List Mgmt. 2015 Draft, Trades and Retirements Thread Pt 1

[FreeAgent1]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-06-30/live-bidding-set-to-change-academy-nomination-process

Soo we might not have to "show our hand"...... could be good and get Dunkely for what he is actually worth without VIC clubs pushing up the price, could be bad....as less certainty and they just got nah stuff it.

Personally, if dunkley keeps playing mediocre and other mids keep going above, then his chances of going to us massively increase.

I mean unless he gets a guarantee from richmond or nth etc that he is their 1st rounder I wouldnt risk it.

 

[ScrewInStuds]

Get Menzel from the cats as well then

We could solve the KPD problem by grabbing Patton from the Giants. As a bonus, with that lot on our list we can probably pick up BUPA / Medicare as our new corporate sponsor.

 

[ScrewInStuds]

wow. bedford sure has infected this board's views on jetta to think he is worth freos second pick (36 ?) and someone who has played circa 5 games in four and a half seasons.

Off to WCE for a KPD sounds more like it.

 

[replicant]

wow. bedford sure has infected this board's views on jetta to think he is worth freos second pick (36 ?) and someone who has played circa 5 games in four and a half seasons.

What do you think Jetta would be worth?

Most would say 23-27 so split it at 25. That's 756 points.

Pick 36 is 502 points, so the difference would be 250 points. Which is pick 51 or 52. If we're talking about getting Mills and Dunkly, we only care about the points value. Effectively Morabito is steak knives, worth pick 51 or 52, which is what we would be paying.

The points system changes everything. All of a sudden, the classic Big Footy "bunch of spuds for a gun" type trades are good value for us.
As a hypothetical, imagine the following.
We had a bad season and end up with pick 9.
There is an academy player likely to go at pick 5.
With the discount, that player will cost us 1502 points.
Pick 9 is worth 1469.

But what if we could trade pick 9 for picks 19 and 33? People would think that giving up a top 10 pick for picks 19 and 33 is insane, but if you go by the points value, 19+33 is worth 1511 points. Enough for the academy kid plus a small upgrade on our next pick. It would actually be a win for us.

Right now, we are working on a different playing field than other clubs, because we care about the points value of picks, while other clubs only see the pick number. If Jetta goes, don't think about the pick, think about the points we get back, and how that affects the Miulls/Dunkley situation.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Rookie them both.....

Rookie AJ.

Morabitio 1 year deal with 1 year based on KPI's after that (meaning games played).

It is worth a punt. He played well in the WAFL last year. Does anyone know if he is playing this year?

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Off to WCE for a KPD sounds more like it.

Who though? They are not trading McGovern, Brown or MacKensie.

I'd honestly rather target Scott Lycett in a direct swap.

 

[FreeAgent1]

Still $350k issue for trades I believe

 

[Superstar swan]

This is the best trade i have heard for jetta by a margin!!!

I mentioned in the thread earlier that the club may have spoken to morabito

 

[Superstar swan]

Who though? They are not trading McGovern, Brown or MacKensie.

I'd honestly rather target Scott Lycett in a direct swap.

Lycett signed a deal last year, we would have more luck with sinclair

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Still $350k issue for trades I believe

Less than that isn't it, surely Lycett would take a bit of a paycut if we said to him 'here is the number 1 ruck spot'. Worth a go at the least. We need a first choice ruck more than a KP defender. We can deal with having Alir, Reid, Rampe, Grundy as the defenders. What we can't deal with is having Pyke and for him to last half a season and then having to play DRex.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Lycett signed a deal last year, we would have more luck with sinclair

Not a first ruck though. Lycett is. We don't need another 2nd ruck.

 

[Superstar swan]

Not a first ruck though. Lycett is. We don't need another 2nd ruck.

Wouldnt get lycett. No way west coast lets him go.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Wouldnt get lycett. No way west coast lets him go.

Not sure he will be thrilled playing the WAFL for 3 years then. He isn't replacing Nic Nat, and Sinclair is a better '2nd ruck', so where does he fit?

Not saying we will get him, but what is the harm in asking? We need a ruck more than a KPD.

 

[Superstar swan]

Not sure he will be thrilled playing the WAFL for 3 years then. He isn't replacing Nic Nat, and Sinclair is a better '2nd ruck', so where does he fit?

Not saying we will get him, but what is the harm in asking? We need a ruck more than a KPD.

I think he signed for 4 years so id assume he is over 350k. It all depends how the club rates nankervis or naismith. If they think either will be number 1 soon, they could chase someone like minson for a year or 2 as a stop gap

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I think he signed for 4 years so id assume he is over 350k. It all depends how the club rates nankervis or naismith. If they think either will be number 1 soon, they could chase someone like minson for a year or 2 as a stop gap

How about no to Minson, the last thing we need is to go all Essendon and buy every old bloke on the market.

