List Mgmt. Our Trade/FA, Suburban & Country Town Thread

[Babylove]

Inside trading on the afl site said the blues have offered there future first and second for pick 13

I read that. Have they changed the roles to allow that to happen? I thought in order to trade your future first you had to have an F2, F3 and F4

 

[gerryg400]

I read that. Have they changed the roles to allow that to happen? I thought in order to trade your future first you had to have an F2, F3 and F4

Apparently targeting the Bombres F2.

 

[South of the Yarra]

Nah we’re gonna aim for 10th. Clown.

Ease up.

 

[Antz]

Nah we’re gonna aim for 10th. Clown.

Ease up sunshine.

 

[sr36]

I think with Houston, we may have a problem....

I think we're in with a shot if he's open to us, but it will involve us adding our Hawks second rounder to Noble and future first to get 13 and 23 - which I think is about par - and then Port rating this draft highly enough to be happy with 13, 23 and Richards for Houston.

 

[Pleasedontfail11]

Yep, surely Suns take that over Blues future 1st and 2nd. Suns need players ready to go.

The Blues offer is better in some ways to our offer although they would have to trade out pick 34 into the 2025 draft as the 1st step.
It is better because they are offering a 1st and 2nd for pick 13 while we are offering a 1st and Noble for 13 and 23. It comes down to how much they rate Noble. I'm hoping that Noble is more temping than pick 23 and a future Carlton 2nd (probably around 38 on draft night next year). That pick would still be useful for 2025 academy bids for GC.

 

[Fruit]

i am not all over how all the trading works but wouldn’t the fact that Suns want one of our players, Port want one of the Suns players and we want Ports player work in our favour?

 

[VinnieB]

I actually agree with this.

Players leave in sport all the time without Compo.

It's compromised the draft.

If there needs to be compensation, it should be based on the player’s current salary (or final 2 yr average). Or, where the player rates on the existing salary in that clubs list.

I thought compensation was there so that the bottom teams weren’t losing their best players to the top teams and so having a huge impact on their ability to improve.

 

[VinnieB]

The Blues offer is better in some ways to our offer although they would have to trade out pick 34 into the 2025 draft as the 1st step.
It is better because they are offering a 1st and 2nd for pick 13 while we are offering a 1st and Noble for 13 and 23. It comes down to how much they rate Noble. I'm hoping that Noble is more temping than pick 23 and a future Carlton 2nd (probably around 38 on draft night next year). That pick would still be useful for 2025 academy bids for GC.

What about where next year’s 1st is likely to be? Seems Carlton is overrated and we may be underrated in 2025.

 

[76woodenspooners]

I don't see the issue. They're contracted employees - "we can't offer you a contract for next year now, but might be able to later on" happens regularly in most industries.

They'll all be acting as though they're delisted and planning for not being there next year - however a couple of them might get lucky and get a contract.

I’m pretty sure some time ago there was some AFLPA rule that clubs needed to give players their exit interview and advise them of their status for next year within a few days of their last game of the season?

Just like what we did with Begg.

I thought it was strange in previous seasons how we were able to occasionally keep a player in limbo. But his year it’s around 7 players! Did that AFLPA thing get dropped? Or was there some kind of way out of it? Eg: “If you want an answer now, the answer is that you’ll be delisted. But if you like we can keep you on the books and see if something comes up?”

To what extent are other clubs doing this?

I get the cut-throat nature of the industry …

… but consider Jack Martin as an example. With Carlton delisting Jack Martin immediately, they’ve helped out a competitor in Geelong by allowing them to allocate a list spot for Martin and having him join their preseason training on time.

 

[Pleasedontfail11]

i am not all over how all the trading works but wouldn’t the fact that Suns want one of our players, Port want one of the Suns players and we want Ports player work in our favour?

Yes. It could be the perfect storm that takes out Carltons chances at Houston and their 2025 season.

 

[Pleasedontfail11]

What about where next year’s 1st is likely to be? Seems Carlton is overrated and we may be underrated in 2025.

True. I admit I rated our future 1sts the same.

 

[VinnieB]

True. I admit I rated our future 1sts the same.

Of course we will prove them all wrong.

 

[piemad1]

No 13 no noble, we keep him

 

[Caztheconquerer]

I read that. Have they changed the roles to allow that to happen? I thought in order to trade your future first you had to have an F2, F3 and F4

Yeah they are looking to trade this years second into next years

 

[jmac70]

I’m pretty sure some time ago there was some AFLPA rule that clubs needed to give players their exit interview and advise them of their status for next year within a few days of their last game of the season?

Just like what we did with Begg.

