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

[Ge3ks]

Taylor is made for trade season. Playing 4D chess while the rest of us are flicking each other with wet towels.

 

[Alfonz]

To even make that palatable in any shape they’d want to be paying half Bolton’s salary and giving 21 back

If they are paying half Bolton's salary, I don't think we will be getting much back except late junk picks. And even those might be earmarked by Richmond to give Brisbane points.

GC are hardly the beacon to judge fair trade value, but they jettisoned the remaining 1.6 million on Bowes' salary (800k over the last 2 years) for pick 7.

If we want 600k x 4 years, then it would almost certainly be 9+10 and nothing coming back. That might not even be enough to buy Bolton and 2.4 million.

I won't be surprised if we are looking at 9+10 for Bolton and 400k x 4 years and nothing much coming back. If we threw in 16 for Baker instead of his fair value of the Saints 2nd, then Richmond might add 100k per year to how much they are paying for Bolton.

 

[Docker82]

Why Brisbane?

I’m guessing because Richmond have a bunch of later picks that’d be worth more than Brisbane’s first rounder in the points scale if you combine the points of two or more selections.

Tbh though I also think that’s how Gold Coast are supposedly trading so much for Rioli. Getting points back through later picks.

Richmond have a tonne of later picks but if they can deal correctly they probably end up finishing their draft by the mid twenties. A three way trades can mean they get very good picks without completely screwing us at the same time.

 

[pK75]

What if it’s 10, 18&19?

Are we trading 9 to Sydney for 18&19? May as well just give 9&10 to Richmond and be done with it!

 

[pK75]

I believe the step in the middle is that our trading of #9, #14 and F1 is that Bolton, Baker and a couple of second round picks come back. Then we trade those second round picks to Brisbane for their future first for points to match their FS bid.

It would amount to #9 and #14 for the two players.

Except we don’t have 14 anymore and Brisbane would be forced to match with their 1st round pick (15-18) rather than the 2 seconds they get from Richmond. Much easier for us to just hold the 2nd round picks and trade them to Brisbane for their 1st this year, then either use it ourselves our auction it to the highest bidder (probably getting a better F1 than Brisbanes one anyway.
Bolton + Baker + 21 + 29 = 9 + 10 + 16
15-18 = 21+27
We have two picks 15-18 + 29 and a shit tonne of Boltons salary paid.
Personally I am not that keen on Baker, so do the whole thing without ports pick being involved.
Bolton + 21 = 9+10
21+27 = 15-18
We have Brisbane (15-18) and port (16-18) to take to the draft

 

[Cobbler]

Remember when Brad Hill had multiple years contracted at St Kilda had pick #6 and then wouldn't trade it to Freo for him.

They first traded it to GWS for #12 and #18
Then traded #12 and #18 for Howard, Ryder and pick #10 from Port

Then traded pick #10 to us.

We should consider a similar situation with Richmond. Move #9 out to a club with multiple later picks such as;
Sydney for their #18 and #19
Gold Coast for their #13 and #20

Or #9 and #10 to both for all four of those first round picks.

Then we have five. #13, #17, #18, #19, #20

Yep. I mentioned this when Pickett was spoken about. Said we should move 10 out for 2 late firsts.
Effectively, giving us 5 first rounders to wheel and deal with.

We should certainly still consider it. Absolutely leverage what we have.

 

[freo_leo29]

Why do people think that trading 9 or 10 for a F1 takes the F1 off the table?

Tigers will just ask for the F1 instead and it will arguably have lower value than 9 or 10...

 

[Lach72]

Why do people think that trading 9 or 10 for a F1 takes the F1 off the table?

Tigers will just ask for the F1 instead and it will arguably have lower value than 9 or 10...

They can ask all they like.

If Warner is in play next year they can piss up a rope

 

[Cobbler]

I believe the step in the middle is that our trading of #9, #14 and F1 is that Bolton, Baker and a couple of second round picks come back. Then we trade those second round picks to Brisbane for their future first for points to match their FS bid.

It would amount to #9 and #14 for the two players.

Richmond are paying $1.02 to land Brisbanes pick first this year.

They’ll have all the currency and points to outbid anyone.

 

[freo_leo29]

They can ask all they like.

If Warner is in play next year they can piss up a rope

Thats all well and good but Bolton is contracted for 3 years so its now or never for him

 

[Lingsface]

If Erasmus does not play alot next year, he must be looking elsewhere to good for WAFL.

 

[Superkoops]

I believe the step in the middle is that our trading of #9, #14 and F1 is that Bolton, Baker and a couple of second round picks come back. Then we trade those second round picks to Brisbane for their future first for points to match their FS bid.

It would amount to #9 and #14 for the two players.

Where do we get 14?

Likely we end up with 9,10,16

If St Kilda (re: battle) get their wish that will quickly turn to 10,11,17 before trade week even starts. The Free agency kicks off (on 6/10) a few days before Trade period (9/10) and the deal for Battle is done. Will be lodged on 6/10 and compo announced prior to start of trade period on 9/10.

 

[Dockeroo]

What’s this Sam Davison guy at Richmond VFL like? Won the best young player in the VFL award. Seems to be a decent medium/small forward?

