List Mgmt. 2024 List Management thread - Trade Targets

[FUS_RO_DAH]

How much would you pay for Shai Bolton?
If Richmond were this bad all season, and he ‘wanted to come home’ would you pay 2 first rounders for him?which 2?
What about 3 firsts given he is contracted?

As a 1 for one upgrade on any of our smalls bar sonny, and Sonny’s long term replacement.
Shai would have to be the biggest list improvement we could achieve.
Far more impactful that McDonald instead of Treacy.

What’s the offer Richmond and Shai can’t refuse?

Assuming his off field stuff all checked out I'd about throw the three late (yes I'm optimistic) first-rounders at Richmond and run

 

[Retzlaff]

Assuming his off field stuff all checked out I'd about throw the three late (yes I'm optimistic) first-rounders at Richmond and run

We’d make him prioritise 10 tackles over 10 score involvements. Not paying 3 first rounders for a role player

 

[FUS_RO_DAH]

We’d make him prioritise 10 tackles over 10 score involvements.

...Probably wouldn't though, hey?

 

[Taylor]

Bolton wouldn't be coming back to WA for money, that's for sure, so the extra cost of poaching a player wouldn't be there - he'd get paid more at Richmond.

Three firsts for Bolton and Baker with another pick coming back should be in the ballpark.

If the end result is:

OUT: Treacy, 3x 1st round picks
IN: McDonald, Bolton, Baker, 2nd round pick

 

[Dockeroo]

I think the greater issue was not knowing when to walk away from Liam Henry.

He was always talked about as an early second round pick. Given the discounts and other BS that’s part of the bidding system matching a later first round pick would’ve been fine but we really should’ve walked away at Pick 9.

I think Chapman talent wise is fine but that pick also dropped back. I think we should’ve weighed up the cost on the following years first rounder and the future second rounder was actually worth it.

Agree more broadly but gosh that would have been a seriously ballsy move not to match that bid.
Remember Henry was making purple ties and was talked up as the next Michael Walters and the drafts best small forward at the time.
Would have been seriously against the grain and supporter sentiment to walk away from that. I’ll forgive them not making that move to be fair.

 

[bellie4pm]

Agree more broadly but gosh that would have been a seriously ballsy move not to match that bid.
Remember Henry was making purple ties and was talked up as the next Michael Walters and the drafts best small forward at the time.
Would have been seriously against the grain and supporter sentiment to walk away from that. I’ll forgive them not making that move to be fair.

Talked to one if the coaches at the time over a couple of beers. dockers apparently had henry at 20-25 hopefully, 15-20 at worst. But… to keep future academy prospects keen, and in a dick contest with carlton, they (stoopidly) matched the bid knowing they weren’t getting anywhere near a top 10 player.

(Valente was another example he memtioned of recruiting team getting things v v wrong - was so far behind fitness wise, the chances of getting him to afl level were always v v low. It was why no other teams recruited him)

 

[Sherriff Incorporated]

How much would you pay for Shai Bolton?
If Richmond were this bad all season, and he ‘wanted to come home’ would you pay 2 first rounders for him?which 2?
What about 3 firsts given he is contracted?

As a 1 for one upgrade on any of our smalls bar sonny, and Sonny’s long term replacement.
Shai would have to be the biggest list improvement we could achieve.
Far more impactful that McDonald instead of Treacy.

What’s the offer Richmond and Shai can’t refuse?

 

[Sherriff Incorporated]

Talked to one if the coaches at the time over a couple of beers. dockers apparently had henry at 20-25 hopefully, 15-20 at worst. But… to keep future academy prospects keen, and in a dick contest with carlton, they (stoopidly) matched the bid knowing they weren’t getting anywhere near a top 10 player.

(Valente was another example he memtioned of recruiting team getting things v v wrong - was so far behind fitness wise, the chances of getting him to afl level were always v v low. It was why no other teams recruited him)

I followed the draft pretty closely the year Henry was drafted. In what now seems staggeringly ironic for most of that draft year Sharp and Henry were nearly idenical in position expected that they would be drafted at with Sharp projected higher than Henry. Who knows maybe we will end up getting a player of equality to Henry for next to nothing.