One that could come cheapish could be Matthew Leuenberger. He is awful as a forward but he is a brilliant first ruck.

 

[melbournehammer]

What do you think Jetta would be worth?

Most would say 23-27 so split it at 25. That's 756 points.

Pick 36 is 502 points, so the difference would be 250 points. Which is pick 51 or 52. If we're talking about getting Mills and Dunkly, we only care about the points value. Effectively Morabito is steak knives, worth pick 51 or 52, which is what we would be paying.

The points system changes everything. All of a sudden, the classic Big Footy "bunch of spuds for a gun" type trades are good value for us.
As a hypothetical, imagine the following.
We had a bad season and end up with pick 9.
There is an academy player likely to go at pick 5.
With the discount, that player will cost us 1502 points.
Pick 9 is worth 1469.

But what if we could trade pick 9 for picks 19 and 33? People would think that giving up a top 10 pick for picks 19 and 33 is insane, but if you go by the points value, 19+33 is worth 1511 points. Enough for the academy kid plus a small upgrade on our next pick. It would actually be a win for us.

Right now, we are working on a different playing field than other clubs, because we care about the points value of picks, while other clubs only see the pick number. If Jetta goes, don't think about the pick, think about the points we get back, and how that affects the Miulls/Dunkley situation.

25-27.

Man we seriously overreached for him didnt we ?

I don't know how good mills could be - but lets say he is a number 6 in the draft. That means we are trading out a number 13 in the draft to bring in a number 6 in the draft. I also dont know how good dunkley might be - but he might be a top ten player.

But what do they both bring ?

But we know what jetta can actually bring at afl level. we also know a fair bit about our side. Our side is unbalanced. We have a lot on one paced midfielders and a lot of piss poor kicks. And we are proposing to trade out our only quick midfielder who can also kick the ball. And trade him out for an inside midfielder who i have high hopes for and a NSW product who might be the best thing since sliced bread but neither of whom have played at afl level.

On top of that Jetta would be better than shuey, masten, danyel pierce as outside midfielders for either of the western teams.

I think 25-27 is grossly underrating jetta. Go to the phantom draft pages and tell me how many of those picks circa 25-27 would bring you a 20 goal a season winger and a regular assist player. The other day someone was saying hanners was a top 5 player in the draft - an assessment I wouldnt demur from - but to rate jetta so lowly thereafter seems to understate his value to the team and understate his value to teams such as west coast who are fairly one paced around the ball as well.

 

[replicant]

25-27.

Man we seriously overreached for him didnt we ?

I don't know how good mills could be - but lets say he is a number 6 in the draft. That means we are trading out a number 13 in the draft to bring in a number 6 in the draft. I also dont know how good dunkley might be - but he might be a top ten player.

But what do they both bring ?

But we know what jetta can actually bring at afl level. we also know a fair bit about our side. Our side is unbalanced. We have a lot on one paced midfielders and a lot of piss poor kicks. And we are proposing to trade out our only quick midfielder who can also kick the ball. And trade him out for an inside midfielder who i have high hopes for and a NSW product who might be the best thing since sliced bread but neither of whom have played at afl level.

On top of that Jetta would be better than shuey, masten, danyel pierce as outside midfielders for either of the western teams.

I think 25-27 is grossly underrating jetta. Go to the phantom draft pages and tell me how many of those picks circa 25-27 would bring you a 20 goal a season winger and a regular assist player. The other day someone was saying hanners was a top 5 player in the draft - an assessment I wouldnt demur from - but to rate jetta so lowly thereafter seems to understate his value to the team and understate his value to teams such as west coast who are fairly one paced around the ball as well.

I agree, we should keep Jetta. I'm only saying what i think we'd get if he said he wanted to go west (as has been rumoured). If we could get a first rounder, then go for it. But the bottom line is he's an outside player, and won't get the sort of trade value of a KPP or high-accumulating midfielder.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I agree, we should keep Jetta. I'm only saying what i think we'd get if he said he wanted to go west (as has been rumoured). If we could get a first rounder, then go for it. But the bottom line is he's an outside player, and won't get the sort of trade value of a KPP or high-accumulating midfielder.

Freo's first or WCE's first is probably a pretty fair trade, considering Sharrod Welligham went for pick 17.

 

[MF]

I think 25-27 is grossly underrating jetta. Go to the phantom draft pages and tell me how many of those picks circa 25-27 would bring you a 20 goal a season winger and a regular assist player. The other day someone was saying hanners was a top 5 player in the draft - an assessment I wouldnt demur from - but to rate jetta so lowly thereafter seems to understate his value to the team and understate his value to teams such as west coast who are fairly one paced around the ball as well.

