List Mgmt. COLLINGWOOD Trade and F/A Discussion

[Lings of Geelong]

How many list vacancies do the Dogs have, thus how many picks can they use to match?

If you've got your maths right and Darcy gets a bid at 2 - we can then trade them 36+38 for pick 23. They increase their points and probably save their last couple of picks - which also come in to be decent picks - so there's a reason for them to do it (although they could probably get a better deal.) We then trade 23 into next year's draft.

Good question. Not sure, but I suspect it's one more than they were planning on having with Easton Wood's late retirement.

Yeah, 36 and 38 would work for them - they'd be able to keep 52 (which will come in) and get 70 as change from the bid match. But it would leave us having to use 23 to match the Daicos bid at 3.

Here's a scenario that would allow us to use 23 to get a F2, but as you pointed out, it depends what better offers the Doggies get:

Darcy bid at 2
Dogs trade 23 for Pies 40, 48 and F3
Dogs have enough points to match, their next 2021 pick is 69, and they've increased their 2022 draft hand by a F3
Pies now have 23, 36, 38, 43, 50, 53 (6/2666)

Daicos bid at 3
Trade 23 for someone's F2
Pies have enough points to match, their next 2021 pick is 68
They've now got F1, F2 and 2 x F3 to try get back into this year

 

[sr36]

Yeah, 36 and 38 would work for them - they'd be able to keep 52 (which will come in) and get 70 as change from the bid match. But it would leave us having to use 23 to match the Daicos bid at 3.

According to your previous post - Daicos at 3 means we don't need 36 + 38? So we wouldn't need to use 23 to match if Darcy got a bid at 2 - we could just on-trade it.

 

[Lings of Geelong]

According to your previous post - Daicos at 3 means we don't need 36 + 38? So we wouldn't need to use 23 to match - we could just on-trade it.

That was based on getting 41 from Brisbane as well. Add that into the most recent scenario, and yeah, that'd work

 

[partypie]

if we free up an extra list spot the above would give us 1965 points which is a deficit of only 49 points which wouldnt even knock our 2022 first back a spot. Deal would be done in 2 parts, net loss is 2 future thirds plus excess points this year. win-win for both team but doggies may well get a better offer.

We can't free up an extra list spot now, everyone on the senior list has been re-signed.

Any deficit means our first round pick next year gets knocked back one spot.

 

[partypie]

900 to 950k is what was being bandied.

At the time 900k was the ceiling from what I was able to gather when it was signed, especially given the rumblings that it was markedly less than the $1 mil per year over seven years that was being bandied about.

Seems reasonable that he went for $6 mil+ over 7 years vs $5 mil+ over 5 years from the Crows, although whether any serious sort of offer was ever tabled by them is debatable, given Grundy's statement that he never spoke with them (or anybody else) regarding his future.

Still a shitload of money over a long period for any player.

 

[RobJD]

Unfortunately for them they're not in a position to dictate too much. They don't facilitate a trade then the pick gets absorbed in matching a bid on Darcy. They'll therefore do a trade you'd imagine. The question is with who.

Agree if there's no offers from others, I'd have thought that the Cats, Swans and even North might be pretty keen on Pick 23 and they can package some offers that would be better than ADE's F2.

 

[jmac70]

Click on thread.
Read post about Grundy’s contact.
Leave thread.

 

[manicmagpie]

why is that? unless we finish top 4 the points difference is more than 50 so why would our pick get knocked back?

It's confusing, but apparently the rule is any deficit and you automatically drop 1 place. After you drop 1 spot, the rule changes so that you need to lose all the points difference to drop any further.

e.g. Pick 2 = 2517 points, Pick 3 = 2234 and Pick 4 = 2034.

If we start at Pick 2 again next year but have any deficit at all we will automatically drop to Pick 3, even if we have more than the 2,234 that Pick 3 is worth.

However, we would have to have a deficit of 483 points and actually fall below the value of Pick 4 before we'd drop any more places.

 

[partypie]

Good question. Not sure, but I suspect it's one more than they were planning on having with Easton Wood's late retirement.

Yeah, 36 and 38 would work for them - they'd be able to keep 52 (which will come in) and get 70 as change from the bid match. But it would leave us having to use 23 to match the Daicos bid at 3.

