Recruiting AFL Trade & Free Agency XII - đź’°đź’°đź’°

Remove this Banner Ad

Call Me Cake said:
No because even that pick won't come good for a few years and we need to start moving from now.
Click to expand...
I would hazard a guess that a top 5 pick should be playing 50% of the games in year 2

only thing that should be holding back a top draftee is injury or being a young KPP
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Yoda_ said:
I would hazard a guess that a top 5 pick should be playing 50% of the games in year 2

only thing that should be holding back a top draftee is injury or being a young KPP
Click to expand...
I would say it is horses for courses.
 
Snake Charmer said:
I don’t get excited about delisted players but I’d love us to give Culley a chance to earn a spot over the summer. Hasn’t had the best run at it with injury.
Click to expand...
Agree with that. Culley can play mid or forward.
 
eth-dog said:
I call a spade a spade. In this case, calling a dumb idea a dumb idea.
Click to expand...

It’s not dumb it’s just uncomfortable because it challenges your bias’ and scarcity mindset.

The idea that if we have a bad team and if we find 1 good asset we should horde it and try and fill in the rest of the team with scraps vs investing the more valuable asset in a way that benefits the team is scary.

It’s even more confronting when the path forward purely chasing value is to empower players you have a personal bias against into succeeding. (Parish and Sheil)

Parish and Sheil are both former AA players who have medium speed and below average but competent kicking. Their lack of defensive running/effort seems more about effort than anything else and if they aren’t providing that effort you can just drop one for Hobbs or even Roberts who looks a great find.

That’s more then enough production for a 4th option mid (assuming Merrett, Durham and Tsatas are options 1-3)
 
Durham, Martin, Caldwell are 23 with 70 games on average between them.

The thought of what that core can be when they're 26+ at 150+ games is something we should be seeing as a positive.

Out of all the actual pressing issues we have you talk down one of the only shining lights for us this year.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

joey_jo_jo said:
Caldwell maybe on the smaller size but its nuts to think he cant absorb or apply physical pressure. Go back and watch the dogs game, Duz got all the acclaim for his job on Bont but Caldwell went head to head with Libba and blunted his impact too.

I agree as a group we have this issue but he is one of the few mids who has improved us in this regards so why would we toss him out to slot proven defensive liabilities parish/shiel back in?
Parish is the guy we shouldve moved on, but the ship has probably sailed as his stocks are very low now. In addition to the shortcomings Eth posted above one thing I noticed going to games live at back end of the year is even when we have ball in hand Parish is rarely gut running to provide the backline an out. he is happy to guard grass and wait for them to fumble their way out of the backline.
Click to expand...
I genuinely see parish’s career at the crossroads. He seems to have a bit of FIGJAM about him, whether it’s true or not. It results in him thinking that he doesn’t needing to do extra stuff like tackling and harassing to be useful to the team, which is delusional.
He really needs to be getting the footy 35-40 times to be effective due to poor kicking and a poor defensive game, and he’s been pretty ordinary since his AA season. I think he can turn it around, but he needs to be much fitter (pinging a calf annually doesn’t help), and realise he’s not where he thinks he’s at.

Brad should be handing out some home truths if he’s fair dinkum, but I’m not sure he’s has it in him.
 
Sporno 4 Pyros said:
Damo not happy that we didn’t provide enough content (aka Dodo leaks) for trade radio this year??
“Ring it and tell it” Damo write good!!
View attachment 2146667
Click to expand...

Was road tripping for the last few days of the trade period & listened to all of Damo’s trade radio work. Gave us more tears in eyes laughs than you’d expect… not from what they intended.

There’s not doubt he’s aiming for a Sunday Footy Show blokie vibe… but he delivers a lone drunk guy at the bar who latches onto you & wants to share one misguided opinion over & over & over again.

A few nuggets :

Caller - what’s the latest on the Carlton pick swap?
Damo - nothing. On trade radio we don’t really care about pick swaps
Soooo… trades of players only.

Caller - will Houston get to pies?
Damo - I haven’t caught up with that one today, so not sure… (moves onto how he’s hosting the final day)
Soooo… no prep on the big player trades.

