Speculation Liam Baker

[Jeremias]

Time for some house cleaning.

1) Do not drag discussions or individual posts over here from other threads or boards.

Feel free to respond to those posts wherever they were posted, if you so choose.

2) Enough with the personal attacks. It’s a long season and this one may go the distance, so if you want to remain a part of the discussion, do it respectfully.

We will use thread bans and infractions if necessary.

 

[Barrybran]

That said, if our #1 target is strictly top 3, pick 3 is off the table.

 

[Elton Johns Wig]

It would be interesting to know our targets but 3 down to 9 feels like a big drop. 3 down to 6 could work depending on how clubs rate Murphy Reid. Looking back at the pick 2 trade in 2022, that was 2, 40 + Rioli for 8, 12, F2 (40) + F3 (49). If we have a target inside the top 6 I could see something like 3, F2 + F3 for 6, 17 + Baker, leaving us with 6, 12, 17, 23 and Richmond with 1, 3, 9, 21, 29 without any other trades.

Richmond won't give up 2 first rounders and Baker to get pick 3 and scraps.

Sheesh.

 

[Elton Johns Wig]

That said, if our #1 target is strictly top 3, pick 3 is off the table.

Yep, agree. If WC have a top 3 target they REALLY want, there's no way it happens.

If Baker picks West Coast, I think the clubs will work it out pretty easily.

Baker is a good player, but not A+ grade player wise.
He does have elite consistency and effort, and is an A+ leader though. These traits would fit well in a developing side.

Tiges have been happy with how he's handled himself with the upcoming move, zero angst and nothing but love and respect between club and player.

I don't get the gnashing of teeth over this one. Unlike a 4 year contracted player like Bolton, where you WILL have to pay overs if you want him, this should be simple.

Baker being OOC means WC probably pick him up for slightly unders, and Richmond won't cry too much about that. (the fans though)

 

[Purple Suit]

Jon Ralph is the only person who's happy about Sam Maclure being around because he made just as many awful calls about WC last trade/draft period but noone remembers

Also, there's no world where WC could've got Sheezel. If we don't do the trade, North just take him at 1. We passed on Wardlaw or Cadman.

Not sure about that. North needed Cadman too, the deal just solved multiple issues for them and they got more picks out of it.

Why would GWS pay pick 12 for a 2 pick upgrade from 3 to 1 if they didn’t have to?

That’s what the top end costs, not 3 to 9 for a pick 20 odd value.

 

[Barrybran]

Richmond won't give up 2 first rounders and Baker to get pick 3 and scraps.

Sheesh.

Two first rounders you don't currently have.

What's the big picture for Richmond this off-season?

On face value, a first rounder for Baker and pick 6 for Rioli is overs but you have three players likely to move on this via trades and a plethora of minor picks.

The fact that pick 3 has come up suggests that is Richmond's target. From West Coast's perspective, that isn't going to come cheap, nor is it going to happen unless we have targets down the board.

From Gold Coast's perspective, they'd be mad to trade any picks ahead of a potential Lombard bid.

Freo's perspective is a little easier to deal with for all parties involved.

The way I see it, everyone is looking for 2-3 key pieces and the rest is collateral.

Richmond - pick 3 headlining a number of high end draft picks

West Coast - multiple high end draft picks; probably an extra pick after the Barrass trade

Freo - Bolton and Pickett; maybe a couple of lower picks on hand

Gold Coast - Rioli, Lombard, a pick ahead of the Lombard bid

With all that in mind, Richmond could get 3, West Coast 6, Gold Coast 9 and the rest is split by agreement.

Putting everyone into the one deal (forgetting other trades for a moment)...

Richmond
OUT: Bolton, Rioli, Baker, 29
IN: 3, 10, 46, F2 (WCE)

West Coast
OUT: 3, F2, F3
IN: 6, 17, Baker

Gold Coast
OUT: 6, 13, 46
IN: 9, 29, Rioli

Fremantle
OUT: 9, 10,17
IN: 13, F3 (WCE), Bolton

Richmond trades 39, 41, 46 + 47 on to Brisbane for 14.

That leaves everyone with the following:

Richmond - 1, 3, 10, 14, 21
West Coast - 6, 12, 17, 23, Baker
Gold Coast - 9, 20, 26, 29, Rioli
Fremantle - 13, 27, Bolton

You take a slight haircut on Baker and your minor picks and effectively give up a second rounder for free but get overs on Bolton and Rioli and walk to the draft with five very good picks to kick start your rebuild. Meanwhile, everyone else achieves their objectives as well.

The main caveats to this is a potential Pickett trade as Melbourne would likely want one of picks 9 or 10 themselves, and St Kilda having an extra pick represents a free hit on Lombard, but Richmond, Gold Coast and Fremantle have enough non-first round picks between them to sort things out and not short-change anyone.

