List Mgmt. The too early 2019 trade discussion

[Pea Nut]

Ronke got drafted off a very good over age season for the Calder Cannons playing almost exclusively midfield. He played midfield like a smaller version of Patrick Dangerfield with the same strength at the contest and explosive acceleration.....ever since he's been at the Swans he's been pigeon-holed as a small forward by Longmire. He's a much better footballer than you think believe me. Only reason he slipped through to the rookie draft was the doubts on his kicking IMO.

Fair enough, but from what I've seen of him this year in the NEAFL, he hasn't been much good at all. He has had a bit of midfield time, but still mostly playing as a small forward.

 

[Johnny Rutten]

Trade Jenkins, free agent Day (KPF Day). Can play forward and ruck allowing Himmelburg to develop physically another year or two.

Bit of a gap in proven abilities between JJ and Day. I'd rather stick with JJ, thank you very much. I think any talk of trading JJ should now be very close to dead (unless we received an offer that is too good to refuse -- very unlikely). Josh has proven over the last month how important he is to our structure, when in form. He's contracted to the end of 2021, and I'd expect him to see that out.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

CEY is an unrestricted FA. If he goes, he goes for nothing. Probably wouldn't even get anything of value (or anything at all?) as compensation.

Why wouldn’t we get compensation?

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Bit of a gap in proven abilities between JJ and Day. I'd rather stick with JJ, thank you very much. I think any talk of trading JJ should now be very close to dead (unless we received an offer that is too good to refuse -- very unlikely). Josh has proven over the last month how important he is to our structure, when in form. He's contracted to the end of 2021, and I'd expect him to see that out.

Nah, we should trade. Our window is almost closed and we need to look to the younger guys.

 

[Thetrader15]

Like Henderson?

He was a FA...Like CEY

 

[BRL121]

He was a FA...Like CEY

He was a delisted free agent. We didn't want him (wrongly).

 

[Vader]

CEY is an unrestricted FA. If he goes, he goes for nothing. Probably wouldn't even get anything of value (or anything at all?) as compensation.

Unrestricted means that we don't have the right to match any offers he may choose to accept, it doesn't mean that we don't receive compensation.

However, the fact that he's on our rookie list, will have only played around 50 games by the end of the year, and is probably on close to minimum pay, all indicate that we probably won't receive any compensation.

These are all indicators, but the final determinant is the size of the offer he receives.

It wouldn't be the first time we lose a player to FA without compensation - Chris Knights set the precedent years ago.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[Jarman3]

Unrestricted means that we don't have the right to match any offers he may choose to accept, it doesn't mean that we don't receive compensation.

However, the fact that he's on our rookie list, will have only played around 50 games by the end of the year, and is probably on close to minimum pay, all indicate that we probably won't receive any compensation.

These are all indicators, but the final determinant is the size of the offer he receives.

It wouldn't be the first time we lose a player to FA without compensation - Chris Knights set the precedent years ago.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Yeah, that's what I'm getting at. He'll attract a decent but not huge contract. Rookie list, not many games to his name, wouldn't have racked up a lot of B&F or Brownlow votes (although he'll probably get a few this year). It all points to zero compensation, or pretty close to it.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Unrestricted means that we don't have the right to match any offers he may choose to accept, it doesn't mean that we don't receive compensation.

However, the fact that he's on our rookie list, will have only played around 50 games by the end of the year, and is probably on close to minimum pay, all indicate that we probably won't receive any compensation.

These are all indicators, but the final determinant is the size of the offer he receives.

It wouldn't be the first time we lose a player to FA without compensation - Chris Knights set the precedent years ago.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Since when does the rookie list factor in?
I thought it was just based on the salary, length of contract and age?

 

[mattymac]

Looking forward to end of 3rd round compo for CEY.

At this point he's clearly worth more to us than letting him go.

Stick fat with him for 8 years then when he finally clicks he walks would be peak crows but from what I've heard he's pretty firmly based in Adelaide so hopefully hangs around and pays back the faith

 

[Eagleboy2011]

I wonder if the bottom 2 stay as they are, GC would consider a swap pick 2 and 16 for our pick 1.

 

[Pea Nut]

I wonder if the bottom 2 stay as they are, GC would consider a swap pick 2 and 16 for our pick 1.

I would think that if they were trading for Carlton's pick, regardless of whether it turns out to be pick 1 or pick 2, it would involve players, not picks. Surely the combo of both Rowell and Anderson would have to be tempting when putting together a long term list strategy.

 

[GrommoT]

Nah, we should trade. Our window is almost closed and we need to look to the younger guys.

It will be interesting to see how the club proceeds and wouldn't be surprised if they don't go down the significant list turnover path (aside from retirements/delisting of clearly cooked players).

Despite feeling like we're on the downward slide, we still find ourselves likely to end up round the middle of the top 8 this year and still have a chance to get into the GF.

We as fans might be more willing to go down the rebuild path when it seems like our list (while can be competitive) is not good enough to actually be premiers, but what about the club?

If there is any truth to the club seriously trying to get Grundy for next season and they achieve it, we would be on the up again pretty quickly.

We already have drafted a lot of kids over the last few seasons that look promising to be able to become best 22 players and trading in a big fish or two will likely cost our good draft picks this year. I don't think it will be out of character for the Crows to do that rather than get more talent from the draft this year.

 

[Crow till I die]

I wonder if the bottom 2 stay as they are, GC would consider a swap pick 2 and 16 for our pick 1.

putting that in context, would we swap pick 2 & 19 for their pick 1 (if they finish bottom)...