 

[Dirty_banchez]

We should throw a bag at Callum Brown from GWS. He's exactly what we need.

 

[Andy Brennan]

We should throw a bag at Callum Brown from GWS. He's exactly what we need.

That hogan guy goes alright too would love him at Freo

 

[Sherriff Incorporated]

That hogan guy goes alright too would love him at Freo

Well today at least I hope Jesse kicks a bag against Collingwood. We need as many early season loses as possible for Collingwood to get the Shultz pickout of the late teens.

 

[Docker82]

We should throw a bag at Callum Brown from GWS. He's exactly what we need.

Freo is closer to home for him I guess…

 

[freo_leo29]

We could've traded in Hogan and Lobb and kept a high draft selection IMO.

Perhaps the mistake was trading out pick 6 to Port Adelaide to get pick 11 and some later picks.

A future second rounder could've got the Lobb trade done imo.

Neale and Hogan trades had similar value.

Lobb was contracted, a future 2nd was never in play

 

[freo_leo29]

A bit of hindsight on the splitting pick 6 to port trade

It has been a fairly recent thing (like last 4 years) where the clubs have rated the pointy end of the draft so much higher than later first rounds. (Possibly enhanced by riskier covid drafts)

At the time we were all absolutely stoked that we managed to get all those picks off of port, port fans were questioning wtf they were doing, selling the farm for one player (and arguably they didn't end up getting high enough for the players they actually wanted originally in Rankine and lukosious)

We had also just had massive success in splitting pick 3 to GWS, so there weren't too many at all that were mad at the plan.

 

[go_the_dockers]

A bit of hindsight on the splitting pick 6 to port trade

It has been a fairly recent thing (like last 4 years) where the clubs have rated the pointy end of the draft so much higher than later first rounds. (Possibly enhanced by riskier covid drafts)

At the time we were all absolutely stoked that we managed to get all those picks off of port, port fans were questioning wtf they were doing, selling the farm for one player (and arguably they didn't end up getting high enough for the players they actually wanted originally in Rankine and lukosious)

We had also just had massive success in splitting pick 3 to GWS, so there weren't too many at all that were mad at the plan.

Speak for yourself. Myself, and several other people were not keen on Lobb, and only 1/2 keen on Hogan considering his injury history, and this was with no knowledge of his off field issues

We got lucky splitting pick 3, I would not want to do it too often.


In reality, if we had not traded in people like Wilson, Matera etc for future picks, the splitting 1st round picks would not have been needed.

 

[Superkoops]

Speak for yourself. Myself, and several other people were not keen on Lobb, and only 1/2 keen on Hogan considering his injury history, and this was with no knowledge of his off field issues

We got lucky splitting pick 3, I would not want to do it too often.


In reality, if we had not traded in people like Wilson, Matera etc for future picks, the splitting 1st round picks would not have been needed.

Matera was traded for F3. Not sure that impacted greatly on any future trades. In fact I’m comfortable with the F3 and F4 trades. Colyer for F4 and Corbett for F4. Honestly now days with all the academy players and that was starting come into effect around those years and clubs really selecting on needs basis in the back end - whether it is F3 (ie pick 45) or F4 (ie pick 50 after pick matching or passing on later picks) it doesn’t make much difference. I can’t quite remember but an example was Schultz at around 53 which had we retained that F3 instead of trading for Matera would likely have been 45-47 and probably if not Schultz another mature age.

I will agree with F2 (and definitely F1) comment. Unless it is a generational type like Luke Jackson and squeaky clean then you hang onto them. I’ll reserve judgement on Logan McDonald but he certainly is a promising player.

We had a habit of trading out our F2 for a few years - starting with the Harley Bennell trade period. We were then playing catch-up and I agree Wilson was another. I really doubt GWS would accept anything less and we were hamstring from tossing the F2 the year proceeding.

