List Mgmt. Trade Hypotheticals (opposition posters post here)

Remove this Banner Ad

gillo94 said:
What new rules? Explain.
Click to expand...
Can only use as many picks as you have list spots vacant - including the clubs with academies and father-son also.

For example, a club with a normal sized list delists or retires 3 players, then can only take 3 draft picks into draft night. So if that club has traded to get 3 first round picks, it's second, third & subsequent round picks are all lost. It's forcing the academy clubs to keep early picks and use their picks around the right pick for kids. What it means is no more picking up a first round talent for several lower picks - clubs like Carlton are going to have to pay around the correct price or GWS etc will have to accept unders for their traded players.

This year and next GWS still has their expanded list size, so it mitigates the issue a little, but with last year's future picks we already have 5 picks in the first & second rounds, so aren't going to take multiple later picks. I can see us accepting second round picks when we want late first round, or doing pick upgrades in an effort to extract maximum value. e.g. GWS would rate Marchbank as attracting mid first round value, at worst late first round. Could see bargaining for a pick trade (Pies' #7 for Blues #5 - 234 points) plus Blues second round pick (#23 - 815 points) to total 1049 points or late first round value, and Blues don't lose too much choice from first round. But a trade of say second and third round picks (#23 & #41 = 1227 points = pick 13) would actually be less attractive because of the risk that the second of those picks (#41 & 412 points) could be lost.

And also - your reference to last year's GWS4 trade doesn't factor in the difference between GWS' position last year and this, and the difference in quality between last year's group and this year's.
 
Giant Strides said:
Can only use as many picks as you have list spots vacant - including the clubs with academies and father-son also.

For example, a club with a normal sized list delists or retires 3 players, then can only take 3 draft picks into draft night. So if that club has traded to get 3 first round picks, it's second, third & subsequent round picks are all lost. It's forcing the academy clubs to keep early picks and use their picks around the right pick for kids. What it means is no more picking up a first round talent for several lower picks - clubs like Carlton are going to have to pay around the correct price or GWS etc will have to accept unders for their traded players.

This year and next GWS still has their expanded list size, so it mitigates the issue a little, but with last year's future picks we already have 5 picks in the first & second rounds, so aren't going to take multiple later picks. I can see us accepting second round picks when we want late first round, or doing pick upgrades in an effort to extract maximum value. e.g. GWS would rate Marchbank as attracting mid first round value, at worst late first round. Could see bargaining for a pick trade (Pies' #7 for Blues #5 - 234 points) plus Blues second round pick (#23 - 815 points) to total 1049 points or late first round value, and Blues don't lose too much choice from first round. But a trade of say second and third round picks (#23 & #41 = 1227 points = pick 13) would actually be less attractive because of the risk that the second of those picks (#41 & 412 points) could be lost.

And also - your reference to last year's GWS4 trade doesn't factor in the difference between GWS' position last year and this, and the difference in quality between last year's group and this year's.
Click to expand...

How will it affect Caleb Marchbank scenario then?

Pick 5 is overs and new rules won't allow Blues handing over 4/5 small picks
 

Log in to remove this ad.

gillo94 said:
How will it affect Caleb Marchbank scenario then?

Pick 5 is overs and new rules won't allow Blues handing over 4/5 small picks
Click to expand...
If a 1st rounder is off the table i cant see how you get him.
You dont have any players we would want.
And we cant take multiple small picks.

Even in a mega trade a 1st rounder has to be involved if we are talking Marchbank.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
 
gillo94 said:
What new rules? Explain

SOS is set on Marchbank
Click to expand...

It's the VIC clubs and the AFL saying that we aren't allowed more than one or two academy players at most each year. They set up the rules to say that you might have to use more than one pick to add up the points needed to match a bid. Then they hamstring you by saying you can't have too many picks.

If we (when we get to normal list size) delist our three minimum, we can only have three picks in the draft. If our first academy player costs two or three picks to add up to the points needed, then we get no more picks in the draft.

I assume we'd get the last two picks at the end because otherwise we'd be two players short on our list.