 

[Vader]

Since when does the rookie list factor in?
I thought it was just based on the salary, length of contract and age?

Being on the rookie list isn't a factor in itself. It is, however, an indicator as to where he stands on our list, which is a guide to the level of compensation which we could expect.

It's only an indicator, not a determinant.

Sent from my SM-T510 using Tapatalk

 

[Bearded Clam]

putting that in context, would we swap pick 2 & 19 for their pick 1 (if they finish bottom)...

Nope.

Pick 1 and 2 at the moment look to be Rowell and Anderson.. both equally great.. I wouldn’t care which of the two we picked if we had pick 1.. so pick 2 and 19 is better because we still end up with one of these lads and we have the pick in the late teens that Hamish can use to weave his magic.

 

[Crow till I die]

Nope.

Pick 1 and 2 at the moment look to be Rowell and Anderson.. both equally great.. I wouldn’t care which of the two we picked if we had pick 1.. so pick 2 and 19 is better because we still end up with one of these lads and we have the pick in the late teens that Hamish can use to weave his magic.

100% - and that is my point that it is crazy to think GC trade 2 & 16 for 1 when there is no way on earth we trade 2 & 19 for 1

 

[Bearded Clam]

100% - and that is my point that it is crazy to think GC trade 2 & 16 for 1 when there is no way on earth we trade 2 & 19 for 1

If we end up with pick 1 or 2 and GC the other... it will be interesting to see if GC come hard for our pick so they can grab both Rowell and Anderson given how close the lads are friendship wise..

Long way to go yet though... one of them might slide down in contention this year or, god forbid, one might get an injury that sees them miss half the season and slide..

We still have to keep hoping Carlton continue with their current failure to win games.. they aren’t playing that badly but they just can’t seem to get over the line..

 

[Crow till I die]

If we end up with pick 1 or 2 and GC the other... it will be interesting to see if GC come hard for our pick so they can grab both Rowell and Anderson given how close the lads are friendship wise..

Long way to go yet though... one of them might slide down in contention this year or, god forbid, one might get an injury that sees them miss half the season and slide..

We still have to keep hoping Carlton continue with their current failure to win games.. they aren’t playing that badly but they just can’t seem to get over the line..

What if we made a play for GC pick 2 (or 1) if we have pick 1 (or 2). Would pick 19 + future 1st and maybe a player get the job done?..if GC are worried about the go home factor of rowell or anderson and if there is a real talent drop off after pick 2?. They might just be prepared to trade down to get more picks an a needs player (ie Greenwood or Keath) - I know it sounds a big price to pay, but getting both Rowell and Anderson might be huge in the future of this club if we did

 

[GrommoT]

100% - and that is my point that it is crazy to think GC trade 2 & 16 for 1 when there is no way on earth we trade 2 & 19 for 1

I think that's true if there was nothing else to it but what if we had pick 1 and likely to take a player that GC is absolutely desperate to get? They might do the 1 for 2 + 16 deal. It all depends on whether one or both sides have a reason for wanting such a deal and the other being willing to consider it.

OTOH, wonder if GC had pick 1 and 12 (Bris r1) and we had pick 2, 20 and say 35, might GC consider trading 1 for 20, 35 and our 2020 r1 (giving us chance to draft Rowell & Anderson this year)? GC would still have 12, 20, 35, ... and maybe a mid-teens r1 pick next year.

 

[GrommoT]

What if we made a play for GC pick 2 (or 1) if we have pick 1 (or 2). ...

snap!

 

[Crow till I die]

I think that's true if there was nothing else to it but what if we had pick 1 and likely to take a player that GC is absolutely desperate to get? They might do the 1 for 2 + 16 deal. It all depends on whether one or both sides have a reason for wanting such a deal and the other being willing to consider it.

OTOH, wonder if GC had pick 1 and 12 (Bris r1) and we had pick 2, 20 and say 35, might GC consider trading 1 for 20, 35 and our 2020 r1 (giving us chance to draft Rowell & Anderson this year)? GC would still have 12, 20, 35, ... and maybe a mid-teens r1 pick next year.

We would have to at least ask the question. Alternatively our pick might be available to them for one of ..you know who

 

[Bearded Clam]

What if we made a play for GC pick 2 (or 1) if we have pick 1 (or 2). Would pick 19 + future 1st and maybe a player get the job done?..if GC are worried about the go home factor of rowell or anderson and if there is a real talent drop off after pick 2?. They might just be prepared to trade down to get more picks an a needs player (ie Greenwood or Keath) - I know it sounds a big price to pay, but getting both Rowell and Anderson might be huge in the future of this club if we did

It would be awesome to get both players and base our midfield around brad, Matt, Rowell, Anderson for the next 8 years!.. also throwing the likes of chayce Jones and Ned mchenry into that mix.. I’ve liked the look of Jones when he’s been thrown into the centre bounces in the sanfl at times... real speed and great skills... and he’ll only get better.

But it just seems like something that GC would be more attracted to than Adelaide... they have more to offer us too when it comes to a trade.. if we had pick 1 or 2 they would be silly not to offer Rankine up for it IMO and get Rowell and Anderson instead. Rankine won’t hang around.

 

[Bearded Clam]

We would have to at least ask the question. Alternatively our pick might be available to them for one of ..you know who

I’d do it for Rankine.. not Luko...

 

[GrommoT]

... But it just seems like something that GC would be more attracted to than Adelaide...

Hmm... you're basing that on past habits (and also not in situations where we might be in position to make such high level trades).