Strategy Trade and List Management thread 3 (...The pining for the departed. Edition)

[Hoges64]

Some good news and bad news. Good news is that as of right now the Koby Stevens trade is worth pick 67 in points value.

The bad news is that we're the ones giving the pick to the Saints. Yep, as of the current ladder the Koby Stevens trade works out to -292 points(pick 67). We give them 61+53 and get 50+72.

So not only did we give StKilda a clearly best 22, 189cm big bodied 25 disposals midfielder with good skills (compared to the other hacks in the Saints midfield), but we were also generous enough to give them a draft pick on top for their troubles. How nice of us.
Now we know why JMac said in the post trade period video on our site that he was very disappointing in that trade. Would this be the first trade in AFL history where a team actually gives up a draft pick ALONG with a player for nothing in return? If he was so disappointed in the trade (as he should be) why the hell not make a stand and just send him to the PSD? Getting nothing for him is better than losing out on draft picks/points for nothing.

At least it looks like we're getting something in return for the Hrovat trade. That works out to us getting pick 54 atm. This is also for a player who is a clear best 22 for North, and tbh both Hrovat and Stevens would be in the top dozen or so players in their respective teams so far this season.

For some perspective here are some other trades done recently;

Collingwood got pick 32 for Paul Seedsman, who hasn't played a single AFL game this year.

Blues got pick 31 (in points) for Tom Bell who's playing VFL for the worst team in the league.

GWS got pick 30 for Curtly Hampton who's playing VFL for the Crows.

WestCoast got pick 31 for a 29yr old Matt Rosa who can barely get a game at GC.

But shouldn't fringe players from the Premiers have good value? Isn't that what we learnt from the Jed Anderson trade? Which got the Hawks pick 15 (with later pick swaps). Who btw also can't get a game for the 3rd worst team in the league (Actually he got recalled to their AFL team this weekend for some reason, but got 9 disposals so it will probably be his last game for the season, and maybe for the club).

I get your point, but Hampton and Rosa have missed seniors due to injury, not playing ressies.

 

[ArNcHiSe]

They need to rebuild the midfield depth. Dale and Webb aren't up to it. 1 injury to a midfielder and this whole team is shot.

 

[footyfan000001]

When's the last time we had a really good decent experienced assistant coach? Wouldn't mind one sitting next to Bevo.

 

[MJ_Dogs]

Anyone slightly concerned at our inability to land any decent opposition players in trade/FA? Pretty much every other VIC club has. I know we have a build your own philosophy which has worked for us. But right now we really need to quickly fix the gaps in our list and waiting for draftees won't cut it. Missing out on Hurley is really hurting us right now. Wouldn't fix all our issues no but with our injuries he would be a hue difference.

 

[Johnny_Dogg4]

Anyone slightly concerned at our inability to land any decent opposition players in trade/FA? Pretty much every other VIC club has. I know we have a build your own philosophy which has worked for us. But right now we really need to quickly fix the gaps in our list and waiting for draftees won't cut it. Missing out on Hurley is really hurting us right now. Wouldn't fix all our issues no but with our injuries he would be a hue difference.

well we are going to find out what JMAC is made of. he will earn his $
the young players generally wont make sudden impact, rather we have to wait 2-4 years for them to impact.

im just not sure if we can land a quality player.
hawks 09-12 did it with a mix of a lot of trades and draft

 

[TBOW]

Crazy - Daniel is as close to Sam Mitchell as you can get.

I would keep him over Stringer.

Yep. I think Daniel could win a Brownlow. But I think Lever could be the next Rance. The kid is a key defender holding his own mid way through his 3rd season. He defends ferociously and is incredibly composed.

I also can't ignore Daniels deficiencies. Our team defence relies on every player covering space and being able to defend in the air and on the deck. I believe teams have already targeted him coming out of defence as he cannot compete in a marking contest. I also question his ability to pressure opponents when most opposition know they can push him over like a toddler. He is a ferret around the packs but will never be strong in the contests- again due to his size.
These are not criticisms they are reality. I think Daniel works incredibly hard to mitigate these factors and counter them with his running and creativity, but they are still things that need to be taken into account when evaluating his game.

As for trading Stringer over Daniel I've always been a sell high kind of guy. Now would be the worst time to trade Jake, I'll back him to get his shit together.

Of course all of these decisions completely ignore the human element which is something I'm always critical of in this thread. I'm not saying we should trade Caleb Daniel I'm just saying that on paper Lever for Daniel is more than fair.

 

[Doggies_13]

Are guys seriously talking about trading Caleb daniel? He's been one of our most consistent players since returning from the twos, plenty of trade before him.

Astonishing some of the calls on here

 

[Super Hans]

Are guys seriously talking about trading Caleb daniel? He's been one of our most consistent players since returning from the twos, plenty of trade before him.

Astonishing some of the calls on here

People want to trade everyone after a loss. I honestly reckon Bont is the only young player I've never seen someone want to trade.

It used to be Macrae. Now it's Daniel and Stringer.

 

[Doggies_13]

People want to trade everyone after a loss. I honestly reckon Bont is the only young player I've never seen someone want to trade.

It used to be Macrae. Now it's Daniel and Stringer.

Yep happens every time.

If we have to trade anyone I'd let hunter go 10x before any of them and I'd be lowering the offer to jj and if he wants to go let him.

We aren't in a bad position we have a lot of young unknown guys, yes we need to improve the bottom half a dozen of our list but you would think we are a basket case with the talk here.

We have a few deficiencies that need addressing.

A small quick forward
A kpd
A second kpf ( doesn't need to be a star just an upgrade on Cloke and redpath)
Better ball users.

