List Mgmt. 2024 Trade & List Management Thread - Part 3

Remove this Banner Ad

Player moves

PlayerOriginal ClubTrade/FANew ClubResult
Isaac CummingGWSUFAAdelaideEnd of Round 1 Compo (pick 21) to GWS
Josh BattleSt KildaUFAHawthornRound 1 Compo (Pick 8) to St.Kilda
Tom CampbellSt KildaDFAMelbourneNo Compensation
Harry PerrymanGWSUFACollingwoodRound 1 Compo (Pick 16) to GWS
Elliott HimmelbergAdelaideUFAGold CoastNo Compensation
Nick HaynesGWSUFACarltonNo Compensation
Alex Neal-BullenMelbourneTradeAdelaideRound 2 Pick (28) to Melbourne
Jack DarlingWest CoastTradeNorth MelbourneRound 4 pick (68) to WCE
Jack GrahamRichmondUFAWest CoastEnd of Round 2 Compo (Pick 42) to Richmond


 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Looking more and more like we will have the personal terms for Houston and the best compensation for Port.

Port have every right to say yeah well North will pay you better than the others to go home and we want their offer.

If you leave, you're going to North.

(And accordingly, I think there's every chance he stays at Port)
 

I dont believe he is worried about satisfying the dogs. It is about the $$ or length of contract for him to make it worth his while.

If he is playing hardball, id be happy to leave him to play in the 2s at the dogs. I thought this was just going to be a win/win for both clubs. We'd probably get a better outcome if we got another year of development into someone like powell.
 

Log in to remove this ad.


Western Bulldogs’ playmaker Caleb Daniel is still considering a lucrative offer to reinvigorate his career at North Melbourne.

The premiership star discussed the potential move with family and friends back home in South Australia over the weekend and was in talks on Monday with his manager Marty Pask.

The Kangaroos are keen to add Daniel’s precision kicking skills for more polish in the back half and could involve pick 25 in a deal to satisfy the Bulldogs for the 28-year-old.

It would be a tempting second-round selection for the Dogs, who don’t have a first-round pick in this year’s draft but could yet snare number 17 from the Cats for Bailey Smith.


The Saints are also keen on Jack Macrae but are only willing to give up a late pick, such as 47, if they pay all of his salary at Moorabbin.

Daniel would net the Dogs a bigger draft bounty if he elects for a fresh start after a 10-year stint at the Bulldogs including a best-and-fairest in 2020.

The utility enjoyed a strong finish to the season, gathering an average 24 touches in his last three matches of the 2024 season.

The Dogs are unlikely to have any certainty over Smith until the last day of the trade period as the Cats and Dogs stand firm on their demands.

The expectation among clubs is that he would be available at the Cats’ pick 17 if the clubs remained at loggerheads and he slipped through to the national draft.

It makes a rival play for him in the draft almost impossible as clubs would only take him following in-depth discussions about his mental health issues, which Smith has spoken openly about.

There would also have to be medical checks following the knee reconstruction last year, meaning Geelong holds the upper hand in negotiations as Smith is unwilling to discuss his future with any other clubs.

The Cats remain the certain landing spot for Smith after list boss Andrew Mackie said Geelong was keen to strike a trade with the Dogs for the midfielder.

But Geelong is keen to offer its first pick in this year’s draft for Smith rather than multiple top-end selections including a future first-round draft pick.

The Cats would need the future first-rounder to nab Melbourne superstar Clayton Oliver if he became available again either in this trade period or next year.

Oliver is still interested in joining Geelong despite Melbourne’s firm denials.

The Dogs could push the Cats for a pick swap as part of the Smith deal which benefits the Dogs such as exchanging the Dogs’ third-round pick for the Cats’ second-round pick.
 
Daniel not nominating is doing us a favour isn’t it? If he nominated it obligates us to get a deal done, giving the dogs the upper hand in negotiation. This way it allows us to sit back and wait for the dogs to accept what we decide is fair. I think Daniel is doing us a solid.
 
Daniel not nominating is doing us a favour isn’t it? If he nominated it obligates us to get a deal done, giving the dogs the upper hand in negotiation. This way it allows us to sit back and wait for the dogs to accept what we decide is fair. I think Daniel is doing us a solid.
Disagree now they have no reason to trade him

If he nominated us then they have a reason to let him go
 
Disagree now they have no reason to trade him

If he nominated us then they have a reason to let him go

It feels like it’s playing out a little like when we were after Hunter Clark a couple years back. I can see the Dogs offering him next week.
 
We may be sorting out what happens with our F1 before any potential trades for Parker and Daniel, so we know whether we can trade other futures.

I'd be pretty disappointed if we traded out either 25 or 43 without picks this year coming back, especially for those kinds of players.
Yep, if saints are offering 47 for Macrae and Smith is potentially pick 17 there is no way in hell that Daniel is worth pick 25.
 
Cracks me up how the phrase “just a half back flanker” is still used as a pejorative in 2024.
I understand the point you're making, and it's quite right, at least up to a point imo.

Rebound footy is indeed modern footy, and you need quality to do it, but in the ultimate, the really elite quality goes forward of the ball, as we saw with Sheezel.

if we could get Houston for something reasonable, I'd be for it, but to get there we will have to trump the pies or carlton with a bid that's over the top, and it's a step too far
 
Parker is worth 43; no issue at all that a bargain.

Caleb at 25 feels overs, but let's look at the big picture here. Putting Caleb on an HB flank gives us Fish to push forward. Or move McArch into the midfield, and Sheez can spend more time forward.

We have young talent coming out of our ears but we are at risk of burning it if we cant get some experience around them.

Caleb/Parker and to a lesser extent Darling would be brillant. Put Houston in that mix and a good year with injuries, we could play finals.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

It feels like it’s playing out a little like when we were after Hunter Clark a couple years back. I can see the Dogs offering him next week.

Difference with hunter clark was didn't they want our pick 3 I think we had.... dogs at best will be asking 2nd rd but should be more 30s


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
It feels like it’s playing out a little like when we were after Hunter Clark a couple years back. I can see the Dogs offering him next week.
I quite like the club's strategy, which seems to be to offer a 'double split' to the industry, and see who bites.

By the 'double split', I mean offering to split one or both of our firsts this year and next, which can then be 'mixed and matched' according to what incoming player might be worth.

Like you, I wouldn't be jumping too soon - leave the 'double split' on the table into next week and let the industry come to us.

If nothing happens and we're left with Darling, Parker and our existing picks (less whatever Parker costs), then we've still done well, and anything better than that is a bonus.
 
If we trade 25 for Caleb Daniel then we may as well fire anyone involved with list management or recruitment.

We need more pick inside the top 30 to further out list build that has to remain the priority. Burning key picks for the sake of maturity when we already have Parker and Darling walking in the door would be as dumb as topping up on the likes of Tyson, Hall, Polec ect
 
"Would" and "could" seem to do a lot of the heavy lifting in the Herald Sun's reporting on the trade collateral for Caleb Daniel
 
I struggle to understand how a guy who spent half the season last year not in the best 22 for his club and the other half as a sub is worth a second round pick straight up. That's utter madness!
Because our picks don’t seem to hold the same value as other teams. It must be a conditioning effect because we always pay overs and receive unders.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. 2024 Trade & List Management Thread - Part 3

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top