-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
List Mgmt. Trade & Free Agency - Fred 11
- Thread starter _RT_
- Start date
- Tagged users None
panatha1908
All Australian
- Jul 4, 2021
- 787
- 1,892
- AFL Club
- Richmond
For all the freebie father sons and academy players the dogs have had walk in, bailey Smith walking to the PSD would balance it out a bit. That 2021 midfield of their really got cleared out. I reckon naughten should be traded out for a good pick to give them a better balance forward too
Dogs were the 2nd highest scoring team in 2024. Part of the reason for that is Naughton's ability to play both close to and further away from goal, which you would think would help to balance their forward line. There is a reason he is contracted on big money until age 32. It is because he is a gun player.
In 2019, Richmond's 20th best player was probably Noah Balta.
Our 32nd, 42nd, 43rd and 45th were probably Oleg Markov, Callum Moore, Derek Eggmolese-Smith and Ryan Garthwaite.
Would you prefer only Balta on your list, or all of Oleg Markov, Callum Moore, Derek Eggmolese-Smith and Ryan Garthwaite instead?
Quality over quantity. The 2024 draft pool is supposedly high quality, but it drops off a big cliff after pick 30.
So there’s been a lot of chat in here suggesting we must be moving up for two seeing we seemingly didn’t want to take three in the trade for Baker
Devils advocate for the FOS and Lalor duo acolytes but perhaps that means we actually rate the depth, prefer more picks and won’t trade up at all
Devils advocate for the FOS and Lalor duo acolytes but perhaps that means we actually rate the depth, prefer more picks and won’t trade up at all
tigs2010
Pick 1...
I guess that's only a risk if you think North don't do the trade until draft night, which increases the risk that they get "stuck" with 2. I'd think they'd want to get a slide done before Wednesday in which case we'd know who has the pick.
It then comes down to how good our intel is. If it remains with north, do they take a mid or do they just reach for Tauru (who I think is gone by 5 anyway). If it's Carlton, are they getting 2 because they want FOS exclusively (if so take him at 1). If it's Melbourne are they doing it to get Lalor (if so take Lalor at 1). All comes down to who clubs are targeting and our view of the draft.
If toce wants Lalor/FOS combo and nothing else because he sees them above the rest- agree with you, we pay overs (using 6) to get 2.
If we want to partner Lalor with FOS/Jagga then pick 3 is fine.
If we want to partner FOS with Lalor/Smillie/Langford, then 3 is fine.
If we think there's a group of 6-7 mids all pretty even, then target 3 and look to get 3 of FOS,Jagga,Lalor,Langford,Smillie.
If we don't trade up at all, then we think there's a blanket over top 20 and we want as many picks in that range as possible.
Either way the deal we do (or don't do) will reflect the clubs view of the draft.
All the scenarios currently on the board are what we as fans want based on videos, not what the club wants.
- Jan 7, 2010
- 12,875
- 37,824
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Adelaide Strikers
Richmond wants high draft picks to re-build; it does not want a lot of junk picks for Academy players or Father/Sons.
- Richmond do not have any academy players to select.
- Richmond do not have any father/son players to select.
- Richmond does need high draft picks.
North would laugh at that deal. They'd want 6&10 for pick 2 alone.
KrispyKreme
All Australian
- Apr 21, 2024
- 888
- 1,586
- AFL Club
- Richmond
They’d have to cough up pick 24 at least for 6&10 no other club will be silly enough to do just 6 & 10 or 8 & 9 etc seems Carlton want FOS to pair with Sam Walsh
& Saints want Sam Lalor
- Oct 27, 2014
- 17,886
- 122,343
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Geelong are threating to walk him through the ND and selecting him with pick 17
I would love GWS to pick him at 16.
- Jan 3, 2012
- 47,219
- 96,856
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Chelsea FC, Victory, All Blecks,
Have we got our picks yet?
tigs2010
Pick 1...
I'd take him at 11 if we had that pick.
He's 23 so perfect age for us, even if he slaps 900k on his head, we can afford it and finally if he's stating a contract for 6-7 years then it's high risk for him because he's potentially stuck at another club if someone pulls the trigger first.
All this talk of PSD for Baker and ND for Smith, I'd love other clubs to stand up and transfer some power back to the club losing the player (don't think either end up in ND/PSD honestly)
We could fly up the ladder if Rioli doesn't get done, we bring back Baker, add Smith and 5x picks in the first 24
We are talking about 1 pick in the 40's above what we would normally consider a fair deal for pick 20. So let's say pick 45 is the extra premium we paid to get pick 20.
This draft has been compared with the very strong and deep 2017 draft.
TLDR: Go to the last bolded statement below.
