List Mgmt. Contract, Trade & Draftee Discussion, 2023: Picks 1,20,34,39,53 ,58

[Keys]

Link to contract status of all players

The Contracts Thread

2024 List Changes : Retired- Gaff Delisted - Jones, Trew, Baker Requested Trades - Barrass, Darling Current contract status (Updated 18/9/24) : Total 41 Players (Pending Trades) - Main List (35) Rookie List (4) Cat B (2) Contracted to 2028 (2) : Liam Duggan (11/12/96) - Signed a 4 year...

www.bigfooty.com

Link to Lore ’s excellent draft order thread that is updated to reflect current ladder positions

Resource - 2023 AFL Draft Order

Every trade as it happens!

www.bigfooty.com

 

[DJMac]

Didn't you hear, Norf are sending their super special members emails about it already

all several of them.

 

[Wooshaaaa]

Bit of draft discussion on our board in regards to North, and I contributed the following.


I wouldn’t be surprised if North use pick 14 as part of a trade package for Gold Coast’s pick 4.

In The Round So Far episode today, they played a clip from Clarko’s press conference, where Clarko discussed the win and the draft ramifications, and mentions they’ll still get good kids at picks 2, 3 and 5.

The only way North get picks 3 & 5, is the AFL give pick 3 as compo for McKay, and if they trade for the now pick 5 from Gold Coast.

GC might favour that trade if it means North doesn’t bid on Walter at picks 2 & 3 as well.

The AFL will have pitch forks at there gates if they allow Riley sanders to walk for nothing to norf.

At the least I suspect the AFL will make norf match any selection bid. If that happens clubs will keep norf honest. That's where they'll need pick 5

Huge for Norf anyways
2 3 5

On Pixel 6 Pro using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[WCE_phil]

I think it's almost a certainty that if Waterman is retained he is moved to the rookie list.

 

[stylish]

Can’t trade a F1 and F2 unless the AFL change the trading rules which is a possibility after last year

In any case North aren’t doing that trade - maybe for one of those picks but not both

Don’t mind the Gold Coast trade proposal

Keys
1) What picks would you relinquish #1 for
2) can you see a club being able to engineer that scenario?

 

[Dom sheed pocket]

The AFL will have pitch forks at there gates if they allow Riley sanders to walk for nothing to norf.

At the least I suspect the AFL will make norf match any selection bid. If that happens clubs will keep norf honest. That's where they'll need pick 5

Huge for Norf anyways
2 3 5

On Pixel 6 Pro using BigFooty.com mobile app

The issue here is the decision on any assistance to North will be made in GF week, which is before any FA request, or potential pick trades are done.

The AFL can’t make decision on any assistance to North based on what they think might happen over the trade period.

It does put them in a bit of a situation and as a result, I expect them to be conservative.

They will provide north with access to Sanders, but North may need to match a bid with points- this would also result in incentivising north to trade ports first to avoid it getting eaten up by a Sanders bid. Either as part of a deal for GCs pick or a future pick.

Can definitely see North having 2,3,5 and access to Sanders.

And the AFL will then say “no more”.

 

[Bleedblueandgold]

Yeah that's the last one I can think of, was that because Hooker didn't want to come back the other way or something though?

Yep he nailed his front door shut so the club couldn't discuss the trade plan with him.

 

[Bleedblueandgold]

Norf have something like 28 first and second rounders on their list . With a bunch of top 10 picks.

They don't need anymore high end picks

Afl would be better providing them with extra soft cap space for development coaches .

Problem is afl will have to give them extra money to use the soft cap space

Surely this season has proved they aren't the worst side in the comp.
Sadly we are.
So Norf should not be receiving any help from the AFL, absolutely none.

 

[dinnaz]

You still riding the Busslinger train?

Aye, he's coming along nicely in the VFL, and I reckon he's a better CHB than Curtin.

 

[Shueygod]

Best trade for all parties is:
GC lose pick 5 - Gain 16, 19 and a guarantee that Walter won’t be bid on the 1st 3 picks
North lose 2, 3 and 16 - Gain 1 and 5
WC lose 1 and 19 - Gain 2 and 3

Eagles get Mckercher and Curtin
north get Reid and Watson/Duursma
GC get a points boost

 

[Cuzz09]

Best trade for all parties is:
GC lose pick 5 - Gain 16, 19 and a guarantee that Walter won’t be bid on the 1st 3 picks
North lose 2, 3 and 16 - Gain 1 and 5
WC lose 1 and 19 - Gain 2 and 3

Eagles get Mckercher and Curtin
north get Reid and Watson/Duursma
GC get a points boost

I'd like another pick in the teens for that deal

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Godfather32]

If North end up with 2, 3 & 5 would they trade 1 for 3 & 5?
1 for 2 & 3 is a complete fantasy and not happening but 1 for 3 & 5?
Is that worth it for us?

 

[Shueygod]

I'd like another pick in the teens for that deal

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

I think the gap between Mckercher and Reid is far less significant than the one between Curtin and pick 19.

Don’t see us getting more in a trade to be honestZ

 

[TerryFilk]

If North end up with 2, 3 & 5 would they trade 1 for 3 & 5?
1 for 2 & 3 is a complete fantasy and not happening but 1 for 3 & 5?
Is that worth it for us?

Probably not, because North will go Reid and Curtin at 1 and 2.

I mean if we ended up with McKercher and Duursma or Watson, it’d be fine, but I’d rather just Reid.

I’d only want to trade pick 1 if it netted us both Curtin and McKercher.

 

[Shueygod]

If North end up with 2, 3 & 5 would they trade 1 for 3 & 5?
1 for 2 & 3 is a complete fantasy and not happening but 1 for 3 & 5?
Is that worth it for us?

I doubt it.

 

[Godfather32]

I doubt it.

