List Mgmt. 2013 Trade / Draft / Free Agency

[God Save Max King]

If we came out of this draft with something like Aish, Honeychurch, Bontempelli. I would we be over the moon.
I think Honey and Bontempelli will go to early for our 2nd / 3rd pick... Unless we trade for pick 10 or so.

Bontempelli is a top 20 prospect for now and with some good work will be a top 10 likely. Honeychurch will be long gone by our 3rd pick, second is looking likely.

My dream draft with picks 3/21/40 would be Aish (improbable), Salem (extremely unlikely) and Battersby (also extremely unlikely).

A more realistic version of a dream draft would be Kelly, Honeychurch and Franetic.

 

[FlyingSledghamer]

Thats what I was saying. Unless we get 10.
Then it could be possible to get 3. Aish, 10. Bontempelli, 21. Honeychurch.
Then I'd be break dancing lol

 

[Half Back Pocket]

10 is gonna cost...what are you prepared to pay Sledge?

 

[Barrels]

Bontempelli is a top 20 prospect for now and with some good work will be a top 10 likely. Honeychurch will be long gone by our 3rd pick, second is looking likely.

My dream draft with picks 3/21/40 would be Aish (improbable), Salem (extremely unlikely) and Battersby (also extremely unlikely).

A more realistic version of a dream draft would be Kelly, Honeychurch and Franetic.

No love for my boy Boag at the 3rd Round pick? Averaging 19.5 touches and 1.8 goals a game as an inside mid/marking forward pocket. BIG bodied.

 

[God Save Max King]

No love for my boy Boag at the 3rd Round pick? Averaging 19.5 touches and 1.8 goals a game as an inside mid/marking forward pocket. BIG bodied.

He can win hard ball and he is MASSIVE but that might be the reason he is dominating u18. Franetic is a very hard worker and he can also play at half-forward, I would prefer a Charger as well (massive bias for the Chargers).

 

[Barrels]

He can win hard ball and he is MASSIVE but that might be the reason he is dominating u18. Franetic is a very hard worker and he can also play at half-forward, I would prefer a Charger as well (massive bias for the Chargers).

Currently no former Chargers on our list. The Falcons gave us Simpkin (hit), Lever (miss) and Steven (biiig hit). I'm going with the Falcons.

 

[Sir Skid]

i'm not sure you can compare boyd to hickey/big ben. its like comparing white to hickey/big ben. talking about a key fwd vs two ruckmen, both of which are terrible fwds

boyd vs stanley would be a fairer comparison

the way i see it long term. big ben/hickey/pierce all fight it out for the number 1 ruck. fwds chosen from white/lee/stanley/boyd. back on resting ruck could be stanley we'll see

I agree. IMO we are not comparing the same type of players.
Boyd as I understand it is a prospective power key forward.
Mac, Hickey and Stanley are not that at all.
Looked at Whites highlights from the weekend and he has a long way to go IMO.
Don't mean to pick on either Dal or Monty as both have been great over several years now but what number mid would they be considered in either Swans or Pies?
My guess would be around 5th best in both of these sides and these are our current best mids (I know Steven is coming on). As I said I don't want to knock them but lets be realistic about their worth in the marketplace.

 

[Sir Skid]

Currently no former Chargers on our list. The Falcons gave us Simpkin (hit), Lever (miss) and Steven (biiig hit). I'm going with the Falcons.

Not sure how you define Lever as a miss? He was always going to be a long term proposition IMHO.
Lets give him a bit of time.

 

[hayes]

i'm not sure you can compare boyd to hickey/big ben. its like comparing white to hickey/big ben. talking about a key fwd vs two ruckmen, both of which are terrible fwds

boyd vs stanley would be a fairer comparison

the way i see it long term. big ben/hickey/pierce all fight it out for the number 1 ruck. fwds chosen from white/lee/stanley/boyd. back on resting ruck could be stanley we'll see

Ultimately if we land Boyd it gets back to Macca vs Hickey. With White and Lee already in the forward line we can't have both Macca and Hickey as well. Without Boyd you can get away with one of Macca/Hickey resting forward while the other rucks. With all of them it's just too top heavy which is what I think he was getting at. If we go with Boyd we might have to look to the backline for ruck relief.

