Mega Thread Dayne Beams trade (Its over, thread closed)

[wednesdaywarrior]

Given this mornings report that Derek is now going to school on the top 5 or so draft potentials, I would imagine the thinking is somewhere along the lines that if we can jag the guy in this years draft who becomes the immediate impact player we might come out of this Ok. Looking at guys like Petracca and Brayshaw for example, they have good size already. Though as many have noted Petracca is likely to go number 1.The question is, can we get the guy who is set to become the next Selwood or Wines who impacts season one then goes on to produce? If that can happen then the problem of age profiles becomes less problematic. I don't mind if we can somehow do this, even if we get a guy who doesn't hit pay dirt until his second or third year if we got for example a solid set of steak knives from Brisbane to tide us over til then but it would depend a lot on having that confidence that we can replace Beams in the short term with the guy picked at 4 or 5. In this respect it would be a big bonus if Melbourne were denied the priority pick, which I don't expect will happen.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Given this mornings report that Derek is now going to school on the top 5 or so draft potentials, I would imagine the thinking is somewhere along the lines that if we can jag the guy in this years draft who becomes the immediate impact player we might come out of this Ok. Looking at guys like Petracca and Brayshaw for example, they have good size already. Though as many have noted Petracca is likely to go number 1.The question is, can we get the guy who is set to become the next Selwood or Wines who impacts season one then goes on to produce? If that can happen then the problem of age profiles becomes less problematic. I don't mind if we can somehow do this, even if we get a guy who doesn't hit pay dirt until his second or third year if we got for example a solid set of steak knives from Brisbane to tide us over til then but it would depend a lot on having that confidence that we can replace Beams in the short term with the guy picked at 4 or 5. In this expect it would be a big bonus if Melbourne were denied the priority pick, which I don't expect will happen.

Although i agree with that approach - it is very unlikely that we will get a player on par with Beams... So i wouldnt be accepting pick 4/5 on it's own without something else thrown in. . (hopefully another player... Would really only accept a lower draft pick if it can be used, along with pick 4, to get someone like Dangerfield who makes us better immediately and long term)
-

(And its just semantics - but melbourne won't get a priority pick... They will get a Compensation pick for Frawley- one that, if i understand the rules correctly, depends on his new salary... And so yes it likely will be a first rounder)

 

[Justlokan]

I'm not sure what the Saints would think especially if pick 4 becomes pick 5 but I like that. Not sure Dekka & Bucks would either given earlier statements about experience, but would they change their mind if it's pick 1 & a guarantee of Petrecca?

We may also need to throw in a second round pick as the Saints are in serious rebuild mode they will place a premium on stockpiling youth

 

[DNine]

I think we should be making a big play at Levi Greenwood. He would replace Beams nicely if he continues to improve on what he showed this year he would be great, and what is the rumour this morning that Tigers are looking at Hannebery? I think we should target him for Beams replacement. Would make sense. If Tigers get Greenwood and Hannebery, and we end up with 2 draft picks, I think I will give up.

 

[Snoop Dog]

You said he'd go past one or two of them you thought. Them not coming has nothing to do with this statement. And lol Crisp top 5-7. Maybe he should get a consistent game first.

I think you missed the point the comment was a touch flippant but go away and let me know how many blokes in our team bettered those stats this year.

 

[Snoop Dog]

I am told Collingwood are actively seeking a way to elevate pick 4/5 into pick 1 or 2. View is that if they could get to Brayshaw (at least) then the deal becomes more interesting. Consider a scenario of;

Melbourne
Gain - pick 5 and Lumumba
Lose - pick 2 and a 3rd round

Collingwood
Gain - Pick 2 (Brayshaw) and Melbourne 3rd round
Lose - Pick 5 and Lumumba

Sticking point might be how Melbourne get Stretch so it may be we get their 2nd round and give them back our 3rd or something.

