Mega Thread Trade and List Management discussion

[Dry Rot]

The three fourth rounders we have likely end up being valued at around 400 points altogether, so a pick in the late 30s-early 40s to a side just looking for points. Now if you add this to other assets it allows some nice upgrades to occur - for example, if our second rounder next year ends up around 32, it would be beneficial for a team looking for points to give us a pick around 19-20 for these four picks. All of a sudden we've got a really nice pick without giving up much. It's a hypothetical example, but it's entirely feasible assuming the right strings are pulled and the right calls made.

Gone are the days where stockpiling fourth rounders is useless. These can be significant assets for teams with academy selections now given the DVI.

We may need these picks next year, with a likely 4 retirements and a couple of others leaving.

 

[yebiga]

I'd keep j grant
He now knows he has virtually no value
Might be just the scare he needs
Sadly there is a lot of unrealized talent in that weird body

 

[dogwatch]

I like Jed Adcock and reckon he has a lot to offer, just not at the Dogs most likely.

I dunno. He would "add" immensely to the possibilities for Suckling jokes.

 

[go you pups]

I dunno. He would "add" immensely to the possibilities for Suckling jokes.

Surely we are a chance on that front with Biggs and Suckling being recent additions to compliment the Package and Wood.

 

[Fultons]

We need almost all our best 22 at or past 100 games to be anywhere near that side. They had 17 players with over 150 games experience, with a further 4 with 100 or more. The 2010 Collingwood side was another that was also relatively young and inexperienced and they had 15 with over 150 and 6 with 100 or more.

Currently our list has 6 players with more than 100 games experience, Boyd, Murphy, Morris, Minson, Picken and Suckling, with only Dahlhaus, Crameri, Grant (if he stays), Wood, Roughead, Wallis, and Libba a chance to reach 100 by the end of next year (the latter two only if we play finals and they play every game). That's 13 players (some who may not be best 22) as a best case scenario with 100ish games experience by the end of next year. That still leaves us nowhere near two of the least experienced flag winners of the modern era. They are already statistical outliers, we would be statistical improbabilities at absolute best case scenario, in reality winning the flag next year is nigh impossible.
2017 however, is a very different kettle of fish. Our window starts then.

Ok I understand but still don't rate those stats. They don't take any nuances such as the ability of exceptional 50 gamers and inspiring leadership into account but yeah unlikely. Two more questions to run through your calculator. If as you suggest we miss the eight next year. Is there a stat about it being impossible to win a flag from 9/10th the previous year? And do you think the club has been remiss in not forcing the retirement of moyd and Morris?

 

[go you pups]

Ok I understand but still don't rate those stats. They don't take any nuances such as the ability of exceptional 50 gamers and inspiring leadership into account but yeah unlikely. Two more questions to run through your calculator. If as you suggest we miss the eight next year. Is there a stat about it being impossible to win a flag from 9/10th the previous year? And do you think the club has been remiss in not forcing the retirement of moyd and Morris?

Plenty of clubs have finished 9th/10th the year before and challenged/won the next year.

Geelong 2007, they were 10th the year before.
WCE were great this year finished 9th last year.
Collingwood were a rabble IIRC in 00/01 but made a grand final in 02
Adelaide didn't make finals in 1996 IIRC, won 97
Sydney finished 12th or 13th in 95, made the grand final in 96

The percentage is lower of course as a seasoned finals unit would be better prepared to go all the way, but it's possible to win the year after missing out on finals the year beforehand.

 

[immortalmike]

Ok I understand but still don't rate those stats. They don't take any nuances such as the ability of exceptional 50 gamers and inspiring leadership into account but yeah unlikely. Two more questions to run through your calculator. If as you suggest we miss the eight next year. Is there a stat about it being impossible to win a flag from 9/10th the previous year? And do you think the club has been remiss in not forcing the retirement of moyd and Morris?

Rate them however you wish, but that we win the flag next year is nigh on a statistical impossibility. Buddy Franklin and Jarryd Roughead were as good if not better than any 50ish game player we currently have on our list but it still took the Hawks pumping 100 games into them in order to win the flag.

As for your questions, teams missing the finals one year and winning the flag the next happens often enough. It often actually allows a competent team to grab a couple of missing pieces with a lowish draft pick (i.e., through trade). And no Boyd and Morris are extremely important to our young list as leaders, one (or fingers crossed) both may be around in 2017 for our sustained flag tilt, remembering that both were late starters to AFL football.

 

[Dogs Rule]

All jokes aside, given our lack of experience, I think Adcock would be a valuable addition. Get him for nicks, so nothing to lose really.

 

[doggies ftw]

I love it how we're even discussing winning the flag, this time last year we were discussing if we could possibly get out of the bottom 4 (well personally I was saying we would finish around 10th )

 

[Bazza Bulldog]

It might have been mentioned already, but what chance of Lake getting a coaching role, then being rookied (like the GWS model)? He could be handy come September if he can get into some decent shape.

 

[Roscoe_au]

It might have been mentioned already, but what chance of Lake getting a coaching role, then being rookied (like the GWS model)? He could be handy come September if he can get into some decent shape.

Depends on whether we can get a release from Caroline Springs

According to Lake he's very happy in retirement. I'm not sure what sort of coach he'd make? Seems a little left of centre, but I don't know him. Other posters will know whether he is a coaching prospect.