I thought it was strange in previous seasons how we were able to occasionally keep a player in limbo. But his year it’s around 7 players! Did that AFLPA thing get dropped? Or was there some kind of way out of it? Eg: “If you want an answer now, the answer is that you’ll be delisted. But if you like we can keep you on the books and see if something comes up?”

To what extent are other clubs doing this?

I get the cut-throat nature of the industry …

… but consider Jack Martin as an example. With Carlton delisting Jack Martin immediately, they’ve helped out a competitor in Geelong by allowing them to allocate a list spot for Martin and having him join their preseason training on time.

Maybe the club advised them that their status was ‘wait and see.’

 

[Granit1962]

Maybe they prefer a wait and see, rather than a seeya later

 

[sr36]

I’m pretty sure some time ago there was some AFLPA rule that clubs needed to give players their exit interview and advise them of their status for next year within a few days of their last game of the season?

Just like what we did with Begg.

I thought it was strange in previous seasons how we were able to occasionally keep a player in limbo. But his year it’s around 7 players! Did that AFLPA thing get dropped? Or was there some kind of way out of it? Eg: “If you want an answer now, the answer is that you’ll be delisted. But if you like we can keep you on the books and see if something comes up?”

To what extent are other clubs doing this?

I get the cut-throat nature of the industry …

… but consider Jack Martin as an example. With Carlton delisting Jack Martin immediately, they’ve helped out a competitor in Geelong by allowing them to allocate a list spot for Martin and having him join their preseason training on time.

I don't know what the rules are or have been previously, but if you shift your focus to the contract, they're the same as Martin and other clubs delisted guys - no contract for next year and hopeful to get one somewhere - the only difference is that we haven't completely ruled them out yet. Would it somehow be better if we delisted them all now and then later added one or two of them as DFA? - either way, their manager is going to be trying to get them somewhere at the moment because they don't have a job for next year yet

 

[Matt_352]

We won’t we be aiming to win Flag next year

Um yes we ****ing are

 

[Apex36]

I included Schultz as a comparison as ultimately I think us getting our end of that deal involves either GC paying a Schultz like price for Noble or Port getting significant unders for Houston.

No matter how a 3 way deal masks the individual values, we'll need one of the other sides to give us outstanding value for that deal to go through. Or both give us very good value.

Twomey is reporting that we’re pushing for a trade of Noble and our F1 for 13 and 23. If we work based on how the club is valuing Noble and 13 then the deal I’ve proposed seems perfectly reasonable and you seem to be over valuing 13.

That’s the last I’m going to say on it because this is going around in circles now.

 

[gouki88]

I think we're in with a shot if he's open to us, but it will involve us adding our Hawks second rounder to Noble and future first to get 13 and 23 - which I think is about par - and then Port rating this draft highly enough to be happy with 13, 23 and Richards for Houston.

I think this is a pretty reasonable escalation in response to Carlton apparently upping their offer. I trust that we’d have plans for securing McGuane next year.

Given Port have the most measly picks of anyone in this draft, would have to think 13 + 23 would appeal most to them

 

[Hardas]

Twomey is reporting that we’re pushing for a trade of Noble and our F1 for 13 and 23. If we work based on how the club is valuing Noble and 13 then the deal I’ve proposed seems perfectly reasonable and you seem to be over valuing 13.

That’s the last I’m going to say on it because this is going around in circles now.

Liked for POV - not for you promising not to further debate the point!

 

[Crazy Tails]

i am not all over how all the trading works but wouldn’t the fact that Suns want one of our players, Port want one of the Suns players and we want Ports player work in our favour?

Yeah their pursuit of a contracted Noble has us in a good position to work the deal on 13. If Blues got the 13 how do the Suns do the deal with us on Noble?


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[sr36]

Twomey is reporting that we’re pushing for a trade of Noble and our F1 for 13 and 23. If we work based on how the club is valuing Noble and 13 then the deal I’ve proposed seems perfectly reasonable and you seem to be over valuing 13.

That’s the last I’m going to say on it because this is going around in circles now.

Yes, it looks like we're going in low at this stage. It also says Sydney have offered 19+21, and Carlton have offered a future first and future second, which they'd get for their mid 30s pick (it's the Schultz price). And it's likely to go up in price from here as teams aren't likely to go to their maximum before the actual auction.

I'm sorry if it annoys you, but I think your deal was too low for Port - this deal gets them pick 23 on top - and then they'd do a separate deal for Lukosius probably the second rounder at most that you had them giving - he's a salary dump, as much as GC might be trying to deny it.

 

[upnsmoke]

We won’t we be aiming to win Flag next year

You need to use a comma.