Stupid rule.
 
gillo94 said:
How will it affect Caleb Marchbank scenario then? Pick 5 is overs and new rules won't allow Blues handing over 4/5 small picks
Click to expand...
Options IMO:
  • Second rounder only. This year's is #23. That would be unders from GWS perspective, but little point adding a third or fourth rounder.
  • Next year's second rounder. This is only delaying the impact and would still be unders, but GWS would inevitably want extra points next year too.
  • Small pick upgrade plus second rounder. I agree that Carlton is not going to pay pick 5 alone for him. But as per the example in my previous post, could be a pick swap of CFC pick & GWS' Pies pick plus the second rounder. This is closest IMO to value (late first round) but only gives GWS the one extra pick. Doesn't hurt CFC too much in an even draft, & might give GWS an option to get someone like Marshall.
  • Large pick upgrade. Based on current finishing order, swap CFC #5 pick for Geelong's #16 pick = 811 points = pick 24. Unders from GWS perspective but CFC suffer a large downgrade of their first round pick. Can't see CFC taking that route - would prefer to just give up #23 I'd think.
  • Multiple player trade. Unlike last year's GWS4, of whom 3 (Sumner, Lamb & Phillips) were lowish value, most of those this year that SOS might target (Marchbank, Steele, Tommo) are up in the mid-late first round or minimum early second round value. So bundling 2 or 3 players together would cost true value of pick #5 rather than a second round pick. That's where your board doesn't get the difference in value between last year & this year. From GWS perspective, if players want to leave then bundling them together might be better value than selling separately - but only if true value is received. Otherwise, an option is to trade separately for second round picks and look to swap in a deal similar to the Bulldogs-Carlton trade last year.
The new rules will make the trading period more difficult than last year as the academy clubs won't do the easy deals for low picks. In the end the Victorian clubs pushed to get rules like this instituted - well, now have to accept the impact on their trading.
 
Giant Strides said:
Options IMO:
  • Second rounder only. This year's is #23. That would be unders from GWS perspective, but little point adding a third or fourth rounder.
  • Next year's second rounder. This is only delaying the impact and would still be unders, but GWS would inevitably want extra points next year too.
  • Small pick upgrade plus second rounder. I agree that Carlton is not going to pay pick 5 alone for him. But as per the example in my previous post, could be a pick swap of CFC pick & GWS' Pies pick plus the second rounder. This is closest IMO to value (late first round) but only gives GWS the one extra pick. Doesn't hurt CFC too much in an even draft, & might give GWS an option to get someone like Marshall.
  • Large pick upgrade. Based on current finishing order, swap CFC #5 pick for Geelong's #16 pick = 811 points = pick 24. Unders from GWS perspective but CFC suffer a large downgrade of their first round pick. Can't see CFC taking that route - would prefer to just give up #23 I'd think.
  • Multiple player trade. Unlike last year's GWS4, of whom 3 (Sumner, Lamb & Phillips) were lowish value, most of those this year that SOS might target (Marchbank, Steele, Tommo) are up in the mid-late first round or minimum early second round value. So bundling 2 or 3 players together would cost true value of pick #5 rather than a second round pick. That's where your board doesn't get the difference in value between last year & this year. From GWS perspective, if players want to leave then bundling them together might be better value than selling separately - but only if true value is received. Otherwise, an option is to trade separately for second round picks and look to swap in a deal similar to the Bulldogs-Carlton trade last year.
The new rules will make the trading period more difficult than last year as the academy clubs won't do the easy deals for low picks. In the end the Victorian clubs pushed to get rules like this instituted - well, now have to accept the impact on their trading.
Click to expand...

What's your trade scenario that involves

1 Caleb Marchbank & Adam Tomlinson
2 Marchbank Tomlimson & O'Meara at Carlton

Giant General already mentioned
Pick 5 and second Rd pick
For
Marchbank Tomlinson and third Rd coming back to Blues but we already have 2 third Rd picks this year
 
Last edited:
gillo94 said:
How will it affect Caleb Marchbank scenario then?

Pick 5 is overs and new rules won't allow Blues handing over 4/5 small picks
Click to expand...

I just realised too, that you can't hand over 4/5 small picks - because you don't have 4/5 small picks to hand over unless you are getting rid of 4/5 players.