 

[God Save Max King]

Currently no former Chargers on our list. The Falcons gave us Simpkin (hit), Lever (miss) and Steven (biiig hit). I'm going with the Falcons.

My bias was referring to the fact that I "barrack" for the Chargers in the TAC Cup. There is no doubt that the Falcons develop players better but bias aside I still see Franetic as a slightly better prospect.

 

[Sir Skid]

Ultimately if we land Boyd it gets back to Macca vs Hickey. With White and Lee already in the forward line we can't have both Macca and Hickey as well. Without Boyd you can get away with one of Macca/Hickey resting forward while the other rucks. With all of them it's just too top heavy which is what I think he was getting at. If we go with Boyd we might have to look to the backline for ruck relief.

I take your point but one or two injuries to talls and we are back to the drawing board.
Are you saying we don't need depth in the rucks and KPP roles? Surely not.

 

[God Save Max King]

I take your point but one or two injuries to talls and we are back to the drawing board.
Are you saying we don't need depth in the rucks and KPP roles? Surely not.

Pierce is already at the club and by some reports he is developing well. White + Boyd for key position and Lee + Markworth + Siposs as medium forwards seems like enough depth for me!

 

[hayes]

I take your point but one or two injuries to talls and we are back to the drawing board.
Are you saying we don't need depth in the rucks and KPP roles? Surely not.

I'm talking more best 22. None of those players are going to be happy with being just depth. If a tall is injured can always bring in a medium.

EDIT: Yep, plus what Rahul said.

 

[BrianSpeaking]

A little birdie told me today that we are serious in our pursuit of the number 1 pick, whilst just as serious about keeping our first pick at what looks like 3 or 4.

Everyone apart from Roo and the young on ballers are on the table for the right price.....game on!

 

[Bull3tblitz]

We won't land it and i'll stick by this. Everyone bar those may been on the table but only chance we have is with Steven and/or McEvoy going.

I just have this feeling that the club will pull the trigger and McEvoy will be at GWS next year.

 

[BrianSpeaking]

I for one am happy with whatever happens, I just want us to get our hands on elite talent, I love the club and colours first and foremost. Players will come and go, I still haven't gotten over Plugger leaving, but thankfully the club was able to move forward and play in 4 Grand finals in the following 15 years, an amazing thing if you grew up supporting us in the dreadful, pathetic and depressing 80's.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

We won't land it and i'll stick by this. Everyone bar those may been on the table but only chance we have is with Steven and/or McEvoy going.

I don't see the point of trading Steven.

 

[CHBench]

McEvoy has to agree.. and i don't think he will

Throwing in a tractor would sway him! I swear he mentioned having land in Albury in his farming video.

 

[Defacto]

A little birdie told me today that we are serious in our pursuit of the number 1 pick, whilst just as serious about keeping our first pick at what looks like 3 or 4.

Everyone apart from Roo and the young on ballers are on the table for the right price.....game on!

 

[Defacto]

I for one am happy with whatever happens, I just want us to get our hands on elite talent, I love the club and colours first and foremost. Players will come and go, I still haven't gotten over Plugger leaving, but thankfully the club was able to move forward and play in 4 Grand finals in the following 15 years, an amazing thing if you grew up supporting us in the dreadful, pathetic and depressing 80's.

agree club before player

i guess how savory the trade is comes down to who is on the table

 

[Periphery]

Hows this for an idea for a play for Pick 1 where we keep McEvoy:

St Kilda trade Dal Santo to Essendon for Bellchambers.
St Kilda then trades Bellchambers and Gilbert to GWS for Pick 1.

Pros:

• We get pick 1 for Dal Santo and Gilbert. Would people be willing to do that if GWS was after a midfielder/defender instead of a ruck/defender combo?

• We keep McEvoy, who as everyone keeps saying seems to be a key part of the clubs long term plans.

• On the surface this seems to tick all the boxes that each club needs too fill. Although I wouldn't want to lose Dal Santo it could be mutually beneficial for both parties (Club gets Pick 1 and Dal gets a shot at a flag). Essendon gets the midfielder everyone says they need and GWS gets the ruck and defender they are after.

• Leaves us with Pick 3.

Cons/Unknowns:

• Our midfield and defense is hurt in the short term. But improving both of these are more long term prospects and short term issues could be partially resolved by other trades (Mitch Brown for instance).

