Mega Thread 2014 Free Agency and Trade discussion

[Gysberts2Bate]

Now now, we aren't a retirement home.

Tell that to Jack Watts. He shows the aggression of a 90 year old.

 

[Cannon82]

Are you kidding? He would light the place up!

I see what you did there.

 

[LeverPuller]

And there goes the hornets' nest

 

[Blackas87]

Now now, we aren't a retirement home.

We also aren't a kindergarten

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

We also aren't a kindergarten

So...we're a high school? Stuck in an eternal purgatory of hope quashed by brutal reality?

 

[Cannon82]

Stuck in an eternal purgatory of hope quashed by brutal reality?

Sounds more like the period when you first move full-time into the work force.

 

[hulkhogan1]

We also aren't a kindergarten

Boyd - 32 y/o next month
Sewell - 30 y/o
and the possibility of O'Keefe - 34 y/o
and bringing in Cross last year - 31 y/o

Whilst all real good players in their time, and are still going solid (especially our own, Cross), we don't want to bring in FOUR 30+ y/o's in a span of two off-seasons. I see Sewell retiring at the end of the year, hammy's are too shot. Boyd will either re-sign for another year or two for the dogs or seek opportunities elsewhere, and I can't see us going after him if we're wanting to bring in O'Keefe. He is seeking more game time and we can certainly offer him that while our young guys all develop, we won't be looking for a short term fix in him, let's say it'll be more of a player/mentor/coach type of role, plays out next year and could possibly end up going a coach of some sort under Roosy for a year. Having Cross/O'K in the team as mentors for the youngin's would do them wonders, Cross has been outstanding for us this year and we noticed his absence and leadership after the North game. I say bring in O'K, but no more 30+ y/o's, as I said, great players in their own rights, but we don't want too many. I just look at it as Ryan will just be taking up Byrnes' spot on the list.

 

[schmuttt]

Boyd - 32 y/o next month
Sewell - 30 y/o
and the possibility of O'Keefe - 34 y/o
and bringing in Cross last year - 31 y/o

Whilst all real good players in their time, and are still going solid (especially our own, Cross), we don't want to bring in FOUR 30+ y/o's in a span of two off-seasons. I see Sewell retiring at the end of the year, hammy's are too shot. Boyd will either re-sign for another year or two for the dogs or seek opportunities elsewhere, and I can't see us going after him if we're wanting to bring in O'Keefe. He is seeking more game time and we can certainly offer him that while our young guys all develop, we won't be looking for a short term fix in him, let's say it'll be more of a player/mentor/coach type of role, plays out next year and could possibly end up going a coach of some sort under Roosy for a year. Having Cross/O'K in the team as mentors for the youngin's would do them wonders, Cross has been outstanding for us this year and we noticed his absence and leadership after the North game. I say bring in O'K, but no more 30+ y/o's, as I said, great players in their own rights, but we don't want too many. I just look at it as Ryan will just be taking up Byrnes' spot on the list.

Malceski is also 31 next year, would you take him AND ROK?

 

[Cannon82]

We should also look at Ben Hudson.

 

[hulkhogan1]

Malceski is also 31 next year, would you take him AND ROK?

Hmm, fair call. In Malceski's case he's a player that we NEED, a great kick coming off the backline. If we get him then we have a solid backline, we have a solid backline as is but the disposal is atrocious barring Dunn (still not great disposal, but it's decent and has a booming kick). My previous comment still stands as the mentioned 4 players are mids, two 30+ y/o mids in Cross and O'K to mentor our young ones and play out their career would do us enough. Don't get me wrong the other two would be handy, however we need to build depth AND a solid midfield, not having to bring in veterans and rely on them to transform our midfield for the next year or so until they bugger off. We aren't in a position in need to bring a veteran in ASAP so they can help us win the flag (Lake to Hawks, boosted the backline and won the Norm Smith medal), we're wanting to build a team with the right foundations for years to come. Cross as a tagger suits us perfect and O'K in the midfield would be good as well, however I can't see him playing every game next year (barring injuries) as he would need rests, etc, if he could play 15 games with us then good on him. Bring ROK in as a player/coach type, let him play for a year (couldn't see him going past next year surely?), let him get his 300 games with us (hopefully), then become a coach with us in some capacity with Crossy (if Daniel doesn't play on for another year), happy days.

