Official GIANTS trade period thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Really would help our cause if GWS had a pick around the 8-15 that could be traded to us in a deal for 5 and 6 involving Martin. Something like:

Dogs Receive: MD#1, Jed Anderson, Pick 8-15
GWS Receive: Picks 5 and 6

The only other realistic option I see is us landing Tom Lee instead of that 8-15 pick.
 
dlanod said:
In this case we would be giving up something - Jed Anderson. I'd much rather have him on our list. :)
Click to expand...

Maybe he doesn't want to play for you but is happy to be on traded.

Remember the zone allowances and mini draft picks are in place to assist GWS building their list through trade period. Basically you get access to players to trade without costing the club anything.
 
Obeanie1 said:
Maybe he doesn't want to play for you but is happy to be on traded.

Remember the zone allowances and mini draft picks are in place to assist GWS building their list through trade period. Basically you get access to players to trade without costing the club anything.
Click to expand...

Yes. And by keeping Anderson, we will be doing just that.

GWS isnt Fremantle. Our purpose is not to strengthen existing clubs by doing very, very soft deals.

If WCE want Anderson, then they are going to need to make it worth it for us.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Obeanie1 said:
Maybe he doesn't want to play for you but is happy to be on traded.

Remember the zone allowances and mini draft picks are in place to assist GWS building their list through trade period. Basically you get access to players to trade without costing the club anything.
Click to expand...

Now you're just making stuff up. This is the same kid that's played for the Giants a number of times already.

This isn't the same situation as the mini draft picks. We can put Jed on our list, so trading him does cost us that at least.
 
I think it's widely reported that Anderson was only a bub when he came over and wasn't ready for the pressures associated with AFL footy. He seems a lot more mature now and is definitely a talent.

I think he's worth another shot, we could do with a talent like him.
 
On NT zone selections interesting to see Dom Barry have such a solid draft combine with a 3rd in the 3km time trial, 9th in the shuttle run (level 14.2), 3rd-best score in the kicking test and was top-10 in the running vertical jump (84cm) and repeat sprints (25.19 seconds). So with Anderson, Barry and Neade all showing something it will be interesting to see how we use those zone selections,
 
IanW said:
Yes. And by keeping Anderson, we will be doing just that.

GWS isnt Fremantle. Our purpose is not to strengthen existing clubs by doing very, very soft deals.

If WCE want Anderson, then they are going to need to make it worth it for us.
Click to expand...

What very, very soft deal are you refering to?

I'd seriously consider offering up our first rounder for him, pick 17 ATM. This is in the range mentioned above.

Koby Stevens + a second rounder isn't a soft deal either.
 
dlanod said:
Now you're just making stuff up. This is the same kid that's played for the Giants a number of times already.

This isn't the same situation as the mini draft picks. We can put Jed on our list, so trading him does cost us that at least.
Click to expand...

Jed was listed as a 16 yr old and moved to Sydney to train and play for GWS already. It didn't work out at the time for several reasons. My understanding is if he's not interested in playing in Sydney GWS can't list him under a zone selection.

There are a lot of NT boys playing in Melbourne and also in WA and they do catch up. Not so many in Sydney so maybe he'd prefer to play elsewhere. Even so GWS with his permission can prelist him as a zone selection and then on trade him. It doesn't cost GWS anything, no draft pick, no salary cap. Hence the "It costs GWS nothing and they can gain another first rounder or a player by doing this"

Not too sure what you are debating here TBH.

GWS can manufacture another top draft pick by trading a player they don't already have but have access to, thats one reason the AFL granted these concessions.
 
Obeanie1 said:
What very, very soft deal are you refering to?

I'd seriously consider offering up our first rounder for him, pick 17 ATM. This is in the range mentioned above.

Koby Stevens + a second rounder isn't a soft deal either.
Click to expand...

You should have a word with the bloke using your nick who said

"Maybe late 1st to early second as technically in this sort of tradeGWS are giving up nothing and getting a pretty decent pick."
 
Using Obeanie's logic, maybe WCE should offload Shuey, Natanui and Kennedy to us. After all maybe they're sick of West Coast. Maybe, what a great word for "let's make up a scenario". :rolleyes:

I repeat, since you don't seem to understand, trading Jed costs GWS Jed. After all he can't be on our list if we trade him. Have a look into the concept of opportunity cost.

"Maybe" he doesn't want to play for us... Of course, "maybe" he does, or "maybe" he doesn't care where he ends up. But unless he actually confirms that he won't play for GWS, trading him costs GWS the opportunity to have him on our own list.

