List Mgmt. Trade & F/A - 2018/2019 - Part 3

[sr36]

Didn't Beams cost us more?

So we did have the currency - but I suspect you mean for both.

No. Not in draft picks and probably not in salary cap either.

 

[loki04]

The deal was solid , the ASADA stuff couldn't be known for what he showed the deal was good. what would of you done better.

Paid less.

 

[loki04]

You need to look up what the Cost of something is

I believe you do and when you realise you aren't dealing with a monetary currency system (trades in AFL is akin to Bartering) you will realise where you are going wrong.

 

[Port Magpie]

It did cost a 2nd rounder for Murray and a 3rd.

Or are you suggesting we have a 2nd round pick still? Where did it go to magic fairy land?

Um I think he explained it well, we found a hidden gem that didn’t work because of reasons well beyond the clubs control. No problem with the recruiting from me and in the end only cost us 13 places in the second/third round.

 

[JJ14AU]

Didn't Beams cost us more?

So we did have the currency - but I suspect you mean for both.

Both would be nice but meant May on his own. Don’t know if GC would have budged and taken 18 and a future 1st for May when Dees had 6 on offer.

Would have liked us to appear to try harder and possibly bundle 18 and 2019 1st for possibly pick 10 this year and see if that worked?

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I wonder if the AFL has a “commissioner’s exempt list” in much the same way as the NFL does. Murray would be a prime candidate as someone who can’t play but can’t be delisted and shouldn’t be drawing a salary or taking up a place on a senior list.

 

[loki04]

Um I think he explained it well, we found a hidden gem that didn’t work because of reasons well beyond the clubs control. No problem with the recruiting from me and in the end only cost us 13 places in the second/third round.

Hidden gem? He played 2 or 3 decent games then was shut out of the game at AFL level there after, he may have developed further to adapt he may not of. We wont know.

The deal was overs for a rookie listed non afl experienced NEAFL player who was heavily linked to be borderline on delist and given a last minute rookie offer after our interest was known.

These players are usually gone for much much less, like Roughead @ 72!

 

[Port Magpie]

Get excited pies, Beams is back!!! Yes it was for two first rounders (plus compensation picks back) but given our current form those picks are almost second rounders. We unexpectedly made a GF and have now made our team better - signed up our in house talent, a good run with injuries and we should give things a huge shake next year

 

[sr36]

Just had a quick look at the ages of the six potential retirements I talked about.

I think Greenwood and Varcoe may stay around beyond 2019 and maybe Reid if his body isn't completely shot (still 29 when the 2019 season starts).

But I think Wells, Dunn and Goldsack will retire next season.

I'm pretty confident that Dunn and Goldsack won't retire. They appear to love it, they'll only go when pushed. Hopefully Dunn's footy is good enough next year to not be pushed. Unless we have a run of injuries, I think Goldsack will struggle to get a game next year and will probably be pushed.

Wells is a different kettle of fish. I'm hopeful of him doing the work, getting his mojo back and being a gun next year, at which point we'd have to give him another year.

 

[unplugged]

If we're not already in Tomlinson's ear about replacing Goldsack in 2020 we're doing it wrong.

Also, I've always had the firm belief that we should look to get Josh Kelly to replace Pendlebury in the future. Now we've got Beams, I'm not sure it's necessary.

I wonder if Beams or anyone else is being back ended to take over from Wells' contract?

So much intrigue as to where our TPP is at IMO. If we're gonna bring in elite replacements it'll likely need to be via FA.

 

[NT.Thunder]

No. Not in draft picks and probably not in salary cap either.

The next few years will determine the cost of this years trade period I guess

 

[sr36]

Hidden gem? He played 2 or 3 decent games then was shut out of the game at AFL level there after, he may have developed further to adapt he may not of. We wont know.

The deal was overs for a rookie listed non afl experienced NEAFL player who was heavily linked to be borderline on delist and given a last minute rookie offer after our interest was known.

These players are usually gone for much much less, like Roughead @ 72!

Agree with the bolded part, but it sounds like a pretty typical pick in the 30s to me, which is what we gave up. Therefore to have also gotten a pick in the 50s sounds like a decent deal to me - sans cocaine.

