Mega Thread Trade and List Management discussion

[Wizard17]

Why trade a midfielder that is a best 22 player right now? Really I'd be sitting back not trading up unless we got a really good deal.

Why would we trade a KPP player thats playing pretty well in the vfl and will be a top 22 player within two years (i.e. morris finishing his career)

 

[TBOW]

Harbrow and Brennan were like a Band 2

That was expansion compo, completely different system. As far as I can remember there has never been band 2 or 4 free agency compo given.
Hate to say it but on precedence it looks like Melbourne will get 3.

 

[_M_16_]

FFS, we're not trading Griffen, we're not trading Wallis.
Wallis wears the #3, has history with the bulldogs and before his injury was one of our best players. It's no coincidence that our dip late in the year coincided with his injury.

Never said we are, or suggested we should trade Wallis. Just used a random name that has been thrown in, along with Hrovat. Was just pointing out a trade hypothetical should one of their names be thrown in the ring. Just can't see a fair deal being worked out, without us being royally screwed over and paying massive overs
I'd be massively pissed off if we gave up any young gun. Pick 5 and a game of wait and see is what it will be

 

[TBOW]

Cool. Who's he?

Gold Coast tall skinny defender who a couple of people on here have mentioned we like. I don't know anything about him personally.
I imagine JMac has a list of guys he came across prior to working at the kennel that he believes fit our recruiting mantra. Shade may just be one of them.

 

[dogwatch]

I've never once brought up a trade hypothetical. Admittedly, I have had a little too much time on my hands these past few days.

Now about Macrae...

Freudian slip. Should I have said "vital hypotheticals"? Or "immortal" ones?

 

[dogwatch]

Cuxii wij2 2fiej fujc 2veruine elae jock stribger ijs al ejk2 23 wnenner 0roeower ifnbwb uwh3

POTY. I'll have what he's having.

 

[Gmod23]

Because we'd get in a lot of crap from the AFL and lose all of our picks completely if you were suggesting we should have tanked

It may cost us a bit, but we won't be that stupid to give up anything completely absurd. Sometimes you have to make big sacrifices to get what you want. Paid of for the Hawks big time.

Would have to give up something to drop back and get two picks in the teens anyway. Drop back pick 5, then trade up a second round pick or two to get a second one in there. I would still rather have more picks in the top 30, than just a couple. I think two picks in the teens, and two picks in the 20's wouldn't be to far a part in the type of player we can get from them. The only difference is, one we keep pick 5 and draft a player likely to be better than any two players in the teens.

I am suggesting that maybe a team recently traded a lot of players out of their team at the same time with a view of perhaps getting a high draft pick this year.... not just the picks they got for said player but also the resulting lower performance this year.

 

[immortalmike]

Freudian slip. Should I have said "vital hypotheticals"? Or "immortal" ones?

What did I do?

 

[Next Waiting]

POTY. I'll have what he's having.

What he's having is about a grand a hit.....

 

[josh the gent]

Macrae is an awful kick, up and under kicking. He needs to improve massively.
Forget endurance and strength compared to Dangerfield.
Danger turns over the ball occasionally because of the speed he is breaking the lines.
It is folly to compare Macrae to Danger.
I would think he is more comparable to Thompson. A ball winner and distributor, that isn't a knock as Thompson has had a great career.

Try comparing Macrae to Dangerfield as a 20 year old. Macrae has him covered in almost every facet of his game.

 

[Mutt]

I really don't see why we'd be keen to burn cash and picks on greenwood. And I don't know why he'd come. And with Reid (likely) off the table, our picks seem reasonably safe.

If the club has identified Wright as a must-have player, then we should do it. If they are only looking for a way to appease the fans and media, I say hold firm and take pick 5 or 6 to the draft.

If one was to think in a really Machiavellian manner, could we be trying to get pick 2 or 3 to satisfy Essendon for Carlisle?

 

[TempleKelvington]

I can't see us being able to move up in the draft. Might be better off moving our first pick back in the draft and get 2 later first rounders to get McKenzie and KPD that will be available mid first round.

Not bad thinking.....if we could manufacture something that could net us McKenzie and say Kyle Langord with 2 later first round picks I would not be unhappy. Just depends of course. I think if Melbourne get Pick 3 then I reckon we should seriously consider that tactic. Because I know that Lever and Durdin are rated, I'm not sure it's a better result than say 2 players like McKenzie and Langford instead......Of course Langford could be replaced with any number of first rounder rated mids. Both Mckenzie and Langford are tipped to be gone before our current second round selections.

Lever looks likely to go to GWS anyway, so that leaves Durdin....I'm not sold at all on him.

We could still have our 2 second rounders, with those we might sneak a Menadue and Cockortwo.

Risky play and of course open to much derision if it backfires lol. Even worse if Wright then slipped past 5 anyway lol.

 

[TBOW]

I've been thinking about the Reid situation & I'm not as convinced as some others that we are out of the race.
These rumblings have been going on all year, you don't suddenly go 'Oh he has a girlfriend & a house, too bad'.
Club officials don't just get on the radio and say anything, there would be a reason for the line.

I think it is either a case of Sam being keen on the move but unable to convince his lady. (quite likely)

OR us realising that we may not have the chips that Sydney want, but that they do need to offload Sam. So we are 'cooling' on the deal to soften the terms.

It certainly seems like Sydney whipped up the Buddy deal expecting some collateral but not wanting to miss the marketing gold mine. If that is the case the onus is on them to move players and we are right to play it cool.