• I don't know if we could even get Bellchambers. Could GWS just chuck wads of cash at him at the end of the year and get him?

• Would GWS want Gilbert? Who else could we trade to get them interested?

That is the rough idea anyway. 2nd/3rd round picks could be thrown in to sweeten deals if needed.

There are clearly people with more footy knowledge than me here so what do you guys think? Is this the stupidest idea of all time or could it (or something close to it) work?

 

[SaintLex]

Hows this for an idea for a play for Pick 1 where we keep McEvoy:

St Kilda trade Dal Santo to Essendon for Bellchambers.
St Kilda then trades Bellchambers and Gilbert to GWS for Pick 1.

Pros:

• We get pick 1 for Dal Santo and Gilbert. Would people be willing to do that if GWS was after a midfielder/defender instead of a ruck/defender combo?

• We keep McEvoy, who as everyone keeps saying seems to be a key part of the clubs long term plans.

• On the surface this seems to tick all the boxes that each club needs too fill. Although I wouldn't want to lose Dal Santo it could be mutually beneficial for both parties (Club gets Pick 1 and Dal gets a shot at a flag). Essendon gets the midfielder everyone says they need and GWS gets the ruck and defender they are after.

• Leaves us with Pick 3.

Cons/Unknowns:

• Our midfield and defense is hurt in the short term. But improving both of these are more long term prospects and short term issues could be partially resolved by other trades (Mitch Brown for instance).

• I don't know if we could even get Bellchambers. Could GWS just chuck wads of cash at him at the end of the year and get him?

• Would GWS want Gilbert? Who else could we trade to get them interested?

That is the rough idea anyway. 2nd/3rd round picks could be thrown in to sweeten deals if needed.


There are clearly people with more footy knowledge than me here so what do you guys think? Is this the stupidest idea of all time or could it (or something close to it) work?

Seems a fair deal to me. Good post

The only thing is i'm loathe to trade Dal for a number of reasons. Firstly, he wants to stay. Secondly, we're set to lose a lot of experience anyway and Dal's a great mentor and leader. If Lenny retires, we'll need Dal more than ever. Lastly, he takes a tag, which may affect his game but has no doubt led to the development of Steven. If Nick leaves, Steven will almost certainly cop a tag every week.

I can definitely see both sides of the argument and it will definitely be a hard decision that i'm glad I don't have to make. But if he doesn't want to leave, we shouldn't be showing him the door.

 

[aussierulesrules]

A little birdie told me today that we are serious in our pursuit of the number 1 pick, whilst just as serious about keeping our first pick at what looks like 3 or 4.

I love little birdies, especially when they have news like that!

 

[God Save Max King]

A little birdie told me today that we are serious in our pursuit of the number 1 pick, whilst just as serious about keeping our first pick at what looks like 3 or 4.

Everyone apart from Roo and the young on ballers are on the table for the right price.....game on!

And obviously Lenny, right?

 

[Sunshine Saint]

Hows this for an idea for a play for Pick 1 where we keep McEvoy:

St Kilda trade Dal Santo to Essendon for Bellchambers.
St Kilda then trades Bellchambers and Gilbert to GWS for Pick 1.

Pros:

• We get pick 1 for Dal Santo and Gilbert. Would people be willing to do that if GWS was after a midfielder/defender instead of a ruck/defender combo?

• We keep McEvoy, who as everyone keeps saying seems to be a key part of the clubs long term plans.

• On the surface this seems to tick all the boxes that each club needs too fill. Although I wouldn't want to lose Dal Santo it could be mutually beneficial for both parties (Club gets Pick 1 and Dal gets a shot at a flag). Essendon gets the midfielder everyone says they need and GWS gets the ruck and defender they are after.

• Leaves us with Pick 3.

Cons/Unknowns:

• Our midfield and defense is hurt in the short term. But improving both of these are more long term prospects and short term issues could be partially resolved by other trades (Mitch Brown for instance).

• I don't know if we could even get Bellchambers. Could GWS just chuck wads of cash at him at the end of the year and get him?

• Would GWS want Gilbert? Who else could we trade to get them interested?

That is the rough idea anyway. 2nd/3rd round picks could be thrown in to sweeten deals if needed.


There are clearly people with more footy knowledge than me here so what do you guys think? Is this the stupidest idea of all time or could it (or something close to it) work?

Welcome and good first post