Trade hypotheticals

[Ambrosia]

Would rate Sucking at around #13-15

You can't be serious.

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

We won't be trading Steven anyway.

If we did it would be for some offer that would have to be very good overs, Suckling who would be 30 odd by the time we would probably "challenge" again and a late first rounder wouldn't be anywhere near what we would take to give up a good young midfielder who has a lot of good footy in front of him.

 

[MAAAATTDAAAAMON]

Overrating Suckling there.

 

[Moist Biscuit]

Rate Paparone but I also rate Mason Shaw, who if I'm not mistaken is out of Contract. Port supporters, could you please provide a link of where Shaw signed a 3 year deal straight away.

 

[iBeng]

Losing Paps I dont think will hurt us to much...He has shown more this year but hes still one of those players of "What is he, and what will he be when hes bigger?". Some say Forward, some say third tall, others thing uility and theres also the wing position he can be. Hes basicly whatever the club hes at wants him to become.

If we got a straight player swap or a pick in the late 20s early 30s I probably wouldnt be against him going home. Yeo was the biggest WA loss for us, besides Mitch Clark of course.

 

[Lionmoe21]

Losing Paps I dont think will hurt us to much...He has shown more this year but hes still one of those players of "What is he, and what will he be when hes bigger?". Some say Forward, some say third tall, others thing uility and theres also the wing position he can be. Hes basicly whatever the club hes at wants him to become.

If we got a straight player swap or a pick in the late 20s early 30s I probably wouldnt be against him going home. Yeo was the biggest WA loss for us, besides Mitch Clark of course.

I think the best offer we would get would have to be fremantle's second and a player since west coast wont have thier second

 

[Moist Biscuit]

I think the best offer we would get would have to be fremantle's second and a player since west coast wont have thier second

Would do a second round and Clancee Pearce for Paparone and a 3rd

 

[iBeng]

Would do a second round and Clancee Pearce for Paparone and a 3rd

I wouldnt be disapointed with that. He would make a good replacement for Hanley coming of the halfback, so we can use Hanley in the Mid/Forward permenantly.

Of course Clancee may not want to move from WA.

 

[Moist Biscuit]

I wouldnt be disapointed with that. He would make a good replacement for Hanley coming of the halfback, so we can use Hanley in the Mid/Forward permenantly.

Of course Clancee may not want to move from WA.

Yeah true, all hypotheticals at the moment, he's a good player when in form, just hasn't found that form this year and has been overtaken by Spurr, Sutcliffe and Neale in the best 22.

 

[iBeng]

Yeah true, all hypotheticals at the moment, he's a good player when in form, just hasn't found that form this year and has been overtaken by Spurr, Sutcliffe and Neale in the best 22.

Hes also signed until 2016, according to Wikiland.

 

[Super Hans]

I'd rate Steven at around pick #5-7

That would probably be a fair trade. Would rate Sucking at around #13-15 and our first will likely be #15-18

No way Suckling is worth that much. Tag him and he struggles big time. Low 20's is around his mark.

 

[juss]

Would rate Sucking at around #13-15

Dont think other clubs would. His foot skills are exceptional bit his position is not one that is hard to fill and there are a number of guys ahead of him in that position, these days there are a lot of mids who could transition to the HBF who havent yet played there. The rebounding defender role isnt a hard position to cover.

 

[Oddhawk]

We won't be trading Steven anyway.

If we did it would be for some offer that would have to be very good overs, Suckling who would be 30 odd by the time we would probably "challenge" again and a late first rounder wouldn't be anywhere near what we would take to give up a good young midfielder who has a lot of good footy in front of him.

Suckling is 23.... How long before you challenge for a flag?? A decade?!

 

[Oddhawk]

Suckling is 23.... How long before you challenge for a flag?? A decade?!

Pooh I take that back. He's 25. Still.... 5 years before you're competitive? That is why the saints struggle.

 

[ArdentEagle]

Cam Ellis-Yolmen
What is his perceived trade value?

 

[TBOW]

How dare you even think of trading Bonts! At 18 years old he's shown he can play as a midfielder, CHF, and even drift back. You wouldn't trade him unless the deal was far too good to pass up. And I mean along the lines of getting Cameron, Boyd and Whitfield for Bontempelli.

Didn't say I would do it, just trying to gauge values. Think the club loves Bonts too much to ever see him go- it would be a very ballsy move though. Boyd is still very much all potential.

 

[Tragic sainter]

I'd do Suckling and our first for Steven

I bet you would. Only thing is you'd be laughed at for offering it.