 

[Bay Pie]

Random trade:

Patfull to GWS for pick 21 ( Hey, Terry Wallace said that's his worth)
Merrrit & pick 4 to Demons for pick 2 ( Partial Marty Pask trade stolen)
Beams to Brisbane for picks 2 & 21

Demons lose - Pick 2
Demons gain - pick 4 & Merrit
GWS lose - pick 21
GWS gain - Patfull
Brisbane lose - pick 4, Patfull & Meritt (2 x 30 year olds)
Brisbane gain - Beams
Pies lose - Beams
Pies gain - Picks 2 & 21

Not great for us but gets us 1 of the clear best 2 mids in the draft. We could perhaps throw Yagmoor back to Brisbane

 

[BEEG]

Random trade:

Patfull to GWS for pick 21 ( Hey, Terry Wallace said that's his worth)
Merrrit & pick 4 to Demons for pick 2 ( Partial Marty Pask trade stolen)
Beams to Brisbane for picks 2 & 21

Demons lose - Pick 2
Demons gain - pick 4 & Merrit
GWS lose - pick 21
GWS gain - Patfull
Brisbane lose - pick 4, Patfull & Meritt (2 x 30 year olds)
Brisbane gain - Beams
Pies lose - Beams
Pies gain - Picks 2 & 21

Not great for us but gets us 1 of the clear best 2 mids in the draft. We could perhaps throw Yagmoor back to Brisbane

I would take that

 

[Snoop Dog]

Random trade:

Patfull to GWS for pick 21 ( Hey, Terry Wallace said that's his worth)
Merrrit & pick 4 to Demons for pick 2 ( Partial Marty Pask trade stolen)
Beams to Brisbane for picks 2 & 21

Demons lose - Pick 2
Demons gain - pick 4 & Merrit
GWS lose - pick 21
GWS gain - Patfull
Brisbane lose - pick 4, Patfull & Meritt (2 x 30 year olds)
Brisbane gain - Beams
Pies lose - Beams
Pies gain - Picks 2 & 21

Not great for us but gets us 1 of the clear best 2 mids in the draft. We could perhaps throw Yagmoor back to Brisbane

I just think the Lions would see that as a big give up.

 

[danielnajdek]

Yeah Patfull and Merrit are untouchable.

 

[josephs_79]

While not wanting to lose either of them, it's not that they are untouchable it is more losing both at once.

I think one or the other might be ok (preferably Merrett IMO) but not both is what we are saying.

 

[No SPIN]

You don't look at it in a player transaction view.
You ask yourself.
Is it a waste of Buckley's coaching that he couldn't get the best out of premiership players in their prime years?
What affect has trading these players had on the overall morale and cohesion of the playing list?
You don't look at what they are achieving or not at other clubs.

Yes lets have a team full of players beyond their use by date, for the sake of great morale at the club.
Player changes are inevitable at successful clubs and the remaining players understand that

I don't care either way but a current player is hardly going to say anything but praise for the coach to the media.

If he was unhappy he would just decline the interview - that's much easier, than spouting BS like you're suggesting.

 

[Bay Pie]

I just think the Lions would see that as a big give up.

Yeah possibly, especially considering the untouchables on their list

How about:

Demons Gain - Merritt, pick 5, Lumumba
Demons Lose - Picks 2, 22 & 35 (from Geelong for Clark)

Brisbane Gain - Beams
Brisbane Lose - Pick 5 & Merritt

Pies Gain - Picks 2, 22 & 35 (from Geelong for Clark)
Pies Lose - Beams & Lumumba

 

[Baird]

So Frawley has joined the Hawks.

If the reported offers were true, 450k for 4 years, is that band 2 compensation?

 

[Pleasedontfail11]

So Frawley has joined the Hawks.

If the reported offers were true, 450k for 4 years, is that band 2 compensation?

Won't be band 1.

 

[Pendles!]

So Frawley has joined the Hawks.

If the reported offers were true, 450k for 4 years, is that band 2 compensation?

That cannot be band 1....

 

[Hollow Knight]

Yeah possibly, especially considering the untouchables on their list

How about:

Demons Gain - Merritt, pick 5, Lumumba
Demons Lose - Picks 2, 22 & 35 (from Geelong for Clark)

Brisbane Gain - Beams
Brisbane Lose - Pick 5 & Merritt

Pies Gain - Picks 2, 22 & 35 (from Geelong for Clark)
Pies Lose - Beams & Lumumba

Doesn't look too unbalanced but would think that the Demons are reasonably confident they could get Merrett and Lumumba by using later picks and Clark and without downgrading their first pick out of the "top 4 consensus zone".

Frawley going for band 2 could be a good result though.

If the Dees get pick 19 compensation for Frawley, Brisbane might be upgrade their second rounder from 25 to 19 as part of a Merrett trade.

Pick 4 (in the top 4 consensus zone) plus 19 is an appreciably better package for Beams than 5 and 24. Not guaranteed to get it done, but it's definitely better.

