Rumour 2024 Hypothetical trade and FA Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

I’ve watched all the championships games in full. to call it ordinary is simply wrong. There is little likelihood of a Harley Reid sure, but this is a strong draft where all the experts who usually only do a top 20 at this stage of the year, have all said they had to push to 30 given the depth. Give the positional variety as well there could be superstars given time to develop especially KP. To trade out especially when we are trying to fast track our rise makes no sense.

Knowing how even it seems makes it exciting.
 
Nick Hind on the cheap?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

If Bailey Smith came to us we shouldn’t be handing over our first for him if it’s around 7 or 8, we should split it so we still have a first round pick, that we can go to the draft with or make another trade with, as it’s to much to trade with.

In 2016 We traded pick 14 for Tom Mitchell who was 24 at the time the same age Smith will be when he would play his first game for us.

Smith has play 103 games
Mitchell had played 65 games

Smith is coming off a ACL injury.

Mitchell the year before he was traded had his best year for the Swans and was one of Swans best in the 2016 Grand final loss against the Dogs in his last game for the swans.
 
If Bailey Smith came to us we shouldn’t be handing over our first for him if it’s around 7 or 8, we should split it so we still have a first round pick, that we can go to the draft with or make another trade with, as it’s to much to trade with.

In 2016 We traded pick 14 for Tom Mitchell who was 24 at the time the same age Smith will be when he would play his first game for us.

Smith has play 103 games
Mitchell had played 65 games

Smith is coming off a ACL injury.

Mitchell the year before he was traded had his best year for the Swans and was one of Swans best in the 2016 Grand final loss against the Dogs in his last game for the swans.
 
Cost would be high, Marshall would deserve first ruck based on output and not sure Hawks would offer that so why would he request a trade away from a team who have salary cap to burn and where he has that role already?

Marshall is like Meek but gets more of the ball, and he doesn't use the ball particularly well. I like the balance we have.

Chasing Marshall would just be tying effort and resources up in the wrong place.


Like some have mentioned already trying to acquire Marshall (as good as he is) would be a gross negligence of our salary cap space. We have a 210cm Ned Reeves as a more than capable back up who if not for the ruck rule changes would've likely been our #1 ruck that is contracted for another 2 more seasons (RFA at the end of 2026).

Looking at the stats below as KermitJagger mentions yes Marshall get's a lot more of the ball (14.2 kicks per game) but with our young midfield brigade it's not the be all end all of what we need and one could argue that what Meek offers (36.6 hitouts per game / 8.8 handballs per game) suits our faster running style better.

Lastly both guys spend around about 85% of the time on the ground which would negate each other as neither is really the type to rest as a forward target.

IMO the huge cost for Marshall would be a waste of not only salary cap but also the draft collateral to obtain him which should be used in other areas that need to be filled (KPD + dynamic mid / forward). Marshall is a UFA at the end of 2027 and the Saints would ask for the world.

Screenshot 2024-07-19 at 1.02.01 pm.png
 
The ruck rule has seemingly impacted jumping ruckman more than anything, which Reeves is not. If Reeves became stronger then the rule would benefit him. He's been replaced my Meek because Meek is now fit enough to have an impact around the ground and he throws his weight around.

Also, as everyone else has pointed out there's absolutely no way we'd be interested in Marshall whilst we have Meek on the list.
 
The ruck rule has seemingly impacted jumping ruckman more than anything, which Reeves is not. If Reeves became stronger then the rule would benefit him. He's been replaced my Meek because Meek is now fit enough to have an impact around the ground and he throws his weight around.

Also, as everyone else has pointed out there's absolutely no way we'd be interested in Marshall whilst we have Meek on the list.
What type of ruckman is Reeves then? He's not a Meek type.
 
Hard Pass on Marshall here. He may get more possessions than Meek but he turns it over more, give away more frees and has lower disposal efficiency which goes against what style we are playing. For every dump kick (clearance) from the centre that gets picked off and returned back into the arms of an oppo player, Marshall's stats look better than Meek who has recently started to use his handball to our mids who in turn use it better into our F50 or HFF area.
Meek is playing pretty well at the moment as a full time No. 1 Ruck, I'd prefer to keep it that way.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Has anyone thought to offer Bailey a lifetime supply of free surfboards? It’s no home and land package but he might surf one day and we need to be in on the ground floor
 
Has anyone thought to offer Bailey a lifetime supply of free surfboards? It’s no home and land package but he might surf one day and we need to be in on the ground floor
He will ( possibly ) have a surf park on the other side of the mordi fwy - pretty much a stones throw away… latest stage of planning just approved.. No doubt there are a lot more hurdles left though.

 
Like some have mentioned already trying to acquire Marshall (as good as he is) would be a gross negligence of our salary cap space. We have a 210cm Ned Reeves as a more than capable back up who if not for the ruck rule changes would've likely been our #1 ruck that is contracted for another 2 more seasons (RFA at the end of 2026).

Looking at the stats below as KermitJagger mentions yes Marshall get's a lot more of the ball (14.2 kicks per game) but with our young midfield brigade it's not the be all end all of what we need and one could argue that what Meek offers (36.6 hitouts per game / 8.8 handballs per game) suits our faster running style better.

Lastly both guys spend around about 85% of the time on the ground which would negate each other as neither is really the type to rest as a forward target.

IMO the huge cost for Marshall would be a waste of not only salary cap but also the draft collateral to obtain him which should be used in other areas that need to be filled (KPD + dynamic mid / forward). Marshall is a UFA at the end of 2027 and the Saints would ask for the world.

View attachment 2052090
Marshall gets more disposals than Meek because Meek taps it to teammates whereas Marshall grabs it and kicks it to the opposition.
 
The ruck rule has seemingly impacted jumping ruckman more than anything, which Reeves is not. If Reeves became stronger then the rule would benefit him. He's been replaced my Meek because Meek is now fit enough to have an impact around the ground and he throws his weight around.

Also, as everyone else has pointed out there's absolutely no way we'd be interested in Marshall whilst we have Meek on the list.
Reeves is a Beanpole ruck, if he bulked up into a tower ruck like Sandilands he'd dominate the taps (which to be fair he did last season). However he already struggles to get around the ground and keep up, I doubt extra weight would help with that.
 
It’s an arbitrary game but I will play. Of top 10 Duursma and sanders have been in and out, Curtin read caddy have hardly played.
I would rate ashcroft smith trainor lalor Draper and maybe osullivan (not done well returning from injury but will be elite) ahead of those.
You said yourself you are waiting for highlights that’s not much to genuinely assess the draft crop.
I meant judging against form as U18s, not as rookie AFL listed players.
All of the top 10 from last season looked better IMO.
I should add that I give a lot of weight to style of play.
Some players, I will never warm to as potential draftees bc they just don't move well, despite their numbers.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Rumour 2024 Hypothetical trade and FA Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top