2012 List Management - Drafts, Trading and Delistings

[fitzroybowiedog]

i wish we could just have all of them......

i can't wait for the trade/draft. this thread is beginning to do my head in, but i can't help coming back.

 

[Testekill]

Hey guys, not sure if you've discussed it already or would at all be interested, but do you think the Dogs would consider looking at Bret Thornton as a UFA? If your forward stocks are as bad as is suggested, he might be a nice stop-gap while some younger guys develop. Would probably play for next to nothing as long as he was guaranteed game time and has no serious injury problems.

 

[Tommycash]

We're currently leading the race to get Stevens- http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...l-for-joel-caddy/story-fnca0u4y-1226487669784. Bell & Stevens? We're really going for Mids this year aint we? Do you think this will change our draft strategy? Perhaps it will lead to a few current players for us changing their positions. Time will tell.

 

[Igloo]

We're currently leading the race to get Stevens- http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...l-for-joel-caddy/story-fnca0u4y-1226487669784. Bell & Stevens? We're really going for Mids this year aint we? Do you think this will change our draft strategy? Perhaps it will lead to a few current players for us changing their positions. Time will tell.

Will be annoyed if we give up a 2nd or 3rd round pick. Why are we linked to so many people when we have openly said our main focus will be on the draft? Has that changed, or do we consider "main focus" to be about 3 picks?

Personally hope all these trade rumours are just the usual "low placed club being linked to everyone" sort of stories.

 

[Gghippo]

You've confused me.

If you wanted Tyson

Pick 5 + Pick 6 = Dom Tyson, Jack Martin?

Deal would never be done, GWS getting ripped up a new one there. Jack Martin would have gone top 3 next year, he's very good and GC/Melb will be interviewing this week. Which means they've shown interest. If WB want to get the deal done for Martin they can't just offer up Pick 5 or 6 because GC or Melb can trump that with Pick 2 or Pick 4.

GWS will gladly give him to you for Pick 5 + 6 but you'll never trade two top draft picks for one player.

That's where Richmond come in, if we give you Pick 9, you'll be happy to part ways with Pick 5 + 6 if there's a little more sweetener going your way, ie, Jed Anderson.

But that reams GWS who've now lost Anderson and Tyson to get the deal done. If Richmond can offer up a 30-40 goal a year small forward, then it equals out pretty well for everyone except Richmond.

Richmond now give up Pick 9 and Robin Nahas for Dom Tyson. Nahas kicks 30-40 goals a year, so we get reamed on that deal, GWS just evened themselves out by getting Nahas whilst the Dogs are riding into the sunset.

Now this is where the deal will work, Dogs will give Richmond Pick 47. Deal done.

RICHMOND GIVE: Pick 9, Robin Nahas
Richmond GET: Dom Tyson, Pick 47

BULLDOGS GIVE: Pick 5, Pick 6, Pick 47
BULLDOGS GET: Jack Martin (MD1), Pick 9, Jed Anderson

GWS GIVE: Dom Tyson, MD 1
GWS GET: Pick 5, Pick 6, Robin Nahas

That's the kind of deal that will play out.

TROLL Alert....

Pick 47 will not come into the above equation.

 

[DragzLS1]

Will be annoyed if we give up a 2nd or 3rd round pick. Why are we linked to so many people when we have openly said our main focus will be on the draft? Has that changed, or do we consider "main focus" to be about 3 picks?

Personally hope all these trade rumours are just the usual "low placed club being linked to everyone" sort of stories.[/quote]

I think thats the case. Lake has been linked to Hawks for 2 years now ever since we dropped out of the top 4. We have supposedly been after Lynch, Cloke, Dawes, Martin ect.. Just ignore it for now I say until something actually happens.

 

[fronkalicious]

See Banfield might be available. Rate this kid. Super, super speed, kicks goals and applies excellent forward pressure. I'd happily trade a 3rd rounder for him instead of for Toy or Koby Stevens. These types are quite hard to find and Im very impressed with this guy.

NIPPY small forward Todd Banfield could be an early casualty in heavy list scrutiny undertaken at Brisbane by coach Michael Voss.​

• 
  Brisbane's Todd Banfield (pictured) could be on the move
  Getty Images​

• PREV
  
• NEXT

The one-time Australian Gaelic Rules representative is considering options and seems likely to ask to be traded when the league’s official three-week trade period starts on Monday, October 8.
Banfield could emerge as a portion of any trade package that Lions management offer Adelaide as bargaining to win potential boom recruit Kurt Tippett hots up as soon as the annual trading period opens.
Banfield, 22, has only been offered a one-year contract to stay with the Lions and is believed to be keen on at least a two-year deal.
The potentially explosive goal-opportunist toured Ireland in 2010 with the Australian International Rules team and finished eighth in Brisbane’s fairest-and-best voting last year from 19 games before injury setbacks wrecked this season and he made only 12 senior appearances.
He has booted 57 goals in his short 53-game career at Brisbane since he was taken from Swan Districts in the WAFL as a third round pick and number 41 overall in the 2008 national draft.

