List Mgmt. 2025 Draft & Trade Hypotheticals

[Punts]

Yea I think Reid requests a trade this year , his ego won’t allow him to play for a team getting belted every week.

Only opens up more cash and picks for Chad imo

Chad won’t go there

 

[Superstar swan]

Chad won’t go there

Why ? If he’s getting close to 2 mill per year, it’s a tough offer to turn down

 

[Punts]

Why ? If he’s getting close to 2 mill per year, it’s a tough offer to turn down

He won’t be half the player he is now in that team and that midfield

He will be there number 1 mid and get targeted every week

Plus a little like Reid his ego will get hurt getting bashed up and neat every week

 

[Cadsky]

Chad Warner was the most ferocious and tenacious mid we've had since Brett Kirk. And our club & coaches have turned him into Chad Wingard, a one way running fringe dweller around the ruck.
I was hoping Cox would put an end to that, and have him harden TF up again, but it's gotten demonstrably worse in the first two games. Two tackles in two games. Cantering about until he sees an opportunity to look good in attack.

Wingard-esque.

When Cox is fired at the end of next year we need to reset the coaching staff entirely and get in someone that values contested possessions, physically dominanting your oppenent as well as the run. Ship off the big girl's blouses like McDonald if we can get a first for him at end of year which along with the Chad mid first rounder we get ought to allow a bit of a reset. Probably WCE splite their first for two in the teens and we take those two for both Chad and McDonald? Or the first for both?

Barry Hall to be appointed as club psychologist & boxing coach, appointments to be undertaken in that dual capacity.

 

[Kiama Chris]

Yep WTF didn’t we have a crack at him as a free agent?

Who says we didn't?

 

[Kiama Chris]

Few academy boys this year, wonder whether we get a pick in before them

Most likely 4 quality kids, first one possibly top 10 (although also possibly later than that, who knows?). Midfielder forward 2 X medium defenders ? but both quality will possibly absorb all our picks.

 

[Caj]

Who says we didn't?

If we did we failed miserably, Freo gave him away for nothing

 

[Adnico26Parker]

Just on the Academy boys, I would be wary about who we think we'd match bids on, given the popular view that we would match a bid on Cochran last year, and we passed - even at pick 47.

 

[Bloods86]

Just on the Academy boys, I would be wary about who we think we'd match bids on, given the popular view that we would match a bid on Cochran last year, and we passed - even at pick 47.

I don't think it's beneficial for the academy to get into the practice of not matching bids. But at the same time, list management needs to have integrity.

Taking a player that is surplus to needs doesn't make much sense unless we're in a rebuild or have already covered needs in the draft/trade.

So if we see a best option between King or Chamberlain and not a big difference in role, or say one looks more likely inside than the other, then you could argue we don't take the other. Or if we don't see Carmichael as a potential lockdown type and we already have plenty of half backs, we might look elsewhere to fill a need.

 

[Kiama Chris]

If we did we failed miserably, Freo gave him away for nothing

Freo? Daniher? Huh?

 

[Kiama Chris]

I don't think it's beneficial for the academy to get into the practice of not matching bids. But at the same time, list management needs to have integrity.

Taking a player that is surplus to needs doesn't make much sense unless we're in a rebuild or have already covered needs in the draft/trade.

So if we see a best option between King or Chamberlain and not a big difference in role, or say one looks more likely inside than the other, then you could argue we don't take the other. Or if we don't see Carmichael as a potential lockdown type and we already have plenty of half backs, we might look elsewhere to fill a need.

The smoky is McNamara who might end up as a tough midfielder. Your point is correct, especially if the kid has been bid on.

 

[Caj]

Freo? Daniher? Huh?

Oops getting mixed up with Hogan who we didn’t bother with either

As for Daniher, if we’d convinced him 12 months earlier to join, why didn’t we seal the deal 12 months later?

 

[Kiama Chris]

Oops getting mixed up with Hogan who we didn’t bother with either

As for Daniher, if we’d convinced him 12 months earlier to join, why didn’t we seal the deal 12 months later?

