Recruiting Trade & Free Agency V

[Duckworth]

We still have our 2018 1st + Dogs 2018 1st. One of them for Saad + 19/23, then 19/23 for Smith.

Or GWS pick 24 and Smith I guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Alfred E Neuman]

But those two 2018 2nd rounders turn into Rhylee West under the points system, who would have cost them their 2018 1st rounder anyway (assuming his draft value holds over the next 12 months).

Sweet, sounds like a win win then.

 

[Great8]

How highly is West Jnr rated?

Top 20

 

[Stopher]

Top 20

It's one thing that could actually work in our favour, offering them extra points for him in 2018 picks.

 

[Jobe Watson]

Or GWS pick 24 and Smith I guess.

Yeah, either/or.

Unless I'm completely misreading the F/S points system (which is possible), it all lines up.

 

[CBombers17]

I would prefer to be bringing in good midfielders but this year there is nothing to match the over all quality of the three proven players we can get in. 11 could land us a good midfielder via the draft but with the three trades we are bringing in proven players who all will improve us.
The obvious risk is what you have said and that is maybe missing the gun mid via the draft or trade next year. It is a risk but I think with the quality coming in it is worth that risk.
There is nothing we can do now that gives us another big body top line mid for next season. Who knows what next season will bring, someone may step up, someone may want to be trade out or the hail mary event Rory Sloane comes to us via FA .
It is a risk, I agree that we need to improve the midfield but this year i think we need to run with the chance of bringing in 3 players who will make a difference.

Thanks ANT555 - At least this way there will be plenty of opportunity for could-be mids on the list to get AFL game time. If a couple develop - say Mcgrath/Langford - in addition to these trades - it may make us even more attractive to a sloan type who wants success in in 2018 and beyond.

 

[Duckworth]

Yeah, either/or.

Unless I'm completely misreading the F/S points system (which is possible), it all lines up.

So we get SSS for 11, 28 and next years 2nd. I’m OK with that.

Edit: with the bonus of hoping the Dogs do badly to get a top 5 pick. If we keep their first instead of our own.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Old Campaigner]

So we get SSS for 11, 28 and next years 2nd. I’m OK with that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think most clubs would b overjoyed to get 2 best 22 players in this years draft plus another best 22 player + a first round pick and late picks in the next draft.

In trades of picks for players, the club that gets the player almost always wins. Picks are horribly over valued. Even players picked in the first round have a shockingly low average games played given everyone talks them all up as stars in the lead up to draft day. I suspect among fans there is a bit of confirmation bias or something and we remember the picks that we've done well on but easily forget the multitude who are delisted after a couple of years or never live up to the hype. The fact that we are getting proven players to nominate us is a win in itself, it points to a future where we are getting proven best 22 players with none of the risk and uncertainty of drafting unproven kids.

 

[Sammymoite]

Anyone reckon we'll get all three S's?

 

[Duckworth]

Anyone reckon we'll get all three S's?

Jobe Watson convinced me, it’s happening.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JayJ20]

I think the SEN deal will be the one that both teams will be happy with.

We stay in the first round next year. Dogs exchange a 2018 1st rounder they'll probably have to use on a F/S anyway for pick 11 this year that they can actually use to draft. We give them a second rounder next year that they can combine with their own second to use for West, who will likely be bid on pretty early.

We give GC one of our firsts next year for Saad + either 22 or 19.
We then give that pick to GWS for Smith.

Essentially, it's a first rounder and 2 seconds for Saad, Smith and Stringer while keeping a first in the supposed strong draft.

GC get the first rounder they're after. GWS get an early second pick that they can use to potentially trade into the first round. Bulldogs get to turn a likely non-live first round pick next year into a live pick this year.

 

[vast]

Melbourne arent really gonna give 2 first round picks for lever are they?

What the next genuine superstar going to cost in a trade. 2 first and 2 2nd rounders + ?

 

[ant555]

This is what i've been saying. My only concern is whether Smith will be a genuine midfielder or not, because i certainly don't want him as another small forward. Do you have an opinion on that?

Has had some high possession games (30 plus) playing through the midfield at various stages and if you go back to those games his contested v uncontested footy was well balanced.

 

[Lore]

Am I right in thinking that this is how the proposed SEN rumour trade (11 + 29 + Bombers 2018 2nd FOR Stringer + Dogs 2018 1st) would work out?

They can either use their 2018 1st rounder to get West and also have their 2018 2nd rounder, with us straight swapping Stringer for 11 (keeping pick 29),

OR, give up their 2018 1st with us sending pick 11, pick 29 and a 2018 2nd back in return. Since our 2018 2nd + Dogs 2018 2nd = a top 15 pick, they can then use the points from those two picks to secure West in place of their first rounder. In essence, 11 + 29 for Stringer and Dogs 2018 2nd rounder.

If so, sounds pretty fair, and would make securing Saad and Smith a hell of a lot easier.

The first time I saw that post I just glossed over it... "another convoluted hypothetical trade" I thought. Reading on a bit I had to scroll back and figure out why the heck the dogs would agree to part with their first rounder..

So put simply:
ESS out/WB in: 11, 29, 2018 2nd
WB out/ESS in: Stringer, Dogs 2018 1st

But with the expectation that the Dogs still get a first round kid next year because they use the two second rounders next year to get a father/son kid called West?

Yeah, either/or.

Unless I'm completely misreading the F/S points system (which is possible), it all lines up.

The crux of the points/bidding system is that if someone bids on your player with their pick, then you need to pay 80% of the value of that pick with your next available pick/s in order to match it. Our second round pick can upgrade theirs at best to anywhere between pick 3 and pick 13, depending on where the teams finish next year.