Here's a scenario that would allow us to use 23 to get a F2, but as you pointed out, it depends what better offers the Doggies get:

Darcy bid at 2
Dogs trade 23 for Pies 40, 48 and F3
Dogs have enough points to match, their next 2021 pick is 69, and they've increased their 2022 draft hand by a F3
Pies now have 23, 36, 38, 43, 50, 53 (6/2666)

Daicos bid at 3
Trade 23 for someone's F2
Pies have enough points to match, their next 2021 pick is 68
They've now got F1, F2 and 2 x F3 to try get back into this year

The thing that doesn't make sense about this is why we're paying the premium to get pick 23 as if it's still going to be pick 23, instead of the pick 26-27 it's likely to be on the second day of the draft (maybe even 28 if there are three academy bids by the time we hit the mid 20's).

The Doggies might very well trade pick 23 out when the bid comes in, but it doesn't hold pick 23 value and probably not even the value of the pick 26-27 it is likely to end up being for us, given that we'd need to pay the "upgrade" tax to secure a future 2nd and maybe pay the tax again to get back into the late 20's this year.

Dealing with the Doggies for this year's pick 23 just isn't a good option for us, given that we can't hold onto the pick.

 

[Prochard123]

Think we should absolutely be speaking to Hugh Greenwood

1

Hugh Greenwood

Age

32

Ht

190cm

Wt

92kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.9

4star

K

8.8

3star

HB

8.1

5star

M

2.3

2star

T

6.8

5star

CL

4.6

5star

D

17.4

4star

K

10.4

4star

HB

7.0

4star

M

1.5

2star

T

8.9

5star

CL

5.6

5star

D

16.4

4star

K

8.6

4star

HB

7.8

5star

M

2.2

3star

T

7.6

5star

CL

4.4

5star

about picking him up late in the draft.

 

[partypie]

Well no, and let me explain to you why.

Pick 2 = 2517 points, with discount = 2013.6

Without pick 36 and 38, we have 1269 points. But losing them also unlocks room for another 2 picks to contribute points, adding to the total of 6 draft picks as per Hine's interview.

Using the ladder position from this year, Hawthorn's future 3rd is roughly pick 41, Richmond's future 3rd is roughly pick 43 (which will be close to North's pick 42 this year). If we can convert our 2 future 3rds into equivalent picks this year, 40, (41/Hawthorn future 3rd), (42/Richmond future 3rd), 46, 48, 55 adds up to 2059 points, which is JUST ENOUGH TO MATCH DAICOS AT PICK 2. Worst case scenario we give up another future 3rd (brisbane) to make the deal more achievable.

In practise, how this would work is the following:

(1) Pick 36, Pick 38, future 3rd to Adelaide for future 2nd (pick 22 using current ladder position, WBD supporters seem very happy with this return)
(2) Hawthorn future 3rd for pick 41 (Brisbane, they would love this trade to match Daicos)
(3) Richmond future 3rd for pick 42 (North Melbourne, another ideal fit as they are only taking 3 picks to the draft, so either 42 or 47 is redundant anyways)
(4) Use 40, 41, 42, 46, 48, 55 to match Daicos
(5) Trade Adelaide future 2nd to WBD for pick 23, which is then used in the live draft.

This seems to align with all the trade rumours/interviews/intel we have received across multiple sources too.

Thoughts Knightmare ?

Wait, so the sum total of this is we burn all of pick 36, 38 and all of our future 3rd's just to match the bid on Daicos and get what will end up being pick 26/27 (maybe even 28)?

That's not even accounting for the fact that as soon as we walk into the draft with a 341 point deficit that North will bid on Daicos at pick 1, which is just good business. I'd strongly doubt that we'd bank on pulling off two or three live trades at the beginning of the draft in the space of five minutes with three separate clubs to just barely match a pick 2 bid on Daicos, as that is so fraught with risk I don't even know where to begin, so most if not all of the moves you propose in steps 1-3 would have to happen prior to the draft.

This is just all so shaky as a proposal and doesn't really do to strengthen our draft position, indeed when you look at the overall result it probably weakens it.

