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

[Snuffaluphagus]

If it is just Bolton we’re bringing across in 2024 Trade period, we are reportedly shopping around one of our picks for a good F1. So that alone supports what exactly what you’re saying. I agree Swans won’t want 2027 draft picks. They will still be in the mix and that draft will be heavily compromised.

I really dont want to send a pick into next year if it's just Bolton, I hope we dont do that. I think that's really stupid, or, at the very least, it's just one 1st round pick next year. The more we have, the more is demanded for Warner

 

[Ysaye]

For mine, this is a draft to go with later picks if ever there was one because of the depth probably even all the way to pick 40 - I don't know there is much difference in quality between a pick 15 to a pick 30. It is also arguably a year to go majority "Brand WA" because otherwise we have players sitting around with high "go home" factor, and because of said eveness and the fact that it is mainly the Vics who will be up first in the draft, everyone apart from Bo Allan is likely to go later than pick 25, including Hamish Davis and Gayle Gerryn who are still really really good prospects IMO.

So if the offer to lose all of 9,10 and 16 in return for Bolton, a likely decent next year first round (ideally Kangaroos - for being part of a potential Warner trade) and a second rounder around the 25-30 mark (Leaving us with that and the Saints second rounder), I would do it.

But I think there is also a bit a water to go under the bridge before that which further complicates matters; we don't know yet which players want to be traded from the club / the club is willing to let go to other clubs for decent deals. My ears pricked up at the way the club mentioned Cox (My interpretation is that it sounds both we and Cox are open to a trade for the right price to Adelaide or Port) and I am not sure what will happen with Switkowski.

 

[s_wd6]

But I think there is also a bit a water to go under the bridge before that which further complicates matters; we don't know yet which players want to be traded from the club / the club is willing to let go to other clubs for decent deals. My ears pricked up at the way the club mentioned Cox (My interpretation is that it sounds both we and Cox are open to a trade for the right price to Adelaide or Port) and I am not sure what will happen with Switkowski.

Don't think the club has mentioned Cox at all

 

[Superkoops]

Don't think the club has mentioned Cox at all

Cox was mentioned. The only mention was from Briety who said there had been an enquiry from a club about Cox and the response from Freo was Cox would not be traded.

We all know who that club is and they ask the same question every year. That is Adelaide Crows.

 

[Purple Suit]

I really dont want to send a pick into next year if it's just Bolton, I hope we dont do that. I think that's really stupid, or, at the very least, it's just one 1st round pick next year. The more we have, the more is demanded for Warner

While I agree with you. Unless WC wants to offer their pick 1-4, having a low pick gets us a fair bit of leverage if he’s out of contract. We can walk him to the draft with a top 10 pick so Sydney have to deal with what we offer. Dawson is an example of this.

The issue with Jackson was WC were in the market to split for him so no contract mattered less. Maybe they are worried the ego maniacs over at WC will try top up with Warner.

 

[s_wd6]

Cox was mentioned. The only mention was from Briety who said there had been an enquiry from a club about Cox and the response from Freo was Cox would not be traded.

We all know who that club is and they ask the same question every year. That is Adelaide Crows.

Do you have a link to the interview? Only recent one from Brierty I listened to in full had no mention of him.

 

[Wray27]

I had someone at work claiming to be a friend of Warner's partner say they have decided to stay in Sydney. There's a lot of shit going around atm.

Geez Wako. I told you she lives in Perth.

 

[mike91]

I don't think it's enough. You need a current first at least, that gets to insulting levels otherwise

It does, but this is where clubs need to be more ruthless.

Here's a very good offer (overs) for your contracted player. This offer won't be here in 12 months' time when he's uncontracted.

If we happen to offer 2 first round picks in the teens in 12 months' time, it is what is, they had their chance.




On SM-G781B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[malpaso]

Spoke to someone from Melbourne close to the Switskowski family. Reckons there’s a huge pull to go back to Victoria but equally loves it here. Reckons it’s 50/50 whether he goes back this year but 100% likely that he will eventually.

Only way I'd want to trade Switkowski if is it's to the Demons in a deal for Pickett.

 

[bellie4pm]

Three or four years is quite a lot IMO.

Let’s say it takes Kelm two years to play a game - he’s 27 by then. Normally you’re thinking about drafting a player to replace a senior player when they’re around 28 or 29 so you can get two to three years development in before the younger player is expected to take over.

A 21/22 year old takes that time and, if things go well, they’ve still got 6-7 years of prime left to make a difference.

As I said I’d hope Kelm is way way better than the other Irish guy otherwise I’d rather allow the extra years to develop into a good footballer.

Btw Gaelic players can only take up one Category B rookie spot so it just makes the list spots argument a little stronger. Category A rookies most of the time are more likely to contribute tbh. Having said that you can upgrade from Category B to Category A so if an Irish player does really well year one or two making them a Category A and bringing in another Irish may help. As I said a few pages back I think it’s likely we make more list changes next year than this year so we might need to get creative with the draftees we do bring in.

