List Mgmt. COLLINGWOOD Trade and F/A Discussion 2023

[Antz]

The key AFL trades still to be completed as D-Day approaches

There are still plenty of trades yet to be agreed upon, including potential deals for Lachie Schultz, Jack Billings and Xavier Duursma, as the AFL’s annual swap fest reaches its final three days.

www.theage.com.au

Just get the deal done, even if we have to give away our future 1st. We are in the premiership window and Schultz will play an important part for us to challenge again next year.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[manicpie]

Sounds like we’ll have a 2nd rounder available in 2024 to use to bring him in

Yeah, that's our biggest obstacle, plus Sydney are going to offer him 10mil per season for 10 years

 

[SchuPie]

Yeah, that's our biggest obstacle, plus Sydney are going to offer him 10mil per season for 10 years

I’m actually ok w the terms and would be happy for us to do the same but as it’s a trade, I can’t see us having the capital

 

[3rdMan]

The forward line with McRae has never just relied on one forward to kick goals. Everyone works for each other to score.

His pressure, his ability to chain link up the ground is huge. He kicks enough goals to be a threat also. If he gets one, he normally kicks a couple more.

Agree completely. The only thing I've said is that some are overrating his offensive ability, putting him up there with some of the best in the league. I don't think he's at that level.

He's a great fit for our team because of his pressure, running and ball winning ability. The goals are nice but not the primary reason he'll be good for us and his offensive ability is not special.

 

[KinderSmock]

It's proposed that MSD selections can stay on the rookie list for 3.5 years instead of needing promotion after 2.5. It would mean that Johnson and Begg don't need promotion this year. Johnson has a contract for next year so if the change doesn't come into effect he'll be promoted, but I reckon the fact it hasn't been confirmed is the big hurdle to Begg being re-signed at the moment.

Beggy isn't staying. If Lycett becomes a DFA, he'll probably be added. We could explore other rucks, too.

Begg was beaten week in, week out in the VFL and did not look remotely close to AFL standard as a ruck. VFL, he showed some glimpses as a KPP but not enough to warrant a spot. His performance against Richmond, a side that had decided it was ready for Mad Monday, was an anomaly.

 

[Scud2]

I love that deals gather momentum.

The wording journalists use make trades sound like a racehorse.

 

[manicpie]

I’m actually ok w the terms and would be happy for us to do the same but as it’s a trade, I can’t see us having the capital

I just really doubt that we would chase him to be honest. I'm sure we would realise our limitations to be able to facilitate a trade

 

[3rdMan]

I'm sure the Schultz deal will be done. Our first was reported to be on the table early so Freo were always going to ask for, and get, more. Question will be how much more. I doubt we give up our future first but a second round pick of some type could be involved with something coming back.

Don't think Freo can afford to keep him. Not many small forwards get paid $800k or more and Schultz doesn't have the level of talent to attract that in FA. $600-700k is more likely. The very best they'll get is end of first round compo, it could even be second round. That's not worth holding onto a wantaway player for a year, they're already being offered that or more.

 

[Jen2310]

At the start of the age article it says this.

Collingwood and Fremantle are at a stalemate over Lachie Schultz, with the Dockers presenting the Magpies with their final deal ultimatum – centring on a future first-round pick and a pick in this draft.

 

[3rdMan]

At the start of the age article it says this.

Collingwood and Fremantle are at a stalemate over Lachie Schultz, with the Dockers presenting the Magpies with their final deal ultimatum – centring on a future first-round pick and a pick in this draft.

Not too happy if we give up our future first, but ok if we have to, main risk would be a horror year of injuries.

 

[TradeDraft]

Not too happy if we give up our future first, but ok if we have to, main risk would be a horror year of injuries.

Well we have to or we won't get Shultz

 

[Antz]

At the start of the age article it says this.

Collingwood and Fremantle are at a stalemate over Lachie Schultz, with the Dockers presenting the Magpies with their final deal ultimatum – centring on a future first-round pick and a pick in this draft.

What are your thoughts Jen? Do you think we should give up our future 1st?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[partypie]

At the start of the age article it says this.

Collingwood and Fremantle are at a stalemate over Lachie Schultz, with the Dockers presenting the Magpies with their final deal ultimatum – centring on a future first-round pick and a pick in this draft.

