List Mgmt. 2021 Trade & List Management Thread II - IN: CCJ

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.


 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

King Corey said:
I still think it's too much when Tarrant is factored in.

Richmond potentially walk away with Tarrant, #38 and #45 (Chol) after it all settles.

We gain CCJ for #38 AND Tarrant while forgoing our own chance at compo. Putting the PSD pistol aside, they still need to provide an incentive to trade rather than delist Tarrant and there's none in that deal.
Click to expand...
1633061006632.png
1633061028680.png
from
www.foxsports.com.au

Lottery tickets or close to a sure thing? What AFL draft picks are actually worth

Lottery tickets or close to a sure thing? What AFL draft picks are actually worth
www.foxsports.com.au www.foxsports.com.au
Old data for sure.
But it would be similar these days.
Pick 38 isnt great.
I doubt we care.
Just get the deal done.
1633061238097.png
 
King Corey said:
I still think it's too much when Tarrant is factored in.

Richmond potentially walk away with Tarrant, #38 and #45 (Chol) after it all settles.

We gain CCJ for #38 AND Tarrant while forgoing our own chance at compo. Putting the PSD pistol aside, they still need to provide an incentive to trade rather than delist Tarrant and there's none in that deal.
Click to expand...

If we don't get something of rough equal value pick wise, I don't see how we are being pricks making them own poor list management.

Pick 69 or GAGF.
 
danielG said:
Sorry for the intrusion
Listening to offers for pick 1 is interesting...I wonder if a deal with GWS and Crows would be on the cards.
North lose pick one
North gain Pick 2 (Callaghan) & Crows 2022 1st (most likely top 5)
Giants gain Crows pick 4 (Mac Andrew) and Kangas pick 20
Crows gain pick 1 (Horne)
Crows Lose Pick 4 and 2022 first rouder...
who says no ? All clubs might get their preferred player if North are worried about Horne go home factor.
Click to expand...
Thanks for thinking of us but our man Rooboy 96 will help you out with some ‘magic dice’ that will give you a fair answer..
 
Ryz said:
If we don't get something of rough equal value pick wise, I don't see how we are being pricks making them own poor list management.

Pick 69 or GAGF.
Click to expand...

Agreed if it isn’t Tarrant and 69 Rawlings is a fraud he has shown zero hard image. He runs a tight lipped crew but gets walked all over.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
danielG said:
Sorry for the intrusion
Listening to offers for pick 1 is interesting...I wonder if a deal with GWS and Crows would be on the cards.
North lose pick one
North gain Pick 2 (Callaghan) & Crows 2022 1st (most likely top 5)
Giants gain Crows pick 4 (Mac Andrew) and Kangas pick 20
Crows gain pick 1 (Horne)
Crows Lose Pick 4 and 2022 first rouder...
who says no ? All clubs might get their preferred player if North are worried about Horne go home factor.
Click to expand...

You lost me at "North lose pick 1".....
 
I’m completely of the belief that pick #20 is too early to start focusing on needs.

I remember 2014 when we needed a KPD and ended up reaching for Nielsen at #25. Or even 2011 when we were desperate for a HBF at #18. You could even bring up 2012 when we didn’t need a ruck so we passed on Brodie Grundy at #15; or a success story would be last year where nobody wanted another midfielder for us, but we walked out of the draft with Tom Powell at #13.

15-25 is the sweet spot where good recruiters can make a difference by finding the guys who are undervalued. You look back at past drafts and a lot of the time there’s only about 3-4 difference makers in that group. I’d much rather we try to find those players than pick a KPD in the hope that they can fill an important role for us in 4-5 years.
 
Last edited:
The Anvil said:
The best outcome for the Roos is Tarrant as FA and CCJ to PSD. If we aren't using this as the baseline then we are kidding ourselves and not serious about doing what it takes to get our best possible team.
Click to expand...

Exactly. If we do nothing we get CCJ and possibly 39 for Tarrant. Why are we even talking unless Richmond offers us something better than that?
 



North to ‘take calls’ on trading No.1 pick, price set for Tigers young gun: Roos trade whispers
Zac Rayson




North Melbourne list boss Glenn Luff has opened up on the club’s ‘pretty disappointing’ loss of Robbie Tarrant to Richmond and revealed the Kangaroos’ plans to sign Tigers young gun Callum Coleman-Jones.