 

[Roscoe_au]

All jokes aside, given our lack of experience, I think Adcock would be a valuable addition. Get him for nicks, so nothing to lose really.

Whose spot does he take in the side?

 

[BRWB]

Whose spot does he take in the side?

Seemingly academic, but I think we could fit him in. How many games like his elim final does Roberts get before he's dropped? How many before he is injured again? Does Rough play back? Will he be fit? Will Hamling take the gorillas? Will he stay fit?

Yeah think we could squeeze Lake in.

Like a few others I'd be supportive of picking a mature KPD either in the draft or rookie such is our gaping hole in the backline.

 

[CaptainMurphy]

Seemingly academic, but I think we could fit him in. How many games like his elim final does Roberts get before he's dropped? How many before he is injured again? Does Rough play back? Will he be fit? Will Hamling take the gorillas? Will he stay fit?

Yeah think we could squeeze Lake in.

Like a few others I'd be supportive of picking a mature KPD either in the draft or rookie such is our gaping hole in the backline.

I think he was talking about Adcock.

 

[BRWB]

I think he was talking about Adcock.

Woops.

I agree on Adcock. Don't need. Seems a no brainer to go to the rudderless GC, meaning doesn't have to move states.

 

[FreeAgent1]

Once again our clubs trade amicably. Biggs for nothing last year cause we could see we were going to lose him for nothing and he wanted the dogs and now you have done the same for Talia.

May clubs continue to trade internally where there doesnt have to be a 'loser' of the trade and the trade isnt facilitated through media posturing!!!!!

thanks

 

[Yojimbo]

Woops.

I agree on Adcock. Don't need. Seems a no brainer to go to the rudderless GC, meaning doesn't have to move states.

I think he will go to Geelong as they have multiple players to pick up
with a draft entry around 67. Gold Coast took Rosa from West Coast
so may not need to Adcock.

 

[doggies ftw]

Once again our clubs trade amicably. Biggs for nothing last year cause we could see we were going to lose him for nothing and he wanted the dogs and now you have done the same for Talia.

May clubs continue to trade internally where there doesnt have to be a 'loser' of the trade and the trade isnt facilitated through media posturing!!!!!

thanks

No worries, just make sure you keep us in mind when it comes to future pick downgrade trades to get points

 

[FreeAgent1]

No worries, just make sure you keep us in mind when it comes to future pick downgrade trades to get points

Haha tbh I think you will find academy clubs will legit 'partner' up with non academy clubs for swaps......those who aren't jerks....... so that rules out quite a few VFL clubs

 

[The Inbetweener]

Don't want to be negative but I really don't get the Talia trade. People compare it to the Biggs trade- in that situation the price we paid for getting Biggs was going back 2 spots in the draft which was great.

In this situation, unless we finish above the Swans (which has to be considered an outside chance and at best is a 50/50) we have given Talia up for free AND we have a worse draft position.

Why take that chance? Surely it was better to just delist him and loss him for nothing rather than lose him for nothing AND worsen out draft position?

 

[Roscoe_au]

Haha tbh I think you will find academy clubs will legit 'partner' up with non academy clubs for swaps......those who aren't jerks....... so that rules out quite a few VFL clubs

Essendon will swap your first and second rounders for something in the 70's each year

 

[BRWB]

Don't want to be negative but I really don't get the Talia trade. People compare it to the Biggs trade- in that situation the price we paid for getting Biggs was going back 2 spots in the draft which was great.

In this situation, unless we finish above the Swans (which has to be considered an outside chance and at best is a 50/50) we have given Talia up for free AND we have a worse draft position.

Why take that chance? Surely it was better to just delist him and loss him for nothing rather than lose him for nothing AND worsen out draft position?

Next years draft is reportedly much deeper so accumulating picks/points then rather than this year is okay by me, even if on the surface we may drift a few spots back.

 

[Barking Mad]

Adcock will be keeping one of the young pups out of the side so i'd prefer not. A rookie slot for Lake isn't that silly even though it would pain me to take him back after leaving us for personal glory. He'd certainly buy us a year on a KPB and also teach the young guys a thing or 3.

 

[FreeAgent1]

Don't want to be negative but I really don't get the Talia trade. People compare it to the Biggs trade- in that situation the price we paid for getting Biggs was going back 2 spots in the draft which was great.

In this situation, unless we finish above the Swans (which has to be considered an outside chance and at best is a 50/50) we have given Talia up for free AND we have a worse draft position.

Why take that chance? Surely it was better to just delist him and loss him for nothing rather than lose him for nothing AND worsen out draft position?

There is an extremely good chance we will finish below you next year, outside of the midfield we have 0 depth..... that said, if we finish 6 and 7 then it really isnt that different...

 

[House_of_Dahl]

Don't want to be negative but I really don't get the Talia trade. People compare it to the Biggs trade- in that situation the price we paid for getting Biggs was going back 2 spots in the draft which was great.

In this situation, unless we finish above the Swans (which has to be considered an outside chance and at best is a 50/50) we have given Talia up for free AND we have a worse draft position.

Why take that chance? Surely it was better to just delist him and loss him for nothing rather than lose him for nothing AND worsen out draft position?

Other way to look at is that we only gave up a pick we weren't going to use and couldn't package up in any deals for a pick we at least might use or be able to package up in a deal next year.