Pick 19 is a fair and reasonable offer for a player who can leave them next year for at best band 2 (and most likely band 3) compo - let's not forget that McStay on his $650k per year only got Brisbane band 3 compo (2nd round pick) and Schultz wont be on that sort of money.

Freo asking for a lot more in trade than they'd get from him walking as a UFA next year is idiotic and we shouldn't cave under any circumstances. At some point we have to stand up for ourselves at the trade table and make it clear that we're no longer patsies who will allow themselves to be screwed when the persons on the other side of the table start acting like asses (as in the donkey variety) over a player who they don't value and thus wants to leave.

If that means walking away and backing in our current list (and especially our youth to take another step forward) next year then I'm comfortable with that. We wont fall in a heap if Schultz doesn't come over this year and last time I checked we're already flush with goal kicking small forwards.

 

[Jen2310]

What are your thoughts Jen? Do you think we should give up our future 1st?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Definitely should not give a future 1st. You just never know what happens in 12 months. We've had experience when you gamble with futures.
Also what if there is a high profile player next year that wants to come, but we've already sold off our 1st..
Should be this years, and maybe a Future 2nd.

 

[sam_e]

Not too happy if we give up our future first, but ok if we have to, main risk would be a horror year of injuries.

come to think of it, i'm probably ok giving them our future 1st as long as we get their future 2nd back

with that, there's a chance they'll then hold 2024 (#18) and we'll hold 2024 (#19)

edit: i definitely wouldn't give up a future 1st

 

[Penski]

We have a window that we need to capitalise on. It's the only time that i would entertain a future 1st.

 

[Ugene41]

We have a window that we need to capitalise on. It's the only time that i would entertain a future 1st.

Yea but there's also better players we can target with a future first for our window than a Schultz.

 

[Kramer]

come to think of it, i'm probably ok giving them our future 1st as long as we get their future 2nd back

i agree but they've already traded it to port.

big issue i have with trading the future first is it limits what we can do next year. if murphy is forced to retire we then have a hole in defence and wont be able to get a quality replacement next year.

 

[Masked Magician]

I usually back Wright in and like what he’s done being our list manager.

I don’t think he’s handled this situation at all well (pending the offical trade going through so I will reserve absolute melts until then).

Giving away adams prior to the Shultz deal going through was a mistake IMO.

We should be prepared to walk away from the deal. 19 this year is fair with some pick swapping in later rounds sure.

If we buckle and give away a future first for a player who has personal reasons to return to VIC and is an unrestricted free agent next season, I’d be pretty disappointed.

We should offer 19 as the centrepiece of the deal with the understanding from both parties that we will walk away if not accepted.

This is going down to Wednesday night and it’s likely we will buckle because we’ve already let Adams go and likely given our word to Schultz + his manager.

 

[Frankie23]

I’d walk away, a future first and another pick this year when we can get him for free next year? Hahahah dreaming….

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Kinda shocked that I still people saying we need to go for a key forward when we just won a flag without one against a team with one of the best key backs in the comp

I’d argue we probably don’t need one lol

Especially when McStay had literally just played his breakout game that showed everyone why we got him

 

[Masked Magician]

If we want to trade a future I’d consider our future 2nd

So 19 + future 2nd for Freo’s future 3rd as an absolute worse case last ditch effort on Wednesday night if the deal hasn’t gone through.

 

[thommo_legend]

19 and 33 at most or walk away

 

[12kilos]

At the start of the age article it says this.

Collingwood and Fremantle are at a stalemate over Lachie Schultz, with the Dockers presenting the Magpies with their final deal ultimatum – centring on a future first-round pick and a pick in this draft.

If Fremantle are going to be that unreasonable no deal!
I know we're in the window but we can't have our pants pulled down..
At best this year's first rounder and that's all.
Don't forget Hine has had very good picks late teens or early 29s ie Allan, Henry.
Worse case Shulstz can wait another year

 

[3rdMan]

If Fremantle are going to be that unreasonable no deal!
I know we're in the window but we can't have our pants pulled down..
At best this year's first rounder and that's all.
Don't forget Hine has had very good picks late teens or early 29s ie Allan, Henry.
Worse case Shulstz can wait another year

Don't think waiting another year is acceptable for us. We need the strongest list possible next year. Having lost a best 22 player, we need to bring one in. Waiting is really not an option.