List Mgmt. Contract, Trade and Draft Discussions - 2024 Post Season

Whose future picks would you have preferred?


  • Total voters
    216

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #2


Quick links



Trade period
In:
12, F1, F2, F3, 73, Baker, Owies, Graham*
Out: 3, 63, F4, Barrass, Darling

*Free agent

Done deals

  • Jai Culley, Alex Witherden and Coby Burgiel delisted






  • Zane Trew, Jamaine Jones and Jordyn Baker delisted

 
Last edited by a moderator:
There's two things that matter in your scenario though, 1) what is coming back and 2) what are we conceding in terms of talent by dropping from 13 to 24/32?


Statistically, pick 14 will play 118.7 games and we have a better than 1 in 4 chance of getting a 200 gamer.

If we trade 14 for Baker + 32, what are we getting back? Baker is likely to play 100-odd games for us, assuming he plays another 6-7 seasons, with production likely to taper off in the last 2-3 seasons.
Pick 34 nets us a player statistically likely to play less than 40 games, and only a better than 1 in 4 chance of playing 120 games (as opposed to 200 games for pick 14).

In a nutshell, Baker + 32 is not good value for us if we're rebuilding. Yes, 2 players. But neither is likely to be around as long as pick 14 would.

It has to be Baker + 24. 1 in 4 chance to play 160 games.
Nicely put. Agree there looks to be a sweet spot that it has to be the 24 coming back and that’s what I personally would hope for.

And don’t get me wrong, the players around 14 look real delicious this year, but I don’t mind the club trying different things to maximise the list turnover. If they did nothing but have an outgoing pick for an incoming player, our rebuild would arguably take a lot longer and we’d have the likes of Ledwards, Witherden and Rotham on the list again.
 
Having a good relationship with AFL house will be beneficial as there are other things currently in play after the equalisation review. No will mean no so what’s the point in poking the bear and looking like a beggar that’s being turned away. It would be a poor look for the club putting its hand out for assistance and being told no. We would get zero support from the AFL media just like during the COVID era and that was a poor look for our club. Surely that one is recent enough to remember what having whinge looks like in the VAFL landscape.
Don't buy this at all.

Let's agree to disagree on this one.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

They should be very much in the window with their list profile and the talent they have.

However, when you have a case of the losers ingrained in your DNA it's hard to realise your potential.
Agree. And it is off field too. As supporters Eagles and Docker fans are at opposite ends of the spectrum. Generalising, they’re happy if they win. We’re pissed off we lose.

High expectations might mean more heartache but also … more success?

Frankly, I don’t give much time to all ‘the Derby’ hype. To me beating the Dockers is just another four points, to them it’s way more important. Sad but true.
 
AFL Trade Radio
@traderadio
·
16s

"Dan Rioli - Richmond want more than Pick 6. It is on the table, the Tigers aren't happy with just pick 6, and want more than that." - Tom with the latest on Dan Rioli

More than 6? haha wow
No Way Commando GIF by 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment
 
AFL Trade Radio
@traderadio
·
16s

"Dan Rioli - Richmond want more than Pick 6. It is on the table, the Tigers aren't happy with just pick 6, and want more than that." - Tom with the latest on Dan Rioli

More than 6? haha wow

Based on that Bolton is worth the first 4 picks in the draft.
Rioli I would not offer a first round for.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I’m not saying paying pick 14 isn’t overs for Baker but I think picks in general are over valued especially looking at our drafting ability.

Baker or any of the following
Brander
Venables
Hewett (still some hope he’s not dead)
Chesser
A couple of things.
Firstly, you can't include Venables in that comparison given the circumstances.
Secondly, Hewett will be tremendous if he can get on to the park.
Also, this years draft is considered much deeper than previous years (despite the top end not being as good).
I would back a Travaglia or Lindsay to play more games for us than Baker.
 
I’m not saying paying pick 14 isn’t overs for Baker but I think picks in general are over valued especially looking at our drafting ability.

Baker or any of the following
Brander
Venables
Hewett (still some hope he’s not dead)
Chesser
What? I'll give you Brander but Venables was awesome, Hewett will be a gun and Chesser will be ok
 
I concur. But then we're allegedly going to offer pick 14 for Baker, so everything is sideways.

The problem is the gap between our draft picks is quite big. I don’t think Baker is worth 14 but I think he is worth more than 23.
We don’t have pick 17 or 18 unfortunately.
Sometimes these deals can only get done with what’s in your hand.
If the Hawks had a better pick then we would be asking for it for Barrass.
Just the way it is.
 
A bid on Ashcroft at 1 makes sense as he is the best player in the draft.

If Tigers agree to not bid on either Ashcroft or Marshall, Tigers would not have to over pay for pick 20
These are the deals the AFL needs to scrutinise.

If another club offers more points for pick 20 than the Tigers the club offering the most points should get the deal.

Tigers promising not to bid using pick 1 as leverage is outside the current rules. And is technically draft tampering.

A trade for points should be an open auction.
 
Last edited:
Later pick for baker , let them contract him for a year if they dont accept . Dont waste a pick on him when we dont need him . The bitter taste of losing Barrass for Baker doesnt sit right . Our recruiters should know how we supporters feel
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top