List Mgmt. 2024 List Management thread - Trade Targets

[wakojako]

Tom Barrass contracted for a long time and Warner contracted for the single year but younger make them fairly evenly valued in my view - we only need to satisfy WC in trade for Barrass and they are looking for picks for him.

Sydney have picks #18, 19 and then #56. They aren't giving WC a great deal there.
Freo currently has #8, #13, #16 and #24

I'd argue that #13 and our future first are better than the entire Swans hand this year and maybe next included too.

If WC are content with pick #13 and the future first then we have #8, #16 and #24 to trade for Bolton coming home for family reasons.

Tay if we land with Warner and Bolton who in there right mind would value our F1
As Snuff says we aren't landing both unless we lose a player. My first preference is Bolton because what side has made a premiership without a small forward?

 

[Taylor]

Tay if we land with Warner and Bolton who in there right mind would value our F1
As Snuff says we aren't landing both unless we lose a player. My first preference is Bolton because what side has made a premiership without a small forward?

Let's see then, I think it's going to show the supremacy of the players nomination. If Tom Barrass says "make me a Swan" then Sydney have to get really creative both in terms of finding near a million dollars to pay him and in value to trade.

Now they might see themselves losing Warner next year anyway and that their key defensive post might be the difference for them more than a midfielder/forward - especially when his salary can get them half way to Barrass in the first year.

Or maybe WC let a contracted key position club champion go for those two last picks in the first round.

Players entering the mix muddies the water on all values thrown around, especially contracted players.

 

[Cobbler]

Swans are not letting Chad Warner go without getting our best two firsts, and they are definitely not giving 19 back. 40 something if you're lucky. Similarly, the moment you trade the top 10, Richmond, say get ****ed, I'm not losing Bolton without a top 10.

Maybe there is like a 5% chance if both us and Pies (cant believe ****ing Port won the last two weeks) miss finals but it's still not happening because they are contracted.

This all assumes we can fit like $2.2m into cap in one hit which I still struggle to believe.

Never has a team added two talents like Warner and Bolton at once, yet alone when both contracted and we can do a million hypotheticals but barring one of the two telling their club they are returning to WA and not coming back then there's just no chance

I don’t think you’ve read my post properly.

They’re getting Barrass.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

I don’t think you’ve read my post properly.

They’re getting Barrass.

I did, they are getting reamed paying Warner for Barrass and tiny pick upgrade and there is no world we get Warner while contracted for 8 and moving from 16 to 19? C'mon, that's crazy. Barrass picking Sydney makes the trade possible, not a bargain

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Here's the comparative, what would you do to the club if the club traded Brayshaw for Tom Papley

11

Tom Papley

Age

28

Ht

177cm

Wt

77kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.1

4star

K

9.1

4star

HB

5.0

4star

M

3.7

4star

T

3.2

5star

G

1.5

5star

D

12.3

3star

K

8.9

4star

HB

3.4

2star

M

4.5

4star

T

1.5

2star

G

2.4

5star

D

13.4

4star

K

8.0

3star

HB

5.4

4star

M

3.4

4star

T

3.4

5star

G

1.6

5star

(contracted very good player in a position of need) and turning 25 into 19?

I would burn the place to the ground

 

[Cobbler]

I did, they are getting reamed paying Warner for Barrass and tiny pick upgrade and there is no world we get Warner while contracted for 8 and moving from 16 to 19? C'mon, that's crazy. Barrass picking Sydney makes the trade possible, not a bargain

Take 19 out of it completely then.

8 and 16 values Warner at pick 2
Barrass and 23 for Warner

We’d still have 13 and a future 1st plus pick 25 to work towards Bolton. Thats pick 2 value alone even assuming the future first is pick 18.

It can be done.

You said no one has ever landed 2 stars, but rarely does a team essentially have 4 firsts.

Plenty of star go for 2 firsts and that’s basically what we’ll have for both players.

I’m positive that if we had 13, 25 and our future 1st we could work a deal for Bolton.

 

[Cobbler]

Here's the comparative, what would you do to the club if the club traded Brayshaw for Tom Papley (contracted very good player in a position of need) and turning 25 into 19?

