Ultimate Glory 2023 Trade speculation and Shinbeggars discussion

[triple treat]

We’re not getting Picks 10 and 17, just like we’re not getting Pick 4.

Why? If the Dogs are willing to give that up for pick 4 then why wouldn’t they give it up for pick 3? Or have the Hawks ruled that out?

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

We could easily get pick 4, if we wanted to trade F1. Only way any team could better that is if WCE or North offer F1.

No, we couldn’t easily get Pick 4 which is why no one has us getting Pick 4.

 

[triple treat]

If Dogs are offering 10, 17 and f1 as rumoured then that’s better than Hawthorns f1 alone

In an open draft it is but when those picks will just be eaten up it’s not. And like many have said GC will have plenty of points when they trade out a few players

 

[butlers hawks]

In an open draft it is but when those picks will just be eaten up it’s not. And like many have said GC will have plenty of points when they trade out a few players

They wouldn’t be keeping 10 and 17 they would then be traded again

 

[cryptor]

Apologies I'm a bit late to the party on this rumour but saw an article in The Age linking us to Jamarra Ugle-Haga in 2024. What do you guys think about this?

I think the Bulldogs have too many KPFs at the moment. Naughton, Lobb, JUH, Darcy and potentially adding Croft this draft (if he nominates as a F/S despite the logjam).

We should be talking to Naughton, JUH and Darcy right now about the opportunity we have for one of them to come into our team and strike up a partnership with Lewis. The famous #23 will be freed up once Kosi makes his move to the Tigers. We have the salary cap room and draft capital to make it happen. They just have to make it known they want it to happen so the clubs can work on a deal.

 

[triple treat]

They wouldn’t be keeping 10 and 17 they would then be traded again

For what? More points this year or a future 1st? If it’s for a future 1st wouldn’t ours be more appealing unless Roos or Eagles are willing to trade there’s?

 

[Scrads]

A scenario I would love is that once the first couple of picks are known (Reid, etc), we tell Gold Coast we want to bid on Walter (as we obviously need a key forward) at pick 3. However, we will trade them pick 3 and our future 2nd for pick 4 and their future first. Gold Coast get ahead of the Walter bid, meaning they get an extra first rounder this year (Pick 3 + Walter) and an early 2nd next year. In other words, they end up with 2 firsts and a second.

We still get our man this year but have upgraded our 2nd to a first next year, meaning we will have 2 firsts.

Unlikely to work (better offers, Walter bid coming earlier)- but has genuine benefit for both teams.

GC will have to trade that selection before North are on the clock as GC can't make a trade once (if) North put a bid in.

 

[butlers hawks]

For what? More points this year or a future 1st? If it’s for a future 1st wouldn’t ours be more appealing unless Roos or Eagles are willing to trade there’s?

well, if they move it for a future 1 then they would walk into next year with 3 firsts (their own, Dogs and the team trading for it) rather than just theirs and ours.

 

[Platten44]

GC will trade pick 4 to the Dogs for 10,17 and Dogs future 1st. GC will then trade 10 for Richmond’s future 1st and 17 for more points if needed or if they have enough points 17 for one of Norths future charity picks.

 

[Kuuz]

We have a greater chance of landing GWS Pick 6 through a salary dump, than we are landing GCS Pick 4.

There are clubs with much more flexible options to trade to GCS than we do - we just don't have a huge array of picks to play with. I just don't see it. Twomey outlined it a few weeks ago on their podcast, and he laid out a compelling case that Hawks were pretty low odds based on what we can offer.

I'm hoping we can do some work with GWS to pull out some magic and get a second pick in the first round, but just feels like we're thin on options to tempt sides with.

Our trade bait are all out of contract or low on exposed talent, and we only would want to trade our F1/F2 in terms of picks. The biggest asset we have is our salary cap space, which we haven't been able to capitalise on with free agency, nor we cannot use to draw picks with it ... yet.

 

[Rocket72]

I'm seeing this a lot - our first pick this year is a "hell no" but or F1 is "absolutely, all in" and I don't completely understand. Don't they have pretty comparable value? Why say "only" future 1st? Are Hawthorn fans expecting us to be top 6 next year such that the value is much less?

I think it's pretty reasonable to assume it will be a top 6 or 7 pick next year (compared to pick 4 this year). Therefore, I'm not sure why there is such diametrically opposed views on the current 1st compared to the future 1st?