Luff also said Trent Dumont, Shaun Atley, and Tom Campbell’s positions on the list remain in limbo, and hinted at the club’s approach to incoming arrival Tom Lynch – as well as the upcoming AFL Draft in which the club has the number one pick.


Luff told AFL Trade Radio that the club was seeking to hold onto its number 20 draft pick in trade negotiations with the Tigers over gifted young ruck-forward Callum Coleman-Jones, who has requested a trade to North Melbourne.

“We’ve had some early discussions with the Tigers. We’ll put something to them pretty early in the trade period … Obviously what happens with Robbie Tarrant will have an effect on that,” he said.

“We’re pretty clear in our head what it would take. There’s plenty of history in terms of ruck-forwards and what they go for at that age.”
He added: “We’re keen to keep pick 20. 38 (another North Melbourne draft pick) – something around that region, that’s what history tells you gets these deals done. We’ll be looking in that area.”

Coleman-Jones could join through the pre-season draft if a trade deal can’t be struck, but Luff said: “I would have expected hopefully it doesn’t get to that point. We don’t want to use that to get him through the door. We’re pretty comfortable that something should get done.”

As for how the club will use the versatile youngster, Luff said: “It’s pretty clear that Nobes (Noble) is a two-rucks coach. He loves playing the two rucks. We’ve got Todd Goldstein who is a great player for us for a long time. We have to look at the long term in terms of our ruck stocks, we’ve got Tristan Xerri as well.

“We feel Cal is more of a ruck-forward rather than a forward-ruck. He probably hasn’t got that opportunity at the Tigers. He’s keen to get more opportunity in the ruck and we think we can provide that.

“Goldie played a lot more forward last year and it’s clear he can do that. In the short term we think they can share the ruck duties and long term we think Cal is a really good option in the ruck.”

The Kangaroos list boss didn’t hide his disappointment at the departure of Robbie Tarrant after 14 seasons at the club, saying North Melbourne offered him a ‘pretty similar’ two-year deal to that he signed at Richmond.

“Well clearly we wanted Robbie to stay as a North Melbourne player … he’s an absolute great of our club. We had a two-year offer on the table to Robbie. Unfortunately he’s picked another club in Richmond,” he said.

“We get that, we understand where Robbie is at in his career. Where we are as a list – we’re rebuilding. So we totally understand where Robbie’s coming from and why he would choose to chase that Premiership somewhere else.

“We’re pretty disappointed to lose him. We would have loved for Robbie to be a one-club player but that’s how it panned out.”
The club reportedly had a one-year contract offer on the table for some months, but only upped the ante following Richmond’s own two-year offer.

Luff added: “Recently it was a one-year (offer). We got a two-year offer in the end … you have to look at the longevity of the rest of the year. Robbie is into his 15th year next season, we had to take that into account. In the end it was two years. We think it was a pretty similar offer.”


Luff added that he expects Richmond to trade for Tarrant rather than sign him as a free agent, given the Tigers will lose 24-year-old unrestricted free agent Mabior Chol to the Gold Coast.

Were the Tigers to sign Tarrant as a free agent, they would likely lose their expected third-round compensation pick for Chol.

Luff said: “We’re not entirely sure (if the Tigers will trade for Tarrant). That’s probably the gut feel at the moment,” hinting an outcome could be revealed “in the next couple of days.”

But he declared that the club is ‘not panicking’ over the loss of a key position player.

“In terms of depth of our key positions, we’re not going to panic too much. It’d be easy to go out and get a delist free agent around the 28-plus age. We think it’s an opportunity for a list spot and to bring someone through the draft and develop from a young age.

“I think the initial reaction is ‘we have to replace him’. But we’ve got Ben McKay, we’ve got Josh Walker. Aidan Corr played two games for us last year and we’re really excited about what Aiden can bring, he can play tall. We’ve got Aiden Bonar and Lachie Young that can play a bit taller as well.

“We’re not panicking, but there’s no doubt in the long term from a club’s point of view we need to look at that space.”

