List Mgmt. 2023 Draft & Trade Hypotheticals

[Ticky009]

Key Dates:

Trade Period, October 6–18

• Restricted & Unrestricted Free Agency Period: Friday, October 6, 9am – Friday October 13, 5pm (bid matching ends Monday October 16, 5pm)
• Trade Period (1), picks & players: Monday, October 9, 9am – Wednesday October 18, 7.30pm

Quiet Period, October 19–November 20

• Trade Period (2), picks only: Monday, October 23, 9am – Friday November 10, 5pm
• List Lodgement 1*: Tuesday, October 31, 2pm
• Delisted Free Agency Period (1): Wednesday, November 1, 9am – Wednesday November 8, 5pm
• Delisted Free Agency Period (2): Friday, November 10, 9am–5pm
• List Lodgement 2*: Tuesday, November 14, 2pm

Draft Period, November 20–22

• Round 1 of the National Draft: Monday, November 20, time and venue TBA
• Trade Period (3), picks only: Tuesday, November 21, 5.45pm–6.30pm
• Round 2–end of the National Draft: Tuesday, November 21, 7pm until completion
• Rookie Promotions: Tuesday, November 21, after the National Draft
• Delisted Free Agency Period (3): Tuesday, November 21, after the National Draft
• List Lodgement 3*: Wednesday, November 22, 10am (optional; required for those participating in the PSD)
• Pre-Season Draft: Wednesday, November 22, 3pm
• Rookie Draft: Wednesday, November 22, 3.20pm
• Final List Lodgement*: Thursday, November 23, 4pm

* List lodgement dates are yet to be made public, so are approximate based on past history and the requirements of the AFL Rules. When lists are lodged, the number of players on the list must not exceed maximum list sizes. At the same time, clubs must provide the AFL with estimates of total player payments in the current and following year, which must prove the club is not and will not exceed the salary cap. (AFL Rules 5.3, 6.1, 6.8, 7.2, 7.9)

 

[momentbymoment]

Just make sure you have Big Footy open and refreshed, I reckon you'll get the vibe on how to react within 5 seconds.

I am preparing the frownie emojis as we speak.

 

[DST]

Drafting more midfield is not a priority for the Swans. We are stacked. We would not match an earlier bid than where we can comfortably do so. There is Indhi this year (though I don't think so) and other Academy mids next year. It is not a priority this year.

We have nothing like Clearly on our list at present in terms of young players. Sheldrick is inside/first hands just like him but has no where near the aerobic capacity.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[DST]

I don’t believe we’d match if a bid came in the mid-first round.

Especially if it swallowed up our first pick.

Any bid post our pick 12 (or where it ends up) will be matched.

We have planned for this and none of the teams pre our first pick are going to place a bid.

So once again, we will be taking him from mid to late first round onwards.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[liz]

He’d be easily best available if he slipped that far (he won’t)

"Best available" is highly subjective and best left to those who have access to all the information (including interviews and the like).

Even then, most of them don't pick "best available" even when they think they are. But some get close to "best available". But whether they make the right choice or not, they are doing it from a far better informed position than you or I am in.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

"Best available" is highly subjective and best left to those who have access to all the information (including interviews and the like).

Even then, most of them don't pick "best available" even when they think they are. But some get close to "best available". But whether they make the right choice or not, they are doing it from a far better informed position than you or I am in.

100% but I'm expecting us to take who is best available not really going needs based like many want

 

[LukeParkerno1]

There could be a fair few live trades this year

 

[Kiama Chris]

"Best available" is highly subjective and best left to those who have access to all the information (including interviews and the like).

Even then, most of them don't pick "best available" even when they think they are. But some get close to "best available". But whether they make the right choice or not, they are doing it from a far better informed position than you or I am in.

Yep. "Best available" is always a mix of factors, not some magic number. It varies from club to club on the same player.

 

[mtooler]

Just hoping its nobody thats been mentioned after 812 pages.