Temporal discounting

 

[triple treat]

well, if they move it for a future 1 then they would walk into next year with 3 firsts (their own, Dogs and the team trading for it) rather than just theirs and ours.

Yeah ok, but that would give them the dogs 1st ( let’s say 12-18) there own and who ever is willing to trade out of next years 1st round ( I would of thought another pick 12-18) or a top 5 pick as that’s the range where a lot of teams will us finishing.

 

[Lickmesocks]

We’re not getting Picks 10 and 17, just like we’re not getting Pick 4.

My goodness. Some common sense!!! What about pick 6 from the giants if we take Haynes

 

[Guardian Hawk]

GC will have to trade that selection before North are on the clock as GC can't make a trade once (if) North put a bid in.

Yeah and the plan was dependent on North not putting in a bid...which earlier in the year (when I thought of it) looked a strong chance (North potentially last with Reid, Walter coming up the draft order later in the year, McKay $ bonanza not yet known, etc). It's why I said it is probably unlkely now as a North bid seems more likely (especially with 2 picks) but they may still have their eyes set on others (North often do), particularly knowing he is tied to Gold Coast. Once the draft is close, where the top picks are going are usually known to clubs (or it could happen on draft night which is less likely as Gold Coast would want to try and trade prior). Here's hoping as it would mean we upgrade our 2nd to a good 1st next year for the cost of 1 place this year (where we would likely pick the same player regardless).

 

[Yardie]

Nobody has convinced me yet how taking nothing is better than taking a 3rd round pick - particularly in a year where we’ll need points for McCabe. The PSD threat is a temper tantrum - I’m confident our club won’t go there.

It's not a temper tantrum at all. It's a mechanism that is available to assist in driving the best deal for the club. Just remember that we are the club that sent Croad away to Fremantle against his wishes to get what we wanted.

 

[Platten44]

GC will have to trade that selection before North are on the clock as GC can't make a trade once (if) North put a bid in.

You can trade a pick after the bid comes

 

[eldorado]

"We need another top 10 pick!"

The Bigfooty equivalent of saying "I wish this money was real!" when playing Monopoly...

 

[Yardie]

Got anything for us?

I think it should be a rule that if you ask this question to an ITK then it must include the following:

 

[BIGHAWK23]

I think it should be a rule that if you ask this question to an ITK then it must include the following:

I thought it was implied

 

[Judd2Sewell]

Sleepy Mark better be up to something.

Get that pick #4 from Gold Coast.

 

[Yardie]

I thought it was implied

I just love the picture

 

[Suntory Boss Coffee]

Sleepy Mark better be up to something.

Get that pick #4 from Gold Coast.

We just don't have the draft capital unfortunately.

 

[butlers hawks]

Yeah ok, but that would give them the dogs 1st ( let’s say 12-18) there own and who ever is willing to trade out of next years 1st round ( I would of thought another pick 12-18) or a top 5 pick as that’s the range where a lot of teams will us finishing.

Same thing again, can on trade, there is always the chance that Hawthorn take a leap next year or the Dogs having Bont get injured and falling.

from a pure numbers point of view on current form if they knew the ladder would be the same next off season as this season yeah I get it but dont forget there is reporting Hawthorn are going to try and sign big names next year, you dont really want to use the pick this year and have nothing to trade for that deal if a player wants to come too.

Common sense to me personally says that the smarter move for GC is the Dogs offer as it gives them more assets to move for either points or to keep trading into the future

 

[eldorado]

Sleepy Mark better be up to something.

Get that pick #4 from Gold Coast.

"...and when you awake...you will feel the urge...to give us pick 4 for extremely little...possibly Fergus Greene or salary cap relief...3....2...1...."

 

[triple treat]

Same thing again, can on trade, there is always the chance that Hawthorn take a leap next year or the Dogs having Bont get injured and falling.

from a pure numbers point of view on current form if they knew the ladder would be the same next off season as this season yeah I get it but dont forget there is reporting Hawthorn are going to try and sign big names next year, you dont really want to use the pick this year and have nothing to trade for that deal if a player wants to come too.

Common sense to me personally says that the smarter move for GC is the Dogs offer as it gives them more assets to move for either points or to keep trading into the future

Fair enough