 

[dogwatch]

We're currently leading the race to get Stevens-

That may mean we are the last ones to rule him out. If there's a "race" for him I hope the WB are a scratching.

But if in their infinite wisdom our recruiting team like him it had better not be for any pick under 60.

 

[Testekill]

I would target Banfield also. I consider him to be a pretty talented young bloke.

 

[Igloo]

Don't mind Banfield. The massive downside to his game is how fumbly he is though. Can't take a clean ball. Which is pretty important for a crumbing forward.

 

[Mutt]

We're currently leading the race to get Stevens- http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...l-for-joel-caddy/story-fnca0u4y-1226487669784. Bell & Stevens? We're really going for Mids this year aint we? Do you think this will change our draft strategy? Perhaps it will lead to a few current players for us changing their positions. Time will tell.

I think we'll find that we will enquire and talk to other clubs about 3 or maybe more potential trades, but we'll be interested in each of them only at the right price.

This usually means one or maybe two at best actually happen for us each year. It may be that none of them come off. Improbable for all of them to come off and if that did happen, we would only pull the trigger on the one or two we covet the most.

 

[yebiga]

Can we put this Richmond Tyson nonsense to bed. No matter what Journo is touting this until GWS actually ask for a particular player from Richmond this trade is not worthy of discussion. The idea that Richmond will give up pick 9 for last years pick 3 and some unstipulated player is simply flying a kite. Then, it somehow becomes embroiled with our picks 5&6?
Now Stringer's broken leg is part of this Tyson/Richmon deal too.

As for Martin, no matter how good he might be - he is a twig and his father is not unlike Josh Hill's. He has to adapt to living in Melbourne and he can't play next year - he remains a flight risk.
Melbourne and GC have nigh on ruled him out.
Pick 6 may prove be too generous for Martin and GWS may need to throw in the sweetner not us.

If Stringer would have been number 1 prior to his broken leg - We must take him with pick 5. A broken leg for a 17 year old is nothing at all and he is ready to go Round 1 2013 and will probably play 15+ games in his first year - And could well be something very very special. Has great leadership qualities and experience playing against men - a no brainer.

As for the MD picks, I would sooner we punted on Jesse Hogan.

The quality big boys are the players you most need.

 

[paulveed]

I have made the point before, that I think pick 6 is the upper limit for Martin. Full stop...no sweeteners, no extra ANYTHING. Take it or leave it, or we walk.
Reality is GWS are giving up nothing in selling off MD picks, so what ever they get is an AFL donated bonus. No reason why we should add an extra WB donated bonus. They must use it or lose it anyway, and it has cost them nothing to start with.

As to the purported 3 way deal, I doubt GWS would be interested in any player Richmond would be willing to part with. More likely they would be looking at a pick upgrade as a sweetener re Tyson, IE 9 + swap GWS 3rd rounder for Richmond's 2nd rounder.

 

[G-Mo77]

TROLL Alert....

Pick 47 will not come into the above equation.

Troll alert. Don't be so anti-social. CNB1990 has been a good contributor in this thread.

 

[Nath09]

I'm far from on an expert on the kids in this draft so just wondering which hypothetical situation supporters in the know see as a better draft outcome:

a) Martin + Anderson + Garlett (or an equivalent player available at 9)

or

b) Stringer + Mayes/O'Rourke/Macrae/Wines

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

 

[100action]

I can sort of see why it makes sense for GWS ...

They would get pick 6 for Martin/MD1 if we dealt direct.
They are losing Tyson anyway and Richmond can only offer pick 9 ATM, so getting pick 5 is a big improvement.

So for this upgrade from pick 9 to pick 5 they are giving up Jed Anderson who they could keep (unlike MD1) but perhaps they don't rate him that highly, or he is surplus to needs in the context of the others on their playing list. This leaves them with a very strong hand in a very strong draft - picks 1, 5 and 6.

Obviously if they can extract something else from Richmond that would be even better for them (... or us!)

sounds reasonable but do you know if Jed is prone to homesickness?

 

[doggies ftw]

He is a dogs fan so it would be hard to see him wanting to leave.