DRAFT PLANS

Asked whether the club would consider trading the valuable number one pick in the AFL Draft, Luff said it was possible – but unlikely.

“It’s a pretty valuable pick one this year, we think. It’s probably more valuable than any other year. We’d be silly not to take talls and hear what’s being put to us. There’s been a couple of nibbles but pretty small,” he said.

“We’ll sit back and take calls and see what comes. It’s pretty clear that it’d have to be a pretty attractive deal to hand over pick one.”

But he wouldn’t bite at a question as to whether Jason Horne-Francis was a lock for the number one pick. “Clearly we’ve tracked Jason and a lot of guys in that area, he said. “He’s had an outstanding two years playing league footy (SANFL) at his age. He’s clearly a special talent. No doubt he’ll be talked about heavily.”

Another option would be to bid on Nick Daicos – a Magpies father-son pick – and force Collingwood to match the bid. And Luff said it was an option: “We’ve got seven or eight weeks until the draft so there’s plenty of time to talk about that. We haven’t really got too in depth into it at the moment.”

LYNCH’S ARRIVAL

Another question looming large over the Roos’ trade period is whether former Crow and Saint Tom Lynch will join the club as a rookie-listed player, or only as a VFL player as he looks to move to coaching.

Luff said a decision had not yet been made: “We’re still working through that. The boys are really excited about it … He’s clearly got a real passion for coaching and wants to get to that point.

“How we acquire him, we’re still working through that. The rookie list is an option, there’s a veto option. That’ll sort itself out in the next few weeks.”

“We’ve got a really young forward line, it’s our youngest line on the list. To bring someone of his quality to teach our young exciting forwards is a no-brainer.”

TRIO IN LIMBO

As for players like Trent Dumont, Shaun Atley, and Tom Campbell, their time at the club is on thin ice. Luff revealed they’ll have to wait until the close of the trade period to find out if they’ll find a place on a ‘bit tight’ list.

On Dumont, Luff said: “He hasn’t got a contract. It’s got to a point where list spots are a bit tight. Trent along with another three boys are in the wait-and-see basket, see how the trade period pans out. We’ll have to assess that once we get through the trade period and see where we sit with Trent.”

As for Atley and Campbell, Luff added: “It’s a wait and see for those guys … You never know what things can happen. We learned that lesson last year.”

“We’ve communicated really early with Shaun with where it’s at and hopefully there’s a spot for him.”
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Mixed Results said:
I’m completely of the belief that pick #20 is too early to start focusing on needs.

I remember 2014 when we needed a KPD and ended up reaching for Nielsen at #25. Or even 2011 when we were desperate for a HBF at #18. You could even bring up 2012 when we didn’t need a ruck so we passed on Brodie Grundy at #15; or a success story would be last year where nobody wanted another midfielder for us, but we walked out of the draft with Tom Powell at #13.

15-25 is the sweet spot where good recruiters can make a difference by finding the guys who are undervalued. You look back at past drafts and a lot of the time there’s only about 3-4 difference makers in that group. I’d much rather we try to find those players then pick a KPD in the hope that they can fill an important role for us in 4-5 years.
Click to expand...

I agree with you in principle,but surely we wouldn’t take an inside mid if they were best available at 20. Similarly surely we wouldn’t take a mid sized forward. Or a Ruck/KPF.

We have so many players under 24. Most of them are mids and forwards. Fortunately we don’t have a young KPD other than Mckay, any locked in running half back or any locked in medium/small defender.

So I think it’s best available as long as they are defenders. Or skillfull pressure small forward.
 
danielG said:
Sorry for the intrusion
Listening to offers for pick 1 is interesting...I wonder if a deal with GWS and Crows would be on the cards.
North lose pick one
North gain Pick 2 (Callaghan) & Crows 2022 1st (most likely top 5)
Giants gain Crows pick 4 (Mac Andrew) and Kangas pick 20
Crows gain pick 1 (Horne)
Crows Lose Pick 4 and 2022 first rouder...
who says no ? All clubs might get their preferred player if North are worried about Horne go home factor.
Click to expand...
i would rather give our pick 20 this year and future first 2022 directly to GWS to gain access to Callaghan , that way we have JHF as well
 
Confirmed - the trade period ends at 7:30pm EST on Wednesday October 13. FoxFooty #AFLTrade
 
the big lebowski said:
I agree with you in principle,but surely we wouldn’t take an inside mid if they were best available at 20. Similarly surely we wouldn’t take a mid sized forward. Or a Ruck/KPF.

