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)

 

[TheMase]

Deficit gets applied to the round the original pick was in.

As it's still round 1 it would be applied to our first pick

Yeah my bad a couple mentioned that.
There is unlikely to be a deficit and if there is, it’s likely to be very minor.

Not sure I’d be that concerned about it unless he goes very early, which nobody is predicting.

I find it strange, due to academy and FS picks, that the system allows a mid 20s pick to be considered first round and treated as such in this manner. Bit of a weird quirk

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Yeah my bad a couple mentioned that.
There is unlikely to be a deficit and if there is, it’s likely to be very minor.

Not sure I’d be that concerned about it unless he goes very early, which nobody is predicting.

I find it strange, due to academy and FS picks, that the system allows a mid 20s pick to be considered first round and treated as such in this manner. Bit of a weird quirk

I expect them to clean this loophole before the next draft. It's reared it's head massively this year, we are likely to have MORE picks tonight than on night 2, not sure that's a great idea. I expect the bidding system to be completely revamped too and many on here don't agree with me so I won't open that can of worms again just gouing to say expect it to happen which will take away the discount at least.

 

[Bloods86]

Honestly don’t see much difference between 28 and a pick in the 40’s which will move to the mid to late 30’s with all those matching with GC players. I’m not a fan of deficits regardless of what round it is. It’s a moot thing as it’s likely we don’t have a deficit anyway.

Deficit comes from the round picked by the way likely to have 25-26 picks tonight so if a bid is tonight deficit comes from our first

I’m just hoping we don’t reach at our pick tonight it’s making me way too nervous. Taking a mid at 12 could have epic melts on here

Aside from Clay Hall, and he should probably go earlier, there's not an inside mid in the 40s onwards comparable to Cleary (in value).

And I wouldn't even do it (pass on Cleary) to land a KPP or ruck with that 40s pick. Even me, the Needs guy with a significant portion of my 4 million posts dedicated to the strategy.

PS. I don't want a mid at 12/15, but I would be less upset if it were DeMattia or Hardeman given the roles they could fill.

 

[Ticky009]

Game Day Thread for Day 1 of the 2023 Draft is now Open for business

2023 AFL DRAFT - National Draft completed, PSD & Rookie Draft Wednesday @ 3pm

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Bandicoot]

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, 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?

We couldn't be that lucky, surely.

 

[Tomorrow]

Why does our own draft hand make any difference to the deal we strike for McDonald in the unfortunate (and, IMO, unlikely) event of him requesting a trade to Perth?

One can hope Mcdonald signs on again, like Dawson, but if he decides to take up the carrots offered, and move back to WA, the only say the Swans can have is accept the best offer from a bidding Freo or WC. Pyke, now heading WC, knows all the insides and outs of the Swans, as well as a good relationship with Mcdonald. Freo has already amassed 3 first round picks for 2024, some of it will be used to entice the reluctant Swans on board. So if, and it is a if, if McDonald does a Dawson, Swans having their own 3 1st round picks helps to nullify some of Freos potential bid. But even if McDonald stays and I hope he does, next years 1st round is shaping far superior to this years, imo.

 

[Membling]

We couldn't be that lucky, surely.

Maybe he did a Cyril Rioli, Chad Wingard and Archie Perkins and bombed the interviews

One can dream

 

[Bandicoot]

Dodoro is capable of doing some very stupid things, all while thinking he is a genus.

What type of genus is he?

 

[Bandicoot]

For what it's worth, someone on Reddit claiming to be a friend of Cleary had said Collingwood have told him he will be their first pick.

I don't have a problem with that. We will still have enough points to match.

 

[momentbymoment]

What type of genus is he?

The Dunning-Kruger variety.

 

[Bloods86]

What type of genus is he?

Raphus

 

[Bandicoot]

HAPPY DRAFT DAY - 814 PAGES OF COMPLETE DRIVEL AND IT ALL COMES DOWN TO THIS....and tomorrow.

To be fair ticky, a few of those 814 did relate to the trade period.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Aside from Clay Hall, and he should probably go earlier, there's not an inside mid in the 40s onwards comparable to Cleary (in value).

And I wouldn't even do it (pass on Cleary) to land a KPP or ruck with that 40s pick. Even me, the Needs guy with a significant portion of my 4 million posts dedicated to the strategy.

PS. I don't want a mid at 12/15, but I would be less upset if it were DeMattia or Hardeman given the roles they could fill.

I'm all for a smaller bloke at 12 (whatever it becomes), I want Wilson he's my number 1 pick, we won't get O'Sulivan he'd be best available and hit a need. I personally would trade down if Wilson is off the board.

 

[Bandicoot]

There should be a line, no issue at pick 25 plus not before then please, we don't need to carry deficits into next year. We can easily bring him home in 3 years.

It has been shown earlier that even at 22, we will still have enough points. Collingwood's first pick will be either 24 or 25.
Of course we will match it or do you believe we'll get someone better at 45?

 

[LukeParkerno1]

It has been shown earlier that even at 22, we will still have enough points. Collingwood's first pick will be either 24 or 25.
Of course we will match it or do you believe we'll get someone better at 45?

Have no issue matching so long as it’s not a deficit. I’d rather sell 12 then take 17/18 then match.

 

[BloodySwan]

I don't have a problem with that. We will still have enough points to match.

We'll go into deficit if Collingwood use their first and we match

 

[Bandicoot]

I doubt we'll have a deficit so the point is moot but personally I wouldn't match before pick 30, been consistent with this.

That is probably the most ridiculous comment you have made on this whole thread.
No deficit for next year but you would still say to the best current talent in our academy that we don't want you. Go and play somewhere else.
I can't even imagine the long term damage that would do to our academy. And for what?
So we can pick someone in the 40's instead who will probably be delisted two years later.

 

[Bandicoot]

I would put a hefty wager on and Cleary bid being after pick 23

It's quite likely Collingwood will bid on him with their first pick (19) but it will be 24 at best on the night. May even be 25.

 

[Jewelsbon]

I find it amusing that many on here are annoyed at the NRL nabbing Woods, yet others are happy to let a kid who stuck with us and the code, go to Collingwood.
If we don't match on Cleary - wherever he's bid and no matter the deficit, in my opinion it sends all kinds of wrong messages.

 

[Bandicoot]

We'll go into deficit if Collingwood use their first and we match

You obviously have either no idea how the points system works or you think Collingwood will be having a pick at 19.
There is no way we will have a deficit in this case.

 

[Swansujelly]

no way known we pass on Cleary anytime after our first pick.

 

[Kiama Chris]

What type of genus is he?

He is of the pin-head mushroom genus Hymenochaetales. For real.

 

[Kiama Chris]

You obviously have either no idea how the points system works or you think Collingwood will be having a pick at 19.
There is no way we will have a deficit in this case.

19 will be 24 or 25.

 

[anotherletdown]

Have no issue matching so long as it’s not a deficit. I’d rather sell 12 then take 17/18 then match.

The problem with 17/18 is that GWS have 16 and we know what happened last year - Rowston. We might trade down but find ourselves matching a Cleary bid earlier

 

[LukeParkerno1]

The problem with 17/18 is that GWS have 16 and we know what happened last year - Rowston. We might trade down but find ourselves matching a Cleary bid earlier

Surely the very last player on the GWS needs is an inside mid! How many do they need?

Plus the GWS pick may not be there expecting it to be involved in the WCE trade