I really don't get what's so hard to get about that.
 
dlanod said:
Using Obeanie's logic, maybe WCE should offload Shuey, Natanui and Kennedy to us. After all maybe they're sick of West Coast. Maybe, what a great word for "let's make up a scenario". :rolleyes:

I repeat, since you don't seem to understand, trading Jed costs GWS Jed. After all he can't be on our list if we trade him. Have a look into the concept of opportunity cost.

"Maybe" he doesn't want to play for us... Of course, "maybe" he does, or "maybe" he doesn't care where he ends up. But unless he actually confirms that he won't play for GWS, trading him costs GWS the opportunity to have him on our own list.

I really don't get what's so hard to get about that.
Click to expand...



Maybe I'll just move on and you can debate this with the other two people who can be bothered posting on here.o_O

Great stuff, keep up the quality discussions. :cool:
 
Emma Quayle suggests this morning that GC mightn't bid #2 on Viney, which could mean that picks 2 through 6 open up in the mini-draft trade picture.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Scully2Folau said:
Emma Quayle suggests this morning that GC mightn't bid #2 on Viney, which could mean that picks 2 through 6 open up in the mini-draft trade picture.
Click to expand...
Doesnt Really matter as far as the MD goes i believe, Even if they Bid Melbourne will use selection 3 on Viney, They wont let him go to GC- Too Good and they have too much to lose PR wise
 
THE_GUN said:
Doesnt Really matter as far as the MD goes i believe, Even if they Bid Melbourne will use selection 3 on Viney, They wont let him go to GC- Too Good and they have too much to lose PR wise
Click to expand...
What it does though is ensures another live pick in the top 3. It mightn't have any impact on the mini-draft trades, but it does slightly improve the market for them.
 
Reports on twitter say that GC have traded #2 to GWS for mini-draft #1 (and they'll select Jack Martin)

So, first two draft picks in hand and we've got MD2 to offload.
 
Reports on twitter say that GC have traded #2 to GWS for mini-draft #1 (and they'll select Jack Martin)

So, first two draft picks in hand and we've got MD2 to offload.
 
THE_GUN said:
Wow- that is unbelievable result for GWS
1.Whitfield
2.Grundy
5.Mayes/Wines/O'Rouke - Surely wb will be looking at Hogan now
Click to expand...

After how Cameron went this year, I think a lot of clubs will be looking at a big, young KPF that you can get a year into in the reserves.
 
IanW said:
After how Cameron went this year, I think a lot of clubs will be looking at a big, young KPF that you can get a year into in the reserves.
Click to expand...
Well if Collingwood end up with Pick #4 from melbourne for wellingham/Dawes - I will bet my left testi that they will be looking at Hogan

So GWS could end up with #1 #2 #4
 
Mountain Giant said:
Hmm. Not someone like Plowman? I only want us to get Whitfield because of how good he (apparently) is and can be. We don't need that many midfielders.
Click to expand...
I wouldnt go spending up on Backmen tbh, You can always get them later in the draft - This year you have Guys like Wallis,Rodda,Corr,Thurlow all expected to go #30+ Unless they are Hurley Quality

GWS better off Poaching/Trading for the Backs you need

Mids are the Go and can never have enough gun Mids/Fowards
 
THE_GUN said:
I wouldnt go spending up on Backmen tbh, You can always get them later in the draft - This year you have Guys like Wallis,Rodda,Corr,Thurlow all expected to go #30+ Unless they are Hurley Quality

GWS better off Poaching/Trading for the Backs you need

Mids are the Go and can never have enough gun Mids/Fowards
Click to expand...

Funny thing is, I was kind of thinking that if we were to draft more midfielders - we should have traded Tyson away then.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Official GIANTS trade period thread

Similar threads

Colonial
Women's Footy VFLW Giants Thread
Replies
18
Views
940
MelbourneGWS
M
GWS Goose
Opinion The Giants best 22
Replies
22
Views
1K
Colonial
Colonial
The Dr
Podcast Historic AFL podcast: The build of the GWS Giants
Replies
3
Views
326
GWS Goose
GWS Goose
steviewonder36
Anyone collect Giants Membership Lanyards and Caps?
Replies
4
Views
269
Colonial
Colonial
ClockworkOrange
Analysis Umpiring Department vs Giants - Please explain, Laura Kane
Replies
16
Views
521
BarryAglett
BarryAglett
Colonial
Analysis 2025 GWS Giants - Predicted best 22, breakout player(s), general player/team discussion & questions
2 3 4
Replies
89
Views
3K
BarryAglett
BarryAglett
PaythePerryman
GIANT rivals
Replies
17
Views
1K
Brave New World
B

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top