Which has to be the firm favourite scenario.

 

[RUNVS]

What time do people think the draft will actually start tomorrow?

I get to work at 7:30pm and I am wondering if I should go in a tiny bit early so I can watch the start of the draft instead of missing the first few picks.

 

[Kiama Chris]

Which has to be the firm favourite scenario.

I think I've looked at every possible draftee.
Now I sit here wondering why I've spent so much time trying to figure out who I think the club should draft when I have exactly zero influence over the outcome.
Given Kinnear's winsome ways I'm probably around a 95% chance of being disappointed, which is pretty amazing given that there are 3 players I'd be delighted with, at least 6 players I'd be fine with and a fair few more I'd be OK with even while thinking WTF?
THEN THERE ARE ALL THE REST KINNEAR.

 

[RUNVS]

I think I've looked at every possible draftee.
Now I sit here wondering why I've spent so much time trying to figure out who I think the club should draft when I have exactly zero influence over the outcome.
Given Kinnear's winsome ways I'm probably around a 95% chance of being disappointed, which is pretty amazing given that there are 3 players I'd be delighted with, at least 6 players I'd be fine with and a fair few more I'd be OK with even while thinking WTF?
THEN THERE ARE ALL THE REST KINNEAR.

I remember so many years my reaction in the first round of the draft.

"Who the hell is Ling"

"Who the hell is Stoddart"

"Who on earth is Sheldriick, what is a Sheldrick"

"Dean Towers, we were not linked to him, I don't know anything about him"

"Who is Konstanty" closely followed by "why the hell did we draft a small forward"

 

[Kiama Chris]

I remember so many years my reaction in the first round of the draft.

"Who the hell is Ling"

"Who the hell is Stoddart"

"Who on earth is Sheldriick, what is a Sheldrick"

"Dean Towers, we were not linked to him, I don't know anything about him"

"Who is Konstanty" closely followed by "why the hell did we draft a small forward"

Once we delisted Ronke I thought Konstanty was a chance. I would have kept Ronke and delisted someone else (name starting with G!) and picked Barnett (Ruck) and Van Es (KPD) with next pick. Sliding doors. Everything changes.

 

[caesar88]

Cleary will get bid on by the Pies with their first I reckon.

I wouldn't want to be Beatson telling Horse that we didn't match it.

 

[RUNVS]

Cleary will get bid on by the Pies with their first I reckon.

I wouldn't want to be Beatson telling Horse that we didn't match it.

I am not sure we will be able to match. We won't have the points.

 

[Membling]

For cleary bid we can currently match up to pick 28 without going into deficit.

Couple in following

GC match (3 players, minimum 6 picks)
WB (1 player, 2 picks)
Hawks (1 player, 3 picks)


Should move our pick 45 down to 43 and pick 55 down to 49, meaning we can match a bid up to pick 23 and be just in deficit if bid comes in at 22.

43 + 49 = 665 points or equivalent to pick 29. Add in discount at bid of 23 (815 x .8 = 652 points)

In the above, pies first will be pick 24 with academy selections of Walters, Read, McCabe, Rogers and Croft

 

[Kiama Chris]

Cleary will get bid on by the Pies with their first I reckon.

I wouldn't want to be Beatson telling Horse that we didn't match it.

Pick 19 (up to 24 or 25) is possible but where would he fit in the Pies plans? They were already dropping Adams out of CBAs.
Surely a tall would fit their needs better?
Pick 33 (whatever that ends up) might be a different matter.
Or are you just catastrophizing?

 

[caesar88]

Pick 19 (up to 24 or 25) is possible but where would he fit in the Pies plans? They were already dropping Adams out of CBAs.
Surely a tall would fit their needs better?
Pick 33 (whatever that ends up) might be a different matter.
Or are you just catastrophizing?

Collingwood's midfield is old. They just lost Adams. Pendlebury (who was still their 2nd-most used mid at CBAs last year), Mitchell & Crisp are all on the wrong side of 30. De Goey & N. Daicos are their only young mids before you get to the unproven Macrae, and even then De Goey will be 28 by early next season, so his prime may only have a few years left in it.