 

[blue shark]

If there was a chance for Taylor after a GWS flag, he would be my first pick.
McDonald and Treacy could also work, with Josh turned into a defender.
Probably means that Hughes wouldn’t get another game.
Defensively we could be the best in the AFL, with a reasonable forward line.
With that spine of talls, a few swingmen, I doubt any list could compete?
Similar to the Crows in 2017, but we would be better on all lines.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Matera was traded for F3. Not sure that impacted greatly on any future trades. In fact I’m comfortable with the F3 and F4 trades. Colyer for F4 and Corbett for F4. Honestly now days with all the academy players and that was starting come into effect around those years and clubs really selecting on needs basis in the back end - whether it is F3 (ie pick 45) or F4 (ie pick 50 after pick matching or passing on later picks) it doesn’t make much difference. I can’t quite remember but an example was Schultz at around 53 which had we retained that F3 instead of trading for Matera would likely have been 45-47 and probably if not Schultz another mature age.

I will agree with F2 (and definitely F1) comment. Unless it is a generational type like Luke Jackson and squeaky clean then you hang onto them. I’ll reserve judgement on Logan McDonald but he certainly is a promising player.

We had a habit of trading out our F2 for a few years - starting with the Harley Bennell trade period. We were then playing catch-up and I agree Wilson was another. I really doubt GWS would accept anything less and we were hamstring from tossing the F2 the year proceeding.

If the players we solid, then I could tolerate it. I don't think Matera, Colyer, Corbett were ever going to be near best 22, Wilson was the wrong age for our side and they all used up valuable picks that could have been best 22 players now.


I would prefer (and I think long term, during a rebuild you are better off) picking an unknown player who could be an A or B grader, than selecting known C Graders or B graders who won't be around when you are pushing for a flag.

Looking back through the draft, here are some late picks that are available that we potentially missed by trading in players.

24 Tim Kelly
26 Liam Ryan
28 Sam Taylor
31 Bayley Fritsch
37 Harrison Petty
73 Sam Switkowski

24 Bobby Hill
33 James Jordon
57 Lachie Schultz



32 Trent Rivers+
37 Keidean Coleman
39 Chad Warner
61 Michael Frederick



46 Tyler Brockman

 

[Joao]

A bit of hindsight on the splitting pick 6 to port trade

It has been a fairly recent thing (like last 4 years) where the clubs have rated the pointy end of the draft so much higher than later first rounds. (Possibly enhanced by riskier covid drafts)

At the time we were all absolutely stoked that we managed to get all those picks off of port, port fans were questioning wtf they were doing, selling the farm for one player (and arguably they didn't end up getting high enough for the players they actually wanted originally in Rankine and lukosious)

We had also just had massive success in splitting pick 3 to GWS, so there weren't too many at all that were mad at the plan.

No we weren't.

 

[freo_leo29]

No we weren't.

Yes we were

 

[Joao]

Yes we were

I'm part of all and I was the exact opposite of what you said.

 

[Taylor]

From memory we had pick 6 and then nothing until the 80s with two tall forwards wanting to come to the club and a bunch of open list spots.

It gave us a hand to work with instead of us definitely giving away our only pick.

Losing Neale compounded the problem but if we had to trade pick 6 in the Lobb exchange people would be even more savage about his trade and he was the one we got reasonable value out of.

 

[Joao]

I've no problem with anything we did for Lobb (if anything, we got real value) after we split 6 - but we should never have split 6 in the first place.

 

[go_the_dockers]

I've no problem with anything we did for Lobb (if anything, we got real value) after we split 6 - but we should never have split 6 in the first place.

From memory we had pick 6 and then nothing until the 80s with two tall forwards wanting to come to the club and a bunch of open list spots.

It gave us a hand to work with instead of us definitely giving away our only pick.

Losing Neale compounded the problem but if we had to trade pick 6 in the Lobb exchange people would be even more savage about his trade and he was the one we got reasonable value out of.

I can't help but think if we had stopped trading away our future 2nd and 3rd for average players, then we would not have been forced to split a top 10 pick.


Maybe not trading at all during a rebuild is a good idea.

 

[Joao]

I can't help but think if we had stopped trading away our future 2nd and 3rd for average players, then we would not have been forced to split a top 10 pick.


Maybe not trading at all during a rebuild is a good idea.

I don't mind the 3rds and 4ths, but the 1sts and 2nds should be very conservatively used.

We were just 1 of many clubs who overrate their list and chase top ups for another crack.