 

[coryne]

Asked this question over on the Carlton board, but I wanted some "independent" feed back too


Just done a Ladder Predictor again. Lets assume that the GCS finds some form again and can beat St. Kilda, Carlton and the Eagles in rd 23 they would (theoretically) end up finishing 10th x3 games clear of Richmond (so could drop 1-2 of those games too and not change their position). Say Carlton also finish 14th ahead of Melbourne, who lose Frawley and are awarded a Band 1 compo pick.


Draft order from my predicted ladder would be something like

#1. St. Kilda
#2. Giants
#3. Lions
#4. Melbourne
#5. Melbourne (Compo)
#6. Carlton
#7. Bulldogs
#8. Eagles
#9. Richmond
#10. GCS
#11. Adelaide
#12. Collingwood
#13. North
#14. Port
#15. Freo
#16. Geelong
#17. GCS (Geelong compo)
#18. Hawthorn
#19. Sydney
#20. Essendon
#21. GWS (Compo)
#22. St. Kilda
#23. Giants
#24. Lions
#25. Melbourne
#26. Carlton
#27. Bulldogs
#28. Eagles
#29. Richmond
#30. GCS



So under this scenario the GCS would end up with #10 and #17, Carlton with #6.


So my question is would a 5 spot improvement in the GCS 1st selection (from #10 to #6) be worth the #18 compo pick ??? Would an exchange of second rd picks also be required to even out the trade, so Carlton get #10, #17 and #30 for #6 and #26. If the top 15ish players is fairly even, and the talls fairly even too outside of the top handful (Wright/McCartin/Durdin), and the GCS still need to trim back their list, then will this be a suitable option for both sides allowing Carlton to target quantity to improve our list while the GCS can target a player in the top 10 they may lose access to with their original pick ???



EDIT. Fixed up some picks.

 

[RossFC]

Do Essendon have a 1st and 2nd round pick this year?

 

[JasRulz63]

Do Essendon have a 1st and 2nd round pick this year?

Nope, only an end of first round.

 

[Mego Red]

Cam Ellis-Yolmen
What is his perceived trade value?

Pick in the 40's.

 

[coryne]

Nope, only an end of first round.

Crap knew I forgot something for my pick order

 

[JasRulz63]

Crap knew I forgot something for my pick order

GWS also have an end of first round compensation pick that follows the Essendon one, so they'll have something like 20 and 22 which will be interesting come draft time.

I wonder if Port will try to do something similar to last year and trade 20 and 22 for their first round pick (with some moving around of second rounders) and trade 22 off to WC for Lycett if he demands to go to Port like Polec did. I know WC fans will demand Port's first round pick, but we saw with Polec last year that just because you demand it, doesn't mean you're getting it.

 

[Mego Red]

Asked this question over on the Carlton board, but I wanted some "independent" feed back too


Just done a Ladder Predictor again. Lets assume that the GCS finds some form again and can beat St. Kilda, Carlton and the Eagles in rd 23 they would (theoretically) end up finishing 10th x3 games clear of Richmond (so could drop 1-2 of those games too and not change their position). Say Carlton also finish 14th ahead of Melbourne, who lose Frawley and are awarded a Band 1 compo pick.


Draft order from my predicted ladder would be something like

#1. St. Kilda
#2. Giants
#3. Lions
#4. Melbourne
#5. Melbourne (Compo)
#6. Carlton
#7. Bulldogs
#8. Eagles
#9. Richmond
#10. GCS
#11. Adelaide
#12. Collingwood
#13. North
#14. Port
#15. Freo
#16. Geelong
#17. GCS (Geelong compo)
#18. Hawthorn
#19. Sydney
#20. Essendon
#21. St. Kilda
#22. Giants
#23. Lions
#24. Melbourne
#25. Carlton
#26. Bulldogs
#27. Eagles
#28. Richmond
#29. GCS



So under this scenario the GCS would end up with #10 and #17, Carlton with #6.


So my question is would a 5 spot improvement in the GCS 1st selection (from #10 to #6) be worth the #18 compo pick ??? Would an exchange of second rd picks also be required to even out the trade, so Carlton get #10, #17 and #29 for #6 and #25. If the top 15ish players is fairly even, and the talls fairly even too outside of the top handful (Wright/McCartin/Durdin), and the GCS still need to trim back their list, then will this be a suitable option for both sides allowing Carlton to target quantity to improve our list while the GCS can target a player in the top 10 they may lose access to with their original pick ???

I don't mind this. Would probably make some sense for GCS.

 

[eaglespremiers]

I'd rate Steven at around pick #5-7

Would be perfectly happy trading our first round pick for Steven.
Exactly what we need IMO.