 

[Gghippo]

I don't know if this is classified as draft tampering... But if Melbourne don't get pick #3 for Frawley. And we are confident they are going to pick up Brawshaw with #2. I reckon we should do a deal with the Pies and Blues.

Assuming Pies get something like picks #4 and #24 for Beams.

We agree not to bid on Moore if they don't select Wright or McCartin with #4. We get pick #24 for Jones and Tutt. On the proviso Carlton don't bid on Moore, Collingwood doesn't select Carlton's preference at #6 and Carlton give pick #43 to Collingwood.

Effectively we and Carlton move up a spot in the draft so Pies can get Moore as a second round pick.

 

[maddog37]

Could just be a way to keep the media off the scent too.

 

[Wizard17]

Yes that is draft tampering.

I don't know if this is classified as draft tampering... But if Melbourne don't get pick #3 for Frawley. And we are confident they are going to pick up Brawshaw with #2. I reckon we should do a deal with the Pies and Blues.

Assuming Pies get something like picks #4 and #24 for Beams.

We agree not to bid on Moore if they don't select Wright or McCartin with #4. We get pick #24 for Jones and Tutt. On the proviso Carlton don't bid on Moore, Collingwood doesn't select Carlton's preference at #6 and Carlton give pick #43 to Collingwood.

Effectively we and Carlton move up a spot in the draft so Pies can get Moore as a second round pick.

 

[Some Idiot]

What he's having is about a grand a hit.....

Must've been some kind of night

 

[TempleKelvington]

Ok here is a possible play.

Pick 5 or 6 to Port for picks 16 and 35. Port trade pick 5 or 6 to Essendon for Ryder and in exchange for Essendon's pick 19. Port pass on that pick to us. We end up with picks 16,19 and 35 for pick 5.......We should get Mckenzie and another Mid....Langford maybe if he slips a little in the first round.

We give the Blues Jones and 35 for their pick 27.

So we have 16,19,25,26,27,42 (not allowing for movement in draft order due to FA). 42 is there to grab the ZCord.

We then go to the draft and get Langford, McKenzie, Menadue, Cockortwo, Keitel, Cordy.

Langford is Bontesk 190cm rangy mid who can play anywhere, reportedly is lacking the contested elements that the Bont has...but they said the same things about the Bont at one stage.

McKenzie is a big bodied genuine FF and for mine is the not far off Wright or McCartin.

Menadue and Cockatoo are explosive mids, Keitel looks the best credentialed KP defender/forward available in the second round.

Risks.....we miss on McCartin or Wright or another highly touted top 10.

Reward....we don't have all our first round eggs in one basket. We address more needs with 2 KP players and Cords as 3 tall and add some x factor speed.

 

[EASTWESTDOGS]

I don't know if this is classified as draft tampering... But if Melbourne don't get pick #3 for Frawley. And we are confident they are going to pick up Brawshaw with #2. I reckon we should do a deal with the Pies and Blues.

Assuming Pies get something like picks #4 and #24 for Beams.

We agree not to bid on Moore if they don't select Wright or McCartin with #4. We get pick #24 for Jones and Tutt. On the proviso Carlton don't bid on Moore, Collingwood doesn't select Carlton's preference at #6 and Carlton give pick #43 to Collingwood.

Effectively we and Carlton move up a spot in the draft so Pies can get Moore as a second round pick.

That's similar to what the Dees did with Viney. I think Gws and the Suns they came up with a trade plan that they didn't nominate VINEY and let him slip to the Dees 2nd pick but i can't remember what that deal was at the time.
But the above suggestion could work as long as we now what the top picks are going to be so a player we want will be there at pick at pick 5 or 6 what ever that ends up being.

 

[tenderwarrior]

How does Collingwood get Carlton's Pick 43? They can't just hand it over.

I think stuff like this happens all the time, not sure if the AFL cares too much about it to be honest, it just seems like good strategy to me.

 

[tenderwarrior]

How does Collingwood get Carlton's Pick 43? They can't just hand it over.

I think stuff like this happens all the time, not sure if the AFL cares too much about it to be honest, it just seems like good strategy to me.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

How does Collingwood get Carlton's Pick 43? They can't just hand it over.

I think stuff like this happens all the time, not sure if the AFL cares too much about it to be honest, it just seems like good strategy to me.

Pick 43 and a swap of late picks, a player that was going to be delisted anyway, swap of picks, they could get a third team in to make it a three-way trade so it all gets fudged up, clubs are expert at this sort of stuff. Just look at the complicated mess at how we were allowed to take Jade Rawlings with pick 1 in the PSD.

 

[tenderwarrior]

Pick 43 and a swap of late picks, a player that was going to be delisted anyway, swap of picks, they could get a third team in to make it a three-way trade so it all gets fudged up, clubs are expert at this sort of stuff. Just look at the complicated mess at how we were allowed to take Jade Rawlings with pick 1 in the PSD.

My question was more directed at the scenerio posted, that just had Collingwood recieve a pick out of thin air

 

[AjsGuns]

Wow alot of talk about us upgrading our pick on the draft board, no way we give up Hrovrat and #6 for #3 that's just ridiculous. Is it confirmed Melb are getting pick #3 for Frawley? last i heard Hawks were offering him 450k but haven't kept up over the last three or four days, If that's the case that would be band 2 not 1.

 

[Fossie 32]

What's the deal with bidding for Moore all that would do is piss off the pies and he doesn't want to play got us