Picks 36 and 46 seems pretty reasonable..
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
News James Peatling chooses Adelaide
- Thread starter Scorpus
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Picks 36 and 46 seems pretty reasonable..
- Jul 6, 2017
- 31,071
- 44,071
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Would have thought if we could get some late points back to cover a welsh bid, then its a fair trade
F2 in 2025 will probably drop down 6-8 spots after all the Academy and F/S picks, likely to be in the 30s somewhere.
- Jul 6, 2017
- 31,071
- 44,071
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
I think GWS have a couple of picks in the 50's they are not going to use, they could throw them our way in this and then we should be covered for a bid post pick 30 after the picks come back in and we factor the f/s points discount.
PaythePerryman
Club Legend
- Oct 13, 2020
- 1,203
- 2,136
- AFL Club
- GWS
We just need to cover whatever we need to give up for Stringer (56) and potentially Shiel (??).
Then we have an academy Ruck that we need enough points for in Logan Smith (currently rated at #40)
- Jul 6, 2017
- 31,071
- 44,071
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Yep, I suppose pick 43 coming in could also be split up for extra picks too
From todays Gettable
They also said they didn’t expect that to be the deal in the end.
What did we play well?
We left your 46 with Melbourne, you need to go and speak to them.
Why would they do us a favour and just gift them to us? Everything has value, you never know what might be able to be done on draft night or later in the trade period. This idiotic ‘but there’s no use for the pick(s) so it’s valueless’ is hilarious. Not a single negotiator approached discussions with that attitude.
Except maybe our LM group who are all desperate for quick fix ahead of using capital to build a contending squad.
Kane McGoodwin
Make me an Admin!
- May 21, 2001
- 85,220
- 89,935
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Adelaide Crows
F2 & pick 46 for Peatling, 53 & 56.
GWS move up the order with unused picks.
We have points for Welsh.
- Jul 6, 2017
- 31,071
- 44,071
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Think you have missed the overarching point old fella. If we agree to give them pick 43 in addition to our F2, then it should be contingent on getting extra late points back for a welsh bid. I could not GAF if its their 50's picks or they get them from somewhere else. But as a trade, if they can accomodate us i see no reason not to accomodate them if it is mutually beneficial.
The fact that we were apparently trying to include a player in the Peatling deal and don't want to give up 43, suggests we might want to use 43 at the draft.
One more trade out/ delist to happen? (Please be Burgess)
Actually please be Burgess and Strachan. Use a late/ rookie pick on a 20 to 24 yo ruck.
BRL121 Burgess fan, or just don't think we need a pick in the second round this draft?
- Aug 30, 2021
- 18,154
- 35,760
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
We still have to move a player to the rookie list, maybe we are trying to avoid that
- Jun 21, 2014
- 9,237
- 10,304
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Your scenario isn't going to happen. We may well need such a pick for Welsh points. I haven't thought about it too much, but if no bid on Welsh has come before 43, we might trade the pick on the fly.
Yeah, I'm being a bit hopeful.
I would expect someone to trade with us for a half decent 2025 pick if a bid doesn't come for Welsh by 43.
Last year, pick 59 moved in 13 places to pick 46 after bids were matched. I'm not expecting the same level this year, but it probably comes in enough to match a bid at around pick 48 or earlier. I haven't seen many draft lists with Welsh earlier than 43 (which will probably also move in a few places). It's more likely than not that a bid doesn't come before that pick.
Yes, we absolutely could trade pick 43 for a pick next year if a bid doesn't come in. It will likely be decent, probably a mid to late second if there's a kid another club likes still opn the board. But would we prefer the kid available at 43 than Welsh if a bid came early? Would we prefer to have the option of both?
Burgess isn't essential, neither is Stachan. And we can still move someone to the rookie list, even if we delist Burgess and/ or Strachan.
And even if we didn't, delisting a player gets us an extra rookie pick. Worth it!
And yes, I am being a bit hopeful. But I'm happy with that choice.
