Traded Tom Mitchell [traded to Hawthorn with pick 57 for pick 14 & 52]

[SydneySwans!!!!]

Should be a straight forward trade this years first round pick for mitchell.

What are you giving up for JOM?

 

[Smithdogmaddog]

What are you giving up for JOM?

Next years first and one of sicily or langford

 

[Membling]

Next years first and one of sicily or langford

Doubt it would get it done...

 

[Smithdogmaddog]

Doubt it would get it done...

If treloar is worth 2 first rounders and JOM hasn't played for 2 years and has dodgy knees then a reasonable deal has to be considerably less than that.

Fully expect GC to be difficult about it, just hope we don't budge and pay overs. He can always go in the national draft with a decent price on his head and we can take him with the pick we get for Hill (late first or early second round) and GC get nothing.

 

[killerspud]

Don't want. We have Papley, and we have Rose and Robinson sitting in the 2's waiting for a chance. Breust would chew up too much cap for the role he plays.

...and let's face it - you don't have much cap left to chew

 

[killerspud]

Would love Breust at the dogs , would be perfect for us

No problem - straight swap

Breust for Dahlhaus

 

[Membling]

If treloar is worth 2 first rounders and JOM hasn't played for 2 years and has dodgy knees then a reasonable deal has to be considerably less than that.

Fully expect GC to be difficult about it, just hope we don't budge and pay overs. He can always go in the national draft with a decent price on his head and we can take him with the pick we get for Hill (late first or early second round) and GC get nothing.

Depends how GC feel about it. They could make a stand in regards to player movements and set a precedent, rightly or wrongly.

Also, you guys wouldnt take him if dodgy knees were a concern, surely?

Should be interesting trad regardless.

...and let's face it - you don't have much cap left to chew

Probably is running close. We shall wait and see what the new CBA is

 

[Smithdogmaddog]

Depends how GC feel about it. They could make a stand in regards to player movements and set a precedent, rightly or wrongly.

Also, you guys wouldnt take him if dodgy knees were a concern, surely?

Should be interesting trad regardless.



Probably is running close. We shall wait and see what the new CBA is

There is obviously some risk in taking him but a risk we're willing to take but due to that risk you'd expect to give up less.

 

[docko911]

Should be a straight forward trade this years first round pick for mitchell.

Yeah if you had pick 6, but you have pick 14. You'll probably need to give up next years first and this years second.

JOM will cost you this years first and a good player. Shiel, Breust, Stratton...

 

[Smithdogmaddog]

Yeah if you had pick 6, but you have pick 14. You'll probably need to give up next years first and this years second.

JOM will cost you this years first and a good player. Shiel, Breust, Stratton...

Nah, you're seriously over rating mitchell and JOM (taking injury into account).

For example Prestia is not worth your first pick, rich should do the same thing as hawks 1st rounder next year and a decent player. GC said they dont need anymore picks this year and want players but i reckon they should stock up on picks for 2017 draft too. That way they can blanket bomb two consecutive drafts and have a mini rebuild very quickly.

 

[Since 2001]

Doubt it would get it done...

It will be something like
Port: hawks 2016 first
Hawks: O'Meara
Gcs: hartlett, sicily and howe

 

[prodigy]

It will be something like
Port: hawks 2016 first
Hawks: O'Meara
Gcs: hartlett, sicily and howe

I'm surprised you're willing to part with Sicily. Will be a gun.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[replicant]

Nah, you're seriously over rating mitchell and JOM (taking injury into account).

For example Prestia is not worth your first pick, rich should do the same thing as hawks 1st rounder next year and a decent player. GC said they dont need anymore picks this year and want players but i reckon they should stock up on picks for 2017 draft too. That way they can blanket bomb two consecutive drafts and have a mini rebuild very quickly.

You're overrating draft picks.

Here's the recent pick 6's:
2006 mitch thorp
2007 david myers
2008 chris yarran
2009 gary rohan
2010 reece conca
2011 chad wingard
2012 jackson macrae
2013 mattew scharenberg
2014 caleb marchbank
2015 aaron francis

Both Prestia and Mitchell are significantly better than every single name on that list except Chad Wingard (Jackson Macrae close, and Francis is a maybe).

So Prestia is absolutely worth their first pick.

 

[Smithdogmaddog]

I don't rate prestia and mitchell that highly is more the point. They are a tier below the best midfielders in the game.

Rate prestia higher than mitchell but almost all of the players you listed above are very talented and if it wasnt for injuries would be even better.

