More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - featuring the mini-draft

[bodazoka]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

January to April would of included these players from the past few drafts (kids picked inside the top 10): (none in 2010)

2009 - Andrew Moore

2008 - Jack Watts
Jack Ziebell

2007 - Trent Cotchin
Cale Morton
Rhys Palmer
Patrick Dangerfield

2006 - Bryce Gibbs
Ben Reid

2005 - Xavier Ellis
Scott Pendlebury
Patrick Ryder
JON

2004 - Brett Deledio
Jarryd Roughhead
Lance Franklin
Jordan Lewis

So chances are there is going to be a kid in that bottom age group who is worth trading one of your experienced players for. You would have to really back your talent scouts in though, but If your talking about a very good midfielder in the U16's this year there is a very good chance that kid will also be very good the year after as well.

 

[Toadvine]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

Priddis & A Selwood for a kid named O,Meara could be on the cards

If that's all it takes to get someone like O'Meara I'll be surprised. If it is the case throwing up Tuck and Thursty should get us in the mix for a pick.

But again... Highly unlikely

 

[The Passenger]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

from what i've read on this O'Meara i doubt Selwood and Priddis will get the job done.

Taking Priddis to GWS could be a great result for west coast. i reckon we'd get far more than he is worth (as he is pretty highly rated) and it would force us to ween ourselves from relying on him and get someone else in there who can take us to the next level.

 

[chardonnay]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

Why would the Eagles want more kids at the expense of hard bodied proven AFL footballers.
Why some Eagles fans want to turn the club into a clone of Richmond is beyond me ...

 

[folester41]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

sadly your right chardonnay, you need those experienced players to help the youngsters and ease the pressure on them.

however in saying that, you might miss out on a young gun that can do special things and take your club places.

 

[94_Eagles]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

Essendon did pretty well out of this when Freo joined the comp... we gave up Ridley and Delaney and got a certain 17 yr old called Matthew Lloyd!!!

We will certainly be trading for Joe Daniher at some stage, i would give them Dyson or Prismall in exchange at the moment.

Dyson Heppell?

 

[Vader]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

We will certainly be trading for Joe Daniher at some stage, i would give them Dyson or Prismall in exchange at the moment.

Why? Your mob will be signing him as a F/S selection. There's no trading involved.

 

[Raymann]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

Well you can off load some expensive seconds players and keep a first round draft pick! Two good reasons...

 

[dlanod]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

Going by stats alone you're looking at four players who should be in the best 12 of the coming year (assuming talent is evenly distributed throughout the year) and potentially in the best 5 or 6. Worst case you're getting the equivalent of pick 12, and it'll take more than some "expensive seconds players" to trade for that each year.

 

[Slattery_20]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

Essendon did pretty well out of this when Freo joined the comp... we gave up Ridley and Delaney and got a certain 17 yr old called Matthew Lloyd!!!

We will certainly be trading for Joe Daniher at some stage, i would give them Dyson or Prismall in exchange at the moment.

Every bit of this post is win.

 

[yaco55]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

We need to realise that the 4, 17 year olds GWS must trade - Are definite Top 10 picks.

You need to give up a player who is of equivalent value - At least a player you would get a top 20 pick in the free market.

Probably a Stanton or Priddis type is what GWS would seek - And seeing the problems that GC have with KP's - preference could be for this type of player.

 

[Ants]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

We need to realise that the 4, 17 year olds GWS must trade - Are definite Top 10 picks.

You need to give up a player who is of equivalent value - At least a player you would get a top 20 pick in the free market.

Probably a Stanton or Priddis type is what GWS would seek - And seeing the problems that GC have with KP's - preference could be for this type of player.

No, not all of these players are guaranteed top 10 picks. Hell, if the talent is distributed evenly some surely wouldn't be. Players have bad final years and sometimes go backwards.

And you may not have to give up equivalent value to get them. GWS can't keep them, so they will want to maximise the value. But at the same time, unlike a team trading a normal pick there is no benefit in not trading them at all.

Teams with the "spare" equivalent value may not want to give it up. Our window is probably opening now, and we would hope to have a real shot in 2012. Trading one of our best midfielders for a kid who may be better is not a good move when you're challenging. You can't be in rebuild mode forever.

And teams leaving the window will want to keep their 20-25yr old talent. Its the older talent they might consider letting go, but GWS won't be so interested in that.

I don't think its a lay down misere that they will ALL go market value.