I would burn the place to the ground

That’s a stupid comparison because you’re basing it off non realistic hypotheticals.

All of this is based on the discussion Warner wants Freo and Barrass wants Swans.

If Papley was lured by Freo and Brayshaw wanted to leave to Swans then a player for player swap with an additional pick is about all you could hope for isn’t it??

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

That’s a stupid comparison because you’re basing it off non realistic hypotheticals.

All of this is based on the discussion Warner wants Freo and Barrass wants Swans.

If Papley was lured by Freo and Brayshaw wanted to leave to Swans then a player for player swap with an additional pick is about all you could hope for isn’t it??

Take 19 out of it completely then.

8 and 16 values Warner at pick 2
Barrass and 23 for Warner

We’d still have 13 and a future 1st plus pick 25 to work towards Bolton. Thats pick 2 value alone even assuming the future first is pick 18.

It can be done.

You said no one has ever landed 2 stars, but rarely does a team essentially have 4 firsts.

Plenty of star go for 2 firsts and that’s basically what we’ll have for both players.

I’m positive that if we had 13, 25 and our future 1st we could work a deal for Bolton.

If both uncontracted I might have some hope, both contracted and there's just no way IMO. These things are always more expensive then we think. Agree to disagree

 

[Cobbler]

If both uncontracted I might have some hope, both contracted and there's just no way IMO. These things are always more expensive then we think. Agree to disagree

I think a contracted Warner is irrelevant if they’re bringing in a contracted Barrass. That certainly helps our cause.

Bolton I agree. Richmond may want the world and hold him if they can’t get 2 decent picks.

We’d clearly be paying overs if it was any 2 firsts if out of contract. So, it would really depend on whether Richmond want to rebuild quickly or how compassionate they are feeling. But 13,25 and a future first isn’t exactly low balling.

 

[Cobbler]

If both uncontracted I might have some hope, both contracted and there's just no way IMO. These things are always more expensive then we think. Agree to disagree

If we could only bring in one this year who would you rather? Let’s assume we can bring in the other the following year.

I’d have to go Bolton myself.

Then grab an out of contract Warner next year.

But I think the club would rather grab Warner and just let the Bolton thing play out.

 

[theGav56]

Not keen on that, but obviously depends on where the picks end up. If we're giving away three firsts then I'd wanna use that pick 3 on the draft.

In a draft where they prospects seem very evenly rated inside the top 20?

I would do that trade if Sydney take 3 for Warner.

 

[Wallsy78]

Are we actually allowed to trade all four 1sts if we wanted to? Does anyone have a good grasp of the rules?

"clubs must make at least two first-round selections in each four-year period or face restrictions from trading any further first-round draft pick"

For us:
2021 - 2 (Amiss & Erasmus)
2022 - 0
2023 - 0
2024

So theoretically if we trade all 3 in 2024, for this rolling 4 year period we have still taken 2 first rounders. Therefore we are eligible to trade our future 1st in 2025. Is this the right interpretation?

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

If we could only bring in one this year who would you rather? Let’s assume we can bring in the other the following year.

I’d have to go Bolton myself.

Then grab an out of contract Warner next year.

But I think the club would rather grab Warner and just let the Bolton thing play out.

Full disclosure, as I've been going through this in my head of late. I think I'd only want one of them. The more I think about it, I think they are actually the same player and play the same role - Swittas (just significantly better at it obviously). They are both mid/fwds. In slightly different ways, they are explosive, damaging mids who need to be fed the ball to have maximum impact.

Per even Richmond fans, Bolton is a hybrid, not a real small forward. While yes, the elite small forwards all spend time on ball now, Bolton's best use seems to be like 60/40, not primarily up front.

So all that to say, Warner, because of his Grand Final effort and not having won a flag yet leaving me more confident we'll get his best. I also believe Daniels and think it was chips in on Warner and Bolton has come late so isnt a priority.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Are we actually allowed to trade all four 1sts if we wanted to? Does anyone have a good grasp of the rules?

"clubs must make at least two first-round selections in each four-year period or face restrictions from trading any further first-round draft pick"

For us:
2021 - 2 (Amiss & Erasmus)
2022 - 0
2023 - 0
2024

So theoretically if we trade all 3 in 2024, for this rolling 4 year period we have still taken 2 first rounders. Therefore we are eligible to trade our future 1st in 2025. Is this the right interpretation?