Of course, they'd probably prefer our 2018 first in a straight swap, because then they can get another top kid as well as their father/son. Depends how much they want to act like campaigners and how much we're willing to spend on Stringer I suppose.

 

[JayDon]

Stringer IN!
The other 2? I'll have SAAD.
We've got blokes who can do the SAAD thing.
The same for Smith. Good get but whatever.
Get Stringer now. Throw it all in!
I love the potential of our young emerging stars!
Stringer in creates havoc for other teams and our emerging players may well create similar?
UNLEASH FURY!
And stop the delay! No need to. Look decided to create more FEAR!!!

 

[Jobe Watson]

But with the expectation that the Dogs still get a first round kid next year because they use the two second rounders next year to get a father/son kid called West?

Basically.

Dogs get: 11, 30, Essendon 2018 2nd
Essendon get: Stringer, Dogs 2018 1st

It looks unfair like that, but when you consider that two 2018 2nd rounders can be used by the Dogs to combine for a 1st round prospect under the F/S rule, it looks pretty even.

Dogs lose their 2018 2nd - because that will be combined with our 2018 2nd to turn into a 2018 1st to secure likely top 15 prospect West - but they get an extra 2nd round pick to use this year. Since everyone has a boner for next year's draft and this year's draft is supposed to be weak, they may baulk at replacing a pick next year for one this year. However, they could send our pick 30 to Freo for Crozier while keeping their own 2nd rounder, leaving them with 9 + 11 + 27 in this year's draft.

Of course, they'd probably prefer our 2018 first in a straight swap

Yeah, a straight swap would be easiest. But I doubt Dodo would want to risk next year's 1st for Stringer.

But this still gives them their sought-after pick 11, will still allow them to secure West (assuming he doesn't get bid on very early in next year's draft or, conversely, does his knee and turns into a 2nd round prospect) who would have likely cost them their 2018 1st anyway, and will still allow them to make a 2nd round draft selection while bringing in Crozier this year. For us, it makes it easy to get Saad + Smith as we now have another 1st rounder to swap for one of them. Win/win.

 

[Tazdog]

No bias pls but would you rather have our first rounder or dogs first rounder next year?? Which will be higher?

 

[vast]

We should under no circumstance give up 2 first round picks. Especially next years have a look at what happened to collingwood with treloar. He is no bust but most who are being honest would take that trade back.

 

[TDay]

It seems at the moment that Dodoro simply does not value Stringer as high as pick 11.

Trust in the Dodo. He won't get swept up in the hype of 'winning' trade period. Play it as it is - a big risk that is not worth sacrificing any future picks (future currency for inside mids) or the Saad or Smith trades for.

 

[Tazdog]

I actually know the fletchers rather well, but I've never been able to see mason play connons and wouldn't really be able to tell of his draft value, would he be budded on after first round? It seems he is around a 30-50ish pick atm I think. Does anyone have a more accurate value for him?

 

[JayDon]

Get Stringer and back our own boys!? Maybe a Miles. That's it.

 

[Tazdog]

His younger brother is a dud btw don't worry about getting him have watched him play and can confirm not the greatest fletcher son

 

[WEEVZ]

Just thought of a way of getting Smith without giving up Pick 11 for him. Given that GWS just refused Freo's first offer for Nathan Wilson (the link to the article is here: https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/gr...n/news-story/cf0bc896be63f879290e05a6cfec5973), maybe we should look to get involved in a three-way deal with them? I know it's not likely to happen but what are people's thoughts on this?
FRE out/GWS in: Pick 5
GWS out/FRE in: Nathan Wilson
GWS out/ESS in: Devon Smith
ESS out/FRE in: Pick 28

Note: GWS wants a pick in the 15-20 range for Wilson, and in this scenario I'm assuming he's worth Pick 15, and doing the maths it makes Smith worth about Pick 25, Pick 28 more or less makes up the points difference for Freo.

We then do:
ESS out/GCS in: Pick 11 + 2018 2nd
GCS out/ESS in: Saad + Picks 22 & 24

ESS out/WBD in: Pick 22
WBD out/ESS in: Stringer

 

[Old Campaigner]

I actually know the fletchers rather well, but I've never been able to see mason play connons and wouldn't really be able to tell of his draft value, would he be budded on after first round? It seems he is around a 30-50ish pick atm I think. Does anyone have a more accurate value for him?

He'd be a top 5 pick but we're hiding him so we can pick him up in the 5th round

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

New deal...

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...lose-in-on-jake-stringer-20171011-gyz312.html

Essendon have proposed a new arrangement in which they give up their first three picks in the draft and net all three of their trade targets.

Under the plan Essendon would give the Bulldogs their first- and third-round selections (picks 11 and 46) and in return the Dogs give them Jake Stringer and their second round pick, currently selection 26.

The Bombers would then have picks 26 and 28, which they would seek to use as part of trades for Devon Smith and Adam Saad.

The Dogs are considering the deal but are reluctant to part with more than Stringer for the Bombers' pick 11.

A deal has also been raised with Richmond to trade two picks in the 20s to the Tigers for the second of their first-round draft selections at pick 17.


Under that deal GWS would trade Smith and their pick 23 to Essendon for pick 11. Essendon would then trade picks 23 and 28 to Richmond for 17 and the Dons would aim to pass pick 17 on to the Dogs for Stringer.

The logic of that deal is that Richmond may not need to use the first of their two first-round draft picks on Patrick Naish and so could then have sufficient points from the picks in the 20s to match any bid for the talented father-son player.

There is a risk in that for Richmond, however, if a bid comes in earlier than expected for Naish.

That creative arrangement may happen but is seen as far less likely than the first option.