Trade Radio doing a 30 min bit on: the draft is overrated, no one ever succeeded on a draft first approach and clubs should focus on trading in experienced players instead.

Overdue for a Twelfth Man type piss take.
 

A three-year plan: Why the Bombers didn’t hunt anyone this trade period​

By Jake Niall​

October 18, 2024 — 6.47pm

Essendon didn’t chase Dan Houston, when they held a better draft hand than Collingwood and had comfortably enough draft and salary cap capital to accommodate the All-Australian defender.

The Dons weren’t in the market for Clayton Oliver, whose for sale sign was quickly removed once he met with the Cats on a rustic date. They didn’t get into a bidding war with Hawthorn for either Josh Battle or Tom Barrass, and didn’t bite at Caleb Daniel or Jack Macrae when they were on the exit ramp from the Bulldogs.

They never made any play for Bailey Smith, who theoretically fitted their need for a midfielder with power and speed. Brad Scott, presumably, would have known his twin brother’s team was further down the road, in every sense.

[PLAYERCARD]Bailey Smith[/PLAYERCARD] got his wish with a move to Geelong.

Bailey Smith got his wish with a move to Geelong.

The only time the Bombers were mentioned in trade dispatches was in relation to the challenge of offloading Jake Stringer to the beleaguered Giants, and in a pick-swap trade with Melbourne that protected their draft position from any bid on academy recruit Isaac Kako.

No player arrived at the club in a trade, compared to last year when the Dons imported four – three of them free agents to fill specific holes – without any draft cost.

Essendon’s reticence to chase players wasn’t a sudden decision the club made in late September or October.

Essendon CEO Craig Vozzo has plenty of work to do alongside Brad Scott and Matt Rosa.

Essendon CEO Craig Vozzo has plenty of work to do alongside Brad Scott and Matt Rosa.CREDIT: JUSTIN MCMANUS

It was the beginning of a three-year strategy.

The club’s new list manager Matt Rosa, in concert with chief executive Craig Vozzo, has authored a three-year plan that has been presented to Essendon’s board.

As year one of that three-year plan, this post-season has clearly emphasised the view of Rosa, Scott and Vozzo that the playing list is in need of A-grade talent and that star quality is best found in the national draft.

Hence, the Bombers haven’t chased or spent big on seasoned recruits, saving their draft capital for youth – starting with Kako, who will be acquired with the help of Melbourne’s secondary picks (and future first-round) that were exchanged for Essendon’s pick No 9.
By year three of the Rosa plan, the Bombers will be more willing to splurge on a prized recruit, hoping that, by that stage, they will have assembled more elite talent – and invested games in those kids.

It is a strategy that reeks of realism and of recognition that – Zach Merrett excepted – they don’t have the same level of top-shelf players as Carlton, the Brisbane Lions or Sydney. It is a plan that was easier to execute under Rosa, as the new list boss, than on the watch of his more extroverted and visible predecessor Adrian Dodoro, who has left the club after nearly three decades at the helm of recruiting/list management.

The Bombers will not say it, but the fact that they are willing to go to the draft, after two years under Scott, is also a recognition that the strategy of 2017-19 failed.

In those three years, the Dons imported Adam Saad, Devon Smith, Stringer (all 2017) and Dylan Shiel (costing 2018 and 2019 first-round choices). This doesn’t mean the strategy – trading for mature players to push for the summit – was misguided, only that it foundered on execution.
Only two players remain from those recruited by Essendon over 2017-19, and they had no pick higher than 30 in that period.

Under the plan, they will take three or four players in the upcoming national draft.

Essendon’s 2017-19 plan unravelled in the pandemic, especially in 2020 when Saad, Joe Daniher and Conor McKenna walked, leaving demographic and positional holes. The three top-10 draft picks garnered from that exodus, thus far, have brought disappointing returns.

Talls Nik Cox and Zach Reid having been unable to establish themselves, partly due to injury, while Archie Perkins remains an unfulfilled talent.

Nate Caddy and Brad Scott at Essendon training.