My understanding is that he approached us, we asked Dodo, he said your treasury and your first born and we said yeah, nah! 12 months later, Lions did a good pitch. Get the feeling Joe is a fairly simple soul.

 

[Kbroome]

Just on the Academy boys, I would be wary about who we think we'd match bids on, given the popular view that we would match a bid on Cochran last year, and we passed - even at pick 47.

I think also there may have been a thought that Blakey is here until 2030 or whatever and Cochran plays a similar type of role to him and Snell, we need more physical key defenders than 3rd/4th interceptors

 

[bedford]

View attachment 2252485
View attachment 2252486
View attachment 2252487

Get used to it

 

[Adnico26Parker]

I think also there may have been a thought that Blakey is here until 2030 or whatever and Cochran plays a similar type of role to him and Snell, we need more physical key defenders than 3rd/4th interceptors

As does Riak - the only difference is he is a year older than Cochran, and Joel can also play forward and on the wing.

List management team clearly rated Andrew ahead of Joel.

 

[Kbroome]

As does Riak - the only difference is he is a year older than Cochran, and Joel can also play forward and on the wing.

List management team clearly rated Andrew ahead of Joel.

I think Riak has a better ability on playing lockdown compared to Joel Cochran.

 

[Deccas]

Who are the academy kids this year? They any good?

 

[Bloods86]

Who are the academy kids this year? They any good?

The 3 most likely are mentioned here, but obviously a draft year is a long time in footy.

25 in 2025: A look ahead to next year’s top prospects

With the 2024 AFL Draft in the books, it is time to look forward to next year's crop. We highlight 25 prospects to watch in 2025.

central.rookieme.com

 

[Kiama Chris]

The 3 most likely are mentioned here, but obviously a draft year is a long time in footy.

25 in 2025: A look ahead to next year’s top prospects

With the 2024 AFL Draft in the books, it is time to look forward to next year's crop. We highlight 25 prospects to watch in 2025.

central.rookieme.com

Plus Kaiden McNamara.

 

[hairy biker]

After the draft each year Cal Twomey does a review looking at the machinations on draft night(s).
2024 version;

Inside the draft: Deals that Tigers rejected, the 'it' player who six clubs chased

Callum Twomey takes a closer look at the wheeling and dealing behind the scenes at the 2024 Telstra AFL Draft

www.afl.com.au

Now post draft clubs might be a bit more open on the wheeling and dealing and reportedly not only were we looking to move up the 2024 draft but we were prepared to put our 2025 first rounder on the table.

From the article;
The Swans put forward their two first-rounders this year (2024), plus their future first-rounder, in exchange for the Tigers' pick 12 and two later first-rounders

I thought we'd be doing the opposite (moving picks to 2025) to match academy bids.

Later in the draft as we attempted to move higher our second rounder from 2025 was offered up, instead of our 1st.

We also reportedly knocked back an offer from the Roos, of North's future first for our pick 26 and a future first-rounder.
To quote Twomey; (we) wanted two additions this year (2024) instead of one this year and one the next.

Now maybe if the first trade had gone through we'd have moved one of the Richmond picks back into 2025, maybe we intend to bring fwd picks from 2026/7 (although those drafts are likely to be highly comprised due to Tasmania's entry) or just maybe Chad is gone and we intend to split an early pick(s) we get for him (cue outrage on both scenarios).
I guess also possible that the recruiters may not rate our academy kids as high as others seem to do.

Or of course maybe the list mgt team was just living in the moment and figured they'd work out 2025 in 2025, although I doubt they are quite so short-sighted.

As it happens the trade never took place and we still have our 2025 first rounder, but I thought it surprising (assuming Twomey is correct) that we were willing to give up that pick.

 

[ShireSwan]

View attachment 2252485
View attachment 2252486
View attachment 2252487

You don't think the team and club need to harden TF up?
Fair enough I guess. But I do.