 

[Docker82]

What’s this Sam Davison guy at Richmond VFL like? Won the best young player in the VFL award. Seems to be a decent medium/small forward?

Think he might've been the only mature ager in the country invited to the national combine (I could be wrong here but there wasn't many if any others).

I haven't seen him play personally but some clubs are clearly interested.

 

[G Mus]

If Erasmus does not play alot next year, he must be looking elsewhere to good for WAFL.

Yep you’d think next season is go time, fyfe is easy to pass with a big PS

 

[Stinky Lomax]

What’s this Sam Davison guy at Richmond VFL like? Won the best young player in the VFL award. Seems to be a decent medium/small forward?

Think he might've been the only mature ager in the country invited to the national combine (I could be wrong here but there wasn't many if any others).

I haven't seen him play personally but some clubs are clearly interested.

- Sam Davidson

vfl.aflmstats.com

 

[guidodp15]

Surely Bolton is at most 10 and 17
Baker should be 25.

I think the bolton trade will be 9,10,25 for bolton and 21

 

[s_wd6]

I think the bolton trade will be 9,10,25 for bolton and 21

No way is Bolton worth two top ten picks unless they’re paying his salary

 

[Docker82]

- Sam Davidson

vfl.aflmstats.com

Don’t really like stats as a way to measure a draft prospect tbh.

I’ve seen too many players with great state stats overlooked over and over again. Usually if you actually watch these guys you can see why quite easily.

I’ve seen guys I like the look of but aren’t stars at state league level as well. Really liked M.Parker and N.Martin - neither were stars at state league level from a stats POV but they bigger bodies and good athleticism that to me just screamed AFL player.

There’s clearly enough AFL clubs that at least want to look at Davidson though so I don’t think he falls into the first category.

 

[Wee Jessies]

Remember when Brad Hill had multiple years contracted at St Kilda had pick #6 and then wouldn't trade it to Freo for him.

They first traded it to GWS for #12 and #18
Then traded #12 and #18 for Howard, Ryder and pick #10 from Port

Then traded pick #10 to us.

We should consider a similar situation with Richmond. Move #9 out to a club with multiple later picks such as;
Sydney for their #18 and #19
Gold Coast for their #13 and #20

Or #9 and #10 to both for all four of those first round picks.

Then we have five. #13, #17, #18, #19, #20

In the wrong thread, I suggested 9 or 10 to NM (apparently they are keen on this year's draft) for future 1st and their second rd pick this year. Then one of those picks becomes the centrepiece of the Bolton deal but not both 9 and 10. That seems way too rich.

It feels like talent drops a bit after the teens, which those later picks will become with free agents and academy picks. But I agree with the logic of adding extra picks for trade purposes.

I couldn't find a trade worth more than pick 4/5 including a contracted Lachie Neale outside of the farcical Shiel trade, which is a cautionary tale in itself. 9 and 27 is more than the net value of the Neale trade so in my view that is the starting worth, anything more and it is salary relief.

 

[Stinky Lomax]

Don’t really like stats as a way to measure a draft prospect tbh.

I’ve seen too many players with great state stats overlooked over and over again. Usually if you actually watch these guys you can see why quite easily.

I’ve seen guys I like the look of but aren’t stars at state league level as well. Really liked M.Parker and N.Martin - neither were stars at state league level from a stats POV but they bigger bodies and good athleticism that to me just screamed AFL player.

There’s clearly enough AFL clubs that at least want to look at Davidson though so I don’t think he falls into the first category.

Way to over analyse. I’ve never heard of him & it was put up so people had an idea of who you were talking about.

 

[CapitalA]

I think the bolton trade will be 9,10,25 for bolton and 21

Maybe in an average draft, this is a good draft. 9 and 17.

 

[Dayts]

In the wrong thread, I suggested 9 or 10 to NM (apparently they are keen on this year's draft) for future 1st and their second rd pick this year. Then one of those picks becomes the centrepiece of the Bolton deal but not both 9 and 10. That seems way too rich.

It feels like talent drops a bit after the teens, which those later picks will become with free agents and academy picks. But I agree with the logic of adding extra picks for trade purposes.

I couldn't find a trade worth more than pick 4/5 including a contracted Lachie Neale outside of the farcical Shiel trade, which is a cautionary tale in itself. 9 and 27 is more than the net value of the Neale trade so in my view that is the starting worth, anything more and it is salary relief.

Death riding north would be sweet!
Way less stressful

 

[arsesmart]

There must be a point where Richmond is just too pick-bloated and can't fit in any more first rounders...

... surely we wait...then strike with a suddenly appealing wafer thin calorie-lite offer!

 

[Alfonz]

No way is Bolton worth two top ten picks unless they’re paying his salary

By now I would have thought it should be assumed that any proposed trade includes significant salary cap relief. It's absolutely essential to have Richmond pay a large chunk of salary.

The most any side has in the top 100 paid players in the comp is 8 at GWS and Melbourne, which includes Haynes and Brayshaw who will be coming off the books.

We're already at 7 (which does not include key pillars Treacy, Pearce, Amiss) and looking to bring in Bolton and Warner. Maybe Pickett. It's simply not possible with Bolton on 1-1.2 million. We need to drop that number as much as possible and will pay accordingly at the trade table.