Strategy Trade and List Management Thread Part 7 (opposition supporters - READ posting rules before posting)

[Bulldogs85]

The only two I'd actually want. Was tempted by knevitt but after watching more of him recently, that's changed, he wouldn't be an upgrade on Poulter.
Tall, Slow wingman who has the occasional brain fart. I am a Poulter fan but wouldn't want two of him.

Maybe we can ask for Shaun Mannagh

 

[threenewpadlocks]

If Smith were a free agent, he would get us a compensation pick immediately after our own. That's roughly equivalent in value to Geelong's 1st (or future first) + their second, a pick in the 30s.

The reason Free Agency exists after 8 years, and not 6, is to give clubs a reasonable benefit for identifying and developing talent, with compensation on the fact that you don't get a full career of benefit for such identification and development, but a balance to the fact that there should be some individual freedom vs. The need to run an equalised competition with some freedom restrictions via a draft and more limited freedom until 8 years.

We've only gotten 6 of the 8 years out of Smith, and as such, deserve to be compensated beyond what he would garner as a free agent.

Ultimately, the AFL's list management ruleset is broken because it simultaneously allows players to be out of contact but not a free agent (which doesn't exist in American sports) but also allow players to "nominate" clubs and refuse trades to clubs they don't sign a contract with.

The only backstop to this is a player being redrafted through either the national (Luke Ball) or pre-season draft. But that too has its issues, as the player can set contract terms before the draft and a club is obligated to that contract terms upon drafting a player. That complexity in contract with backloading/frontloading/triggers etc. got Jack Martin

19

Jack Martin

Age

31

Ht

186cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.2

4star

K

10.0

4star

HB

6.3

4star

M

4.9

5star

T

3.7

5star

G

0.9

4star

D

14.9

4star

K

7.9

3star

HB

7.0

4star

M

4.3

4star

T

3.6

4star

G

1.1

5star

D

8.2

2star

K

4.6

2star

HB

3.6

3star

M

1.8

2star

T

2.0

4star

G

0.6

3star

to Blues and can obviously be negotiated and manufactured before the draft by the team they initially requested in the first place and teams would pass over them as a player as they don't want to risk not fitting them into their salary cap (while the the team they requested the trade to obviously only can fit them so after negotiating a contract with the player. When they go through the draft they can set a complex contract structure that would immediately put all other teams over the cap should they draft them, like we are hoping Richmond do).

The pre-season draft also acts as an equalisation measure, in theory, because it is reverse ladder order. So while for instance Adelaide screwed over GWS lowballing Jackson Hately

6

Jackson Hately

Age

25

Ht

191cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

15.3

4star

K

8.5

3star

HB

6.8

4star

M

4.8

5star

T

2.6

4star

CL

0.7

3star

D

14.2

3star

K

8.4

3star

HB

5.8

3star

M

4.8

4star

T

1.4

2star

CL

0.4

3star

D

17.2

5star

K

8.6

4star

HB

8.6

5star

M

5.6

5star

T

3.0

5star

CL

0.8

3star

similar to us and Geelong, at least you can say the above machinery in option functioned as an equalisation measure by Hately moving to a team lower down on the previous season's ladder.

Obviously that doesn't apply here as Smith is seeking a move to a team that finished higher than us. Given that, I would love for us, understanding that Geelong does not meet compensating us for identifying and developing Smith's talent, for us to draft him ahead of Geelong in the PSD. Who cares if it's a contract by design (a poison pill) to make it hard for us and easy for Geelong. Who cares if it would cause disharmy for the club. Who cares if Smith would not be that good on the field given he wants to leave. That's on him and his desired new club in a combination of moving to a team higher on the ladder, not waiting another 2 years until free agency, and Geelong not paying up on a trade. The AFL list management system is broken only insofar as teams are not willing to do things like "redraft a player who requested a trade", it's how you make that less broken.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

My guesses would be Knevitt, Clark, O’Sullivan, Stephens, De Koning.

I doubt geelong would trade osullivan bc blicavs is almost done and hes the replacement.
Geelong is trying very hard to get tdk again next year so i doubt they would trade sdk until tdk signs which means that probably doesnt happen til next year if at all.
I would be open to trading clark but hes a one position inside mid with a limited tank (at this stage) so im not sure how he would get a game in your side.
Id be open to trading stevens but he has the same problem.
If i had to guess anyone id say knevitt because he can play a lot of different positions (making it easier for him to fit in your side) and he was our best vfl player in the finals and arguably should be getting more games. I could see you selling him on it.

 

[fred cook]

Wonder if Fev would entertain coaching our forwards for a slab or 2?