You guys are limited in trading picks to anyone (let alone academy clubs) or getting picks traded in as well. You want to trade player X to, say North, it's going to be 1 player 1 pick, because there's no point getting two or three picks in if you can't use them and it's no point trading out 2 or 3 picks if it's going to leave you short, or the team you're trading to can use them anyway.
 
gillo94 said:
What's your trade scenario that involves

1 Caleb Marchbank & Adam Tomlinson
2 Marchbank Tomlimson & O'Meara at Carlton

Giant General already mentioned
Pick 5 and second Rd pick
For
Marchbank Tomlinson and third Rd coming back to Blues but we already have 2 third Rd picks this year
Click to expand...

There is no trade scenario that involves Tomlinson;):p
 
gillo94 said:
What's your trade scenario that involves:
1 Caleb Marchbank & Adam Tomlinson
Click to expand...
OK. Caleb is worth mid to late first round to GWS. Tommo (not convinced yet that he'll leave, but hypothetically if he does) he's late first round or early second round (despite the CFC board wanting to devalue him he's a 5-year, 65-game 23 year old player currently in the best 22 of a top 4 team). If you valued them conservatively at #17 (1025 pts) and #21 (878 pts) - & personally I rate them higher than that - it adds up to more than the value of pick #5. CFC needs to see the big picture - that would get 2 players I'd expect to be in the top 22, both former first round picks, for the price of one. I know you don't want to give up a first round pick in 2016, but you can't expect to trade in gold whilst paying crap. And you get two players who would remediate some of the holes created in your list profile from poor drafting in 2011-2014. Given CFC's need to refresh their list, I could see GWS being generous and adding a later pick such as #50 to allow you to get another player in a really even/deep draft year. Your board's fascination with getting Tommo, Marchbank, Stewart & someone else for pick #23 is ridiculous.

gillo94 said:
What's your trade scenario that involves:
2 Marchbank Tomlinson & O'Meara at Carlton
Click to expand...
Honestly, I can't see that happening unless you use future picks, and even then difficult to do. GCS want two first round picks for O'Meara. Everitt won't satisfy them in place of one. Best scenario might involve a pick for Zach Touhy if you trade him - first round 2016 or 2017 plus the Touhy pick plus Everitt might suffice. Then the other first round pick for Caelb & Tommo - GWS would undoubtedly accept next year's pick even if you rise up the order (but probably wouldn't return pick 50 this year, maybe pick #68 which has low points value).

I know that's not what CFC posters want to hear - & it's just my opinion, so the respective list management teams might have other creative thoughts - but it's going to be harder than last year.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Ichabod Noodle said:
I just realised too, that you can't hand over 4/5 small picks - because you don't have 4/5 small picks to hand over unless you are getting rid of 4/5 players.

You guys are limited in trading picks to anyone (let alone academy clubs) or getting picks traded in as well. You want to trade player X to, say North, it's going to be 1 player 1 pick, because there's no point getting two or three picks in if you can't use them and it's no point trading out 2 or 3 picks if it's going to leave you short, or the team you're trading to can use them anyway.
Click to expand...
No, the picks only get culled come draft day. You still have as many imaginary picks as you want up until then, so can trade your fifth round pick despite only making three list changes.

Bear in mind that there are list lodgements after the trade period, so you don't know how many spots each team has until after them.
 
Giant Strides said:
I know that's not what CFC posters want to hear - & it's just my opinion, so the respective list management teams might have other creative thoughts - but it's going to be harder than last year.
Click to expand...
Yeah some seriously deluded people on our board who think last year's trade sets some sort of precedent. No doubt SOS and your list management team are on good terms and will be able to work something out if the mooted player(s) want to come to us. It's rumoured the trade of an experienced player may help facillitate a deal, whether to you or elsewhere I'm not sure. I reckon a downgrade from pick 5 to 7 will be involved for us too.

Also, what are your thoughts on Stewart? Thought he looked really good at times last year. Any idea about his future?
 
RudyBlue said:
Yeah some seriously deluded people on our board who think last year's trade sets some sort of precedent. No doubt SOS and your list management team are on good terms and will be able to work something out if the mooted player(s) want to come to us. It's rumoured the trade of an experienced player may help facillitate a deal, whether to you or elsewhere I'm not sure. I reckon a downgrade from pick 5 to 7 will be involved for us too.

