List Mgmt. 2024 List Management thread - Trade Targets

[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.

 

[DocT]

We should be able to get Bolton for 'unders'. Here's why.

The reality is that as a player, Bolton is not worth that much to Richmond. Bolton turns 26 in December, he's had 3-4 of his prime years and has 3-4 prime years to go. Richmond are not likely to be finals contenders in this time.

This draft is both deep and has fewer 'stand out' players according to those who are supposed to know. What this means is that Picks 1-8 are worth much the same as any year. But in a deep draft picks 9-30 are worth considerably more than usual.

We also have the Tassie distortion looming on future drafts.

So it would seem that for rebuilding teams, 2024 is the year to go hard at the draft and picks 9-30 are more valuable than otherwise.

So we should be able to get Bolton for less than we might pay in other years.

The main argument against Freo's strong position that I can see is that we don't appear to have other similar options to Bolton available. Richmond know we really want him. This will reduce our bargaining power.

In light of the above I would think picks 9 and 17 are plenty with something like 25 or thereabouts coming back. This might value Bolton around a Pick 6-7. We let Cerra go for Pick 6, a highly rated mid who was at the start of his prime.

 

[eastfreo75]

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.

Devil is always in the detail.

Salary cap is increasing, Fyfe, Walters and O'Meara will be coming off our books and players will need to take a slight pay cut to keep the team together.

It really depends on what Richmond is prepared to cover in terms of salary cap.

Personally, I don't think we can get Pickett, Warner, and Bolton unless we trade out players (salary cap).

Salary cap relief is worth paying for in draft picks and free agency can balance out the loss of picks.

A side point is that Baker is a salary cap waste and that will limit our future recruiting and player retention.

 

[Swiggy]

We should be able to get Bolton for 'unders'. Here's why.

The reality is that as a player, Bolton is not worth that much to Richmond. Bolton turns 26 in December, he's had 2-3 of his prime years and has 3-4 prime years to go. Richmond are not likely to be finals contenders in this time.

This draft is both deep and has fewer 'stand out' players according to those who are supposed to know. What this means is that Picks 1-8 are worth much the same as any year. But in a deep draft picks 9-30 are worth considerably more than usual.

We also have the Tassie distortion looming on future drafts.

So it would seem that for rebuilding teams, 2024 is the year to go hard at the draft and picks 9-30 are more valuable than otherwise.

So we should be able to get Bolton for less than we might pay in other years.

The main argument against Freo's strong position that I can see is that we don't appear to have other similar options to Bolton available. Richmond know we really want him. This will reduce our bargaining power.

In light of the above I would think picks 9 and 17 are plenty with something like 25 or thereabouts coming back. This might value Bolton around a Pick 6-7. We let Cerra go for Pick 6, a highly rated mid who was at the start of his prime.

9 & 17 for Bolton & 29 I think is the deal

 

[eastfreo75]

9 & 17 for Bolton & 29 I think is the deal

I am ok with this.

Still gives us picks 10,26,29.

 

[go_the_dockers]

9 & 17 for Bolton & 29 I think is the deal

There will be some brilliant late picks.

Getting 29 back, may let us get Hannaford or someone like that. Looks like an amazing draft.

Cal Twomey's Phantom Form Guide: Top draft prospects' September ranking

AFL.com.au's draft guru Cal Twomey delivers his third Phantom Form Guide ahead of the 2024 Telstra AFL Draft

www.afl.com.au

 

[freo_leo29]

I'll be surprised if it's anything under 9 and 10

Got to remember it's walls doing the trading

 

[Swiggy]

I'll be surprised if it's anything under 9 and 10

Got to remember it's walls doing the trading

What’s with the walls bashing? Has done plenty of good trades

 

[freodog]

There will be some brilliant late picks.

Getting 29 back, may let us get Hannaford or someone like that. Looks like an amazing draft.

Cal Twomey's Phantom Form Guide: Top draft prospects' September ranking

AFL.com.au's draft guru Cal Twomey delivers his third Phantom Form Guide ahead of the 2024 Telstra AFL Draft

www.afl.com.au

Gggrreeeeeeeeeaaaaaaatt Brisbane get another top 5 Father/son pick Father/son rule is the biggest rort in the AFL.

 

[freo_leo29]

What’s with the walls bashing? Has done plenty of good trades

No "walls bashing" here

He is a shocking trader, great drafter though

 

[wakojako]

I'll be surprised if it's anything under 9 and 10

Got to remember it's walls doing the trading

If we have other trade targets Walls can't do that

 

[Swiggy]

No "walls bashing" here

He is a shocking trader, great drafter though

Disagree on that. He's traded pretty well of late. Jackson is the outlier but that wasn’t really on him most would have thought Freo would play finals in 2023

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

If it's 9 and 17 I'd expect nothing back so maybe some salary or a pick in the 40s at best. 29 is very optimistic.

If it's 9 and 10, I'd expect a lot of salary and a 20s pick back. All the reasons people list for "getting him cheap" are more the reasons they will let him go. Remember they value him so highly they gave him a $1 - $1.2m contract. We are still paying a big price

 

[mike91]

Disagree on that. He's traded pretty well of late. Jackson is the outlier but that wasn’t really on him most would have thought Freo would play finals in 2023

Nah. What he gave up for an uncontracted player was downright stupid.

 

[Swiggy]

If it's 9 and 17 I'd expect nothing back so maybe some salary or a pick in the 40s at best. 29 is very optimistic.

If it's 9 and 10, I'd expect a lot of salary and a 20s pick back. All the reasons people list for "getting him cheap" are more the reasons they will let him go. Remember they value him so highly they gave him a $1 - $1.2m contract. We are still paying a big price

If Richmond get 9 & 17 for Bolton
Plus 6 for Rioli
Say 13 for baker (have to give something back

They’d have 1,6,9,13,17,21
They probably wouldn’t even use 29 that why I think freo can get it back

 

[Swiggy]

Nah. What he gave up for an uncontracted player was downright stupid.

Had to get it done… could have walked to west coast.
2 first was around the price at the time. Had to throw bit more in as they were hoping was 2 picks in late teens

 

[mike91]

Had to get it done… could have walked to west coast.
2 first was around the price at the time. Had to throw bit more in as they were hoping was 2 picks in late teens

In what world were Melbourne going to lose Jackson for nothing by letting him walk to West Coast for free? We overpaid, it's literally that simple

 

[Paracleet]

The price for Jackson was set by West Coast. Same as we set the price for Kelly. The Walls bashing about that trade is tiresome.