I completely agree. Most Bigfooty posters have this ignorant notion that a pick 14 pick in the draft is solid gold. Here are the players taken at that pick before and after Jettas draft...

Ayce Cordy
Brodie Smith
Jack Grimes
James Sellar
Grant Birchall
Angus Monfries
Fergus Watts

I'd rather keep Jetta than roll the dice on getting one of the others there.

Here are the players taken at 25 in the same drafts...

Harry Miller
Adam Hartlett
Wayde Mills
Nathan Djerrkura
Tom Collier
Jack Redden
Aaron Black


Not a chance in hell I'd rather pick 25 than Jetta. Fortunately most football clubs don't use bigfooty logic when it comes to trades (except Essendon). Jetta is worth a mid-late first rounder for sure.

 

[tizzay7]

Allen Christiansen went for pick 21. Jetta is worth more i think. We wont be entertaining any ideas less than pick 17 imo. I would rather keep him.

 

[Wayne Swan]

Here's a write up from one of the very credible Phantom Draft posters Skippos.

Josh Dunkley (189 cm, 85 kg inside midfielder)

Josh Dunkley is the prototypical big bodied inside midfielder of the draft. Unlike Mills and Hopper, who aren't that much smaller than him, Dunkley wins his ball not by feel, skill or touch but by physical dominance. He's an imposing player. He's strong through the core and makes it very difficult to move him off his path; if Dunkley sees a ground ball and goes for it, you're not going to bump him off that like you could most players, you're going to have to beat him to it. He compliments this physical and powerful brand of contested ball winning with a reasonable read of the ruck tap. As well as thriving in contested ball situations, he thrives in other physical situations too - he's a marking target and someone who will win his share of one on one targets and hit the scoreboard but he's also a ferocious and volume tackler. He anticipates the opponent's decisions well and is able to position himself to effect a tackle the moment a player receives the ball, hence his high numbers despite not having speed or agility. However, outside of physical situations Dunkley is limited. He doesn't find the ball outside, often positioning himself poorly and by foot is shaky. He lacks penetration and technique while also making poor and rash decisions and having limited vision - with ball in hand it's like he has blinkers on and only sees what's directly ahead. Under pressure he is prone to panicking and lacks composure in general. Athletically he's relatively slow and lacks agility or evasive moves. He does not possess elite endurance either and will need to improve this given his limited style - it is imperative he is able to effect every stoppage. As a player you know what you're going to get with Dunkley, he's a player who's all about the physical side of the game and how he possesses the ball. And it's a valuable role in a side. But outside of that, he's limited.

 

[Cadsky]

How about no to Minson, the last thing we need is to go all Essendon and buy every old bloke on the market.

One that could come cheapish could be Matthew Leuenberger. He is awful as a forward but he is a brilliant first ruck.

Exactly what i was gonna day. Leuenberger is a free agent isnt he? We could get him for nothing and still trade Jetta for a KPD.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Exactly what i was gonna day. Leuenberger is a free agent isnt he? We could get him for nothing and still trade Jetta for a KPD.

RFA I think, but don't quote me on that. Will come cheap as chips too. Brisbane would be happy with a compo pick anyway.

 

[Skippos]

Here's a write up from one of the very credible Phantom Draft posters Skippos.

Josh Dunkley (189 cm, 85 kg inside midfielder)

Josh Dunkley is the prototypical big bodied inside midfielder of the draft. Unlike Mills and Hopper, who aren't that much smaller than him, Dunkley wins his ball not by feel, skill or touch but by physical dominance. He's an imposing player. He's strong through the core and makes it very difficult to move him off his path; if Dunkley sees a ground ball and goes for it, you're not going to bump him off that like you could most players, you're going to have to beat him to it. He compliments this physical and powerful brand of contested ball winning with a reasonable read of the ruck tap. As well as thriving in contested ball situations, he thrives in other physical situations too - he's a marking target and someone who will win his share of one on one targets and hit the scoreboard but he's also a ferocious and volume tackler. He anticipates the opponent's decisions well and is able to position himself to effect a tackle the moment a player receives the ball, hence his high numbers despite not having speed or agility. However, outside of physical situations Dunkley is limited. He doesn't find the ball outside, often positioning himself poorly and by foot is shaky. He lacks penetration and technique while also making poor and rash decisions and having limited vision - with ball in hand it's like he has blinkers on and only sees what's directly ahead. Under pressure he is prone to panicking and lacks composure in general. Athletically he's relatively slow and lacks agility or evasive moves. He does not possess elite endurance either and will need to improve this given his limited style - it is imperative he is able to effect every stoppage. As a player you know what you're going to get with Dunkley, he's a player who's all about the physical side of the game and how he possesses the ball. And it's a valuable role in a side. But outside of that, he's limited.

He didn't play a great game last week.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Good the more less damaging games the less chance we will have to cop up so much for both of them