Nate Caddy and Brad Scott at Essendon training.CREDIT: AFL PHOTOS

The 2020 draft was afflicted by COVID, and the clubs who dived deep into that pool – Collingwood was another – have had largely underwhelming yields.
It’s too soon to render judgments on first-round midfielders Ben Hobbs (2021) and Elijah Tsatas (2022), except to say that they have to improve significantly and that, as inside mids, they arguably fill similar roles.

Nate Caddy has the mark of class and athleticism and should more than cover for the loss of Stringer over the next few years.

That the three-year plan has been signed off on and has entered phase one bespeaks the fact that the stoic Essendon faithful will have their patience further tested in 2025. They have endured more than just about any other club’s fan base over two decades, including St Kilda’s.

At least there’s a plan. That Vozzo and Scott aren’t spruiking it is a measure of another recognition within Tullamarine – that the fans are tired of hearing about what will happen. They just want to see it.





Oh good, another plan.

Well at least they know we’re not good enough.

My big question is if this is the plan, why the hell weren’t we more active in trading for picks?
 
You gotta have something someone wants in order to trade for picks
 
Bunk Moreland said:

A three-year plan: Why the Bombers didn’t hunt anyone this trade period​

By Jake Niall​

October 18, 2024 — 6.47pm

Essendon didn’t chase Dan Houston, when they held a better draft hand than Collingwood and had comfortably enough draft and salary cap capital to accommodate the All-Australian defender.

The Dons weren’t in the market for Clayton Oliver, whose for sale sign was quickly removed once he met with the Cats on a rustic date. They didn’t get into a bidding war with Hawthorn for either Josh Battle or Tom Barrass, and didn’t bite at Caleb Daniel or Jack Macrae when they were on the exit ramp from the Bulldogs.

They never made any play for Bailey Smith, who theoretically fitted their need for a midfielder with power and speed. Brad Scott, presumably, would have known his twin brother’s team was further down the road, in every sense.

Bailey Smith got his wish with a move to Geelong.

Bailey Smith got his wish with a move to Geelong.

The only time the Bombers were mentioned in trade dispatches was in relation to the challenge of offloading Jake Stringer to the beleaguered Giants, and in a pick-swap trade with Melbourne that protected their draft position from any bid on academy recruit Isaac Kako.

No player arrived at the club in a trade, compared to last year when the Dons imported four – three of them free agents to fill specific holes – without any draft cost.

Essendon’s reticence to chase players wasn’t a sudden decision the club made in late September or October.

Essendon CEO Craig Vozzo has plenty of work to do alongside Brad Scott and Matt Rosa.

Essendon CEO Craig Vozzo has plenty of work to do alongside Brad Scott and Matt Rosa.CREDIT: JUSTIN MCMANUS

It was the beginning of a three-year strategy.

The club’s new list manager Matt Rosa, in concert with chief executive Craig Vozzo, has authored a three-year plan that has been presented to Essendon’s board.

As year one of that three-year plan, this post-season has clearly emphasised the view of Rosa, Scott and Vozzo that the playing list is in need of A-grade talent and that star quality is best found in the national draft.

Hence, the Bombers haven’t chased or spent big on seasoned recruits, saving their draft capital for youth – starting with Kako, who will be acquired with the help of Melbourne’s secondary picks (and future first-round) that were exchanged for Essendon’s pick No 9.
By year three of the Rosa plan, the Bombers will be more willing to splurge on a prized recruit, hoping that, by that stage, they will have assembled more elite talent – and invested games in those kids.

It is a strategy that reeks of realism and of recognition that – Zach Merrett excepted – they don’t have the same level of top-shelf players as Carlton, the Brisbane Lions or Sydney. It is a plan that was easier to execute under Rosa, as the new list boss, than on the watch of his more extroverted and visible predecessor Adrian Dodoro, who has left the club after nearly three decades at the helm of recruiting/list management.

The Bombers will not say it, but the fact that they are willing to go to the draft, after two years under Scott, is also a recognition that the strategy of 2017-19 failed.