 

[mark121]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

GWS can trade these picks this year or the next and i wouldnt be suprised if they didnt trade any of them this year, however they will very likely trade one of these picks at the end of this year and keep the other three for next year.

 

[morebeer]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

We need to realise that the 4, 17 year olds GWS must trade - Are definite Top 10 picks.

You need to give up a player who is of equivalent value - At least a player you would get a top 20 pick in the free market.

Probably a Stanton or Priddis type is what GWS would seek - And seeing the problems that GC have with KP's - preference could be for this type of player.

You are on the money Yaco. They will have the VALUE of a top 10 pick.

I think the people who view it any other way are not looking at from GWS point of view, they think that their team will be able to trade some list cloggers for a future gun.

Sure, they need some list cloggers but that is what the PSD, rookie list is for.

 

[yaco55]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

No, not all of these players are guaranteed top 10 picks. Hell, if the talent is distributed evenly some surely wouldn't be. Players have bad final years and sometimes go backwards.

And you may not have to give up equivalent value to get them. GWS can't keep them, so they will want to maximise the value. But at the same time, unlike a team trading a normal pick there is no benefit in not trading them at all.

Teams with the "spare" equivalent value may not want to give it up. Our window is probably opening now, and we would hope to have a real shot in 2012. Trading one of our best midfielders for a kid who may be better is not a good move when you're challenging. You can't be in rebuild mode forever.

And teams leaving the window will want to keep their 20-25yr old talent. Its the older talent they might consider letting go, but GWS won't be so interested in that.

I don't think its a lay down misere that they will ALL go market value.

Look at the history of the draft - You are telling me that with Access to the best 4 17 year olds in the next two drafts - They wont be Top 10 picks - Of course they could be DUDS - which happens with about 2 out of 10 top Ten picks. And each year the Top 10 draft picks - have an average of 4 or 5 17 year olds in the Top 10.

Never said GWS would get true market value - That is why I suggested players of the ilk of Stanton or Priddis would be reasonable selections for GWS.The GWS will be targetting Top 10 players with their uncontracted selections.

 

[Ants]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

Look at the history of the draft - You are telling me that with Access to the best 4 17 year olds in the next two drafts - They wont be Top 10 picks - Of course they could be DUDS - which happens with about 2 out of 10 top Ten picks. And each year the Top 10 draft picks - have an average of 4 or 5 17 year olds in the Top 10.

Never said GWS would get true market value - That is why I suggested players of the ilk of Stanton or Priddis would be reasonable selections for GWS.The GWS will be targetting Top 10 players with their uncontracted selections.

Hmm, ok, yes splitting them into two each draft should mean they're as good as top 10 picks. I was thinking if all 4 went in a single draft, the last couple wouldn't be.

But are you honestly saying Stanton isn't worth a top 10 pick? Not that I would give him up for one of these picks.

 

[morebeer]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

This really is an interesting rule.

The intention of the selections is obviously for GWS to trade for ready made AFL players, then the rule further stipulates that the players must be contracted.

These would seem to restrict what they can do with the trades but another option they can consider is that they could manufacture a situation whereby they gain draft picks as the main consideration.

For example, they could trade one of the 16 year old for a contracted, low value list clogger. Then in a separate deal they could trade one of their low draft picks for the other teams high draft pick, like what happened in the Jarraod Brennan pick swap.

So the overall deal may look like;
GWS In: List clogger, pick 10.
GWS Out: 16 year old, pick 60.

The stipulation that the player must be contracted could even be manipulated by clubs by the use of 'sign and trade' agreements. In this scenario an uncontracted low value list clogger would receive a one year contract but then get on traded to GWS immediatley. GWS keeps the list clogger if they want but its not critical to the overall deal.

Whether we think that GWS would be wise to use these trades on ready made players is debateable but clearly it seems that this 16 year old trade option has a fair bit of flexibility and workable provisions to ensure GWS get good value.

 

[Vader]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

Adelaide were hoping to do one of these deals with GWS to swindle Todd Viney's son away, before Melbourne could grab him under the F/S rule.

Adelaide were expecting to receive a 1st round selection as compensation for losing Nathan Bock to GC. They were then going to trade this pick to GWS for the right to draft Viney. However, the AFL screwed the AFC over by judging Bock's value as a "Band 3" player (end of 1st round selection). This was enough for the whole deal to fall over.