 

[fronkalicious]

I'm far from on an expert on the kids in this draft so just wondering which hypothetical situation supporters in the know see as a better draft outcome:

a) Martin + Anderson + Garlett (or an equivalent player available at 9)

or

b) Stringer + Mayes/O'Rourke/Macrae/Wines

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Can I take option c) martin and stringer (and Anderson if the gws deal has any legs)????

 

[Nath09]

Can I take option c) martin and stringer (and Anderson if the gws deal has any legs)????

If 6 is enough on its own for Martin, then a Stringer and Martin combo seems the best outcome.

I suppose the concern is if the Richmond deal is legitimate and 6 is not enough, we sacrifice 5 & 6 for Martin + Anderson. Will stringer be around at 9 though?

Its a tough one, I was just wondering what supporters thought were more valuable; two high picks (5 & 6 - whoever we may get for them) or one very high pick (Martin), a mid pick (Garlett) and a late pick (Anderson)?

 

[fronkalicious]

If 6 is enough on its own for Martin, then a Stringer and Martin combo seems the best outcome.

I suppose the concern is if the Richmond deal is legitimate and 6 is not enough, we sacrifice 5 & 6 for Martin + Anderson. Will stringer be around at 9 though?

Its a tough one, I was just wondering what supporters thought were more valuable; two high picks (5 & 6 - whoever we may get for them) or one very high pick (Martin), a mid pick (Garlett) and a late pick (Anderson)?

This is where it gets difficult.

If wines or macrae (orourke and mayes will be gone) are still there at 9, then I take Anderson and wines/macrae over stringer.

If its Anderson and garlett, I'd take stringer ahead of that package.

 

[topdog]

Can we put this Richmond Tyson nonsense to bed. No matter what Journo is touting this until GWS actually ask for a particular player from Richmond this trade is not worthy of discussion. The idea that Richmond will give up pick 9 for last years pick 3 and some unstipulated player is simply flying a kite. Then, it somehow becomes embroiled with our picks 5&6?
Now Stringer's broken leg is part of this Tyson/Richmon deal too.

As for Martin, no matter how good he might be - he is a twig and his father is not unlike Josh Hill's. He has to adapt to living in Melbourne and he can't play next year - he remains a flight risk.
Melbourne and GC have nigh on ruled him out.
Pick 6 may prove be too generous for Martin and GWS may need to throw in the sweetner not us.

If Stringer would have been number 1 prior to his broken leg - We must take him with pick 5. A broken leg for a 17 year old is nothing at all and he is ready to go Round 1 2013 and will probably play 15+ games in his first year - And could well be something very very special. Has great leadership qualities and experience playing against men - a no brainer.

As for the MD picks, I would sooner we punted on Jesse Hogan.

The quality big boys are the players you most need.

I totally agree

How about we keep pick 5 and trade pick 6 for MD pick 2 (Jesse Hogan) and Jed Anderson. Pick 6 is too high for Hogan alone but with Anderson will be about right.

 

[100action]

I still dont like the involvement of Richmond in a three way trade, there is no logic behind it:

If you look at fig 1 richmond is surplus to needs, they are a link in the chain that is not required, we are downgrading pick 5 so they can get Tyson.

Fig 2 shows we can cut out the middle man and get Dom Tyson directly, it doesnt make a difference to GWS who is losing him, they are getting picks 5 and 6 anyway. Why let richmond take him and settle for pick 9?. Tyson is good friends with charger draft class Jong and Pearce, I am sure we can make a good pitch to him.

Fig 3 shows we dont even have to help richmond out and completely distance ourselves from Tyson, getting MD1 and JA or just MD1 for pick 6 is a likely result given our position of power. Not only that we get to keep pick 5, why downgrade it to pick 9 to help shitmound out? why strengthen the opposition? we are not charity.

 

[Rookie]

I totally agree

How about we keep pick 5 and trade pick 6 for MD pick 2 (Jesse Hogan) and Jed Anderson. Pick 6 is too high for Hogan alone but with Anderson will be about right.

I approve of this!

 

[Nath09]

This is where it gets difficult.

If wines or macrae (orourke and mayes will be gone) are still there at 9, then I take Anderson and wines/macrae over stringer.

If its Anderson and garlett, I'd take stringer ahead of that package.

I've seen a lot of people both rate O'Rourke and Macrae differently. What's your personal opinion on who is the better prospect and why?

 

[Rookie]

I totally agree

How about we keep pick 5 and trade pick 6 for MD pick 2 (Jesse Hogan) and Jed Anderson. Pick 6 is too high for Hogan alone but with Anderson will be about right.

I approve of this.