List Mgmt. Official 2016 trade period discussion

[Sticksman]

I suspect that GWS pay a guy to stand by the office door holding their books directly above a paper shredder 24 hours a day. If at any time AFL staff knock on the door he has to let go of the books to be able to open the door for them, inadvertently shredding all of the evidence...

Allegedly.

They have a small supporter base and I find it hard to imagine their major sponsors contributing vast amounts to the club. The only other stream of cash is from the AFL and it would know exactly how much is pumped in.

 

[Munich]

That's sounds like a culture shift to me.........around about the same time Scott other on the club

Let's not open that ol' can of worms...

Aight, this has been fun, has helped me procrastinate enough from the work I'm meant to be doing right now.

I'm nearly all trade-talked out I think.

One more day!

 

[zb14]

I don't think that first round picks are overrated but that people over estimate the strike rate of drafting in general.

Yes, that's probably the more accurate way of putting it. In essence, a known afl exposed quantity will generally see a better return than the lottery of the draft. Generally. So, trading is really the low-risk approach. The Hawks cottoned onto this a while back, whether that was by accident or design I'm not sure. It's a shame the 2 in 4 rule didn't come in a decade ago, as we would've avoided a Hawthorn 3peat I'm certain.

 

[David the Cat]

I don't think he creamed it.

He was the first person to actually trade for a RFA. No one has given more than Wells for a RFA. (A)

Henderson - most would say we overpaid at the time. (B)

Scooter was free

Smith - Wasn't in their 22 and was right time and place for us to sneak in with 2 3rd round picks. (C)

We got good players but we didn't necessarily do anything out of the ordinary - the players wanted to come and we paid fair value or a bit more (or just what was within the rules for scooter).

(A) It was worth it.

(B) Those who said that "at the time" were proved wrong. Henderson was better than good in 2016 and will be a fixture in our side for the foreseeable future.

(C) He creamed it there then....

 

[Seeds]

taylor and hawkins were backended

Well that's insanely stupid. We back ended contracts in the years we weren't a premiership threat into the years where we could be a premiership threat. Mind boggles. Ok the wells must go theme is going to grow louder over the coming days.

 

[Seeds]

Conca was pick 6 in the same draft. Going by your method Conca straight swap for Caddy is a fair swap. I will call Hartley and Wells to not lose anymore sleep over the trade as we have juat figured it out for them.

A richmond top 10 pick ain't worth the same as a top ten pick from another club. It's like the dual currency system used in Iraq.

 

[Mahlepi]

Mate cmon this is the same Wells that creamed the trade period last year. Give him some credit we will see.

creamed - lets get serious
selwood wanting to play with his brother in his home state and a freebie
henderson for a first round pick, many at the time called it paying overs
danger - was a steal but we we should have gained him as a rfa, just dumb played by all

stanley - paid overs
bundy - accepted unders
walker - traded for jack
jj - traded for jack
sj - bad trade
kersten - will be another fail
vardy - traded for jack
his trade history is average - his drafting is of a higher level

 

[David the Cat]

How did you enjoy the stat comparison?

Notice that Conca actually wins?

Like I said earlier....you can keep your Reece Conca....

And good luck in Fantasy Football in the future.

 

[Mahlepi]

Well that's insanely stupid. We back ended contracts in the years we weren't a premiership threat into the years where we could be a premiership threat. Mind boggles. Ok the wells must go theme is going to grow louder over the coming days.

its the reason we tipped out varcoe
the issue was we kept injured players on main list and paid them well, and this was part of our problem
- vardy is a prime example of a fail in this regard

 

[Seeds]

(A) It was worth it.

(B) Those who said that "at the time" were proved wrong. Henderson was better than good in 2016 and will be a fixture in our side for the foreseeable future.

(C) He creamed it there then....

In regards to B there is no proving things wrong in hindsight. Even if you have special insight the rest of the market doesn't as the rest of the market is where the price is set.

 

[Cevap_Roll]

A richmond top 10 pick ain't worth the same as a top ten pick from another club. It's like the dual currency system used in Iraq.

I will pay that.

