Rumour GFC 2024 Player Trading, Drafting FA, Rumours and Wish lists Pt 2

[cats_09]

Ask and we'll try our best to assist - so here's 2024 Provisional AFL Draft Order

As normal, would like to acknowledge & thank Lore for creating this, keeping it up to date and making it available for all users on BF to use and keep track of the picks ahead of the upcoming draft





I'll also sticky this post to ensure it's easily accessible for discussion of our hypothetical trader

 

[dazbroncos]

Holmes cost us pick 22 and then a reasonable renewed contract, so I am more than happy to support him on the list.

Holmes does not have the red flags (form, injury, off field) that smith does. And yet people seem to ignore the very steep acquisition cost (salary cap and draft capital) that it will take to get smith.

Comparing Holmes and smith is kind of pointless.

Every time you sign a big free agent, it has a chance to sink your cap or lift your team.

How much buyer remorse do you reckon Richmond have with hopper or st kilda have with hannebury? Their fatal mistake was giving big contracts to players with red flags.

Let’s not be st kilda or Richmond.

Its the attitude that gets me.

He's shown what he can do when unmotivated, pouty and suffering from poor decisions.

Now, when he first gets to Geelong ( if) im sure we'll have the best Baz.

But what happens when (if) his form drops, he makes another poor choice and gets busted for it, or when things just naturally get harder for him. Are we gonna see him double down and work harder to get back if that's whats needed or will we see what've seen already.

People can surely change as they get older etc but paying an upfront heavy price ignoring those risk potentials can be horrendous as you state.

Go Catters

 

[Warhorse]

Holmes cost us pick 22 and then a reasonable renewed contract, so I am more than happy to support him on the list.

Holmes does not have the red flags (form, injury, off field) that smith does. And yet people seem to ignore the very steep acquisition cost (salary cap and draft capital) that it will take to get smith.

Comparing Holmes and smith is kind of pointless.

Every time you sign a big free agent, it has a chance to sink your cap or lift your team.

How much buyer remorse do you reckon Richmond have with hopper or st kilda have with hannebury? Their fatal mistake was giving big contracts to players with red flags.

Let’s not be st kilda or Richmond.

What are we going to use that cap space on instead? Which players are you suggesting?

 

[Warhorse]

Its the attitude that gets me.

He's shown what he can do when unmotivated, pouty and suffering from poor decisions.

Now, when he first gets to Geelong ( if) im sure we'll have the best Baz.

But what happens when (if) his form drops, he makes another poor choice and gets busted for it, or when things just naturally get harder for him. Are we gonna see him double down and work harder to get back if that's whats needed or will we see what've seen already.

People can surely change as they get older etc but paying an upfront heavy price ignoring those risk potentials can be horrendous as you state.

Go Catters

We just gave Stengle a big pay rise and his off field behaviour is more questionable than Smiths

 

[D BRIDGE]

Every time you sign a big free agent, it has a chance to sink your cap or lift your team.

How much buyer remorse do you reckon Richmond have with hopper or st kilda have with hannebury? Their fatal mistake was giving big contracts to players with red flags.

Let’s not be st kilda or Richmond.

They’d have remorse because the players couldn’t deliver on the field.

We will have buyers remorse for sure if Smith gets to us and is injured 24/7.

I think we will have so much cap room that we need to use it one way or another… so I’m not worried about Smith destroying our cap (we are too smart for that).

If Smith gets on the park, he should be fine.

If it blows up on us I’ll be all over the club for making the wrong move… even though I endorse it lol.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Smith has been pushed onto the wing/flank over the past few years dues to other bulldog mids unable to play other positions (libba) or being better (bont). I think Smith will be a very good contested ball winner for us

I really think people are looking at the stat lines to conclude his limitations rather than looking at the actual dogs line ups he's playing in.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

If we get him cheap then great, bring it on. But for my taste he is too high risk to pay the price that he will command.

Define cheap?

His trade will cost about half Hoppers

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Holmes cost us pick 22 and then a reasonable renewed contract, so I am more than happy to support him on the list.

Holmes does not have the red flags (form, injury, off field) that smith does. And yet people seem to ignore the very steep acquisition cost (salary cap and draft capital) that it will take to get smith.

Comparing Holmes and smith is kind of pointless.

Every time you sign a big free agent, it has a chance to sink your cap or lift your team.

How much buyer remorse do you reckon Richmond have with hopper or st kilda have with hannebury? Their fatal mistake was giving big contracts to players with red flags.

Let’s not be st kilda or Richmond.

We drafted Holmes though. You're comparing it to choosing to win the lottery.

 

[Hinkley29]

We drafted Holmes though. You're comparing it to choosing to win the lottery.

I didn’t make the comparison.

I agree, it is a ridiculous comparison.

 

[Hinkley29]

Define cheap?

His trade will cost about half Hoppers

For me the contract is far more important than the trade cost.

7 years for hopper was madness.

If we get him on a contract comparable to what we paid Stengle and Holmes, then I am happy to give up the equivalent of pick 20 ish to get him.