A guy called Tom Hawkins I think might have a bit of spare time next year

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

I doubt geelong would trade osullivan bc blicavs is almost done and hes the replacement.
Geelong is trying very hard to get tdk again next year so i doubt they would trade sdk until tdk signs which means that probably doesnt happen til next year if at all.
I would be open to trading clark but hes a one position inside mid with a limited tank (at this stage) so im not sure how he would get a game in your side.
Id be open to trading stevens but he has the same problem.
If i had to guess anyone id say knevitt because he can play a lot of different positions (making it easier for him to fit in your side) and he was our best vfl player in the finals and arguably should be getting more games. I could see you selling him on it.

Hypothetically, could you see somebody like Close being movable if we are looking for a mature player to be added to a potential deal? Right age bracket and skillset to replace some of our weakest best 23 players.

 

[Dog 36]

Can rule out De Koning and O’Sullivan Geelong wouldn’t even think about trading them

That’s where the Dogs get the player or players to tell cats we want out and take it out of their hands to some extent

Have heard Dogs not happy with Cats and Smith

 

[FoochPackage]

My god. If someone talks up Knevitt I might vomit. Bloke is not upto it.

 

[Next Waiting]

Hypothetically, could you see somebody like Close being movable if we are looking for a mature player to be added to a potential deal? Right age bracket and skillset to replace some of our weakest best 23 players.

I'd be more than happy with Close alone. If they wanna throw in a pick as well, sure, but it wouldn't be a deal breaker.

 

[Dogs 13]

Just me, but I don’t want any Cat's steak knives players.
We’ve been burnt so many times by them (apart from Matty Robbins & Bluey Hampshire of course ).

 

[Freshwater]

Hypothetically, could you see somebody like Close being movable if we are looking for a mature player to be added to a potential deal? Right age bracket and skillset to replace some of our weakest best 23 players.

No where near good exchange for us.

 

[Dogsman16]

I’ll take one first round pick and throw Hawkins in as the forwards coach rather than the **** we have had to cop over the past few seasons.

Would probably improve our team more than any random player/pick.

 

[Freshwater]

I doubt geelong would trade osullivan bc blicavs is almost done and hes the replacement.
Geelong is trying very hard to get tdk again next year so i doubt they would trade sdk until tdk signs which means that probably doesnt happen til next year if at all.
I would be open to trading clark but hes a one position inside mid with a limited tank (at this stage) so im not sure how he would get a game in your side.
Id be open to trading stevens but he has the same problem.
If i had to guess anyone id say knevitt because he can play a lot of different positions (making it easier for him to fit in your side) and he was our best vfl player in the finals and arguably should be getting more games. I could see you selling him on it.

Your best VFL player for a superstar? How is that even remotely close to a fair enough trade?

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Your best VFL player for a superstar? How is that even remotely close to a fair enough trade?

Knevitt would be a 10 % steakknives to add to the other 90 % of whatever picks geelong put up for smith. I dont think anyone was or ever would suggest an actual straight swap.

 

[Mojorisin]

Your best VFL player for a superstar? How is that even remotely close to a fair enough trade?

Knevitt is a great VFL player. But I doubt that transfers to AFL level.

 

[BallaratBulldog]

Knevitt is a great VFL player. But I doubt that transfers to AFL level.

Hamling and Biggs did from memory. Maybe current offerings like Baker and Poulter have left some uneasy on outer players.

 

[Mojorisin]

Hamling and Biggs did from memory. Maybe current offerings like Baker and Poulter have left some uneasy on outer players.

I still hold hope for Poulter. Won't be a superstar but I think he will be a good 18-25 type (same as Knevitt) difference being Hamling, Baker and Poulter were free whilst Biggs was a late pick swap and Cats would want to use Knevitt to hold onto their first rounder.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Hypothetically, could you see somebody like Close being movable if we are looking for a mature player to be added to a potential deal? Right age bracket and skillset to replace some of our weakest best 23 players.

Funnily enough yes-as much as emotionally I would like to keep him as he's a real gun you have to have list balance.
I could maybe see him being in this trade or some other trade we might do next year.
My reasoning is more while he's a very good cog in our team i doubt we hang onto all our front half smalls long term
Stengle-clearly staying-signed for 5
Miers-is as local as you can get will play his whole career at geelong unless we force him out which i doubt
Mannagh-as the last few weeks have shown is worth more to us than we would get for him so we would be silly to trade
Dempsey-i'd expect we give him a new long term deal and he would take it.

So to me close as the interstate player is the logical one to move and front half is probably our strongest area so we can cover him if it helps address a list weakness elsewhere (such as midfield).

But as always the issue would be whether a) he wants to go and b) would he look at another club in vic or would he only want back to SA.