Doubt they'd do it or doubt it would be worth it for us?

 

[Godfather32]

Probably not, because North will go Reid and Curtin at 1 and 2.

I mean if we ended up with McKercher and Duursma or Watson, it’d be fine, but I’d rather just Reid.

I’d only want to trade pick 1 if it netted us both Curtin and McKercher.

Yeah Curtin and McKercher would be the dream but I don't see a way it happens.
I agree, probably just take Reid. My worry is Bond and co getting involved in some stupid deal with Garry and Melbourne and us ending up with a bunch of guys outside the top 3

 

[Shueygod]

Doubt they'd do it or doubt it would be worth it for us?

They’d do it, would think North would prefer 3 and 5 heavily to 1

 

[Shueygod]

Yeah Curtin and McKercher would be the dream but I don't see a way it happens.
I agree, probably just take Reid. My worry is Bond and co getting involved in some stupid deal with Garry and Melbourne and us ending up with a bunch of guys outside the top 3

Best trade for all parties is:
GC lose pick 5 - Gain 16, 19 and a guarantee that Walter won’t be bid on the 1st 3 picks
North lose 2, 3 and 16 - Gain 1 and 5
WC lose 1 and 19 - Gain 2 and 3

Eagles get Mckercher and Curtin
north get Reid and Watson/Duursma
GC get a points boost

This is how it happens, makes sense for all clubs as North likely have a preference for Watson/Duursma then Mckercher.

 

[Keys]

Bit of draft discussion on our board in regards to North, and I contributed the following.


I wouldn’t be surprised if North use pick 14 as part of a trade package for Gold Coast’s pick 4.

In The Round So Far episode today, they played a clip from Clarko’s press conference, where Clarko discussed the win and the draft ramifications, and mentions they’ll still get good kids at picks 2, 3 and 5.

The only way North get picks 3 & 5, is the AFL give pick 3 as compo for McKay, and if they trade for the now pick 5 from Gold Coast.

GC might favour that trade if it means North doesn’t bid on Walter at picks 2 & 3 as well.

Out of curiosity I watched that bit of TRSF just to see what Clarkson said

When talking about the value of pick 1 and pointing out it doesn’t necessarily help win premierships

“.. then maybe pick 2, pick 3, pick 5. They’re still going to be good picks and good players so we’ll just take what we can get”

I interpret that as good players being available generally at those picks not that he’s expecting North to hold those actual picks

 

[Godfather32]

This is how it happens, makes sense for all clubs as North likely have a preference for Watson/Duursma then Mckercher.

Nah, North would be salivating over the Curtin/McKercher duo themselves imo.

 

[Shueygod]

Nah, North would be salivating over the Curtin/McKercher duo themselves imo.

Strong majority of their board prefer Watson/Duursma to Mckercher. North have a shitton of mids and they have even less of a need if they get Sanders.

Comes down to if they value the difference between Curtin and Reid at pick 16.

 

[ROO DOGG]

The issue here is the decision on any assistance to North will be made in GF week, which is before any FA request, or potential pick trades are done.

The AFL can’t make decision on any assistance to North based on what they think might happen over the trade period.

It does put them in a bit of a situation and as a result, I expect them to be conservative.

They will provide north with access to Sanders, but North may need to match a bid with points- this would also result in incentivising north to trade ports first to avoid it getting eaten up by a Sanders bid. Either as part of a deal for GCs pick or a future pick.

Can definitely see North having 2,3,5 and access to Sanders.

And the AFL will then say “no more”.

That's way too much assistance, its almot start up club consessions. They don't need or deserve that much.

 

[random260]

Yeah, it isn’t unders. 2x top 10s is obviously ideal, but in all likelihood, it’s unlikely anyone bar North has 2x top 10s.


If you’re expecting a JHF deal I personally think you’ll be disappointed. You also neglected the fact that 14 was exchanged for Norths pick 19. There were also circumstances around that offer, the key one being that Jason was South Australian and the Crows knew he’d go to Port if he ever was traded.

Is 3, 12 and a future second (pick 36) that different from 2 and 15? I don’t think it is. WCE traded pick 2 for 8 & 12 for further context.

Reid a higher talent then JHF? Yeah I don’t think that’s the perception amongst most recruiters.


Haha with all due respect, you’re delusional if you think Harley is happy with leaving Victoria.

I had dinner with a recruiter a few weeks back, that is definitely their perception. By a fair margin.

Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I work for a different Victorian club. I will put down 3 pieces of information.

1. I believe JHF is at least on a par talent level wise with Reid and with more proven explosive midfield power but less versatility.
2. Melbourne are very confident in their ability to get a trade deal over the line for pick 1.
3. Reid himself has no issue leaving Victoria, the Vic players to worry about with the go home card are Watson and Caddy.

Pretty big raps for Harley boi. JHF is everything I would hope we can get out of Harley.

I mean Curtin and Mckn seem on par with what north got for JHF. But similar to feeling norf had with (Wardlaw and sheezle) I would have a taste in my mouth for a split second.

But I want us to back ourselves.

 

[Shueygod]

Pretty big raps for Harley boi. JHF is everything I would hope we can get out of Harley.

I mean Curtin and Mckn seem on par with what north got for JHF. But similar to feeling norf had with (Wardlaw and sheezle) I would have a taste in my mouth for a split second.

But I want us to back ourselves.

North also gave 1 for 16 in that trade, 2 and 3 for 1 and 19 would be far more than North received for JHF.

 

[Godfather32]

Strong majority of their board prefer Watson/Duursma to Mckercher. North have a shitton of mids and they have even less of a need if they get Sanders.

Comes down to if they value the difference between Curtin and Reid at pick 16.

All going to be a waste of time talking about when Norf just re-sign McKay or only get band 2 compo anyway