In those three years, the Dons imported Adam Saad, Devon Smith, Stringer (all 2017) and Dylan Shiel (costing 2018 and 2019 first-round choices). This doesn’t mean the strategy – trading for mature players to push for the summit – was misguided, only that it foundered on execution.
Only two players remain from those recruited by Essendon over 2017-19, and they had no pick higher than 30 in that period.

Under the plan, they will take three or four players in the upcoming national draft.

Essendon’s 2017-19 plan unravelled in the pandemic, especially in 2020 when Saad, Joe Daniher and Conor McKenna walked, leaving demographic and positional holes. The three top-10 draft picks garnered from that exodus, thus far, have brought disappointing returns.

Talls Nik Cox and Zach Reid having been unable to establish themselves, partly due to injury, while Archie Perkins remains an unfulfilled talent.

Nate Caddy and Brad Scott at Essendon training.

Nate Caddy and Brad Scott at Essendon training.CREDIT: AFL PHOTOS

The 2020 draft was afflicted by COVID, and the clubs who dived deep into that pool – Collingwood was another – have had largely underwhelming yields.
It’s too soon to render judgments on first-round midfielders Ben Hobbs (2021) and Elijah Tsatas (2022), except to say that they have to improve significantly and that, as inside mids, they arguably fill similar roles.

Nate Caddy has the mark of class and athleticism and should more than cover for the loss of Stringer over the next few years.

That the three-year plan has been signed off on and has entered phase one bespeaks the fact that the stoic Essendon faithful will have their patience further tested in 2025. They have endured more than just about any other club’s fan base over two decades, including St Kilda’s.

At least there’s a plan. That Vozzo and Scott aren’t spruiking it is a measure of another recognition within Tullamarine – that the fans are tired of hearing about what will happen. They just want to see it.





Oh good, another plan.

Well at least they know we’re not good enough.

My big question is if this is the plan, why the hell weren’t we more active in trading for picks?
Click to expand...
How do you know that they where not ? there where a lot of clubs looking for picks and it is not over yet.
 
for all the wheeling and dealing, if an injured Bailey Smith and an underwhelming Dan Houston were the picks of the bunch, it really was an underwhelming trade period

for all the chest beating (and I know I am one), clubs obviously weren't as interested in what we were offering to make deals happen.
 
Bunk Moreland said:

A three-year plan: Why the Bombers didn’t hunt anyone this trade period​

By Jake Niall​

October 18, 2024 — 6.47pm

Essendon didn’t chase Dan Houston, when they held a better draft hand than Collingwood and had comfortably enough draft and salary cap capital to accommodate the All-Australian defender.

The Dons weren’t in the market for Clayton Oliver, whose for sale sign was quickly removed once he met with the Cats on a rustic date. They didn’t get into a bidding war with Hawthorn for either Josh Battle or Tom Barrass, and didn’t bite at Caleb Daniel or Jack Macrae when they were on the exit ramp from the Bulldogs.

They never made any play for Bailey Smith, who theoretically fitted their need for a midfielder with power and speed. Brad Scott, presumably, would have known his twin brother’s team was further down the road, in every sense.

Bailey Smith got his wish with a move to Geelong.

Bailey Smith got his wish with a move to Geelong.

The only time the Bombers were mentioned in trade dispatches was in relation to the challenge of offloading Jake Stringer to the beleaguered Giants, and in a pick-swap trade with Melbourne that protected their draft position from any bid on academy recruit Isaac Kako.

No player arrived at the club in a trade, compared to last year when the Dons imported four – three of them free agents to fill specific holes – without any draft cost.

Essendon’s reticence to chase players wasn’t a sudden decision the club made in late September or October.

Essendon CEO Craig Vozzo has plenty of work to do alongside Brad Scott and Matt Rosa.

Essendon CEO Craig Vozzo has plenty of work to do alongside Brad Scott and Matt Rosa.CREDIT: JUSTIN MCMANUS

It was the beginning of a three-year strategy.

The club’s new list manager Matt Rosa, in concert with chief executive Craig Vozzo, has authored a three-year plan that has been presented to Essendon’s board.

As year one of that three-year plan, this post-season has clearly emphasised the view of Rosa, Scott and Vozzo that the playing list is in need of A-grade talent and that star quality is best found in the national draft.