 

[MyManLynch]

Frawley joining the Hawks will result in Pick 4 remains as pick 4 .
Hawks don't have to pay Frawls silly $$. He is chasing a flag.
Pick 4 just become more valuable.

 

[Unknown Identity]

Band 1 has to be at least $600K a season and even then it's not guaranteed.

End of First Round pick for Frawley if true, which lets be honest, is his worth.

 

[NT.Thunder]

I am told Collingwood are actively seeking a way to elevate pick 4/5 into pick 1 or 2. View is that if they could get to Brayshaw (at least) then the deal becomes more interesting. Consider a scenario of;

Melbourne
Gain - pick 5 and Lumumba
Lose - pick 2 and a 3rd round

Collingwood
Gain - Pick 2 (Brayshaw) and Melbourne 3rd round
Lose - Pick 5 and Lumumba

Sticking point might be how Melbourne get Stretch so it may be we get their 2nd round and give them back our 3rd or something.

So is the sticking point to this also Dangerfield's willingness to look at a trade to Collingwood?

I can't see us moving up in the draft order and getting Dangerfield so it seems like one or the other to me. I know we have stated we are looking for a like for like replacement, but truth be know, there isnt much on offer in this category. Dangerfield/Sloane, yet highly unlikely, a tier or 2 down Levi Greenwood and then down to the unknown kids like ORouke. GC does have options within their midfield but not sure how likely they are to break-up a solid playing group that are just starting to gel as potentially the best midfield in 3 years.

Making it difficult is the unknowns with regards to coaching groups of Adl and GCS and just how willing the clubs would be too play around with star players potentially impacting on attracting a quality coach.

It's messy for so many reasons. At least we know Beams wants to go and where and like Dekka said, it's up to Brisbane to fulfill our needs not Beams needs.

Replacing a marquee player with another won't be easy and I'm leaning towards not possible so maybe we do look to the draft early to target future talent if it is so cut and dry.

 

[Unknown Identity]

Yeah possibly, especially considering the untouchables on their list

How about:

Demons Gain - Merritt, pick 5, Lumumba
Demons Lose - Picks 2, 22 & 35 (from Geelong for Clark)

Brisbane Gain - Beams
Brisbane Lose - Pick 5 & Merritt

Pies Gain - Picks 2, 22 & 35 (from Geelong for Clark)
Pies Lose - Beams & Lumumba

Why on earth would Melbourne do that trade?
They will get Lumumba for 22 straight swap.
They could get Merrett for 35 straight swap.
So they are effectively trading pick 2 for 5 for absolutely nothing?

I mean i know we've taken advantage of them in the past but this is just cruel..

 

[Couch Coach]

Doesn't look too unbalanced but would think that the Demons are reasonably confident they could get Merrett and Lumumba by using later picks and Clark and without downgrading their first pick out of the "top 4 consensus zone".

Frawley going for band 2 could be a good result though.

If the Dees get pick 19 compensation for Frawley, Brisbane might be upgrade their second rounder from 25 to 19 as part of a Merrett trade.

Pick 4 (in the top 4 consensus zone) plus 19 is an appreciably better package for Beams than 5 and 24. Not guaranteed to get it done, but it's definitely better.

Pretty sure it's been widely noted that we want a ready made replacement not draft picks.

So Pick 5 and 24 or 4 and 19 are not what we want. Just like we don't want L'berger because it's not a position we need to fill.

 

[Snoop Dog]

Yeah possibly, especially considering the untouchables on their list

How about:

Demons Gain - Merritt, pick 5, Lumumba
Demons Lose - Picks 2, 22 & 35 (from Geelong for Clark)

Brisbane Gain - Beams
Brisbane Lose - Pick 5 & Merritt

Pies Gain - Picks 2, 22 & 35 (from Geelong for Clark)
Pies Lose - Beams & Lumumba

Yep that works...nice but i tinnk melb will feel shortchanged

 

[Unknown Identity]

Pretty sure it's been widely noted that we want a ready made replacement not draft picks.

So Pick 5 and 24 or 4 and 19 are not what we want. Just like we don't want L'berger because it's not a position we need to fill.

Leuenberger would be ontraded.

Pick 4, 22 (lumumba pick) and Leuenberger to Crows for Danger.

 

[Couch Coach]

Yep that works...nice but i tinnk melb will feel shortchanged

How does 3 draft picks give us a ready made player?