 

[_Cayz_]

Like I said earlier....you can keep your Reece Conca....

And good luck in Fantasy Football in the future.

Thank you, I am actually pretty good at Fantasy Football.

 

[Catsnlakers]

Not sold on Tuohy, but incredibly happy to get rid of Smedts.

I think tuohy will blossom more in a defence that can intercept mark more often, its one thing we do alot better then he would of experienced at the blues, that will mean he can get on his bike more for handball receives and use his long kicking.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Thank you, I am actually pretty good at Fantasy Football.

We know, you barrack for Richmond.

 

[Cataholic]

Not at all.

I said:

If Caddy is worth pick 15 and 24 then Conca is worth a first rounder. Did you forget how to read?

Yes, I can read, but you're slow catching on.

Visiting us with a smartarse attitude won't end well. Capiche?

 

[catempire]

Not at all.

I said:

If Caddy is worth pick 15 and 24 then Conca is worth a first rounder. Did you forget how to read?

Careful.

 

[Lana]

Yes, that's probably the more accurate way of putting it. In essence, a known afl exposed quantity will generally see a better return than the lottery of the draft. Generally. So, trading is really the low-risk approach. The Hawks cottoned onto this a while back, whether that was by accident or design I'm not sure. It's a shame the 2 in 4 rule didn't come in a decade ago, as we would've avoided a Hawthorn 3peat I'm certain.

I wouldn't say it the low risk approach it depends who you're bringing in, O'Meara would be anything but low risk. But at least you know what you're getting into before you recruit the player and there is less likely be surprises both good and bad.

 

[thegerman]

creamed the trade period? bwahhahahaha....all he did was bring in players who wanted to come and paid more than he had to in every single transaction.

Lol. We went from a team sliding out of finals, with an old list. To top 2.

Give me a break

 

[_Cayz_]

Careful.

My apologies, I retract that part of my statement.

After reviewing the compared stats of Conca and Caddy, does anyone still seriously believe Caddy is worth Pick 15 and 24?

The Age is reporting:

"Caddy appears destined to join the Tigers on the final day of trading with the Cats and Tigers haggling over whether the deal will be done for pick 24 or 27."

 

[MelbCat]

My take on things:

- Tuohy and Carlton's R2 2017 for Smedts and Geelong's R1 2016 = Slightly below par at worst and slightly above par at best.
- Vardy for pick 54 = par. Pick 34 is fantasy land stuff.
- Kersten for pick 40 = par. Pick 63 is below par.
- Caddy for pick 15 = par. Pick 24/27 is completely unacceptable. Pick 15 AND pick 24/27 is fantasy land stuff. I suspect (hope), there will be a player from GWS involved.

Obviously the last 3 deals are speculative at this stage but that's my assessment of things as they currently sit. Not sure what all the fuss is about.

Sent from my HTC_0PJA10 using Tapatalk

Richardson: Hey Wells its Dan here from the Tigs, can we talk about Caddy?
Wells: "If you want him as much as you say you do .... he is a required player look its getting late in the afternoon for a trade so caugh up pick 15 & 27 and his all yours."
Richardson: "Oh ok well well just think about it for a minute"
Wells: "dont take too long we know about AFL houses fax problems"

 

[Munich]

Any reason for that?

Oh sorry, missed this.

I just think he's a spud. Plain and simple.

 

[catempire]

My apologies, I retract that part of my statement.

After reviewing the compared stats of Conca and Caddy, does anyone still seriously believe Caddy is worth Pick 15 and 24?

The Age is reporting:

"Caddy appears destined to join the Tigers on the final day of trading with the Cats and Tigers haggling over whether the deal will be done for pick 24 or 27."

Everyone here is pretty familiar with what The Age is reporting. If you have something else to add, by all means. Otherwise, perhaps move on.

 

[ryza87]

Would Wells consider a straight swap of Lennon and Caddy?

 

[thegerman]

How did you enjoy the stat comparison?

Notice that Conca actually wins?

Hope the weather is nice for you guys in September, wherever you go on holidays

 

[thegerman]

Would Wells consider a straight swap of Lennon and Caddy?

Ha ha lol no