 

[prodigy]

You're overrating draft picks.

Here's the recent pick 6's:
2006 mitch thorp
2007 david myers
2008 chris yarran
2009 gary rohan
2010 reece conca
2011 chad wingard
2012 jackson macrae
2013 mattew scharenberg
2014 caleb marchbank
2015 aaron francis

Both Prestia and Mitchell are significantly better than every single name on that list except Chad Wingard (Jackson Macrae close, and Francis is a maybe).

So Prestia is absolutely worth their first pick.

Gary Rohan is pretty handy.

Just because a recent run of pick 6's haven't done well, doesn't mean the worth of pick 6 should be decreased. That's utterly ridiculous.
I don't know what the run of pick 7's have been like but if they have garnered better players, would you say pick 7 is worth more than pick 6?
Outrageous.

Prestia is a good player with the potential to be great, and I would understand if Richmond gave up pick 6 for him, but I don't think we will. I feel as though our 2017 first round pick will be of greater use to Gold Coast.

I'd give pick 6 for Mitchell on the other hand if they add in Nankervis.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[replicant]

Gary Rohan is pretty handy.

Just because a recent run of pick 6's haven't done well, doesn't mean the worth of pick 6 should be decreased. That's utterly ridiculous.
I don't know what the run of pick 7's have been like but if they have garnered better players, would you say pick 7 is worth more than pick 6?
Outrageous.

Prestia is a good player with the potential to be great, and I would understand if Richmond gave up pick 6 for him, but I don't think we will. I feel as though our 2017 first round pick will be of greater use to Gold Coast.

I'd give pick 6 for Mitchell on the other hand if they add in Nankervis.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pick 7 is equally hit and miss. This is the point. Draft picks are a risk, you don't know how that kid will turn out. Prestia or Mitchell are known quantities. There' no risk of a kid not coming on, you know they are guns. Any list manager who wouldn't trade pick 6 for either isn't worth his salary. They might try for some extra steak knives, but the basic trade is in their favour already.

 

[prodigy]

Pick 7 is equally hit and miss. This is the point. Draft picks are a risk, you don't know how that kid will turn out. Prestia or Mitchell are known quantities. There' no risk of a kid not coming on, you know they are guns. Any list manager who wouldn't trade pick 6 for either isn't worth his salary. They might try for some extra steak knives, but the basic trade is in their favour already.

I think you're under-valuing the potential of a kid picked in the top 10.
Prestia has had his fair share of injury worries.
Mitchell struggled to initially break into the Sydney side for whatever reason it may have been.

The steak knives that would be involved in either trade I think is important.

I'll use the same example as before - Pick 6 for Mitchell is probably overs.
Pick 6 for Mitchell and Nankervis is fair considering the potential worth Nankervis has to a team like Richmond with minimal ruck stocks/KPP.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TW Sherrin]

Next years first and one of sicily or langford

Langford? Hasn't he played most of the year in the twos?

 

[BPikkers]

I think it comes down to how much a player is worth to the club who wants him and that will determine the price.

Hawks obviously need to plan against an ageing midfield, and Mitchell it exactly the type they need. So what is he worth to the Hawks?

If it's true about the $$ the tigers are offering Prestia, there is little doubt they will be paying up for him on the trade table. The Tigers can't afford the embarrassment of missing out on him and again not being able to land a top player. They will blink first.

 

[Baz_hawk]

It will be something like
Port: hawks 2016 first
Hawks: O'Meara
Gcs: hartlett, sicily and howe

Sicily and Howe???

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

It will be something like
Port: hawks 2016 first
Hawks: O'Meara
Gcs: hartlett, sicily and howe

No it won't. Just stop.

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Swans retiring McGlynn....opening up cap space for Mitchell....or someone else?

 

[Wojcinski]

LOL at Hawthorn thinking they'll get T.Mitch with a spud player or a late first rounder. He is a gun and arguably worth more than JOM

 

[Smithdogmaddog]

Langford? Hasn't he played most of the year in the twos?

He's definitely dropped off since 2014 due to form and injuries but GC are desperate for mids and he's a contested beast. Doesn't suit our gameplan but might be better suited at GC.

 

[Smithdogmaddog]

LOL at Hawthorn thinking they'll get T.Mitch with a spud player or a late first rounder. He is a gun and arguably worth more than JOM

If only we had a gun player like dean gore to add to the trade like geelong did with Dangerfield.