 

[Bussie]

Think we should absolutely be speaking to Hugh Greenwood about picking him up late in the draft.

Wondered what you were talking about, wow. What a rort.
Clearance machine.

 

[Prochard123]

Wondered what you were talking about, wow. What a rort.
Clearance machine.

- Big bodied clearance machine with elite defensive/tackling pressure to complement Adams/Pendlebury/Sidebottom in the present
- Will support growth of our younger and less physical mids (Daicos brothers, Macrae, etc.)
- Virtually free and is a huge update over half our list, let alone a rookie we can find at the end of the draft
- Cheap as chips salary wise as he's still on a relatively low contract from before
- Joined AFL late so his body hasn't taken as much stress like Patrick Cripps

 

[partypie]

Think we should absolutely be speaking to Hugh Greenwood about picking him up late in the draft.

If it wasn't for his age I'd be all over him right now, but with him turning 30 in March and now having a knee to 'manage' at least in the short term he's probably not a great fit for us.

If we were a couple of years further ahead on our "rebuild" and legitimately looking at playing finals / flirting with the top 4 already then yeah I'd go for him as a player who could improve our midfield and hopefully push us further up the ladder.

 

[Prochard123]

If it wasn't for his age I'd be all over him right now, but with him turning 30 in March and now having a knee to 'manage' at least in the short term he's probably not a great fit for us.

If we were a couple of years further ahead on our "rebuild" and legitimately looking at playing finals / flirting with the top 4 already then yeah I'd go for him as a player who could improve our midfield and hopefully push us further up the ladder.

If he wasn't turning 30 with injury concerns he wouldn't be free. Not a player of his calibre.

 

[partypie]

If he wasn't turning 30 with injury concerns he wouldn't be free. Not a player of his calibre.

That is also correct. It's a bit of a sliding doors thing I guess, with us having committed more to a rebuild for the immediate future than contending for a flag again. Wind back the clock to last year and put him on the table under the same circumstances and we're definitely swooping on him, indeed it may have lessened the downturn in our midfield's output stemming from Treloar's departure to a significant degree.

 

[TradeDraft]

 

[Dead Eye Didak]

Think we should absolutely be speaking to Hugh Greenwood about picking him up late in the draft.

I know he slaughtered us in the midfield when the Suns knocked us off at the 'G'. I think he had over 10 clearances and tackles in that match....

 

[Dead Eye Didak]

If it wasn't for his age I'd be all over him right now, but with him turning 30 in March and now having a knee to 'manage' at least in the short term he's probably not a great fit for us.

If we were a couple of years further ahead on our "rebuild" and legitimately looking at playing finals / flirting with the top 4 already then yeah I'd go for him as a player who could improve our midfield and hopefully push us further up the ladder.

I believe he will be fit and ready to go round 1. Plus the guy is a fitness freak, so his age or his body should be of no concern....

 

[Dead Eye Didak]

We definitely should be talking to him, he would be great for Macrae, McInnes, Daicos, all the young bodies we can expect in the midfield next year, at times...

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

We definitely should be talking to him, he would be great for Macrae, McInnes, Daicos, all the young bodies we can expect in the midfield next year, at times...

It’s just a list management decision, they will redraft him

 

[magpie_marty]

No Idea how the rookie draft works,
But would Paddy McCartin be an option?
And yes he has had struggles but from games I have seen him play when fit he looks very handy.

 

[Louie the Lipinski]

I believe he will be fit and ready to go round 1. Plus the guy is a fitness freak, so his age or his body should be of no concern....

Doesn't fit the age demographic of players we're bringing into the club. We have enough late 20s early 30s players on our list to guide the emerging talent. The Cats will probably be all over him.

 

[partypie]

I believe he will be fit and ready to go round 1. Plus the guy is a fitness freak, so his age or his body should be of no concern....

He may very well be, but a complete rupture of the MCL is still a serious injury.

The point about his age not fitting in with when we are likely to be pushing back up the ladder again in 2-3 times is still very much a concern.

 

[partypie]

No Idea how the rookie draft works,
But would Paddy McCartin be an option?
And yes he has had struggles but from games I have seen him play when fit he looks very handy.

No thanks, very hard pass. The hardest of passes actually.