I hope we are smart enough to keep the deal to 3 years or less. But I think it will be a minimum of 4.

 

[Hinkley29]

They’d have remorse because the players couldn’t deliver on the field.

We will have buyers remorse for sure if Smith gets to us and is injured 24/7.

I think we will have so much cap room that we need to use it one way or another… so I’m not worried about Smith destroying our cap (we are too smart for that).

If Smith gets on the park, he should be fine.

If it blows up on us I’ll be all over the club for making the wrong move… even though I endorse it lol.

The hopper deal looked bad as soon as they signed it. When it was announced I had a little chuckle and was happy to see Richmond do it.

they have got no-one to blame but themselves - it was a batshit crazy deal in the moment.

If we sign smith to a reasonable contract and it doesn’t work then I won’t be cranky. It would just be one of those things that happens, and you move on.

But if we sign him to a 6 year deal that looks ridiculous in the moment AND then it goes south, then I will not be happy.

Let’s avoid easily foreseeable mistakes. Like Richmond with hopper and Hannebery at st kilda.

 

[D BRIDGE]

I didn’t make the comparison.

I agree, it is a ridiculous comparison.

How is Holmes v Smith a ridiculous comparison?

 

[CatToTheFuture]

For me the contract is far more important than the trade cost.

7 years for hopper was madness.

If we get him on a contract comparable to what we paid Stengle and Holmes, then I am happy to give up the equivalent of pick 20 ish to get him.

I hope we are smart enough to keep the deal to 3 years or less. But I think it will be a minimum of 4.

We've never handed out a contract for more than 5 years and I would be astonished if we started with Smith. It'll be 4 or 5 and the money will sound high, but the cap increases mean it's not really a problem it's just the sticker shock of inflation.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

How is Holmes v Smith a ridiculous comparison?

The recruitment of the two. One was drafted the other traded

 

[Hinkley29]

How is Holmes v Smith a ridiculous comparison?

We acquired one through the draft.

The other we will need to pay through the nose to get.

 

[D BRIDGE]

We acquired one through the draft.

The other we will need to pay through the nose to get.

You are inventing a narrative I never touched.

You mentioned that LDU was a better user of the ball than Smith and that wasn’t a good sign for Smith.

I said Holmes sprays it and is still a very important player for us.

Nothing to do with trades, draft picks, years of contracts or $$$.

Smith isn’t a great kick… but neither is Holmes or Danger and they still are guys I’m very happy to have on our list.

 

[D BRIDGE]

The recruitment of the two. One was drafted the other traded

So you can’t compare players kicking ability if they are not acquired the same way?

 

[frggr]

Ollie Lord…omitted. Opportunity for him to come home??

Other than Georgiades, Port haven't had a damaging forward in years.

I wonder if Lord would improve in a better environment?

 

[Hinkley29]

We've never handed out a contract for more than 5 years and I would be astonished if we started with Smith. It'll be 4 or 5 and the money will sound high, but the cap increases mean it's not really a problem it's just the sticker shock of inflation.

anything more than 3 years is too long for smith. 4 would be troubling (but maybe ok), 5 would be very concerning, 6 would be absolute madness.

 

[frggr]

Why are people comparing LDU to Smith when they're clearly different types of mid?

 

[Warhorse]

We acquired one through the draft.

The other we will need to pay through the nose to get.

What are we going to use the salary cap space on instead?

 

[Hinkley29]

You are inventing a narrative I never touched.

You mentioned that LDU was a better user of the ball than Smith and that wasn’t a good sign for Smith.

I said Holmes sprays it and is still a very important player for us.

Nothing to do with trades, draft picks, years of contracts or $$$.

Smith isn’t a great kick… but neither is Holmes or Danger and they still are guys I’m very happy to have on our list.

You have missed the point.

Of course we are happy to have Holmes on our list. And I would argue he is a much more valuable asset than smith.

The discussion around smith was debating the cost of acquisition. Holmes is irrelevant to that discussion.

 

[frggr]

Honestly, part of me wishes we were mature enough as an industry to just get this over with like they do overseas.

Whether it's us or Hawthorn, you can't convince me Smith doesn't know where he's going. He would've had a fair idea for the best part of a year.

Some wouldn't handle it well, but for any international sports fans, I'd say him just coming out and saying I want to go to X, Y, or Z would be a welcome change to the countdown clock we've got now.

Yeah but then what would the 24/7 AFL news media report about?

1 article "Smith to Geelong" vs 100 "Where's Smith going"? articles 18 months out

 

[Warhorse]

anything more than 3 years is too long for smith. 4 would be troubling (but maybe ok), 5 would be very concerning, 6 would be absolute madness.

We won't attract anyone to Geelong if that's the standard you want to apply. What other players would you be chasing in this off season using the cap space we have available?

 

[Hinkley29]

Why are people comparing LDU to Smith when they're clearly different types of mid?

The discussion is around which player would you prefer to acquire, and at what cost.

 

[Warhorse]

The discussion is around which player would you prefer to acquire, and at what cost.

LDU would cost a top 5 pick minimum.