I think in all of this rightly or wrongly Geelong will be reluctant to force out a player in the smith trade-we dont culturally really do it historically.
If you look at the henry negotiations part of why it dragged out with collingwood (and yes i concede smith is a much better player than henry was at that time, its a genuine post im just making a different point) is because we werent willing to force a player out from our end and they didnt want to do the deal without a player they didnt want our picks only (given that we were never trading our future 1st and we told them that).
Now luckily mitchell wanted to get to collingwood and sam mitchell really liked stephens from his draft year so went and enticed him. And stevens being outside our 22 and a hawks supporter as a kid thought he would get more games there (in hindsight he made a bad call) jumped at it.
We didnt stand in his way but we didnt force it from our end. Mackie was quite clear on it at that time.

So I think this will be similar in that the dogs if they want one of our players will have to tap him up and convince him to go and then at the right price we would say yes.
That's part of why I suggested knevitt as i think he's the sort of player that would jump at an offer of say a 3 year deal and a promise of more gametime (on a wing of HFF or HBF etc) and say to Geelong 'I want to go trade me there'.

Whether that means negotiations between geelong and the dogs require a 3rd club involved (like the henry deal did) i'm not sure but it's just my thoughts on it.

 

[Dannnnnnnnnn]

No where near good exchange for us.

As an addition to picks, not a one for one swap. He would 100% be an upgrade on our current high half-forwards and as PO has described above could be dispensible. He's absolutely the type I'd be looking at if they won't add more picks to their current offer (presumably their first).

 

[Dogs Rule]

To toughen up, and to add some pace.

This is the big one.

 

[Del203211]

Clark and Close I’ll cop

 

[Mojorisin]

Clark and Close I’ll cop

Close would be a nice peice up forward as long as its in addition to good picks, but I don't rate Clark at all way to vanilla, we are moving away from players like him.

 

[Freshwater]

Funnily enough yes-as much as emotionally I would like to keep him as he's a real gun you have to have list balance.
I could maybe see him being in this trade or some other trade we might do next year.
My reasoning is more while he's a very good cog in our team i doubt we hang onto all our front half smalls long term
Stengle-clearly staying-signed for 5
Miers-is as local as you can get will play his whole career at geelong unless we force him out which i doubt
Mannagh-as the last few weeks have shown is worth more to us than we would get for him so we would be silly to trade
Dempsey-i'd expect we give him a new long term deal and he would take it.

So to me close as the interstate player is the logical one to move and front half is probably our strongest area so we can cover him if it helps address a list weakness elsewhere (such as midfield).

But as always the issue would be whether a) he wants to go and b) would he look at another club in vic or would he only want back to SA.

I think in all of this rightly or wrongly Geelong will be reluctant to force out a player in the smith trade-we dont culturally really do it historically.
If you look at the henry negotiations part of why it dragged out with collingwood (and yes i concede smith is a much better player than henry was at that time, its a genuine post im just making a different point) is because we werent willing to force a player out from our end and they didnt want to do the deal without a player they didnt want our picks only (given that we were never trading our future 1st and we told them that).
Now luckily mitchell wanted to get to collingwood and sam mitchell really liked stephens from his draft year so went and enticed him. And stevens being outside our 22 and a hawks supporter as a kid thought he would get more games there (in hindsight he made a bad call) jumped at it.
We didnt stand in his way but we didnt force it from our end. Mackie was quite clear on it at that time.

So I think this will be similar in that the dogs if they want one of our players will have to tap him up and convince him to go and then at the right price we would say yes.
That's part of why I suggested knevitt as i think he's the sort of player that would jump at an offer of say a 3 year deal and a promise of more gametime (on a wing of HFF or HBF etc) and say to Geelong 'I want to go trade me there'.

Whether that means negotiations between geelong and the dogs require a 3rd club involved (like the henry deal did) i'm not sure but it's just my thoughts on it.

Knevitt couldn’t be more local if he was born on Kardinia Park. Third generation Grovedale Football Club, barracked for the club, family barracks for the club.

 

[Dogs Rule]

At least we got a guy who could play every week on the wing...right?

Read it and weep.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/1223432...63Y6g8SKNEN1Qca0LA_aem_02BZO4jFjudIEHTzvRlv3w

Footscray VFL is both a blessing and a curse.

Missed big time. You just have to ask what were we thinking?

 

[Mofra]

For an opposition view if the cats were willing to throw up anyone its probably either clohesy or knevitt (although both are locals who are close with our other geelong guys they are expendable on field wise). Anyone else you would likely ask for is less likely to be willing to go.

I mention Clohesy as I'd expect he plays round 1 for us and he's seemingly fringe at the cats. Seems to like the rougher stuff too which we can always use.

 

[Mofra]

A guy called Tom Hawkins I think might have a bit of spare time next year

He'll be farming. Doubt he has any interest in entering the development pathway next year