Hence, the Bombers haven’t chased or spent big on seasoned recruits, saving their draft capital for youth – starting with Kako, who will be acquired with the help of Melbourne’s secondary picks (and future first-round) that were exchanged for Essendon’s pick No 9.
By year three of the Rosa plan, the Bombers will be more willing to splurge on a prized recruit, hoping that, by that stage, they will have assembled more elite talent – and invested games in those kids.

It is a strategy that reeks of realism and of recognition that – Zach Merrett excepted – they don’t have the same level of top-shelf players as Carlton, the Brisbane Lions or Sydney. It is a plan that was easier to execute under Rosa, as the new list boss, than on the watch of his more extroverted and visible predecessor Adrian Dodoro, who has left the club after nearly three decades at the helm of recruiting/list management.

The Bombers will not say it, but the fact that they are willing to go to the draft, after two years under Scott, is also a recognition that the strategy of 2017-19 failed.

In those three years, the Dons imported Adam Saad, Devon Smith, Stringer (all 2017) and Dylan Shiel (costing 2018 and 2019 first-round choices). This doesn’t mean the strategy – trading for mature players to push for the summit – was misguided, only that it foundered on execution.
Only two players remain from those recruited by Essendon over 2017-19, and they had no pick higher than 30 in that period.

Under the plan, they will take three or four players in the upcoming national draft.

Essendon’s 2017-19 plan unravelled in the pandemic, especially in 2020 when Saad, Joe Daniher and Conor McKenna walked, leaving demographic and positional holes. The three top-10 draft picks garnered from that exodus, thus far, have brought disappointing returns.

Talls Nik Cox and Zach Reid having been unable to establish themselves, partly due to injury, while Archie Perkins remains an unfulfilled talent.

Nate Caddy and Brad Scott at Essendon training.

Nate Caddy and Brad Scott at Essendon training.CREDIT: AFL PHOTOS

The 2020 draft was afflicted by COVID, and the clubs who dived deep into that pool – Collingwood was another – have had largely underwhelming yields.
It’s too soon to render judgments on first-round midfielders Ben Hobbs (2021) and Elijah Tsatas (2022), except to say that they have to improve significantly and that, as inside mids, they arguably fill similar roles.

Nate Caddy has the mark of class and athleticism and should more than cover for the loss of Stringer over the next few years.

That the three-year plan has been signed off on and has entered phase one bespeaks the fact that the stoic Essendon faithful will have their patience further tested in 2025. They have endured more than just about any other club’s fan base over two decades, including St Kilda’s.

At least there’s a plan. That Vozzo and Scott aren’t spruiking it is a measure of another recognition within Tullamarine – that the fans are tired of hearing about what will happen. They just want to see it.





Oh good, another plan.

Well at least they know we’re not good enough.

My big question is if this is the plan, why the hell weren’t we more active in trading for picks?
Click to expand...
You kind of need to be in the fortunate position where good (but not great) players who won't be part of your next premiership tilt want to leave your club in a super draft year (ala Richmond). If you start shopping them around then you dilute your draft currency pretty quickly, and there isn't much value in our existing list.

I think Rosa made the best of a bad situation.
 
Bunk Moreland said:

A three-year plan: Why the Bombers didn’t hunt anyone this trade period​

By Jake Niall​

October 18, 2024 — 6.47pm

Essendon didn’t chase Dan Houston, when they held a better draft hand than Collingwood and had comfortably enough draft and salary cap capital to accommodate the All-Australian defender.

The Dons weren’t in the market for Clayton Oliver, whose for sale sign was quickly removed once he met with the Cats on a rustic date. They didn’t get into a bidding war with Hawthorn for either Josh Battle or Tom Barrass, and didn’t bite at Caleb Daniel or Jack Macrae when they were on the exit ramp from the Bulldogs.

They never made any play for Bailey Smith, who theoretically fitted their need for a midfielder with power and speed. Brad Scott, presumably, would have known his twin brother’s team was further down the road, in every sense.

Bailey Smith got his wish with a move to Geelong.

Bailey Smith got his wish with a move to Geelong.