 

[TradeDraft]

I guess getting the 2 Tall Irish Kids made at easier for us to Trade the Future 1st Rounder next year

 

[unplugged]

By the way, how terrible is that time of year? Footy has finished, the trade period is over, and now we wait for the draft. To make matters worse, the draft is usually exciting but this time our draftees are already half picked. Boring

Might have to find a new hobby.

 

[Port Magpie]

Hidden gem? He played 2 or 3 decent games then was shut out of the game at AFL level there after, he may have developed further to adapt he may not of. We wont know.

The deal was overs for a rookie listed non afl experienced NEAFL player who was heavily linked to be borderline on delist and given a last minute rookie offer after our interest was known.

These players are usually gone for much much less, like Roughead @ 72!

Yep I understand that, perhaps we’ll never know what his capacity was, but what I’m saying is for a rookie/draftee that was able to come straight into the 22 the price was not too high.

 

[Copeland]

Just had a quick look at the ages of the six potential retirements I talked about.

I think Greenwood and Varcoe may stay around beyond 2019 and maybe Reid if his body isn't completely shot (still 29 when the 2019 season starts).

But I think Wells, Dunn and Goldsack will retire next season.

Year by year propositions I'd say, like Ried.

 

[loki04]

Agree with the bolded part, but it sounds like a pretty typical pick in the 30s to me, which is what we gave up. Therefore to have also gotten a pick in the 50s sounds like a decent deal to me - sans cocaine.

So why wasn't Roughead a proven premiership KPP player traded for a pick in the 30s? A player with much higher credentials.

Typically they go for a song.

 

[Port Magpie]

So why wasn't Roughead a proven premiership KPP player traded for a pick in the 30s? A player with much higher credentials.

Typically they go for a song.

Yeah but Roughead is a fringe player that will be cover at best - not best 22

 

[Saintly Viewed]

The next few years will determine the cost of this years trade period I guess

As it usually is.

Every year we have an outcome in trade and drafting.

Years later it can be reviewed as a great positive, a bomb or somewhere in between.

 

[Hardas]

Job list.

Sign De Goey. Tick
Blood youth while the team has injuries. Tick
Make finals. Tick.
Go deep in finals. Tick.
Sign Moore. Tick.
Sign Langdon. Tick.
Get Beams. Tick
Get a backup kpp/ruckman. Tick
Trade pick to manage academy points. Tick.

Next?
Sign Mihocek.
Get a Hine special with our only live pick (currently 175 by my calcualtions!!!)
Miraculously keep Murray after his B sample comes out negative (or flawed).
Start training.
Win 2019 premiership.

Only 2019?

 

[sr36]

So why wasn't Roughead a proven premiership KPP player traded for a pick in the 30s? A player with much higher credentials.

Typically they go for a song.

They do usually go for a song, but similarly to your - we're not dealing with money explanation of trade cost, not all Category B rookies are the same. If we had proof that Sydney would have given him away for next to nothing, I'd agree that we stuffed the negotiation and should have gotten him cheaper, but I still wouldn't be convinced that we stuffed the valuation of him or paid more than he was worth, because he looked to me like he was worth a pick in the 30s by himself, let alone with a pick coming back to us.

 

[jackcass]

Just had a quick look at the ages of the six potential retirements I talked about.

I think Greenwood and Varcoe may stay around beyond 2019 and maybe Reid if his body isn't completely shot (still 29 when the 2019 season starts).

But I think Wells, Dunn and Goldsack will retire next season.

All 6 would be out of contract this time next year so the choice may not be theirs.

 

[NT.Thunder]

As it usually is.

Every year we have an outcome in trade and drafting.

Years later it can be reviewed as a great positive, a bomb or somewhere in between.

I'd argue this is different given the original focus surrounded Lynch and May and we ended with a completely different approach being Beams.

 

[jackcass]

Only 2019?

1 week at a time....

 

[sr36]

If we're not already in Tomlinson's ear about replacing Goldsack in 2020 we're doing it wrong.

Also, I've always had the firm belief that we should look to get Josh Kelly to replace Pendlebury in the future. Now we've got Beams, I'm not sure it's necessary.

I wonder if Beams or anyone else is being back ended to take over from Wells' contract?

So much intrigue as to where our TPP is at IMO. If we're gonna bring in elite replacements it'll likely need to be via FA.

Are you trying to address the strange fact that we appear to have gone a trade period without endless Tomlinson speculation on this board.