Honestly think he can play 25 or start 26 - hes been training with afl ball since we showed an interest precovid

 

[oldgoat]

Can go back after he’s retired at 32 with minimum a flag under his belt

Or three

 

[Superkoops]

Do you have a link to the interview? Only recent one from Brierty I listened to in full had no mention of him.

It was an article I read and was a journalist summarising some comments. Might have been 3-4 weeks ago

 

[Alfonz]

Terrible trade if we give up all three first picks.

Perhaps we don’t get the upgrade of 16.

But in what world is Bolton/Baker combo worth 9,10,16

If that is the direction you think it is heading we need to split pick 9 or 10, because only two of three need to be involved.

9 > 17/18 and 19

10 + 17/18 > Bolton
19 > Baker

We need to get active with other options like Sydney etc. and give Richmond the choice. Baker is out of contract but will help them get a very good deal overall. If just Bolton we will pay overs. But will keep one of the early picks.

In the world where we are buying 400k x 4 years (or similar) of Bolton's salary. Our salary cap will be at breaking point trying to fit in the highly paid guns, and we really need Richmond to pay a large chunk. I'm continually bemused by how many people are seemingly ignoring our salary cap situation when discussing the trade options.

Trading 9, 10, 16 for Bolton + Baker is not ideal, but it is not crazy. It is within the realms of possibility. My preference would be to leave Baker to WC, but I am comfortable with 9+10 for Bolton + salary.

 

[wakojako]

Geez Wako. I told you she lives in Perth.

Sorry bro I genuinely forgot.

 

[fnerd]

Sorry bro I genuinely forgot.

FFS wako!! get your head in the (trade) game!

 

[theGav56]

Hope so

I would think he is on 450k a season. Although not big money, then if not played why not move him on, on proviso that we don't pay his salary and freethe cash up for Warner or Pickett next season. Not saying we will land them but it gives us more cap space

Opposite for me. Pay his salary and grab the list space.

 

[King Huskii]

Opposite for me. Pay his salary and grab the list space.

We have plenty of list spaces

 

[Vimal Anand]

Why suddenly a lot of talk here about all first round picks to be traded Richmond? Any news in media?

On SM-S918B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

It does, but this is where clubs need to be more ruthless.

Here's a very good offer (overs) for your contracted player. This offer won't be here in 12 months' time when he's uncontracted.

If we happen to offer 2 first round picks in the teens in 12 months' time, it is what is, they had their chance.




On SM-G781B using BigFooty.com mobile app

Yeah, it's kind of why I'm hoping regardless he requests a trade this year. There's actually a sizeable difference between pick 9 this year and pick whatever it is in 2 years (they get next years regardless of whether a trade is done this year or next so it doesn't matter) AND if he asks for a trade this year and they say no then like you said, it's easier next year to say, well, you had your chance, this is all we have.

Taking extra capital specifically for Warner is dumb and I'll be peeved if we do it (even though it's exactly something we'd do).

 

[theGav56]

Yep.
I can live with 9 + 10 for Bolton and Baker.
Take 16 to the draft for a developing small or possible slider like Bo Allan.

Otherwise split 10.

Offer 9, 16 and whatever.

The likely lollies in the jar at pick 16 include Allan, Tregalia, Hynes, Berry, Tauru and Lyndsey.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

In the world where we are buying 400k x 4 years (or similar) of Bolton's salary. Our salary cap will be at breaking point trying to fit in the highly paid guns, and we really need Richmond to pay a large chunk. I'm continually bemused by how many people are seemingly ignoring our salary cap situation when discussing the trade options.

Trading 9, 10, 16 for Bolton + Baker is not ideal, but it is not crazy. It is within the realms of possibility. My preference would be to leave Baker to WC, but I am comfortable with 9+10 for Bolton + salary.

Salary is an intangible value to supporters though, look at how it's always glossed over talking JOM and Meek trade. It's much easier to appreciate the value in picks.

 

[theGav56]

We have plenty of list spaces

Great. Let's fill them with players who will be options to get a game sometime. Brodie clearly isn't going to.

 

[Cobbler]

Yeah, it's kind of why I'm hoping regardless he requests a trade this year. There's actually a sizeable difference between pick 9 this year and pick whatever it is in 2 years (they get next years regardless of whether a trade is done this year or next so it doesn't matter) AND if he asks for a trade this year and they say no then like you said, it's easier next year to say, well, you had your chance, this is all we have.

Taking extra capital specifically for Warner is dumb and I'll be peeved if we do it (even though it's exactly something we'd do).

The extra capital may be a just in case scenario. Like just in case Pickett also wishes to leave.

 

[wakojako]

Anyone excited for what gems the Geelong talent scout Liam Woodland will find? First season with us and there is bound to be some hidden gems outside the first round.

 

[fnerd]

Anyone excited for what gems the Geelong talent scout Liam Woodland will find? First season with us and there is bound to be some hidden gems outside the first round.

Yea Maybe but wallsy is the man m8
Always has been always will be