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

[Taylor]

Fremantle were looking to move one of the firsts into next year, I don't see a reason why that isn't still the case.

To me that's #9 and #16 to Richmond for Bolton and #29

Then #10 is offered to whomever wants it for a F1.

When Pickett comes back on the table that can change to #10 and a contracted player from us for him.

 

[THE_GUN]

All that still reads to me like the smartest and best thing to do is to spread good value into next year but we'll see how trade period goes. Losing pick 9 for a likely top 5 pick next year seems a no brainer to me

If i was Blair (he is a pretty good operator) why would i take that ? I would be saying he is contracted and the cost for Bolton is 9 & 10 and we are prepared to look at salary contribution. But not with the 9 & 16 i dont think freo would drop shai and even if they do keep him. then if he really wants the north pick he will just deal it himself.

Baker i would rather he goes to the eagles as i believe pick #3 is gettable with Baker but not without him
Baker + 10 + 39 ( for dev ) would get that done

If we’re prepared to lose 9,10 and 16 anyway, I would certainly entertain whatever we could to extrapolate greater value first.

Just depends what domino needs to fall first.

As freo should but im pretty sure the ground work has been done by the 2 clubs and well known what the expectations would be. Freo have tended to be hard asses trading out contracted players but have also payed the price bringing in heavily contracted players specially pieces they are desperate to get. Shai Bolton is a special player
Jye Amiss kicked 36.28 in a team that should have been top 4
Shai Bolton kicked 34.26 playing 60/40 mid foward in a crap team when he was checked out

He would be untouchable in the freo foward line
but you guys will see that next year anyway (if Eagles dont pull a shift and Mini gets the job)

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Fremantle were looking to move one of the firsts into next year, I don't see a reason why that isn't still the case.

To me that's #9 and #16 to Richmond for Bolton and #29

Then #10 is offered to whomever wants it for a F1.

Why, it's completely ridiculous list management unless they use that F1 immediately in a trade for a player? I'll be so angry if we head into next year with two firsts

 

[dont bowl there]

Fremantle were looking to move one of the firsts into next year, I don't see a reason why that isn't still the case.

To me that's #9 and #16 to Richmond for Bolton and #29

Then #10 is offered to whomever wants it for a F1.

Makes absolutely no sense to me why we would be doing this. We don't need to move another first to trade for Warner, aren't they allowing 2 years of future trading? So we already have 2025, 26 and 27 available.

 

[Taylor]

Why, it's completely ridiculous list management unless they use that F1 immediately in a trade for a player? I'll be so angry if we head into next year with two firsts

Why would you be upset with two first round picks next year? By all means offer those picks this year but we aren't regretting turning down pick #18 for Schultz this season.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Makes absolutely no sense to me why we would be doing this. We don't need to move another first to trade for Warner, aren't they allowing 2 years of future trading? So we already have 2025, 26 and 27 available.

And we dont need to do all three for Warner anyway. Two of them is sufficient

 

[Taylor]

Makes absolutely no sense to me why we would be doing this. We don't need to move another first to trade for Warner, aren't they allowing 2 years of future trading? So we already have 2025, 26 and 27 available.

I don't think future picks will be valued as highly as the current year, current draft ones - as you'll see evident in your reaction to holding #10 or a future pick.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Why would you be upset with two first round picks next year? By all means offer those picks this year but we aren't regretting turning down pick #18 for Schultz this season.

We should regret it more, what price do you pay on missing finals? We dont need maximum value we need talent developing and in the door now even if it's a kid. I'm not doing it for Warner just to increase whatever price we pay.

 

[Taylor]

I am also bracing for a new paradigm of trading when more year's worth of picks become available to trade. I'm not expecting the quality of the players moving to change, there are already seriously good players being traded, but I think the price will go up.

 

[kuhni]

My issues with trading for F1 is consistent:
1. It increases the demands from Sydney for Warner.
2. If they aren´t used in a trade, future draft picks are even less experienced and less likely to contribute to a near-term finals push.

 

[Taylor]

We should regret it more, what price do you pay on missing finals? We dont need maximum value we need talent developing and in the door now even if it's a kid. I'm not doing it for Warner just to increase whatever price we pay.

Are you making the case than a player drafted at pick #10 would be the difference in us making finals or not in their first season?

Because the other side you could be arguing is that we can force a club to trade their player to us now, this year with the cunning use of .... pick #10?

We would be better with Pickett or Warner, but if they won't be traded I think we are better rolling the dice on turning the Schultz pick into a top five pick.

 

[MadMundy]

So far, every player of need has been re-signed, it's a nice feeling.

Knobel re-signing would be nice too, haven't seen enough on him to judge though.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Are you making the case than a player drafted at pick #10 would be the difference in us making finals or not in their first season?

Because the other side you could be arguing is that we can force a club to trade their player to us now, this year with the cunning use of .... pick #10?

We would be better with Pickett or Warner, but if they won't be traded I think we are better rolling the dice on turning the Schultz pick into a top five pick.

Maybe next year, maybe in two years when they are still a year ahead of whoever we draft next year.

The only clubs that should be looking to take extra firsts into next year if it means maximum value are Richmond, West Coast and Gold Coast.

 

[rubydoomsday]

If i was Blair (he is a pretty good operator) why would i take that ? I would be saying he is contracted and the cost for Bolton is 9 & 10 and we are prepared to look at salary contribution. But not with the 9 & 16 i dont think freo would drop shai and even if they do keep him. then if he really wants the north pick he will just deal it himself.