For months now I've heard through the grapevine that the Pies are looking to reinforce their young inside mid stocks, so their interest in Cleary doesn't surprise me one bit.

 

[TheMase]

For cleary bid we can currently match up to pick 28 without going into deficit.

Couple in following

GC match (3 players, minimum 6 picks)
WB (1 player, 2 picks)
Hawks (1 player, 3 picks)


Should move our pick 45 down to 43 and pick 55 down to 49, meaning we can match a bid up to pick 23 and be just in deficit if bid comes in at 22.

43 + 49 = 665 points or equivalent to pick 29. Add in discount at bid of 23 (815 x .8 = 652 points)

In the above, pies first will be pick 24 with academy selections of Walters, Read, McCabe, Rogers and Croft

The discount is fixed 197 points after pick 18, so it’s slightly better than that and can match pick 22

 

[Bloods86]

Collingwood's midfield is old. They just lost Adams. Pendlebury (who was still their 2nd-most used mid at CBAs last year), Mitchell & Crisp are all on the wrong side of 30. De Goey & N. Daicos are their only young mids before you get to the unproven Macrae, and even then De Goey will be 28 by early next season, so his prime may only have a few years left in it.

For months now I've heard through the grapevine that the Pies are looking to reinforce their young inside mid stocks, so their interest in Cleary doesn't surprise me one bit.

Yeah, and we're the ones who took Adams from them. They'd be very confident we match anyway, but he's still a decent pick if we didn't.

 

[Kiama Chris]

Yeah, and we're the ones who took Adams from them. They'd be very confident we match anyway, but he's still a decent pick if we didn't.

True I guess but I'm pretty amazed that an AA inside mid with decent VFL exposed form often doesn't make it into top 40 in phantom drafts. Often seems that CTL form counts for more.

 

[Bloods86]

100% but I'm expecting us to take who is best available not really going needs based like many want

I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority camp i.e. needs being a significant factor.

But look, if we pick a medium forward or a wing/half back with our first, I think I'll just wait to see what we do with a potential 3rd pick or Cat A rookie, and then the Cat B spot.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority camp i.e. needs being a significant factor.

Before our trade period I was with you take the needs based tall, now I’m okay with best available and trade for needs

 

[Adnico26Parker]

FWIW, Marc McGowan in The Age is still somehow getting O'Sullivan to pick 16 in his latest phantom (as skeptical as that is!)

Otherwise: O’Sullivan is off the board, and Sydney need to look elsewhere. The player most often linked to them is Northern Knights ruckman Will Green, who could develop behind recruit Brodie Grundy

4

Brodie Grundy

Age

30

Ht

202cm

Wt

105kg

Pos.

Ruck

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.5

4star

K

8.0

3star

HB

9.6

5star

CL

4.1

5star

HO

32.0

5star

D

16.4

4star

K

6.8

3star

HB

9.6

5star

CL

4.0

5star

HO

34.6

5star

D

13.8

4star

K

5.2

2star

HB

8.6

5star

CL

2.6

5star

HO

20.6

5star

, while Wilson or Tholstrup could be available here. There’s been noise about Sandringham Dragons midfielder Charlie Edwards, too.

Also dropped this in at the end - Could Sydney take a flyer on Eastern Ranges ball magnet Tyson Sruk (Midfielder/defender, 180cm, 82kg), who won 37 disposals in the Coates Talent League grand final?

 

[LukeParkerno1]

I’d rather take Charlie Edwards than Green but I’d understand the draw to Green. Just don’t love taking rucks early personally.

 

[RUNVS]

I’d rather take Charlie Edwards than Green but I’d understand the draw to Green. Just don’t love taking rucks early personally.

Neither do I. 18 year olds are hard enough to predict as it is in terms of how good they will be in a few years time and ruckmen is double that.