Our problem atm is clearly desire though especially defensively

 

[TBOW]

People want to trade everyone after a loss. I honestly reckon Bont is the only young player I've never seen someone want to trade.

It used to be Macrae. Now it's Daniel and Stringer.

Calm down.
Someone claimed that if we wanted Lever Adelaide would ask for Daniel and I said that I would do that trade.
No one is tearing the list apart.

This used to be a forum for hypothetical conversations...

 

[Doggies_13]

Calm down.
Someone claimed that if we wanted Lever Adelaide would ask for Daniel and I said that I would do that trade.
No one is tearing the list apart.

This used to be a forum for hypothetical conversations...

It's a bad hypothetical trade as Adelaide would not be interested they want a Gibbs type mid not a daniel type. They'd want a macrae not a daniel for lever and they expect something else on top without a doubt.

Lever is worth more to Adelaide than we would have to give to get him

 

[dergert]

When's the last time we had a really good decent experienced assistant coach? Wouldn't mind one sitting next to Bevo.

Chris maple.
Now he's doing some development stuff.

 

[TBOW]

It's a bad hypothetical trade as Adelaide would not be interested they want a Gibbs type mid not a daniel type. They'd want a macrae not a daniel for lever and they expect something else on top without a doubt.

Lever is worth more to Adelaide than we would have to give to get him

I agree with that. But I'm not the one who put Daniel in the equation.
Clubs rarely trade players out who don't want to leave regardless so nominating a trade is pointless.
All about being named as the preferred destination and bundling up draft picks these days.

 

[bobby2]

Calm down.
Someone claimed that if we wanted Lever Adelaide would ask for Daniel and I said that I would do that trade.
No one is tearing the list apart.

This used to be a forum for hypothetical conversations...

Maybe they would ask for Daniel, but here's how that hypothetical conversation would actually go down.
1. We tell lever's manager we want him (probably already happened).
2. Lever would need to decide he wants to play for us.
3. Adelaide say we want bont/macrae/Daniel, etc.
4. We say no, they're contracted. We'll give you draft picks.
5. After haggling for a while, we'll end up giving them draft picks.

Whether Caleb or lever would be more beneficial to the club is irrelevant. If lever says he wants to come here, we can have both. If he doesn't, we won't have him.

The only way they would get players in return is if the player says he wants to go to Adelaide (much like how we'll only get lever if he nominates us). Even then, we may turn down the player's request to leave if he's contracted.

I think you're also being harsh on Caleb defensively. While opposition teams try to exploit him in the air, this tactic doesn't actually work that well. They'll kick 40m to a contest to target him, instead of 55 to a contest or 25 to an open player. He usually manages to halve the contest in the air. Even if they win the contest, they haven't gained much more than they would from hitting the much more assured short option. If the ball hits the ground, they have potentially turned the ball over in a dangerous position and in the near vicinity of our best ball user.

 

[cleveland]

I was told by someone at the club that Bev was very happy to see the back of Stevens. No idea why.

But in principle I agree 100%.

Has a nasty habit thats why

 

[TBOW]

Maybe they would ask for Daniel, but here's how that hypothetical conversation would actually go down.
1. We tell lever's manager we want him (probably already happened).
2. Lever would need to decide he wants to play for us.
3. Adelaide say we want bont/macrae/Daniel, etc.
4. We say no, they're contracted. We'll give you draft picks.
5. After haggling for a while, we'll end up giving them draft picks.

Whether Caleb or lever would be more beneficial to the club is irrelevant. If lever says he wants to come here, we can have both. If he doesn't, we won't have him.

The only way they would get players in return is if the player says he wants to go to Adelaide (much like how we'll only get lever if he nominates us). Even then, we may turn down the player's request to leave if he's contracted.

I think you're also being harsh on Caleb defensively. While opposition teams try to exploit him in the air, this tactic doesn't actually work that well. They'll kick 40m to a contest to target him, instead of 55 to a contest or 25 to an open player. He usually manages to halve the contest in the air. Even if they win the contest, they haven't gained much more than they would from hitting the much more assured short option. If the ball hits the ground, they have potentially turned the ball over in a dangerous position and in the near vicinity of our best ball user.

Agreed on the first point - as per my post above.

And yes I am admittedly being harsh on Daniel but that is list management. Every player has there flaws and they all need to be taken into account in the context of the team.
As I said earlier, I think Caleb is a great player but his flaws worry me.

 

[GetDimmaBack]

Has a nasty habit thats why

Err, how nasty, Cleve?

 

[cleveland]

Err, how nasty, Cleve?

Learnt it at the eagles

 

[GetDimmaBack]

Learnt it at the eagles

I see...

 

[cleveland]

Someone rang sen this morning saying that 2 players have had a falling out and its ripping the club apart.

Stringer, JJ?

 

[inyourfacedunk]

Someone rang sen this morning saying that 2 players have had a falling out and its ripping the club apart.

Stringer, JJ?

Someone read a rumour on the internet and called up a radio station to repeat it.

 

[Dogs Rule]

Someone rang sen this morning saying that 2 players have had a falling out and its ripping the club apart.

Stringer, JJ?

Even if it was true, are we dealing with a bunch of teenage girls here or a group of highly paid professional athletes? FFS, just do your job.

 

[Super Hans]

We prob shouldn't believe everything we hear on SEN.

 

[cleveland]

We prob shouldn't believe everything we hear on SEN.

True but i have been hearing it for a few weeks

 

[timtamWB]

SEN will put anyone and everyone on air.

Don't trust anything you hear from a caller at all. And take everything you hear from everyone else on there with a grain of salt.