ok, I'm just trying to get everyone to realise the demands may be a little exorbitant and too remember what MOST of us were happy before the trade period started

I’m with you on this whole thing, people are getting way ahead of themselves about Hill the player. He is very very good but not elite imo, doesn’t hit the scoreboard enough for that title.

 

[Carnthedockers]

We have the trade capital, and obviously a plan. All our deals not with Peter Bell will get done.

Interesting that your club is the common denominator in the Bruce, Steven and hill trade, yet bell is apparently the problem

 

[Dale147]

Marshal was good for me in SC

 

[dont bowl there]

Marshall is an absolute gun.

 

[summerthebat]

Who?