The only time the Bombers were mentioned in trade dispatches was in relation to the challenge of offloading Jake Stringer to the beleaguered Giants, and in a pick-swap trade with Melbourne that protected their draft position from any bid on academy recruit Isaac Kako.

No player arrived at the club in a trade, compared to last year when the Dons imported four – three of them free agents to fill specific holes – without any draft cost.

Essendon’s reticence to chase players wasn’t a sudden decision the club made in late September or October.

Essendon CEO Craig Vozzo has plenty of work to do alongside Brad Scott and Matt Rosa.

Essendon CEO Craig Vozzo has plenty of work to do alongside Brad Scott and Matt Rosa.CREDIT: JUSTIN MCMANUS

It was the beginning of a three-year strategy.

The club’s new list manager Matt Rosa, in concert with chief executive Craig Vozzo, has authored a three-year plan that has been presented to Essendon’s board.

As year one of that three-year plan, this post-season has clearly emphasised the view of Rosa, Scott and Vozzo that the playing list is in need of A-grade talent and that star quality is best found in the national draft.

Hence, the Bombers haven’t chased or spent big on seasoned recruits, saving their draft capital for youth – starting with Kako, who will be acquired with the help of Melbourne’s secondary picks (and future first-round) that were exchanged for Essendon’s pick No 9.
By year three of the Rosa plan, the Bombers will be more willing to splurge on a prized recruit, hoping that, by that stage, they will have assembled more elite talent – and invested games in those kids.

It is a strategy that reeks of realism and of recognition that – Zach Merrett excepted – they don’t have the same level of top-shelf players as Carlton, the Brisbane Lions or Sydney. It is a plan that was easier to execute under Rosa, as the new list boss, than on the watch of his more extroverted and visible predecessor Adrian Dodoro, who has left the club after nearly three decades at the helm of recruiting/list management.

The Bombers will not say it, but the fact that they are willing to go to the draft, after two years under Scott, is also a recognition that the strategy of 2017-19 failed.

In those three years, the Dons imported Adam Saad, Devon Smith, Stringer (all 2017) and Dylan Shiel (costing 2018 and 2019 first-round choices). This doesn’t mean the strategy – trading for mature players to push for the summit – was misguided, only that it foundered on execution.
Only two players remain from those recruited by Essendon over 2017-19, and they had no pick higher than 30 in that period.

Under the plan, they will take three or four players in the upcoming national draft.

Essendon’s 2017-19 plan unravelled in the pandemic, especially in 2020 when Saad, Joe Daniher and Conor McKenna walked, leaving demographic and positional holes. The three top-10 draft picks garnered from that exodus, thus far, have brought disappointing returns.

Talls Nik Cox and Zach Reid having been unable to establish themselves, partly due to injury, while Archie Perkins remains an unfulfilled talent.

Nate Caddy and Brad Scott at Essendon training.

Nate Caddy and Brad Scott at Essendon training.CREDIT: AFL PHOTOS

The 2020 draft was afflicted by COVID, and the clubs who dived deep into that pool – Collingwood was another – have had largely underwhelming yields.
It’s too soon to render judgments on first-round midfielders Ben Hobbs (2021) and Elijah Tsatas (2022), except to say that they have to improve significantly and that, as inside mids, they arguably fill similar roles.

Nate Caddy has the mark of class and athleticism and should more than cover for the loss of Stringer over the next few years.

That the three-year plan has been signed off on and has entered phase one bespeaks the fact that the stoic Essendon faithful will have their patience further tested in 2025. They have endured more than just about any other club’s fan base over two decades, including St Kilda’s.

At least there’s a plan. That Vozzo and Scott aren’t spruiking it is a measure of another recognition within Tullamarine – that the fans are tired of hearing about what will happen. They just want to see it.





Oh good, another plan.

Well at least they know we’re not good enough.

My big question is if this is the plan, why the hell weren’t we more active in trading for picks?
Click to expand...

This is actually the best article I've read for a long time.

I think this would have to be the first time since 2010 where they've actually decided to build something from the ground up.
 
jdstorm said:
No shit.