Also, what are your thoughts on Stewart? Thought he looked really good at times last year. Any idea about his future?
Click to expand...
Jimmy's an interesting one. The last two years he's trained really well over the off season and really looked good coming into the year through the pre-season, but just hasn't been able to nail a spot. Last year Sunshine showed more in the final pre-season game and this year Lobb and then Patton looked better on the paddock by the early rounds.

From my personal perspective, a bit similar to Jake Barrett in that I'd like to keep him as inexpensive backup. If we lose McCarthy, and guys we've bought as forwards - Tommo, Finlayson & Himmelberg - are playing down back, we don't have too many options should one of Jezza, Patton or Lobb go down. Anyone from this year's draft (e.g. Sproule or less likely Marshall) are going to take a couple of years to become an option. But you can't expect Stewart to like that as an option, so likely he looks elsewhere if another club gives him promise of first grade action. If he gets a solid run in a starting team, he might prove to be solid for a few years (and good luck to him if so). I think he needs to choose the club carefully, though, otherwise he'll simply end up in the same position as here.

Haven't heard any credible rumours of moving, just the usual BF, broad rumours - but I'm not ITK so my thoughts are my own speculation.
 
Giant Strides said:
Jimmy's an interesting one. The last two years he's trained really well over the off season and really looked good coming into the year through the pre-season, but just hasn't been able to nail a spot. Last year Sunshine showed more in the final pre-season game and this year Lobb and then Patton looked better on the paddock by the early rounds.

From my personal perspective, a bit similar to Jake Barrett in that I'd like to keep him as inexpensive backup. If we lose McCarthy, and guys we've bought as forwards - Tommo, Finlayson & Himmelberg - are playing down back, we don't have too many options should one of Jezza, Patton or Lobb go down. Anyone from this year's draft (e.g. Sproule or less likely Marshall) are going to take a couple of years to become an option. But you can't expect Stewart to like that as an option, so likely he looks elsewhere if another club gives him promise of first grade action. If he gets a solid run in a starting team, he might prove to be solid for a few years (and good luck to him if so). I think he needs to choose the club carefully, though, otherwise he'll simply end up in the same position as here.

Haven't heard any credible rumours of moving, just the usual BF, broad rumours - but I'm not ITK so my thoughts are my own speculation.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Looks like he has some tools and he's at that age where it can suddenly click for KPFs.

I feel as though he could be a cheapish Membrey-like acquistion, if all goes well. But for every Membrey, there's 5-10 that don't make it (Liam Jones ).

Geez it'd be great if Jaksch could show something.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
 
Ellie Aquitaine said:
Realistically a WHE deal will include salary cover. He'd be on good wages for reserves.
Click to expand...

This is correct but I think the competition for him mitigates that. Carlton and Collingwood are confirmed to be there and Richmond and Nth Melb also likely to get involved.

For mine slow teams like North MElb and Carlton should make him a priority and don't be surprised if Hawthorn has a sniff as Dunstall rates him big time.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. Trade Hypotheticals (opposition posters post here)

Similar threads

Giant Strides
  • Poll
BF Awards 2024 GWS Board Poster of the Year - congrats Orange Crush!!
Replies
14
Views
709
BarryAglett
BarryAglett
TY24
Welcome September Bandwagoners Introduce Yourselves Here
Replies
3
Views
379
GWS Goose
GWS Goose
Giant Strides
Women's Footy AFLW Trade & Draft 2024
2 3
Replies
65
Views
2K
captainMyCaptain
captainMyCaptain
Giant Strides
  • Sticky
List Mgmt. 2025 GWS Giants List Management - Academy, Free Agent, Trade & Draft
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
Giant Pete
Giant Pete
Giant Strides
#20 Jake Stringer (traded in, 2024)
Replies
2
Views
446
Giant Strides
Giant Strides
Giant Strides
List Mgmt. AFLW Trade & Draft 2023
2
Replies
47
Views
2K
captainMyCaptain
captainMyCaptain
Giant Strides
List Mgmt. 2024 GWS Giants List Management - Academy, Free Agent, Trade & Draft
103 104 105 106 107
Replies
3K
Views
117K
GWS Goose
GWS Goose

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top