I think the rule has been broken enough times on request that it wont matter. It's just there to stop some club blowing themselves up basically

 

[theGav56]

We can also take midfielders outside the first round.

Gross.

 

[Cobbler]

Full disclosure, as I've been going through this in my head of late. I think I'd only want one of them. The more I think about it, I think they are actually the same player and play the same role - Swittas (just significantly better at it obviously). They are both mid/fwds. In slightly different ways, they are explosive, damaging mids who need to be fed the ball to have maximum impact.

Per even Richmond fans, Bolton is a hybrid, not a real small forward. While yes, the elite small forwards all spend time on ball now, Bolton's best use seems to be like 60/40, not primarily up front.

So all that to say, Warner, because of his Grand Final effort and not having won a flag yet leaving me more confident we'll get his best. I also believe Daniels and think it was chips in on Warner and Bolton has come late so isnt a priority.

I’d happily take them both!
Imagine our mid/ forward rotations!
I guess Warner makes more sense as he’d also weaken a contender.

 

[Wallsy78]

I think the rule has been broken enough times on request that it wont matter. It's just there to stop some club blowing themselves up basically

I cant personally remember a time when there has been granted an exemption, can you remember? The rules state that for a player within a certain age and experience an exemption can be granted. I just cant remember it happening.

But I remember when Port were denied their request for exemption during the JHF trade. It wasn't the 2 in 4 years for 1st rounders rule in this case, it was specifically how you cant trade both your future 1st and your future 2nd/3rd/4th. Only one

 

[wakojako]

Per even Richmond fans, Bolton is a hybrid, not a real small forward. While yes, the elite small forwards all spend time on ball now, Bolton's best use seems to be like 60/40, not primarily up front.

Some people forget what he is capable of when he plays the small forward role:

 

[Purple Jesus]

Gross.

L. Neale and N. Fyfe say G'Day.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Some people forget what he is capable of when he plays the small forward role:

Haha, wont exactly be upset at getting him and I am pretty positive one of Bolton or Warner is in purple next year

 

[bruzaar62]

Some people forget what he is capable of when he plays the small forward role:

WANT

 

[Wallsy78]

The argument that Bolton is more a player of need I don't agree with. I urge people to watch some of the games where Chad has played large minutes forward for Sydney early in the year. I remember watching him play vs bulldogs, he kicked 4 goals and had 3 goal assists and he was ridiculous in that role

Chad is an offensive weapon that would spend large minutes forward for us. We badly lack players that can win a genuine 1-on-1 in our forward line.

He has had a rough month but lets not forget how good he is. 23 years old and still 10th in the coaches votes for the year and has kicked 29 goals. Think it would really suit him not having to win his own ball here as much and playing a real offensive role.

Not to say I dont like Bolton, he is a gun and would also fit a need for us. But Chad is on another level and I can only see us fitting one in the cap.

It's a bloody nice position to be in though, a lot better than arguing over a couple of spuds

 

[Midnite65]

Warner in play for either us or WC ?
I heard about the Barrass thing a couple of months back - real need for the Swans in defence.
But would the Barrass move be part of the Eagles landing Warner or assisting with draft currency ?
I did think the Hawks move made a bit of sense with a swap and pick of Grainger- Barrass.
I reckon English is a big one for the Eagles, can’t see Warner going there with Graham from Richmond as well as Baker likely- that is a pretty stacked midfield to accompany- Reid, Yeo and Kelly - add Hewitt who looks like a player….
Can’t see how Warner really is a need now?

What are the Swans going to do about their KPF's though??? They are pretty weak.

 

[Purple Jesus]

I'd prefer Warner too but I also want another big bodied contested ball winning beast to replace Fyfe in the inside. I don't think that'll be Serong or Brayshaw or Young. They're amazing in their own right but they're not that bull.

 

[Wizard]

I'd prefer Warner too but I also want another big bodied contested ball winning beast to replace Fyfe in the inside. I don't think that'll be Serong or Brayshaw or Young. They're amazing in their own right but they're not that bull.

Matt Johnson and Neil Erasmus say hi.