Opinion 2015 Draft Discussion Thread - now including Rookie Draft Talk

[replicant]

Why the hell are we not in for Carlisle? Wants out, is 23, absolute GUN when playing in his PROPER position which is FB and will easily replace Richards and Grundy for the next 10 years who are finished.

Give me a spell about his attitude. How would you feel towards your employer if they did what Essendon had done? I do not blame him one iota for wanting out of that toxic football club.

Beatson and Harley should be all over getting him to the club. Our first pick should do it, if they want more chuck in Bird.

Disgraceful that were not in for him. Perfect opportunity to get a KPD for the next 10 years.

Because he's going to earn more than $450k. So we're not allowed.

Thanks VFL.

 

[Chaisa]

Why the hell are we not in for Carlisle? Wants out, is 23, absolute GUN when playing in his PROPER position which is FB and will easily replace Richards and Grundy for the next 10 years who are finished.

Give me a spell about his attitude. How would you feel towards your employer if they did what Essendon had done? I do not blame him one iota for wanting out of that toxic football club.

Beatson and Harley should be all over getting him to the club. Our first pick should do it, if they want more chuck in Bird.

Disgraceful that were not in for him. Perfect opportunity to get a KPD for the next 10 years.

Costs too much I'm afraid.

 

[JimmySwan]

Because he's going to earn more than $450k. So we're not allowed.

Thanks VFL.

We can easily back end his contract. Offer him 400k first year and once this ridiculous ban is over bump up his price. 400k first year, 500k plus next years after ban has subsided.

Surely we can do that?

 

[replicant]

We can easily back end his contract. Offer him 400k first year and once this ridiculous ban is over bump up his price. 400k first year, 500k plus next years after ban has subsided.

Surely we can do that?

Nope. It's averaged over the life of the contract.

 

[bedford]

Because he's going to earn more than $450k. So we're not allowed.

Thanks VFL.

He has nothing to do with the VFL, all though Essendon's ressies play in it. WTFDWFT

 

[replicant]

He has nothing to do with the VFL, all though Essendon's ressies play in it. WTFDWFT

The trade ban has everthing to do with a VFL mentality though. WTFDYTYA?

 

[Lakeside Swan]

I'd like a bit of Lobbe!

Ear, ear.

 

[Lakeside Swan]

Has there been any confirmation of Dunkley's intentions? If not I wouldn't be surprised if the Swans had asked him to delay an announcement until after the trade period.

On a recent AFL video he mentioned that he wouldn't nominate until after the trade period. Maybe this could be because he wants to see what draft picks we have? Maybe this could be to see what draft picks Richmond have?

 

[doona]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-10-...lions-may-match-bombers-offer-for-leuenberger

wonder if we saw this happening? Thought it could get to messy?

 

[DST]

Because he's going to earn more than $450k. So we're not allowed.

Thanks VFL.

Even without the trade restrictions in place we would no be able to fit his wages in, unless we cut one of our top 10 earning players.

Our salary cap is now tighter than a nun's nasty

 

[robbieando]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-10-...lions-may-match-bombers-offer-for-leuenberger

wonder if we saw this happening? Thought it could get to messy?

Always was the chance of them matching with the restrictions we had in terms of what we could offer Leuenberger salary wise and the fact they went from thinking they were going to get a 1st Round Pick after their first selection for him to only a end of second round pick maybe a end of third at worst in terms of their compo pick.

 

[doona]

Always was the chance of them matching with the restrictions we had in terms of what we could offer Leuenberger salary wise and the fact they went from thinking they were going to get a 1st Round Pick after their first selection for him to only a end of second round pick maybe a end of third at worst in terms of their compo pick.

375k is quite low though, would have been obvious that it would net Brisbane a bad pick. I mean we want to pay Sinclair 400k

 

[Lakeside Swan]

375k is quite low though, would have been obvious that it would net Brisbane a bad pick. I mean we want to pay Sinclair 400k

People are saying $400k for Sinclair but that's a figure that only BigFooty people have mentioned. On the Perth news they said $1 million over 4 years which is more likely to be closer to the figure I would think.

 

[doona]

People are saying $400k for Sinclair but that's a figure that only BigFooty people have mentioned. On the Perth news they said $1 million over 4 years which is more likely to be closer to the figure I would think.

250k is waaay lower then the AFL average per year. Highly doubt Sinclair would move from Perth for that.

So I highly doubt the figure you just posted. As he would be our primary ruck.

 

[Superstar swan]

250k is waaay lower then the AFL minimum per year. Highly doubt Sinclair would move from Perth for that.

So I highly doubt the figure you just posted. As he would be our primary ruck.

250k is a lot higher than the afl minimum

 

[The19thMan]

Would you guys do 28 + 32 for 14 considering 28 + 32 are worth more than 14 in terms of academy points?

 

[doona]

250k is a lot higher than the afl minimum

Meant average, my bad

 

[replicant]

Would you guys do 28 + 32 for 14 considering 28 + 32 are worth more than 14 in terms of academy points?

Only if Dunkley nominates. Otherwise i don't think it'll make much difference to us.

 

[Tuco]

People are saying $400k for Sinclair but that's a figure that only BigFooty people have mentioned. On the Perth news they said $1 million over 4 years which is more likely to be closer to the figure I would think.

Yeah. I always take a round number like that in the media with a pinch of salt, too.

 

[The19thMan]

Only if Dunkley nominates. Otherwise i don't think it'll make much difference to us.

What about Mills?

 

[doona]

Would you guys do 28 + 32 for 14 considering 28 + 32 are worth more than 14 in terms of academy points?

No way. A club like Collingwood I reckon would give ~21 (from gcs) & 26 for it.

With the amount of trades, if we trade it, would go to the highest bidder.

I doubt yours would be the hhighest bid.

 

[The19thMan]

No way. A club like Collingwood I reckon would give ~21 (from gcs) & 26 for it.

With the amount of trades, if we trade it, would go to the highest bidder.

I doubt yours would be the hhighest bid.

Fair enough. I'm sure all the list managers and recruiters will be going over all the scenarios where they can make these kind of deals.

 

[doona]

Fair enough. I'm sure all the list managers and recruiters will be going over all the scenarios where they can make these kind of deals.

Potentially yours could be the best, but the amount of trading because picks below 20 are not that good, means a lot of clubs would be after it.

Essendon, Collingwood are 2 I could see trumping that.

And Collingwood will trade out of the first round because of Treloar.

 

[replicant]

What about Mills?

Mills will cost likely our first and maybe a little under our second. Not sure, depends where he's bid If it's 3, then we need a few points, but if it's 4 or later, we should have enough anyway. Either way, the few points we gain from swapping our first for two second rounders is only going tog et us from pick 70 odd to pick 55 odd, which in this draft is meaningless.

If Dunkley nominates, we need more points.

 

[AG]

Still on the ruck merry-go-round:

Terry Wallace, who is reviewing Port's list is saying he's not sure Dixon, Ryder, Westhoff, Lobbe, and Schulz can all play together. Reckons Lobbe could be one to go.

Option for a 3-way trade with us and WCE? Jetta-Lobbe-maybe 2nd this year and next?

Came on to mention this. Read that article and I'd be happier with Lobbe over Sinclair.

Swans need to get creative with pursuing a ruckman. Not as keen on Sinclair as others. He had a good patch this year surrounded by average performances.