 

[Turbocat]

Hmm, fair call. In Malceski's case he's a player that we NEED, a great kick coming off the backline. If we get him then we have a solid backline, we have a solid backline as is but the disposal is atrocious barring Dunn (still not great disposal, but it's decent and has a booming kick). My previous comment still stands as the mentioned 4 players are mids, two 30+ y/o mids in Cross and O'K to mentor our young ones and play out their career would do us enough. Don't get me wrong the other two would be handy, however we need to build depth AND a solid midfield, not having to bring in veterans and rely on them to transform our midfield for the next year or so until they bugger off. We aren't in a position in need to bring a veteran in ASAP so they can help us win the flag (Lake to Hawks, boosted the backline and won the Norm Smith medal), we're wanting to build a team with the right foundations for years to come. Cross as a tagger suits us perfect and O'K in the midfield would be good as well, however I can't see him playing every game next year (barring injuries) as he would need rests, etc, if he could play 15 games with us then good on him. Bring ROK in as a player/coach type, let him play for a year (couldn't see him going past next year surely?), let him get his 300 games with us (hopefully), then become a coach with us in some capacity with Crossy (if Daniel doesn't play on for another year), happy days.

With the likely hood of you getting a probable P3 for Frawley , that really restricts you having an interest in other FA's , the P3 is just too good to lose. FA in , and FA out = 0 comp

So that mean you either for forget the other FA's or you trade for them.

What would you trade to get Malceski or ROK ? R2 pick for both? I wondered if they offered Mitchell and Malceski for your R1, that would be a tempting deal.

 

[Theo X]

We should also look at Ben Hudson.

LOL

 

[hulkhogan1]

With the likely hood of you getting a probable P3 for Frawley , that really restricts you having an interest in other FA's , the P3 is just too good to lose. FA in , and FA out = 0 comp

So that mean you either for forget the other FA's or you trade for them.

What would you trade to get Malceski or ROK ? R2 pick for both? I wondered if they offered Mitchell and Malceski for your R1, that would be a tempting deal.

You'd think we'd trade for them, because there's no way we'd dilute that big of a pick, I'd probably trade R2 for both. I'd love to get Mitchell across but I don't necessarily want to trade a R1 pick for him even with Malceski in the mix. I'd rather trade that pick and get Dylan Shiel in a straight swap.

 

[Dory_77]

With the likely hood of you getting a probable P3 for Frawley , that really restricts you having an interest in other FA's , the P3 is just too good to lose. FA in , and FA out = 0 comp

So that mean you either for forget the other FA's or you trade for them.

What would you trade to get Malceski or ROK ? R2 pick for both? I wondered if they offered Mitchell and Malceski for your R1, that would be a tempting deal.

We could potentially get ROK as a delisted FA which would keep our compo intact. Not sure what we'd trade for Malceski. Our 3rd rounder seems likely to be used on Stretch as a FS and I think our 2nd rounder would be too high for someone his age, despite his skills. The Mitchell/Malceski one does seem like a reasonable deal though.

 

[Blackas87]

Boyd - 32 y/o next month
Sewell - 30 y/o
and the possibility of O'Keefe - 34 y/o
and bringing in Cross last year - 31 y/o

Whilst all real good players in their time, and are still going solid (especially our own, Cross), we don't want to bring in FOUR 30+ y/o's in a span of two off-seasons. I see Sewell retiring at the end of the year, hammy's are too shot. Boyd will either re-sign for another year or two for the dogs or seek opportunities elsewhere, and I can't see us going after him if we're wanting to bring in O'Keefe. He is seeking more game time and we can certainly offer him that while our young guys all develop, we won't be looking for a short term fix in him, let's say it'll be more of a player/mentor/coach type of role, plays out next year and could possibly end up going a coach of some sort under Roosy for a year. Having Cross/O'K in the team as mentors for the youngin's would do them wonders, Cross has been outstanding for us this year and we noticed his absence and leadership after the North game. I say bring in O'K, but no more 30+ y/o's, as I said, great players in their own rights, but we don't want too many. I just look at it as Ryan will just be taking up Byrnes' spot on the list.

Obvious you wouldn't take all of them but it's unlikely they'll all end up delisted by their clubs anyway, our midfield is still the worst in the league though, Cross has been massive for us this year so I like the idea of getting another ex gun delisted player to help out short term, Boyd is still averaging 27 possies a game but I've heard May be pushed out of the dogs midfield as their younger blokes step up, Boyd would really relieve more pressure off Jones, Tyson and Viney.