In 2017 the following players remained available at pick 45: Worpel, Paton, Farrell, Payne, Miers, Miller, Zerk, Dylan Moore, Meek, Xerri, Guelfi, Banfield, Baker, Mihocek, Holman, Amartey, Lachlan Murphy.
So of 78 players taken from pick 45 onwards there are 17 x what we might call useful players. Zero marquee wage level players. And with one of those picks at random you were about a 22% chance to get a useful player. Obviously 45 is the highest value of all those picks so you might have been a 35-40% chance of getting a useful player with that pick.
But from pick 20 you can add in the following who were available: Oscar Allen, Tim Kelly, Noah Balta, Sam Taylor, Tom DeKoning, are marquee contract level players, plus
Tom McCartin, Petty, Nathan Murphy, Coleman-Jones, Lachie Fogarty, Liam Ryan, Brent Daniels, Spargo, Fritsch, Ballard.
15 of 25 of these players are useful and up to 10 of them you would probably say are really good players. So you were about a 40% chance to get a really good player with any pick in that range, but 20 of course is the highest value pick in the range, so you were probably a 60% chance to get a really good player with that pick.
One important thing is probably the 6 best, or 6 of the best 7 remaining available at 20 were picked with picks from 20 onwards but BEFORE the first pick Richmond surrendered in the deal, pick 32.
I don't think there is much doubt that teams would swap 32, 42, 43, 45 in the 2017 draft for pick 20 in the 2017 draft given what is now known. Of course this draft won't be exactly the same, but this would be the principle Richmond are working on. Also, given we are likely to have about 7 selections before the first of the picks we traded out, you just wouldn't want to be drafting that many players all at once if you kept the greater number of picks.
In short, pick 20 in the 2017 draft was worth roughly the value of a random top 10 pick. Picks from 32 onwards were still valuable, but of much lesser value.
Points don’t mean shit if you don’t have a FS or Academy player.
panatha1908
All Australian
- Jul 4, 2021
- 787
- 1,892
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Darcy and JUH key forwards , swapping with English in ruck, 4 quick players at their feet. I'd trade naughton to WC for Barass and a pick and lobb to whoever wants him, and use that cap space on other needs, and let that team have flag tilts for the next 5 years. At the moment too much of their salary cap is on 4 key position forwards
I reckon too many teams play it too safe. Naughton is a good player but they are desperate in their back half and have 4 key forwards on their list
I'd take him at 11 if we had that pick.
He's 23 so perfect age for us, even if he slaps 900k on his head, we can afford it and finally if he's stating a contract for 6-7 years then it's high risk for him because he's potentially stuck at another club if someone pulls the trigger first.
All this talk of PSD for Baker and ND for Smith, I'd love other clubs to stand up and transfer some power back to the club losing the player (don't think either end up in ND/PSD honestly)
We could fly up the ladder if Rioli doesn't get done, we bring back Baker, add Smith and 5x picks in the first 24
We could probably trade 11 to GWS for 16 & 21 and grab Smith and another strong prospect.
North could also easily split their pick 2 and end up with say 7 & 11. And then do the same trick trading 11 with GWS and thus urning their pick 2 into Bailey Smith + pick 7 + pick 21, which to be honest would probably suit them down to the ground.
West Coast another team that could easily do similar. Saints, possibly Demons, Crows.
That is not a risk free strategy for the Cats. It relies wholly on clubs not drafting Smith simply because he wants to be at another club.
Tiger_Of_Old
THE_GUN:"Why don't you use your reg acc"7/9/24
If it went down that way it'll be 10 not 11.
- Jan 7, 2010
- 12,875
- 37,824
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Adelaide Strikers
Richmond would have more suitors trading Cumberland than Footscray trading Lobb!
Tiger_Of_Old
THE_GUN:"Why don't you use your reg acc"7/9/24
KrispyKreme
All Australian
- Apr 21, 2024
- 888
- 1,586
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Told the old man if they don’t pick FOS I’ll go for Collingwood. He almost had a stroke on the spot. ****ing TOCE and Blair going to give me a flipping brain aneurysm the campaigners
tigs2010
Pick 1...
The risk is his player manager makes it difficult to get their players in future. No one good goes to North anyway so makes sense for them to do it.
DontArgue4
17🏆19🏆20🏆
- May 3, 2013
- 18,826
- 60,154
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Houston Rockets, Arsenal, PhiEagles
If a player manager is steering his players away from a certain club to settle an old score, he is not managing in the players' best interests.
For teams who have cap space and can split higher value picks, Smith + a little bit later pick in a deep draft may represent an excellent risk.
As you say, Norf, no brainer, he is just what they need.
Similar threads
