Big Fish ?...Hawthorn trade news and targets thread(not for trade hypotheticals)

[Brant]

Would you rather Whitfield or Lever more?

Lever.

 

[sven_inc]

Seems the future trading document released by the AFL via the Herald Sun helps us out immensely.

Can trade future picks before needing to have one this year and next if I understand it correctly.

Still plenty of trading ammo left in the gun!

 

[sven_inc]

Seems the future trading document released by the AFL via the Herald Sun helps us out immensely.

Can trade future picks before needing to have one this year and next if I understand it correctly.

Still plenty of trading ammo left in the gun!

 

[Roughies Boys]

Why can't we have both ? haha

Depends where we finish on the ladder

 

[bradburygold]

Seems the future trading document released by the AFL via the Herald Sun helps us out immensely.

Can trade future picks before needing to have one this year and next if I understand it correctly.

Still plenty of trading ammo left in the gun!

Link?

 

[threesixpio]

Seems the future trading document released by the AFL via the Herald Sun helps us out immensely.

Can trade future picks before needing to have one this year and next if I understand it correctly.

Still plenty of trading ammo left in the gun!

Is that the Geelong rule?

 

[OzJohnnie]

Is that the Geelong rule?

No. The AFL has published their trading rules document and it turns out the press has been wrong about future picks. You don't have to use 2 picks every four years, exactly. You just have to have used two picks in the last four years. So that means, I believe, we can trade another future first rounder if we pick one up in two years's time. Or use two first rounders in the same year.

I cant find a copy of the rule book and the assclowns writing this story are unable to explain it clearly.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...9/news-story/62ac5fa26bb74712ec0a6e84e2e92888

 

[threesixpio]

No. The AFL has published their trading rules document and it turns out the press has been wrong about future picks. You don't have to use 2 picks every four years, exactly. You just have to have used two picks in the last four years. So that means, I believe, we can trade another future first rounder if we pick one up in two years's time. Or use two first rounders in the same year.

I cant find a copy of the rule book and the assclowns writing this story are unable to explain it clearly.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...9/news-story/62ac5fa26bb74712ec0a6e84e2e92888

We used two first rounders last year. That means we can trade another one yeah? Lovell and Burton

 

[OzJohnnie]

We used two first rounders last year. That means we can trade another one yeah? Lovell and Burton

I'm not certain, but from that craptastic article I believe yes, we still have a first rounder to trade.

 

[OzJohnnie]

Also, the implication being that there is no penalty for getting caught short of trades, per se, instead you're just not allowed to trade first rounders until enough time has passed to get two in the last four years.

I hate to admit it, but the AFL designed a good rule there. It's self-regulating and requires no judgement to enforce.

 

[threesixpio]

Changed to Dylan Shiel

 

[Mr Lizard]

I'm not certain, but from that craptastic article I believe yes, we still have a first rounder to trade.

If we trade out next years first round pick, it puts us in the position of needing to trade another one in for 2019.

 

[OzJohnnie]

If we trade out next years first round pick, it puts us in the position of needing to trade another one in for 2019.

I'm not sure about that. It would be great to read the rules for myself so I new for certain, but from the article it seems that if a team wants over trade its first rounders then only need to trade one back in if they want to keep trading. Otherwise they just need to let enough time pass so that two trades have happened in the last four years. I think you need the two past trades to be eligible to trade again, but there is no penalty, per se, for not having two trades in the last four (other than not being able to trade).

That's why I remarked it was such a good rule. It doesn't require the commission to sit in judgement, fraught as that is with old-boys back room deals. It appears to merely be a binary yes/no can you trade. Like a light switch. On or off. If it is, then it's pretty smart.

 

[sven_inc]

My quick interpretation was that the four year trading cycle doesn't kick in until 2019. This would allow us (and Geelong) to trade this years and next years to speed up our respective rebuilds.

Exciting.

 

[bradburygold]

The thumpings wont help attract any big fish but interesting the reports richmond have upped their offer from 800k to 1m, screams to me he is gettable if they cant get him to sign

 

[Roughies Boys]

The thumpings wont help attract any big fish but interesting the reports richmond have upped their offer from 800k to 1m, screams to me he is gettable if they cant get him to sign

He'd be #1 to get. But I think Rocky is the guy with Lever through as trade.

Wait a year for Whitfield.

 

[Hawker98]

Tom Nicholls is out of contract at the end of next season, him and Ceglar could make a half decent ruck duo for a few years


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Kanga Commando]

The thumpings wont help attract any big fish but interesting the reports richmond have upped their offer from 800k to 1m, screams to me he is gettable if they cant get him to sign

Have heard recently all he's chasing is coin... We will have heaps once the deck is cleared late this year

 

[Roughies Boys]

Whitfield our big fish of 2018 Off-season

 

[Gralin]

I thought this was the 2017 thread

 

[Steven Tyler]

Whitfield is a big fish?

 

[Snoref]

Considering our draft picks available i think Jasper Pittard could be a cheap fit.

 

[Hawkie_McHawkHawk]

The thumpings wont help attract any big fish but interesting the reports richmond have upped their offer from 800k to 1m, screams to me he is gettable if they cant get him to sign

Hawthorn would be nuts to go after Dusty, which Id bet my nuts they won't.
I can't see a club as clever as ours putting massive coin into a player that could help right now but will be at the tail end of his career by the time we're truly challenging again.
If I know the club like I think I do they'll be looking at young up and coming mids who require further development to turn into the next wave of elite mids, and pay them what they're worth, rather than entering a bidding war for the top few players league wide.

Players like Fyfe and Martin could help right now but they are salary cap cloggers, whilst we are at the (close to) bottom of the rebuild cycle it would a bad move I think.

 

[Steven Tyler]

Hawthorn would be nuts to go after Dusty, which Id bet my nuts they won't.
I can't see a club as clever as ours putting massive coin into a player that could help right now but will be at the tail end of his career by the time we're truly challenging again.
If I know the club like I think I do they'll be looking at young up and coming mids who require further development to turn into the next wave of elite mids, and pay them what they're worth, rather than entering a bidding war for the top few players league wide.

Players like Fyfe and Martin could help right now but they are salary cap cloggers, whilst we are at the (close to) bottom of the rebuild cycle it would a bad move I think.

So do we trade guys like Gunston, Rioli, Breust, Smith?

 

[Hawkie_McHawkHawk]

So do we trade guys like Gunston, Rioli, Breust, Smith?

In my opinion, with all emotion taken out of it, id see what other clubs would offer for someone like Cyril..
He's 28 this year, relies heavily on his athleticism and he's still in his prime so other clubs would throw themselves at someone of his class.. But il stop right there before I get lynched!