Sewell I'm not as keen on but perhaps if Boyd isn't available we can look at him.

O'keefe is struggling to get games at Sydney so it's a real unknown how he can perform next year, while I can see him being on the list it's more of a coaching/mentoring role he'll play, he would be great for Jack Trengove to learn off.

Our focus must be under 23's but you also can't expect them to carry the team strait away, a few older blokes can't hurt while the young guys develop

 

[Turbocat]

We could potentially get ROK as a delisted FA which would keep our compo intact. Not sure what we'd trade for Malceski. Our 3rd rounder seems likely to be used on Stretch as a FS and I think our 2nd rounder would be too high for someone his age, despite his skills. The Mitchell/Malceski one does seem like a reasonable deal though.

Remember any trade must satisfy the Swans , and probably better than what they will get as comp. So if the are told he is a in R2 FA , then your R3 wouldn't be in the ball park , have to be your R2

 

[mrmonkey]

If Matthew Boyd and Brad Sewell aren't offered new contracts by their clubs I wouldn't mind offering them a similar deal to Daniel Cross, 1 year with a performance based 2nd option. Our midfield is the worst in the league, they would help while our young blokes develop.

I had a fellow Melbourne supporter say the exact same thing at footy training,must be a common thought.

 

[RandB]

Remember any trade must satisfy the Swans , and probably better than what they will get as comp. So if the are told he is a in R2 FA , then your R3 wouldn't be in the ball park , have to be your R2

If they bring in other FAs of their own however it may become advantageous simply to trade.

 

[hulkhogan1]

Obvious you wouldn't take all of them but it's unlikely they'll all end up delisted by their clubs anyway, our midfield is still the worst in the league though, Cross has been massive for us this year so I like the idea of getting another ex gun delisted player to help out short term, Boyd is still averaging 27 possies a game but I've heard May be pushed out of the dogs midfield as their younger blokes step up, Boyd would really relieve more pressure off Jones, Tyson and Viney.

Sewell I'm not as keen on but perhaps if Boyd isn't available we can look at him.

O'keefe is struggling to get games at Sydney so it's a real unknown how he can perform next year, while I can see him being on the list it's more of a coaching/mentoring role he'll play, he would be great for Jack Trengove to learn off.

Our focus must be under 23's but you also can't expect them to carry the team strait away, a few older blokes can't hurt while the young guys develop

Yeah, I do see what you're saying, and Roos even says that we still need class in the midfield. With what looks like Chip will leave, with a heap of salary cap we'll go hard for a few stars, I wouldn't be surprised if we went hard at Dylan Shiel again, tried to get him last year for pick 2 but deal didn't get done. While he isn't the classiest player he's still going to be a gun in the coming years from what he's shown already. So I reckon Roos will adress our mid department come years end, free a few spots up with delisted players and players who have retired/leave. We'll still have a fairly young list yes, but another pre-season under their belts, more game time experience and we'll be even better. It's the process. I'm all for getting ROK and Malceski, but for me no more veterans other than them. We'll have the right amount of balance of young guys (say, 20-24 year old bracket) and veterans.

 

[Cannon82]

If they bring in other FAs of their own however it may become advantageous simply to trade.

I was going to say something about the list of FA being a bit s**t and Sydney wouldn't be interested in any of them, but then I remembered Frawley.

 

[RandB]

I was going to say something about the list of FA being a bit s**t and Sydney wouldn't be interested in any of them, but then I remembered Frawley.

True, I didn't put much thought into the available players besides Chip.

 

[The Dr]

You'd think we'd trade for them, because there's no way we'd dilute that big of a pick, I'd probably trade R2 for both. I'd love to get Mitchell across but I don't necessarily want to trade a R1 pick for him even with Malceski in the mix. I'd rather trade that pick and get Dylan Shiel in a straight swap.

W....T....F???

 

[hulkhogan1]

W....T....F???

Round 2 pick, not pick 2 if that's what you were getting at.

 

[Devastating Boris]

A trade of Frawley for malceski and Mitchell would work I reckon. If Frawley wants the swans they won't have much cap room for him and our compo will reflect that. I would suggest a straight swap if that's the case.

 

[Cannon82]

Round 2 pick, not pick 2 if that's what you were getting at.

Probably more trading pick #20 odd for a 30 and 34 year old. There is no need to trade for RO'K - we should be able to pick him up for nothing as a delisted FA.