List Mgmt. Trade & Free Agency - Fred 11

What Picks Will Richmond Get For Baker Bolton & Rioli

  • 6, 10, 11, 14

  • 6, 10, 14, 18

  • 6, 11, 14, 18

  • 6, 10, 11, 26 & WCE 2025 R2

  • 6, 10, 18, 26 & WCE 2025 R2

  • Other


Results are only viewable after voting.

Remove this Banner Ad

what is Blair thinking right now I wonder
images
 
Nah mate we want the FoS/Lalor combo with a large fries.
Two best mates are made to be together.
we arent getting that unless we have pick 2
 
Funny, but it's still bad business to make deals that way. Multiple teams need later picks for the points, including some teams that we are already looking to make deals with. Whatever small benefit there is to locking in a trade for a mystery pick is not worth forfeiting the bargaining power that those picks have and locking them out of any other potential deal that could materialize in the following months. It's just dumb, even if it's how the IRL brains of AFL list management often do it.

Look, this is probably not what happened at all, it is just one possible explanation I thought of that might explain the lopsided looking deal.

But to say it is dumb is to say that any example of the following is by definition dumb:

- AFL teams trading future picks in when they are uncertain of the value of those picks(what Richmond would have been doing in my scenario) but trading out something of more certain value(like Richmond pledging 4 picks = to or greater then 1700 points in my scenario.)

So take the Collingwood-Fremantle deal over Schultz, Collingwood wanted a less toublesome small forward than Ginnivan as a priority and were prepared to risk their F1 pick to get him. It blew up in their face when the future pick became more valuable than anticipated. Collingwood KNEW what they were getting, they just didn't know what they were paying for it. But Fremantle, they were the ones really speculating. They released a required contracted player for pick 32 and a future pick that could have realistically ended up as late as about 23rd in the 2024 draft. They gave up a certain position to speculate on an uncertain outcome. And they had a nice win. In truth the deal was always probably tilted in their favour, so it was clearly a great speculation from the outset.

What you are saying here is Collingwood did nothing wrong because they were getting a known outcome. But Fremantle did a dumb thing because they were getting an unknown outcome.

All speculations carry downside and upside risk. Let's say a deal like what I speculated on was made after rd 12 for instance. The Lions were sitting in 13th place on the ladder. There would have been a very real risk they were going to be coughing up a top 10 pick. Unlikely, but realistically in play. Certainly more realistic than finishing 5th on the ladder, then winning the flag from there and the pick plummetting to 23 or wherever it ends up.

So if the deal was made by Richmond at that point to pledge 1700 points in 4 or less picks for the Brisbane Rd 1 2024 pick, was it really dumb by Richmond? Or was it a very decent bet that just happened to get worst case sceanrio'd? I made a living from betting for around 20 years so I understand the nature of speculation. I would take that bet if I were Richmond every day of the week, and lock it in. And I would never have even concerned myself with the eventual result. My job was simply to make as many good bets as I possibly could. That requires entering the market at a point when you think(but can never know for certain) you have good value.

A bad outcome doesn't magically turn a good decision into a bad one. A good outcome doesn't magically turn a bad decision into a good one. Blair Hartley is in the business of making all sorts of decisions that carry upside and downside risk. Trades, contracts, delists etc etc. He has absolutely no way of ensuring none of those decisions have bad outcomes. So all he can do is exercise good judgement, knowing that over time this will more likely than not lead to good outcomes.

It would be intriguing to know whether something like this would ever actually take place or whether there is some other reason Richmond apparently gave up value in this trade. However, I doubt we will ever know for certain.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

i personally don't see a need to trade for 2 or 3 considering the supposed top 6-7 players (we'd have 2 picks) and then it evens out past that for the rest

get our Cotch and Dusty 1st 2 picks and build around them with the other 4-5 picks
we still have next year and the year after, to pick an extra 2 at least A graders before Tassie comes in
 
As I said in draft thread… get pick 3 and then tell north if FOS/Lalor are not there at 3 we’re taking Tauru.

They either hold or miss Tauru. If I can’t have FOS/Lalor, Tauru is a great replacement.

This is assuming all the rumours around this are true
100% love this
I was literally thinking about this too.

I’d be very happy with Tauru at 3 if north takes FOS or Lalor
Kid looks an absolute freak
 
i personally don't see a need to trade for 2 or 3 considering the supposed top 6-7 players (we'd have 2 picks) and then it evens out past that for the rest

get our Cotch and Dusty 1st 2 picks and build around them with the other 4-5 picks
we still have next year and the year after, to pick an extra 2 at least A graders before Tassie comes in

You get the two players with the highest ceiling in the draft if you go 1&2 this is why clubs are scrambling to pick them!
 
As I said in draft thread… get pick 3 and then tell north if FOS/Lalor are not there at 3 we’re taking Tauru.

They either hold or miss Tauru. If I can’t have FOS/Lalor, Tauru is a great replacement.

This is assuming all the rumours around this are true
The Dees might hold 2
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

As I said in draft thread… get pick 3 and then tell north if FOS/Lalor are not there at 3 we’re taking Tauru.

They either hold or miss Tauru. If I can’t have FOS/Lalor, Tauru is a great replacement.

This is assuming all the rumours around this are true
1728808376850.gif
i personally don't see a need to trade for 2 or 3 considering the supposed top 6-7 players (we'd have 2 picks) and then it evens out past that for the rest

get our Cotch and Dusty 1st 2 picks and build around them with the other 4-5 picks
we still have next year and the year after, to pick an extra 2 at least A graders before Tassie comes in
You second paragraph contradicts your first.

There's not a top 6-7. There's a top 2 (not counting Ashcroft and Lombard), then there's a second group. Pick 3 is not worth much more than pick 7 in this draft - unless we can use it the way Calcium suggests.
 
Yep forget Cotchin and Edwards (FOS and Smith), Martin and Rance (Lalor and Tauru) is the way to go if North decides for the nuclear option.
Either way we laughing
But god I want FOS and Lalor
 

Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. Trade & Free Agency - Fred 11

Back
Top