 

[TigerTime88]

Can we please stop saying "pick 23 will turn into pick 29...."

It does not matter because the players that get picked from Academies or F/S, the club does not have access too anyway!!

Clubs know that and know what players will go that they don't have access too, and where they should go.

I think it matters because it means for one of our better senior players we are getting the 29th best kid and not the 23rd.

 

[Elton Johns Wig]

Two first rounders you don't currently have.

What's the big picture for Richmond this off-season?

On face value, a first rounder for Baker and pick 6 for Rioli is overs but you have three players likely to move on this via trades and a plethora of minor picks.

The fact that pick 3 has come up suggests that is Richmond's target. From West Coast's perspective, that isn't going to come cheap, nor is it going to happen unless we have targets down the board.

From Gold Coast's perspective, they'd be mad to trade any picks ahead of a potential Lombard bid.

Freo's perspective is a little easier to deal with for all parties involved.

The way I see it, everyone is looking for 2-3 key pieces and the rest is collateral.

Richmond - pick 3 headlining a number of high end draft picks

West Coast - multiple high end draft picks; probably an extra pick after the Barrass trade

Freo - Bolton and Pickett; maybe a couple of lower picks on hand

Gold Coast - Rioli, Lombard, a pick ahead of the Lombard bid

With all that in mind, Richmond could get 3, West Coast 6, Gold Coast 9 and the rest is split by agreement.

Putting everyone into the one deal (forgetting other trades for a moment)...

Richmond
OUT: Bolton, Rioli, Baker, 29
IN: 3, 10, 46, F2 (WCE)

West Coast
OUT: 3, F2, F3
IN: 6, 17, Baker

Gold Coast
OUT: 6, 13, 46
IN: 9, 29, Rioli

Fremantle
OUT: 9, 10,17
IN: 13, F3 (WCE), Bolton

Richmond trades 39, 41, 46 + 47 on to Brisbane for 14.

That leaves everyone with the following:

Richmond - 1, 3, 10, 14, 21
West Coast - 6, 12, 17, 23, Baker
Gold Coast - 9, 20, 26, 29, Rioli
Fremantle - 13, 27, Bolton

You take a slight haircut on Baker and your minor picks and effectively give up a second rounder for free but get overs on Bolton and Rioli and walk to the draft with five very good picks to kick start your rebuild. Meanwhile, everyone else achieves their objectives as well.

The main caveats to this is a potential Pickett trade as Melbourne would likely want one of picks 9 or 10 themselves, and St Kilda having an extra pick represents a free hit on Lombard, but Richmond, Gold Coast and Fremantle have enough non-first round picks between them to sort things out and not short-change anyone.

I don't think that's how it ends up. Purely because we have players with 3 and 4 years left on contracts. That comes at a price. I believe we will end up with more than what you have listed. Not from Baker though

If Baker choses WC I think it'll be cheap and also separate.


In your scenario above, if I'm WC, I'm grabbing that with both arms and both legs. Clear winners.

 

[WCE_authentic]

I don't think that's how it ends up. Purely because we have players with 3 and 4 years left on contracts. That comes at a price. I believe we will end up with more than what you have listed. Not from Baker though

If Baker choses WC I think it'll be cheap and also separate.


In your scenario above, if I'm WC, I'm grabbing that with both arms and both legs. Clear winners.

It's not if Baker chooses WC, WC would have to choose Baker and this would only happen if they believe he is worth the pick it would fairly cost. For WC with an old and failing playing group, getting a mature player, in premiership contented pre-retirement phase of career, is not exactly what they need. It will be only Fremantle you have to deal with, and he will be priority number 4 for them, so you will likely get scraps.

 

[docko911]

Two first rounders you don't currently have.

What's the big picture for Richmond this off-season?

On face value, a first rounder for Baker and pick 6 for Rioli is overs but you have three players likely to move on this via trades and a plethora of minor picks.

The fact that pick 3 has come up suggests that is Richmond's target. From West Coast's perspective, that isn't going to come cheap, nor is it going to happen unless we have targets down the board.

From Gold Coast's perspective, they'd be mad to trade any picks ahead of a potential Lombard bid.

Freo's perspective is a little easier to deal with for all parties involved.

The way I see it, everyone is looking for 2-3 key pieces and the rest is collateral.

Richmond - pick 3 headlining a number of high end draft picks

West Coast - multiple high end draft picks; probably an extra pick after the Barrass trade

Freo - Bolton and Pickett; maybe a couple of lower picks on hand

Gold Coast - Rioli, Lombard, a pick ahead of the Lombard bid

With all that in mind, Richmond could get 3, West Coast 6, Gold Coast 9 and the rest is split by agreement.