I'd like a mid that goes ball hunting without regard, and belts opponents to the ground who have the temerity to think they can get the ball. I'd also like a KPF who can take a contested mark. And a team that other teams are half scared of cause they know they're going to get bashed up around the ball.

I must be crazy thinking that's how you win football games.

 

[Kiama Chris]

After the draft each year Cal Twomey does a review looking at the machinations on draft night(s).
2024 version;

Inside the draft: Deals that Tigers rejected, the 'it' player who six clubs chased

Callum Twomey takes a closer look at the wheeling and dealing behind the scenes at the 2024 Telstra AFL Draft

www.afl.com.au

Now post draft clubs might be a bit more open on the wheeling and dealing and reportedly not only were we looking to move up the 2024 draft but we were prepared to put our 2025 first rounder on the table.

From the article;
The Swans put forward their two first-rounders this year (2024), plus their future first-rounder, in exchange for the Tigers' pick 12 and two later first-rounders

I thought we'd be doing the opposite (moving picks to 2025) to match academy bids.

Later in the draft as we attempted to move higher our second rounder from 2025 was offered up, instead of our 1st.

We also reportedly knocked back an offer from the Roos, of North's future first for our pick 26 and a future first-rounder.
To quote Twomey; (we) wanted two additions this year (2024) instead of one this year and one the next.

Now maybe if the first trade had gone through we'd have moved one of the Richmond picks back into 2025, maybe we intend to bring fwd picks from 2026/7 (although those drafts are likely to be highly comprised due to Tasmania's entry) or just maybe Chad is gone and we intend to split an early pick(s) we get for him (cue outrage on both scenarios).
I guess also possible that the recruiters may not rate our academy kids as high as others seem to do.

Or of course maybe the list mgt team was just living in the moment and figured they'd work out 2025 in 2025, although I doubt they are quite so short-sighted.

As it happens the trade never took place and we still have our 2025 first rounder, but I thought it surprising (assuming Twomey is correct) that we were willing to give up that pick.

We obviously had certain players in mind but couldn't get there. Given how scrambled things ended up we will probably never know who they were. The recruiters should keep shtum.

 

[tombomb]

After the draft each year Cal Twomey does a review looking at the machinations on draft night(s).
2024 version;

Inside the draft: Deals that Tigers rejected, the 'it' player who six clubs chased

Callum Twomey takes a closer look at the wheeling and dealing behind the scenes at the 2024 Telstra AFL Draft

www.afl.com.au

Now post draft clubs might be a bit more open on the wheeling and dealing and reportedly not only were we looking to move up the 2024 draft but we were prepared to put our 2025 first rounder on the table.

From the article;
The Swans put forward their two first-rounders this year (2024), plus their future first-rounder, in exchange for the Tigers' pick 12 and two later first-rounders

I thought we'd be doing the opposite (moving picks to 2025) to match academy bids.

Later in the draft as we attempted to move higher our second rounder from 2025 was offered up, instead of our 1st.

We also reportedly knocked back an offer from the Roos, of North's future first for our pick 26 and a future first-rounder.
To quote Twomey; (we) wanted two additions this year (2024) instead of one this year and one the next.

Now maybe if the first trade had gone through we'd have moved one of the Richmond picks back into 2025, maybe we intend to bring fwd picks from 2026/7 (although those drafts are likely to be highly comprised due to Tasmania's entry) or just maybe Chad is gone and we intend to split an early pick(s) we get for him (cue outrage on both scenarios).
I guess also possible that the recruiters may not rate our academy kids as high as others seem to do.

Or of course maybe the list mgt team was just living in the moment and figured they'd work out 2025 in 2025, although I doubt they are quite so short-sighted.

As it happens the trade never took place and we still have our 2025 first rounder, but I thought it surprising (assuming Twomey is correct) that we were willing to give up that pick.

Neither of the two offers involving us were really that aggressive though.

 

[Adnico26Parker]

We obviously had certain players in mind but couldn't get there. Given how scrambled things ended up we will probably never know who they were. The recruiters should keep shtum.

Faull and Trainor