But even though he’s better they largely have the same flaws/issues being small

Say Caldwell’s on field value is 9/10 player and his trade value is 8/10 (Essendon tax)

Meanwhile on field Sheils a 7/10 but off field his trade value is 1/10 (generous)

In this hypothetical Sheil is in the VFL part of the depth chart. So really he’s representing 0/10 on field AFLs value

Trade Caldwell (9 ) for a haul (8/10) and replace him as a starter with Sheil (7) and your + 6 football value on the transaction total value to AFL list (+15)

Vs trading sheil (say 1 value) and keeping Caldwell (9) with a total value of +10 added to the AFL side

Now Sports more than just cold math. (And much more involved math at that)

you have to play the hand your delt. If you’re trying to maximise your list quality giving away talented players with little trade value normally hurts more then it helps

At this point Rosa is just building depth and will
Likely ask Scott to trial guys at other positions to maximise on field talent and hopefully it all works out
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I follow you, but surely there is a simpler question in a trade.. are you getting back more than you're giving?

Caldwell might return comparatively better value than Shiel... but what's the point if what you get back is less value than Caldwell has?

If we had drafted Caldwell with pick 5 we would be happy with ourselves. He's a total gun. I would not be confident that we would draft a better player with whatever capital we got for him.
 
Call Me Cake said:
Durham, Martin, Caldwell are 23 with 70 games on average between them.

The thought of what that core can be when they're 26+ at 150+ games is something we should be seeing as a positive.

Out of all the actual pressing issues we have you try and talk down one of the only shining lights for us this year.

jdstorm you need to stop drinking so early.
Click to expand...

I’m doing no talking down of Caldwell thank you. I’ve been saying he’s been that good that lots of other teams would want him. Then we had a hypothetical conversation about trading him in a similar way to how we talk about Warner or Harley Reid or any of the other good/star player.

It’s purely hypothetical about asset management in furthering goals towards rebuilding.

Personally I think the 2020 rebuild is going decently. The team has just has a few significant bottlenecks to unkink.

Fix these the team gets better fast. Losts of teams getting better so not sure how high we jump. But think there’s a good argument to make that we’re ready to make a big jump with a few tweaks and internal age based development


fairbump_playon said:
I'm not sure I follow you, but surely there is a simpler question in a trade.. are you getting back more than you're giving?

Caldwell might return comparatively better value than Shiel... but what's the point if what you get back is less value than Caldwell has?

If we had drafted Caldwell with pick 5 we would be happy with ourselves. He's a total gun. I would not be confident that we would draft a better player with whatever capital we got for him.
Click to expand...
Going by your simple question are you getting back more than your giving. I’m just trying to factor in opportunity cost and value above replacement player into that conversation.
 
I do feel sorry for Zach.

If somehow Reid does want to come to us then I would not be upset trading Zach to a contender for more draft collateral for Harley.

He deserves to at least win one final.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Recruiting AFL Trade & Free Agency XII - đź’°đź’°đź’°

Similar threads

Duckworth
  • Locked
Recruiting AFL Trade & Free Agency XI - McKay. Goldstein. Gresham. Duursma!
382 383 384 385 386
Replies
10K
Views
386K
Lore
Lore
Lore
Recruiting AFLW Draft and Trade 2024 - Clarke traded to St Kilda, Scott walks to the draft
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
ant555
ant555
ghostdog
  • Locked
Recruiting AFLW Draft and Trade 2023 - Premiership demon Maddison Gay requests a trade to Essendon - 5/12
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
CrowdedHouse
CrowdedHouse
Old Campaigner
Roast AFL media - trade rumour tracker
Replies
7
Views
1K
andleanback
A
eth-dog
AFL Player #25: Jaxon Prior - Welcome to Essendon!
2
Replies
49
Views
3K
Yoda_
Yoda_
RedmanWasHere
AFL Player #42: Jayden Nguyen - Welcome to Essendon!
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
Yoda_
Yoda_
RedmanWasHere
AFL Player #40: Zak Johnson - Welcome to Essendon!
2 3
Replies
52
Views
4K
Keystone agony
Keystone agony

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top