Putting everyone into the one deal (forgetting other trades for a moment)...

Richmond
OUT: Bolton, Rioli, Baker, 29
IN: 3, 10, 46, F2 (WCE)

West Coast
OUT: 3, F2, F3
IN: 6, 17, Baker

Gold Coast
OUT: 6, 13, 46
IN: 9, 29, Rioli

Fremantle
OUT: 9, 10,17
IN: 13, F3 (WCE), Bolton

Richmond trades 39, 41, 46 + 47 on to Brisbane for 14.

That leaves everyone with the following:

Richmond - 1, 3, 10, 14, 21
West Coast - 6, 12, 17, 23, Baker
Gold Coast - 9, 20, 26, 29, Rioli
Fremantle - 13, 27, Bolton

You take a slight haircut on Baker and your minor picks and effectively give up a second rounder for free but get overs on Bolton and Rioli and walk to the draft with five very good picks to kick start your rebuild. Meanwhile, everyone else achieves their objectives as well.

The main caveats to this is a potential Pickett trade as Melbourne would likely want one of picks 9 or 10 themselves, and St Kilda having an extra pick represents a free hit on Lombard, but Richmond, Gold Coast and Fremantle have enough non-first round picks between them to sort things out and not short-change anyone.

in effect you’re giving up a future 3rd for Baker.

 

[Barrybran]

in effect you’re giving up a future 3rd for Baker.

That values Baker at our F2

 

[Obeanie1]

in effect you’re giving up a future 3rd for Baker.

Um no. In effect you can't read very well.

Baker lands a F2nd AND a F3rd.

Pick 3 split for 6 and 17. Which will slide to 8 and 19.

In 2022 Eagles split pick 2 for pick 9 and 14.

So pick 3 for live picks 8 and 19 isn't silly at all.

Nor is a F2nd AND a F3rd for Baker.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Um no. In effect you can't read very well.

Baker lands a F2nd AND a F3rd.

Pick 3 split for 6 and 17. Which will slide to 8 and 19.

In 2022 Eagles split pick 2 for pick 9 and 14.

So pick 3 for live picks 8 and 19 isn't silly at all.

Nor is a F2nd AND a F3rd for Baker.

Not that I think it matters that much but arent some of these numbers fudged a bit? Why is 6 moving back two spots and wont 3 move back one as well? It's more like 4 for 7 and 19? Still probably accurate but also, I'm not sure the sliding matters as much in this draft when trading, but maybe that's just cope for Freo's trades

 

[docko911]

Um no. In effect you can't read very well.

Baker lands a F2nd AND a F3rd.

Pick 3 split for 6 and 17. Which will slide to 8 and 19.

In 2022 Eagles split pick 2 for pick 9 and 14.

So pick 3 for live picks 8 and 19 isn't silly at all.

Nor is a F2nd AND a F3rd for Baker.

Pick 6 + 17 = 2776 points
Pick 3 = 2234 points

If your future 2nd is pick 23 again it will be worth 815 points. Now that’s a little off on my behalf because there would be a surplus of 273 points which would bring your 3rd pick (pick 41 = 412 points) up to about pick 28 value. Of course I haven’t factored in the amount pick 17 this year and your future 2nd/3rd will drop back in the draft. 17 probably 3-4 space but your picks probably 5+, and then there is also the risk of you having a better year than this year.

All in all, no we are not trading Baker for the equivalent of pick 25-30 because it involves a 3 place pick upgrade in a really even draft.

 

[Barrybran]

Pick 6 + 17 = 2776 points
Pick 3 = 2234 points

If your future 2nd is pick 23 again it will be worth 815 points. Now that’s a little off on my behalf because there would be a surplus of 273 points which would bring your 3rd pick (pick 41 = 412 points) up to about pick 28 value. Of course I haven’t factored in the amount pick 17 this year and your future 2nd/3rd will drop back in the draft. 17 probably 3-4 space but your picks probably 5+, and then there is also the risk of you having a better year than this year.

All in all, no we are not trading Baker for the equivalent of pick 25-30 because it involves a 3 place pick upgrade in a really even draft.

We're not finishing between 7-12 next year (where pick 25-30 sits)

 

[tigs2010]

Does anyone else's eyes glaze over when they see points being used as basis for a trade when neither team has anyone to match a bid on? Or is it just me?

 

[Big_Birdy]

I know I am in the minority among Eagles supporters but if the draft top end is as deep as they say, and West Coast is of that belief, then getting Baker for just a pick downgrade is a bit of a no-brainer for me. The ability to hold onto 23 is a large incentive.

If the draft is as deep as they say - 9, 12*, 23, 30*, 59 is a better hand than 3, 12*, 30*, 59

Its why Schofield said the would take it on his pod. We can get in an experienced player to help us hopefully improve competitiveness while keeping a relatively high pick.