We have so many players under 24. Most of them are mids and forwards. Fortunately we don’t have a young KPD other than Mckay, any locked in running half back or any locked in medium/small defender.

So I think it’s best available as long as they are defenders. Or skillfull pressure small forward.
Click to expand...

I was thinking about us passing on Brodie Grundy earlier and what would have happened if we drafted him in 2012 like a lot of people on this board wanted. While having both him and Goldstein together wouldn’t have worked out at all, the end result would probably have worked out better for us than 70 odd games from Garner and an unceremonial delisting.

if there’s a guy there that you think has a chance to be special then you should always take them. If we draft somebody who ends up being the next Ben Cunnington at pick #20 I’m not going to be too upset. It’s a good problem to have.
 
Mixed Results said:
I was thinking about us passing on Brodie Grundy earlier and what would have happened if we drafted him in 2012 like a lot of people on this board wanted. While having both him and Goldstein together wouldn’t have worked out at all, the end result would probably have worked out better for us than 70 odd games from Garner and an unceremonial delisting.

if there’s a guy there that you think has a chance to be special then you should always take them. If we draft somebody who ends up being the next Ben Cunnington at pick #20 I’m not going to be too upset. It’s a good problem to have.
Click to expand...

Again I agree with you in principle but the example of Grundy and Goldy isn’t the same as another inside mid at 20.

We are going to have 6 first round mid field picks 23 or under. All will be 200 game players. And we are crying out for your g players, across multiple positions in the backline.

I’m not saying reach for needs, but surely 20 gives us scope to find a backman around where he should be ranked.
 
Le Grille said:
So we pay pick 20 and down grade pick 1 for a future 1st? Pass
Click to expand...
7577969923 said:
Not the worst proposal I've seen.
Click to expand...
JUST NORTH said:
i would rather give our pick 20 this year and future first 2022 directly to GWS to gain access to Callaghan , that way we have JHF as well
Click to expand...
I'm not concerned either way given it's not impacting my team, just thought it was a way for all teams to get a win. Maybe your 3rd rather than 2nd is closer to the mark. Either way, you're on a winner with Horne or Callaghan. Both is just getting greedy, you're already loaded with midfielders. Good luck ya'll .
 
danielG said:
I'm not concerned either way given it's not impacting my team, just thought it was a way for all teams to get a win. Maybe your 3rd rather than 2nd is closer to the mark. Either way, you're on a winner with Horne or Callaghan. Both is just getting greedy, you're already loaded with midfielders. Good luck ya'll .
Click to expand...
I just don’t think it’s a win for us mate, that’s all
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Daniltchenko You Beauty
  • Locked
List Mgmt. 2024 Trade & List Management Thread - Part II
396 397 398 399 400
Replies
10K
Views
478K
Twangler
T
giantroo
List Mgmt. 2025 Trade & List Management Thread
2 3
Replies
58
Views
3K
The Nostradamus
The Nostradamus
Daniltchenko You Beauty
  • Locked
List Mgmt. 2024 Trade & List Management Thread - Part 3
407 408 409 410 411
Replies
10K
Views
465K
DuckYeah
DuckYeah
giantroo
List Mgmt. 2023 Trade & List Management Thread III
139 140 141 142 143
Replies
4K
Views
212K
The Nostradamus
The Nostradamus
giantroo
  • Locked
List Mgmt. 2024 Trade & List Management Thread
397 398 399 400 401
Replies
10K
Views
515K
King Hansen
King Hansen
Makeshift Park
Preview Changes vs Brisvegas [In: Greenwood, Comben & Shiels / Out: Pink, Lazzaro & CCJ]
25 26 27 28 29
Replies
701
Views
27K
Big_H
Big_H
scottywiper
List management 101 (69?)
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
277
Views
12K
The Nostradamus
The Nostradamus

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top