This should give you an idea of what GWS are expecting/demanding for these kids. Forget about Delaney/Lloyd swindles and flogging off list cloggers, it's not going to happen. GWS are expecting (and will be getting) a high 1st round draft pick, or a player of similar value.

 

[Quigley]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

Vader what I think GWS will be after is future picks plus reasonable players who can make them competitive early. The market they are in is more difficult than GC and so they need to be up and running quicker. With that said they are going to want to hord as many future picks as they can so the compo picks will have value to them.

 

[ROYAL EAGLE]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

We need to realise that the 4, 17 year olds GWS must trade - Are definite Top 10 picks.

You need to give up a player who is of equivalent value - At least a player you would get a top 20 pick in the free market.

Probably a Stanton or Priddis type is what GWS would seek - And seeing the problems that GC have with KP's - preference could be for this type of player.

Your on the money there Jaeger O'Meara and Jack Martin have both stated they wont leave WA.
Collingwood where way into Jaeger but he has told them he is not interested, and will go to a WA club.
Jack Martin is a very quite geraldton via broome kid, who really doesn't want to leave WA as well.

Hayden Yarren is the other WA kid available but he is happy to go anywhere.He was best player at the under 16 carnival, as a goal kicking wingman.

What this means is Freo and WCE will go into a bidding war to get hold of them.
So GWS will definately pick up some good experienced hard bodies to play for them.

 

[Ants]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

Your on the money there Jaeger O'Meara and Jack Martin have both stated they wont leave WA.
Collingwood where way into Jaeger but he has told them he is not interested, and will go to a WA club.
Jack Martin is a very quite geraldton via broome kid, who really doesn't want to leave WA as well.

Hayden Yarren is the other WA kid available but he is happy to go anywhere.He was best player at the under 16 carnival, as a goal kicking wingman.

What this means is Freo and WCE will go into a bidding war to get hold of them.
So GWS will definately pick up some good experienced hard bodies to play for them.

Not sure I believe this, people were saying similar things about the GC U17 picks - that players like Matera would turn them down and try the draft. But I didn't believe it, and don't believe it now.

WC and Freo look like being higher position clubs over the next few seasons. Why would a 17yr old kid turn down the chance to be drafted (and paid) a year early when if he's as good as everyone says he's got no hope of getting drafted by the WA clubs the next year anyway? He may as well take a Vic's offer now.

And if he doesn't, then unless your right and Freo/WCE start a bidding war, the other clubs will presumably just switch to someone from another state. If there are only 2 picks on offer each year, its not like they can't find two other top young kids to draft.

 

[Raymann]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

I agree with all that you have said ANTS, just one correction...

it is not 2 each year it is 4 over the two years.

if they wanted to, they could trade the 4 kids this year!

 

[Vader]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

Vader what I think GWS will be after is future picks plus reasonable players who can make them competitive early. The market they are in is more difficult than GC and so they need to be up and running quicker. With that said they are going to want to hord as many future picks as they can so the compo picks will have value to them.

Agreed.. but that doesn't change the value of those picks - they're looking for future 1st round picks, or a player of the same value.

 

[Raymann]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

Agreed.. but that doesn't change the value of those picks - they're looking for future 1st round picks, or a player of the same value.

Vader - you obviously have the same mail as i do...

i believe that GWS are very interested in the ablett pick 10 from Geelong.

 

[yaco55]

Re: More clarity on GWS U17yr old trades - no mini-draft

Not sure I believe this, people were saying similar things about the GC U17 picks - that players like Matera would turn them down and try the draft. But I didn't believe it, and don't believe it now.

WC and Freo look like being higher position clubs over the next few seasons. Why would a 17yr old kid turn down the chance to be drafted (and paid) a year early when if he's as good as everyone says he's got no hope of getting drafted by the WA clubs the next year anyway? He may as well take a Vic's offer now.

And if he doesn't, then unless your right and Freo/WCE start a bidding war, the other clubs will presumably just switch to someone from another state. If there are only 2 picks on offer each year, its not like they can't find two other top young kids to draft.

Think that you are missing the point.

GWS decides which 17 year olds they will trade

This will be governed by two factors

1) Clubs being interested in player x or player Y
2) How GWS determine if a player wants to move to Sydney.

In scenario 2 - As RE pointed out - You have players from WA being highly sought by local clubs will probably build up the bidding process - And these 4, 17 year old players - Dont necessarily have to be the best of that age group.