Now throw your eggs Eagles fans.

 

[JackOutback]

Richmond won't give up 2 first rounders and Baker to get pick 3 and scraps.

Sheesh.

And the Eagles won't give up pick 3 for pick 9, the downgrade is too big, no matter what the points tell you. Picks 1-3 come at an absolute premium because that's where the jets are. A downgrade from 3 to 6 is possible because the gap is less pronounced but you're still moving away from the cream of the crop to the fairly sure it will pan out.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Does anyone else's eyes glaze over when they see points being used as basis for a trade when neither team has anyone to match a bid on? Or is it just me?

I think you can use it as a guide for moving up, seems to be at least 30% points surcharge to move up, sometimes up to 50%. If a pick suggestion doesnt have that, it's wrong.

The whole, these together are worth pick 3 per points is garbage though, because the system is currently broken

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

I know I am in the minority among Eagles supporters but if the draft top end is as deep as they say, and West Coast is of that belief, then getting Baker for just a pick downgrade is a bit of a no-brainer for me. The ability to hold onto 23 is a large incentive.

If the draft is as deep as they say - 9, 12*, 23, 30*, 59 is a better hand than 3, 12*, 30*, 59

Its why Schofield said the would take it on his pod. We can get in an experienced player to help us hopefully improve competitiveness while keeping a relatively high pick.


Now throw your eggs Eagles fans.

I wouldnt want to be moving further than 6 if they did it. Even as it is, you move to 9, you are starting to move to a drop in quality you dont want to do for a Baker IMO. That should be a no-go

 

[tigs2010]

I think you can use it as a guide for moving up, seems to be at least 30% points surcharge to move up, sometimes up to 50%. If a pick suggestion doesnt have that, it's wrong.

The whole, these together are worth pick 3 per points is garbage though, because the system is currently broken

Yep needs to have a loading to higher picks when talking pick swaps.

Add a player in and I roll my eyes and completely zone out.

 

[amazingjoshy]

I know I am in the minority among Eagles supporters but if the draft top end is as deep as they say, and West Coast is of that belief, then getting Baker for just a pick downgrade is a bit of a no-brainer for me. The ability to hold onto 23 is a large incentive.

If the draft is as deep as they say - 9, 12*, 23, 30*, 59 is a better hand than 3, 12*, 30*, 59

Its why Schofield said the would take it on his pod. We can get in an experienced player to help us hopefully improve competitiveness while keeping a relatively high pick.


Now throw your eggs Eagles fans.

But if we just traded 3 on its own we'd get better than 9 + 23 imo

 

[Big_Birdy]

I wouldnt want to be moving further than 6 if they did it. Even as it is, you move to 9, you are starting to move to a drop in quality you dont want to do for a Baker IMO. That should be a no-go

That's all fair enough. But like I said, if the club believes the quality available at 9 is still in that top echelon (and the clubs make it their business to have an idea of who is taking who) then they should do the trade. I will agree, if they don't think that, then they shouldn't.

The last thing they should be doing is second guess themselves though. Thankfully they didn't last year.

I think a lot of the angst from us is because Bo Allen may be there at our pick and we may take him. We've almost gone anti WA players thinking we are settling. To be fair though many of our posters would have seen him play a bit.

If they don't do the trade I'm not losing sleep. I suggest other fans do the same if they do.

 

[Big_Birdy]

But if we just traded 3 on its own we'd get better than 9 + 23 imo

But we wouldn't get Baker. A known quantity.

At least we know he is AFL standard. Plenty of picks in the teens aren't as it turns out.

 

[amazingjoshy]

But we wouldn't get Baker. A known quantity.

At least we know he is AFL standard. Plenty of picks in the teens aren't as it turns out.

Yes we would. We'd trade 23 for Baker and then trade 3 for something better than 9 + 23.

 

[Big_Birdy]

Yes we would. We'd trade 23 for Baker and then trade 3 for something better than 9 + 23.

If that is a possibility then I agree with you. But to who?

The depth of the draft is the issue for us. Clubs don't want to trade up. North probably want to split pick 2 so they will get first dibs for example.

These things don't happen in a vacuum. 1 for 2 and 17,18 or whatever is was last year gets done probably every year since drafting began except last year. The circumstances are different every year. Yes we could split 2 into 8 and 12 in 2022. The circumstances are different this year and I don't think a similar outcome is realistic possibility, but would be stoked if proven wrong.

In another year yes we may be able to do even better, but, that doesn't mean it isn't a good deal, or the right thing to do as it stands.

Of course yes, if there is a realistic possibility of splitting pick 3 outside of Baker for better than 9 and 23, then I agree we shouldn't do the 3 for Baker and 9.