Mega Thread Trade and List Management discussion

[fronkalicious]

fronkalicious At risk of firing up an already volatile board, now that the trade period is over, are you able to reveal the trade that we tried to do to get a high draft pick?

Fair call. Yes I will.

We had serious discussions with Carlton around trading bontempelli for picks 1 and whatever they received for yarran
......................................................................................................................







Sorry aldo, I'd rather not discuss what we were planning.

 

[BallaratBulldog]

jesus... if that happened. I still think it was Libba

 

[TheHoneyBadger]

Fair call. Yes I will.

We had serious discussions with Carlton around trading bontempelli for picks 1 and whatever they received for yarran
......................................................................................................................







Sorry aldo, I'd rather not discuss what we were planning.

My doctor will be sending you an invoice.

 

[Hard Ball Get]

Lets say Dal thinks Ben McKay is the possible ruck/forward that we know he has been on the lookout for. hypothetical like.

Before the trade with Carlton, we take Ben McKay with pick 11. Its a reach, but we cant risk him not being there at pick 30.

Now we take him with 21, and get another pick right after. How is that not a better scenario?

You might have your heart set on some player who is being talked up in the phantom drafts as being available at 11, but when has Dalrymple ever taken a player that was talked up in the phantoms as being available for our early picks? never ever, thats when.

I don't think we need a young developing ruck forward personally. We need an established ruck.

 

[dergert]

Holy ****. That would tear the seams of our team's fabric right into little pieces. I trust our list management teams but that kid is a once in a generation player.

 

[dergert]

Wait. That just flew over my head. Damn you fronk.

 

[True Dog]

Not one to jump up and down about these things, but:

1. I don't like not having a first round pick 2 years in a row.
2. I don't like losing an AFL ready key defender (Talia) from a list already thin in that area and not replacing him with another one.
3. I don't think our list needs another four 18 year olds.

I wonder if we won't nominate Macpherson at all, and just use picks 21, 22 and 30 and then either re-sign Grant with our 5th spot or sign a mature delisted free agent.

By all means Fronk, jump away (you have every right to)

 

[TedDougChris]

My perspective on the whole trade period. This is what I think might have happened

1. We had a target in place for the ruck, which we believe to be Martin - which then fell through.
2. We enquired about those KPP's we were keen on. May, Haynes, then Carlisle when the Talia shit went down. Possibly some others we are not aware of.
3. We these were rebuffed, we then looked at the draft and decided that there were potential targets in the 3 - 6 range, that would be very useful acquisitions.
4. We then chased some of these picks, but either the price was too high (from memory Melbourne wanted Dahl plus our first pick for their first last year) or they were unwilling to trade them at the time we enquired.
5. We then made a late play for Lobbe - as a potential ruck upgrade on what we have.
6. Our desire to get rid of Talia for something realistic was compounded by the AFL 'Nothing to See here policy' (although his value isnt high in any case)
7. We've then assessed the draft and determined that 2 picks in the 20's is better than one at 11 - in terms of quality and filling gaps in our list.

You can argue that we haven't gone hard enough, but IMO there were only a handful of real quality players traded - Treloar, Dangerfield, Carlisle, Bennell; with a few good players (Henderson, Yarran, Rosa, Aish, maybe a few others) and the rest were just good ordinary players or outright spuds (mostly to Carlton).

Most of these guys don't really fill a need for us (or didn't want to come here) and some we are better off without (if the rumours about Bennell and Carlisle are true).

Given the issues with low scoring, unattractive and slow moving football we were complaining about 12 months ago, I'd be backing the recruiters to help us fill the spots we have and look forward to further upward progression next year - because as we've seen, a plan and the right talent can make huge in-roads in a short period of time.

 

[Hard Ball Get]

100% accurate and absolutely the right thing to do. A good will trade for sure.

Right thing to do by who?
A. Swans
B. Talia

The only way it aids us is if there is a similar situation in reverse, which is unlikely.

 

[fronkalicious]

Right thing to do by who?
A. Swans
B. Talia

The only way it aids us is if there is a similar situation in reverse, which is unlikely.

Swans. As they did by us last year with Biggs.

