List Mgmt. 2024 List Management thread - Trade Targets Part 2

[DragoDelph]

"West Coast would be open to trading its No. 3 pick to Richmond if it secures Liam Baker with all options open as both WA clubs await an official decision on the Tigers vice-captain."

https://archive.md/6Npxk

Oh please do west coast. Please do.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

"West Coast would be open to trading its No. 3 pick to Richmond if it secures Liam Baker with all options open as both WA clubs await an official decision on the Tigers vice-captain.

The depth of the draft means the Eagles might be prepared to accept a pick back later in the top 10 if they secure their man."

https://archive.md/6Npxk

It's by Ralph, I'm pretty sure he's actually a Richmond bigfooty poster at this stage

 

[Heave Ho Bro]

If they get 3 for Baker WTF are they gonna expect for Bolton

 

[mattis117]

If they get 3 for Baker WTF are they gonna expect for Bolton

It's most likely they do a trade with us first and secure pick 9, which they then swap with West Coast. They would still have to sweeten that further IMO, pick 3 value is > than Baker + 9 (which will actually be like 11 or 12 on the night).

 

[freo1997]

Crazy Pykey at the helm.

 

[Chris25]

Every year we hear certain things about the draft but it's reasonably similar most years IMO.

Pick 50 might be as good as pick 40 in other years but the way they're talking you'd swear there's 60 players that'd go in the top 20 last year. I'm not buying it personally.

I don't think it's a super draft, but I do think it's a value draft. As DragoDelph said, I look at this draft in groups.

Group 1 - picks 1 to 10
Group 2 - picks 11 to 30
Group 3 - the rest

I think the sweet spot for value is in that second round, where you could potentially get a guy you rate top 15 at pick 30. But I do think there'll also be decent players picked up late or as rookies.

My main argument is to not trade in players to line up at Peel, no Josh Corbett deals this year. And that if you're 50/50 on an uncontracted player, then to let them go and try again - don't just whack someone on the rookie list for the sake of having another year. Guys like Kuek and Stanley may have potential, but I'd be backing my scouts to find someone this year.

Really, I just want 4 or so picks across both drafts.

 

[Taylor]

Perhaps WC will pay Graham (26yrs) enough to secure Richmond pick #2 in free agency compensation and WC get our pick back from the Bolton trade. Three years at $1m, then extend for two years at $100,000 each next year.

Rich Out: Bolton, Graham, Baker
Rich In: #2, #4, #17

 

[FreoBraddles]

So hypothetically.

Would we swap Brodie + R2 + R3 for Tim Kelly + R4 if West coast took on all of Brodie's wage and some of Kelly's?

Remember when someone asked who Adam Simpson would bring with him? Think we have our answer

 

[Tonga Bob]

It's by Ralph, I'm pretty sure he's actually a Richmond bigfooty poster at this stage

Wiggum?

 

[DragoDelph]

Wiggum?

 

[pK75]

Perhaps WC will pay Graham (26yrs) enough to secure Richmond pick #2 in free agency compensation and WC get our pick back from the Bolton trade. Three years at $1m, then extend for two years at $100,000 each next year.

Rich Out: Bolton, Graham, Baker
Rich In: #2, #4, #17

So WC are: out pick 3, in Graham, Baker, 9?

 

[Taylor]

So WC are: out pick 3, in Graham, Baker, 9?

Exactly.

And Freo are in: Bolton, out: #9 (#10)(#11) and #17 (#18)(#19) (depending on compensation picks Graham/Battle)

 

[DragoDelph]

Exactly.

And Freo are in: Bolton, out: #9 (#10)(#11) and #17 (#18)(#19) (depending on compensation picks Graham/Battle)

We'll give WC Brodie just to even it out a bit.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

We'll give WC Brodie just to even it out a bit.

"**** Will Brodie" - Dragodelph circa 2024

 

[Cesoir]

Yeah but Kelly is an offensive mid

Why are people so easily offended these days?

 

[Docker82]

I don't think it's a super draft, but I do think it's a value draft. As DragoDelph said, I look at this draft in groups.

Group 1 - picks 1 to 10
Group 2 - picks 11 to 30
Group 3 - the rest

I think the sweet spot for value is in that second round, where you could potentially get a guy you rate top 15 at pick 30. But I do think there'll also be decent players picked up late or as rookies.

My main argument is to not trade in players to line up at Peel, no Josh Corbett deals this year. And that if you're 50/50 on an uncontracted player, then to let them go and try again - don't just whack someone on the rookie list for the sake of having another year. Guys like Kuek and Stanley may have potential, but I'd be backing my scouts to find someone this year.

Really, I just want 4 or so picks across both drafts.

The previous poster said what you've referred to as group 2 as 40 players. You've gone with 30, which for me is starting become believable.

Agree with everything else in your post btw. Just an observation that someone like yourself who's watching the players and isn't necessarily building up the hype for clicks (ie the mainstream media) seems doesn't think there's twice as much good players in this draft than last year.

 

[Docker82]

Most drafts aren't normally similar. They vary greatly.

I look back on previous drafts all the time and I couldn't disagree more.

There's outliers like 2001 but for the most part drafts end up producing a similar amount of good players especially once you get beyond probably about pick 25. Every year without fail we hear something that makes this year's draft better than last year's and that the next year's draft a super draft.

 

[DragoDelph]

The previous poster said what you've referred to as group 2 as 40 players. You've gone with 30, which for me is starting become believable.

Agree with everything else in your post btw. Just an observation that someone like yourself who's watching the players and isn't necessarily building up the hype for clicks (ie the mainstream media) seems doesn't think there's twice as much good players in this draft than last year.

Did you read my disclaimer?

I have no clue, it was for illustrative purposes.

 

[apuchar]

Kelly wants Bolton at WC

 

[Freoforever86]

Kelly wants Bolton at WC

he’s gonna be disappointed

 

[apuchar]

he’s gonna be disappointed

If WC are prepared to give up pick 3 anything is possible. Not sure if WC are into long re-builds.

 

[mike91]

Eh, Martin for close to nothing is handy.

If WC are prepared to give up pick 3 anything is possible. Not sure if WC are into long re-builds.

Not really. They don't need to convince Richmond, they need to convince Bolton

 

[Piggy Smalls]

If we were able to identify 5 good players over the last 5 years, and get them to come to us then I would be delighted.

They are great at filling holes on their list with established players. You can say it is easy, but we can't do it.

Jackson - ruck/forward hole created by Lobb leaving

Sharp - Was a list need for wing

Clark - was highly rated by Geelong

Wagner - Crucial depth (granted he wasn't a trade, but still)

Brodie - was a list need but a handful have since gone past him.

I'd say apart from JHF we've probably done as well as or better than Port in this space.

 

[Piggy Smalls]

If WC are prepared to give up pick 3 anything is possible. Not sure if WC are into long re-builds.

If WC give up pick 3 for Bolton I'll personally drive him there.

 

[pK75]

Kelly wants Bolton at WC

Asking us if we’re interested in him seems a strange way to go about it. They (Kelly and Bolton) have the same manager, so I suspect once Kelly learned Bolton was freo bound he told his manager he’d like to play with him if possible. Hence the casual enquire about the chance from his manager to Freo