Baker i would rather he goes to the eagles as i believe pick #3 is gettable with Baker but not without him
Baker + 10 + 39 ( for dev ) would get that done


As freo should but im pretty sure the ground work has been done by the 2 clubs and well known what the expectations would be. Freo have tended to be hard asses trading out contracted players but have also payed the price bringing in heavily contracted players specially pieces they are desperate to get. Shai Bolton is a special player
Jye Amiss kicked 36.28 in a team that should have been top 4
Shai Bolton kicked 34.26 playing 60/40 mid foward in a crap team when he was checked out

He would be untouchable in the freo foward line
but you guys will see that next year anyway (if Eagles dont pull a shift and Mini gets the job)

the year before, Amiss kicked 41.17 in only his second injury-uninterrupted AFL year.

do not base your assessment of Jye on 2024

 

[Docker82]

The biggest issue I'd have with not re-signing Knobel is we'd be drafting someone similar just younger anyway?

Reidy isn't quite AFL standard IMO. He's basically like your Dan Curries or Tom Campbells of this world. Hell probably have a 7-10 year AFL career and play sub-30 games IMO.

 

[Cobbler]

If i was Blair (he is a pretty good operator) why would i take that ? I would be saying he is contracted and the cost for Bolton is 9 & 10 and we are prepared to look at salary contribution. But not with the 9 & 16 i dont think freo would drop shai and even if they do keep him. then if he really wants the north pick he will just deal it himself.

Baker i would rather he goes to the eagles as i believe pick #3 is gettable with Baker but not without him
Baker + 10 + 39 ( for dev ) would get that done


As freo should but im pretty sure the ground work has been done by the 2 clubs and well known what the expectations would be. Freo have tended to be hard asses trading out contracted players but have also payed the price bringing in heavily contracted players specially pieces they are desperate to get. Shai Bolton is a special player
Jye Amiss kicked 36.28 in a team that should have been top 4
Shai Bolton kicked 34.26 playing 60/40 mid foward in a crap team when he was checked out

He would be untouchable in the freo foward line
but you guys will see that next year anyway (if Eagles dont pull a shift and Mini gets the job)

Provide an example of hard asses when someone was in contract?

Simply asking for a players worth not a vic media driven worth is the least we ask.

I’ll wait for the example…

 

[THE_GUN]

Maybe next year, maybe in two years when they are still a year ahead of whoever we draft next year.

The only clubs that should be looking to take extra firsts into next year if it means maximum value are Richmond, West Coast and Gold Coast.

Not blowing smoke up anybody's backside here and you know i would rather Baker goes to the eagles as i see pick #3 as a real possibility with Pyke/Clarke wording and how open they are to accumulate picks inside 30.

But with Bolton & Baker i would honestly be putting $100 on freo for the flag and $500 on making top 4
Bolton & Baker add 30 goals to your score min and makes your Midfield / HB better.
1 thing about Baker he adds grit to the team.

 

[Taylor]

Maybe next year, maybe in two years when they are still a year ahead of whoever we draft next year.

The only clubs that should be looking to take extra firsts into next year if it means maximum value are Richmond, West Coast and Gold Coast.

Any club with trade targets should take the extra first. I much prefer Warner or Pickett next year (if we can't this year) over the as yet unknown player available at pick #10/11

 

[THE_GUN]

Provide an example of hard asses when someone was in contract?

Simply asking for a players worth not a vic media driven worth is the least we ask.

I’ll wait for the example…

Well clearly the best example is Weller #2 and just last year Shultz for F1 & #34
thats milking the at its best. sure pick 19 was not expected but 15/16 plus 34 is still good overs

 

[The Feeder Club]

That Schultz trade really screwed Collingwood. If they still had pick 10 they get Houston in a heartbeat, who they want and need but can't afford the trade price. So now they try and steal Perryman from under Port's nose in a desperate attempt to throw a spanner in the works and make Port think again about trading Houston elsewhere. Not to say Perryman is no good but it all seems faintly hilarious.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Any club with trade targets should take the extra first. I much prefer Warner or Pickett next year (if we can't this year) over the as yet unknown player available at pick #10/11

Yes but why maximise the price you pay? We didn't move anything into the future for Jackson and it would have been a great price if we hadn't fallen off the following year. I don't think anyone moves significant value to next year for a trade target, I can't think of any time it's happened. Any value gained turning 9 into 4 or 5 just goes straight to Sydney or Melbourne.

We also aren't getting both next year with the salary cap, it's one or the other, so it doesn't help there either.

 

[Taylor]

Yes but why maximise the price you pay? We didn't move anything into the future for Jackson and it would have been a great price if we hadn't fallen off the following year. I don't think anyone moves significant value to next year for a trade target, I can't think of any time it's happened. Any value gained turning 9 into 4 or 5 just goes straight to Sydney or Melbourne.

We also aren't getting both next year with the salary cap, it's one or the other, so it doesn't help there either.

We are in direct competition with a club that will have a top three pick, that's why we need to roll value over.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

We are in direct competition with a club that will have a top three pick, that's why we need to roll value over.

What, since when have you believed that? Like everyone else, Warner goes where Warner wants.

 

[Rockmelon]

We’ve done some pretty stupid things as a footy club, but trading pick 10 for an uncontracted Baker would be on the podium.

I refuse to believe we’re that stupid

 

[s_wd6]

We are in direct competition with a club that will have a top three pick, that's why we need to roll value over.

We don’t need Warner. We’d seriously do better using pick 9 this Year on one of those small forwards than move it on to next year for a chance at Warner. We lose him to west coast so what? It’s not like he’s going to make them a better team than us.