 

[Bulldog1954]

The clubs recruiting department are going to be much more aware of the sort of players that will be available at picks in the early twenties then a bunch of people on Bigfooty thinking they are experts because they watch a few draft videos and have their amazing "sources" we hear about so often.

 

[Hard Ball Get]

Swans. As they did by us last year with Biggs.

I think the Biggs trade was fair. He's a great depth player with the potential to be slightly more.

 

[ErnieSigley]

Yeah, my gripe with the Talia trade is simply that the AFL investigation forced us to trade Talia for a draft pick equivalent to Michael's value to us, where most trades are calculated with a net value closer to the value of a player to the club pursuing him.

Players get sacked. We aren't the first or the last to lose a player for relatively nothing. Again this is about club ethics above anything else.

 

[razorwick]

Are you sure about that Ernie ?
I can only ever him kicking 200 on him

I remember the day. Dunstall went off with a quad at the 8 minute mark of the 1st quarter.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

Not quite sure I get the outcries (not on here) of "loopholes" with the picks-for-points deals. I may be missing something but I don't see any loophole in that at all. I see it as being a way whereby the academy system is benefiting clubs other than those with academies, which is a fantastic thing for the game.

 

[ErnieSigley]

Are you sure about that Ernie ?
I can only ever him kicking 200 on him

One of the very few. I remember the footy show doing a segment on it years ago

 

[ThirdLegUp]

Fair call. Yes I will.

We had serious discussions with Carlton around trading bontempelli for picks 1 and whatever they received for yarran
......................................................................................................................







Sorry aldo, I'd rather not discuss what we were planning.

Fronk, dead set.... i have just taken 2 panamax... reading Bonts name caused a brain bleed on its own, thus the rest of the sentance processed by my hemorrhaging brain as bont and our first (11) for Yarran.... feeling whoozy, gonna lie down.

 

[King Bont]

Fair call. Yes I will.

We had serious discussions with Carlton around trading bontempelli for picks 1 and whatever they received for yarran
......................................................................................................................







Sorry aldo, I'd rather not discuss what we were planning.

Before the Carlisle drug scandal, saints fans were claiming Libba was targeted by them. Is there any truth behind that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Norm De Guerre]

Fair call. Yes I will.

We had serious discussions with Carlton around trading bontempelli for picks 1 and whatever they received for yarran
......................................................................................................................







Sorry aldo, I'd rather not discuss what we were planning.

You bastard! You made me read that twice.

That's a new personal record for me.

 

[go you pups]

Fronk strikes again

 

[fronkalicious]

Before the Carlisle drug scandal, saints fans were claiming Libba was targeted by them. Is there any truth behind that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Absolutely none

 

[TedDougChris]

Not quite sure I get the outcries (not on here) of "loopholes" with the picks-for-points deals. I may be missing something but I don't see any loophole in that at all. I see it as being a way whereby the academy system is benefiting clubs other than those with academies, which is a fantastic thing for the game.

I think there are two issues. One is there are more academy players each than F/S each year. So there is more benefit to certain clubs. This is multiplied by the discount they get for each player.

The second is the ability for these clubs to bid for higher players. We cannot pool our points for Weitering, but Sydney could (if he was an academy player). So high picks are less important to them than other sides.

Theyve used this to obtain more points by selling high picks for more points than they are worth, meaning that they are essentially moving up the order all the time. Combined with the discount I suspect they have access to far more points than we would in the same situation...

 

[stefoid]

I don't think we need a young developing ruck forward personally. We need an established ruck.

sure, but we are talking about the draft. We tried and failed to trade for an established ruck.

 

[Mattdougie]

sure, but we are talking about the draft. We tried and failed to trade for an established ruck.

We failed Coz we didn't go hard enough

Look at the cats and Hawks.

They pinpoint what they need and go and get it.

We needed a ruckman who would release Rough as a KP.

People can make excuses like their wasn't one there or blah blah but they are always there if you go hard enough and sell the club to the player. Hawks prove it year after year and cats did it this year

 

[yebiga]

Got luck with f/s in libbas year
The last few years of trading where conducted under the guidance of Brendan Mac
I fear we will now revert to the Howard years

E- for trade period